Wind-tunnel tests of a blunt-nose aileron with beveled trailing edge on an NACA 66(215)-216 airfoil with several modific...

A'A


ACR No. L5B10


NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS




WAR 11FTIME REPORT
ORIGINALLY ISSUED
February 1945 as
Advance Confidential Report L5B10

WIND-TUmEL TESTS OF A BLUNT-NOSE ALERON WITH LEVELED
TRAILING EDGE ON AN NACA 66(215)-2a6 AFOIL
WITH SEVERAL MODIFICATIONS OF AILERON NOSE
AND ADJACENT AIRFOIL CONTOUR
By J. D. Bird

Langley Memorial Aeronautical Laboratory
Langley Field, Va.






NACA


WASHINGTON
NACA WARTIME REPORTS are reprints of papers originally issued to provide rapid distribution of
advance research results to an authorized group requiring them for the war effort. They were pre-
viously held under a security status but are now unclassified. Some of these reports were not tech-
nically edited. All have been reproduced without change In order to expedite general distribution.


L 105


DOCUMENTS DEPARTMENT


L- los




































Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2011 with funding from
University of Florida, George A. Smathers Libraries with support from LYRASIS and the Sloan Foundation


http://www.archive.org/details/windtunneltestsoOClang








NACA ACR No. L5B10

NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS


ADVANCE CONFIDENTIAL REPORT

WIND-TUNNEL TESTS OF A BLUNT-NOSE AILERON I'WITH BEVELED

TRAILING EDGE ON AN NACA 66(215)-216 AIRFOIL

WITH SEVERAL !MODIFICATIONS OF AILERON NOSE

AND ADJACENT AIRFOIL CONTOUR

By J. D. Bird


SUMMARY


Ailerons having a beveled trailing edge and a blunt-
nose overhang of 55 percent aileron chord on an
NACA 66(215)-216 airfoil have been tested in the two-
dimensional-flonw test section of the Langley stability
tunnel. Five configurations of the model were tested
with various modifications of the aileron nose and
adjacent airfoil contour to determine the effect of these
modifications on the lift and aileron hinge-moment charac-
teri .tics.

The results indicated that making the nose of the
aileron more elliptical decreased the balance of hinge
moments at small aileron angles and increased the balance
of hinge m: oments at large aileron angles. The lift coef-
ficients, especially at large aileron angles, were
increased by this modification.

Flaring the airfoil contour near the aileron nose
had Ln effect on the hinge moments for small aileron
angles similar to the effect of making the aileron nose
less blunt, whereas rounding the airfoil contour had an
effect similar to making the aileron nose more blunt.
Flaring the airfoil contour caused a decrease in the lift
resulting from aileron deflection. The effects of airfoil-
contour changes were small at large aileron angles.

Comparison with other data indicated that, for small
aileron angles, the increments of hinge-moment coefficient
resulting from a beveled trailing edge and a blunt-nose
overhang were additive.









2 CONFIDENTIAL ITACA f.CR No. L5B10


INTRODUCTION


A beveled trailing edge or an overhang with an
extremely blunt nose gives most of its balancing action
at small aileron angles, whereas an overhang with a
rounded blunt nose gives most of its balancing action at
large aileron angles. A beveled aileron with a rounded
blunt nose that fell within the contour of the airfoil
at zero deflection might then be expected to have a high
degree of balance over a large deflection range. The
present investigation was made to determine the effect of
the shape of the aileron nose and the adjacent airfoil
contour on the hinge-moment and lift characteristics of
such an aileron and to determine, by comparison with other
data, whether the effects of the blunt-nose overhang and
the beveled trailing edge on the aileron hinge-moment
characteristics are additive, as has been assumed in some
aileron correlations.


SYM BOLS


The coefficients and symbols used herein are defined
as follows:

cl airfoil section lift coefficient (L/qc)

Act increment of airfoil section lift coefficient

Ch aileron section hinge-moment coefficient (h/qcg2)
Ach increment of aileron section hinge-moment coef-
ficient

1 airfoil section lift

h aileron section hinge moment

c chord of airfoil

ca chord of aileron behind hinge axis

q dynamic pressure pV)

V free-stream velocity


CONFIDENTIAL










NACA ACR No. L5B10


p mass densi


CONFIDENTIAL


ty of air


angle of attack of
ratio


airfoil for infinite aspect


aileron deflection with respect to airfoil


'a.
U6 = --

6ch
ch -



Ca ao
0hh
c5






cl- =
Scoo

cl = 6-


at cZ = 0.1


at 6 = 0



at ao = 0



at 6 = 00



at ao = 0


w airfoil-contour configuration in region adjacent
to aileron nose

n aileron-nose configuration

Subscripts 1 to 4 to w and n indicate configu-
rations as given in figure 1 and table I. Configuration
designations are used as subscripts to identify corre-
sponding lift and hinge-moment coefficients.


APPARATUS AND 1/ODEL


Tests were made in the two-dimensional-flow test
section of the Langley stability tunnel. This section
is rectangular, 6 feet high, and 2.5 feet wide.

The model tested had an NACA 66(215)-216 airfoil
section of 2-foot chord and completely spanned the width
of the test section. Table II gives the airfoil ordinates.


CONFIDENTIAL









CITACt ACR o. L5BlO


The aileron had a chord of 0.20c, a 0.35Ca blunt-nose
balance, and a 260 beveled trailing edge. The five
aileron and airfoil configurations are described in
table I and figure 1.


'TEST CONDITIONS


Hinge moments were measured with a spring hinge-
moment balance, and lift was measured by an integrating
manometer connected to orifices in the floor and ceiling
of the tunnel. The hinge moments and lifts were measured
for a range of aileron angles from 00 to 250 and for an
angle-of-attack range from 00 to 100. The tests were
made at a dynamic pressure of 250 pounds per square foot,
which corresponds to a TJa9h number of 0.42 and to a test
Reynolds number of 6 x 10o based on standard sea-level
atmospheric conditions. All five configurations were
tested with the gap at the aileron nose sealed and
unsealed. Angles of attack were set within t0.10 and
aileron angles, within 0.50. Hinge-moment coefficients
are believed to be accurate to 0.003 and lift coef-
ficients, to 0.01. The data were corrected for jet-
boundary effects. The corrected values were computed as
follows:

ao = 1.023aOT

cL = 0.965clT

ch = chT + 0.00L5clT

where oT, c LT, and chT are the uncorrected angle
of attack in degrees, lift coefficient, and hinge-moment
coefficient.


RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Presentation of Data


The section lift and aileron section hinge-moment
characteristics are given in figures 2 to 6 for the


CONFI DENTIAL


CONFIDENTIAL










NACA ACR No. L5510


various airfoil-contour and aileron-nose configurations
tested. The increments of lift and hinge-moment coef-
ficients resulting from the modifications are plotted in
figures 7 to 12. Some of the data and important parameters
from references 1 and 2 are compared with results of the
present tests in figures 15 to 18 and table III.


Effect of iiodifications on Lift and Hinge-Moment

Characteristics

Sealed ailerons.- Figure 7(a) shows, for gap sealed,
the increments ach that result from rounding the air-
foil contour adjacent to the aileron nose. The curves
indicate that, in general, the balance is increased for
aileron angles up to approximately 10o but that, for
angles greater than t10, the change in balance is
Decreased to a small value at the largest positive or
negative angles. These results indicate that this modi-
fication gives results similar to those obtained when an
aileron nose is made more blunt.

The increments Ach caused by flaring the airfoil
contour in the area adjacent to the aileron nose are
shown in figure 8(a) for gap sealed. The flare decreases
the degree of balance for aileron angles up to approxi-
mately tl40, beyond which the balance is increased almost
to the value for configuration w1n1. This loss in
balance at small deflections is caused by the shielding
effect of the flare, which gives results similar to those
obtained when an aileron nose is made less blunt.

The curves of figure 9(a) show, for gap sealed, the
increments Ach caused by making the aileron nose more
nearly elliptical. These curves indicate that this modi-
fication decreases the degree of balance for aileron
angles up to approximately tl00 and increases the balance
for the rest of the aileron-angle range.

Figure 10(a) shows, for the gap sealed, the incre-
ments Acj caused by increased rounding of the airfoil
contour in the area aIjacent to the aileron nose. The
curves, though quite irregular, generally indicate an
increase of about 4 percent in c,6 for small aileron
angles.


CONFIDENTIAL


CONFIDENTIAL









NACA ACR No. L5BIO


The increments Act that result from flaring the
airfoil contour in the area adjacent to the aileron nose
are given in figure 11(a) for gap sealed. These curves
indicate a loss of approximately 10 percent in cl6 for
aileron angles up to approximately t120. For large
aileron angles, the lift coefficient increases to approxi-
mately the value obtained for the unmodified airfoil
(configuration wlnl).

Figure 12(a) shows, for gap sealed, the incre-
ments Ac1 that result from making the aileron nose more
nearly elliptical. These curves indicate an appreciable
increase in lift coefficient for large aileron angles.
This large increase occurs at positive and negative
aileron angles from 120 to 240., because the aileron with
the more elliptical nose stalls at larger aileron angles
than the aileron with the rounded blunt nose. The sealed
aileron gave an increase of about 4 percent in cL. for
aileron angles up to 120.

Unsealed ailerons.- The principal effect of removing
the sea Tfigs. 7(b), 8(b), 9(b), 10(b), and 11(b)) is to
accentuate the effects of contour modification on the
values of ch and cl shown for the sealed gaps. The
results given in figure 12(b), however, are an exception
to this statement.

General remarks.- It is believed that more nearly
linear hin e-monrent characteristics could be obtained if
the aileron overhang were slightly longer and more
elliptical than the overhangs tested. Such a configu-
ration would allow the overhang to produce more balance
at large deflections for which the degree of balance due
to the beveled trailing edge is reduced. With the over-
hangs tested, the hinge-moment characteristics showed a
definite tendency toward increased linearity as the over-
hang was made more elliptical; however, the overhang was
not long enough nor elliptical enough to obtain the linear
hinge-moment characteristics expected.


Increments Ach Caused by Beveled Trailing Edge and

by Overhang

For a number of correlations of aileron hinge-moment
characteristics, the assumntion has been made that the


CONFT DENT AL


CONFIDENTIAL









NACA ACR No. L5BlO


increments of hinge-moment coefficient caused by different
aileron balances, such as overhangs and bevels, are addi-
tive when these aileron balances are used with each other.
The validity of this assumption is investigated in
figures 15 and 14 for the blunt-nose aileron with a
beveled trailing edge.

Figure 15 compares the variation of ch with 6
at ao = 00 for the cusped plain aileron (unpublished
data), the plain aileron with a 260 beveled trailing edge
(estimated from unpublished data), the cusped aileron with
a 0.35ca blunt-nose overhang (reference 1), and the aileron
with a 260 beveled trailing edge and a 0.55ca blunt-nose
overhang (fig. 2(a)). All these data are for sealed
0.20c ailerons on the same airfoil and therefore should
be comparable. The data for the plain aileron with the
260 beveled trailing edge were estimated from unpublished
data for a cusped plain aileron and for a straight-side
plain aileron on the assumption that the change in ch is
a linear function of the trailing-edge angle.

Figure 14(a), which was obtained from figure 13,
shows that the increments Ach caused by the bevel on
plain ailerons and on ailerons with blunt-nose overhang
are in good agreement for aileron angles from approxi-
mately -3- to 40; figure 14(b) shows that the incre-
ments Ach caused by the blunt-nose overhang on cusped
and on beveled ailerons also are in good agreement for
this range of aileron angles. The curves show less good
agreement for aileron angles outside the range from -80
to 4'. This lack of agreement at large aileron angles
may be caused by the effect of the blunt nose on the air
flow over the bevel. The curves of figure 14 also indicate
that the 260 teveled trailing edge produced much more
balance than the 0.55ca blunt-nose overhang.


CDmoarison with Other Ailerons

The hinge-moment and lift characteristics for the
aileron having a 260 beveled trailing edge and a
0.55ca blunt-nose overhang (configuration w1nl) are
compared in figures 15 to 18 with the characteristics for
cusped ailerons of references 1 and 2 having a
0.55ca blunt-nose overhang and a 0.60ca internal balance,


CONFI DENTAL


CONFIDENTIAL









DTACA ACR No. L5B10


respectively. All three ailerons had sealed gaps, had
the same chord, and were on the same airfoil.

Figure 15 indicates that the internally balanced
aileron has a greater linear range of ch against 6 and
a slope ch6 nearer zero than either of the other two
ailerons. The cusped aileron with blunt-nose overhang
produced the least balance. A slight positive value
of ch5 is shown at ao = 00 for the beveled aileron
with the blunt-nose overhang. This overbalance is counter-
acted to some extent by the positive cha shown for this
aileron in figure 16.

The cusped aileron with internal balance and the
cusped aileron with blunt-nose overhang have negative
values of cha (fig. 16). The negative value of ch.
would generally cause the internally balanced aileron to
be overbalanced for a large range of the aileron deflec-
tion (where ch6 = 0). Slightly less balance-plate chord
should make it possible for this aileron to operate with-
out being overbalanced. Overbalance would probably not
occur with the blunt-nose aileron since it has a negative
value of ch6i

Figure 17 and table III indicate that, of the three
ailerons considered, the cusped aileron with the blunt-
nose overhang has the largest value of cL6. Both the
cusped and beveled ailerons having the blunt-nose overhang
stall at a lower deflection than the internally balanced
aileron. The internally balanced aileron, which has no
projecting nose, therefore produces higher positive and
negative lifts at large deflections than the other two
ailerons. As might be expected, the aileron with the
beveled trailing edge produces a smaller lift than the
cusped ailerons.

The values of cla as given in table III and the
curves of cl plotted against ao for 6 = 00 (fig. 13)
indicate that the cusped aileron with blunt-nose overhang
has the largest value of c, and that the aileron with
the beveled trailing edge and blunt-nose overhang has the
lowest value.


C?'NFI DEIITIAL


CONFIDENTIAL










NACA ACR Ho. L5B10


CONCLUSIONS


Ailerons having a 0.35-aileron-chord blunt-nose
overhang and a 26 beveled trailing edge have been tested
in two-dirensional flow on an NACA 66(215)-216 airfoil
with several modifications of the aileron nose and
adjacent airfoil contour. The results of these tests and
coinparis>n with results of previous tests of cusped
internally balanced and blunt-nose ailerons indicated the
following conclusions:

1. Making the aileron nose more nearly elliptical
decreased the balance of hinge moments at small aileron
angles and increased the balance of hinge moments at
large aileron angles. The lift coefficients at large
angles were higher than those obtained with the more
blunt nose.

2. Founding the airfoil contour adjacent to the
aileron nose gen.-rally increased-the balance of hinge
m.ments -and, for small aileron angles, slightly increased
the value of the slope of the curve of lift coefficient
against aileran angle cZg. The increase in balance was
most pronounced for a range of aileron angle of 10.
This modification gave results similar to those that would
be obtained when an aileron nose is made more blunt.

5. Flaring the airfoil contour in the region
adjacent to the aileron nose decreased the balance of
hinge mort.nts for aileron angles up to approximately 14o.
The value of cl, over a large part of the aileron-angle
range was decreased. These results were similar to those
that wD.Duld be obtained when an aileron nose is made less
blunt.

h. The effects of the airfoil-contour changes were
small at large aileron angles.

5. Unsealing the gap at the aileron nose generally
caused the effects resulting from the various modifi-
cations of the aileron nose and adjacent airfoil contour
to be more nrDnounced.

6. The aileron with 0.60-aileron-chord internal balance
and cusped trailing edge afforded a greater degree of balance
cf hinge rmoments and higher lift at large deflections than
the cusped aileron with the 0.35-aileron-chord blunt-nose


C ONFI DENTIAL


CONFIDENTIAL









:-.ACA ACR 11o. L5.I.)j


overhang or the aileron with 260 beveled trailing edge
and 0.35-aileron-chord blunt-nose overhang.

7. Comparison with other data jiidicated that, for
small aileron angles, the increments of hinge-moment
coefficient resulting from a beveled trailing edge and a
blunt-nose overhang were additive.


Langley Memorial Aeronautical Laboratory
National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics
Langley Field, Va.



REFERENCES


1. Letko, %., Denaci, H. G., and Freed, C.: iind-funnel
Tests of Ailerons at Various Speeds. I Ailerons
of 0.20 Airfoil Chard and True Contour with
0.35 Aileron-Chord Eb,.reme Blunt Nose Balance on
the NACA 66,2-216 Airfoil. NT.CI ACR 'To. 5F11,
19435.
2. Denaci, H. G., and Bird, J. D.: '"ind-Tunnel Tests
of Ailerons at Various Speeds. II Ailerons of
0.20 Airfoil Chord and True Contour with 0.60 Aileron-
Chord Sealed Tnteinal 2.-..ce on the i.-.Ca 66,2-216
Airfoil. NACA ACR !'). 5P38, 1945.


CO' 'IDE:ITIAL


CONFILEIITTAL













NACA ACR No. L5B10


CONFIDENTIAL


.r-
4.3








o-



0


3 o'0
a) (D 0)
;5 F4l T
?-f Cd r
P- r-4 ::s
r=4 ol
oll 0


42
-'





0
0D


0

o


0
"-I
4+




4-1

0
0


CON.FI DEiITIAL


0
F-

o









H
O 0
E-H E-


O)

(D

0




f-I
1-1r
04


4-

0

co
*oo



00



o 4
O-)
0 H


i









.~CA ACR N'. L5B10


TABLE IT.- ORDINATES FOR NACA 66(215)-216 AIRFOIL1
[Basic airfoil contour; stations and ordinates in
percent airfoil chord]

Upper surface Lover surface
Station Ordinate Station Ordinate

0 0 0 0
.Lol 1.250 .599 -1.1 0
.640 1.484 .860 -1.54
1.128 1.053 1.572 -1.644
2.562 2.560 2.658 -2.182
4.8L6 .00o4 5.154 -2.972
7.540 4.L28 7.660 .580
9.838 5.140 10.162 -4.106
14.3U5 6.276 15.1 5 -4.950
19.860 7.1 6 20.1 o -5.564
24.379 7.8 25.121 -6.054
2.900 .56 0.100 -6.422
3.924 8.756 2.5.076 -6.676
.99 8.980 0o.051 -6.858
.974 9.092 45.026 -6.902
50.000 9.060 50.000 -6.854
55.025 3.875 54.975 -6.685
60.0 8 8.496 5 .952 -6.554
65.067 7.862 .955 -5.802
70.031 6.9 1 62.L19 -4.997
75.087 ..3o0 7 .915 .070
80.085 .644 7'915 -5.0 2
85.075 3.595 ,4.925 -2.0 9
90.055 2.105 49.945 -1.069
95.028 .91) 94.972 -.281
100.000 0 100.000 0
L. E. radius: 1.575. Slope of radius
through L. E.: 0.094
'This airfoil is the same as NACA 66,2-216 airfoil, for
which the designation has been changed since refer-
ences 1 and 2 were published.

NATIONAL ADVISORY
COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS


CONFIDENTIAL


CONFIDENTIAL













NACA ACR No. L5B10O


CONFIDENTIAL


0.,


Lo 0










P C


0H 0
LO













r-I




Er 4
0 0 C


0 0 0


S 0 0
0 I 0







I
N- -:: -.
ti 0 I I





oN Co 0
oO 0 0 0




O

00 *
0




0 I





1 ,4- H r-I I





--0 0









o o N 0-
S Elr-i 0 r- o r.--












4H 40 0(
H o O O
o H 0 0




M M-- ;o


CONFIDENTIAL


) r-iH
0







r-I COJ








NACA ACR No. L5BO Fig. 1









00
.











--







I / n
S \. 1 .. ..








NACA ACR No. L5B10


-30 20 -/0 0 /0 `0 30
Aileron angle 6 deg
(CJ Sea/ecd gap.
F/r'ure 2. Sect/an character/isftCs of b/unt-nose a//eron with bevel/e
Iroiling edge A17tfoll awftour w, ; aileron nose n, .


Fig. 2a








NACA ACR No. L5B10


-3O -20 -/O 0 /O0
4/e/7on angle 6 deg

,,' I/nreo/ed gap .
/gure' 2. Co~rf/c/uded


20 30


Fig. 2b








NACA ACR No. L5B10


-30 -20 -/0 0 /0 20 30
Ai/eron ongle 1 deg
(0) Jealed gap.
Figure 3.- Seci/on characferiyt/cs of b/un--nose aileron wifh
beve/ed trailing edge /Airfoil contour wz ; al/eron no/e n/.


Fig. 3a









NACA ACR NO. L5B10


30 -20 -/O 0 /0 20 30
Aileron ongle 6 deg
Ib) Unse/led gap.
Figure 3.- Conc/uded .


Fig. 3b








NACA ACR No. L5B10O


R =OOZc

.Sea/
















LO I R R A :O UI^L
p ..




1-









o -2 -/O / 0 30---4-












(aAileron o, ged, deg
igre 4.- io hro -i.stis of bunt-ose /o,


,t 'G bove/I d trollin g edg d/rfaX col-lour wj; o?/eron
nose n1 .
o ..__ ->2t -/








--- -- -- ----.^ -/-0 0 0 0
- /l -ro o --/B^- d- .. -
(a) _ 1 _
/'gure4.- ~ ~ ~ ~ 5e,/1 ,^oheic'iso /n-ms /eo
wit :===::::::: edg. 'lr/#/ o-o; w_; ^ lro


Fig. 4a









NACA ACR No. L5B10






S. ---




0.














0
S.4- -























o
0. ---_--




0 -------


-30 -20 -/0 0 /0 ea JO
A//eron ongle, 6 deg
(b) Unseo/ed gap.
Figure 4.- Concluded .


Fig. 4b








NACA ACR No. L5B10O


-30 -0O -/0 0 /0
A//eroon ang/e ) 6 deg


ZO 30


(0. Sea/ed gap.
F,9ree 5.-w Section characteristics of blunt-nose al/eron with
tevelea' troi/ng edqe. A,//rfo/'/ contour wy ; aileron nose nI.


Fig. 5a








NACA ACR No. L5BO


-30 -20 -/O0 0 /0
Al/eron ang/e 6 deg
(6) nseao/ed g;o
FI/gure 5. Conc/lded .


20 30


Fig. 5b








NACA ACR No. L5B10 Fig. 6a



< flore rounded oirfoil contour
1 ,/ 1ore nearly el/bho/ nose
Seal



m'^ CONFIDENTIAL
















/.2

















-.8





-20 -/0 0 /0 20 30
A ,leron ang/e, 6, de9
(a) Sea ed gap1
q .re 6.- 3ec#idn cha/racerisfics of /~unt-nose aileron with/
Deve. ,d traihng edge. /rKl// confour, n4 ; 7i/eron /7ose, nz.









NACA ACR No. L5B10


MoI ,re rounded o/rfol/ confoMur
M /l-ore nelry e///lola/ nose




CONFIDENTIAL


I\






S._/



/0.2




-r















Ge I
'"^^ r-nj1111111111 -


-30 -20 -/0


fb) /nseo/ed op .
Figure 6 Conc/luded.o


0 /0 20


A/leron o/7'e 6 dey


Fig. 6b







NACA ACR No. L5B10


c~z


0 <


Rs












Iki


L1
o


*N

II~


Fig. 7a,b


v' 1m7I "'u._a/jao_ iu/_ou./-sRy6/ u/c/P1 3 s'jo ,c/sc/a/1




NACA ACR No. L5B10


O

O
!

9l-
0/

cz
i
^^

^. ^


K


Fig. 8a,b







NACA ACR No. L5B10O


Fig. 9a,b


'

!


_0



-- --N-
<1-







__
-- .




'N
-- -4- -


o/ -^,


0







VZ
I


















*I.
E-4
Z-
94I


q?7 VUW~~ lUUO/^/L/~3S^ uquWg-01


I


^ ^








NACA ACR No. L5B10O


Fig. 1Oa,b


^N
^'N

1









?'3

SZ
^N











I.


e'~7 7 '/~4?/~2/~4/6'Oa








NACA ACR No. L5B10


N


N
1.~








N
N

'K
'K




0'


vo



b
S / o /' o '


^ES^^EEEEE N.








--I~N -x--1


I' I' II



,0 7 ," /i/si/_,9oj I/// 'o,/,o/2.rJ o ,/a'diV.'/,


Pig. lla,b








NACA ACR No. L5B10


'3



12"N


'1Z
^0

0






't3
N

0',

'3/




^'

N-)


i.









0
fs',


10





V;

I%.


V 7 L' 4 /5Iddos3
,t y// vfo/..; s- ..o .,t uour~acfy


Fig. 12a,b





NACA ACR No.' L5B10 Fig. 13


E- IN-44
z
-t----- -|4(z.









S-1
_,.. 2 ,
-- -- -- --











!K' ,a _? -
4 - 'I" 0.
---^--^-7^ ------'0 *
-^-^ ^/ ----
_^^ ___
^---^/L7------.
^ 5 I7 SZ I >K
"S< 1 __ __ __ *^\ i l^ l
-ll--l -^ ~-1*--{
/^-|-7^-uL^ I
-^~~ ~s? ^ -
jt^^ __. ^ 1
-J --^? --- It, "
'N N \ ^ N




-L --ii I rn i

-I\L -I-- I-- 1 I yv'
LID r0/9/3//90)
4t/49tt/oW-96Lu/Cf (J/q.pa9








NACA ACR No. L5B10


-I

E-4




0









i-N
c.)





2










I


N cz~
IN.

N N


N
N




















IN.
N
N


Fig. 14a,b


-<







NACA ACR No. L5B10


4,










oo lz
Si









.'








o
< 4%
*6


Fig. 15







NACA ACR No. L5B10 Fig. 16


c-C
-i-
4I / -4
__/ ____ f

2 ---/ o' .






o o .
^/ '/


















a -
) o-
'I.-


























I 4 S
rJW WW~~ C-.fo!43^







NACA ACR No. L5B10


4N
II
O o-















NI Is
O

















14/ uc~2dg


Fig. 17








NACA ACR No. L5B10


CONFIDENTIAL


26 o



8/tt-yoos e a/'/7ron
deve/ed 7. E.




0/{1nt-nose a//eron cuooea


n/lernla//lly a/aln'eda
7//Perozn cuLoed


K/


-eve/ecd a/i/eror;
w- h / /urnt-n,-oW
0


.rusped a//7e'or w/i7' w/U4 -
- o0'e overhan/y preference/


" I ATiON/IL ADV SORY
/' COII ITTEE IOR AE ONAU1 CS


-5 -4 -3 -2 -/ 9 / Z 3 4 5 6 7 8 3 I0

&Seci-n angof a// ac, o, d!fY CONFIDENTIAL

Fgure /8. -1Va"/' a&se'rt/n //l/ coe/WJkent
wi/h second ang/e of /ack 6 = o0.
All ai/eIo0s sealed.


.8

.7

.6

.5"

.4


.




oS


Fig. 18








UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA

3 1262 08104 995 8



UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
DOCUMENTS DEPARTiMENT
10 TARSTON SCIENCE LIBRARY
'O. BOX 117011
ESVILLE.FL 32611-7011 USA
























ii











'i '