Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
R=19930093910 2018-06-17T08:56:29+00:00Z
ba
J“
‘J
. ..
.! , ,.. -.&k
,.: r .’, ??.’T;,
}-+!; : ‘; % ~
NATIONALADVISORY COMMITTEE
FOR AERONAUTICS
Washington
November 1951
~ Illlllllllllll
~
31176014412044
NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS
suMMARY
INTRODUCTION
dp
UdU =-r
dU_
—— df 1
u ‘71-M2
This boundary case shows that the finite magnitude of the tunnel
will lead to differences compared to the flow condition in the free
atmosphere. Much effort has been put forth to make the transition, by
suitable numerical corrections, from the test values in the tunnel of
finite magnitude to the case undisturbed by walls.
NACA TM 1320 3
Any tunnel correction for zerb lift, which is the case always
considered below, is based on the assumption that the flow in the closest
proximity of the model is the same as in the free atmosphere, that, how-
ever, the free-stream velocity at some distance ahead of the object in
the tunnel is different from that in free atmosphere. Thus, one must
determine what difference exists between the mean local speed in the
proximity of the model location and the tunnel speed ahead of the model.
This can be done by first determining, in the well-known manner, the
influence of the fixed walls by doubly periodic mirroring and then,
with the methods of linearized theory, taking into consideration the’
compressibility. If the flow were free from drag, the model could be
represented by a suitable source-sink distribution, the mirror images
of which may be assumed to be simple dipoles since the model always is
relatively small compared to the tunnel dimensions. The equivalent
dipole strength is proportional to the volume of the object. The
incremental velocity AU+ may be calculated simply; the result is
‘1
L5LTil
--y = ‘~1 ‘k.+ (1)
where in
k“ a numerical factor
(2)
.,
12
U. 4 FK
AUi
— . eil + ei2 (3)
U.
NACA m 1320 5
(4)
‘=” @@3’2”
(6)
cw.- .. ‘mess
—
““K pkFB
1.
6 , NACA TM 1320
q mess
Cw
mess PK
2. MEASUREMENTS
1 260 80
2 211 65
3 162.5 50
Measuring series
NAci ,m 1320 7
-. ,,
~ accurate description of the test arrangements (test section,
supports, balance) may be found in Feldmannts report (footnote 2). Here
we shall only describe a few details.
Stice, .by the installation of the auxiliary struts, the tunnel cross
section is reduced and thereby the’blockage Mach number changed, one must,
in calibrating the supports, be particularly careful to keep the cross-
sectional area of the test section constant by adequate removal of
material at the upper corner strips.
The same corrected Mach number should pertain to points with the
same cwq/ measured on models of different sizes and hence at different
~ree-stream% ch numbers in the tunnel. By fulfillment of this condition,
the numerical corrections can thus be obtained experimentally.
The Mach numbers measured for different model sizes for cvq/~ = const.
were plotted against the ratio of frontal area to tunnel area
(= Fs/FK) of the models (figs. 3 and 4, upper half, open circles
connected by solid lines). The calculated corrected mch numbers in each
case (filled-in circles - according to Thorn, equation (5), filled-in
triangles - according to G6thert, equation (4)) also were plotted against
Fs/FK. They should be the same for all models, that is, their connecting
lines (thinly drawn, Thorn, dashed, G6thert) ought to stand vertically in
figures 3 and 4. One can see that, according to this criterion, the
order of magnitude of the calculated corrections appears in general to
be correct; only a few of the curves show a slight inclination. With
decreasing model size we may attach increasing significance to the
corrected Mach numbers. If, therefore, the thin connecting line of the
fiorr with decreasing Fs/~ is inclined toward higher Mach numbers, the
correction is too small and vice versa. One realizes that the correction
according to Thorn is somewhat too small up to about ~orr = 0.84, too
large above MCOH = 0.93. According to our measurements, this results
independently of thickness and wing shape. G6thert’s corrections, which
differ noticeably from Thorn’s only for higher values of Cw, are there
too small UP to about ~orr = 0.93. .
10 WCA m 1320
,“
,,
,,
. ...,. ,,
,., ~.,,,.~
,-. , :’
,.,,
,, .:.,’
,,
! ! ! .—!. .——..!. . —,,—. ———. —... —
I
NACA TM 1320 11
.... .
.-. .
.-
,,
,( .. . ..—.W--.+
...+.. ““”!
. . ..” .. -.=*L.
-.s.s,
.--”
. ,’
1i
12 NACA TM 1320
Al
m
1 1
JJ2
A B
A3
1 t
12k!H_l i~i II ,,, ,, I,IV [o
1111
‘1
,!
,111
,,,;
Cw
:23
I I 1:,, 0.05
-u I I
‘-’ CW ~= CONST.
PK
0.04
0.03
/1// I I
0.02
/-f/$ ..
-.-,
nni
I I I I
M~
0
0.7 0.75 0.8 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.0
Figure 3.- Drag coefficient Cw plotted against the Mach number M for
A, -
0.01
A2 -
B“
0.005
A
w. 0
Figure 4.-
w
~
0.75 .
Drag coefficient
5
Cw plotted
0.90
M--o
against
0.95 1,0°
14 NACA TM 1320
1.6
?
A “0.04 I .4
12%
-0.03
-0.02 1,2
Cwo
( A. --— “0.01
———
--- I-M I.0
10
0.3 0.2 0.1 0
0.8
.l+i~o ~
~1-M
0.3 0.2 0. I 0° _
0.6
0.4
0.2
-
0
1.6 1.4 1.2 1.0 0.8 ; 0.4 0.2 )
Figure 5.- l&m&n’s rule. A. Unswept wing. B. Wing with 35° sweepback.
Filled-in circles: T = O.12; open circles: T= 0.09. The same applies
to crossed circles which pertain to the values for the sweptback wing
corrected according to Thorn. For comparison. the extrapolated curves
also have been drawn over the undisturbed scales.
..
.~_--—. .——.
-. : ,.