NASA

TECHNICAL

NOTE

NASA TN D-6800

O cO
I

Z I===

CASE FiLE COPY

LONGITUDINAL CHARACTERISTICS PROPELLER-DRIVEN

AERODYNAMIC OF LIGHT, TWIN-ENGINE,

AIRPLANES

by Chester Flight Edwards,

H.

Wolowicz Center 93523

and

Roxanah

B.

Yancey

Research Calif.

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

WASHINGTON, D. C.

JUNE 1972

r_L_

1. Report TN

No. D-6800

2. Government Accession No.

3. Recipient's Catalog No.

4. Title and Subtitle LONGITUDINAL AERODYNAMIC ENGINE, PROPELLER-DRIVEN CHARACTERISTICS AIRPLANES OF LIGHT, TWIN-

5. Report Date June 1972 Organization Code

6. Performing

7. Author(s) Chester H. Wolowicz and Roxanah B. Yancey

8. Performing Organization Report No. H-646 10. Work Unit No.

9. Performing Organization NASA P. O. Edwards, Flight Research Box 273 California

Name and Address Center 93523 13. Type of Report and Period Covered 736-05-00-01-24 11. Contract or Grant No.

12. Sponsoring

Agency Name and Address and 20546 Space Administration

Technical 14. Sponsoring

Note Agency Code

National Aeronautics Washington, D. C. 15. Supplementary Notes

16. Abstract

This procedures dynamic airplanes. included. The airplane

report and stability

documents design data and control for

representative for predicting characteristics predicting drag

state-of-the-art analytical the longitudinal static and of light, propeller-driven characteristics are also

Procedures

procedures in the clean

are applied configuration

to a twin-engine, from zero lift

to

propeller-driven stall conditions.

The calculated characteristics are compared flight data. Included in the comparisons are Istics, period and damping of the short-period windup-turn characteristics. All calculations

with wind-tunnel and level-flight trim characteroscillatory mode, and are documented.

"'17. Key Words (Suggested by Author(s)) Light airplane Aerodynamic

18. Distribution

Statement

characteristics

- prediction

Unclassified

- Unlimited

19. Security Unclassified

Class[f. (of this report)

20. Security Classif. (of this page) Unclassified

21. No. of Pages 361

22. Price"

$6.00
22151

For sale by the National

Technical

Information

Service, Springfield,

Virginia

1i'i,

CONTENTS Page TABLES RELATED TO SUBJECT AIRPLANE ................. FIGURES COMPARING CALCULATED CHARACTERISTICS SUMMARY .................................... i. 0 INTRODUCTION .............................. 2.0 SCOPE OF THE STUDY ......................... 3.0 THE AIRPLANE .............................. 3.1 3.2 ......... vi ix 1 2 2 3 6

4.0

Center-of-Gravity Positions Used in the Analysis ....... Geometric Parameters of the Wing and Horizontal Tail Used in the Analysis ...................... 3.2.1 Symbols ......................... PREDICTION OF PROPELLER-OFF AERODYNAMIC CHARACTERISTICS .......................... 4. i Wing and Horizontal-Tail Airfoil Section Characteristics .... 4.1. i Symbols ..... .................... 4.2 Lift Characteristics of the Wing and Horizontal Tail ..... 4 2 1 Symbols 4.3 Lift Due to Fuselage and Nacelles ............... 4.3.1 Symbols ........................ 4.4 Lift Due to Combined Wing-Fuselage-Nacelle ......... 4.4.1 Symbols ........................ 4.5 Cmo and Aerodynamic Center of the Wing and Horizontal Tail 4.6 4.7 4.8 ............................... 4.5.1 Symbols ......................... Wing-Fuselage Pitching Moment at Zero Lift .......... 4.6.1 Symbols ......................... Fuselage and Nacelle Pitching Moments ............. 4.7. I Symbols ......................... Wing-Fuselage-Nacelle Pitching Moments ........... 4.8.1 Contributing Factors to V_;ing-Fuselage-Nacelle Pitching Moments ................... 4.8.2 Static Margin of Wing-Fuselage-Nacelles ....... 4.8.3 Pitching-Moment Coefficient of Wing-FuselageNacelles ....................... 4.8.4 Symbols ......................... Downwash and Dynamic Pressure at the Horizontal Tail 4 9 1 Downwash 4.9.2 Dynamic-Pressure Ratio ............... 4.9.3 Symbols ........................ Lift of the Complete Airplane (5 e = 0 ) ............ 4. I 0.1 Symbol s ........................ Pitching Moments of the Complete Airplane (5 e = 0 ) ..... 4.1 i. i Symbols ........................ Drag of the Complete Airplane ................. 4.12.1 Zero-Lift Drag of Wing, Horizontal Tail, and Vertical Tail ..................... 4.12.2 4.12.3 Zero-Lift Drag of Fuselage and Nacelles ....... Zero-Lift Interference Drag of Wing-Fuselage, Tail-Fuselage, and Wing-Nacelles ..........
.oo

13 13 15 27 29 37 38 46 48 55 56 60 60 64 64 68 68 71 72 75 87 87 90 92 109 111 lt7 118 122 122 123 124

4.9

....

4. i0 4. II 4.12

111

CONTENTS-

Continued Page

4.12.4 4.12.5 4.12.6 4.12.7 4.12.8 4.12.9 Effect of Pitching 4.13.1 4.13.2 4.13.3 4.13.4

Drag of Wing and Horizontal Tail at Angle of Attack ......................... Drag of Fuselage and Nacelles at Angle of Attack ......................... Wing-Fuselage Interference Drag at Angle of Attack .........................

127 129 130 131 131 132 156 156 160 161 162 165 184 184 191 192 215 216 217 221 223 224 256 262 282 285 300 301 310 311 311 313 315 325 325 328

5.0

6.0

Cooling Drag ...................... Summary Drag of the Complete Airplane ........ Symbols ......................... 4.13 Horizontal Taft and Tab Deflection on Lift and Moments ....................... Lift of the Horizontal Tail in the Linear Range .... Maximum Lift of the Horizontal Tail .......... Lift Curves of the Horizontal Tail Through Stall . . . Lift and Pitching-Moment Curves of the Airplane Including the Effect of Elevator Positions ...... 4.13.5 Symbols ......................... 4.14 Horizontal-Tail Hinge Moments and Stick Forces ........ 4.14.1 Horizontal-Tail Hinge Moments ............ 4.14.2 Stick Forces ...................... 4.14.3 Symbols ......................... PREDICTION OF POWER-ON AE RODYNAMIC CHARACTERISTICS ............................. 5.1 Power Effects on Lift ...................... 5.1.1 Tail-Off Lift Characteristics With Power On ..... 5.1.2 Horizontal-Tail Contribution to Lift .......... 5.1.3 Net Characteristics of the Subject Airplane ...... 5.1.4 Symbols ......................... 5.2 Power Effects on Pitching Moments ............... 5.2.1 Symbol s ......................... 5.3 Power Effects on Drag ...................... 5.3.1 Symbols ......................... 5.4 Power Effects on Horizontal-Tail Hinge Moments and Stick Forces .......................... 5.4.1 Symbols ......................... DYNAMIC CHARACTERISTICS .................... 6.1 Lift Due to Dynamic Motions .................. 6.1.1 6.1.2 6.2 6.1.3 Pitching 6.2.1 6.2.2 6.2.3 Lift Lift Due to pitch Due to Vertical Rate, CLq .............. CL_ .......

Acceleration,

Symbols Moments Pitching Pitching Cm_

......................... Due to Dynamic Motions ........... Moments Due to Pitch Rate, Cmq Moment Due to Vertical Acceleration, Rate and Transient .............

......

......................... Vertical

Pitching Moments Due to Pitch Acceleration in Short-Period Oscillations, (Cmq

iv

+ Cm_)

33O

CONTENTS

- Concluded Page

6.3 6.4

6.2.4 Symbols ......................... Short-Period Transient Oscillation Characteristics 6.3.1 Symbols ......................... Windup-Turn Characteristics ................. 6.4.1 6.4,2 Variation of Otrim and 5etri m With Stick Load Factor ........................ Variation of Hinge Moments and With Load Factor .................. 6.4.3 Symbols ......................... .................................

.....

331 340 341 346 346

Forces 349 351 359

REFERENCES

TABLES RELATED TO SUBJECTAIRPLANE

Page 3-1 3.2-1 PREDICTION 4. i-I 4.2-i 4.3-1 4.4-1 4.4-2 4.5-1 4.6-1 4.7-1 4.7-2 4.8.1-1 4.8.1-2 4.8.3-1 4.9. i-i MANUFACTURER' S PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SUBJECT AIRPLANE .................... PERTINENT WING AND HORIZONTAL-TAIL GEOMETRIC PARAMETERS USED IN THE ANALYSIS ............ OF PROPELLER-OFF AERODYNAMIC CHARACTERISTICS 16 31 40 50 51 57 AT 62

4 9

AIRPLANE WING AND HORIZONTAL-TAIL AIRFOIL SECTION CHARACTERISTICS .................. LIFT CHARACTERISTICS OF AIRPLANE WING AND HORIZONTAL TAIL ....................... CONTRIBUTION OF FUSELAGE AND NACELLES TO AIRPLANE LIFT COEFFICIENT ................ WING LIFT OF AIRPLANE INCLUDING MUTUAL WINGFUSELAGE INTERFERENCE .................. SUMMARY OF WING-FUSELAGE-NACELLE LIFT ........ Cmo AND AERODYNAMIC CENTER OF WING AND HORIZONTAL TAIL ....................... WING-FUSELAGE PITCHING MOMENTS OF AIRPLANE ZERO LIFT ............................ FUSELAGE AND NACELLE PITCHING MOMENTS OF

AmPLANE ...............

G6
67 80 81 83

4.9.1-2 4.9.2-2 4.10-1

TABULAR INTEGRATION OF FUSELAGE PiTCt{IN6MOMENT PARAMETERS .................... WING PITCHING MOMENTS OF THE AIRPLANE ......... " FREE MOMENTS" OF FUSELAGE AND NACELLES ...... PITCHING MOMENTS OF WING-FUSELAGE-NACELLES CONFIGURATION ......................... PERTINENT PARAMETERS FOR COMPUTING AVERAGE DOWNWASH AT HORIZONTAL TAIL OF SUBJECT AIRPLANE ............................ SUMMARY CALCULATION OF AVERAGE DOWNWASH AT HORIZONTAL TAIL OF SUBJECT AIRPLANE ......... DYNAMIC-PRESSURE RATIO AT THE HORIZONTAL TAIL OF THE SUBJECT AIRPLANE .................. LIFT OF HORIZONTAL TAIL IN THE PRESENCE OF THE FUSELAGE (6 = 0 ) ...................... e LIFT OF THE COMPLETE OF AIRPLANE THE COMPLETE (6e = 0) .........

96 97 99 113 114

4.10-2 4.11-1

PITCHING (5 e 0 )

MOMENTS

AIRPLANE 119 137 137 138 139 140

4.12. i-I 4.12.1-2 4.12.2-1 4.12.3-1 4.12.4-1

SURFACE ROUGHNESS HEIGHT k ................ ZERO-LIFT DRAG OF WING, HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL TAILS ........................ ZERO-LIFT DRAG OF FUSELAGE AND NACELLES ....... ZERO-LIFT DRAG OF THE COMPONENTS ............ DRAG OF WING AND HORIZONTAL TAIL DUE TO LIFT .....

vi

TABLES

- Continued Page

4.12.5-1 4.12.8-1 4.13.1-1 4.13.2-1 4.13.4-1 4.14.1-1

DRAG DRAG

DUE TO OF THE

LIFT OF FUSELAGE AND NACELLES ...... COMPLETE AIRPLANE (6e = 0 ) .........

142 143 170 173 174

LIFT CONTRIBUTION OF THE HORIZONTAL TAIL WITH TAB-TO-ELEVATOR GEAR RATIO OF i. 5 .......... MAXIMUM LIFT COEFFICIENTS OF THE HORIZONTAL TAIL .............................. EFFECT OF ELEVATOR DEFLECTION ON LIFT AND PITCHING MOMENTS OF THE AIRPLANE ........... LIFT CHARACTERISTICS OF HORIZONTAL TAIL ALONE IN THE AND PRESENCE 6e, WITH OF TAB THE BODY AS A FUNCTION GEARED IN RATIO OF OF a_ h

6tab/6 e = 1.5 4.14.1-2 4.14.1-3 4.14.1-4 PREDICTION 5.1.1-1 5.1.1-2 5.1.1-3 5.1.1-4 5.1.2-1 5.2-1 5.2-2 5.2-3 5.2-4 5.2-5 5.2-6 5.3-1 5.3-2 5.3-3 5.3-4 5.4-1 5.4-2 DYNAMIC 6.1.1-1

..........................

197 198 200 202

PERTINENT RELATIONS FOR HORIZONTAL-TAIL HINGE MOMENTS ............................ HORIZONTAL-TAIL TAB CHARACTERISTICS .......... HORIZONTAL-TAIL HINGE-MOMENT CHARACTERISTICS OF POWE R-ON CHARAC TE RISTICS

. . .

LIFT DUE TO DIRECT ACTION OF THE PROPELLER FORCES ............................. WING-LIFT INCREMENTS DUE TO PROPELLER SLIPSTREAM EFFECTS ....................... TAIL-OFF LIFT CHARACTERISTICS WITH POWER ON ..... POWER EFFECTS ON MAXIMUM LIFT .............. EFFECT OF ELEVATOR DEFLECTION ON LIFT WITH POWER ON ............................ PITCHING-MOMENT INCREMENTS DUE TO PROPELLER FORCES ............................. ZER O-LIFT PITCHING-MOMENT INCREMENT DUE TO POWER .............................. PITCHING-MOMENT INCREMENT DUE TO POWERINDUCED CHANGE IN WING LIFT ............... PITCHING-MOMENT INCREMENT DUE TO POWER EFFECT ON NACELLE FREE MOMENTS ................ TAIL-OFF PITCHING-MOMENT CHARAC TE RISTICS WITH POWER ON .......................... EFFECT OF ELEVATOR DEFLECTION ON PITCHING MOMENTS WITH POWER ON .................. ZERO-LIFT DRAG INCREMENTS DUE TO POWER ....... INDUCED-DRAG INCREMENT DUE TO POWER ......... CHANGE IN COOLING-SYSTEM DRAG DUE TO POWER ..... POWER-ON DRAG OF THE COMPLETE AIRPLANE ....... HORIZONTAL-TAIL TAB CHARACTERISTICS .......... HORIZONTAL-TAIL HINGE-MOMENT CHARACTERISTICS . . CHARACTERISTICS LIFT DUE TO PITCH RATE, CLq vii ................

230 232 235 236 237 267 268 270 271 272 273 289 290 294 295 304 305

319

TABLES - Concluded
Page

6.1.2-1 6.2.1-1 6.2.2-1 6.4.1-1 6.4.2-1

LIFT DUE TO VERTICAL ACCELERATION, CL& ...... PITCHING MOMENTSDUE TO PITCH RATE, Cmq ...... PITCHING MOMENT DUE TO VERTICAL ACCELERATION, Cm_. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . .............
WINDUP-TURN VARIATION OF _trim AND 5etri m WITH LOAD FACTOR ......................... VARIATION OF HINGE MOMENTS AND STICK FORCES WITH LOAD FACTOR IN WINDUP TURN ...........

321 335 337

354 356

...

Vlll

FIGURES

COMPARING

CALCULATED

CHARACTERISTICS

Page PROPELLER-OFF 4.4-4 4.8.3-2 4.10-1 4.11-1 CHARACTERISTICS wing-fuselage-nacelles Sw = 178 sq ft ............. tail-off data. lift curve 54

Comparison of predicted with wind-tunnel data. Comparison of calculated istics with wind-tunnel

pitching-moment characterS w = 178 sq ft .......... with wind-tunnel

86 115

Comparison of predicted airplane lift curve data. 5 e =0; S w = 178 sq ft ................. Comparison of predicted tunnel data. 6 e = 0;

airplane pitching moments with Sw = 178 sq ft; center of gravity

wind=

0.10 w ..............................
4.12.8-1 4.13.4-1 Comparison wind-tunnel of predicted airlSlane drag data. 5 e = 0; propellers characteristics with off; S w = 178 sq ft...

120
152

Comparison of predicted propeller-off lift and pitchingmoment characteristics of the airplane with wind-tunnel data as a function of o_ and 6 e. b S w= 178 sq ft; 5tab/6 e = 1.5 (propeller-off wind-tunnel data data at T% = 0 with propeller of gravity = 0. 106 w ....................... of calculated coefficients and of the wind-tunnel-determined horizontal assumed tail. 5tab/Se hinge= 1.5; 214 obtained from propeller-on effects calculated out); center 182

4.14.1-10

Comparison moment

wind-tunnel off condition POWER-ON 5.1.2-4

data at T_ = 0 ...........................

equivalent

to propeller-

CHARACTERISTICS Comparison of calculated and experimentally determined (ref. downwash at the horizontal tail of the subject airplane at several power settings ..................... Comparison of calculated and wind-tunnel-determined variation of C L with oeb at different power conditions and elevator deflections Comparison ........................... of calculated and wind-tunnel-determined at T_ tail-off = 0.44 and 275 variation and elevator 276 variation and elevator 277 2) 253

5.1.3-1

255

5.2-2

lift and pitching-moment center of gravity = 0.10_ 5.2-3 Comparison of Cm of calculated with c_b Center of calculated with CL Center

characteristics w ................... and

wind-tunnel-determined power conditions

at different of gravity and

deflections. 5.2-4 Comparison of Cm

- 0. 106 w ...........

wind-tunnel-determined power conditions

at different of gravity

deflections.

- 0.10_ w ............

ix

FIGURES

- Concluded Page

5.2-5

Comparison of neutral-point modified calculated and characteristics. Center Comparison determined and angle Comparison

characteristics determined wind-tunnel pitching-moment of gravity = 0.10_ w ..........

from 278

5.2-6

of the variation of calculated pitch-control effectiveness of attack ........................ of calculated static pitch,

and _qnd-tunnelwith thrust coefficient 279 Cmc d and control ef-

5.2-7

fectiveness, Cm_ e, with wind-tunnel values as a function of angle of attack. O. 12_ w ............................. 5.2-8 Comparison of calculated C L, ab' and

and flight-determined Center of gravity

= 280

5e

characteristics from windairspeed.

for

trim level flight tunnel and flight Center of gravity 5.3-4 5.3-5 Comparison of C D Comparison of C D Comparison

conditions with those obtained data as a function of calibrated = 0.12_ w ................... wind-tunnel-determined power conditions. wind-tunnel-determined power conditions. _qnd-tunnel-determined

281 variation 5e = 0 .... variation 5 e = 0 .... variation of 308 298 299

of calculated and with _b at different of calculated and with C L at different of calculated and

5.4-1

5.4 -2

hinge moment Chh(t ) with angle of attack at different power conditions and elevator deflections ............... Comparison of calculated hinge-moment and stick-force characteristics in level flight with those obtained from wind-ttmnel and flight data as a function of airspeed. Altitude = 6000 ft; center of gravity -=-0.12_ w .................... Comparison values Center of calculated Cmq + Cm& with flight-determined pulse maneuvers.

309

6.2.3-1

obtained from transient short-period of gravity = 0.126 w ...................

339 and damping as a function time histories of gravity = of 344 of 345

6.3-1

Comparison of calculated short-period frequency characteristics with flight-determined values airspeed. Center of gravity = 0.12_ w ............. Comparison of calculated and flight-determined airplane response to pulse-type input. Center 0.12_ w ..............................

6.3-2

6.4.2-1

Comparison of calculated hinge-moment and stick-force characteristics in a windup turn with those obtained from x_indtunnel and flightdata as a function of load factor. Altitude = 6000 ft;center of gravity = 0.12Cw; V = 220 ft/sec .......

358

LONGITUDINAL

AERODYNAMIC PROPE Chester H.

CHARACTERISTICS LLER-DRIVEN

OF

LIGHT, S Yancey

TWIN-ENGINE,

AIRPLANE Roxanah Center B.

Wolowicz and Flight Research

SUM MA RY

Representative state-of-the-art analytical procedures and design data for predicting the subsonic longitudinal static and dynamic stability and control characteristics of light, propeller-driven airplanes are documented. Procedures for predicting drag characteristics are also included. The procedures are applied to a twin-engine, configuration to determine the lift, pitching-moment, zero lift to stall conditions. Also determined are period and damping of the short-period oscillatory istics. All calculations are documented. The calculated lift characteristics as a function of angle of attack, elevator correlated settings, propeller-driven airplane in the clean and drag characteristics from level-flight trim characteristics, mode, and windup-turn character-

well with full-scale wind-tunnel and power conditions.

data

The calculated drag characteristics also correlated well with full-scale windtunnel data as a function of angle of attack, lift coefficient, and power settings in the linear range at zero thrust conditions. With increasing thrust, the correlation was good at the lower angles of attack, but tended to deteriorate with increasing angle of attack. When the increment of induced drag due to power was omitted, good correlation resulted throughout the power range at the high angles of attack. It was surmised that the wide, built-in nacelles had a significant nullifying effect on the power-induced drag of the immersed portion of the wing. Calculated propeller-off tunnel data for zero elevator slope correlation was good dicated than was reflected lift-carryover effects onto of the airplane investigated. improved if this carryover pitching-moment characteristics agreed well with winddeflection. When different elevator settings were included, but larger calculated control effectiveness in pitch was inby tunnel data. Study of this discrepancy indicated that tail the body are nil for the horizontal-tail and body configuration Correlation of pitch control effectiveness would have been effect had been eliminated from the calculations.

The addition of power effects to the calculated pitching-moment characteristics resulted in an increasing disparity between the calculated and the wind-tunnel-derived pitching-moment slopes with increasing power. It was deduced that the deterioration in correlation with increasing power was due to inadequate design data for the powerinduced downwash increment at the tail. When the power-induced downwash was reduced by 40 percent, good correlation of slopes for all power conditions resulted. It H-646

was concluded that the design data used properly account for the slipstream-flow type used on the airplane analyzed. Using the modified power-induced ments correlated relatively well with acteristics for level flight and windup

to obtain the interference

downwash of wide,

due to power did not built-in nacelles of the

downwash, the calculated elevator hinge wind-tunnel data. Calculated stick-force turns agreed reasonably well with flight

mochardata.

1.0

INTRODUCTION

As part of a NASA program to enhance general aviation safety and utility, the NASA Flight Research Center has undertaken the documentation of analytical procedures and design data, oriented to the needs of the industry, for predicting the subsonic static and dynamic stability and control characteristics of propeller-driven aircraft. In partial fulfillment of this project, representative state-of-the-art methods have been compiled and, in some instances, extensions proposed. The results have been applied to a representative light, low-wing, twin-engine, propeller-driven airplane in the clean configuration, and the accuracy of the methods has been determined by comparing calculated characteristics with wind-tunnel and flight data. This report summarizes methods and guidelines which should enable obtain improved estimates of the stability and control characteristics for conditions in general and the power effects on twin-engine, propeller-driven in particular. Axis systems, in accord with sign conventions, and standard NASA practice definitions of stability and usage. and control a designer propeller-off designs to

derivatives

are

2.0

SCOPE

OF THE

STUDY

As a logical starting point for the study, use was made of the USAF Stability and Control Datcom handbook (ref. 1). This is a compendium of methods and design data for predicting the stability and control characteristics of jet and propeller-driven aircraft from subsonic through hypersonic regions of flight. It deals primarily with winged configurations with untwisted constant airfoil sections. A considerable portion of the material is based on NACA and NASA reports. In the present report, Datcom is listed as the reference when it provides a unique treatment of information from other sources. The basic source is referenced when Datcom repeats pertinent equations and design data from another source. During this study, it became necessary to supplement the Datcom methods and to provide some innovations. The analysis of longitudinal characteristics zero lift to stall and involved stall conditions on conditions are considered in all instances. moment, drag, and hinge-moment-coefficient attack and elevator position. Elevator trim in the clean configuration ranged from of the elevator. Propeller-off and powerIncluded are analyses of the lift, pitchingcharacteristics as functions of angle of and stick-force characteristics for 1 g

H-646

flight and windup turns are also included, as well as short-period and damping characteristics. In the systematic buildup of the predicted longitudinal characteristics, procedures, design charts, calculations, and correlating figures used to illustrate the accuracy of the results are presented. The report is divided into three phases: propeller-off static characteristics; effect of power on the static characteristics; and dynamic characteristics, both with the propeller off and with the power on. The propeller-off static characteristic buildup initially considers tail-off lift and pitching moments in sequence. This is followed by a consideration of the effects of the horizontal tail on the characteristics, drag buildup of the complete airplane, and, finally, the derivation of the horizontal-tail hingemoment characteristics. The effects of power on the lift, pitch, drag, and hinge moments are considered in the secondphase. The third phase considers the derivation of the dynamic-stability derivative s. Throughout the report, comparisons are made with wind-tunnel and flight data when appropriate data are available. Notations and symbols are defined in each section as they are used. 3.0 THE AIRPLANE The airplane used in the analysis is representative of general-aviation, personalowner aircraft. It is a six-place, low-wing, twin-engine, propeller-driven, all-metal airplane with an all-movable horizontal stabilizer. Pertinent physical characteristics, as provided by the manufacturer, are listed in table 3-1. A three-view dra_dng is presented in figure 3-1. The all-movable horizontal tail (referred to herein as a stabilator or elevator) is equipped with a trailing-edge antiservo tab geared to move in the same direction as the tail with a gear ratio of 1.5 tab per degree of stabilator. The servo tab is geared to increase the elevator control-force gradient.

H-646

TABLE 3-1 MANUFACTURER' S PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICSOF THE SUBJECT AIRPLANE

Wing Location ............................... Low Loading, lb/sq ft ........................... 20.2 Airfoil section ..................... NACA 642, A215 (modified) Area, sq ft ............................. 178.0 Span, ft ............................... 35.98 Mean aerodynamic chord, ft .................... 5.00 Aspect ratio ............................. 7.30 Dihedral, deg ........................... 5.00 Incidence, deg ........................... 2.00 Aerodynamic twist ......................... 0 Power Horsepower/engine ........................ 160.00 Loading, lb/hp ........................... 11.3 Engine ............................ 2 Lycoming I0-320-B Propellers Type ............ Hartzell HC-E2YL-2A constant speed full feathering Blades ............................... 7663 -4 Diameter, in ............................ 72.00 Weight and balance Maximum gross weight, lb ..................... 3600.00 Empty gross weight, lb ....................... 2160.00 Allowable center of gravity for maximum gross weight, percent mean aerodynamic chord ................ 12.5 to 28.6 Allowable center of gravity for empty gross weight, percent mean aerodynamic chord ............... 3.3 to 21.6 Control-surface deflection, degAileron ............................... 18 up, 14 do_n Elevator (stabilator) ......................... 14 up, 4 down Rudder .............................. 22 right, 20 left Flap (full) ............................. 27 Adjustable trim systems Longitudinal ............................ Tab Directional ............................. Bungee Lateral ...............................

H-64 6

12.5

35.98

Figure

3-1.

Three-view

dr;_wing

of the

tesi

airpl,_ne.

Dimensions

in feet.

H-646

3.1

Center-of-Gravity

Positions

Used

in the

Analysis

The center of gravity of the airplane, for analytical purposes, was fixed at 10 percent of the wing mean aerodynamic chord and 12 inches below the X-body axis (located on the zero waterline) to conform with the full-scale wind-tunnel data (ref. 2) used in the correlation of analytically predicted characteristics. For preliminary design purposes, a more typical assumption of center-of-gravity position for the start of analysis would be 25 percent of the wing mean aerodynamic chord. In correlations wind-tunnel data center-of-gravity with flight data, both the analytically predicted characteristics were modified to conform with the 12-percent mean aerodynamic conditions of the flight data. and chord

H-646

3.2 Geometric Parameters of the Wing and Horizontal Tail Used in the Analysis In analytically predicting the longitudinal characteristics, the wing and horizontal tail were considered on the basis of total planform and exposedpanel planform, depending on the characteristics being determined. Total planform was considered to extend through the nacelle and the fuselage; exposedpanel planform terminated at the fuselage. Pertinent dimensions for the wing and tail are shown in figures 3.2-1 to
3.2-3. The wing was considered to have zero leading-edge sweep, although there is actually some sweepback between the fuselage and the nacelle. As a result of the assumption of zero leading-edge sweep, the reference total planform area used in determining the characteristics was 172.3 square feet in contrast to the manufacturer Ts reference area of 178 square feet, based on a projection of the actual leading edge through the fuselage. Because wind-ttmnel data and flight-determined characteristics were based on the 178-square-foot area, the predicted characteristics were ultimately referenced to this area for comparison purposes. Table 3.2-1 analysis. Symbols b2 A b
b e

lists

the

geometric

parameters

of the wing

and horizontal

tail

pertinent

to the 3.2.1

aspect span, span tab mean

ratio, ft or in. of the exposed in. chord, chord in. of the exposed panel, in. panels, ft or in.

btab

span,

aerodynamic aerodynamic chord, chord in. of the in. in.

_e

mean root root

Cr

(Cr) e ct Ctab lh

exposed

panel,

in.

tip chord, tab chord,

distance of the area, sq

from the aircraft center of gravity horizontal-tail mean aerodynamic

to the chord,

quarter in.

chord

Y_

lateral distance chord, in.

to the

mean

aerodynamic

chord

from

the

root

(Yc)e H -646

lateral distance to the mean aerodynamic chord panel from the exposed panel root chord, in.

of the

exposed

F
Ac/2 A c/4
A1 e X

dihedral sweep sweep sweep taper

angle, of the of the of the ratio,

deg half-chord quarter-chord leading ct -c r

line,

deg line, deg deg

edge,

H-646

TABLE PERTINENT WING AND

3.2-1 PARAMETERS

HORIZONTAL-TAIL GEOMETRIC USED IN THE ANALYSIS

Symbol

De scription Total

Wing Exposed 148.0 32.0 6.9 39.0 71.9 544

Horizontal Total 32.5 12.5 4.8 21.4 41.5 .515

tail Exposed 28.73 11.25 4.4 21.4 39.3 .545

Vertical Exposed 14.6 4.67 1.49 24.0 51.0 .471

tail

S b A c t
Cr

Area, Span, Aspect

sq ft ft b2 ratio, in. in. ct -Cr

c172.3 36.0 7.5 39.0 76.0 .513

Tip chord, Root chord, Taper ratio,

Y_ F Ale A c//4 ac/2

aMean b Lateral

aerodynamic position in.

chord, of mean

in. aerodynamic

59.50 96.48

57.10 86.58

32.45 33.10

31.2 30.10

39.2 d24.6

chord,

Dihedral angle, deg Leading-edge sweep, deg Sweep of e/4 line, deg Sweep of c/2 line, deg

5 0 -2.5 -5

5 0 -2.5 -5

0 12 8 5

0 12 8 5 35 3O 25

_-=

Cr(!+X+X2'_

/ b
reference on 178 in theoretical feet, the determination reference as given area in of characteristics. for figure the wind-tunnel 3.2-3. The and final values data. of calculated square flight

b ye=
CArea characteristics dFrom

,(, +
as basic are based

u_d

root

chord

of exposed

vertical-tail

panel

H-646

g_

,,
,d

. _I_

_ _

_
m

"_
p.,,.. I'0 O0 .-i,.11'% ..+,-,. ,tO I Yu,O _0 l,_ 0-,,i,-, ,-i,,-, II

_._
_._

/
_++_+ /
._='_
b _-'_ __..__->"

_'_

..i.-+

_.,',

I I

/
<

0 Z

(33

10

H-646

11

ct = 21.4

f
!

4.6

Ac/4 Ale = 12 ,

= 8

Ctab = O. 18c-

[h = 173.94 (wind tunnel) ([h = 172.75, flight) btab 2 59.4

b= 2

75

y_ -- 33. lO Q chord line /

I

259.33

ICr) e - 39.3
I I !

15

41.5

Torque tube (station 250. 50)

Figure All

3.2-2. dimensions

Pertinent in inches

horizontal-tail except

dimensions

used

in the

analysis.

as noted.

H-646

11

ct = 24

A[e = 35o be = 56.0 C,e= 39.2

/ / /

(Cr)e = 51.0

Figure 3.2-3. calculations.

Pertinent dimensions of exposed All dimensions in inches except

vertical-tail as noted.

panel

used

in drag

12

H-646

4.0 PREDICTION OF PROPELLER-OFF AERODYNAMIC CHARACTERISTICS 4.1 Wing andHorizontal-Tail Airfoil SectionCharacteristics Somesuccess has been achievedin predicting airfoil section characteristics; however, where possible, section characteristics should be based on experimental data (ref. 3, for example) with the maximum lift coefficient corrected to the Reynoldsnumber being considered. The discussion in this section is presented to showthe trends created by the variation of pertinent section geometric characteristics. Theoretically, airfoil section lift-curve slopes for nonseparated, incompressible flow conditions are affected by airfoil thickness ratio, t/c, andto a much lesser extent by trailing-edge angle, (Pte(fig. 4.1-1), as shownby the following equation from reference 1: cl
(4. i-i)

Ol

= 6.28

+ 4.7(t/c)

(1 + 0.00375_0te

) per

radian

where

ete

is in degrees.

Practically,

boundary

layer

(which

is influenced

by surface

roughness, leading-edge sharpness, surface curvature, and pressure gradients) reduces the section lift-curve slope significantly. Leading-edge sharpness is normally expressed as a leading-edge-sharpness parameter, Ay (fig. 4.1-2). Effects of leading-edge sharpness and surface roughness are illustrated in this section. The variables of section q_e and Ay are used as correlating parameters throughout the discussion characteristics. It is affected only number effects, howin reference 5 and

Section zero-lift angle of attack cannot be predicted accurately. slightly by Reynolds number and surface roughness (ref. 4); Mach ever, can be significant in the higher subsonic regions as indicated shown in figure 4.1-3 (from ref. 1). Low-speed of stall section separation stalling patterns characteristics and a fourth

types

can be classified into three "pure" "impure" type (ref. 6) as shown in the adjacent sketch.

Leading-edgestall

/-Combined stall

lra,ling-e_estall-\ \= \\Thin airtoi,stal,, \ l

Lift coefficient

VCo?_,?ed

(a) Trailing--edge stall is characterized by a gradual turbulent boundarylayer separation starting at the section trailing edge and moving forward with increasing angle of attack. This type of stall occurs on wings having a thickness of 12 percent or greater. The stall is mild with a gradual rounding of the lift and moment curves near maximum lift coefficient.

Angle of attack

ized H-646

(lo) Leading-edge stall is characterby an abrupt local (small bubble) 13

flow separation near the leading edge. For this separation pattern the lift and pitchingmoment curves showlittle or no changein lift-curve slope prior to maximum lift and an abrupt, often large, changein lift and pitching moment after maximum lift is attained. (c) Thin-airfoil stall is characterized by laminar flow separation from the leading edge, followed by a turbulent reattachment at a point along the chord which moves progressively downstream with increasing angle of attack. The stall is characterized by a rounded lift-curve peak, generally preceded by an inflection in the force and moment variation in the linear range for airfoils with roundedleading edges. (d) Combined trailing-edge and leading-edge stall is characterized by either a semirounded or relatively sharp lift-curve peak and followed by either an abrupt or relatively rapid decrease in lift. The type of leading-edge stall, (b) and (c), and the occurrence of trailing-edge and combined stall are dependenton leading-edge geometry and on the Reynoldsnumber of the boundary layer at the point of separation andthus on the free-stream Reynolds number. This is reflected in figure 4.1-4, from reference 6, where the upper surface ordinate at the 0. 0125 chord was used as a correlating parameter. The type of leadingedge stall affects the section maximum lift coefficient. This is reflected in figure 4.1-5, from reference 1, for an uncambered airfoil at a Reynoldsnumber of 9 106; the leading-edge-sharpness parameter, Ay (fig. 4.1-2), is the correlating parameter. The effect of Reynoldsnumber on the maximum section lift coefficient can be accountedfor by using figure 4.1-6, from reference 1, which uses the leading-edgesharpness parameter, Ay, as the correlating parameter. The effects of surface roughness on maximum section lift coefficient are not so readily accountedfor. Figure 4.1-7, from reference 3, showsthe effects of Reynoldsnumber and NACA standard roughness on an airfoil section. Figures 4.1-8 and 4.1-9, also from reference 3, showthe effects of roughness at the leading edge and at various chordwise locations. It should be noted that NACA standard roughnessis considered to be more severe than that caused by the usual manufacturing irregularities or deterioration in service. The aerodynamic center of thin airfoil sections at subsonic conditions is theoretically located at the quarter-chord point. Experimentally, the aerodynamic center is a function of section thickness ratio andtrailing-edge angle, as shownin figure 4.1-10. For the subject airplane the section airfoil characteristics of the wing andhorizontal tail, summarized in table 4.1-1, were determined from table 4.1-2 (from ref. 1), which is a summary of experimental data (at NRe = 9 106) for NACA fourand five-digit airfoils section characteristics table 4.1-2; tained from 0009 airfoils. and NACA six-series of the wing airfoil airfoils reported in reference (NACA 642A215) were obtained 3. The directly from

the characteristics a linear interpolation

of the horizontal-tail of the characteristics

airfoil (NACA 0008) were oblisted for the NACA 0006 and

attack

The upper limit of linearity, limit of the linear portion

a*, indicated of the lift-curve

in table slope.

4.1-2

is the

upper

angle-of-

14

H-646

4.1.I
a.a.

Symbols aerodynamic section section section section chord, drag lift center in. or of an airfoil ft section, fraction or percent of chord

cd cl
C_ma X

coefficient coefficient lift coefficient

maximum

(ez a )base
Ac/max

section maximum 9 106 based correction section of Iift-curve

lift coefficient at reference on section chord, ft for Reynolds rad or deg at zero about lift the number

Reynolds

number

of

C/max slope,

Cl_
Cm O

section section Mach

pitching-moment pitching-moment number number, thickness coordinate based ratio

coefficient coefficient

Cmc/4

quarter-chord

point

M NRe t/c x/c,y/c Ay

Reynolds maximum section

on the

chord

in ft

dimensions

(fig.

4.1-7) (fig. 4.1-2), percent

section leading-edge-sharpness of chord angle angle limit angle sweep section of attack, of attack of linearity of attack of the at rad for of or deg zero Cla lift

parameter

Ot

%
$ 0/

%1 max Ac/4

c I max line, (fig. (leg 4.1-1), deg

quarter-chord angle

trailing-edge

H-646

15

o o N O ts_ O

_<

O O LO O,1

r_

I I _.._ _._ I

_1

a
r_

_44_ _-_

4 -_

4 _

4 .._

I I I

i ___

, !

.<

,_ , I_
t_ ,.--4

0 r_
r._

i q_ I

,__

_<
_ c"q o,_
I

c'_,1
I

_
I

c_
I

i I

_
I

z_4

, I
I I

4
_ .._

4
.._

4
bJ_ 0

'Ig"
,'_ 0

"CI

x
0

Z
N

g
_

_
o _ _ o ,-_ ._

i_ o o
o

"g<I
._ -F _ _.

""__,_ 0

_'_

_._

_,_
_ _

_ _

o o

"_/'-2

e_g_ g
o , ._._
_ _a _ _

._
N
r_

,_
u N
N <

od

16

H-646

TABLE EXPERIMENTAL LOW-SPEED AIRFOIL

4.1-2 AERODYNAMIC CHARACTERISTICS 1

SECTION [ Ref. 1] NRe :: 9

(a)

4-

and

5-digit

airfoils,

106,

smooth

leading

edge

Airfoil 0006 0009 1408 1410 1412 2412 2415 2418 2421 2424 4412 4415 4418 4421 4424 23012 23015 23018 23021 23024

%,

deg 0 0 .8

Cm o 0 0 -.023 -.020 -.025 -.047 -.049 -.050 -.040 -.040 -.093 -.093 -.088 -.085 -.082 -.014 -.007 -.005 0 0

cla

per 0.108 .109 .109 .108 . 108 .105 ,i06 ,103 .103 .098 .105 .105 .105 .103 .100 .107 .107 .104 ,103 ,097

deg

a.c. %/max' 0.250 ,250 ,250 .247 .252 .247 .246 .241 .241 .231 .247 .245 .242 .238 ,239 .247 ,243 243 ,238 .231 9.0 13.4 14.0 14.3 15.2 16.8 16.4 14.0 16.0 16.0 14. O 15.0 14.0 16.0 16.0 18.0 18.0 16.0 15.0 15.0 deg

C/max 0.92 1.32 1.35 1.50 1.58 1.68 1.63 1.47 1.47 1.29 1.67 1.64 1.53 1.47 1.38 1.79 1.72 1.60 1.50 1.40

c_,

deg 9.0

11.4 10.0 11.0 12.0 9.5 10,0 10.0 8.0 8.4 7.5 8.0 7.2 6.0 4.8 12.0 10.0 11.8 10.3 9,7

-1.0 -I.1 -2.0 -2.0 -2,3 -1.8 -1,8 -3.8 -4.3 -3.8 -3.8 -3.8 -1.4 -1.0 -1.2 -1.2 -.8

_)

6-series

airfoiIs,

NRe

= 9

106,

smooth

leading

edge

Airfoil 63-006 63-009 63-206 63-209 63-210 631-012 631-212 631-412 632-015 632-215 632-415 632-615 633-018 633-218 633-418 633-618 634-021 634-221 634-421 63,4-420 63,4-420 63(420)-422 63(420)-517 64-006 64-009 64-108 C_-ll0 64-206 64-208 64-209 64-210 641-012 641-112 641-212 64_412

(Yo,

deg 0 0

Cmo 0.005 0 -.037 -.032 -.035

cl_

per 0.112 .lI1 .112 .I10 .113

deg

a.c. 0.258 .258 .254 .262 .261 .265 .263 .271 .271 .267 .262 .266 .271 .271 .272 .267 .273 269 .275 .265 .265 .271 .264 .256 .262 ,255 ,261 .253 .257 .261 .258 .262 .267 .262 .267

%l

max' 10.0 I1.0 10.5 12.0 14.5 14.0 14.5 15.0 14.5 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.5 14.5 16.0 16.0 17.0 15.0 16.0 14.0 16.0 14.0 15.0 9.0 11,0 10.0 13.0 12.0 10.5 13.0 14.0 14,5 14.0 15.0 15.0

(leg

el max 0.87 1.15 1.06 1.40 1.56 1.45 1.63 1.77 1.47 1.60 1.68 1.67 1.54 1.85 1.57 1.59 1.38 1.44 1,48 1.42 1.35 1.36 1.60 .8 1.17 1,10 1,40 1.03 1.23 1,40 1.45 1.45 1.50 1.55 1.67

or*,

deg

7.7 10.7 6.0 10.8 9.6 12.8 11.4 9.6 11.0 8.8 10.0 8.6 11.2 8.0 7.0 4.2 9,0 9.2 6.7 7,6 6.0 6.0 8,0 7.2 10.0 10.0 10.0 8.0 8.8 8.9 10.8 11.0 12.2 11.0 8.0

-1.9 -1.4 -1.2 0 -2.0 -2.8 0 -1.0 -2.8 -3.6 0 -1.4 -2.7 -3.8 0 -1.5 -2.8 -2.2 -2.4 -3.2 -3.0 0 0 0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.2 -1.5 -1.6 0 -,8 -1.3 -2.6

0 -.035 -.075 0 -.030 -.069 -.108 0 -.033 -.064 -.097 0 -.035 -.062 -.059 -.037 -.065 -.084 0 0 -.015 -.020 -.040 -.039 -.040 -.040 0 -.017 -.027 -,065

.116 .114 .117 .117 .116 .118 .117 .i18 .118 .118 .118 .118 .118 .120 .109 .li1 .112 .108 .109 .110 .110 .110 .110 .113 .107 .110 ,111 .113 .113 .112

a =

.3

I Lift coefficients

used in these charts are based on chord,

H-646

17

TABLE

4.1-2

(Concluded)

Airfoil 642-015 6,12-215 6,12-415 643-018 643-218 643-418 643-618 644-021 644-221 644-421 65-006 65-009 65-206 65-209 65-210 65-410 651-012 651-212 651-212 651-412 652-015 652-215 652-415 652-415 a = .5 a = .6

ceo,

deg 0

Cm 0 -.030 -.070

c laper 0.112 .112 .115 .111 .115 .116 ,I16 .110 ,117 .120

deg

a.c. 0.267 .265 .264 .206 .271 .273 .273 .274 .271 .276 .258 .264 .257 .259 ,262 .262 .261 .261 .269 .265 .257 .269 .268 .264 .265 .267 .262 .266 .273 .267 .263 .265 .267 .276 .265 ,267 ,274 .272 .272 .276 .252 .259 ,257 .257 .261 .258 .259 .265 .260 .260 ,260 .262 .257 .265 .254 .257 .253 .251 .254 .252 .252

_Clmax, 15.0 15.0 15.0 17.0 16.0 14.0 16.0 14.0 13.0 13.0 12.0 11.0 12,0 12.0 13.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 15.5 15.0 15.5 16.0 20.0 15.0 18.0 17.0 20.0 20.0 16.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 20.0 18.5 20,5 22.0 20,0 20.0 9.0 10.0 10,5 11.0 11.0 14,0 15.0 15.5 16.0 17.0 14.0 16.0 16.0 18.0 13.0 14.0 12.0 3.0 15.0 14.0 15.0

dog

C/max 1.48 1.57 1,65 1.50 1.53 1.57 1.58 1.30 1.32 1.42 .92 1.08 1.03 1.30 1.40 1.52 1.36 1.47 1.50 1.66 1.42 1.53 1.61 1.60 1.44 1.60 1.44 1.58 1.60 1.37 1.48 1.54 1.50 1.64 1.51 1,40 1.46 1,56 1.43 1.52 .80 1.05 1.00 1.17 1.27 1.25 1.46 1.35 1.50 1,60 1,33 1.55 1.46 1.60 1.20 1.43 1.23 1.44 1.61 1.54 1.50

_,

deg 13.0 10.0 8.0 12.0 10.0 8.0 5.6 10.3 6.8 6.4 7.6 9.8 6.0 10,0 9.6 8.0 10.0 9,4 9.6 10.5 11.2 10.0 8.7 7.0 10.5 6.0 i0.0 4.4 4.9 i0.0 8.8 4.9 6.0 5.2 5.3 7.4 6.0 5,0 5,6 4.7 6.5 1O.0 7.0 9.0 10.0 11.2 11.6 12.0 11.4 10.0 10.0 8.8 7.0 4,0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 11.0 12.0

-1.6 -2.8 0 -1.3 -2.9 -3.8 0 -1.2 -2.8 0 0 -1.6 -1.2 -1.6 -2.5 0 -1.0 -1.4 -3.0 0 -1.2 -2.6 -2.6 -.7 a =.5 -3.0 0 -3.0 -4.0 0 -1.2 a= .5 -2.4 -2.8 --4.0 -4.2 0 -1.3 -2.8 a = .5 -2.8 -2,4 0 0 -1.6 -1.0 -1.3 0 -1.2 0 -1.3 -2.6 0 a = .6 -2.0 -1.2 -2.6 0 -1.5 0 -1.5 -3,0 -2,0 -2,0

.004 -.027 -.065 -.095 .005 -.029 -.068 0 0 -.031 -.031 -.034 -.067 0 -.032 -.033 -.070 0 -.032 -.060 -.051 -.019 -.057 0 -.081 -.100 0 -.030 -.059 -.055 -.102 -.078 0 -.029 -,066 -.052 -.061 0 0 -.038 -.034 -.035 0 -.032 .005 -.031 -.069 0 -.044 -.030 -.068 .005 -.040 0 -.040 -.080 -.040 -.040

.105 ,107 .105 .106 .108 .112 .110 .108 .108 .111 .111 .112 .iii .lll .I12 .106 .I00 .I12 .110 .100 .I00 .110 .i15 .113 .104 .112 .115 ,116 .116 .116 .100 ,103 .108 ,107 .110 .106 .t02 .105 .106 ,106 ,105 .114 .100 .100 .105 ,103 .llO .105 ,100 ,100 ,095

65(215)-114 65(216)-415

65,3-018 65-418 a = .8 65-618 653-018 653-218 653-418 653-418 653-618 653-618 654-021 654-221 654-421 654-421 65(421)-420 66-006 66-009 66-206 66-209 66-210 661-012 661-212 662-015 662-215 662-415 66(215)-016 66(215)-216 66(215)-216 66(215)-416 63A010 63A210 64A010 64A210 64A410 641A212 642A215

a = .5

18

H-646

I1

4O

OOXX-X5

airfoil

series

OOXX-X4 / 32 16-XXX
/ /

65AOXX 00XX-X2 0XX

/ 24

16

56-0XX 55-OXX 64-0XX

.04

.08

.12 tlc

.16

.20

.24

.28

Figure

4.1-1.

Variation

of trailing-edge

angle

with

airfoil

thickness

ratio

(ref.

1).

H-646

19

NACA 4-digit and 5-digi series

3 _Y, %chord

NACA 63 senes-_ airfoils

Double wedge

.04

.08 tic

.12

.16

.20

Figure ratio

4. 1-2. Variation (ref. 1).

of leading-edge

sharpness

parameter

with

airfoil

thickness

_o)M (%)M = . 3 12 -I .3 4 .5 .6 .7

\9

_io t/c,!% chord

.8 .9 1.0

M cOSAcl 4 Figure 2O 4. 1-3. Mach number correction for zero-lift angle of attack (ref. 1). H-646

I!

!f

O0 2 i 1.5

<> <>

0 o

Thin-airfoil

stall

-o
--<>_--<>
\ \

Leading-edgestall Combined leading-edge] and trailing-edge stall

I
I

Trailing-edge

stall

10 7 9 8 7 6 5 4 NRe Thin-airfoil stall,

--4_I:

2 eclae Stall J \ I Lea(]ina1.5

0---- OCX:

10 6 9 8 7 6 5 4 0 .4 .8 1.2 1.6 2.0 2.4

Combined leading-edge and trailing-edge stall <>.- --_

0--

2.8

3.2

3.6

Upper-surface

ordinate at O.0125 chord, % chord

Figure 4.1-4. Low-speed stalling Reynolds number and upper-surface chord station (ref. 6).

characteristics ordinates

of

of airfoil the airfoil

sections sections

correlated at the

with 0. 0125-

H-646

21

1.6

1.2

Position

of maximum % chord

thickness, c_ max .8 -"-_P t I redomina nt leading-edge stall P_dominant trailingedge stall

I
.4 0 (Long bubble) 1 I (Short bubble) 2 Ay, _/o chord 3 4 5

Figure 4.1-5. Airfoil NRe= 9 106.

section

maximum

lift

coefficient

of uncambered

airfoils

(ref.

1).

.4 I _25 I ACtma x 0 6 x 106 -.._.._____3 10 6 x NR e x 106 9 x 106

2 Ay, % chord

Figure

4.1-6.

Effect

of Reynolds

number

on section

maximum

lift

(ref.

1).

22

H-646

_J

1_ :Lt,-j
J

0 . . _ 0 J_ 0

I I X N _ " I"

\
c_ 0 I _J u

00_0
_0

% 0

EE
I

/ -_--i ---t ...... [ .........

2;

%..-i 0 m O0 _J

N oo i

-I

,.--i o:1 ! m

'
I I I

}
%

L_I__I_
I

I
!

I _ l __1
I I I

(.J

g_

H-646

23

le
t
i i

-j

1
,.---4

o o

Q_ 0
L.

0
$--

0
_.--

r-

t-

_oG

-_

! r_

_gccc_

i _.-.--_
c
0 r_

oo

0_

0o<]

c_ c'_

. o c_

< r_

i_:r

....

r_ c_

o
! ! I

g_
i

H-646 24

xO

l--i oo

_d I C) i

O i 00 i

! _0 I 0 0 0 0 0

.-4

_o
(x) O.) A O O,1 v _D

L.)

< C_

C
c_ O O ,_..4

"_

b_C
0,_

--

O0 ! _C_ xO

0 0

od ! 0

H-646

25

28

27

26

ao

c.

25

"fochord

24

23

22 0 4 8 12 16 (Pte, deg 20 24 28 32

Figure (ref.

4.1-10. Effect of trailing-edge 1). Subsonic speed.

angle

on section

aerodynamic-center

location

26

H-646

4.2

Lift

Characteristics

of the

Wing

and

Horizontal

Tail

Lift characteristics of the wing and horizontal tail are considered in terms of total (which includes the portion covered by the body) and exposed areas of the respective surfaces (section 3.2). Body in this context includes fuselage and nacelles. The exposed panel concept is used in obtaining the net propeller-off lift and pitching-moment characteristics of the airplane; the total wing concept is used in determining maximum lift coefficient, drag, and power effects on the lift and pitching moment. The procedures of this section are restricted to untwisted wings; lift characteristics of twisted wings are considered in reference 7. In the following discussion the expression "wing" is used as a general term and applied to both wings and tail surfaces. The wing and horizontal-tail lift curves of the subject airplane, as determined by the following procedures, are shown in figure 4.2-1. Zero-lift angle of attack for untwisted, constant section airfoil wings is relatively unaffected by wing planform geometry. It is primarily a function of section geometry (section 4.1). Therefore, the section zero-lift angle can be assumed to be the value for the overall wing. Lift-curve slopes of tapered wings, in the subsonic determined by the modified lifting-line theory method simple and does not require the use of the taper ratio chord sweep angle, rather than the quarter chord, is lift-curve slope is determined as a function of aspect Ac/2, Mach number, in reference M, and 8: section lift-curve slope, developed region up to M = 0.6, can be of reference 8. The method is as a parameter because the midused as the sweep angle. The ratio, A, midchord sweep angle, Cla, by the following equation

CLc_ = /A2 2 +_ _ where /3 = 1 - M 2 _ equation. The upper section limit airfoil

O

2_r per (fi2 + tan2Ac/2 Figure 4.2-2 ) + 4 is the graphical equivalent of the radian (4.2-1)

and

Clc_ k = 2---_-"

to the

of linearity of the limit of linearity,

wing lift-curve ct,* (section

4.1

slope and

is considered fig. 4.2-1).

to be equal

The maximum lift coefficient and angle of attack for the maximum subsonic conditions (up to M = 0.6) may be determined by the empirical reference 1. The reference considered procedures for both high- and ratio wings; however, because general aviation aircraft are concerned ratio wings as defined by 3 (C 1 + 1) cOSAle where ratio H-646 C 1 is given data are in figure 4.2-3 as a function of taper ratio, only the

lift of wings at method of low-aspectwith high-aspect-

A >

(4.2-2)

high-aspect-

presented. 27

For high-aspect-ratio, untwisted, constant section wings, CLmax

C +

(4.2-3) ACLmax

CLmax

C/ma x

/max

CLma c_CLma x CL
Ol

x + _o + AC_CLma x (4.2-4)

where, Ay (fig.

as functions 4.1-2),

of leading-edge

sweep,

Ale,

and

leading-edge

sharpness

ratio,

CLmax is obtained C/ma x from figure 4.2-4 for M = 0.2

AaCLma

is separation the angle-of-attack from

correction figure 4.2-5

at

CLmax

for

flow

ACLmax and where CLa is the lift-curve

is the

Mach

number

correction

from

figure

4.2-6

slope

obtained

from

equation

(4.2-1)

or figure

4.2-2

C/max

is the

section

airfoil

maximum

lift

coefficient

obtained

from

section

4.1

c_ o

is the

zero-lift

angle that,

obtained basis

from

section

4.1 (4.2-3) and figures 4.2-4 and 4.2-6,

It should CLmax is not

be noted a function

on the

of equation or aspect ratio.

of wing

area

Pertinent aspects of the horizontal tail of the subject in table 4.2-1. The results The fairings of the curves in the stall angle of attack,

calculation for the lift characteristics of the wing and airplane at wind-tunnel Mach conditions are summarized were applied to the lift curves shown in figure 4.2-1. figure 4.2-1 from the upper limits of linearity, a_*, to were based on the stall characteristics of section

O_CLmax,

airfoils (section 4.1). Regardless of where the separation first appears on threedimensional wings (inboard or tips), it is the type of separation on the section airfoil that determines the lift-curve shape near maximum lift. In figure 4.2-1, it is evident that rounding of the lift curves occurs near CLmax.

28

H-646

The shape of the lift curve beyond stall is not so easily approximated. Although reference 1 provided a technique for estimating the shape of the lift curve beyond stall, the technique could not be applied satisfactorily to the subject airplane. Thus, for the wing, the lift curve was terminated at maximum lift. However, because a study of the pitch characteristics of the subject airplane involved stalled regions of the tail, the shape of the horizontal-tail lift curve in the stalled region was estimated on the basis of a study of the stall characteristics of various tails in reference 9. 4.2. I Symbols A C1 aspect constant aspect lift ratio (from ratio fig. 4.2-3) used in equation (4.2-2) defining high

CL

coefficient considered lift

of a finite

surface

at the

subsonic

Mach

number

CLma

maximum considered,

coefficient obtained

of a finite from equation

surface (4.2-3)

at the

Mach

number

CLma

x maximum-lift-coefficient ure 4.2-4 factor at M = 0.2 , obtained from fig-

C/ma x

ACLma

Mach number correction ficient, obtained from lift-curve obtained maximum ditions, slope from

of the figure

incompressible 4.2-6

maximum

lift

coef-

CL_

of a finite surface equation (4.2-1) lift coefficient from section slope section

at the Mach number or figure 4.2-2, per at incompressible 4.1 (M < 0.2)

considered, rad con-

C/ma x

section obtained

(M < 0.2)

cl
0t

section lift-curve obtained from Cl_ 27r Mach number surface

at incompressible 4.1, per rad

conditions,

kM

planform Ay
O/

area,

sq ft parameter as defined in section 4.1.1

leading-edge-sharpness angle angle of attack, of attack tad

or deg for zero lift, deg

of surface

H-646

29

a*

limit

of linearity

of the

lift

curve at its

of a surface, CLmax,

deg from equation

aCLma

angle of attack (4.2-4) angle-of-attack from figure

of a surface

obtained

A_ L

max

correction 4.2-5, deg

at CLmax

for

flow

separation,

obtained

_ ; (1 - M2) 1/2
Ale Ac/2 sweep sweep taper Subsc ript s:
e

of the of the ratio

surface surface of surface

leading midchord

edge, line,

deg deg

exposed horizontal wing

panel tail

h
W

3O

H-646

"_ r/l

_o
oe-

_
,d _d _ _d _. _:=.

,._y_ c __ _
,4 o _._

o
d #_ d = d =..d .

_z _._
o

_4

%. o . =o ,_{ _ . d .

%0

Z 0

o
0 < L"- 0

_
Lr_

_
. ClO L_

_
.0 _t_

oo %4
_

_q C_l c_, 1 _ _-_

o=

'-:.

o=

d#

',

o=

c:) II 0 < 0

o ==

_. z

o=

_ ,d

N N o N

o_ _

o '_ == _ <

F
I._

g .i
o

w -%

_._

3
+

<_#

._ <_?R_._ _

H-646

31

L.____

----- .,a )

_I:

"_',,_.,,___

l:I

,--I

O,l

0 1_ 1 .,_

.r-_

4-) N o,=.i 0

_,

-'-"-_ _

I_

! ,._ ,-_

k
N iii _

,.-i

32

H-646

.9 [
,p.._

oO

e'-

_9 O

I 'q

_9

OO
o

H-646

33

O0

0 0 (D 0 0 0

O., c_

d
I C-I

*p-I

34

tt-646

lo6

m_

1.4 <1,4...
1.2

CLmax 1.0 cl max .8

J

2.0

.6

I
.4 0 I0 20 30 Ale , deg Figure 4.2-4. Subsonic constant airfoil section 12 maximum lift of high-aspect wings (ref. 1). M _0.2. ratio, untwisted, 40 50 60

10

......./y
I0 20 30 Ale , deg 40 50 60

CL :___
i

AaCLmax

AaCLmax, deg 6

Figure 4.2-5. Angle-of-attack high-aspect-ratio, untwisted, M_0.2 to 0.6.

H-646

increment constant

for subsonic airfoil section

maximum lift of wings (ref. 1).

35

0!

0 Ay _Y

-,2

ACLma x -.4

__

ACLmax

4 -Ale 20 4.5

-.6--

Ale ....... _, .__.5.. -.6

-.g

Ay

13.o

..... ACLmax -. 2 ...... Ale "40 -", _. 4.5"._ ACLmax-.2 Ale60

_'_ i I

2. 0

Figure 4.2-6. Mach high-aspect-ratio, 36

number correction untwisted, constant

for subsonic maximum airfoil section wings

lift of (ref. 1). H-64 6

4.3

Lift

Due to Fuselage

and

Nacelles

Techniques for predicting the lift contribution of bodies assume that the normal forces acting on bodies of revolution at angles of attack consist of a linear combination of potential flow and viscous crossflow contributions. As indicated by referencc 10, the normal forces acting on the forward or expanding portions of the bodies agree well with those predicted by potential theory, whereas poor agreement occurs for the aft or contracting portions where viscosity effects become more important. By assuming potential flow over only a forward portion of the body and viscous flow for the remainder of the body, reference 10 arrived at equations for lift, pitching moment, and drag of bodies which showed good correlation with experimental data for a number of bodies of revolution up to 16 to 18 angle of attack. The method of reference 10 is empirical only to the extent of the definition of the arbitrary longitudinal boundary between potential and viscous flow. On the basis two-thirds power of reference of the body Potential 10, the volume, flow lift Coefficient of a body of revolution, V B, is obtained from the expression Viscous flow based on the

_; B__ ff(k__22 _ k2 )fxodSo " "

CLB-57.3(VB)2/3j 0 -d_-x dx+"

2
_?rCdcdX

"
(4.3-1)

2_Beff flB (57.3)2 (V B)2/3jx

wh ere (k 2 - kl) obtained ratio, Cdc function from dmax lB is the steady-state Mach angle crossflow number, drag M c, of the coefficient obtained from body for circular figure relative 4.3-3 to its zero-lift line, cylinders, a is the figures apparent 4.3-1 mass and 4.3-2, factor, and r7 is the drag proportionality of body factor, fineness

respectively,

as a function

of crossflow is the

degree

C_Beff s x

of attack

equivalent

is the limit from

of integration 4.3--4

in feet as a function area, of equation

(the

determined rate

figure

arbitrary boundary between the two flows) x1 of -where x 1 is the point at which the l B ' dSo x, dx ' is a negative 1 ccm_idercd [, "c the maximum the !imit at

of change To simplify

of the the x o,

cross-section application to b,e dctermil_

SO, with (4.3-1), x1 -YTB' but -_th

reference :_,

of integration,

," bv

assumed

point

II-646

37

dS o which _ is a minimum, that is, x1 is the point of maximum cross section. As a result of this simplifying assumption which results in slightly optimistic contributions of bodies, 2_Beff(k2 - kl)
CLB _ 57.3 Soma x + (57.3) which is the equation used in this report. 2 (VB)2/3 2(_Bef? f Xo lB VrCdcdX (4.3-2)

(VB) 2/3

Because the equation for lift of bodies is based on bodies of revolution, it is necessary to replace the actual body of the airplane by an approximate equivalent body of revolution to serve as a mathematical model for analysis. This requires study of the profile as well as the plan-view outline of the body to arrive at the shape, based on judgment, which will provide the same lift characteristics. For the subject airplane, figure 4.3-5(a) shows the estimated equivalent circular fuselage in relation to the actual fuselage. It should be noted that the equivalent fuselage has a zero-lift angle 3 below the reference X-body axis. The nacelle, shown in figure 4.3-5(b), does not lend itself to such a simple estimate of equivalence because of its wide rectangular shape and irregular profile, As an approximation for equivalence, the crosssectional area of an equivalent circular nacelle at any one point, x, was assumed to be equal to the actual cross-sectional area. The axis of the equivalent nacelle was assumed to be parallel to the X-body axis (reference axis of the airplane). Table 4.3-1 lists the pertinent of the fuselage and nacelles of the terms of wing area (S w = 172.3): FuseI
g

aspects subject age

of the airplane

calculations for as summarized

the lift by the

contributions following in

Naccllcs Crossflow

Potential

P,_ter,tial B - 3 ;2] +

Crossflow

CLf where

+ CLn

' = [0./ 00218(a_ B - 3) + 0." 0000309(c_

o_ B h 3.1 CL B

is the

angle

of attack

of the

airplane,

relative

to the

body

X-axis,

deg

Sym b o Is lift coefficient to two-thirds noted coefficient lage and of the body (where power of the body body is a general term) referred volume or to the wing area as

C Lf, C Ln

lift

of the body, nacelle, respectively

CLB,

applied

specifically

to the

fuse-

Cd c

steady-state crossflow Mach number, Me,

drag coefficient, a function obtained from figure 4.3-3

of crossflow

38

H-64 6

dmax

maximum reduced body

diameter mass factor ft or in. lB,

of an equivalent from potential

circular flow theory

body,

in. in figure 4.3-1

k2 - k 1 lB /f, In

as listed

length,

as noted specifically to the fuselage and nacelle,

body length, re spectively Mach M sin number (_Beff

applied

M Mc
r

radius of an equivalent circular considered, in. or ff cross-section maximum reference volume area cross-section wing area, of an equivalent area sq ff circular

body

at the

body

cross

section

being

S o

circular

body,

sq ft body, sq ft

Soma x Sw VB Vf, V n

of an equivalent

circular

of an equivalent VB,

body,

cu ft to the fuselage and nacelle,

body volume, respectively distance ceases, from in.

applied

specifically

Xo

the nose or ft

of the

body

to the

point

where

potential

flow

xI

distance from the nose of the body of change of body cross-sectional increment length of the body, in. body, axis

to the area or ft

point with

of maximum body length,

negative rate in. or ft

angle of attack of the actual attack, o_, using X-body aBef f effective deg C_neff effective nacelle, _o B zero-lift X-body zero-lift drag angle of attack

synonymous as reference, circular

to airplane deg body,

angle

of

of an equivalent

aB

+ ao B,

_feff'

angle

of attack,

O_Beff,

applied

specifically

to the

fuselage

and

re spectively angle axis angle, of an equivalent of the airplane, c_OB , applied factor from circular deg specifically figure body relative to the reference

_of

to the 4.3-2

fuselage

proportionality

H-646

39

_>_I _
o

-_
;_"_o .
fI_._

o.
c_

_=.
g
I o

d
-I-

L_

00
d
+

E
Z <

2 1441 I _ _
l

I I
I

- A 44

g
i

4
i i i

I I

I 4 ,

0 c_

,I

<

Z 0 Z < _I _

_I _

g
o

<

>
"_

_._ + _2

c_
II

2
a

Z
0 Z

e Em

_
i

Yi
= _._ _ _ o
g
,ii II

,
Z 0 LO

_ _'_-_
M

I_
M

_-

_'_

o_

+ _ r..) I

2
e

4O

tl-646

o
4_

4_

o o
,F--_

4_

_:_ o

_2

H-646

4 1

0r,,_

c_ -0

oO

ill-....
1 ,

0 0_

c_

\
i \ cO

b_

_._

C',l

b__O

42

1.8

f_

1.6

Cdc

1.4

1.2 0 .2 .4 Mc: Figure 4.3-3. dimensional). 1.0

Steady-state crossflow

.6 M sin (aB+
drag coefficient

.8

1.0

oOB)
for circular cylinders (two

o.374I+ xl 0.533
.9

.8
x0

[B .7

.6

.5 .3 .4 .5 .6 Xl _B
Figure negative H-646 4.3-4. rate Extent of applicability of body of potential cross-sectional theory area as with a function body length of the (ref. maximum 10). 43

.7

.8

.9

1.0

of change

0 f! G.> 0

0,-.i 0

o_.,_ 0

0 0

_ 0

0 0

(1) 0,._

,...i

L_ I

,-_

44

H-646

Actual

nacelle

_Equivalent \ Thrust line

circular nacelle _-Equivalent

dmax = 2 tS_oma x _ 31 in.

__
_t_......_

I_-< ,-_ _

--_--_
-J / Parallel to X-body axis of airplane

t xt__4Oin"

-.-_--0

F I-"

xo - 51 in._ In " 106 in. =---

(Io) Nacelle.

Figure

4.3-5.

Concluded.

H-64

45

4.4

Lift

Due

to Combined

Wing-Fuselage-Nacelle

The addition of a body to a wing results in mutual interference effects. Lift of the wing-body combination is influenced by the body upwash effect on wing lift and the lift carryover of wing panel loading onto the body. Net wing upwash and downwash effects on the body influence body pitching moments primarily. Symmetrical body vortices which result from flow separation just behind or above the area of minimum pressure along the side of the body near the nose are normally negligible for most airplane types of wing-body combinations. The lift of the wing-fuselage-nacelle ference effects of wing and fuselage combination be estimated accounting from for the mutual inter-

may

Sw

CLwf n _CLf+ where CLf CLn Kw(f) an isolated Kf(w) from figure (CLoz)_'e 4.2-1 aWabs Because accounted The use is the absolute is the fuselage lift lift of the

CLn+

[Kw(f)

+ Kf(w)]

(CLa)we!Wab

(4.4-1)

from from lift

equation equation on the figure

(4.3-3) (4.3-3)

is the nacelle is the wing, is the 4.4-1 is the ratio

wing 4.4-1

in the and onto

presence reference the body

of the 11 to wing

body

to the

lift

on

obtained ratio

from

of wing

lift

carryover

lift

alone,

obtained

lift-curve

slope

of the

exposed

wing

panels,

obtained

from

table

angle of suitable

of attack data,

of the the

wing,

equal

to

a + i w - aOw of the nacelles are

not

of the lack for. of the

interference

effects

interference

factors,

Kw(f)

and

Kf(w),

from

reference

11 is releading of revolu-

stricted to wings which do not have sweptback trailing edges. The factors were obtained for wings mounted tion but have been used for other configurations. For carryover

edges or sweptforward as midwings on bodies

the subject airplane, the lift of the wing in the presence of the body and the of the wing lift onto the body is calculated in table 4.4-1(a) to be equal to

CLw(f)+f(w) 46

= 0.079(a+4)(referencedto

Sw=

172.3

sq ft)

(4.4-2) H-64 6

The net lift of the wing, fuseIage, and nacelle combination in the linear lift range is obtained by summarizing the fuselage and nacelle contributions as obtained from table 4.3-1 and the Iift of the wing in the presence of the body as obtained from
table 4.4-1(a). Thus

CLwfn

= = [0. 00218(_-

CLf 3) + O. 0000309(ot

+ - 3) 2 ] + [0. 00160c_

CLn

+ CLw(f)+f(w) 4)

+ O. O00010a t2] + O. 079(e_+ (4.4-3)

The addition of a body to the wing in most airplane configurations tends to decrease the maximum lift coefficient and corresponding angle of attack, although an increase in the geometric stall angle is possibIe in some circumstances. The wing planform is a primary consideration. In the absence of theoretical methods, reference and 1 devised corresponding The empirical stall method in the relations angle, uses for predicting _(aCLma x) , for maximum wing-body correction lift coefficient, (CLmax)w up to c 2 (fig. factors, 4.4-2), f,

wf

combinations factor,

M = 0.6.

an empirical equations,

taper the

ratio

in determining, (CLmax)wf (CLmax) and the w ratio

following

empirical

correction

(_CLmax)wf and of the -.(LCLmax )w fuselage , from figure 4.4-3 span, as functions d _ : of (c 2 + 1)A tan Ale

diameter

to the

wing

= __C Lm*ax) wf ] (CLmax)wf and

L(CLmax)w j(CLmax)w
-

(4.4-4)

( CL
\ where maX]wf

[ J(lCLmax)w

(o_CLmax)

(4.4-5)

(CLmax)w total wing alone

and from

(aCLmax) section 4.2

(the absolute

stall

angle

from

zero

lift)are

for

Pertinent ject airplane

aspects are

of the listed

calculations in table

for

( CLmax

)wf

and

(o_CLmax

) wf

for

the

sub-

4.4-1(b). combination for feet (reference the subject airplane area of analysis) in and 47

terms H-646

The net lift of the wing-fuselage-nacelle of a reference wing area of 172.3

square

178.0 square feet (reference area of wind-tunnel data) is summarized in table 4.4-2. The results for a wing area of 178.0 square feet are plotted and compared with windtunnel data in figure 4.4-4. The fairing from the limit of linearity to the maximum lift coefficient was performed in the same manner as for the wing alone (section 4.2) In summary, the lift contributions attributed to the fuselage and nacelle crossflow effects are insignificant. The contributions due to the potential-flow effects on the
fuselage and nacelles are negligible for preliminary estimates but are large enough be significant for refined estimates. Although these fuselage contributions may be negligible or small for lift considerations, they are not necessarily negligible with regard to pitching-moment considerations, as discussed in section 4.8. 4.4. I A b CLf CLmax)w Synzbols wing wing lift aspect span, coefficient lift ratio ft of the fuselage based on the alone, wing area from table to

maximum 4.2-1 maximum ed from lift lift

coefficient

of the wing

obtained

CLmax)wf

lift coefficient figure 4.4-3 of the

of the wing-fuselage

combination,

obtain-

CL n C Lw (f)+f (w)

coefficient

nacelles

based including

on wing mutual

area wing-fuselage inter-

coefficient of the wing ference effects -coefficient of the

C Lwfn

lift

wing-fuselage-nacelle exposed wing panels,

assembly obtained from table

C L a)We

lift-curve 4.2-1, taper fuselage ratio

slope of the per deg correction at the angle deg

c2 d i

factor wing, ft

from

figure

4.4-2

width

wing incidence, X-body axis,

between

the wing

chord

and

reference

Kf(w)

ratio of wing lift carryover tained from figure 4.4-1 ratio of the lift on the wing alone, obtained Mach number

on the

fuselage

to the

wing

alone,

ob-

Kw(f)

wing in the presence from figure 4.4-1

of the

fuselage

to the

48

H-646

Sw

reference area angle of the

wing

area,

sq ft wing panels, sq ft X-body relative axis, to the deg line

Sw e oL

exposed

of attack

relative

to the reference of the wing alone

stall angle of attack of the wing, deg stall angle of attack the zero-lift line wing wing zero-lift angle

zero-lift

of the wing-fuselage of wing, deg of attack relative to the

combination

relative

to

%w eWab s

to the wing wing zero-lift

chord, line,

deg

angle of attack relative - SOw + iw, deg of the taper wing leading

Ale

sweep wing

edge,

deg

ratio

H-646

49

TABLE WING LIFT OF AIRPLANE INCLUDING (a) In

4.4-1 _[NG-FUSELAGE INTERFERENCE

MUTUAL linear range

Sw e CLw(f)+f(w Symbol d b SW Sw e
(_O. W

) =[Kw(f)+ De sc r iption

Kf(w,](CL_)weC_Vab

Sw Magnitudc 4.0 36.0 172.3 148.0 -2.0 2.0 cg+4

Refcrence Figure Figure Table sq ft to wing axis, lift, chord, deg Table Table Table .2.2-1 3.2-1 3.2-1 3.2-1 4.2-1 3-1

Fuselage Wing span, Reference Area Zero-lift of

width ft _x2ng

at wing, area, wing of attack relative sq

ft ft

exposed angle

panels, relative to relative

iw C_Vab s

deg Wing incidence Wing angle - Crow+i LiR-curve of

X-body to zero

attack w, deg

slope

of exposed

wing

panels

per

deg

Table

4.2-1

0747

(CL4w d

e Fuselage-width Ratio of lift on to wing wing-span in presence on ratio of fuselage fuselage to Figure Figure 4,4-1 4.4-t 0.111 1.09 14

g Kw6) Kf(w)
Summaw:

to wing alone Ratio of wing lift wing alone

carryover

CLw(O+f(w

) = O. 079(a+

4)

(b)

Maximum

lift

of wing

with

mutual

wing-body

interference

"(c Lmax) (Chmax)wf Symbol X c2 Ale A (c 2 + 1)A d tan Ale Wing Taper taper ratio =

wf (CLmax)w; @CLmax)wi

[(ceCLmax)wf =[_x

] _Fv ] Reference

_ec (Lmax) w hi a gni t ude 0.513 .103 0 7.5 0 111

(dLm=---_a),--_

De seription ratio correction sweep ratio of

Table factor wing, dcg Figure Table Tablc

3.2-1 4.4-2 3.2-1 3.2-1

Leading-edge Wing aspect

Ratio

of

CLmax

of

wing-fuselage

to

wing

alone

Figure

4.4

-3

1.0

VCLm x):f
c_C .( Lmax)w. \ x }w

Ratio

of

stall

angle

of wing-fuselage

to wing

alone

Figure

4.4-3

1. 025

Maximum Stall angle

lift

coefficient alo.ne

of

wing

alone to zero lift, deg

Table Table

4.2-1 4.2-1

1.23 15.5 +2 :: 17.5

Lma

_C Lmax]w

of wing

relative

= Summary: (C Lmax)w f 1.23; (

ffC Lmax)w f

= 17.8

5O

H-646


rj t _;i o mN

o_

......

_i._

._,_
II

_y

v@
c=,

,%
0

d,.u
4It

__ ......

I_ _ I_

oo d
+ o= o

.,I

11

@
#

O0 _o

00000o0 000000o

.E

@
0

o
<:

o
+

rj

_d

g
,30 0 o ,o, II

_4

:__.. __oo
ff

.
+

,.-t r_

i
ed

,_ _gN_NNNNN

,u,

1.1,1 .......

_e
2 _
0

H-646

51

2.0
...... L--_ +--__
#

I
/ff

I/

1.6

i
1.2

Kw(f), Kf(w)
I i

..... LY2-_____________+ _ / / / __ __ __ __

.8
I

I .4
I i !

I
I

!
i

.2

.4 d b

.6

.8

1.0

Figure wing

4.4-1. at fixed

Lift

ratios

Kw(f) relative

and to the

Kf(w)

based

incidence 1.5

fuselage

on slender-body theory with the 11). Applicable at all speeds, (ref.

1.0 c2

.5

.2

.4

.6

.8

1.0

Figure

4.4-2.

Taper

ratio

correction

factors

(ref.

1).

52

H-646

1.4 /
/

1.2 5.5// C Lmax/w f (c + IIA tanAle 2 CLmax/w 1.0 /12 //i /

/

.8 0 .2 .4 d b .6 .8

1.2

(c2 + 1)A tan_Ale 1.0

I I I I

/iI 1 2 I II

_CLmax/wf (aCLmax/w

.8__

5>5/
.6

12 0 .2

6 .4 d b lift and angle .6 .8

Figure 4.4-3. M = 0.6 (ref. H-646

Wing-body 1).

maximum

of attack

for maximum

lift

below

53

1.4
0

CLmax = 1.28 1.2

0 /

/6" astall 13.8"

1.0

a-X-

.8

(table 4.2-1)

CLwfn .6

.4

2/I
0 -.2t -4 0 4 8 a, deg
Figure 4.4-4. wind-tunnel 54 Comparison of predicted data. S = 178 sq ft.
W

CaIcu lated Wind tunnel

12

16

2O

wing-fuselage-nacelle

lift

curve

with

H- 64 6

4.5

Cmo

and

Aerodynamic

Center

of the Wing

and

Horizontal

Tail air-

Subsonic zero-lift pitching-moment foil lifting surfaces can be determined equation from reference 1:

coefficients approximately

for untwisted, constant section from the following empirical

A cos Ac/4 Cmo where is the section

1 + X cos Ac/4 coefficient (section 4.1). (4.5-1)

= Cmo A+ 2 cosAc/4 --_ zero-lift pitching-moment

Cm

The aerodynamic center, the point about which coefficient is invariant with lift, may be determined center on and as a ratio of the lifting surface mean ure 4.5-1 (from ref. 1) and the equation

the lifting surface pitching-moment relative to a desired reference aerodynamic chord by using fig-

dCm dCL where dC m -_ dC L aerodynamic ratio of the -Xn Cr

=_

x(____ Xac_C r_ Cr/ c

(4.5-2)

is the

static

margin,

the

distance to the

from

the

reference center

center of the

on the surface

mean as a

chord of the lifting surface mean aerodynamic chord distance chord distance in terms k, A tan from of the from of its Ale, and the lifting

aerodynamic

is the

surface positive of the

apex

to the

desired

reference

center

in terms Xac
Cr

of root is the

surface, the apex

rearward lifting surface aft, to the aerodynamic figure 4.5-1 center as a

of the function

surface of

root chord, tan Ale

positive

obtained

from

c-r-r is the
C

ratio

of the

root

chord

to the

mean

aerodynamic
Xa c

chord

of the

surface

Care

is required

in using

figure

4.5-1

to determine

--.
Cr

In this

study

the

best

re-

tan Ale salts A tan curve were Ale obtained curves by crossplotting,
Xa c

at the Cr versus

desired k, and

fl

, to obtain

a family

of a

as functions k

of

crossplotting A tan Ale.

again

to obtain

Xac
for the desired as a function of Cr versus

H-646

55

Table

4.5-1

summarizes

the

calculations

made

to determine

the

Cmo

of the

wing

and horizontal of the surfaces surfaces. 4.5.1 Symbolsconsideration, A

ac

tail of the subject airplane and the location relative to the leading edges of the mean

of the aerodynamic aerodynamic chords

centers of the

The following symbols are related that is, the wing or the horizontal aspect ratio center relative chord as a ratio of the surface

to the tail.

particular

lifting

surface

under

aerodynamic dynamic lift coefficient

to the leading edge of the mean of the mean aerodynamic chord

aero-

CL Cm

pitching-moment aerodynamic
o

coefficient chord of the

about the surface coefficient in.

reference

center

on the

mean

Cm c

zero-lift mean section root Mach

pitching-moment aerodynamic zero-lift of the chord,

of the

surface

Cm o cr M
Xac

pitching-moment surface, in.

coefficient

chord number

distance from the surface, chord, in. distance center, from in.

the lifting-surface obtained from

apex to the aerodynamic center figure 4.5-1 as a ratio of the root

of

Xn

the

lifting

surface

apex

to the

desired

reference

Y_

lateral distance aerodynamic (1 - M2) 1/2 sweep sweep taper of the of the ratio

from chord,

the root in.

chord

of the

surface

to its

mean

A c/4 Ale

quarter-chord leading edge,

line, deg

deg

56

H-646

r_

__J

_J

oo

.< E_ Z
c_ _-, I I*

E _-

_-_ oo

0 1

0 Z

"_

'<

I
I 1 I 1

'

1
I

+
I

', __
_ <_
I 11

1
I I

< _ <
<
Z
0 {fi

'7 I _
0

-,-_

< z <
0

cJ 0;

E
I

e_

"_

._ _

1 P_ C_ X _

H-646

57

1.4 1.2 1.0

1.4 r
....... A tan Ale Unswept tra_ .8
Xac cr
J

A tan Ale

Xac cr

.8
.6
.4 .2
I

J
...2_

___4.__._____
2 --

.6 .4 .2

Z/
Z:

i
-Unswept 0 tan Ale 1 0 0 tan Ale 1 ]

P
tan Ale

B (b)x= o.2.
1.4 A tan Ale 1.2
J

tan Ale

(a) x = o. 1.4

1.0 .8
Xac
!

_____.J
J
f

.8
Xac Cr

Cr

.6

.6

.4 .2 trailing 0 tan Ale [3

(c) Figure 4.5-1. X = 0.25, Wing

2
edge 0 [3
position

2/

Unswept trailing

edge

.4 .2

1 tan Ale

0 tan Ale 6
(d) for

1 13 tan Ale
3. = 0.33. conditions (ref.

aerodynamic-center

subsonic

1).

58

H-646

1.5 A tan Ale 1.4 1.2 1.0

Xac Cr

s
J
3

.8 .6 .4 .2

T Un swept trailing
-------______

edge

0 tan Ale 15
(e) X=

1 [_ tan Ale
0.5.

2.Zl A tan Ale 2.0 6 1.6 5

Xac

-Cr

1.2 .8 .4

1 0 tan Ale 13 (0 ;_=1.

Figure 4.5-1. Concluded.

0 tan Ale

H-646

59

4.6 The moment addition at zero

Wing-Fuselage to a wing contribution,

Pitching results (Cmo}f,

Moment

at Zero

Lift to the pitching figure 4.6-1 cross or

of a fuselage lift. This

in a fuselage may

contribution from

be estimated

{from ref. 12) which section for midwing negative from are the increment, figure.

is based conditions. {ACmo)f,

on streamline For highof 0.004 of suitable

bodies of circular or near or low-wing configurations respectively, the effects to the of the

circular a positive value

is added, data,

obtained on Cmo

In the

absence

nacelles

considered

to be zero. subject airplane of a reference is deterwing area

The wing-fuselage pitching moment at zero lift for the mined in table 4.6-1. The summary results, on the basis 172.3 square feet, show the fuselage effect to be significant:

of

= -0.0240 = -0. 4.6.1 Cm o Symbols zero-lift fuselage cient 0463

- 0.0183

- 0.004

(4.6-1)

pitching-moment

coefficient pitching-moment coeffifrom figure 4.6-1 of the wing from table

contribution to the zero-lift for the midwing configuration pitching-moment coefficient

( mo)w

zero-lift 4.5-1 net zero-lift nacelles mean

pitching-moment assembly aerodynamic of the wing of the chord, chord line line __Ow

coefficient

for

the

wing-fuselage-

wing iw

ft relative to the relative X-body to the axis, referdeg

incidence incidence ence

(iw) o

zero-lift axis, ft nose

of the wing + iw, tad

X-body length,

If If

fuselage

distance from the the wing, ft planform area

of the

fuselage

to the

quarter

chord

of

Sf

of the

fuselage,

sq ft

6O

H-646

planform area of the fuselage the wing mean aerodynamic reference width zero-lift line, correction wing area, sq ft

forward chord,

of the sq ft

quarter

chord

of

of the

fuselage

at the wing,

ft relative to the wing chord

angle deg to

of attack

of the wing

C m o) f

for

the non-midwing highand low-wing

configuration configurations,

equal

to 0.004 and respectively

-0. 004 for

H-646

61

TABLE WING-FUSELAGE PITCHING

4.6-1 OF AIRPLANE AT ZERO IJFT

MOMENTS

(a) Symbol (C
\ nl

Wing

contribution Reference Table 4.5-1 Magnitudc -0.0240

Description Cmo offing

_
!W

0a)

Effect

of

fuselage

on

Cmo

(Cm)f+('_Cm)f Symbol
W

i_(iw)oSf f ]
ion ft the wing,

+(AC o),f
Re fe re nee Figure Figure 3.2-1 4.3-5 3.2-1 3, 2-1 drawings drawings 3.2-1 4. ,t - 1 Magnitude 4.0 24.2 9.01 172.3 65. 26.3 4.96 4/57.3

De se rlpt Width of Fuselage Distance Reference fuselage length, from wing area area mean nose area, of of at ft

If if

of fuselage sq ft sq

to

c/4

of

wing,

ft

Figure Table

sf

Planform PIanform Wing

fuselage, fuseIage

ft of ft 5/4 of wing, sq ft

From From Table Table

forward chord,

aerodynamic of zero-lift used in line figure

(iw) o

Incidence Parameter

of

wing

-aOw

+ iw,

tad

=. 0698

4.6-1

0. 239

sdf

Parameter

used

in

figure

4.6-1

.149

Figure (iw)oSf/f _ Correction AC too) f four low-wing configuration of airplane

4.6-I

-. 141

Section 4,6

-0.

004

Summary:

(Cmo)f

+ (ACmo)f=

-0.0183-

0.004=

-0.0223

(c)

Summar)"

(Cm)wf=-0"0240

- 0.01_3

- 0.004

-0.0463

on

basts

of

_v_

172.3

sq

[t

62

H-646

-.30 w2 Sf

-. 25

-. 05

f
0 .2 .4 Sf_f Sf[f .6 .8 1.0

Figure

4.6-1.

Effect

of a fuselage

on

Cmo.

Midwing

configuration

(ref.

12).

H-646

63

4.7

Fuselage

and

Nacelle

Pitching

Moments

The slope of the pitching-moment Mach numbers may be determined based on potential-flow lift effects the afterbody, which were discussed Potential

curve of the fuselage and nacelles at subsonic from the following equation, from reference 10, on the forebody and on viscous-flow lift effects on in section 4.3Viscous crossfiow

flow

=F2(k2 (Cmt)B L wh e re Cma ) B distance Sx xm from is the is the

- kl)

/ 0 O (Xm-

x) dSx

477Cdc VB + (57.3)2V z B lfxoB r(x m - x)d x] Sw _

(4.7-1)

is based the nose

on the of the

reference body, area per of the nose body,

wing deg body

area

about

a chosen

moment

center

Xm

cross-section distance total from

at distance body to the

from

the

body

nose,

sq ft ft

the of the

of the

chosen

moment

center,

V B is the is angle

volume

cu ft

of attack,

deg

The remaining symbols are defined below and also in table 4.7-1, which summarizes the calculation of the slope of the pitching-moment curve of the fuselage and nacelles the subject airplane about the leading edge of the total wing mean aerodynamic chord. Table 4.7-2 shows the tabular integration procedure used to obtain the values of the integrals for the fuselage. The same procedure was used for the nacelles when xm was taken to be 53 inches from the nose of the nacelles (propellers off).

of

The airplane marized

slope of the pitching-moment curve of the fuselage and nacelles of the subject about the leading edge of the total wing mean aerodynamic chord, as sumin table 4.7-1, is accounted for by

Cm_) fn = 0. 00375 4. 7. 1 Symbols

- 0. 000128_

(4.7-2)

(Cm_)B

variation of the body pitching-moment ence wing area) with angle of attack (Cmo_)n variation attack, respectively of the body pitching-moment applied specifically

coefficient

(based

on refer-

(Cm_)f'

coefficient to the

with fuselage

angle

of

---(Cm_)B'

and nacelles,

64

H- 64 6

wing

mean

aerodynamic crossflow factor,

chord, drag from

ft obtained theory, from table 4.3-1 from

Cd c k2 - k1
lB lf, In

steady-state reduced table body body mass 4.3-1

coefficient, potential-flow

obtained

length, length,

ft or in. l B, applied specifically to the fuselage and nacelles,

respectively
r

effective reference

body wing

radius area,

of

Ax segment

of the

afterbody

length,

ft or in.

Sw
Sx

sq ft circular body at the foregoing

cross-section area of an equivalent station being considered, sq ft volume of an equivalent V B, circular

VB Vf, V n

body,

cu ft to the fuselage and nacelle,

body volume, re spectively width (diameter) station being distance forebody, from

applied

specifically

of an equivalent considered, in. the nose to the of the centroid body of

circular

body

at the

foregoing

to the Ax

centroid for the chosen chord

of

AS x

for

the

and

afterbody,

ft or in.

Xm

distance from the nose of the body to the (leading edge of the mean aerodynamic ft or in.

moment center in this instance),

X o

distance from the nose of the body to the point (demarcation body and afterbody in this instance) where the potential ceases, ft or in. angle change ment of attack, deg area of the body being considered, body, from ft or in. table 4.3-1 across sq ft the

of foreflow

in the cross-section of the body length length of the factor

Ax

seg-

Ax

incremental drag

proportionality

H-646

65

,.) a_

cq

' I I ,
I

I I
I

Y 4 _

._

_
II

d
II

v v

66

H-646

TABLE TABULAR INTEGRATION xo (a) _2] 0 Distance from nose to area Sx, in. 0 6 9 19 25 37 44 55 63.5 72 80 87 94.5 106.5 119 123 127.5 139 150 157 167
X o

4.7-2 PITCHING-MOMENT Xo=167 E 0 (93.2-x}ASx12 PARAMETERS

OF

FUSELAGE

(Xm-X)dSx=

x,

in.

w,

in.

nw 2 Sx = 4{_ sq ft 0

'

AS x,

sq ft

(93.2

- x),

in.

(93.2

- x)AS x

0 16 27 37 42 45 47.5 49.0 48.5 48 44

1.39 1. 396 2.59 3.98 3.50 7.47 2.15 9.62 1.42 11.04 1.26 12.3 0.8 13.1 0.3 12.8 0.2 12.6 -2.0 10.6

87.2 74.2 56.2 38.2 21.2 _6.2 -13.3 -29.8 -45.8 63.8

121 192 -197 82.1 30.1-7.8 10.6 8.9 9.16 127.6 ---

63.8 0 12 If

cuft

_-_.= 765.5

If

= 287 r(93.2 - x)Ax 1728

(b) 17-_fr(Xm-X)dx= xo

E x O =167

Distance

from in. 167

nose,

Ax,

in.

r,

in.

x,

in.

(93.2

- x),

in.

r(93.2 - x)Ax, cu in.

20 187 20 2O7 20 227 20 247 20 267 2O 287

21 18 15 _12----237 _9----257 _8----277

177 197 217

-83.8 -103.8 - 123.8 - 143.8 -163.8 183.8 ---

35,200-----37,400--37,140--34,510-----29,480--29,400 --

1 1728 J
X o

If r(x m - x)dx -203,130 1728 - -117.6 eu ft

]_=

-203,130

H-646

67

4.8 Wing-Fuselage-Nacelle Pitching Moments The wing-fuselage-nacelle pitching-moment characteristics are considered in terms of pitching-moment slopes, aerodynamic center, and pitching-moment coefficient. A first-order approximation of the variation of the pitching-moment coefficient beyond the limit of linearity of the lift-curve slope up to the stall is also considered.
4.8.1 Contributing Factors to Wing-Fuselage-Nacelle zero-lift were Pitching pitching accounted Moments moments of the wing, for in section 4.6. fuselage, For the

Zero-lift pitching moments: The nacelles, and wing-fuselage interference subject airplane, from table 4.6-1(c),

(Cm)x_ffn

= -0. 0463

(4.6-1)

Fuselage and nacelle pitching moments: The fuselage and nacelle pitching moments due to potentialand viscous-flow lift effects were accounted for in section 4.7. For the subject airplane, with the moment center about the leading edge of the total wing mean aerodynamic chord, the results of table 4.7-1 indicate that

Cma ) fn = 0,00375

- 0.000128a

(4.7-2)

Wing pitching moments: The wing pitching moments due to effective wing lift, which includes the effects of body upwash on the wing and wing lift carryover onto the fuselage, can be accounted for (on the basis of relations in ref. 11) by equation (4.8.11) for a moment center about the leading edge of the root chord of the exposed wing panels. For the subject airplane, because of the zero sweep of the leading edge, this is synonymous to the moment center about the leading edge of the reference mean aerodynamic chord of the wing.

(Cm_)w(f)

+f(w )

L\ ere

,w(f) Kw(f)

\ c re/f

,w)Kf(w)J

_'_w)_'_w

) (C L _)We (4.8.1-1)

whe re

_m_) the leading (Xc_

w (f) +f (w) edge of the isthe

is in terms total wing

of total mean

wing

area

and

mean

aerodynamic

chord

about

aerodynamic

chord

-'w\Cre](f) as 68 a fraction

aerodynamic of and about the leading

center edge

of the wing of the root

in the chord

presence of the

of the exposed

fuselage wing panels, H-646

obtained from figure 4.5-1 and Xac_ Cre If(w)

of the For which center wing Aw_]l

is the contribution to the aerodynamic center due to the lift carryover

fuselage _4 and body-width-to-wing-span ratios, d k =_, less to the than 0.5,

on the - M2

is normal for general due to lift carryover

aviation airplanes, the contribution of the wing onto the body is

aerodynamic

c re ]f (w)

1 b-d = _ + 2---_-_--_tan re

Ac/4 2 l_/'_-5-_'_tn_ + " 2 k - 7

(4.8.1-2)

The wing pitching-moment slope for the subject airplane about the leading edge of the mean aerodynamic chord due to the effective wing lift in the presence of the body is summarized in table 4.8.1-1(a) in terms of the reference wing area of 172.3 square feet, or

Cma)w(f)+f(w) Wing pitching moment can be accounted for

= _

0.0195

per

deg

(4.8.1-3)

drag

due to wing drag: The wing by the following relationship:

pitching

moment

due

to wing

/we)
- C Lw whe re zw 8w Aw e is the vertical is the is the wing wing distance mean aspect efficiency wing lift from the X-axis chord,

\d--cT Iw
(4.8.1-4)

zw
c% to the feet c/4 of the wing, positive down

aerodynamic ratio factor coefficient for

is the

wing

induced

drag

CLw

is the

H-646

69

After

converting

and

expressing

CLw

in terms

of

CLwfn,
zw

(4.8.1-5)

(Cm )w(D)=-CLwfn
Wing table pitching-moment slope due to drag for 4.8.1-1(b) in terms of wing area equal

_w
in

the subject airplane is summarized to 172.3 square feet, or

C ms ) w(D)

= 0. 000197

CLwfn

per

deg

(4.8.1-6)

Fuselage and nacelle "free moments": The fuselage and nacelle "free moments" due to induced flow from the wing can be estimated by the technique developed by Multhopp in reference 13. Multhopp indicates that, in considering wing lift carryover onto the body, there remains an essentially free moment (or couple) of the body due to wing upwash ahead of the wing and downwash behind the wing. This wing interference contribution was accounted for by the following equation, which indicates the free moment to be a function of angle of attack:

= ("_"Cma!B(E)

1 36.5Sw_" w

1728 (4.8.1-7)

1
1 36.5SwC whe re wB is the mean width of the body flow planform with segment, Ax to be zero in the body planw S 0 wB2 Ax 1728 dfl dc_

is the variation dc_ form area overlapped Curves ahead fuselage, segments tegrated wing of the
of

of local by the shown edge, at the ahead ' are

ol (considered

wing) in figure x1 --,

e w

ad-_, are leading chord

4.8.1-1 where cw

as

a function is the root

of

Ax

segment of the wing For

position for Ax that to the is assumed inthe

wing

chord

and the

centerline of the wing

of the leading on the

nacelle edge,

for the _ of the edge rises

nacelle.

immediately values, d_ d_

so abruptly adjacent

given segments

based

length trailing

segment of the wing,

leading

edge.

For

aft of the

7O

It- 64 6

to vary linearly and is obtained from

d(_

lh

8_ /

(4.8.1-8)

where De w
is considered lh
]

to be similar from from the the wing wing

to \-_-_']]YI ' trailing trailing edge edge

from

table last Ax

4.9. Ax

1-2,

column

24

is the is the

distance distance

to the to the

segment

xI

segment are summarized in

table

Fuselage 4.8.1-2

and nacelle "free moments" for in terms of a wing area of 172.3 (Cm_)f(_)+n(c) = (Cm_)f(e)+ = 0. 00558 = 0.0109

the subject airplane square feet, or (Cm(_)n(Q + 0. 0053 per deg

(4.8.1-9)

,1.8.2

Sl_ltic Margin of Wing-Fuseltlge-Nacelles The pitching-moment the center of gravity characteristics in terms of the static margin, to the aerodynamic center, are obtained from the the distance expression

from

(dCm_ - \d-_L whe re Xeg is the distance chord to the center )cg

Xcg Cw

_(Cm_)l ECL_

(4.8.2-1)

of gravity of the mean

from

the

leading chord

edge

of the

total

wing

6w
mean aerodynamic as a ratio aerodynamic

(_-:_Cmv_)le dynamic For the chord

is the

pitching-moment

slope

about

the

leading

edge

of the

mean

aero-

wing-fuselage-nacelle Xcg eg [(Cm_)f

configuration

of this

analysis, (Cma)w(D) + (Cmoz)f(c)+n(c)]/e

(dCm_

n + (Cm_)w(f)+f(w)+

-t,

:
of the subject airplane, to the reference center

(LOD n +
(4.8.9-2)
relative of the to the center of gravity at 0. 106 wind-tunnel data), is thus estimated

The static margin (which corresponds to be H-646

71

fdCm

(0. 00375 = -0.10 -

- 0. 000128_)

kd--C L/, w
The preceding The net CLa

- 0. 0195 + 0. 000197 0. 0831

CLwfn

+ 0. 0109

(4.8.2-3) Cm_ quantity quantities in the numerator in the denominator was were obtained from section 4.8. i. from equation (4.4-3), with

obtained

the higher order

a terms

considered to be negligible. as a function of CLwfn only, replace (_ in the

To express the static margin above equation by C Lwfn

C Lwfn 3.7 (4.8.2-4) + _ = 0.0831 from figure reference lift-curve 4.4-4 wing area, slope is the static margin

ce=( CLoe)wfn where -3.7 is the zero-lift angle

of attack

of the

Thus, on the basis subject airplane

of a 172.3-square-foot in the linear range

of the

_dCm_ -\d--_L 4.8.3 Pitching-mo,nenl Linear slope coefficient ]. 10@w

=-0.0456

+00162 CLwfn

(4.8.2-5)

of wing-fuselage-nacelh'._ coefficient in the linear range of the lift-

curve

lift range: The pitching-moment is determined from

f( (Cmwfn). 10_= -J

dCm \-d-_L/. _.dCm_ 106w dCLwfn obtained 10_,,. + (Cm)wfn from equation (4.8.2-5) (4.8.3-1) and

For

the

subject

airplane,

with

-\d-_L/.

(Cmo)wfn about mined 0.10_, to be

from

table

4.6-1(c) basis of the

or equation reference

(4.6-1), wing area

the

pitching-moment square feet,

coefficient is deter-

on the

of 172.3

Cmwfn).

10_ w

= 0. 0456 CLwfn

2 - 0. 0081CLwfn

- 0. 0463

(4.8.3-2)

The

calculation which

of also

..(Cmwfn ) includes

10_ w the

for results

the

linear the

lift

range

is summarized range

in table

4.8.3-1, 72

for

nonlinear

to bc discussed. tt-6.16

Nonlinear lift range: No methods appeared to be available pitching-moment coefficient in the lift region between the upper the lift-curve slope and stall. The apparent need to account for characteristics in this region resulted in an empirical approach provide a first approximation of the variation of C m with CL nacelle configuration.

for determining the limit of linearity of the pitching-moment to the problem to for the wing-fuselage-

The empirical approach takes into consideration equations (4.8.2-2) and (4.8.2-3). The equations were simplified by eliminating the pitching-moment contributions of the wing-induced drag effects. Because the stall characteristics of the wing-fuselagenacelle configuration are generally governed by the stall characteristics of the wing, it was assumed that the potential flow and crossflow contributions of the fuselage and nacelles were unaffected. It was also assumed that the free moment contributions of the fuselage and nacelles were not significantly range of the lift-curve slope approaching stall. that most of the free moment contributions are affected through This assumption from the upwash most of the nonlinear is based on the fact of the wing.

As a result of the preceding assumptions and the fact that the stall characteristics of the wing-fuselage-nacelle characteristics are generally governed by wing stall characteristics, the format of equation (4.8.2-2) was modified to that of equation (4.8.3-3). The equation is restricted to the region extending from the upper limit linearity of the lift-curve slope to stall. (Cm_)f n + (Cma)w (CL_)wfn with data substituted s + (Cmc_) - (ACLa)ws from equation (4.8.2-3), + 0. 0109 fie)+n(e)

of

dCm_

a-eT)s
10_ w For the subject airplane,

0.10

(4.8.3-3)

(0.00375

- 0.000128_s)

+ (Cma)

w_

(4.8.3-4)

whe re is the average is the a average in the nonlinear of total range wing Cma in the nonlinear to an average slope range in the to stall non-

(Cma)ws

value

is a correction
W s

to reduce

( CLa ) wfn

linear

range Because the aerodynamic center of the wing is normally at 0.25_ w in the linear

range of the lift curve and moves aft with increasing 0. 505 at stall, an average value of the aerodynamic (aC)w s, is assumed to be 0.3755.

c_ in the nonlinear range to center in the nonlinear range,

H-646

73

An average value of

CLa )w of the total wing in the nonlinear range approaching

stall, used to obtain (A CL_) Ws, is considered to be the average of the sum of (CL_)w in the linear range and the slope of the line connectingthe upper limit of ]inearity of the CLw versus a curve and the CLmax point. This average slope, referred to as CLo_) , may be determined from
w s

(_)ws =_ _)w
= 0. 063 for the The subject airplane using the and total

(_m_x)w (_)w( - _) ] "

O_Lma x - aZ

;
in table is determined 4.2-1. from

(4.8.3-5)

wing

lift

characteristics slopes

difference

in linear

nonlinear

lift-curve

(__)w_ (_)w (_)w_

= 0. 0759 = 0. 0129 An average value of ,.(Cma)w - 0.063 per of the deg total for the subject in the airplane nonlinear range is determined (4.8.3-6)

wing

from

(m_)ws (aC)ws : (O_)w_

= -0.375 = -0. 0236 The to be 1 average value of c_ in the (0. 063) per deg for the subject was airplane from figure 4.4-4 (4.8.3-7)

nonlinear

range

determined

=1(10 2 12

+ 13. S)

(4.8.3-8)

Substituting

the

determined

values

of

\_(Cm'_]Ws'

(ACLa)w

s,

and

c_ s

for

the

subject

74

H-646

airplane

into

equation

(4.8.3-4)

results

in the

pitching-moment

slope

= -0. 0496

(4.8.3-9)

This curve

slope

is drawn,

as in figure the upper is drawn limit

4.8.3-1,

from

the point CLwfn, to, the

on the to

pitching-moment Finally, to a

representing fiat curve

of linearity, and tangent

(CLmax)wfn. point

reasonably

from,

C*L_ffn

(CLmax)wfn.

Summary: The pitching-moment characteristics of the subject airplane, including the nonlinear region, are summarized in table 4.8.3-1. The results, referenced to a wing area of 178 square feet, are compared with full-scale wind-tunnel data in figure 4.8.3-2. The lift coefficients for the Cmwfn versus CLwfn plot were obtained

from figure 4.4-4. The agreement between predicted pitching-moment data is good. All contributions were 4.8.4
A w

and wind-tunnel-measured pertinent.

Symbols wing aspect ratio

(aC)w s

average value of the aerodynamic center of the wing in the nonlinear range of the wing lift-curve slope to stall expressed as a fraction of the wing mean aerodynamic chord wing lift x span, coefficient lift coefficient of the wing alone configuration , at the upper limit of in.

b CL CLma CL w C Lwf n C Lwfn

maximum

lift coefficient lift coefficient magnitude linearity

of the wing-fuselage-nacelle lift coefficient, lift-curve wing slope, at stall CLwfn

of the of the

(C Lc_)wf n

CLmax)w

lift lift

coefficient coefficient slope

of the

(O m X)w n
(CLa)w(f)+f(w)

of the wing-fuselage-nacelle of the fuselage and nacelles,

configuration per deg

at stall

lift-curve variation cluding attack,

of the lift of the wing the wing lift carryover per deg

in the presence of the fuselage, onto the fuselage, with angle

inof

H-646

75

(cL ) w

lift-curve lift-curve lift-curve deg

slope slope slope

of the of the

isolated exposed

wing, wing

per panels,

deg per deg per

(O )We r
(CLc_)Ws

of the wing-fuselage-nacelle

configuration,

average lift-curve slope of C L _) wfn approaching stall, per deg correction nonlinear pitching-moment zero-lift nacelle to reduce range C L o_,, ,,.fn approaching coefficient coefficient

in the

nonlinear

range

AC L_)w s

to an average stall, per deg

slope

in the

pitching-moment configuration

of the

wing-fuselage-

Cmwfn).

106 w

pitching-moment coefficient figuration relative to the chord point slope of the "free moment"

of the wing-fuselage-nacelle 10-percent mean-aerodynamic-

con-

coefficient

of the

body,

per

deg

"free

moment"

slope,

C m (_) B(c) , applied respectively

specifically

to the

fuselage

and nacelle,

Cm_)f(_:)+n

() = (Cm_)f(e)

+ (Cma)n(c)

slope of the pitching-moment coefficient of the fuselage and nacelles about the leading edge of the wing mean aerodynamic chord as obtained from section 4.7 (does not include "free moments"), per deg slope of the per deg pitching-moment coefficient due to the wing drag,

(Cm_)w(D)

slope of the pitching-moment coefficient about the leading edge of the wing mean aerodynamic chord due to the effective wing lift, including the effects of the fuselage upwash on the wing and wing lift carryover onto the fuselage, per deg average slope of the wing pitching-moment leading edge of the wing mean aerodynamic linear lift range to stall, per deg coefficient chord about the in the non-

Cm O_)ws

76

H-646

summation of the contributions of the wing, fuselage, nacelles, and interacting effects to the slope of the pitching moment about the leading edge of the wing mean aerodynamic chord, per deg

dCD_

rate

of change

of the

wing

drag

with wing

lift

/'dem_

-\d--d-/cg
(dCm_

static margin of the wing

relative to the center of gravity mean aerodynamic chord

as a fraction

-\
_dCm_

log

static margin relative to the the wing mean aerodynamic at 0. 106 w average to the static center

center chord

of gravity with the

as a fraction of center of gravity

105 w

margin in the nonlinear of gravity at 0.10_v

region

to stall

relative

d--C e/w(D)
c n

rate of change of the pitching-moment drag, with the wing lift coefficient chord root root wing wing width wing of the chord chord chord, mean of the efficiency wing at the centerline at the

coefficient,

due

to wing

of the

nacelle, of the

in. in.

C r

of the wing of the in. aerodynamic fuselage factor

centerline panel,

fuselage,

Cr e

exposed

wing

in.

c w

Cw

chord, at the for wing, induced

in. in.

or ft

d
e

drag onto the

(assumed fuselage

equal

to 1.0) alone,

K f(w)

ratio of the wing lift carryover obtained from table 4.4-1(a) ratio of the wing alone, obtained

to the wing

Kw(f) d b

lift in the presence from table 4.4-1(a)

of the

fuselage

to the

wing

k_=-

upper limit from the the body,

of integration leading edge in.

in equation of the wing

(4.8.1-7); at the body

the distance to the nose of

H-646

77

lh

distance from the wing trailing edge to the centroid of the aft Ax segment of the fuselage length (table 4.8.1-2), Mach number wing area, sq ft wing body panels, planform sq ft segment, applied to the Ax, in. and

last in.

M Sw Sw e WB w f, w n

reference area mean mean of the width width,

exposed of the w B,

specifically

fuselage

nacelle,

respectively xI distance ward from the wing leading edge to the Ax segment of the body planform centroid of the area, in. area for-

length of the Ax to and forward

J

segment of the body planform of the wing leading edge, in.

adjacent

x1

distance from Ax segment length of the

the wing trailing edge of the body planform segment of the body

to the centroid area, in. area, in.

of the

aft

Ax

planform

c re/f(w)

contribution to the aerodynamic of the wing onto the fuselage, of the exposed wing panels

center due to the lift carryover as a fraction of the root chord

c re/w

(f)

aerodynamic center of the wing with the wing the fuselage, as a fraction of and about the root chord of the exposed wing panels distance to the center of gravity from the as a ratio of the wing mean aerodynamic vertical chord angle distance from the center of gravity point of the wing mean aerodynamic deg at the upper limit of linearity

in the presence of leading edge of the

Xcg _w
zw

leading chord

edge

of and

to the quarterchord, in.

of attack,

a*

angle of attack slope, deg angle angle average of attack of attack value

of the

lift-curve

% C_CLma x

for

zero

lift,

deg lift, deg

at maximum

of angle

of attack

from

a*

to

c_CLma x tt-646

78

0_0A_
_er

variation of upwash and downwash with angle of attack Ax segment of the body forward of the wing leading and aft of the wing trailing edge, respectively variation of the

at the edge

of upwash with angle of attack of the Ax segment body forward of and adjacent to the wing leading edge

Iafh

average with

downwash gradient at and across compressibility accounted for

the

horizontal

tail

aCw

rate of change attack sweep of the

of downwash,

behind

the

wing,

with

angle

of

Ae/4

quarter-chord

line

of wing,

deg

H-646

79

TABLE WING (a) Due PITCHING lift

4.8.1-1 OF THE AIRPLANE interaction

MOMENTS including mutual

to wing

wing-fuselage

FtXae\

/ac\

llcrc\/Swe\

, "e,f<w> (Cm<Jw<O+f<w >- -[/_-7_-_),,,(O_k"(f)+/;Z)Kf(w/l/_-:ll_l wi

Symbol
Cw

Description Total Root wing chord mean of wing panel slope of aerodynamic wing sq area, ft sq ft wing panels of fuselage onto wing leading with fuselage wing of in to per deg to wing wing alone alone of fuselage, as chord, panels, in. in.

Re fe rence Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table 3.2-1 3 2-1 3 2-1 3.2-1 4.2-1 4.4 -1 (a)

Magnitude 59.5 71.9 172.3 148.0 .0747 1.09 14 (b) 198

Cr e

exposed area, wing

Sw Swe
(CLt_)W Kw (f) Sf(w) e

Reference Exposed I,ift-curve Ratio Ratio of lift

of exposed wing in presence

of wing

lift center

carryover of about

4.4-1(a) 4.5-1

ae\
e re)w d b k h c/4 (f)

Aerodynamic fraction of

presence Cre

and

edge

Fuselage width Wing span, in. d Sweep of wing

at

wing,

in.

Figure Figure

3.2-1 3.2-1

48.0 432.0 0555

quarter-chord to the fuselage, aerodynamic as

line,

deg center of ere due to lift carryover of

Table Equation

2.2-1

-2.5 .25

(Xac
e re 1]_(w )

Contribution wing onto

fraction

(4.8.2-1)

C m Summary: _ a)w(f)+f(w)

= -0.0195 per deg

(b)

Due

to wing

drag
Zw

.
(Cmc_)w ,D): Symbol
i w

[(CL0w

-tC'wfn ZT iwfn 7reA w [

Description

_W

Reference Table 3.2-1 3.2-1 draw-

Magnitude 7.5 59.5 z--2.0 0759 0_31

Aspect Mean

ratio

of

total

wing chord of total wing, in.

cw
Zw

aerodynamic

"Fable From

(CL.)w (cLDwfn

Vertical distance from _-lnd-tunnel center of gravity to Cw/4, positive down, in. Total wing lift-curve slope, based on S w = 172.3 square feet per deg Taft-off lift-curve slope, based on S w = 172.3 square feet per deg Wing efficiency factor

ings Table 4.2-1 From columns

1 and 8 of table 4.4 -2 1.0 (assumed)

Summary:

(Cmo_)w(D)

= O. O00197Ct.wf

per

deg

8O

H-646

[.., > t

am

._._ _
0

._. oo

_'_.1

_t_
0

,,%

;_ _

. . _

.=,_

o_'

x_ 0

_
,=4

_g

oo _

_
g

_.

-:
'
z
m

N_
'

g
l
<1
_

._

_'_

,,a

Z 0

[.,.1

_
2 _ _ "_

._
'_

: _:

_ _
_omo _

,_

_
_

_ "_ _
" o

g_

__ _

H-646

81

TABLE

4.8.1-2 (b) Fuselage

(Concluded)

wf 2Ax

(Cm )r(0 = 36.5Sw w

wf2Ax Segment Ax, in. wf wf 2 _ x 1, in. x 1 x 1

d_

d_

d_

dc_ x1 8c

Cr
1.17 1.00 .78 0.53 .21 .... .... .... .... ....

lb
(fig. 4.8.1-1) 1.15 1.20 1.23 1.32 3.50 0.02 0.15 .45 0.76 1.00 .... .... .... .... ....

wf 2AX 1728

da'

Zh(10.38 5.00 13.40 .... .... 0.01 0.08 .23 0.40 .52 21.78 125.3 0.06 1.86 4.21 2.10 .13

1
L:

9.0 16.0 18.5 18.5 31.2 5.1 27.5 41.0 35.4 17.0

8.0 21.25 32.0 39.25 44.5 44.0 38.25 27.75 16.0 5.0

64 450 1020 1540 1980 i936 1463 770 256 25

0.33 4.17 I0.90 16.50 35.80 5.7 23.3 18.3 5,24 ,25

88.7 76.2 58.9 40.4 15.6 2.8 18.0 52.0 88.0 116.0

2 3 4 5=n 6=n+1 7 8 9 10=m

wf2Ax 1728 per Summary: (Cmce) f (c) = 0. 00558 deg based on S w= 172.3 sq ft

dfl da,

= 174.22

(c)

Nacelles

wn2AX (Cm_)n(c) = (2 nacelles) 36.5Swc w

E
x1 -Cn 0.75 0.69 .59 0.44 .18

da

Wn2AX Segment
=

Ax,

in.

wn

Wn2

1728

x 1,

in.

d_
(fig. 4.8.1-1) 1.25 1.27 l, 32 i. 38 3.65

u'n2Ax 1728 dc_

1
L

7 3 i0 i0 23

16.0 32.5 35,0 35.5 35.0

256 1055 1225 1260 1225

1.04 1.83 7.09 7.29 16.30

48.0 44.0 38.0 28.0 11.5

1.29 2.32 9.36 10.06 59.50

2 3 4 5=n

E Summary: Cm_ S w= )n (e) = 0.0053 sq ff per deg based on

Wn2AX d_ 172-----'8 dtx

= 82.53

172.3

(d)

Summary

(Crnce)f(e)+n(e)

= (Crnoe)f(_)

(Cma)n(e)

= 0.0109

per

deg

82

H-646

[i

@ ----"F_
@ _
,2+_g
Z 0

---4 N
r) u

__
_ ti

,_ _ o_ ; d ," _ ,_ d ," d ,"d d ,"

I I I I I

o
0

_q <
,_
I

d
I

_,_

,. ,

r,..)
t_ _'_ LO _._ I__ _ a_ _ I I t I

Ol

V.)

Y_
0 I r._ I0

Y_
I

YY
I

_
I

I ,
I I1

% 2:

o
!

_ I_ II

_,

@ 2: r_

_'_''0''_ I

I_

ao

H-646

83

For (CLa)w da _ da'_ 3 for /-c versus dcl

other than 0.08,

and _ are each do ratios of (CLa)w

direct

(CLa)w 08 --O.

Xl

versus

S_1 _

da
1.6 2.0 2.4 2.8 XI Cw

.4

.8

1.2 Xl Cw

Figure from body

4.8.1-1. Variation of the wing upwash the leading edge of the wing. For use (ref. 13).

derivative with position along the body in determining T_free moments ty of the

84

H-646

.-I

1(3

I--

-EP
0

Z 0 _

_0
_ _

E c._

H-646

85

Ana lyt ica I 0 Wind tunnel

.2

(Cmwfn).tO_w

o----o---r

D -'-"

-.2
-Z

8 a, deg

12

16

20

.2

(Cmwfn),

lO_w

O-

-.2 0 .2 .4 .6 CLwfn .8 t.O .2 1.4

Figure with

4, 8, 3-2. wind-tunnel

Comparison of calculated data. Sw = 178 sq ft.

tail-off

pitching-moment

characteristics

86

ti-646

4.9

Downwash

and

Dynamic

Pressure

at the

Horizontal

Tail

The methods presented for predicting the subsonic downwash and dynamic pressure in the region of the tail plane for preliminary design purposes were developed for the linear lift region for sweptand unswept-wing airplanes. Their use in the nonlinear region below stall, however, provides reasonable approximations. The total downwash picture is complex, as the following discussion illustrates. A limitation of the method for downwash determination is its neglect of the interference from fuselage and nacelles. Also neglected is the small effect of the tail itself on the flow ahead of it. For conventional configurations of general aviation aircraft, and propeller-off conditions at least, the interference effects do not appear to be significant. 4.9.1 Downwash

The downwash behind a wing at subsonic flow conditions is the result of the wing' s vortex system. A vortex sheet, shed by the lifting wing as in figure 4.9.1-1, is deflected downwind by the bound (lifting) and trailing (tip) vortices. The curvature of the vortex sheet is relatively small in the plane of symmetry for straight wings with reasonably large aspect ratios. Wings with large trailing-edge sweepback produce a vortex sheet that is bowed upward in the plane of symmetry. The vortex sheet does not extend unaltered indefinitely downstream but, as it is displaced vertically, distends rapidly and rolls up like a volute about the tip-vortex cores. The tip vortexes have a relatively small vertical displacement from freestream direction as they tend to move inboard. When all the vorticity is transferred from the sheet to the tip vortexes, the vortex system is considered to be rolled up. Rational tail-plane design depends on a knowledge of the velocity and direction of the airflow in the region behind the wing. The shape of the vortex sheet significantly influences the downwash experienced by the tail in the flow field of the wing. For a complete rollup the spanwise downwash distribution is dependent upon the spanwise lift distribution of the wing. When the rollup is complete, however, the downwash angles for all wings of equal lift and equal effective span at the tail are identical. Since the tip vortexes are somewhat above the vortex sheet, the downwash above the sheet is somewhat greater than the downwash below the sheet. The tip vortexes originate at the wing tips at angles of attack for which the flow is unseparated. Certain thin, highly swept wings have a significantly different flow pattern in the higher angle-of-attack range. These wings are characterized by a leading-edge separation vortex that lies above the surface of the wing. From its inception near the plane of symmetry, it moves outboard in the approximate direction of the wing leading edge and is finally shed in a streamwise direction near the wing tip. For wings stalled at the tip-- a characteristic of highly tapered, untwisted, straight wings and highly swept wings--the downwash in the region of the tail will be greater for a stalled wing than for an unstalled wing for a given lift coefficient. Wings with low taper ratio, or with washout, stall first at the center, and the wake does not c leave the wing at the trailing edge but at a point _ sin a above the trailing edge. In general, H-646 when the wing stalls at the center, the center of the wake moves upward and 87

the vortexes rolling off the edge of the stalled portion reduce the downwash. Several methods are available for predicting downwashat subsonic conditions. Reference 14 considers wings with zero sweep of the quarter-chord line and presents design charts for various taper ratios and aspect ratios for incompressible flow conditions. The design charts are for flapped as well as unflapped configurations and include load distribution, downwashdisplacement, and downwashangles. Reference 15 considers unflapped swept wings and compressible flow conditions. Reference 16 uses graphical procedures and considers unflappedwings of various sweepsat compressible flow conditions. Because of its relative simplicity andversatility, the method of reference 16 (also considered in ref. 1) is presented and applied to the subject airplane. The method of reference 16 is for configurations in which the tail span is less than two-thirds of the wing span. The basic approach of the method is to: (1) Determine the downwashin the plane of symmetry at the height of the tip vortexes at the longitudinal station of the horizontal tail mean aerodynamic chord quarter chord. (2) Correct this value for tail height above the vortexes. (3) Evaluate the effect of tail span by relating the average downwashat the tail to the downwashdetermined from step 2. Details of the development of the method are included in reference 16. It should be noted, however, that the method assumes the vortexes to be essentially rolled up at the longitudinal-tail station. Thus it is fortunate that the vortexes roll up in a shorter distance as the angle of attack increases, becausedownwasheffects become increasingly important at the higher angles of attack. The procedural steps in applying the method are as follows (pertinent dimensions defined in fig. 4.9.1-1): Aweff bweff (1) The effective aspect ratio, Aw , and effective span ratio, bw , are determined from figure 4.9.1-2 as functions of wing angle-of-attack ratio,
_w-%
, taper O_Lma (2) symmetry of tail and x - % The low-speed downwash gradient, core ratio, -\0o_ , in the /Vlow speed figure 4.9.1-3 sweep, as a function (Ac/4) w, from plane of ratio, k w, and sweep of the quarter chord, (Ac/4) w.

at the height of the vortex 2l_____2 length bw , effective aspect gradient at infinity

is obtained Aweff, from

quarter-chord

downwash

obtained

_c OoL

_2(57_.3 7rAw

(CLo_) w

(4.9.1-1)

88

H-646

where (CL0w
and quarter-chord

is in degrees.

_E

At the

wing

trailing

edge,

0"--_ = 1.

(3) The vertical position, a, of the horizontal-tail quarter-chord the vortex core depends upon the type of wing separation as determined ure 4.9.1-4 as a function of leading-edge-sharpness parameter, Ay sweep, (Ac/4) w" For trailing-edge separation,

point relative from fig(from section

to 4.1),

a = z h - /eft (___.. 3 where chord the /eff of is the bweff angle distance quarter wing. in the

0.41_fCLw _/ _rA-,.,ef__ / plane tail mean

bweff 2 from

tan

r tip of the chord, and

(4.9.1-2) quarter F is

wing-chord of the

the vortex

to the

chord For

aerodynamic

dihedral

of the

leading-edge

separation, 0.41CLw_
_

a: 4
where the 13 is the edge span, distance of the from wing root the

(z2+z3 w3
leading edge and l2

(4.9.1-3) ] mean aerodynamic 4.9.1-1. quarter equation chord to

Weft wing

of the

trailing (4) The

chord, vortexes chord 16 but

is as defined longitudinal

in figure location

bvo r,

of the

at the

of the

chord of the tail mean aerodynamic originally obtained from reference

is determined also included /2/ef

from the following in reference 1: f \ u _ is obtained from 1/2

bvo r : bweffwhere bru, the span of the completely

(bweffrolled

bru)tb_ur up vortexes,

(4.9.1-4)

bru and

= [0.78

+ 0.10(A m - 0.4)

+ 0. 003( Ac/4)w]

bweff

(4.9.1-5)

/ru(5) The average downwash gradient

0.56A w CLw acting on the tail is obtained from

(4.9.1-6)

speed

Iv_vc

I low speed

c0 ,,o
\0_/low speed

(4.9.1-7)

H-646

89

where 2a bvor (6) higher

the [ _] quantity bh and bvo r " Because subsonic

is obtained

from

figure

4.9.1-5

(ref.

17) as a function

of

the preceding Mach numbers

result is for low-speed is made, on the basis

conditions, of reference

an adjustment 1, by

to

(4.9.1-8) _oz / M Figure 4.9.1-6, determined downwash index for the accuracy \_o_ /low speed (CLo_)wlo w speed and experimentally provides a qualitative conditions.

from reference 16, compares variation with a for several of the prediction procedure

the calculated airplanes and for propeller-off

Figure 4.9.1-7 shows the calculated downwash characteristics for the subject airplane. No test data were available for comparison. However, on the basis of the correlation of calculated and experimentally determined propeller-off pitching-moment characteristics presented in section 4.11, the calculated downwash characteristics appear to be accurate. Tables 4.9.1-1 and 4.9.1-2 list the pertinent parameters and summary calculations, respectively, for the subject airplane. 4.9.2 Dynamic-Pressure Ratio

A horizontal taft operating in the wake of a wing experiences a loss in effectiveness due to the decrease in dynamic pressure in the wake. This decrease is caused by the loss in flow energy in the form of friction and separation drag of the wing; the greater the drag, the greater the pressure loss. The wake, usually thin and intense near the trailing edge, spreads and decays with increasing downstream distance from the trailing edge in a manner such that the integrated momentum across the wake is constant and not a function of longitudinal distance. The centerline of the wake coincides with the centerline of the trailing vortex sheet. The wake occurs in all speed regions. A basic method for predicting the dynamic pressure at the horizontal tail in the linear lift range up to a Mach number of approximately 0.65 is given in reference 14. This method, which was applied to the subject airplane, neglects fuselage interference effects and was developed on the basis of wings with zero sweep of the quarter chord. Reference 18 extends the application of the method to nonlinear conditions approaching stall. A modification of the basic method, to account for fuselage interference and wing sweep, is presented in reference 19. The procedures of the basic method are considered at this time. On the basis of reference trailing 4.9.2-1) 14, the half-width of the wake, AZwak e, at distance x

from the wing-root quarter chord (fig.

edge to the horizontal-tail is given by AZwake Cw

mean-aerodynamic-chord

x_ _ + N/ "Cw
H-646

9O

where, in accordance with references 14 and 1, CDf, is the wing zero-lift drag coefficient. Curves of this equationare shownin figure 4.9.2-2 for different values of CDf. The maximum loss of dynamic pressure in the wake at the tail which occurs at the wake centerline is obtained from
1/2 _--_-I = 2.42 CDf _x (4.9.2-2)

q_o
or its graphical representation, loss figure at any 4.9.2-3. point

_w+.3

The centerline

dynamic-pressure is obtained from

in the

wake

normal

to and

from

the

wake

_-_ ()() -- _
q_ h
or the its graphical representation, loss distance, figure is zero. z_, is given

q_o

cos2 _ _Zwa k
U

(4.9.2-3)
is greater than 1,

4.9.2-4.

When

Zh AZwake

dynamic-pressure The vertical

by the

equation

l/

z h=xtan where ch is the downwash in the plane 1.62 c h = 57.3 and where The 7 is defined pressure in figure is then CLw =

(7+

eh-

aw) and is given by

(4.9.2-4)

of symmetry 92.83 _A w CLw

_A w 4.9.2-1.

in degrees

(4.9.2-5)

dynamic

determined

to be

(4.9.2-6) h Although the preceding below the stall, reference the stall if the profile drag relations 18 indicates coefficient were developed from results obtained at lifts that they apply with reasonable accuracy above of the stalled wing is known.

H-646

91

The accuracy of the procedure, developedon the basis of unswept wings, may be estimated from table 4.9.2-1 (from ref. 1) which includes swept as well as unswept configurations. The table compares calculated dynamic-pressure ratios with the lowspeedmodel test data of references 20 and 21. The foregoing procedures for determining the dynamic-pressure ratios at the horizontal tail were applied to the subject airplane. Basic pertinent parameters and a summary of the calculations are listed in table 4.9.2-2. The results indicated that the horizontal tail is outside the wake and thus the dynamic-pressure loss is zero in the linear and incipient stall region. At full stall, in the absenceof an applicable profile-drag coefficient, the dynamic-pressure ratio was assumed to be equal to 1.00, although a more realistic value would probably have been closer to 0.80. The results are included in figure 4.9.1-7. Although not used, a modification of the preceding method which considers wing sweep and combined wing-body profile drag was given in reference 19. The procedure is in the form of a nomograph (fig. 4.9.2-5). The accuracy of the method may be estimated from figure 4.9.2-6 (from ref. 19)which uses data from references 21 to 26.
4.9.3
A w

Symbols wing aspect ratio aspect position relative ratio of the wing (from fig. 4.9.1-2)

Aweff
a

effective vertical point

of the horizontal-taft to the vortex core span, ft rolled

(fig.

quarter-chord 4.9.1-1),

in.

bh bru bvor

horizontal-taft span of the

completely

up tip vortexes,

ft

span of the tip vortexes at the longitudinal location of the quarter chord of the horizontal-tail mean aerodynamic chord (fig. 4.9.1-1), ft wing span, ft span of the wing zero-lift (from fig. 4.9.1-2), coefficient, ft respectively

b w

bweff CDf, CL w (C')w (C_O)W,o+ CDf

effective wing wing wing and lift

wing-body coefficient slope, slope for,

drag

lift-curve

per

deg unaccounted

wing lift-curve and accounted chord, ft

with compressibility respectively

92

H-646

mean

aerodynamic aerodynamic of the

chord, chord wing

ft of the wing, to the plane, of the ft X-body from bweff mean axis, the to the aerodynamic tip deg

_w
iw /eft

mean

incidence distance, vortex quarter chord

relative root-chord chord

in the wing at the quarter

chord of the horizontal-tail (fig. 9.4.1-1), ft complete

lru

distance required for the tip vortices, ft tail

rollup

of the

wing-

12

length in the wing root-chord plane from the root-chord trailing edge to the quarter chord of the horizontal-tail mean aerodynamic chord (fig. 4.9.1-1), ft of the wing mean edge of the wing aeroroot

13

distance from the leading edge dynamic chord to the trailing chord, ft Mach number dynamic horizontal-tail pressure,

free-stream
_o

lb/sq

ft dynamic pressure

_h

ratio

of the

to free-stream

dynamic-pressure q_ dynamic-pressure

loss

at the horizontal

tail

as a ratio

of

loss

at the

wake

centerline

as a ratio

of

Sw

wing

area,

sq ft ft/sec of the wake, chord to the aerodynamic from quarter chord

V
X

airspeed,

distance, parallel to the centerline the trailing edge of the wing root chord of the horizontal-tail mean (fig. 4.9.2-1), ft leading-edge-sharpness parameter

Ay
!

zh

vertical distance from the root-chord plane of the to the quarter-chord point of the horizontal-tail aerodynamic chord (fig. 4.9.1-1), ft

wing mean

H-646

93

t/

zh

vertical distance from quarter chord of the chord (fig. 4.9.2-1) half-width of the wake root chord

the centerline horizontal-tail

of the mean

wake to the aerodynamic

AZwake

at a distance (fig. 4.9.2-1),

from ft

trailing

edge

of the wing
Ol

angle angle angle

of attack, of attack of attack

deg relative of the to the wing, X-body axis, to the deg chord, at

ab _C Lmax

relative

CLmax wing zero-lift angle of attack relative relative to the to the wing wing chord, chord, deg a b + i w,

Ol o

Ol w

wing angle deg s absolute

(aW)ab -y

angle

of attack

of the

wing,

aw

- so

angle between the wing chord pIane the trailing edge of the wing root chord of the horizontal-tail mean (fig. 4.9.2-1), deg plane deg of symmetry deg

and the line connecting chord and the quarter aerodynamic chord

downwash,

eh

downwash in the (fig. 4.9.2-1), average downwash

at the

vortex

sheet

_h OCvc Oa

across

the

horizontal

tail,

deg

rate of change of downwash, in the plane the height of the vortex core, with the of attack downwash gradient at infinity

of symmetry at absolute angle

_EQO

_o_

Oa/low

speed'\

Oz /M

average downwash gradient tail with compressibility for, respectively wing sweep taper ratio wing wing leading

at and across the horizontal unaccounted and accounted

of the of the

edge,

deg line, deg

(Ae/4)w /_ = 3' + _h - aw, deg

sweep

quarter-chord

94

H-646

wing

dihedral

angle,

deg

H-646

95

TABLE PERTINENT PARAMETERS HORIZONTAL

4.9.1-1 AT

FOR COMPUTING AVERAGE DOW2qWASH TAIL OF SUBJECT AIRPLANE

Symbol % c_CLma x (Ac/4) w Wing zero-lift angle relative

Description to chord, deg relative to

Reference Table Table Table chord lengths Table Table Table Table 4.2-1 4.2-1 3.2-1 4.1-1 3.2-1 3.2-1 32-1 3.2-1 draw-

Magnitude -2 15.4 -2.5 .0316c 513 7.5 36.0 5.0 2.5 8.68 6.33

Wing angle of attack at maximum chord, deg Wing sweep along c/4 line, deg Wing Wing Wing Wing _ng leading-edge-sharpness taper ratio aspect span, d_edral, ratio ft dog

lift coefficient,

hy
Aw

parameter,

bw
v
P

Table

zh l2 l3

I Perpendicular distance from wing-chord plane to c/4 of horizontal tail, ft Tail length in wing root-chord plane from _tng-root trailing edge to 5/4 of horizontal tall, ft Distance from leading-edge wing mean aerodynamic chord trailing edge of wing root chord, ft; used only if flow separation is at leading edge {fig. 4.9.1-4) Ratio of effective to geometric aspect ratio

to

Scaled from ings Figure 3,2-1 and 3.2-2 Figure 3.2-1

Aweff

Figure 4.9. I-2

1.00

bWeff bw /eft Ratio Tail of effective length to to geometric plane wing from tail, span vortex ft; function tip of of e/4 bwe ff of Figure 4.9.1-2 Scaled from drawings Table 4.2-I 1.00 14.18

in root-chord 5/4 slope

bweff C L a)w Oct 2/2 bw Lift-curve

of horizontal of wing, deg

0.0759 369

Downwash

gradient

at infinity

= 114"6(C _

L )w

Equation

(4.9.1-1)

482 .472

(yvc
\as
bru

/low

speed

Dewnwash vortex Span

gradient core

in plane

of symmetry

at height

of

Figure Equation Equation

4.9.1-3 (4.9.1-5) (4.9.1-6)

/ru

of completely [0.78 + 0.10(k Distance required in chord plane,

rolled up wing-tip vortexes, w - 0.4) + 0. O03(Ac/4)w] Deft , ft for complete rollup of'wing-tip vortexes 0.56Aw CI__ _W

0.7836bwef 4.20/CL w

, semispans location of c/4 _1/2 of = 36 Equation (4.9.1-4) Variable

bvor

Span

of vortexes

at longitudinal - ( b w eff-

horizontal .u

tail ' b w eff _ eru /

[36 b_ ](0:,_1/2:
Vertical core, separation distance I from [O_v

ft

bru_/2_'ff /\bwlru]

ho_i_ntal-taii . i CLw. _ _)" edge, ft

Zh -teffk573is at trailing

loot chord ,Wef t tan T

to vortex P if

Equation

(4.9.

i-2)

Variable

a_h
0_ 0evc .0_ -low speed Ratio of average downwash acting height, downwash at vortex-core on horizont_tail f 2a "-n (_or' _or) to Figure 4.9.1-5 Variable

gg-]M

Downwash

gradient

at horizontal

tail

at Mach

number,

Equation

(4.9.1-8)

_41o

speed

at Mach

-_-'low

speedL(_T-L_--Jlow

speed

wind-tunnel number

96

H-646

_._

,6
@ ,,-'=
@

_o
d e,i # d

,_

_._.

@ @

_,1 ,..._ _.....,_,._,

# s_ .....
. _. _ "..

r_

"_
o

@
.....
i

!
0 [-,

g
o;

[--, Z i O

t.-- t.-

,6 .,,.2._

,6444#

4_
II

..]B

< < 0 Z O

5
< I

@ _ _

$ ,:; .....

_] io
I

..... .....

__
,d

_,-_

i
,,_

_
ii'"

_,,_

_s_ .4x_44x

_-=

_I=

-,....

2s
H -64 6 97

TAB COMPARISON OF CALCULATED TIIE [ Caleulatlons AND

LE

4.9.2-

i DYNAMIC-PRESSURE (FROM REF. i) 14] Percent alculated 0.88 .89 0. 92 .95 .98 1.9 0.88 .89 .93 .97 .99 1.0 1.0 .98 .91 0.88 .89 .92 .95 .98 1.0 0.88 .89 .92 .96 .99 1.0 1.0 .996 .94 .88 0.89 .895 .91 .93 .96 .99 1.0 0.92 .93 96 .99 1.0 0.85 .86 .89 .93 .96 1.0 0.90 .92 0.94 .95 ,96 .96 0.87 .89 .92 .93 .95 .97 0.97 .96 .93 0.96 .96 .95 ,95 ,94 .98 0.95 .94 .94 .94 ,94 .96 1.01 1.02 1.02 1.01 0.95 .95 .95 .94 .94 .97 1.0 0.92 .93 .95 .97 .99 .... .... .... O. 86 .88 .92 est -2.2 -3.3 -2.1 0 2.1 4.2 I.i 0 1.1 4.3 4.2 3.1 3.1 2.1 -2.2 -8.3 -7.3 -3.2 0 4.3 2.0 -7.4 -5.3 -2.1 2.1 5.3 4.2 -1.0 -2.4 -7.8 -13.0 -6.3 -5.8 -4.2 -1.1 2.1 4.1 O 0 0 1.1 2.1 1.0 error RATIOS AT

TEST-DETERMINED TAIL

IIORIZONTAL based

on the procedures _ Cw C_w' deg 0

of reference

Source

Aw

(Ale)w,

deg

_,v

x Cw

Reference

20

I. 0

0 1 2 3 4 6 0 1 2 3 4 6 6 8 10 0 I 2 3 4 6 0 1 2 3 4 6 6 8 i0 12 O I 2 3 4 6 8 0 I 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4 6

Figure

27

...........

Figure

12

i. 0

Figure

12

1.0

0.28

Figure

30

4.5

30

1.0

Figure

15

5.2

30

1.0

Figure

15

5.2

30

1.0

0.28

Figure

36

1.5

60

1.0

Figure

24

60

1.0

Reference

21

3.5

47.5

0.5

1.213

8.1 9.1 8.7

98

H-646

TABLE DYNAMIC-PRESSURE RATIO AT THE (a) Symbol Description Wing angle of attack relative to chord line

4.9.2-2 TAIL OF THE SUBJECT AIRPLANE

ItORIZONTAL parameters

Pertinent

Reference = o_b + tw, deg Table 3-1

Magnitude abe 15 2

%,
Y cw Aw x CDf

Angle between wing chord plane edge of wing root chord and Wing mean aerod3mamic chord, Wing Distance aspect from ratio trailing edge

and line connecting _/4 of horizontal ft

trailing tail, deg Table Table 3.2-1 3.2-1

4.96 7.5 _8.68

of _-lng

root

chord

to

5/4

of Section 4.12

horizontal tail measured along centerline Wing zero-lift drag coefficient of total wing dure of table 4.12-1 Downwash 1.62 57.3-in plane C Lw from o_w + vortex eh), ft _ _/CDf(X/Cw sheet to _/4 of symmetry at vortex

of wake, ft per proce-

0097

eh

sheet

Equation

(4.9.2-5)

3.94

CI% "

z zz h

Vertical tail=xtan(Y

_rA w distance

of horizontal

Equation

(4.9.2-4)

8.68 ,458

tan

[15

- (%;

c)]

&Zwak

Half-width

of wake

= 0.68

+ 0.15), 2.42

ft (CDf) + 0.3 1/2

Equation (4.9.2-1) (fig. 4.9.2-2) Equation (fig. Equation (4.9.2-2) 4.9.2-3) (4.9.2-3)

.116 It

Dynamic-pressure

loss

at wake

centerline

= X/Sw

l_,namtc-pressureloss

at horizontal

tail

oo52 116 I. )
Variable

cos_ _-ra_d
qh Equation q_o Dynamic-pressure ratio at horizontal tail = 1 q_ (4.9.2-6)

(b)

Summary

calculations

0)
c_b, to relative X-axis, deg -4 0 4 8 10 12 13.4

@
Figure c%, = ab+2' deg -2 2 6 10 12 14 15.4

@
4.2-1, ft 2 S w = 172.3 CLw

ch = 3.94 @, deg 0 0 1. 182 2.380 3. 585 4. 176 4. 689 4.846

Y - _v + eh

(9
zff-

z;
AZwakc-

15Qg+@,
17.0 14.18 11.38 8.58 7.18 5.69 4.45

_an 8.G8@_/o.458
0.3057 .2527 .2013 .1509 .1260 .0996 .0778 2.65 2.19 1.75 1.31 1.09 0.86 .68 5.78 4.78 3.8l 2.85 2.38 1.88 1.47

_o, cos2 deg

Since the wake. -AZycak honzo_%l Thus is

q_=0.116 =1- @
greater is than outside 1. O, of the taft

.300 .604 .910 1.060 1. 190 1.23

q.

H-646

99

i / / / /
O

__/ /
/ ,p,-i

100

H-646

...... :l
.......

Z
l
=_

....

t
.4 .6

.......
.8 i.0

7
.4

_-7
.6

' l-f
8 1. 0
, = --

,i
N-% ....
1.0 ........

Awo.ff i
Aw

aeLma x - %

_-_
-_----.
Neff 8:--_

/.

//

/ .....

---

-__o .__/r /
. _ _'

7_.o

Figure

4.9.1-2.

Effective

wing

aspect

ratio

and

span

for low

speeds

(from

ref.

19).

H-646

101

o
,""4

oo

0 > o ,=

i
B
m 0

0 %

g_

102

H-646

_ Z_y, percent mean aerodynamic chord --

Pr edom inant traili ng-edge separation

..__"_

..\_,._

Predominant leading-edge separation

I
I0

I
20

I
30

I
40

I
50 6O

(Ac/4) ' deg w

Figure 4.9.1-4. for subsonic Type of flow separation speeds (ref. 1). as a function of airfoil and wing sweep

1.4 1.2 _0 2----La I

1.0

.8

.6

.4

.2

.4

.8 bh bvor

1.2

1.6

Figure H-646

4.9.1-5.

Average

downwash

acting

on aft lifting

surface

for low

speeds

(ref.

17). 103

/kVl

t_
P

.
.O.I_ b_ 7

z_

tt_clA_w"
.0.6,0 Xw bt_ . O._Z

hw

.5.Z6_N

p
zh

. O. ,O_" b

bh

.0._0

"._. 1
t

_,

deg

I
_h %0 .98 0 2 1.00

I \

J qh
8

-I

I
4

l
6 10

[
12

I
14

I
16

I
-2

I
0

I
2

1
4

%, deg i I
6 %, deg 8

[
10

i
12

I
14

Figure tail

4.9.1-7. Calculated of the subject airplane.

downwash

and

dynamic-pressure

ratio

at the

horizontal

_" of horizontal

tail

V_ Wing-root chord

rY

Free stream

_Wake limits Jr._Centerline _vortex _Wing-chord Figure H-646 4.9.2-1. Relative positions of horizontal tail, wing wake, plane and wing-chord plane. 105 of wake and sheet

.9 .8
L-

.7

.7

CDf

cD,
,6 .....

.6 .5 .4 .3 ! "25_-.20 15. .10

.5 _-wake .4 .3 chord lengths 2 .01

I I

Cw

.2 --.1

1 / 0 .8
X
-p

1.6 chord

2.4

3.2

4.0

.8 x
CW'

1.6 chord

2.4

3.2

4.0

lengths wake edge Figure loss 4.9.2-3. of dynamic from

lengths

CW

Figure width (ref.

4.9.2-2. Relation and distance from AZwake 14).

between trailing

Relation pressure the trailing

between in the edge

maximum wake (ref. and 14).

distance _z_q\'\]<)

2.42 CDfl/2

0.68

Df

+ 0.1

+ 0.03

1.0

__

_/(_

.5
0 7 -1.0

_-/ -_Z

_ q __x,,
.5 1.0

-.5

4"
Z_Zwake Figure 4.9.2-4. Variation of dynamic-pressure loss across the wake (ref. 14).

z_
= cos2 (2 AZEke)"

106

H-646

Aw tan

16 14

12 I0

%, deg

16

+p -y - aw +e h 14 12 I0 8 6 4

Figure 4.9.2-5. by the method reference 14.

Nomograph of reference

for determining dynamic 19, which is a modification

pressure at the horizontal of the basic method of

tail

H-646

107

Ca Icu lated Test

1.0

A w - 4.0 bw I" 0.201 [2 p "1.31T

(Ac/4)w "0o _'w bh - 0.50

.9
.8 1.0

zh - 0

bw

- 0.50

_h
-_ qoo .8 Reference 21)

...... -- -i_,,_._M-

I 0. II

[2 " 1.14 Aw-2.84____ z_ - 0.14

_w - 0.62 (A!e)w- 52.05 bw - 0.48 35.0

1.0

_h
.9

A w _4.5 bw [2 0.895-,2M - 0.20

(Ac/4)w ;_w

- 0.50 - 0.342

Reference 24 .8

42.05

Reference 25 .8

I
_ -.

M - O. 14

I z_ -:,.0,?';"e'w Aw 0 b_,
[2 1.18 _w -0.62

bw

- 0.25

1.0 .9 .8

-I-

....

A w - 3.5

bw

(A1. e)w bh

42'.5 0.50

L
Reference 21 M -- 0. 07 z_ 0. 14

0.375

1.0

qh

.9
.8 0

A w - 3.94

bw

'_ 42.05 (Ale) w ;kw 0.62 0.40

Re,erence26 12 L__ _I 4 8
aw, deg

/-2 _0-96b- _" 16 20

o.21 b,, bw

Figure 4.9.2-6. Comparison of calculated of figure 4.9.2-5, with wind-tunnel data

dynamic-pressure (from refo 19).

ratios,

using

the

nomograph

108

H-G46

4.10 The tail-off contribution

Lift

of the

Complete

Airplane

(6e = 0 ) 4.4. The lift of the of the lift

tail

lift characteristics to lift is considered net lift by

were previously in this section complete

considered in section in order to obtain the in the linear range

complete airplane. The curve may be summarized

of the

airplane

C L = CLwfn wh e re CL)wf CLh(hf) interactions, n is the tail-off is the wing lift lift

+ CLh(hf ) + (ACL)h(fv)

(4.10-i)

coefficient of the

considered horizontal

in section tail including

4.4

(4.4-1) tail-fuselage

contribution and

downwash, effect

dynamic-pressure vortexes

effects on the lift coefficient of the horizontal

(AC L) h (fv) tail

is the

of fuselage

The maximum or stall lift coefficient of the lage is determined in a manner synonymous maximum lift considered in section 4.4. The lift contribution, CLh(hf), of the

horizontal tail in the presence to that used to determine the

of the fusewing-fuselage

horizontal

tail

in the

presence

of the

fuselage,

due to angle of attack at the tail, is given by equation (4.10-2) from reference 11. This equation, as noted in section 4.4, accounts for body-interference effects on the lifting surface and lift carryover from the lifting surface onto the fuselage. It should be noted that in the derivation of the equation, reference 11 considered a midwing configuration on a cylindrical body. The horizontal-tail and fuselage configuration of the subject airplane does not represent this idealized condition. The tail is near the top surface and at the end of the fuselage; also, there is an air gap between the tail surface and the body. Thus the application of the equation represents an approximation, and the amount of lift carryover from the tail to the fuselage may be questioned. The magnitude of this carryover would be of more concern in considering tail contributions to pitching moments than to lift. On the basis of the principles of reference 11,

(4.10-2)

whe re

CL_)h Kh(f) in the H-646

is the ratio

lift-curve of the lift

slope

of the

exposed

panels tail from due

of the to the

tail local

(section angle

4.2) of attack,

is the

on the alone,

horizontal obtained

presence

of the body

to tail

figure

4.4-1 109

Kf01) is the ratio

angle of attack, (C_h is the _h --is the is the obtained angle average

of the from of attack

tail-lift figure

carryover 4.4-1 equal on the at the

onto the

body

to tail

alone

due

to local

at the tail, acting ratio

to tail

(c_b (section (section

_-h) 4.9.1) 4.9.2) of the subject air-

downwash

dynamic-pressure

tail

Pertinent plane are listed

parameters in table

and

summary

calculations

for

CLh(hf)

4.10-1(a).

The effect of body vortexes on the lift of the horizontal tail can be considered negligible when the tail span is greater than three times the body diameter at the This ratio is exceeded in general aviation aircraft; therefore, the effect of body vortexes is neglected. The maximum and used wing the corresponding liftcoefficientof the tailin the presence angle of attack, ( _c_CLma x ) (4.4-4))to , are the of the fuselage, determined stall by the

tail.

CLmax methods of the

h(hf)'

in section 4.4 in the presence

(eqs. (4.4-3) and of the fuselage.

h(hf) obtain

characteristics

Pertinent [c_o _ Lmax}h0af)

parameters of the subject

and

summary airplane are

calculations listed

for

( CLmax 4.10-1(b).

) h(hf)

and

in table

At airplane stalled conditions, the lift contribution of the tail is dependent upon its position relative to the wing wake. The wake of the stalled wing can be considered, in accordance with reference 1, to be bounded by the lines emanating from the leading and trailing edges of the wing parallel to the free-stream direction. For tails outside the wake _ D_h ac_ and }h can be assumed to be equal to zero.

For tails inside the wake, reference 1 recommends that the lift contribution of the tail be assumed to be equal to zero at airplane stall. This does not appear to be a realistic assumption because it implies complete loss of pitch effectiveness of the tail, which is in contradiction with the statement on downwash in section 4.9. I at stall: "For wings stalled at the tip.., the downwash in the region of the tail will be greater for a stalled wing than for an unstalled wing for a given lift coefficient .... when the wing stalls at the center, the center of the wake moves upward and the vortexes rolling off the edge of the stalled portion reduce the downwash. " In the absence of specific quantitative procedures to estimate the downwash at the tail at stall conditions, when the tail is inside the wake, the downwash as determined from figure 4.9.1-7 was assumed, as a first approximation, to be fully effective up to stall. 110 H-646

The summary calculations for the lift of the subject airplane are presented in tables 4.10-1 and4.10-2. The resulting lift curve is compared with wind-tunnel data in figure 4.10-1. The shape of the curve from the limit of Iinearity to the stall was obtained in the same manner as for wings alone (section 4.2).
alone As a matter of interest, a buildup of calculated to the complete airplane, is shown in figure lift characteristics, 4.10-2. from wing

4.10. I Symbols Ah bh CL CLh_ horizontal-tail horizontal-tail lift lift coefficient coefficient of the horizontal tail with tail-fuselage interaction effects included, referred to the wing area and free-stream dynamic pressure unless noted otherwise lift coefficient lift coefficient of the isolated area and a dynamic-pressure value lift of CLh(hf) of the referred horizontal to the tail wing due area to the and effect horizontal ratio of 1 tail referred to aspect span, ratio ft

CLwfn (CLmax)h

tail-off

maximum the tail h (hf) maximum increment

C Lmax) (ACL)h(fv)

coefficient

of fuselage vortexes, dynamic pressure tail-off lift-curve taper-ratio fuselage lift-curve slope slope, of the

free-stream

C L a)wf n (ACLa)h c2 e

per

deg panels of the tail, per deg

exposed factor horizontal tail,

correction width of the lift at the

tail, equal

ft to 0 of the fuselage to the

ih

incidence

horizontal on the tail

Kh(0
Kf(h) qh' q_o

ratio of the tail alone ratio of the

in the

presence

tail-lift

carryover

onto

the tail

fuselage and in the

to the free

tail

alone

dynamic pressure respectively, area area of the of the

at the horizontal lb/sq ft tail, sq ff

stream,

Sh Sh e H-646

horizontal exposed

horizontal-tail

panels,

sq ft 111

Sw

wing

area,

sq ft angle of attack isolated horizontal relative to the tail, X-body deg of the fuselage, axis, deg

0%

airplane stall angle

of the of the

horizontal tail in the

( _C Lmax)

h stall angle deg horizontaI-tail horizontal-tail lift-curve elevator average downwash sweep presence

( CLm x)h(hf
c_h , c_h

angle

of attack,

ab + ih at the limit

_h'

deg of the tail

angle of attack slope, deg equal across at the

of linearity

6 e

deflection, downwash gradient

to 0 in the the horizontal horizontal leading

present tail,

analysis, deg

deg

_h
D_h _c_

tail edge, deg

of the

horizontal-tail taper ratio

Xh

horizontal-tail

112

H-646

TABLE LIFT OF HORIZONTAL TAIL IN THE

4. I0-I PRESENCE OF THE FUSELAGE CLh(hf) (b = 0) e

(a) Lift of the horizontal tail in the linear range,

Symbol a_ (d f) h bh (d f}h Limit Fuselage Horizontal-tail of linearity width

Description of horizontal at horizontal span, ft tail, tail, ft relative to tail chord,deg

Reference Table 4.2-1 Figure Table 3.2-2 3.2-1

Magnitude I0.6 1.25 12.5 10

Kh(f) Kf(h)

Ratio Ratio

of lift

on tail

in presence on

of fuselage fuselage

to tail to tail alone

alone

Fi}ur e 4.4-1
Figure 4.4-I deg Table 4.2-I Table ._. 2-I Table 3.2-1 4.9.1-1

i. 075 .13 0. 070 28.73 172.3 1.0 (constant}

of taiI-lift slope

carryover of exposed horizontal-tail area, ratio sq ft

e
Sh e Sw

Lift-curve Area

horizontal-tail panels,

pane|s, sq ft

per

of exposed wing

Reference

Dynamic-pressure

at the horizontal

tail

Figure

Summary:

CLh(hf)

= 0.01406(_

b-

}h) onbasis

of

Sw=

172.3

sq ft

up to

a_

= 10.6

(b)

Maximum

lift

and

stall

angle

of horizontal

tail

(CLmax)h(hf)

= (CLmax)h

F(CLmax)h(hnl

/_

[(n_CLmax)h(

hf)l

L(CLma)h
S_mboI (A/e)h Ah kh (dr) h bh (CLmax)h Horizontal-tail Itorizontal-tail Horizontal-tail Ratio of body leading-edge aspect taper width ratio ratio to tail span lift at the coefficient

(_CLmax)h(n0 = k_ama_)hL(_Camax) h
Reference Table Table Table tail (based on Table Table Table 3.2-1 3.2-1 3.2-1 4.10-l(a) 4.2-1 4.2-1 Magnitude 12.0 4.8 515 .10 935 14.45

De sc riptl on sweep, deg

Horizontal-tail Sh =32.5 Horizontal-tail Taper-ratio

maximum sq ft) stall angle, correction

deg

e2 (c 2

factor

Figure

4.4-2

1.06 2.10

+ 1)A h tan

(A/e) h

(CLmax)h(hO-

(CLma )h

Figure

4.4-3

99

Figure

4.4-3

1.00

Summary:

(CLmax

h(h0 = 0.926based

on on

Sh= Sw

32.5 sq ft

(c ) =0. 175 based Lmax h(hf)

(_Lmax)b(b, _ 14"45

=172.3

sq ft

H-646

113

II 00

rj
tL

........ 0
I

It

6-"
0 04 I

CXl

t_

r..q Z _q
0,1 I

It

II

@ 2
r_ 4
O0 oo.,.,.,_ I O0 0"1

#
r.q .< F_

o
IL II

@
:.) 0

"_"
._
lllllll' I 0 0

-_(_)

_,

I ,.-4 v

@a#

114

H-646

1.4

-f

f / /

/ 1.2 / /o I o
0 0 0

o CL

Wind tunnel Ca Icu lated

-.2
-4 0 4

I
8 C{b,deg

I
12

I
16

I
2O

Figure data. H-646

4.10-1. 5 e = 0;

Comparison of predicted S w= 178 sqft.

airplane

lift

curve

with

wind-tunnel

115

Wing alone Wing, fuselage Wing, fuselage, Total airplane

nacelles

.z
-4 0

I
4 ab, deg

I
8

I
12

I
16

Figure

4.10-2. sqft.

Predicted

buildup

of the

lift

characteristics

of the

airplane.

6e

= 0o|

Sw=178 116

H-646

II

4.11 The synthesizing pitching

Pitching moments

Moments of the

of the

Complete airplane

Airplane (5 e = 0 ) are

(5 e = 0 ) determined equation: by

complete

previously

determined

information

in the

following

C m = Cmwfn whe re Cmwfn Cmh(hf ference The ) is the is the tail-off pitching-moment

+ Cmh(hf )

(4.11-1)

coefficient tail

considered (including airplane determined

in section tail-fuselage

4.8 inter-

contribution

of the horizontal coefficient horizontal

effects} pitching

to the

pitching-moment due to the

of the tail are

moments

from

Cmh(hf) where, Xcg _w Xh -parallel is the to the airplane X-body axis,

= \6 w __ xcg

xE_/

CLh(hf)

(4.11-2)

center-of-gravity

location

from

the

wing

leading

edge

c is the distance to the _- of the horizontal tailfrom the wing leading edge

_w
CLh(hf) is the liftof the tailin the presence of the fuselage, considered in section 4.10 airplane in table relative 4.11-1. data that in the versus it is by ab to in the

the

Summary calculations for the pitching moments of the subject center of gravity of the wind-tunnel data (0.10_ w) are presented pitching-moment Although the calculated wind-tunnel Cm characteristics are compared correlation appears to be good, versus data. slightly pitch ab curve is slightly that the more calculated

The resulting figure 4.11-1. slope of the

with wind-tunnel it should be noted negative tail-off than Cm data, reflected

corresponding

Considering more positive effectiveness

curve (fig. 4.8.3-2) had evident that the calculated the wind-ttmnel data.

slope than the wind-tunnel of the tail is greater than

For the geometric fuselage-tail that the lift carryover from the tail cause of its location on the fuselage between tail-lift suggested H-646 the horizontal equation that (eq. Kf(h) tail and the (4.10-2))

configuration of the subject airplane to the fuselage may be insignificant (see section 4.10) but also because fuselage. have negligible This been for implies assumed tail-fuselage that the Kf(h) to be equal

it appears_ not only beof the gap factor in the It is similar 117

should

to zero.

be considered

configurations

to that

of the

subject

aircraft. factor neglect affects 4.4-1 to the discrepancy between calculated of the thickness of the boundary layer the effective fuselage diameter used for use in tail-lift equation (4.10-2). is shown in figand wind-tunnel of the fuselage in obtaining the

Another contributing pitching moments is the at the tail. This neglect factor Kh(f) from figure

ure

The buildup 4.11-2.

of the

calculated

pitching-moment

characteristics

4.1 I. 1 Symbols CL CLh(hf) lift lift coefficient coefficient of the horizontal tail with tail-fuselage interaction effects included, referred to the wing area and free-stream dynamic pressure lift lift-curve coefficient slope coefficient contribution CLh0af) coefficient chord, ft chord, carryover tail ft onto the fuselage of the to the fuselage tail alone to the to the pitching-moment coefficient

CLmax (CLol)wf Cm Cmh(h 0 n

maximum tail-off

pitching-moment horizontal-tail based on

Cmwf n

tail-off mean wing ratio

pitching-moment aerodynamic mean

8
_W

aerodynamic

Kf(h) Kh(f)

of the tail-lift lift

ratio of the tail alone wing area,

on the

in the

presence

S w

sq ft

Xcg,Xh

distance, parallel to the X-body axis, from the airplane center of gravity and quarter chord of the horizontal-tail mean aerodynamic chord, respectively, to the leading edge of the wing mean aerodynamic chord, ft airplane stall elevator angle angle of attack deg equal to zero in the present analysis, deg relative to the X-body axis, deg

ozb

of attack,

deflection,

118

H-646

TABLE PITCHING MOMENTS OF THE

4. Ii-i COMPLETE AIRPLANE (6 = 0 ) e

(a) Contribution

of the horizontal tail, Cmh(hf)

Cmh(hf)

:pg
VSw wing leading

_-_w

CLh(hf)

Symbol

Description Airplane mean Distance Wing center-of-gravity location aerodynamic chord to _/4 of the horizontal mean aerodynamic chord, ff from tail edge/wing edge, ft Wind-tunnel Figures

Re fercnee test conditions 3.2-1 and 3.2-2

Magnitude 0.10 15.0 4.96 3. 024

x_g
cw xh
_W

from

wing

leading

Table 3.2-i
.....................

xh
CW

C Lh(hf)

Lift

coefficient

of horizontal

tail

on

basis

of

S w = 172.3

sq

ft

Figure

4.10-1

Variable

Summary:

Cmh0af}

= -2.

924 CLh(hf)

on basis

of

S w = 172.3

sq ft

(b)

Summary

C m = Cmwf. n + Cmh0a0

Airplane on basis CL of sq ft,

On basis of Sw=

@
172.3 Cmwf table sqR

C m

ab,

deg

S w = 178 table

CLh_' table 4.10-2

Cmh_0 -2.924@ 0.1637 .1228 .0789 .0380 %0058 -.0468 -.0906 -.1374 -.1842 -.2251

n,

Cm=

on

basis

of sq ft

4.10-2 -0. 074 .099 .274 .447 622 .797 .972 1. 149 1.290 1. 355

4.8.3-1 -0.0472 -.0399 -.0330 -.0264 -.0204 -.0148 -.0096 -.0049 -.0045 -.0115

0.1165 .0829 .0459 .0116 -.0262 -.0616 -.1002 -.1423 -.1887 -.2366

Sw = 178

.-4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 al0 12 b13.8

-0.056 -.042 -.027 -.013 .002 .016 .031 .047 .063 .077

0.1128 .0802 .0444 .0113 -.0254 -.0596 -.097 -.1377 -.1827 -.2290

alAmit of linearity (C L ) of (r_. 4.4-4). \ a 1wfn bst_dl ,ingle (table 4.4-2 or fig. 4.4-4).

H-646

119

.2-o 0 Cm /--Analytical

o
o Wind-tunnel data

0
-.4 -Z

_____
0 4

_I
8 ob ' deg

I
12 _ aCLmax

I
16

I
20

.2 B
0

0
Cm

0 0 0

-.2

-.4
-.2 0

I
.2

I
.4

I
.6 CL

I
.8

I
1.0

I
1.2

1
_1.4 CLma x

Figure 4.11-1. wind-tunnel

Comparison of predicted data. 6 e = 0; Sw = 178

airplane pitching moments with sq ft; center of gravity = 0. 106 w. H-646

120

I
i

....

Wing alone Wing, fuselage Wing, fuselage, nacelles

.2

Total airplane

0 Cm
-.2

--.....

-.4
-t

I
0 4 ab, deg

I
8

I
12

I
16

.2--

0
Cm

-j2

-_

I
0 .2

I
.zl

I
.6 CL

I
.8

]
1.0

I
1.2

I
1.4

Figure 4.11-2. of the airplane.

Predicted buildup of the pitching-moment characteristics 5 e = 0; Sw = 178 sq ft; center of gravity = 0.10_ w.

H-646

121

4.12 The (1) (2) (3) nacelles (4) (5) (6) (7) contributions Zero-lift Zero-lift Zero-lift drag drag to the of the of the

Drag drag wing, fuselage drag

of the of the

Complete

Airplane airplane are as follows: tail

complete tail, nacelles

horizontal and of the

and vertical

interference

wing-fuselage,

tail-fuselage,

and

wing-

Drag Drag

of the of the

wing

and

horizontal and nacelles drag inlets

tail

at angle

of attack

fuselage

at angle at angle and

of attack of attack flaps time and applied to the subject

Wing-fuselage Cooling drag

interference due to nacelle factors

cooling at this

Each of these airplane. 4.12.1 Zero-Lift

contributing

is considered

Drag of Wing, tlorizontal

Tail, and Vertical

Tail

The zero-lift or profile drag caused by the boundary trailing edge. For subsonic

drag is composed of a skin-friction drag and a pressure layer, which prevents full pressure recovery at the conditions the pressure drag is usually small.

The magnitude of the skin-friction drag, caused by shearing stresses within the boundary layer, depends upon the roughness of the surface and upon whether the flow in the boundary layer is laminar or turbulent. According to reference 1, transition from laminar to turbulent flow on a straight wing can be assumed to occur at a Reynolds number of approximately 1 million, based on the distance from the leading edge. Transition occurs at a lower Reynolds number on a swept wing. Thus, for all practical purposes, the boundary layer is considered to be turbulent for the subsonic conditions of general aviation airplanes. For subsonic conditions (M < 0.6), the profiIe drag coefficient of a Iifting may be accurately determined by using the following empirical equation (ref. on the lifting surface area under consideration: 4 surface 27) based

'_

_Sk where Cf a function 122 is the skin-friction coefficient NRe, of a fiat and the

ZPressure in friction terms

drag

term

plate, parameter

obtained L k

from

figure

4.12.

I-1

as

of Reynolds

number,

H-646

1 surface k surface t c It should arriving areas.

is the

reference

length

in inches,

the

mean

aerodynamic

chord

of the

lifting

is the surface-roughness finish, inches is the thickness ratio

height, of the wing

estimated

from

table

4.12.1-1

on the

basis

of

be noted that at the zero-lift

only the exposed panels of the lifting surfaces are considered in drag of the surfaces to avoid overlap with the fuselage surface

On the basis of equation (4.12.1-1) and the summary calculations of table 4.12.1-2, the contributions of the exposed panels of the wing, horizontal tail, and vertical tail of the subject airplane to the zero-lift drag of the airplane were determined, based on a reference wing area of 172.3 square feet, to be as follows:

Wing

(o) w
tail tail

Sw e

Sw0
- 0.00159

Horizontal

Sw

(4.12.1-2)

Vertical

Sve
(CDo)v and Nacelles =(CDo)v e Sw-0.00077

4.12.2

Zero-Lift

Drag of Fuselage

The zero-lift drag of an isolated body may be estimated by using the following empirical equation from reference 1 based on axisymmetric bodies of revolution. It can be applied to non-body-of-revolution configurations by treating the actual body as an equivalent body of revolution having an axially distributed circumferential area similar to that of the actual body. For subsonic conditions (M -< 0.6), on the basis of the frontal area, SB,

(Co)
D B

CDf + CD b (4.12.2-1)

= Cf 60 +_+ 0. 0025 (_BI swe----_t SB + _13_ase term s drag

Z' Pre Skin-friction whe re CDf is the skin-friction and pressure-drag

ssure-drag term

coefficient

of the

body

H-646

123

Cf is the skin-friction coefficient of a flat plate, obtained from figure 4.12.1-1 as a function of Reynolds number, NRe, based on actual body length, 1B, and the parameter lB T where k is obtained from table having 4.12.1-1 a perimeter equal to the perimeter of the

d B is the maximum frontal

diameter area

of a circle of the body frontal area

S B is the _dB2 equal to 4 Swe t ure 4.12.2-1 From

maximum

of an axisymmetric

body

having

a diameter,

d B,

is the wetted as a ratio reference 27

surface of SB

area

of the body,

and

may

be approximated

from

fig-

/db_3

=0
whe re db is the diameter of the equivalent circular perimeter of the base area

(4.12.2-2)

The preceding equations were applied to the estimation of the fuselage and nacelles of the subject airplane, as isolated bodies. culations in table 4.12.2-1 show, on the basis of a reference wing feet, the zero-lift drags to be as follows:

zero-lift drag The summary area of 172.3

of the calsquare

Fuselage

(Co)
D f (CDo)n

= 0.00780

(4.12.2-3)
per nacelle

Nacelles

= 0. 00374

4.12.3

Zero-Lift

Interference

Drag of lt_ing-Fuselage,

Tail-Fuselage,

and lFing-Nacelles

Zero-lift interference drag of wing-fuselage combinations is at a minimum and tends toward zero at low subsonic speeds when the wing is at the nose or tail of the fuselage. It is at a maximum when the wing is at approximately midlongitudinal position on the body. This is substantiated by limited low-speed wind-tunnel data in reference 27. When these data were applied to the subject airplane, the wing-fuselage zero-lift interference drag was approximately 5 percent of the zero-lift fuselage drag. A more up-to-date and substantial lift interference drag for conventional provided by the use of the correlation the ratio of fuselage drag in the presence omitted. Thus the zero-lift drag of the to wing area, is obtained from procedure to account for wing-fuselage zeroorientation of a wing relative to a fuselage is factor, Rwf, from figure 4.12.3-1, which is of the fuselage wing to fuselage in the presence alone with base drag of the wing, relative

124

H-646

SB

(4.12.3-1)

where CDf) f is the zero-lift drag of the fuselage (section 4.12.2)

!

Rwf base lage

is the

ratio

of the

_4ng-fuselage of Mach

to the number

fuselage-alone and Reynolds

zero-lift number

drag, based

with on fuse-

drag omitted, as a function length in figure 4.12.3-1.

test

The correlation factor was developed values of minimum drag coefficient

in reference 28 by determining to values predicted on the basis

the ratio of of Rwf = 1 that No

for several wing-body combinations. The data for all classes of composite planforms distinction was made in planform type. When the net the correction factor, I_,f, drag was

scarcity of quality test data required be used in the correlation effort.

technique (table

was

applied

to the

subject

airplane,

zero-lift

wing-fuselage

4.12.3-1(a)) SB

(4.12.3-2) = 0. 01688 Zero-lift interference drag of tail-f_selage or tail-tail j_mctures: The zero-lift interference of tail-fuselage or tail-tail junctures may be estimated from empirical relations based on subsonic experimental data. When a tail panel intersects the fuselage, the subsonic interference drag at the junction of the two surfaces may be approximated by equation (4.12.3-3), which was formulated in reference 27 for the interference drag at the junction of a lifting surface (or strut) with a plane wall in turbulent flow conditions. On the basis of a reference wing area, S w, the increment of tail drag due to fuselage interference is approximately

= nl [0.8(t) whe re nI Cre t) is the is the is the the number root of junctures chord ratio tails of the of the tail exposed section the panel at

3 - 0. 0005]

cre2Sw

(4.12.3-3)

surface

with

the

fuselage

thickness vertical

of the intersect

Cre tail, the interference drag due to 125

When H-646

horizontal

each corner of the intersection may be approximated from the following empirical equation from reference 27, based on the experimental data of intersecting streamlined struts: 2 "_ Cint2 n211 t 4 (ACDo)v(h)=-2 - 7(C)intwhere n2 is the number of corners thickness (a cruciform ratio of the intersection intersecting would have four at the corners) interO.

05 t

(C)int j

Sw

(4.12.3-4)

t) F int section Cin t

is the

average

surfaces

is the

chord

at the

intersection

For the subject airplane, the horizontal and vertical tails intersect the fuselage in an area where the fuselage contour is changing. In the absence of pertinent information on the effects of surface contour, the zero-lift interference drag due to the juncture of the tail surfaces with the fuselage was conservatively estimated on the basis of equation (4.12.3-3), the equation for the juncture of a lifting surface with a plane wall. On the basis of the summary calculations in table 4.12.3-1(b), the net zero-lift vertical-tail-fuselage and horizontal-tail-fuselage interference drags are approximately

(CD-oo) h =(CDo)

h + (ACDo)h(f)

= 0.00159 (4.12.3-5)

(CD)

v = (CD)v

+ (ACD)v(f)

= 0.00077

Zero-lift interference drag of nacelle-wing combinations: drag of nacelle-wing combinations in which a relatively slender the wing was considered in reference 27. The study concluded drag of nacelles faired into the wing may be roughly accounted zero-lift wing drag due to the wing area covered by the nacelle.

The zero-Iift interference nacelIe is faired into that the interference for by the increment of Thus, for one nacelle

( Sw) n
(ACDo)n(w) where = (CDo) w S--w (4.12.3-6)

(CDo)w 1), in terms Sw 126 is the

is the of the

zero-lift reference wing

drag wing area,

of the area

exposed

wing

panels,

based

on equation

(4.12.1-

reference

square

feet H-646

(ASw) n is the wing area overlapped by one nacelle, square feet Whenapplied to the subject airplane, the summary calculations of table 4.12.3-1(c) show the net zero-lift drag of the two nacelles to be, on the basis of the reference wing area, S w, (CDo)n(w) =
Summary: mating The zero-lift components is (4.12.3-7)

2[(CDo)n

+(ACDo)n(w)]=

0. 00854

drag

of the

components

plus

the

interference

drags

be-

tween

CD o : (CDo)wf For the subject airplane, as summarized

+(CDo)

h +(CDo)

v + (C_Do)n(w)

(4.12.3-8)

in table

4.12.3-1(d),

CDo = 0. 02778 based reference 4. 12.4 on a reference area (178 wing area of 172.3 wind-tunnel square data, feet. When this is converted

(4.12.3-9) to the

sq ft) of the

CDo = 0. 02681.

Drag of Wing and ttorizontal

Tail at ,,'Ingle of Attack due to vortex boundary system layer

The drag due to lift of a wing is made up of the induced drag downwash and a viscous drag caused primarily by the upper-surface which increases in thickness as the angle of attack increases. On the conventionally basis of simple represented theory by the induced drag of a wing

at subsonic

conditions

is

CL 2 CDi -

7rAwe

(4.12.4-1)

where e is the Oswald span-efficiency factor which is equal to 1 for elliptic wings and can be calculated for wings having other shapes. The equation has limited utility. It provides reasonable values for straight wings below the angle of attack for maximum L . Above this angle, separation of flow at the trailing edge usually causes the drag to increase significantly above the theoretical value obtained from the equation. The equation becomes invalid for swept and low-aspect-ratio _ings because the shedding of the vortex inboard of the wing tips reduces the effective aspect ratio of the wing. Many attempts have been made to develop empirical methods for predicting the subsonic span-efficiency factor, e, over the parabolic-induced-drag region. Development of empirical relations for predicting viscous drag has been handicapped by lack of full-scale correlation data. Substantiation of proposed techniques for calculating H-646 127

the drag due to lift has been hindered by the need to refer to small-scale wind-tunnel data. Several methods were considered for application to general aviation aircraft. These included the method of reference 29, which was refined in reference 28, and
method presented in reference 1. A spot check of the results of applying the two methods to the subject airplane and correlating them with the full-scale wind-tunnel data of the airplane indicated that the former method predicted wing drag which appeared to be excessive with increasing angle of attack. Predictions by the latter method, which is used in this report, appeared to be more reasonable. The from _C Di w where CL its is the lift coefficient area determined obtained from correction figure factor for the taper ratio of taper of the ratio, sur_w' of the lifting surface being considered and referenced to 2 Lw (1 + 5152) + k3A (4.12.4-2) drag of the untwisted wing (and horizontal Induced tail) due to lift can be determined a

Viscous

7rAw

own lifting 51

surface

is a theoretically considered, ratio, Aw

face and

being aspect 52

4.12.4-1

as a function

is a theoretically considered, aspect ratio,

determined obtained Aw determined considered, a parameter, viscous 4.12.4-4 drag as from

correction figure

factor

for

the

sweep

angle of sweep

of the angle,

sur-

face Ac/4,

being and k3

4.12.4-2

as a function

is an empirically surface Ale, being and angle,

sweep-angle obtained J, defined from

correction figure in equation factor for the tan Ohb s

factor 4.12.4-3 (4.12.4-3) surface x

for the

viscous of

drag sweep

of the

as a function

A obtained and

is an empirical from figure

increment of

being and the

considered, parameter J

a function

tan(o_abS)CLma

where

J = 0.3(c

1 + 1)-7

cos

Ale

l
the

(c 1+

1)(c 2 + 1) -

[ c2+X tanAl }
7 figures 4.2-3 and 4.4-2, of table 4.12.4-1(a)

(4.12.4-3)

with the taper re spe ctiv ely. Applied

ratio

constants

c 1 and

c2

obtained

from

to the

subject

aircraft,

summary

calculations

128

H-646

show

that

the

lift-drag

contributions

of the

wing

and horizontal

tail

can be represented

by

C Di ) w = 0.0432CL_

+A wonthe

basis

of

Sw=

172.3

sq ft (4.12.4-4)

(CDi)

Sh=32"5sqfth =0"0669CL_

+Ahnthebasisf

These drag

equations contributions

are in the

applied of the drag

in tables

4.12.4-1(b) as functions in section

and of 4.12.7.

4.12.4-1(c) ab and

to determine 8w = 172.3 square

the

liftfeet

two surfaces summation

to be applied 4.12.5

Drag of Fuselage

and Nacelles

at ,4 ngle of ,,l llack

The drag of flow is potential done for the lift of a body due to

a body at angle of attack is related to its lift. By assuming that the over the forebody and is entirely viscous over the afterbody, as was of the body in section 4.3, the following equation for the subsonic drag angle of attack (in effect, due to lift) was arrived at in reference 10:

(CDi)B whe re oz is the angle line, radians SB feet VB is the volume is the

VB2/3 + 2J f VrCdc d xJVB2/3 Sw 23(k2 kI)SB VB2/------- fZB

Xo

(4.12.5-1)

of attack

of the

equivalent

body

of revolution

relative

to its

zero-

lift

maximum

cross-section

area

of the

equivalent

circular

body,

square

of the

equivalent factor,

circular obtained of finite

body, from to infinite

cubic figure

feet 4.3-1 cylinders, obtained

(k2 - kl)

is a reduced of drag

mass

from

is the ratio figure 4.3-2 Cdc

coefficients

length

is a erossflow

drag

coefficient

of an infinite

length

cylinder,

obtained

from

figure 1B xo from

4.3-3 is the is the length location feet of the from body, the feet nose of the body where potential flow ceases, obtained

figure

4.3-4,

H-646

129

frdx end, square

is half feet

of the

projected

area

of the

equivalent

circular

body

from

Xo

to the

A comparison indicates that

of equation

(4.12.5-1)

with

the

equation

for

the

lift

of a body

in section

4.3

(CDi)B where CLB is the lift of the of attack body per equation body,

= CLB_

(4.12.5-2)

(4.4-2)

c_ is the

angle

of the

radians

Because the subsonic drag of a body due to lift is simply a matter of multiplying its lift by the angle of attack, the drag due to lift of the fuselage and nacelles of the subject airplane, on the basis of the treatment of these components in section 4.3 for the lift of the components, is obtained from Fuselage
2'

Two nacelles
"_/ \

(_b(CDi) fn = CLf 57.3

3) + CLn

ca o 57.3 (4.12.5-3)

where CLf CLn is the is the sum sum reference of columns of columns angle 3 and 5 and of attack 4 in table 6 in table relative 4.4-2 4.4-2 to the body axis naceIIes of wing area.

0% is the

Table 4.12.5-1 summarizes the the subject airplane due to lift. 4. 12. 6 Wing-Fu selage In t erference

calculation of the drag of the fuselage and 2_ne calculations are based on a reference

Drag at ,,1ngle of A l lack

Little appears to be known about wing-fuselage interference drag at angle of attack. There is undoubtedly some increase in parasitic drag at the juncture of the lifting surface and the body. There is also some modification of the induced drag of the wing due to the upwash from the body acting on the wing. This upwash modifies the loading across the span and, for an elliptic wing, could increase the induced drag. For a rectangular wing, the resulting load across the span is made "more elliptic" (tending toward lift distribution of an elliptic wing) and could result in some decrease in induced drag. In the absence of applicable wing-fuselage interference drag 130 representative data, no attempt is made to account for at angle of attack. However, it is believed that the H-646

omission 5 percent 4. l 2.7

of this factor at the angle Cooling Drag

would affect the total drag of attack of incipient stall.

of the

subject

airplane

by less

than

The discussion of nacelle drag in the previous section did not take into account the effect of drag due to the cooling system, which could be a significant factor. An analytical treatment of cooling drag is beyond the scope of this paper because of the complexity and uncertainties in its determination. Some general considerations in its analytical determination may be obtained from reference 27. To account for the cooling drag in the predicted drag characteristics, which were to be compared with windtunnel data, consideration was given to the fact that the wind-tunnel tests of the subject airplane were conducted with the inlet and cooling flaps open and that unpublished, propeller-off, wind-tunnel data were available for the increment of drag due to the cooling system. These data, shown in figure 4.12.7-1, were used to account for the cooling drag. It should be noted that this cooling drag has a characteristic reversal in trends which would be difficult, if not impossible, to predict. The relatively sharp increase in cooling drag above an angle of attack of approximately 8.5 is particularly significant in providing improved correlation of predicted drag characteristics with wind-tunnel data at high angles of attack, as is shown in the next section. 4. 12.8 Summary Drag of the Complete Airplane

The net drag of the subject airplane is summarized in table 4.12.8-1 in the following format. The data for the contributing factors, with the exception of the cooling drag, were obtained from the tables noted above the individual terms. The cooling drag data were obtained from figure 4.12.7-1.
Table 4.12.3-1 4.12.4-1(b) 4.12.4-1(c) 4.12.5-1 4.12.5-I

CD = CDo + (CDi) The above comparison a reference The included 4.12.8-1(c)

w + (CDi) h + (CDi)f

+ (CDi) n + (CD)cooling

system

(4.12.8-1)

result is for a reference wing area of 172.3 square feet. of the calculated drag with wind-tunnel data, the results wing area of 178 square feet in the last column of table

To permit a direct are converted to 4.12.8-1.

calculated drag characteristics with the cooling drag increments omitted and are compared with wind-tunnel data in figures 4.12.8-1(a), 4.12.8-1(b), and as functions of %, C L, and CL2 , respectively. Although the calculated omitted correlates well with the of -4 to 12 in figure 4.12.8-1(a) the addition of attack. of the cooling the drag wind-tunnel data (and a correspondincrement resulted o_ plot b

drag with cooling drag increments through the angle-of-attack range ing CL range in fig. 4.12.8-1(b)),

in excellent

correlation

up to 4 angle

Whereas

C D versus

(fig. 4.12.8-1(a)) angle-of-attack correlation It should crement

shows a slight decrease range, the CD versus limit of linearity (at

in correlation C L plot (fig. C L = 1.15,

over the 4.12.8-1(b)) corresponds

remainder of the shows excellent to c_ -- 10). drag in-

at the

which

be noted that at high angles

the appreciable, and important, of attack is difficult to predict

increase analytically.

in cooling

H-646

131

The predicted buildup of the drag characteristics shownin figure 4.12.8-2 indicates that all contributing factors considered were important.
4.12.9 Symbols

The following list of symbols constitutes the basic symbols used. In several instances, such as in the equation in table 4.12.1-2, a subscript "i" is applied to parenthesized quantities, with an identifying notation on the left side of the equation (such as i = w, h, v), to signify that the equation applies to the surfaces thus identified. If the wing is being considered, i = w and all parenthesized quantities having an i subscript apply to the wing; for example, Sic = Sw e, the area of the exposed wing panel s.
A w

wing drag

aspect

ratio

CD CD b

coefficient coefficient referred to the maximum section) area of the body involved of the cooling system to the airplane frontal

base drag (cross system contribution coefficient skin friction maximum fuselage induced noted CDi (CDi)h' (CDi) n '

CD)cooling

drag

CDf

and pressure frontal area CDf

drag of the

coefficient referred body involved

to the

CDf)f CD i

drag coefficient otherwise body (fuselage

referred

to the

wing

area

unless

C Di) B (CDi)f,

of the

or nacelle)

contribution wing, net

of the respectively,

fuselage, to CDi

horizontal

tail,

nacelles,

and

w
CD o

contribution

of the

fuselage referred

and

nacelles to the wing

to

CDi area unless

zero-lift noted zero-lift are a CDo

drag coefficient otherwise drag coefficient

CDo) B

of a body

referenced

to the

frontal

(CDo)

f'(CDo)n

of the

isolated

fuselage

and to the

one wing

isolated area

nacelle,

respectively, CD o of the

referenced fuselage for, with referenced

(CDo)f(w)

wing-fuselage to the wing

interference area H-646

accounted 132

CDo of (CDo)h'(CDO)w'(CDO)v the and vertical area CDo (CDO)he' (CDo)we' (CDo)ve of the

exposed tail,

panels

of the horizontal referenced

tail,

wing, wing

respectively,

to the

respective

exposed

panel

surface

areas

(C o),s

zero-lift drag coefficient of the exposed panels of a lifting surface, referenced to the exposed panel area net contribution of the horizontal tail, nacelles, and vertical tail, respectively, to the zero-lift drag coefficient with interference effects accounted for, referenced to the wing area

( )hv :

+( O)v
increment of the zero-lift drag coefficient of the and vertical tail, respectively, due to fuselage ference, referenced to the wing area horizontal inter-

: ('O)w +('o),(w)

ACD)

n(w)

increment of the zero-lift due to wing interference, net zero-lift drag of the wing coefficient

drag coefficient of one nacelle referenced to the wing area of the nacelles in the presence

generalized (ACDo)v(f), ACDo)v(h)

expression referenced

representing to the wing

(ACDo)h(f) area

or

increment of the zero-lift drag coefficient of the vertical tail due to the horizontal-tail interference when the vertical tail intersects the horizontal tail, referenced the wing area skin-friction face area, lift coefficient wise coefficient to the wing coefficient obtained referred of a flat plate, based from figure 4.12.1-1 to the wing area unless on a wet

to

Cf

sur-

CL

noted

other-

CL B

lift

of the area

body

(fuselage

or nacelle),

referenced

CLf,

CL n, CL w

lift

coefficient of the tively, referen(:ed

,_uselage, nacelles, t_: _be wing area

anJ

wing,

re_
....

r_

,ec

H-646

133

CLh edc
Cint

lift

coefficient area

of the

horizontal

tail

referred

to the

tail

two-dimensional for circular

steady-state crossflow cylinders, obtained from

drag coefficient figure 4.3-3 tails tail or

chord at the intersection when the horizontal vice versa, ft root chord secting

tail

of the vertical and horizontal is mounted on the vertical

Cr e

of the exposed portion the fuselage, ft

of the

tail

surface

inter-

c I,c2

taper ratio correction factors, used in calculating parameter J, as obtained from figures 4.2-3 re spectiveIy diameter mum diameter area, of the equivalent frontal area of the of the ft factor used in the equivalent

the and 4.4-2,

dB

circular perimeter of the body (fuselage or nacelle), circular perimeter of the

maxift base

db

Oswald span-efficiency equation (4.12.4-1) parameter, taining face defined viscous

induced-drag

the

by equation (4.12.4-3), drag increment, A,

used in obof a lifting sur-

Jh ' Jw

the parameter J applied to the horizontal tailand wing, respectively equivalent sand roughness in. apparent mass of a surface (table4.12.1-1),

k2 - k 1 k3

factor, obtained from figure 4.3-1

sweep-angle correction drag factor for the viscous drag increment, A

lift-to-drag ratio of the wing reference length, for liftingsurfaces, equal to the mean aerodynamic chord of the individual surface, for bodies, equal to the length of the body, in.

1B

reference length of the body (fuselage or nacelle), in. reference length of the fuselage, in.

If
134

H-646

M NRe n1 n2

Mach

number number of junctures of the tail surface with the fuselage

Reynolds number

number of corners in the juncture of the vertical tail with the horizontal tail (cruciform intersection would have four corners) ratio of the wing-fuselage to fuselage-alone with the base drag omitted radius maximum sq ft horizontal of the body, ft area of the body (fuselage or nacelle), zero-lift drag

Rwf

SB

frontal

sh, Sw
She, Sw e , Sve

tail

and

wing

area,

respectively,

sq ft tail, wing,

exposed-panel and vertical wetted wing airfoil surface area

surface area of the horizontal tail, respectively, sq ft area, sq ft by one ratio nacelle, sq ft

Swet

(ASw) n t
C

overlapped thickness

section

( t nt
VB
Xo

average thickness horizontal-tail body volume

ratio of intersecting surfaces or nacelle), of the ft body

vertical-

and

(fuselage the nose area,

cu ft to the point of maximum

distance from cross-section angle of attack, of attack angle

deg relative of attack of the to the relative fuselage zero-lift to the and nacelle, line, X-body deg axis, deg

Ohbs _b

angle airplane

af,%

angle of attack deg _Wab s absolute angle respectively, absolute stall

respectively,

_hab s,

of attack deg angle

of the

horizontal

tail

and _ing,

of attack,

deg

(C_abs) C Lmax H-646 135

(ahabs) CLmax'(aWabs)c Lmax

fl"= (1 - M2) 1/2 A Ah, A w

absolute stall angle of attack of the and wing, respectively, deg

horizontal

tail

viscous

drag

increment increment of the horizontal tail and wing,

viscous drag respectively elevator

6 e

deflection,

deg

51,62

correction factor for the taper ratio and sweep angle of the quarter-chord line, respectively, in calculating the induced-drag coefficient of the wing and horizontal tail net downwash at the drag horizontal tail of finite to infinite length

_h

ratio of the cylinders A c/4' Ale sweep of the respectively, taper ratio

coefficient

quarter-chord deg of the wing

line

and

leading

edge,

Xw

136

H-646

TABLE SURFACE

4.12.1-1 HEIGHT k

ROUGHNESS [ ref. 1]

Type

of surface 0 92 16 .25 .40 1.20 6. O 10.0

k,

in.

Aerodynamically smooth Polished metal or wood Natural sheet metal Smooth matte paint, carefully applied Standard camouflage paint, average application Camouflage paint, mass production spray Dip galvanized metal surface Natural surface of cast iron

to .08 X 10 .3 X 10-3 10 .3 X 10 .3 10 .3 X 10-3 X 10 -3

TABLE ZERO-LIFT DRAG OF WING,

4.12.1-2 AND VERTICAL TAILS

HORIZONTAL

[1

(t_ + 120W/

i4]

Sie_w on basis _

of

Sw=172.3

sq

ft

Magnitude Symbol Description Reference Exposed wing panels in. Table Table 4.12.1-1 3.2-1 57.1 0.25 Exposed horizontal tail x 10 .3 smooth 31.2 matte Exposed vertical tail paint 39.2

ki li li

Surface Reference chord

roughness length, of surfaces,

height,

mean aerodynamic in.

2.28 ki NRe, i Reynolds = 1_(0"65 Cf i Skin-friction Thickness number at 63.4 mph, sea level Wind-tunnel condition Figure Table 4.12. 4.1-1 test 3.09

105 X 106

1,25 I. 69

105 106

1.57 2.12

X 105 106

106 ) coefficient ratio of surface of flat plate 1-1 3.65 .15 X 10 .3 4.08 .08 X 10 .3 3.9 .08 X 10 -3

(t),
2(cf)i[
Si e (CDo) i

Zero-lift exposed Exposed face Zero-lift

drag panel panel drag

of component area, area Sie

on basis

of

Equation Table 3.2-1

(4.12.1-1)

0.00993

0.00951

0.00909

of component

surof Sie ] Sw

148.0

28.73

14.6

of component area, (CDo)i

on basis 2(Cf)[

referencewing

(CDo) w : .00853

(CDo)h .00159

(CDo) v = .00077

H-646

137

TABLE ZERO-LIFT [On basis of DRAG reference OF

4.12.2-1 FUSELAGE wing area, AND NACELLES sq ft]

S w = 172.3

+ CDb)i"

(Cf)i

+{-'_3 [_]-BB)i

\' B]iJ

OBi

0" 029_)

i #

(CDf)it--_w

Magnitude Symbol De sc ription Reference Fus dB i SB i Diameter frontal Frontal vdBi2 4 l i db i Length of equivalent perimeter area, ft area of equivalent perimeter of maximum body, Airplane drawing 5.41 23.0 el age Nacelle 3.0 7.07 per nacelle

, sqft of body, ft of equivalent body of Figure 4.3-5 8.82 _1.0

Diameter of base revolution, R

z4
[dB i db i dB i (Swet) i -SB t (Swe t) i Ratio Wetted [(Swet)i SB i ki li Ratio ki (NRe)i Reynolds (NRe)i (Cf) i Skin number = (0.65 of at 63.4 mph (sea level); Wind-tunnel condition Figure 4.12.1-1 test in common units Surface of wetted surface 1 j SBi, sq ft (smooth matte finish) Table 4.12.1-1 surface area of area isolated to SBi body, Figure ............... 4.12.2-1

4.47

2.94

.15

.33

12.4 285

8.2 58 per nacelle

roughness

height

0.25

X 10 -3 in.

0.25 4.24 5.73

10 -3 x 106 x 106

I. 16 x 106 1.57 x 107

106)/i flat plate

friction

2.8xi0

-3

3.3

10 -3

(C Df)i (cf)i 1 +_

60

.+0.0025(_] B]i

(Swet)i SBi

Equation (4.12.2-1)

0.0584

0.0912 nacelle

per

"/db \

3 Equation (4.12.2-2) _0 _0

[(C D f) i + (CDb) reference

i _' - SBi

on basis sq ft

of

_Do)

f =

CDO)

00780 Sw = 172.3

.00374 per n_ceI]e

138

H-64 6

TABLE ZERO-LIFT (a) Net zero-lift DRAG drag

4.12.3-1 OF TItE COMPONENTS combination

of wing-fuselage

Symbol Zero-lift Base Zero-liR drag M SB If Sw NRe Mach Frontal Length Reference Reynolds Wing-body drag drag

Description of isolated exposed wing panels Table Table fuselage with base Table

Reference 4.12.1-2 4. 12.2-1 4. 12.2-1 condition

Magnitude 0. 00853 0 .0584 0.0_q2 23.0 24.2 172.3

(CDo)w CD b

of fuselage drag of isolated

omitted number area of the wing number of fuselage, fuselage, area, = 0.65 ft sq ft x t06 If factor sq ft Wind-tunnel Table Figure Table 4.12.2-t ,t. 3-5 3.2-1 test condition

Wind-tunnel Figure

1.57 1.07l

I0 7

_f
Summary:

interference

correlation

,t. 12.3-1

(C--_o)

wf = 0. 01688

(b)

Net

zero-lift

drag

of tail

surfaces

in presence

of fuselage

(_D_DO)h v : (C-DDo)h Symbol Zero-lift drag tail panels Zero-liR drag taft Number Thickness Root chord panel of junctures ratio of tail

+ (C-DDo)v = (CDo)h

+ (ACDo)h(f)+

(CDo)v

+ (ACDo)v(f) Magnitude

Description of isolated of isolated exposed exposed horizontalverticalTable Table

Reference 4. 12.1-2 4.12.1-2

ltorizontal 0.00159 .......

tail

Vertical ....... 0. 00077

tail

CDo)h

(COOL
n1 t e ere, Sw (ACDo)h(f) ACI)o v(O

of tail surface tail sq ft

with

fuselage at juncture ft

.............. Table Table Table 4. I-I 3.2-I 3.2-I (4.12.3-3) ....... 172.3 _0 .08

2 .08

3. 275 of exposed wing area, surface, Reference

,i. 25 172.3 ....... _0

InterferenCedue to fuselagedrag of horlzontaI-tail Interference due to drag fuselage of vertiCal-tail

surface surface

Equation Equation

(4.12.3-3)

Summary:

(_Do)h

v = 0.00159

+ 0 + 0. 00077

+ 0 = 0.00236

(c)

Net

zero-lift

drag

of nacelles

in presence

of wing

S_,mbol CD AS'a) Sw )n n Zero-lift Wing area drag

Description of one isolated by one nacelle nacelle, sq ft

Reference Table Figure Table 4. 12.2-1 3.2-1 3.2-1

Magnitude 0. 00374 I0.7 172.3 per nacelle

overlapped wing area,

Reference

sq ft

10 Summary: (C'-Do) n(W) =210.00374 +0.00853_]

7 =0.00854

(d)

Summary

zero-lift

drag

of the Sw=

components; sq ft

on basis

of reference

172.3

wf

hv

n(w)

=001. +000230+000'54:00"7
139

H-646

LO oe0

o._

0o

LO

0'_

oO

.o

O0

0._ o_ LO

o_
0 I oO ! I I I 0"

II

'q

CXl _

Xl

44_4
I

II

._)

_._

g a
.0

o_
b_ ,._

_-

it
_ _ _ _ 0

,-1

Z
b/_ 0

o
0 oo

o
0

o
_

o
0

o
0

._
0

0 0 <

""
0 0

d
II

._ :n

b_

b._

b_._

_1

_;
II

rs
I

r.)
m m bl

_4

r_

"_

140

H-646

TABLE

4.12.4-1

(Concluded)

(b)

Drag

of wing

due

to lift

= 0.0432CL2

+ Aw

Jw

= 7.86

(from

(a));

Wab

CLmax

: 17.4

(from

(a));tan

(.)

Wabs

Clmax _

3134

AW j

'Wab 8 = _b + 4

(a) CLw, figure 4.2-1

CIr. 2

O. 0432 C Lw 2 (_) tan

tan C_Wahs tan tan

,%Vab s

0) (('Di)w

C_b, deg

= O_w+2, deg

2
0 .0225 o. 0930 2025 o. 366 .576 0,828 1. 113 1,416 1.513

O. 0432

kaWabSlCLma = (_/0.3134

figure

4.12.4-4

+ 0
0010 0.0040 .01125 o. 0238 0409 0.0618 .0876 0.1 192 1424

-4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 13.4

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 174

0 . 150 0,305 .450 O. 005 .759 0. 910 1. 055 I 190 1.23

0 900972 O 00402 00875 0.0158 .0249 o. 0358 0481 O. 0612 0654 .0349 0. 0699 .1051 0. 1405 1769

0 1114 0.223 335 0.449 562 O. 678

0 0 0 .0025 0.008 .016 0. 026 .0395 O. 058 .077

0.212[; .24 93 o. 2868 3134

796 0. 915 1. 000

aOn barn of Sw = 172.3 uI ft. 2 (c) Drag of horizontal tail due to lift = 0. 0669 CLh + Ah

Jh = 4.50

(from

(a)); ts ahab ) CLma x : 14.45 (from (a));tan (ct ha b s) CLmax : 0.2577

_b, deg figure

_-h,
4.9.1-7 0 . 96 1.90 2.93 3.87 4.86 5.77 6.61 7.55

@
C_hab s

(,)

@
CL 2 h (_2 0.0807 .0441 0.0182 .0044 0.0001 .0066 0.0253 ,0581 0,1005

0. 0669CL 0.0669(_ 0.00540 .00295 0.00122 .00029 _ 0 .00044 0.00169 ,00389 0.00672 _

tan tan ahabs = tan(_) -0.0699 -.0517 -0.0332 -.0162 0.0023 .0199 0.0389 .0592 0.0778

Xhabs

Ah.

% - ,3_
:(_-(_. deg -4 -2.96 -1.90 -. 93 O. 13 1.14 2.23 3.39 4.45 figure

CL h . 4.2-1

tan (ahabS)cL (_/0.2577

.....

figure

4.12.4-4

on basis Sx_ = 172.3

of sq ft

-4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 tO 12 13.4

-0.284 -.210 -0.135 -.066 0.009 .081 0,159 ,2.1l 0,317 ........................

0,271 -.201 -0. 129

0.001 .0002 _0 _0 _ 0 _ 0 0.0001 ,0004 0.0017

0.0064 0032 1.00122 .0003 _0 .0004 0.0018 0043 O. 0084

0,0012 .00060 0.0002 .000I 0 .0001 0003 0008 0.0016

-. 0629 0,0089 .0772 0,151 .230 0.302

aOn ba_ of S h = 32.5 sq ft.

H-646

141

I1

_'_

_ c_

_1

_'_

--2-
o
r/3

O0 O0

0 0

O0 O0

O0 O0

O0

"

" d

"

v@

@#=

II

II

,_

cx]

,, .

d 4

_ _

_o oO Oo

oO Oo oO

O0 O0 oO

_ Oo oO

_ O0 Oo

0 F-,

"'d

" d

@
I_ II 0 II It _ 0 "0

c_

A C',l !

,, _.

_'_0 O0 I

_,_ c",l O0 I

c-xl _.._ O0

,-._ _ O0

Cxlt "_ O0

b_ 0

,d _" d

," d

" d

"'d

"

142

tl-646

'I

_I _ _~

@
-f

_"

-_

,d

"

"

'

'

_t _:

c:, i m oo oo m m oo _

,.-1

7
a..l a.1 ,.-1 ,J ,'_

d"

d"

d'd'

_"

7
rj IzI _,d _._J@ ' d " d " d " d_

_ 7

d
E

d"

d'd'd"

d"

?e _- ...........
d " d " d " d_ :,4

]
_
.S m "

H-646

143

,-_

o o

_'_

N?

._

144

H-646

32

db

20

Swet 16 SB

12

5 Fineness ratio,_B dB

10

12

Figure

4.12.2-1.

Wetted

area

of blunt-base

ogive

bodies

(ref.

1).

H-646

145

1.2

1.1

Rwf

1.0

.9

.8 06 2 2 3 4 5 6 78108 2 3 4 5678109 Fuselage NRe

Figure

4.12.3-1.

Wing-body

interference

correlation

factor

(ref.

1).

146

It -64 6

18

,olI
61

/ ?

8!I I o61_
.04 1

02

/
I

J
.6 .8 1.0
factor (from ref. 1). 147

.2

.4 _w

Figure

4.12.4-1. speeds;

Taper Ac/4

ratio correction = 0.

Subsonic H-646

3.2

3.0--

2.8

2.6

2.4

2.2 52 2.0

1.8

1.6

1.4

1.2 1.0 0 10 20 30 Ac/,_ deg 40 50 50

Figure

4.12.4-2.

Sweep

angle

correction

factor

for

52 (from

ref.

1).

148

H-646

k3

j-2

__0

20

40 A[ e' deg

60

8O

Figure

4.12.4-3.

Sweep

angle

correction

factor

for

k 3 (from

ref.

1).

H-646

149

.?
J (positive values) it

.2

.4 tan aabs

.6

.8

1.0

tan (aabs) CLmax

Variation Figure 4.12.4-4. 1). h le shape (from ref. 150

with angle of attack < 65; A w > 2. = =

of drag

increment

due

to wing H-646

OO52

0048
0

Wind-tunnel

data data

Faired wind-tunnel 0044

.0040

0036

(CD)cooling system0032

0028

0024

0020

o0016

0012
-i

-2

4 ab, deg

I0

12

Figure 4.12.7-1. Unpublished propeller-off, increment of drag of the subject airplane system being open. S w = 172.3 sq ft.

due

full-scale to inlets

wind-tunnel and flaps

data of of cooling

H-646

151

Wind-tunnel

data

.32

--

Cooling drag included Cooling drag omitted Estimated

?Calculated
I
0

.28

--

.24

--

.20
/ I /I // 0// // /

CD

.16

Stall 12 --

.08

--

.,0,("
.04 --

Calculated Ct_

limit

of

linearity

0 -4 0

I
4

I
8 ab, deg

I
12 16 20

(a)

CD

versus

_b" with

Figure 4.12.8-1. Comparison of predicted airplane drag characteristics wind-tunnel data. 5 e = 0; propellers off; Sw = 178 sq ft. 152

H-646

[i

Wind-tunnel data Cooling drag included Cooling drag omitted I Calculated Estimated

1.4

1.2

Calculated limit of __=.. CLa linearity

1.0

.8

CL

.2

I
0 .04

I
.08

I
12

I
.16 CD

I
.20

I
24

I
.28

I
.32

(b) Figure

CL 4.12.8-1.

versus

C DContinued.

H-646

153

 32 -

.28

.24

.20
/ / 0 /// // //

CD

.16 _

.12

.08

J ,._/ /_'" y

f
o Wind-tunnel data } Ca Icu lated Coo!!ng drag included Cooling drag omitted Estimated

.O4

I
.4 .8 (c) Figure 154

I
CL2 CD 4.12.8-i. versus

I
1.2 CL 2. Concluded.

I
1.6

I
2.0

H-646

.2O

Wing alone Wing, fuselage Wing, fuselage, nacelles Total airplane without cooling drag Total airplane including cooling drag
I !

Extension estimated _//

]Jllj I lit I t

I I gl

o I I

gl

I I

12 CD

.08
/

o
-4 0

I
4

I
8

I
12

I
16

Figure 4.12.8-2. 5 e= 0; Sw=

Predicted 178 sq ft.

buildup

of the drag

characteristics

of the airplane.

H-646

155

4.13

Effect

of Horizontal

Tail

and

Tab

Deflection

on Lift

and

Pitching

Moments

The contributions of the horizontal tail to the lift and pitching moments were considered in sections 4.10 and 4.11 on the basis of a fixed tail at zero incidence setting. In this section the tail is considered as an all-moving surface with a geared tab. Inasmuch as the results from this section are to be used also in obtaining horizontal-tail hinge moments, the tail lift is initially obtained referenced to the tail area. 4.13.1 Lift of the Horizontal Tail in the Linear Range equipped with a tab is attributed to three of attack of the tail, with the tail at zero 6 e, from zero incidence position, and of the fuselage, following equation including referenced carryover to the

The lift of an all-moving horizontal tail superimposed sources: (1) lift due to angle incidence, (2) lift due to stabilizer deflection, (3) lift effects

due to the tab. The tail lift in the presence onto the fuselage, is accounted for by the area, Sh:

horizontal-tail

= IC

6 e + CL6tab_-X----/5 \'e//Stab'

e] _h

(4.13.1-1)

The

three

contributing

sources

for

lift

of the

tail

are

considered

separately. On the basis incidence: relative to the zero

Lift due of tail area, incidence

to angle of attack the lift due to the of the tail,

of the tail, with the tail at zero angle of attack of the tail, (_h, is represented by

setting

(CLh(hf))

5e=0 5tab =0

= (CL(_)h(hf)

(_b-

(4.13.1-2)

This contribution, which includes the lift of the tail in the presence of the fuselage and the lift on the fuselage due to lift carryover of the tail onto the fuselage, is accounted for in section 4.10 by equation (4.10-2), referenced to the wing area. When applied to the subject airplane and referenced to the tail area, Sh, table 4.13.1-1(a) shows that

:0
5tab =0 for a dynamic-pressure ratio, qh _----, equal q from to 1.0.

(4.13.1-3)

Lift stabilizer

due

to stabilizer 5 e,

deflection with

zero was

incidence obtained

positionin a manner

The

lift

due

to to that

deflection,

5ta b = 0

synonymous

used to obtain the lift due equation the tail (abutting 156

to angle of attack the fuselage) was

of the tail considered

from equation (4.10.2). In this to be fixed (5 e = 0 ) relative to H-646

the fuselage, and the lift of the tail due to angle of attack was considered on the basis of the combined tail-fuselage movement relative to the local flow vector and consequent interaction of lift effects. In accord with the principles developed in reference 11, this interaction the present the and of lift instance tail effects where was the accounted lift due for by the to the use of the 6 e, factors of the Kh(f) tail + Kf(h). is to be on the In

deflection, fuselage

surface

desired, fixed

is moving

relative effects are

to the

abutting

which factors

is considered kh(f) + kf(h)

the interaction

accounted

for by the

basis of reference 11. to stabilizer deflection, equation, which is subject (4.10-2), which accounted enced to the tail area:

Thus, 5 e,

when the stabilizer is abutting the relative to the fuselage is accounted

fuselage, the lift due for by the following made at the for equation tail, refer-

to the same cautionary remarks for the tail lift due to the angle

as were of attack

(ACL)Se=(CL_)he(kh(t)

kf{h))-

Shc/qh\ _e-_h _

(4.13.1-4) )

where

__(C L__a)he She kh(f) presence kf(h) the fuselage qh -is the

is the area ratio,

lift-curve of the due

slope exposed

of the tail

exposed

tail

panels

(section

(4.2))

panels deflection, alone, obtained 5 e, of the figure stabilizer lift on the 4.13.1-1 lift carryover onto stabilizer in the

is the of the is the

to stabilizer

fuselage ratio,

to stabilizer due to stabilizer

from of the

deflection, from of the figure tail

to stabilizer is the

alone,

obtained ratio

4.13.1-1 4.9.2)

dynamic-pressure

(section

Applied to the shows that

subject

airplane

and

referenced

to the

tail

area,

Sh,

table

4.13.1-1(b)

0 0 0 6e
for a dynamic-pressure ratio, _h --, q_ equal to 1.0.

(4.13.1-5)

Lift due to the tab: The lift on the horizontal tail due to tab deflection linear lift range of the tail can be obtained by using the following equation developed in reference 8 to obtain the lift increment of high lift flaps: AC L = Ac/_CLc_/F _5)CL ]

in the which was

H-646

157

Whenapplied to the horizontal tail equippedwith a tab, as for the subject airplane, the lift contribution of the tab in terms of lift effectiveness (for [._hh 1.0) is obtained from =
(CLath(f) Kb CL6tab wh e re = Cl6tab (C/a) h (4.13.1-7)

C L_h(f) a) presence have the

is the

lift-curve

slope

of the

horizontal-tail following

surface equation

alone

in the the terms

of the fuselage same definition

and is obtained as for equation

from the (4.13.1-4):

in which

She

and

from

ca) h l section (e_6tab)c

is the 4.1 L

section

lift-curve

slope

of the

untabbed

tail

(6ta b = 0),

obtained

is the (_6tab) aspectratio, c/ Ah, and

tab-chord

factor,

obtained

from

figure

4.13.1-2

as a function

of

(o_6) tab may

Cl be obtained from based the span, c/0tab -_el^,_ \ _]h on theory. based n experimentaI data'

The

required the

ta insert

) 6tab Cl

or from

in figure varies cI value of

4.13.1-2, along /,:_,

When surface, good

_n.._ _,vt a b/ an average

as for

a constant-chord Crab

tab , may

on a tapered he used with 8, the

\, UtabJcl

based

on an average Ch as in accordance the value these of values change factor, in

accuracy _6ta

in most Cl

instances. may be found the tab under quantity the

Otherwise, by determining span curve Kb

with 6t a

reference

effective of several values of

Cl corresponding is the from effective fig-

locations Kb. a The ) .

across area The

and plotting divided is the

against Kb

by the

value ure 158

of 4.13.1-3

6tab

Cl

tab-span

obtained

as a function

of taper

ratio,

Xh,

and

span

ratio,

_,

as defined

in the H-646

figure.

The equation

section from

lift

effectiveness 1:

of the tab,

c /Sta b

, is obtained

from

the

following

reference

1 ClOtab where fi_ is the Prandtl-Glauert

c/6tab lSt a theo

1 (Cl6tab) theory

correction

factor

for

subcritical

Mach

numbers,

equal

to _/1 - M 2

ure

/Stab 4.13.1-4

is the theory as a function

cz__
w

theoretical Cta b of ch

lift and

effectiveness ratio

of the

tab,

obtained

from

fig-

thickness

[Cl5 -6_tab _ tab] theory obtained from figure

is an empirical

correction

factor

based

on experimental (c/_) h

data,

4.13.1-5

as a function

of

cta--_b and (c o_) Ch 1 theory untabbed tail, obtained from section 4.1

:l)

a theory

is the

section

lift

curve

of the

(c/_)theory

_ 57":3 1

[6.28

+ 4 " 7(t)

(1 + 0.00375_te)

(4.1-1)

K _ is an empirical correction for lift effectiveness obtained from figure 4.13.1-6 which was derived from wind-tunnel data Upon applying the preceding relations tab, referenced to the horizontal-tail is shown in table 4.13.1-1(c)

of the tab at large deflections, extensive unpowered-model

of the

to the subject airplane, the lift effectiveness area, Sh, and a dynamic-pressure ratio follows:

of 1.0,

to be as

CLSta b = 0.0279 CLSta b CLSta b 0.0273 0.0231

per per per

deg deg deg

for for for

6ta b= 5ta b 6ta b

6 , 0 , -15 -21

-7.5] (4.13. i-10)

The tab settings shown correspond to elevator settings used in this report with the tab-to-elevator gear ratio H-646

of 4 , of 1.5.

0 ,

-5 ,

-10 ,

and-14

159

Summary: The net lift of the horizontal tail in the linear range as a function of ah, 6e, and 5tab with the tab geared to the elevator was accountedfor by equation (4.13.1-1). This equation, regrouped slightly and referenced to a dynamic-pressure ratio of 1.0, becomes
(4.i3. i-ii)

CLh(hf)

=(CLa)h(hf

) (_b-_h)

+[(CL6e)Stab=0

+ CLbtab

\ be lie

This equation may be abbreviated to the following format, airplane in the summary calculations of table 4.13. l-l(d):

which

is applied

to the

subject

(4.13.1-12)

4.13.2

Maximum

Lift of the Horizontal

Tail angle The of attack inclusion of the horizontal of the tab makes tail untabbed, the deter-

The maximum lift and corresponding 5ta b = 0 , was considered in section 4.2.

mination of maximum lift somewhat more approximate than without the tab. The stall may begin at the tail, tips, or at the tabbed (or flapped) sections, depending on the amount of sweep, taper ratio, and difference in stall angle between the tabbed and untabbed sections. The increment of maximum lift coefficient due to trailing-edge flaps can be determined to a first order of approximation by using semiempirical equation (4.13.2-1) developed in reference 1 on the basis of tabulated values of maximum lift coefficients and stall angles for many planforms with and without flaps (ref. 30). The equation applies to wings and tail surfaces with plain flaps or tabs. For convenience, the nomenclature of the following equation has been changed from a wing designation to a horizontal-tail designation. On the basis of tail area, (Sh) tab CLma whe re

x) b 5ta

max]tab

Sh

CLma x) 5ta b (Sh)ta KA planform, b is the

is the tail area

increment in front derived

of

CLmax

due to tab position the tab for the effects of wing

of and including correction factor

is an empirically obtained from

to account of (hc/4)h

figure

4.13.2-1

as a function

The

increment

in airfoil

maximum-lift

coefficient

due

to the

tab,

(_c /max

),is tab

160

H-646

obtained

from

the

following

empirically

derived

equation

(from

ref.

1):

(Ac/max)tab where

= klk2k3

(Ac/max)base

(4.13.2-2)

hc/

_ maX/base

is the

section angle,

maximum 60 for Ctab c tab

lift plain

increment flaps

for or tabs,

25-percent-chord obtained from

flaps fig-

at a reference ure 4.13.2-2 k1 k2 from

flap-deflection

is a factor is a factor 4.13.2-4

accounting accounting

for for

other

than

0.25, the

obtained reference

from value,

figure

4.13.2-3

angle

other

than

obtained

figure

5tab k 3 is a factor to 1 for The basis plain flaps accounting or tabs coefficient S h, from for any one the relation tab setting may now be determined, on for tab motion as a function of (5 tab) re fe re nce , equal

the

maximum lift of tail area,

(CLmax) whe re

h (hf) = [(C Lmax)

h(hf)]

6tab=0

+ (AC Lmax)

5tab

(4.13.2-3)

[(C ]Lma x) h(hf) presence The airplane elevator 4.13.3 of the summary for each in the

5tab=0

is themaximumlift obtained from section

coefficient 4.10

ofthe

untabbedtail

inthe

fuselage,

calculations for the maximum of several elevator deflections 5tab ratio, -_e = 1.5, are presented Tail Through Stall

lift coefficient of the tail in which the tab is geared in table 4.13.2-1(b).

of the subject to the

Lift Curves of the Horizontal

Because the net lift and pitching moments of an airplane for different elevator positions are dependent upon the tail lift characteristics and could involve the stall region of the tail, operational tail lift curves for the subject airplane are plotted in figure 4.13.3-1 for several elevator positions through the stall region of the tail. The following procedure ure 4.13.3-1 for the subject for the subject airplane) and was used in constructing the lift-curve plots in figairplane on the basis of the horizontal-tail area (32.5 a dynamic-pressure ratio of 1. The resulting curves

sq ft

H-646

161

are the graphical representation of equation (4.13. 1-12) for the linear range and extend through the stall. (1) Using the information in table 4.13.1-1(a), draw the slope of the basic lift curve (5 = 5ta b = 0 ) up to the limit of linearity. e
(2) Spot the stall point for 6e = 0 using [(C Lmax)h(h f )1 5tab =0 and

[I_C f)]Lmax) h(h

5ta b=0

as listed

in table

4.13.

2-1(a).

Fairacurve,

similar

to the

fairing for the isolated stall point. The shape shape in figure 4.10-1 (3) -10 , these On the -14 ordinate using

tail in figure 4.2-1(b), from the limit of the curve in the stall region should as well as in figure 4.2-1(b). at CL_ e to the ah = 0, obtained lift spot the values table of CLge6

of linearity through the now correspond to the

for Draw

6 e = 4 , 0 , lift curves

-5 o , through

and points (4)

from curve.

4.13.1-1(d).

parallel the of

basic

Using values

(C Lmax ) h(hf) 5 e, draw

values

determined lines to denote

in table

4.13.2-1(b),

for

the

selected (5) (through plot ing

horizontal

CLmax. portion this underlay their correspond-

Make a plot, to be used as an underlay in tracing, of the nonlinear and beyond the stall) of the basic lift curve (6 e = 0). Translate to the basic and complete lift the curve curves to the for selected the stall elevator regions. Including the Effecl settings and

relative CLmax

4. I3.4

Lift and Pitchit_g-Moment

Curves of the Airplt_ne characteristics _h and 5 e

of Elevator airplane relations: may

Positions now be

The lift and pitching-moment determined as a function of ab

from

of the complete the following

C L = CLwfn

_ + CLh(hf

) S(_)

"qh__

(4.13.4-1)

Cm = Cmwfn where CLwfn__ and Xcg - x h 6w aerodynamic chord 162 Cmwfn is the chord are the

Xcg-X Cw

h (

C-Lh(h

f)) Sh qh Sw

(4.13.4-2)

tail-off the tail

coefficients, center of gravity

obtained to the of the

from

section

4.8.3 mean aerodynamic H-646

distance of the

from

quarter-chord wing mean

horizontal

in chord

lengths

The lift andpitching-moment characteristics of the subject airplane are calculated in table 4.13.4-1 as a function of _b and 5e with the tab geared to the elevator in the ratio of 1.5. At stall conditions, the horizontal tail is at and in the lower edge of the wake, and its effectiveness at stall was considered as suggestedin section 4.10 for propeller-off and zero-thrust propeller-on conditions. The results, referenced to a wing area of 178 square feet, are compared with full-scale wind-tunnel data in figure 4.13.4-1. In the absenceof appropriate propeller-off wind-tunnel data, propelleron data for T_ = 0 were used with calculated normal-force propeller effects subtracted.
Such use of T_ = 0 data is not normally recommended for comparison after and with propellercomparison thrust power off predictions. It was used in the present instance only of pitching-moment slopes at 5 e = 0 showed correlation effects at the tail. The calculated lift characteristics (fig. 4.13.4-1(a)) relation with wind-tunnel data. The divergence between lift at _b above 6 for 5 e = 4 , which is also reflected a preliminary implied zero

show generally good corthe calculated and wind-tunnel in the pitching-moment

characteristics (fig. 4.13.4-1(b)), is attributed to flow separation on the horizontal tail. The design data used took into account flow separation as a function of tab deflection only (fig. 4.13.1-4). There is a need for design data which account for flow separation as a function of both angle of attack and tab deflection. At low angles and -14 . Both the of attack, calculated be noted elevator stall. the horizontal tail is in the stall lift region when 5 e = -10 reflect

and

wind-tunnel-determined

characteristics

the tail stall. It should involving large negative normally subject to tail

that the subject airplane deflections at low angles

does not operate in regions of attack and thus is not

The calculated pitching-moment characteristics (fig. 4.13.4-1(b)) show good slope correlation with wind-tunnel data up to an angle of attack of approximately 8 . Above this angle the calculated and wind-tunnel data diverge for all indicated elevator deflections except 5 e = 0 . The increasing divergence with increasing elevator deflection indicates progressive flow separation. As mentioned, design data are needed which account for flow separation as a function of both angle of attack and tab deflection. It is evident that the use of design data which take Into account flow separation as a function of tab deflection only (fig. 4.13.1-4) is not sufficient. Calculated pitch-control effectiveness, Cm_e, as obtained from figure 4.13.4-1(b) In an effort data available 5e the 2,

is approximately 20 percent higher than indicated by the wind-tunnel data. to locate the sources of the discrepancy, wind-tunnel control-effectiveness (ref. 2) for 5ta b =0 and geared conditions were used. These data were only for a total Tct power condition of 0.2; however, because

only incremental

effects were desired at constant purpose. The following schedule used in the study.

angle of attack, the data shows the representative

were satisfactory for data, from reference

H-646

163

Figure (in
ref. 6(b) 9 2)

tb' deg 5 5

5e' deg -5 -5

5tab' deg Geared 0

AC m

Cm_e -0.058

Cm5 e

0.29 .17

-0. 034

From

this

schedule CmSe CmStab = - CmSe -0. 024 ..... 1.5

O. 016

/.5 tab_

The reduce

calculated Cm5 e,

dynamic-pressure CmStab, and Cm_ e

ratio

for

Tc/=

0.2

(section ratio

5.1.2) Of 1.00,

was

used

to was

to a dynamic'pressure

which

the ratio used for calculated propeller-off conditions. The wind-tunnel data, thus reduced, are compared in the following table with calculated values excluding and including lift carryover onto the body. The values are referenced to a wing area of 178 square feet and a dynamic-pressure ratio of 1.00.

Cm5 e From wind-tunnel based factor for this data on kh(f) neglected) report -. 0355 (carryover included) only -0.0298 -. 0318

Cmbta -0. 0141 -. 0145

Cm6 e -0. 0510 -. 0543

Calculated, (carryover As calculated

-. 0145 (carryover not included)

-. 0580

A comparison and Cm_ e, which

of the excluded

wind-tunnel the higher

data

with

the

calculated showed the

values

of

Cm5 e, values This

CmStab, to be indicates of the

carryover than

effects,

calculated instance.

approximately that the factor airplane. including

6 percent kh(f)

wind-tunnel too high wind-tunnel showed of the

data for

in each the

is about

6 percent of the effect,

tail-body of

configuration with the

subject value,

A comparison the carryover The effect, the

value calculated

Cm5 e value used

calculated

to be approximately in this report, which

18 percent included cent higher

higher. carryover than

calculated for

value

Cmg e -- -0. 0580 5e conditions

corresponding value

is approximately

14 per-

wind-tunnel

of -0.0510. for the tail-body configuration of the from the tail to the body, due to H-646

On the basis subject airplane 164

of the preceding it appears that

the

comparisons, lift carryover

stabilizer the tion gap

deflection, between the should the for lift the

is insignificant tail and have the been body.

because This assumed from the

of the implies

location that the to zero. body are

of the kf(h)

tail factor

on the

body

and

in equa-

(4.13.1-4) Although

to be equal tail to the

carryovers subject

included kf(h)

in the

calcula-

tions

and

plots

airplane,

it is suggested

that

be considered

negligible for tail-body configurations similar to that of the subject airplane. This should result in calculated values of control effectiveness which would be within approximately 6 percent of the actual values. 4.13.5 Ah Symbols horizontal-tail horizontal-tail lift lift coefficient coefficient of the horizontal tail area, with tail-fuselage of attack, elevator deflection, accounted for as CLh(hf) with the tail, referenced to the interaction effects, angle and tab deflection aspect span, ratio ft

bh
CL

(C Lh(hf))

6e=0 6tab =0

same

elevator

and

tab

settings

at

zero-deflection maximum maximum maximum lift value value

positions coefficient of of CLh(hf) CLh(hf) with the tab at zero setting

CLma x

CLwf n AC L

airplane increment

tail-off of lift

lift

coefficient,

referenced

to wing

area

increment of lift coefficient referenced to tail area increment of maximum lift referenced to tail area lift-curve slope, per deg

due to the

elevator

deflection,

ACLmax)Stab

coefficient

due

to the tab,

lift-curve slope of !he exposed portion of ihe h_rizontaltail panels, refcr,'need to the effective area of the ex: '_scd panels, pr-.r deg

tI- 64 6

165

/CLc_/h (f)

lift-curve effects area,

slope of the horizontal tail alone with fuselage on the tail accounted for, referenced to the tail per deg tail with interacting referenced to the tailtail

CL (_)h (hf)

lift-curve slope of the horizontal fuselage effects accounted for, area, per deg 3C L elevator setting, effectiveness, referenced 05 e to the

CL6e)6tab=0

, with tail area,

the

tab per

fixed deg

at zero

/ tab\
CL5e
elevator with of effectivene the 5tab 5e tab geared ss, (C L6e)Stab:0 to the elevator + CLStab_-_--e to deflect area, per deg in the _ , ratio

referenced 0C L

to the tail

CLbtab

tab

effectiveness, per deg

06tab

, referenced

to the

tail

area,

C m

pitching-moment increment tail-off wing elevator

coefficient coefficient coefficient, 0Cm referenced to the

AC m Cmwfn

of pitching-moment pitching-moment area effectiveness to the

Cm5 e

in pitch, wing area,

35 e per with of

, with deg the 5tab 5e tab

the

tab

fixed,

referenced elevator Cmse elevator the tab Cm6ta b area,

C

effectiveness to deflect area, per

in pitch in the deg ratio

geared , referenced

to the to

wing

0Cm effectiveness per deg in pitch, 35tab , referenced to the wing

chord flap chord, section, horizontal-tail synonymous ft or in. chord, to the tab chord, Cta b, in this

cf

ch

ft or in.

166

H-646

"I

cl Ac 1 (Ac/maX)base

airfoil-section change section flaps flaps section in the

lift

coefficient lift coefficient

airfoil-section

maximum lift increment for the 25-percent-chord at a reference flap-deflection angle (60 for plain or tabs when obtained from fig. 4.13.2-2) maximum lift increment due to the tab

5c/max)

tab airfoil-section lift-curve slope, per deg

Cl a

(cz
cl6ta Ctab Cw b

horizontal-tail

cl 0c/

section tab wing width ft

K !

effectiveness ft or in. aerodynamic fuselage

of the

tab,

, per 06tab

rad

or deg

chord, mean of the

chord, at the

ft or in. tail (fig. 3.2-2),

horizontal

correction large tab

factor

for

the

lift

effectiveness

of the

tab

at

deflections for the inboard carryover tail alone flaps (or tabs) onto the fuselage, with the

Kb
Kf(h)

span

factor

ratio of the tail fixed,

tail-lift to the

Kh (f)

ratio of the lift on the tail in the presence with the tail fixed, to the tail alone correction factor to account planform on the increment due to the tab position for the effects of maximum

of the

fuselage,

KA

of the wing lift coefficient

kf(h)

ratio of the lift carryover, due to stabilizer onto the fuselage to the lift of the stabilizer obtained from figure 4.13.1-1

deflection, alone,

kh(f)

ratio of the lift on the stabilizer, due to stabilizer deflection, in the presence of the fuselage to stabilizer alone, obtained from figure 4.13.1-1

H-646

167

k1, k2, k3

factors used in obtaining A C/ma x) tab to account for Ctab other than 0.25, tab angle other than the referc ence value, and tab motion, respectively Mach number tail and in the free

M qh' q_ Sh,Sh e

dynamic pressure at the horizontal stream, respectively, lb/sq ft area of the horizontal horizontal-tail ft wing thrust area, horizontal tail and tail, respectively, area in front

exposed sq ft

panels

of the

(Sh)tab
Sw

of and

including

the

tab,

sq

sq ft of the propellers, Thrust

coefficient

horizontal-tail

thickness

ratio

Xcg - xh 6
W

distance, parallel to the X-body axis, from the center gravity to the quarter-chord point of the horizontal-tail mean aerodynamic chord as a ratio of the wing mean aerodynamic chord angle airplane of attack, angle deg of attack relative to the X-body axis, deg

of

OZ

o_ b

[(_C Lmax)h

(hi)] 0tab =0

angle of attack of the horizontal tail, relative to its chord line, for the maximum lift coefficient of the tail when the tab deflection is zero, deg

_h = _b#

_h'

deg limit of linearity deg ac l DC L _5 OC L of the horizontal-tail lift-curve slope,

_h

cl

cL

and ac I

, respectively

168

H - 64 6

8c 1 _tab and

8C L _tab 0C L , respectively

5ta

CL

cl

8c I

fl = (I -M2) 1/2 6 5e 5f, 5ta b deflection, elevator deg deflection, deflection, deg respectively, used synonymously,

flap and tab deg average tab

_h 7?

downwash

across

the horizontal

tail,

deg tab tail and

span, as a ratio of the tail extending from the centerline from the centerlinc respectively,

semispan, for the of the horizontal of the tail to the

_i'77o

distance outboard semispan

inboard tail

edge,

as a ratio

of the

A? = _o - '7i (A c/4) h sweep of the horizontal-tail taper angle, ratio deg quarter-chord line, deg

Xh te

horizontal-tail trailing-edge

H-646

169

TABLE LIFT CONTRIBUTION OF THE HORIZONTAL TAIL

4.13.1-1 WITH TAB-TO-ELEVATOR GEAR RATIO OF 1.5

CLh(hf)

La)h(hf

)(_'b-

_'h ,+

(CLbe)

6tab:06e

+ (CL6tab__-e]

6e

qC

(a)

Lift

due

to

angle

of attack,

(CLh(hf))

6e=0 6tab=0

(CLh(hf))Se=O 6tab Description Lift-curve CLa)h(hf) included, Limit of slope of tail with to deg horizontal ratio tail, at the deg horizontal tail-fuselage S h = 32.5 =0

= (CLa)h(hf)(ab-

_l_ _-h-h

Symbol

Reference intersection sq ft Table Figure tail Figure 4.10-1(a) 4.9.1-1 4.9.1-1 effects Table 4.10-1_)

Magnitude 0.0746/deg

referenced linearity, of the

4
_h qh

10.6 f(_b 1.00 )

Downwash Dynamic-pressure

Summary:

___(CLh(hf))Se: 5tab

0 =0

= O. 0746

(_b

_h)

(b)

Effect

of taiI

deflection

on

lift

(5ta b = 0),

(ACL)6e

(ACL)6e

= (CL6e)Stab=06e

qh

= (CLc_)he(kh(f)

+ kf(h,)(Se)

Sh

Symbol (dr) h bh (dO h Fuselage Span width

De scription at horizontal tail, ft tail, ft

Refe Figure Table

renee 3.2-2 3.2-1

Magni

tude

1.25 12.5

of horizontal

.10 Ratio Ratio of lift on movable lift tail in presence of on body body to tail alone alone Figure Figure Table 4.13.1-1 4.13.1-1 4.2-1 .96 .11 0. 0700

kh(_ kf(h)

of movable-tail

carryover

to tail

(CLc_)he Sh e Sh

CLa

of exposed

horizontal-tail horizontal-tail area, sq ft

panels panels,

referenced sq ft

to

She,

per deg Area of exposed Horizontal-tail

Table Table

3.2-1 3.2-1

28.73 32.5

Dynamic-pressure

ratio

at the

horizontal

tail

Figure

4.9.

i-1

1.00

Summary:

(ACL)Se

= 0.06625

referenced

to

Sh

and

_h --

= 1.0

170

H-646

TABLE

4.13.1-I

{Continued)

Oh
(c) Effect of tat)deflection cl
,] "C

on

lift,

(CL6tab6tab)

t]L

5, b 1
C

K,
Shc St-_-

c/Stab,

/Stab)thcoryJ

(/Stab)theory

(C La)h(f)

= (C La)hek

h(f)

Symbol M fll t
C

Description Math _1Airfoil Trailing-edge Aspect Taper ratio ratio number M 2 section thickness angle of ratio horizontal tail tail sq ft panels, chord of horizontal semlspan of horizontal semlspan tail (untabbcd), tail, per deg tail outboard edge of tab tail to inboard edge of tab sq ft of horizontal tail, deg tail

Ik, ference Wind-turmel conditions test

Magnitude 0:083 .997

NACA Table Table Table Table Table Figure Figure Figure

0008 4.1-1 .3.2-1 3.2-1 3.2-1 2.2-1 3.2-2 3.2-2 2.2-2

0, 08 11.0 4._ .515 32.5 2_. ,l,_ 0 792 73

%
Ah _k h Sh Sh e Ctab eh 0i

of horizontal of horizontal area,

Horizontal-tail Area Ratio Distance as Distance as Section of of exposed tab from a fraction from a fraction lift-cum-e chord

horizontal-tail to tail chord chord

root root

of horizontal-tail of horizontal-tail slope of horizontal slope

17 o

Table Equation

4.

1-I it. 1-1)

0.

109

el

C_)h Tlmoretical section llft-cum'c of h_rizonial 11(;t

(el

or)theory (e_,/aJtheory (el Dh 926 r_" :tab Theoretical section effectiveness of tab, f(-'%-h ' _)' per deg Figure 1.13.1-4 :].4 per rad 0593 per deg 57.3 L '-

(cl

a) thco

(C%b) theor,
cl6tn b
(C/6tab) thc(}rv

C tab Functionof c_-and

(e/_)_'

h Figxire 4.12. l-5

._9

_lce)themT /etub ft-_'--h' 6to b) From For For For fig'urc 5ta b 6to b 4.13.1-6: 6,0,-7.5: -15: K t= l'ff 1,: t: 0.9 q 1.00

K _ Empirical correction for flap effectiveness,

5to b = -2l:

O. _3

c/5

"_

= t !t,c,7____ _ cZftab e /Stab = 0,051S per deg for 5ta b = -14 2 _ / 6tab)theory perdcg for \ (c/5 6ta h ta b /theory _ 6 _, 0 , = 0.0529

K'
-7.5

0.0,t39

per

(leg

for

6ta b=

-21

H-646

171

TABLE

4.13.1-1 (c)

(Concluded)

Concluded Reference referenced of body sq ft to to tail She alone TabIe Figure Table Table 4.2-1 4.13.1-1 3.2-1 3.2-1

S_mbot (C L eL)he kh(o CLc e of exposed Ratio Area Area of lift horizontal-tail tail

Description panels in presence panels,

Ma[nltude 0.0700 .96 28.73 32.50 per dog

on movable

She

of exposed of horizontal

horizontal-tall tail, sq ft

sh
C L c_) h(f) =

CL_

of horizontal Sh e

tail

only

in the presence qh

of the

body

= (CLa)hekh(i)--_ = O. 0700 = O. 0594 Symbol (0.96)(1)(_) per deg

referenced 28.73

to

Sh

and

'_--=

1.0

Description

Reference Figure 4.13.1-2

Magnitude -0. 530

(c_6tab)c"

Section

llft

parameter,

f(C-tab_ \Ch/

(c_6tab)

CL Ratio of finite ce6 and section lift parameter, Figure 4.13.1-2 I. 075

545

o.,o9
Kh Span factor, f(N,_o,Xh) Figure 4.13. I-3 .90

%b e' 'ab (e'O h _5

=0.527c, Sta b = O.0279perdeg - 0,0273 per deg deg for for for referenced to Sh

. Kb

(ih
and _---= 1.0 q_

5tab = 6 , 0 , -7.5 (Stab = -15 8ta b=-21

= 0. 0231per

(d)

Lift

contribution

of the

horizontal

tail

Mth

tab-to-elevator

gear

ratio

of 1.5

CLh(hf)

Lc_)h (h f) (_'b

_'h)

(C L6e)Stab=

6e +CLStab,

-(_

Substitution (b), (c) of this be considered

of the

calculated

values

of (C Lc _ \ /h(hI) results

, (CLSe] \ ]6tab=0 In the specific

, and formats

CL5 tab listed

-- obtained below for

in parts the 6e

(a), settings to

table--into the in the follow-on

above equation analysis.

5e

settings to be in follow-on

considered analysis

Correspondlng(_ta with \Oe/

b settings = 1.5

-CLh(h

0 =[(C

L C_)h(h{)(a to

referenced

b - _'h) + CLSe --h 5 e]q_ qh J q_ Sh and --= 1.0

4 0 -5 -10 -14 -7,5 -15

6 0 0.0746(a b_'h) +0.10805 e

0.0746(o' 0.0746(%-

b - _'h ) + O. 10725 _'h)+0.

-21

I008_ e

172

H-646

TABLE MAX'IMUM LIFT COEFFICIENTS (a) Pertinent

4.13,2-1 OF THE ItORIZONTAL TAIL

parameters

Symbol (Ae/4) h Sweep Section Ctab ch (Sh)ta b Area Area of borizontal of horizontal factor maximum accounting accounting of horizontal thickness

Description tail ratio along c/4 line, tall deg

Reference Figure NACA 3.2-2 0008

Magnitude _.0 .08

of horizontal

Tab

chord

as

ratio

of tail tail tail, for lift for for in sq wing

chord front ft planfovm for other deflection 25-percent-chord than 0.25 than reference tab of and including tab, sq ft

Figure Figure Table Figure Figure Figure Figure

3.2-2 3.2-2 3.2-1 4. 13.2-1

.18 27,4 32.5 907 82 .885 Vn riable

sh
KA

Correction

(_cz
kl k2

)
maX/ba se

Section Factor Factor value Factor 5_ab)'re

increment Ctab eht tab

4.13.2-2 4, 13.2-3 4.13.2-4

other

k3

_ccounting Utah fcrencc

for

tab

motion

as

a function

of

1.0

Horizontal-tail presence

maximum of the fuselage,

lift

coefficient based on

with 5ta b = 0 in Sh , 32.5 sq ft

Table

4.10-1

0.

926

Table Horizontal-tall dcg angle of attack at [(CLmax)h(hf)16tab= 0,

4.10-1

14.45

Co)

xLmaxzh(hf)

= (C

/ Lmax-h( he

)]

6tab=O

+(Ae, \ ....

_ _1_ (Sh)tab" /tab _h

A :

'.0.926

+ 0.765(Ae/ \

maX'ta

5e, deg

@
5tab 1.55e, = deg

k2' figure4.13.2-2

@
k3

@
k!k2k3 = 3_) X(_X(_)

@
(Ac' l (Ae/maX)base x

_ b max]jm : (_)(_)

@
(C'Lmax) ACLmax 0.765@ = -0.926 based on Sh +(_, =32.5 sq ft h (h f) =

k 1

4 0 -5 -10 -14 a(CLmax)h010 -7.5 -15 -21

6 0

0.885 , 885 .885 .885 .885 ranis.

0.200 0 -.250 -.46 -.59

1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0

0.177 0 -.221 -.407 -.522

0,82 . 82 .82 .82 .82

0.145 0 -.181 -.334 -.428

0.110 0 -.138 -.256 -.327

-0.816 -.926 -1.064 -1. 182 -1,253

fotminmah

H-646

173

174

H-646

khlf)
!

l o N_

--

kh (f),

kf(h)

, ./_

kflh)

.L

--I

.1

,2

.3

.4

.5 (dr) h bh

.5,

Figure 4.13.1-1. _neidence (ref.

Lift 11). 2.0

ratios

kh(f)

and

kf(h)

based

on slender-body

theory

variable

1.8

1.5

1.4

1.Z

1.0 0 2 4 Ah Figure 4.13.1-2. Tab-chord factor (ref. 8). H-646 Subsoniespeeds; (eS)c/ ( tab)c / 175 6 8 10

l.O m

Kb Kb I

I I _-0 b ! 0
I l I

r/i r/

770

I.0

1.0

.8

.6

K_, /

.4

,//
.2 .4 .6 .8 1.0
Figure 4.13.1-3. Span factor for inboard flaps (ref. 8). H-646

.2

176

clStab)th eory ' per rad

1 0 .1 .2 cf Ch
Figure cf-4.13.1-4. eta b.

.3

.4

.5 1).

Theoretical 1.0

lift

effectiveness

of plain

trailing-edge

flaps

(ref.

1 o00_____ .'98 :94 _

.90 _

__--

.__
(cl5tab)theory 6 .80_r

.4

27o:J'/

72_

0 Figure flaps
H-64 6

.1
correction

.2

c_f Ch

.3

.4

.5

4.13.1-5. (ref. 1).

Empirical cf = Cta b.

for lifteffectiveness

of plain trailing-edge

177

1.0

.8_

cf Ch .6 I0 15 20 ,25 30 40 50

.4

.2

20

40 _, deg

60

80

Figure flaps 178

4.13.1-6. at high

flap

Empirical deflections

correction (revised

for lift effectiveness edition of ref. 1).

of plain

trailing-edge

H-646

1.O0

.9O

.8O KA 7O

KA "[1-0.08 .60

COS2_cl4)h]COS314(Acl4)h

.5O 0

I
10 20 30 40 .50 60
4.13.2-1. Planform correction factor (ref. 1). Trailing-edge flaps.

Figure

H-646

179

,8

........

7-

1.6 1.4 Z_c[ 1.2 max/base 1.0 .8 .6 0

Figure flap 4.13.2-2. angle (ref.

/
S/plit and plain

10

12

14

16

18

20 at reference

Maximum-lift
1).

Airfoil thickness, percent chord increments of 25-percent-chord flaps

1.2
0 --

/
J 8 .....

/_plit kl

.6
.4r_

and plain _flap

.2 /-0
Figure 4.13.2-3.
lo0

......... 4 8
Flap-chord
......

12

16

20

24
factor

28
(ref.

32
1).

Flap chord, percent chord

correction

..4"
.8-.6_ k2
i

.4i

" /

_- R efere no-;flap angle

J

_o 2o 30 40 5_ 60
Flap angle, deg Flap angle correction factor (ref. 1).
H-646

I I

Figure 180

4.13.2-4.

.8

/4 ae,_/

.6

.4 0 432 "I .2

/
0 -.2 CL h(hf)
-,4

-,6

//
x /

,oi/
'
/ / \

-.8

_ _a

_.

/
\/
\
"-

'CLmax )for\ _,,..,... -1.O

6e'_

f
Qh for at 6e=O

\
CLmax
..._
t

/f
/
/
/

-1.2 CLmax for

5e= -14

_'"

":

-16

-12

-8" ah %-_h,

-4 cleg

Figure 4.13.3-1. elevator. 0tab/6 H-646

Calculated e = 1.5;

lift curves of the horizontal tail Sh = 32.5 sq ft; _lh/_t_o= 1.00.

with

tab

geared

to

181

[] O -I

[] O O A -4 O

6e, deg 4

<>
A ,4

14

CL Wind-tunnel 6e deg [] o <> z_ ,4 4 0 -5 -10 -14 Calculated data

1
0 4 8 a b deg (a) Lift Figure 4.13.4-1. characteristics Comparison of the airplane characteristics. lift and pitching-moment as a function of _. and 12 16

J
20

of predicted propeller-off with wind-tunnel data

5 .

S w= 178 sqft; 6tab/ 6 e = I. 5 (propeller-off on data at T c = 0 witH propeller effects 182

wind-tunnel data obtained from propellero e ealeulated out); center of gravity = 0.10c w. H-646

.8--

I0
A A A

0 Cm

(>

0_

o
o

[]
-.__
-_

"-<. o
O

__
_ 0 -5

o
O

_o
o o

o
O

Wind-tu_nnel data

-.4_

o 0

"",4

-.
-_

Calculated 0

I
4 Ob, deg

I
8

I
12

Stall

I
16

(b)

Pitching-moment Figure 4.13.4-1.

characteristics. Concluded. 183

H-646

4.14

Horizontal-Tail

Hinge

Moments

and

Stick

Forces

The procedure of reference 1 for determining pitching moments of wings having trailing-edge flaps was used to determine the hinge moments of an all-moving surface equipped with a tab or flap. It is based on the method of reference 31 for determining the pitching moments of wings having trailing-edge flaps. The method makes use of load distribution theory (ref. 32) for subsonic flow together with two-dimensional airfoil data adjusted for the effects of sweep. The method, as developed in reference is limited to subsonic speeds. 4.14.1 Horizontal-Tail Hinge Moments of an uncambered horizontal Sh, and a unity dynamic-pressure tail about ratio, its hinge line, refermay be determined

31,

enced from

The hinge moments to the tail area, the following

equation:

x c)
Chh (f) = (CLh(f))6tab =0 Ch + (ACL)6tab Ch _ m]Sta (4.14.1-1) whe re CLh(f)) a function is the lift _h coefficient and 5e only, of the with tail alone in the presence on tail of the area presence of tail the of lift body as b

6tab =0 of

Crh = C_b -

6ta b = 0, based

the

The following fuselage, due

equation considers the lift of the stabilizer only, in the to o_ and 5 e. h The lift on the fuselage due to carryover at this time, because it does not enter into

onto the moment

fuselage is not a factor calculations.

hinge-

(CLh(f))6tab:

0 = (CLh(f))

_h

+ (ACL)6e

She

qh

She

qh

+ kh(f)6e]

She Sh

qh q

(4.14.1-2)

and iX area, 184 ) is the increment of lift CL 5ta b obtained from section 4.13 coefficient due to tab deflection, based on tail

H-646

xhinge

- Xac) h 6h to the

is the line

distance in terms

from of tail

the

aerodynamic aerodynamic

center

of the

tail,

with on the

5ta b = 0, tail mean (x hinge

hinge

mean

chord,

measured

aerodynamic - x_/4) 5h h

chord

is the dynamic chord to the is the hinge

distance line

from

the of the

quarter tail

chord

of the

tail

mean chord

aero-

in terms moment

mean

aerodynamic the quarter this quantity

AC _) 6tab mean aerodynamic below. )

pitching

of the for

tab

about

chord

of the

tail

chord

(The procedure

obtaining

is discussed

In instances where the point, as in the present

center case,

of pressure

of the

untabbed

tail

is at the

quarter-chord

Chh(f)

=[(C

Lh(f))Stab= 0

"A'_ L)StabJ -_Xhinge-Xc/4)h ' \ ch

+(ACm)6tab

(4.14.1-3)

When the tab is geared to the horizontal tail, on the basis of tail area, is obtained from

the net

tail

lift

in the above

equation,

Sh e CLh,f) =[(CLh(f))6tab=O+(ACL)Stab 1 =1 (CLa)heZhKh(f)-_h + (4.14.1-4) f CLoz)hekh(f) She -_+ CL6tab

(6tab l 5e \ 5e ]J

! _h _-oO

Applied to the subject airplane, the lift characteristics equations of the tail alone in the linear range in the presence of the body are shown in table 4.14.1-1 (a). The stall conditions of the horizontal tail alone in the presence of the body are obtained by using the stall conditions ) h(f) for the calculated same as in table ( _CLmax settings or Sh e (_max)h(f) The H-646 results for stall conditions are _(_LLmax)h(hf summarized ) Sh 4.14.1-1(b). The lift 185 (4.14.1-5) 4.13.2-1(b). ) h(hf) listed in the in the For table. table 5 e = 0 , The are the stall angle lift coefratio of

( aCLmax ficients She Sh

is the several

maximum reduced

elevator

by the

to obtain

(CLmax)h(f),

in table

characteristics of the horizontal tail alone in the presence of the body are plotted in 5tab figure 4.14.1-1 asa function of _h= (_b- _h and 5e {with 5e - 1.5) for a qh dynamic-pressure ratio of -- = 1.0.
The quires across of the spanwise cl local is the chord, determination the the determination span of the tail of the pitching-moment variation unit (radian) location, G, at any one of the tab contribution spanwise-loading deflection, Xcp, spanwise per The unit for G _, stations of the tab,

(") ACm

5tab, G,

re-

of the per

coefficient, and the

determination thc_chSpan. to 2---_-' The

chordwise loading local and

center-of-pressure coefficient, lift coefficient bh is the

across

station of span,

is equal ch

where

at the span

station tail.

is the of _

corresponding and Xcp are moments to be 1.

of the

determinations

followed by calculations, using an integration process, of incremental due to the tab. The following outline is a detailed clarification of the used to determine (1) design function Obtain the (AC_)Stab. span-loading The outline is similar per unit to that of tab presented

pitching procedures

in reference G _, from the

coefficient

deflection, 4.14.1-2(a) inboard values

charts of reference of wing (or tail)

35 which are shown semispan station, 7, 0.831, and 1.00for fl=_l-M

in figures for several appropriate 2, and

to 4.14.1-2(d) as flaps having semiof__,fl_-_, Aft, ). and To

0.195,__ 0.556, spans,_, where _f'kfc_ a= (from

section4.2),

Af=tan-l/tan_c/4

arrive at the appropriate each set of taper ratio taper ratio of the surface

curves for the flapped surface being considered, interpolate curves for a constant _?f to obtain curves to conform to the being considered. With the desired taper ratio for each curves 77f

established, (_?f = 0. 195, k ' Aft, and curves

interpolate through 0.556, 1.00) which _ for is shown the surface

several crossplots are now in accord being 4.14.1-3 considered.

to obtain a net set of three with the design parameters Such a set of reduced load

distri-

bution

in figure

for a hypothetical

case.

Cross-plot the net set of three curves, such ure 4.14.1-3 (b). (The circles are the crossplot inboard and outboard limits of the flap semispan

as in figure 4.14.1-3(a), as in figpoints. ) On the crossplot locate the under consideration (Vf = 0.1 and 0.75

in the specific illustration) and cross-plot again the span-load distribution curves for these two stations, as in figure 4.14.1-2(c). The two resulting span-load distribution curves in figure 4.14.1-3(c) are the operational curves for subsequent analysis to determine the incremental section lift coefficients as a function of span station, _?. (2) from Determine the incremental section lift coefficient as a function of span station

186

H-646

(czA)
whe re c 1A ) V is the station (Ch)v bh _distribution 77 is the is the chord of the tail tail incremental

sv.3(oh),

section

lift

coefficient

due

to tab

(flap)

deflection

at

at station

r7

span

of the difference

is the curves

in span-load 77 (fig.

coefficients for

for

the

two bounding

span-load

at station

4.14.1-3(e),

example) eldtab

(_5)c l is the two-dimensional as per section 4.13.1 5_a b 5ta b normal is the streamwise line tab

lift-effectiveness

parameter

obtained

from

-(el a) h

deflection

in degrees,

which

is related

to the

deflection

to the hinge

by the

relationship

6_a b = tan-l(eos For conventional (3) The tail surfaces, the difference

Ah/

tan

5tab)
/

(4.14.1-7) and for the 5ta b is negligible. section

between location,

6 tab Xcp,

chordwise

center-of-pressure

incremental

lift coefficient, due to tab deflection, for stations upon three regions of the semispan, two of which regions, shown by the sketch in figure 4.14.1-4, Semispan Semispan Semispan of the tab (a) For stations stations stations, included adjacent in the to and tabbed within by the

across the tail semispan are affected by the tab. consist of the following:

depends These three

section A_ = 0.20 tab, outboard of the of ends of the tab from the ends

not influenced

A T = 0.20

a semispan

station

included

in the

tabbed

portion

of the

semispan,

Xcp_

(Acmf)7?

(cla=0)
H-646

(4.14.

l-S)

187

where is the increment of lift coefficient at station 7? load line, obtained from c/A =0)
r/ referred to the basic

(4.14.1-9)

whe re

ClA Ab

is obtained is the sweepback

from

equation of the

(4.14.1-6) (Xcp)b chordline type) which loading is the due chordwise to tab center-

angle basic

of-pressure deg, obtained

position from

of the

(effective

camber

deflection,

tan and (xcp) b ch Acmf) rl, due percent For tab is obtained

A b = tan from

Ac/4

- _[

_hh

0.25

(4.14.1-10)

figure

4.14.1-5.

is the section increment pitching-moment 7? to tab deflection about the quarter-chord point chord line through (XCP)b 6 (A Cmf _

coefficient in the plane

at semispan normal to tbe

station, constant-

deflections

up to approximately

may

be obtained

from

( Acmf ) 7/ =Cmal' "tab 0tab v where, on the basis of Iifting line theory,

(4.14.1-11)

Cm_"tab and where

57"3

_]\-_h/_

\Ch

]_?J

per

deg

(4.14.1-12)

6_ tab

= tan_ ltCS

A hl tan btab cos A b

).

(4.14.1-13)

For

large

tab

deflections,

emf )

may

be determined

by using

the

empirical

curves

188

H-646

of Acmf in figure 4.14.1-6 (from ref. 1) based on unpowered-modelwind-tunnel data. Figure 4.14.1-7 compares the empirically determined variation of ACmf versus 5tab(Sf) with lifting-line theory as applied to the subject airplane.
(b)
tab,

For semispan stations adjacent to and within

A_ = 0.20

from

the

ends

of the

(4.14.1-14)
of tab where

1
(z
part (a), for span K is a factor sections near

o of

is the tab

ratio

of --.(ACmf) ? and

cl

A=0

, determined _?

in

stations

corresponding

to the

edge

of the

tab location 4.14.1-8 the ends for untabbed air-

foil

for estimating the ends of the

section center-of-pressure tab, obtained from figure of AT) = 0.20 from

(c) For is considered

semispan stations to be 0.25.

outboard

of the

tab,/--g_-.
\-rl

/v
mean

(4) For wings with a swept quarter position at each semispan station must aerodynamic chord by

chord, the be referred

chordwise center-of-pressure to the quarter chord of the

tail

(77 - _)

--

bh/2 Ch

tan

Ac/4

5h

- 0.2

(4.14.1-15)

wh e re 77, aft

(_hh/ of the quarter

is the chord

distance

to the

center tail

of pressure mean mean 3.2 to the

at the

semispan chord chord from

station,

as a ratio

of the

aerodynamic aerodynamic

line

77 is the lateral distance of the tail in semispans, obtained from section

the body

center-

(5) Obtain

the pitching

moment

due

tab

deflection

from

the

integral

@ Cm)Stab=-

0_A'ic

(ch)71lA(Ch)av ) 77

(_-h)_

d_

(4.14.1-16)

H-646

189

where (Ch)v (Ch)av Sh chord, bh is

the ratio of the tail chord at the semispan station, 77, to the average

Tables 4.14.1-2, 4.14.1-3, and 4.14.1-4 summarize the calculations for determining the horizontal-tail hinge moments of the subject airplane, based on the foregoing procedures. Figure 4.14.1-9 shows the variation of the spanwise loading AG coefficient, --_-, due to the tab deflection, used in the calculations. The basic pertinent parameters and operational forms of the equations are listed in tabIe 4.14.1-2. Horizontal-tail tab characteristics are summarized in table 4.14.1-3. The results from table 4.14.1-3 are applied to table 4.14.1-4 to obtain the hinge-moment characteristics for the condition where the tab is geared to the elevator in the ratio of 5tab -_e = 1.5. It should be noted that in table 4.14.1-4 the caIcuIalions involving the non-

linear portion (calculated) not used. The calculated C_h = _b - _h and 6e

of the tail lift curve are identified by block outline and are limit of Iinearity was obtained from a coordinated study of in table 4.14.1-4 with figure 4.14.1-1. compared with full-scale for 5 e = 4 , 0 , and correlation calculations (due to tab exists with wind-5 is c_b, than

tunnel

The calculated hinge-moment data in figure 4.14.1-10. good. At 6 e = -10 between nonlinearity

characteristics are in general, correlation and -14 , in tail although data

reasonably the increasing _b indicates calculated.

good and

at high decreasing

discrepancy an earlier

wind-tunnel

characteristics

deflection)

hinge region

It is possible to arrive at a simple first approximation moment with qb at a constant 5 e for at least the of the (1) Obtain tail hinge the tail moments. hinge moment be assumed The suggested at tail stall empirical for the

of the variation first half of the procedure 6e considered. tail mean

of the nonlinear

taiI

is as follows: At tail stall,

the center of pressure chord. Thus at tail

may stall,

to be at 50 percent

of the

aerodynamic

(Chh(f))

stall

_ (_max)h

(f)(x hinge

Ch

- Xc/2)

q_hh

(4.14.1-17)

q_o

For

the

subject

airplane

at

5 e = -14 ,

(C)hh(f ) stall

_ -l'107

(-6"

94) (1"0)

=0'236

190

H-646

whe re CI h -1.0 from table 4.14.1-4

4
OO

_h (Xhing e _ x_/2)h

= 32.45 -6.94

inches from inches figure 3.2-2

t from
(ah)stal (2) columns at 6e = 1 = (C_b o_ b Ch)stall corresponding 4.14.1-4. _5.7 = 1"0 to

figure

4.14.1-1

Obtain 2 and

(_h)stal For the

1 from subject

the correlation airplane, with

of

(O_h)stal 1 with 1 = 1.00

1 in table

(ah)stal

-14 , (O_b)hstall Locate symbol --

(3) a solid (4) earlier fourth From

(0) ,(Chh stall

on the

plot.

For

the

subject

airplane

this

is indicated

by

in figure that,

4.14.1-10 in general, spot a point linearity

for

6 e = -14 . due to the tab will be experienced approximately airplane has been stall done onepoint. for

Assuming than of its

nonlinearity on the limit to

\

predicted, length from point, subject

calculated toward (Chh(0)

]

Chh(f } curve the stall" calculated This

the

this

plotted for the

sweep airplane

a curve

6 e = -14 4.14.2 Stick

in figure

4.14.1-10.

Forces control system are obtained from work input is equal to work output: 5e Fstic k = (Hinge moment) 57.3 8stick (4.14.1-18) the

Control forces on the stick in a reversible following relation based on the principle that

= 5-_-3.3

hh(f)q_Sha

5stic k

57.3 where Chh (f) H-646 is the hinge-moment coefficient

hh(f)

Sh6 h

(4.14.1-19)

based

on horizontal-tail

dimensions

and

_h --

191
7f_

6e

is the

elevator

deflection, deflection

degrees at the grip point, feet

6stic k For the

is the stick airplane

subject

Fstic k = 40.0
_e

Chh(f}_ _

(4.14.1-20)

based

on

5stick

=26

deg/ft,

Sh=32.5

sq ft,

and

_h--2"71

ft

4.14.3

Symbols All lift and moment coefficients aerodynamic chord. are referenced to the horizontal-tail area and the

mean A bh

horizontal-tail horizontal-tail

aspect span,

ratio ft of the horizontal tail included stall angle tail with

Chh(f)

hinge-moment coefficient fuselage effects on the stall value lift net of Chh(f ) at the tail

(Chh(f)) CL _h(f)

coefficient lift with coefficient the fuselage of the tail angle of the with of the of the effects tail, tail, due to _h' 6 e, and 6ta b ,

included with fuselage effects included, Ch, only

lift Lh(f))c_ h lift ( C Lh(f)) 6 tab:0

coefficient due to the

of attack, tail due to

ah = a b ah effects and

coefficient 6ta b = 0),

5 e (with

fuselage

included

(C--Lmax)h (_max)h(hf)

(f)

maximum maximum fuselage increment

value

CLh(f )

at stall tail with interacting tail-

lift coefficient of the effects included of lift of lift due due to the

elevator

deflection

(AC L)6e increment to the tab deflection

192

H-646

(CLa)h e

lift-curve slope of the exposed portion of the tail referenced to the effective area of the exposed per deg

panels, panels,

CL6e

elevator

effectiveness in the ratio

with of

the

tab

geared deg

to the

elevator

to deflect

5ta------_b, per 6e

OCL

CL6tab (_C_) 6tab 2bh el = 57.3 (a6)cl ef, etab ch (Ch)av (oh) _h cz el
a

tab

effectiveness,

06_tab , per

deg about the quarter-chord chord, due to tab deflection of

increment the tail

of pitching moment, mean aerodynamic

chord of the flap in this section, tail chord, tail ff chord,

and tab, ft

respectively,

used

synonymously

average tail tail chord mean

ft station, chord, ft 77, ft

at the

semispan

aerodynamic lift coefficient slope, slope

section section section

lift-curve lift-curve

0c l 3a , per of the _c 1

deg tail

horizontal

el 6ta b

section

tab

effectiveness, section-lift tab (flap)

06ta b , per

deg station, _?,

increment due to the

coefficient deflection

at semispan

77

increment section-lift coefficient at semispan station, due to the tab deflection, referred to the constantpercent line chord line through (XCP)b ' the basic loading due to tab deflection

77,

H-646

193

C m

II

rate

of change 5ta b
I]

of the about the

section

pitching-moment point chord line

coefficient in the plane (Xcp) b,

5tab

with

quarter-chord

normal to the per deg Acmf

constant-percent

through

section increment pitching-moment coefficient, flap (tab) deflection, about the quarter-chord plane normal to the constant-percent chord (Xcp) b

due to the point in the line through

ACmf) n

ACmf

at semispan

station,

7?

ratio eh ]_7 stick

of the tab

to the tail

chord

at semispan

station,

_?

Fstick G G

force,

lb loading coefficient due to the flap (tab) extending to

spanwise

span loading the plane

coefficient of symmetry

difference in span-load coefficients for load-distribution curves at semispan (fig. 4.14.1-3(b), for example) K a factor for estimating location for untabbed obtained from figure

two bounding station,

span-

the section center-of-pressure section near the ends of the tab, 4.14. t-8

Kh(f)

ratio of the lift on the fixed stabilizer, due to angle of attack, in the presence of the fuselage to the stabilizer alone, obtained from figure 4.4-1

k-

Cl o_ 27r ratio of the deflection, stabilizer Mach dynamic free-stream number pressure at the horizontal tail, lb/sq ft lb/sq ft lift on the stabilizer, due to the stabilizer in the presence of the fuselage to the alone, obtained from figure 4.13.1-1

kh(f)

dynamic area,

pressure, sq ft

Sh

horizontal-tail

194

H-646

Sh e

area of the exposedpanels of the horizontal tail, sq ft thrust coefficient chordwise center-of-pressure location, at semispan station, rT, aft of the quarter chord of and as a ratio
of the horizontal-tail mean aerodynamic chord from chord the with chordwise location of the aerodynamic center leading edge of the tail mean aerodynamic 5ta b = 0 , in. chordwise chordwise center-of-pressure section basic loading location, center ft of pressure, ft

Xach

Xcp (Xcp) b (Xcp) b ch

chordwise the tab a ratio

section basic loading center deflection, from the leading of the tail chord

of pressure, due to edge of the tail as

Ch ]V

chordwise the tab leading distance hinge

center-of-pressure location of the lift due to deflection, at semispan station, r/, from the edge of the tail as a ratio of the tail chord from the aerodynamic line of the tab, in. center of the tail to the

(Xhing e - Xac) h

(Xhing e - Xc/4)h' (Xhinge Y - Xc/2)h

distance, on the tail mean aerodynamic quarter-chord and half-chord point, the tab hinge line, in. lateral lateral angle distance distance of attack, angle from to the deg of attack relative to the the tail plane mean

chord, from respectively,

the to

of symmetry, aerodynamic

ft chord, ft

0% (_b)hstal 1

airplane airplane stall angle stall , c_C Lmax_(hf)

X-body

axis,

deg

angle of attack corresponding at any one deflected position, of attack ah for of the any one tail, 6e eb - _h, setting,

to horizontal-tail deg deg

ah (C_h) stall t o_ C Lmax)h(f)I

deg lift of the tail-fuselage x) h(f) tail

angle of attack of the tail at the maximum including fuselage effect on the tail and interaction same as effects, (_h)stall) respectively

( (oeCLma

isthe 195

H-646

(_h)stal

1 with the

tab

at zero

setting

I(_CLmax)h(f)l 5tab=0 _ (%)c/

fl= 5e 5f 5 stick 5tab 5tZab zz 5tab (1-

clbtab cl

M2) 1/2 elevator flap stick tab deflection, same at the normal tab deg as tab grip to the deflection, point, hinge deg section basic-loading centerft line, deg 5ta b, deg

deflection, deflection deflection

streamwise tab deflection of-pressure

deflection, to the deg across 2y bh of the

normal line,

_h 77

average semispan

downwash station,

the

horizontal

tail,

deg

7?, 77 i o

semispan station tab, respectively semispan increment semispan station

inboard

and

outboard

end

of the

of the

tail

mean

aerodynamic as a ratio of the

chord tail

of spanwise

distance

_f

spanwise length of the flap as a ratio of tail semispan sweep of the line, deg sweep sweep (tan Ac/4 /_ ) , deg horizontal-tail taper ratio of the of the section

(tab)

from

the

plane

of symmetry

Ab

basic-loading

center-of-pressure

Ac/4 Ahl Aft= tan-l\ X

tail tab

quarter-chord hinge line, deg

line,

deg

196

H-646

TABLE LIFT BODY CHARACTERISTICS AS A FUNCTION OF OF _h HORIZONTAL AND 5e, range

4.14.1-1 TAIL WITH TAB ALONE IN THE PRESENCE OF OF 6tab _ THE = 1.5

GEARED to Sh)

IN RATIO

Ca) Linear

(referenced

C'-Lh(f ) = (CLh(f))6tab= _[ \

+ (ACL)Sta She

= l_C LOL)he %Kh(f)____hh

+ [(C Lakekh

(f)SS__
,r

_+ C L6tab______e /_tab

\'] )j 6e} _h

Symbol (CLq)he Sh e Sh Kh(f) kh(f) 6tab Gearing 6e C L6ta b Lift for effectiveness 6ta b= 6 ,0 of , ratio of tab Lift-curve per deg Area of slope

Description of exposed horizontal-tail panels,

Reference Table 4.2-1

Magnitude O. 0700

exposed

horizontal-tail area, in presence tail

panels, sq ft of fuselage

sq

ft

Table Table

3.2-1 3.2-1 4.10-1 4.13.1-1(b)

28.73 32.5 1.075 96

Reference Ratio of lift alone

horizontal-tail on tail

to of

tail

Table Table

Ratio of lift on to tail alone

movable

in presence

fuselage

to elevator tab, -7.5 referenced to S h, per deg: Table Table Table _h 4.13.1-1(c) 4.13.1-1(c) 4.13.1-1(c)

1.5

0279 0273 0231

5ta b = _15 6ta b = -21

Summary:

For

6 e =4

, 0 ,

-5:

_h(f)

= (0.0665c_

h +0.10136e)

_h
5e = -10: C--Lh(f) = (0. 0665c% + 0. 10046e) -q_ q_h q_

5 e = -14:

C'-Lh(f ) = (0.0665c_

h + 0. 09415e)

(b)(C---Lmax)h(f) Symbol Horizontal-tail 5.. =0 , _D angle deg

(referenced

to

Sh) Reference with Table 4.13.2-1(a) Magnitude -_14.45

De sc ription of attack at (_LLmax)h(f)

I(aC

Lmax)h

(f}] 6tab

=0

6e, 4 0 -5 -10 -14

deg

6ta b = 1.55 6 0 -7.5 -15 -21

e from

(C-'Lmax) table -0. -. -I. -I. - I.

h(h 0 , (C--Lmax)h(f)

.--

Sh e " _hh

4.13.2-1(b) 816 926 064 182 253

= (CLmax)h0at) -0. -. -. -1. -1. 721 819 941 045 108

H-646

197

TABLE PERTINENT RELATIONS (a) Symbol M Mach number Description FOR

4.14.1-2 HINGE MOMENTS

HORIZONTAL-TAIL parameters

Pertinent

Reference Wind-tunnel number 997 ITable Table Table i Table chord, ft Table Table Table Figure Figure 3.2-1 3.2-1 3.2-1 3,2-1 3, 2-1 3.2-1 4.5-1 3.2-2 3.2-2 Math O. 083

Magnitude

hh A

Horizontal-tail Horizontal-tail Horizontal-tail Horizontai-tail Horizontal-tail Lateral position

span, aspect taper area, mean of

ft ratio ratio sq ft aerodynamic 5h, ft

12.5 4.8 515 32, 5 2. 704 2. 758 .255 1.17 1.17 h

%
6h Y5 h Xae h (Xhing e - Xac)h (Xhing e - x5/4) h

Aerodynamic center relative to leading edge of mean aerodynamic chord Distance between aerodynamic center of mean aerodynamic chord and hinge line, in. Distance between quarter chord of mean aerodynamic chord and Sh hinge line, in.

(eh)av

................

2.60

%
Ratio of tab chord to tail chord Figure 3,2-2 18 ]7 - Xac) h ,0361 5h

(Otab'
\Ch (hinge

(Xhing e - x_/4)

h 0361 2Y5 h .441 bh Sweep Sweep of quarter-chord of tab hinge line, line deg of horizontal tail, deg Table Figure 3.2-1 3.2-2 8,0 0

'_e/4 Ah l (Xep) b Ch

Chordwise to tab

center-of-pressure dcficetion

position

of basic

loading

due

Figure

4.14.1-5

.66

Ab

S-eop of.epCChordlino ,
deg . in plane normal t to plane to _/ - t. h line, deg J "_ Tab Tab Tab Cl a 27r Cl 5ta b deflection deflection deflection tab hinge in streamwise in plane normal = tan-l(cosAh/tanbtab) /cos (Xcp)b= tan-l_ Aht tan 8tab_ cos Ab ')

Equation

(4.14.1-10)

1.8

5tab 5tab -t 8tab

Equation Equation

(4.14.1_7) (4.14.1-13)

5 tab _- 6ta b

Table

4.2-1

0. 995 -.485 for6ta for for b= 6,0_,-7.5 _

((_5)c/

(ez h )
Hcrtzontal-tail taper for for ratio span-load span-load deg due to tab deflection distribution distribution = Design Design tan Spanwise parameter parameter _ )'tan Ac4'_

Table

4.13.1-1(c) -.475 -.403 6ta b = -15 5ta b = -2I

h k

Table

3.2-1

O. 515 <t. 81 8.02

tt_

),

loading

coefficient

Figure

4, 14.1-2

See

figure

4.14.1-9

(cz_), (ezA=0),
For general reference

Incremental

section

lift

coefficient line = (clA)_7 cs2A b

Equation

(4.14.1-6)

See

part

(b)

Equation

(4.14.1-9)

(ClA)_

? referred

to basic

load

f----------

CmStabtt

- ST.
line

_._.223_j\tCtab_c ., h

[Q

- ctab_ I_,/ --%-h.]3

Equation ' per deg, based on lifting-

(4.14.

[-12)

-0.0110

theory

198

H-646

TABLE

4.14.1-2

(Concluded)

(b)

Increment

section

lift

coefficient

(C/A)71

(4.14.1-6)

_0.212

r/_h)r/

+t+
(_-t/

for

5tab

= 6 ,

-7.5

(used

in

analysls)

0,207

t+
h/r/

for

5tab

= -15

(used

in

analysis)

G _ 0. 176(A _) 77

5tab --(_ for tab = -21 .

(c)

Chord'_tse

center

of

pressure

(Xcp)r/

at

increment

section

For

semlspan

stations

included

in the

tabbed

portion, 7',era f (4.14. I-R)

= 0.26 -/_,-U-'---_
cf where, from figure 4.14.1-7 (for _hh = 0.18),

tab Aemf For semlspan stations adjacent

6 -0.060 t_ aad

-7'5 0.070 within

-tS_ 0.125

-21 0.160 from the ends of the tabs,

,.9. rl = O. 20

(4.14.1-14)

_h ,'r/
where K is obtained from figure 4.14.1-8

[ (e,,,:0)r/Jedgooftab

(d)

Chordwtse

center quarter

of

pressure chord bh

of of tail

increment mear_

section aerodynamic

lift

coefficient chord

relative

to

(_h_

=(rl-r/)'-_-h

- T

tanAc/4+-_-h

(_h)_ L[-_-h]_ \ [/Xcp

(eh)'n [/'Xcp_

-0'25

]
_. 14. t-15]

0.325

(t/-

0.441)+

_" Lk_)r/02 the tail mean

5]

(e)

Pitching

moment

about

the

quarter chord of due to tab deflection

aerod3mamic

chord

(_c')<+tab =-

(_,,).
2.60(_c_()

_'h ,_
(4.14.1-16) dr/ r/ (refe and_ ..... --=qh d I. O) t Sh = 32"6 sq ft

_0 I..(c/A_)

(f)

Hinge-moment

coefficient

of

the

horizontal

tail

Chh(f)

: (CLh(f))0tab:0

(Xhingech-

Xae)h

+ (ACL)0tab

(Xhlllgecb_

xff/4)h

+ (ACmX k

?6ta

:o. ..,6, o
:0.0361_-LL h(O +(AC__ \

++ ("CL)t+]+,'AC"++
\ / tab (refercncedto IOtab Sh =.q2.5sqfland q_h q : 1.0)

(4,

t4.

l-1)

where

CLh(f

Is

obtained

from

figure

4.

N.

I-I

H-646

199

oJ _9

.o O Z

i ,i
e-

200

H-646

II

i!

H-646

201

T_ .....

J _ _. ._"
_ o

202

H-646

tl

.8 66 deg 4 .6

.4 CL O.405 .2 --

6e=O
w

CLh(f)

-.2

_.,
-.
-,8 \"_'//: _ /

L,m,,o, / ..... /
linearity 5e =0 _ ," _ _,
1. _ .L t

(CLmax)h(f) for 5e=O

',

//

\, _

", \\,[ //

a h for ( CLmaxl ,. h(f)| /

Z
--_J 4 8 in tile presence area,

-1.2 -20 -16 -12 -8 -Z 0 ah =ab - _h, deg Figure 4.14.1-1. Calculated tab geared lift curves of the horizontal tail 5tab qh 6c 1.5; alone

of the body with Sh, 32.5 sq ft. H-646

to elevator.

q_o = 1.0;

reference

203

1.0

.8

.6 G_ per rad 6'

0.5
.4

\0.831

.2

.2

.4 77

.6

.8

1.0

(a) Figure straight 4.14.1-2. tapered Spanwise wing (ref. load

= O; inboard distribution Subsonic

flaps. flap deflection for

32).

due to symmetric cf speeds; -_- = 1.

204

H-646

.81 -----z_ -

6 _

--.._,,._. _-l.

_f 00 h 0 .5 1.0 --

G _-, per rad .4 _----_-_ O. 195 .2 '_"%_ O. 556_q

per rad

0 .8

.6

_,,,._

_f

, per rad

.2

.4 11

.6

,8

1.0

(b) Figure H-646

flA k

= 2.0; 4.14.1-2.

inboard

flaps.

Continued. 205

.6 A_ =o=

"_0:,__.._
0 .6

"
AI_=40'=
'r/f 0

per , rad _---__ "____

/ _.___

.5 LO

0 .4

A_=60

_
-, per rad .2

'Tf1.o0

.2

.4 'r/
RA

.6

.8

1.0

(c) Figure

= 6.0; 4.14.1-2.

inboard

flaps.

Continued.

206

H-646

--'--

--

,.00

_ ,e,,ad 0,95 2 I
0 .4

k 0 .5 1.0

,__

A13=50

G 5'

per rad
| |

.2

.4

.6

.8

1.0

(d)

= 10.0; 4.14.1-2.

inboard

flaps.

Figure

Concluded,

207 H-646

.6

I
f

.4 G _, rad .2 \1.0

t
!

=0 r/f 0 (a) General for .2 spanwise specific r#f0.1 .4 load _7 6 .8 curves 1.0 reduced to fiAk ' Aft, and X

distribution )_ = 0. 586;

design.

Aft = 47.35; 0.75

flA = 3 " 87, k

6
G

._-__Actual 0. 195

flap span 0.556 1.0 t $ \

\\

rad '.24 _ _

)))

0 (b) Crossplot specific .6

.2

.4 r/f

.6

.8

1.0

-_

r/f =0. 75 _flap span for a

of (a) to provide flap configuration

variation of loading coefficient with extending from _?f of 0.1 to 0.75.

r/f 0.1 L
I

,,ctu.,,,ao.o.n l
J

.4 , rad .2

-!

0 (c)

.2

.4

.6

.8 (from

1.0 (b)) for flap configuration

Variation of spanwise loading coefficient extending from Vf = 0.1 to 0, 75, Sketches condition. showing reduction

Figure 4.14.1-3. specific design 2O8

of spanwise

loading

design

charts H-646

to

[I

= :

= : ......

A'q_ 0.2

1.0 0

.8O

.60

_ Equation (4.14.1-14) / ! \ \ \\/-\ k

\,.

.4O -/

// / /

Equatior, (4.14.1-14)

.2O --,---- Tabbedsection

.2

.4 _7

.5

.8

1.0

Figure for

4.14. stations

i-4. Sketch of typical across semispan.

variation

of chordwise

center-of-pressure

location

H-646

2O9

.8

.6

>20

(Xcp) b .4 Ch

.2

.4 cf Ch

.6

.8

1.0

Figure ratio

4.14.1-5. (ref. 31).

Variation

of section-basic-loading

center

of pressure

with

flap-chord

210

H-646

cf
Ch. 10 Zlcmf -.2

-.4 0 10 20 30 5f, deg 40 50 60 10

Figure 4.14.1-6. Effect on section incremental data (ref. 1).

of plain-flap deflection and flap-chord-to-wing-chord pitching moment. Based on unpowered-model

ratio wind-tunnel

- From figure

ACmf

-.2

-/Liftingline theory
-.4

10

20

30 6f, deg

40

50

60

10

Figure 4.14.1-7. moment calculated

Comparison of effect of plain-flap deflection on section pitching by lifting-line theory with empirically determined effects from

figure

4.14.1-5

for

cf -Ch

= 0.18.

H-646

211

1.0

.8

.6 K .4

.2

.04

.08 Ay_

.12

.16

.20

Figure 4.14.1-8. Factor unflapped sections near

for estimation of section center-of-pressure end of flaps (ref. 31). Subsonic speeds.

location

for

212

H-646

.6

.5

.4

, per rad .3

.2

7/i =0 7 0 .I .2 .3 .4 .52y 77 =bh .6 .7 .8 .9 1.0

Figure

4.14.1-9. tail
of

Variation subject

of spanwise airplane. _A k

loading =4.81;

coefficient A_= 8.02

due ;

to tab

deflection

on

horizontal

X= 0.515.

H-646

213

.32

Wind-tunnel data _, `4 t, <> o o deg -14 -10 -5 0 4

.28
d ,4

timated Ch at tail stall, = -14

.24

CaIculated * Limit of linearity of tail lift-curve

.20
,4

,V r-/Section 4.14.1 \
\

slope (caIcu lated)

.16

,4

\
\ A\ \

Chh(f) 12 (referenced to tail area and tail mean aerodynamic chord) .08
Z_ Zl Zl

/1 \ -t

6e, deg -14 `4

A

-----'--10

"

.O4 0

5<>

<>

___ _u 0 _----0 0 0

--__-0

-.04
n [3 n El

._____---G---_'_o u
n

4o
[]

I
0 4

I
8 %, deg

1
12

I
16

I
20

Figure moment assumed 214

4.14.1-10. coefficients equivalent

Comparison

of calculated

and 5tab

wind-tunnel = 1.5;

determined wind-tunnel data

hingeat T_ = 0

of the horizontal to propeller-off

tail. -_e condition.

H-646

5.0

PREDICTION

OF

POWER-ON

AERODYNAMIC

CHARACTERISTICS

The effects of power from propeller operation are generally significant on the stability and control characteristics of an airplane. Unfortunately, because the propeller slipstream usually interacts with the flow around several of the airplane components, a number of separate effects must be accounted for. Although some of the effects have been accounted for by theoretical analysis, many are usually estimated by empirical methods.

Successful analytical methods were developed in reference 33 for estimating propeller forces normal to the thrust axis and the effects of slipstream on wing-fuselage characteristics. A successful empirical method was developed in reference 19 for estimating the change in wing lift due to the change in slipstream dynamic pressure on the immersed portion of the wing. Less success has been achieved in providing a general technique to predict the complex changes in flow at the tail. It appears that an empirical technique for predicting power effects on the tail is generally based on experimental data of single-engine airplanes of similar configurations. Attempts to apply the technique to other configurations require some prior knowledge (gained through experience) of the empirical corrections to be applied to the prediction techniques used. One of the more successful investigations to provide a semiempirical the problem of determining the effects of power on the tail contribution of single-engine monoplanes is reported in reference 34. Some effects elevator hinge moments are discussed in reference 35. approach to to the stability of power on

In the following sections, the effects of power on lift, pitching moments, drag, and elevator hinge moments are considered on the basis of methods presented in reference I which are, with some modifications, the methods of reference 19. The method of reference 19, in turn, utilizes the method of reference 33 and refines the method of reference 34. The procedures presented are applied to the subject airplane, sources of discrepancy are identified, and a modification is established for future guidance for similar aircraft. To facilitate the presentation of nomenclature in the discussion of power effects, immersed surface areas and propeller slipstream are defined in figures 5-1 and 5-2, respectively. Figure 5-1(a) provides surface area definitions for a single-engine airplane, and figure 5-1(b) provides definitions for a two-engine airplane (the subject airplane). These definitions are supplemented by written definitions in section 5.1-3.

H-646

215

5.1 Power Effects on Lift The effects of the propeller on the lift forces acting on the airplane may be divided into two groups, those due to the propeller forces and those due to the propeller slipstream. On this basis the lift of the airplane may be represented by
Propeller forces Propeller slipstream effects

\/
Wing Horizontal tail

/
CL = CLprop off + (ACL)T

\/

\
+ ( ACL h )A6th + _CLh)(Aeh)powe r

+ (AC L) Np + (AC L) A_ w + (AC L)Cp

where ACL) (ACL)N (ACL)A_ over the T p w is the is the is the of the is the of this lift lift component component in lift immersed in lift of the of the of the due propeller propeller thrust normal vector force, change slipstreams portion of the wing ep, due Np (fig. in dynamic

(5.1-1)

5-2) pressure

change wing

to power-induced in the propeller immersed from propeller

portion

A C L) _P angle of attack ure 5-2

change portion

to change in fig-

in

resulting

downwash,

shown

ACLh)A_h change in dynamic

is the

change

in lift at the tail

contribution due to power

of the

horizontal

tail

resulting

from

pressure

(ACLh) (Aeh)powe from change r in downwash

is the at the

change tail due

in lift

contribution

of the

horizontal

tail

resulting

to power on lift, the airplane will be considered followed by horizontal-tail effects included. This treatment is

In the following discussion of power effects initially on the basis of tail-off lift characteristics, contributions to lift with tail-fuselage interaction represented by the equation

_CLwfn)power

/
Direct propeller / force effects CL = [(CLwfn)prop off Propeller \ / stream slip-

\
effects \

(5.1-2)

216

H-646

5. I. I

Tail-Off The The

Lift Characteristics tail-off of the

With Power lift

On were is obtained considered from in section 4.5.

propeller-off, contribution

characteristics vector to lift

thrust

n(Tc/.ro,)s o
where n is the number of propellers

Tcs,o

(5.1.1-1)

T c/prop

=- Thrust/propeller

_s w
o_ T vector The following contribution of the propeller normal equation from reference 19: force to the lift is obtained from the is the angle of attack of the thrust axis relative to the free-stream velocity

nf(CN ) 5V.3 Sw
P

Olp (Sp/prOP)cos

_T

(5. i. 1-2)

whe re is the propeller is the inflow propeller factor from figure 5.1.1-1 at T c = 0, per radian given by

normal-force

parameter

= (CN_)p where K N is the proximated by normal-force factor obtained Na KN=80" 7

1+0.8

_-q

(5.1.1-3)

from

the

propeller

manufacturer

or ap-

(5.1.1-4) 0.3Rp where 0.3Rp at 0.3Rp H-646 (similar ratios have the same connotation) 217 is the ratio of the blade \Rp/0.6Rp width, bp, -\RP/0.9Rp to the propeller radius,

is the propeller normal-force derivative given in figure 5.1.1-2 KN=S 0.7 as a function of blade angle, fl,_ and type of propeller
_p is the local angle of attack of the propeller
0_ u

[(CN_)p]

plane

(fig.

5-2),

obtained

from

Up = c_T

as

(tw - _)

(5.1.1-5)

where
_u

is the _w o_o is the is the

upwash

gradient

at the

propeller, o_b + i w

obtained

from

figure

5.1.1-3

angle zero-lift is the

of attack angle area

of the of the of the

wing, wing propeller,

Sp/prop

disk

7rR2
P

The contribution of power to lift due to change in dynamic pressure mersed portion of the wing is obtained from the following equation from

on the imreference 19:

Aqw I/CLw_

(Si/prp)

(5.1.1-6)

where K 1 is an empirical effects aspect on the wing, ratio, A i, correlation obtained of the from parameter figure portion 5.1.1-4 of the for additional as a function wing (fig. 5-1) wing of lift due to the power and

Sw(Tc/prop) 8Rp2

immersed

is the immersed portion

increase of the

in dynamic wing: AC:Iw

pressure

due

to propeller

slipstream

on the

Sw (T c/prop) = (5.1.1-7) 7rRp 2 in the and 5-2, propeller from slipstream (per propeller)

q_o The is obtained, portion of the basis wing, Si, immersed 5-109)

on the

of figures

Si/PrP

= (bi/PrP)

ci

(5.1.

l-S)

218

H-646

whe re bi/pro and

!

=2JRp

2 - (z s-

Zw )2

(5.1. I-9)

z s =-Xp(_ with
O_U

b-

e u-

ep) +z T

(5.1.1-10)

-eu=
and

( w-do)

(5.i. 1-11)

(5.1.1-12)

The

de rivative

is given

by

8p a_p - C 1 + C 2 __,(CN_)p

(5.1.1-13)

where obtained

the

constants from equation

C 1 and (5.1.1-3). of power ep,

C2

are

obtained

from

figure

5.1.1-5

and

(CN_)p

is

The propeller

contribution downwash,

to lift

due from

to change

in angle

of attack

resulting

from

is obtained Aq w

(Si/prop) (A_)si_- Sw ,. (5. I. 1-14)

(ACL)ep

: n(1 + --)(CLo_ q+ --]Wpropoff

w
whe re
_D

and and

Si/pro

are

defined

by equations

(5.1.1-7)

and

(5.1.1-8),

respec-

tively,

Ep = (A_)Si whe re c was defined in equation (5.1.1-12) also be accounted for. The to occur at discrete angles of because the angle of attack 219 8u i - a--_ (5.1.1-15)

The contribution of power to the maximum lift must preceding contributions of power to lift were considered attack to be added to the power-off lift curve. However, H-646

for stall increases with power, dependingprimarily upon the ratio of immersed wing area to total wing area, an additional increase in power effect occurs at or near maximum lift dueto the increase in stall angle. This is illustrated in the following sketch:

"
C Lwfn

/Y/"

(AC_)P wer t
= (ACL) T + (ACL)Np + (ACL)Aqw + (ACL){p

/ Propeller

(aCLmax)prop off

off

a b

The from the

increment following

in maximum empirical

lift equation

due

to the

propeller 1):

power,

ACLmax,

is obtained

(from

ref.

ACLmax

= K (ACL)"

(5.1.1-16) p owe r

whe re
i

CL)powe angle

is the

increment

in tail-off

lift

due

to power

at propeller-off,

maxi-

mum-lift

of attack for maximum lift due to power, to total wing area, obtained from a function of the figure 5.1.1-6 ratio of total

K is a correction immersed wing area

The complete power-on lift curve is constructed of the power-on curve, (b) drawing a horizontal line mum lift coefficient, and (c) translating the nonlinear curve to a tangency with (a) and (b). This construction lift curve but also fixes the power-on stall angle.

by: (a) plotting the linear portion representing the power-on maxipropeller-off portion of the lift not only shapes the power-on

By using the foregoing procedures, the tail-off lift characteristics of the subject airplane were determined and are summarized in tables 5.1.1-1 to 5.1.1-4 for three thrust conditions. In tables 5.1.1-1(c), 5.1.1-2(a)-3, 5.1.1-2(b), and 5.1.1-3, in which the power effects are computed as functions of angle of attack, _b, the tables

220

H-646

are separated into three parts: The first part provides for the calculation of power effects on lift from _b
= -4 (essentially zero lift) to o_ = 12 . b The results of these calculations for each thrust condition (table 5.1.1-3, column 7) are plotted as in figure 5.1.1-7 with the propeller-off, tail-off lift curves superimposed on the plots. These plots constitute the initial phase of construction plots for power-on curves and completion of the calculations. The (_CL)'power table The the With 5.1.1-4 ACLmax propeller-off power-on second part is an interjected in column ACLmax for due line item used only to obtain to be used power in

(summarized to obtain thus

5 of table to power power 5.1.1-7

5.1.1-3) for each

condition. to CLmax-

determined CLmax value and the

each

condition

is now added power-on CL

in figure linear

to obtain of power-on earlier

CLmax

portion

determined, section and

the power-on lift curves are as shown in figure 5.1.1-7.

completed

as explained

in this

With the power-on lift curves completed, the stall angle for condition is noted and used to extend the propeller-off, wing-alone propeller-off, tail-off lift curves to the power-on stall angles as ure 5.1.1-8. This figure is now used to provide the information in column 12 of table 5.1.1-20) and column 6 in table 5.1.1-3 to plete the third part of the tables. The power-on now in tabular llorizontal-Tail The due addition tail-off characteristics form ready for the Contribution of power alters to Lift the propeller-off lift contribution as summarized consideration of net

each power and in figrequired com-

are 5.1.2

in column 7 of table lift with tail on.

5.1.1-3

of the

horizontal

tail been

to power-induced Aqh , at the ratio, -=---q

_o

increments of downwash, (Aeh)power' and tail. The determination of the power-induced

dynamic-pressure dox_zm_ash has

particularly troublesome, more so for multiengine than single-engine aircraft because of the variations in size, shape, and position of the nacelles relative to the wing, which appear to provide more variables and interference with flow over the wing than in single-engine installations. The errors in predicting the power effects on the lift contribution of the horizontal tail for normal configurations are not too significant in determining the net lift of an airplane. They are, however, very significant in determining the pitching-moment characteristics. The power-induced change in downwash at the tail, (Aq_)power, may be estimated from figure 5.1.2-1 for single-engine airplanes and from figure 5. t. 2-2 for multiengine airplanes. These nomographs, developed in reference 19, are presented as functions and H-646 airplane of propeller-off geometry downwash involving vdng angle, area, (_h)prop Sw, s off' thrust radius, coefficient, Rp, and T'c/prop, distance 221

propeller

from thrust axis to the horizontal tail,

ZhT. _, may be

The power-induced changein dynamic-pressure ratio at the tail,

estimated from the nomograph in figure 5.1.2-3 with some reservation regarding the T_ = 0 condition. This nomograph, obtained from reference 1, was originally
developed the ordinate, in reference _Aqh. 19 and In the differs from the original the in the zero vertical displacement was alined of original T c/prop with Aq h the zero value of Sw . This is in contrast to the present 8Rp2# T c/prop Sw 8Rp 2 development, value of -A_h _o alinement of

4
the

with _o shift

the of the

zero

value

of

. that

No explanation the shift was

is given made

in reference with a

1 for

ordinate.

It is surmised

to conform

normally free-stream T_ = 0

accepted value conditions

assumption that the dynamic pressure at the tail in the absence of power effects (propeller off or and positive thrust conditions for which figure

is 90 percent of T_ = 0}. For provides for

5.1.2-3

values of dynamic-pressure propeller-off conditions, conditions be used. For 6tab of --Se the subject the the airplane

ratio less than it is recommended

the values determined in section 4.9.2 that the values obtained for propeller-off

with

the

tab

geared

to the tail

elevator to the lift

to deflect of the

in the

ratio may be

- 1.5, from

contribution

of the horizontal

airplane

obtained

following

relation:

(5.1.2-1) CLh(hf) where CLh(h0) # S h, qh/qx, ratio is the =1.0 of 1.0, obtained and 4.9.1-7; 5.1.2-2 dynamic-pressure ratio at the tail, obtained from 6e; figure downwash downwash 4.13.3-1 at the increment as a function tail with due of off, lift of the tail referenced to the tail area and a [(_ Lh(hf))Sh,qh/qoo ' = 1.0 Sh qh rop off Aq-h ] q_

dynamic-pressure C_h = ab (_h)props (AEh)powe _--(El_] \q_Ip from 222 figure rop off -(e-h)prop off' r,

off - (AEh)power from from figure figure

propeller to power,

obtained obtained

is the

propeller-off

4.9.1-7 H-646

is the
_O

power-induced

increment

in dynamic-pressure

ratio

at the

tail,

obtained zero or

from figure 5.1.2-3. When the increment positive thrust conditions, it is assumed

obtained to be zero

from

the

figure

is negative

for

The effect of the horizontal tail, including elevator (with geared tab) deflections, on the lift of the subject airplane with power on is summarized in column 14 of Calculated downwash characteristics table 5.1.2-1 as a function of _b' 5e, and T c. are compared with those determined from experimental data (ref. 2) in figure 5.1.2-4. The downwash and dynamic-pressure ratio of the horizontal tail, calculated in columns and 4 and column 11 of table 5.1.2-1(b), respectively, are shown in figure 5.1.2-5. The 5, was downwash determined the at the tail determined 2 for each from experimental setting Cm point on, data, versus considered, was equal to _b shown of plot the in figure c_ b by tail-on was on the 5.1.23

in reference

power tail-off

as a function

superimposing Cm plot which

wind-tunnel-determined 5e to the effects. 5e

included

At each Cm,

otb tail

downwash tail thus off.

considered Using mined,

to be equal

at which

C m,

this approach, to be within

the authors of reference 2 considered the downwash, 1 of the correct value at the high angles of attack. of the experimentally of attack for TP = 0 c curves, accurate necessary correlation later. This calculated determined is believed 5e), values downwash, to be within for for t Tc = 0 t T c = 0.

deter-

Considering lated downwash shown later, the thus and

the accuracy at high angle pitching-moment implying it was

the calcu1 . As is show good

Cm = f(_b, calculated to reduce

correlation, i T c -- 0.20

fairly found

At total due

0.44,

the increment

of downwash

to power by 40 percent to achieve of (_b and 5e), as is discussed power had only (fig. 5. i. 2-5). 5.1.3 a slight effect

in pitching-moment 40-percent decrease dynamic-pressure

curves (as a function in downwash due to ratio at the tail

on the

Net Characteristics

of the Subject

Airplane column for At total (discussed 16 of table 5.1.2-1(b)) total T'c = 0, 0.20, t T c = 0.20 in the last and paragraph 0.44, and wind0.44 in

A comparison tunnel-determined figure reduction section) 5.1.3-1

of the calculated (from (ref. 2) lift characteristics shows good correlation.

and

a 40-percent of the previous

in downwash improved the

due to power correlation.

effects

It should be noted that the lift contributions onto the body due to the angle of attack

of the tail include tail-lift carryover of the tail (5 e = 0 ) and elevator de-

flection as discussed in sections 4.10(a) and 4.13-1, respectively. These calculated tail-lift carryover effects for the tail-body configuration of the subject airplane are considered to be excessive, as shown in section 4.11 and section 4.13.4, and should H-646 223

be neglected for this tail-body configuration. Neglect of these carryover effects have an insignificant influence on the lift curves of figure 5.1.3-1 but not on the pitching-moment curves (as was shown in section 4.13.4). 5.1.4 A Ai Symbols wing aspect the aspect ratio ratio of the portion of the wing i_-nmersed 5 i / prop 5i span of the total portion of the slipstreams of the propellers, bi/prop span of the portion of the stream of one propeller, wing ft wing immersed ft immersed in the

would

in

slipstream

of one propeller,

in the

slip-

(bi) e

span of the exposed portions of the wing panels immersed in the propeller slipstream of a singleengine airplane, ft blade factors p, width used obtained of the propeller, ft the propeller downwash,

bp C 1,C 2

in determining from figure

5.1.1-5

CL CLh (hf)

lift net

coefficient lift 5e, coefficient and 5ta b, of the with horizontal tail due to ah, effects

tail-fuselage to the wing CLh(hf),

interaction area to the

included, net lift

referenced

Sh,

=1.0

coefficient,

referenced

horizontal-tail area and a dynamic-pressure at the tail equal to 1.0 maximum lift lift lift coefficient at propeller-off conditions

ratio

CLmax CLprop (CLw)prop off off'(CLwfn)prop off

coefficient coefficient configuration, conditions coefficient on conditions,

of the wing alone and the tail-off respectively, at propeller-off

CLwf n

lift

of the

tail-off

configuration

at powerr

(CLwfn)pro lift

p off + (ACLwfn)powe

C Lwfn ) max 224

tail-off

maximum

coefficient H-646

ACLmax (ACL) Np

increment increment

of maximum of lift

lift

coefficient due force,

due

to power component 5-2)

coefficient normal

to the lift Np (fig.

of the propeller

( Gower

increment of the tail-off lift propeller-off maximum-lift

due to power at the angle of attack

increment of lift coefficient due to the power-induced change in dynamic pressure over the portion of the wing immersed in the propeller slipstreams ACL)T increment propeller increment of attack, of the peller of lift coefficient thrust vector of lift coefficient from wing due to the lift-component

due to the change propeller immersed downwash, in the

in angle _p, pro-

resulting

portions of the slipstreams

increment of horizontal-tail coefficient resulting from change in dynamic pressure increment of horizontal-tail coefficient resulting from in downwash at the tail increment of tail-off lift

contribution to the lift the power-induced at the tail contribution to the the power-induced lift change

AC Lh) (A Ch)P ower

(A w n),owor
Cm

coefficient alone

due

to power

lift-curve slope of the wing conditions, per deg pitching-moment normal-force propeller coefficient derivative disk area,

at propeller-off

of the per tad derivative factor,

propeller

based

on the

reference normal-force having a normal-force per rad mean aerodynamic chord

of a propeller K N, equal to 80.7,

mean aerodynamic immersed in the and 5-1 (b)), ft

chord of the portion propeller slipstream

of the wing (figs. 5-1(a)

(Cri)

root chord of the exposed portion of the immersed in the propeller slipstream engine airplane, ft

wing panel of a single-

H-646

225

ct i

tip chord of the portion propeller slipstream,

of the wing ft

immersed

in the

propeller inflow factor, ratio force coefficient at power-on conditions iT incidence of the axis, deg incidence deg correction correlation power propeller
!

of the propeller to power-off

normal(T_ = 0)

thrust

axis

relative

to the

X-body

iw

of the

wing

relative

to the

X-body

axis,

K K1

factor

for

maximum

lift

due

to power lift due to

parameter effects on the normal-force

for additional wing factor

wing

KN lh,1 h

distance from the center of gravity and the quarter chord of the mean aerodynamic chord of the immersed portion of the wing, respectively, to the quarter chord of the horizontal-tail mean aerodynamic chord, ft normal force of a propeller, lb

number free-stream

of propellers dynamic pressure, lb/sq ft

\qL

]prop

off

dynamic pressure at the horizontal tail for and propeller-off conditions, respectively, ratio of the free-stream dynamic pressure

power-on as a

Aq h

Aq w

increment of power-induced dynamic pressure acting on the horizontal tail and the portions of the wing immersed in the propeller slipstream, respectively, as a ratio of the free-stream dynamic pressure propeller horizontal-tail radius, and ft wing area, respectively, sq ft

%
Sh, Sw S i, Sh i

area of the portions of the wing and horizontal tail, respectively, immersed in the propeller slipstreams (fig. 5-1(b)), sq ft

226

H-646

Shi/prop

horizontal-tail one propeller,

area immersed sq ft

in the

slipstream

of

Si/prop

wing area petler, disk thrust T area

immersed sq ft

in the

slipstream

of one

pro-

Sp/prop T , Tc =

of one propeller, propellers, lb

sq ft

of the

'

T e/prop V X b , Zb

thrust airspeed, x-

coefficient ft/sec

due

to one propeller

and z-coordinate body-axes system

axis,

respectively,

of the

Xp, x_

distance from the center of gravity and the quarter chord of the mean aerodynamic chord of the immersed portion of the wing, respectively, to the propeller, positive forward, ft distance from the aerodynamic center aerodynamic chord of the immersed wing area to the center of gravity, forward, in. or ft of the mean portion of the positive

Xw

Y5 i

lateral distance from the root chord of the exposed portion of an immersed wing panel on a singleengine airplane to the mean aerodynamic chord of the immersed panel, ft distance, parallel to the Z-body axis, from the X-body axis to the quarter chord of the horizontaltail mean aerodynamic chord, positive down, ft effective distance, parallel to the Z-body axis, from the quarter chord of the horizontal-tail mean aerodynamic chord to the centerline of the propeller slipstream, positive down, ft distance, parallel to the Z-body axis, from the thrust axis to the quarter chord of the horizontaltail mean aerodynamic chord, positive down, ft

zh

Zhef f

Zh T

H-646

227

Z s

distance, parallel to the Z-body axis, from the X-body axis to the centerline of the propeller slipstream at the longitudinal station of the quarter chord of the mean aerodynamic chord of the immersed portion of the wing, positive down, ft distance, X-body parallel to the Z-body axis to the thrust axis, axis, from the positive down,

zT

ft

Zw

distance, parallel to the Z-body axis, from the X-body axis to the quarter chord of the mean aerodynamic chord of the immersed portion of the wing, positive down, ft angle airplane deg of attack, angle deg of attack relative to the X-body axis,

( _C Lmax)prop

off

angle of attack, deg angle of attack effect of the angle Of attack

ab,

at stall

with

the

propellers

off,

Ot

of the propeller plane, wing upwash, deg of the of the thrust wing axis, relative deg

includes

the

angle of attack deg

S o

to its

chord

line,

angle its

of attack of the wing chord line, deg

zero-lift

line

relative

to

change in angle of attack of the portion immersed in the propeller slipstream propeller, deg
!

of the wing due to the

propeller
6 e

blade

angle

at 0.75Rp, deg

deg

elevator tab off + (Aeh)power increment power,

deflection, deg

5tab eh = (_-h)props (A_h)powe r

deflection,

of downwash deg at the obtained

at the horizontal

tail

due

to

(_h) props 228 off

average downwash propellers off,

horizontal tail from section

with the 4.9.1, deg H-646

epower

on

downwash deg downwash downwash upwash upwash

at the

horizontal

tail

for

power-on

conditions,

Ep

angle gradient angle gradient

behind

the

propeller, the propeller deg

deg

ao_
- Cu DEU

behind

at the

propeller, propeller

aoz
_e

at the

taper ratio of the exposed portion of the wing panel on a single-engine airplane

immersed (fig. 5-1(a))

H-646

229

TABLE LIFT DUE TO DIRECT ACTION

5.1.1-1 OF THE PROPELLER FORCES

(a)

Contribution

of thrust
/

vector

to lift,

(ACL)

(ACL) s)-i Symbol

n

T = n(T c/prop)

sin

ce T

Description Number of propellers Thrust/propeller

Magnitude "2 As o _b selected

T _/prop

_Sw
Incidence _b + IT' of thrust deg line to reh_renee Xb-axis, (leg

iT

(a)2 T _,/prop o .10 .22 n(Tte/prop) o .20 .44 0 20 44 sin c_b sin a b (AC L) T 1

IOn basis of S w = 178 sq ft.

(b)

Contribution

of propeller

normal ffp

force,

(AC L) Np

(Sp/prop) Sw cos (_'T

(ACL)Np (b)-i Symbol llp Sp/prop SVC Propeller Propeller radius, disk area, ft nRp 2,

nf{CN_)p

57.3

Description

Reference Table 3-1 3.0

Ma grd t ude

sq ft with wind-tunnel Table 3-1

2g. 27 per 178

prolxqler

Reference wing area for and flight data, sq ft r op) Power 8Rp 2 parameter for

comparison

S w ( T c/p

obtaining

correlation

ftmetions Figure _Rp 2 5. l. l-1

2.47(T

_/l)rop)

Sw(Tc/prop) Propeller inflow factor, function of Depends on Tc"Pro p

Width

of propeller

blade,

ft

Manufaclurer

0.4IG .492 ,409 97.7

at 0.3Rp at .6 Rp at 9 Rp

9(;9

--

Normal-force

factor,

2(;2k_}P/0.3Rp

+-

- t_p

0. GRp

Equatiol] (5. 1.1-4)

\Rp]0.9Rp function parameter, of V (rps)2Rp function and of _t

P l'opkl] S ion

j;/

Propeller blade angle, T c' deg Propeller normal-foree

As 1-2

selccted on [_ t

group Figure

5.1.

l)eponds

(c%

Propeller normal-force

derivative,

Equa tion (5, 1. I-:1)

,) IqN _0.7

230

H-646

TABLE (b)-t Symbol 5i Effeeti_e Distance chord (Concluded) De se ription of immersed forward wing area,

5.1.1-1

(Conclu(led)

Re fe renee ft point of c i, ft Figure Figure , .............. Table Figure 3.2-1 5. ]. I-3 3-1 t. 2-1 5-1(b) 5-2

Magnitude 5.50 6, 0

.% x_
-..-et A o(i 1

of propeller

of quarter-chord

........................................................ Aspect Upwash Angle Wing Angle Angle ratio of _ring at propeller (ff wing angle relative to to wing wing chord, (leg (_b + iw, deg

1.09 7.5 .195 '_b + 2 -2 1b

-ggffw GO c_T eCp (b) -2

gradient of attack zero-lift of attack of attack

Table Tahle

relative line,

chord, (leg 0u - _

(if thrust of propeller

eel) + iT, piano, efT

(n'v," - eye),

(leg

Equation

(5. 1. 1-5)

1,20_

b _ .78

T_/prop

@
Sw (Tc</prop) figure 8Rp 2 2.47(T_./prop)

@
f, 5. 1. I-1 as

13(
in wind-tunnel of the subject plane, ('leg 11. _ 19.3 21.5 airtest

o
(CN a ) 1 PJKN: figure 80. 7'

(CNr3p = 1.17 0.0936 .1147 1217 (_ (ACL}Np 0. 00554 0.000519(l.2_ .000756(1.2_, .000924(1.2n, for

@
propellers two @(6_ _p cos cos cos cos _'1) _b ceb c_b

5.1.1-2 0. 080 .098 . 104

0 . 10 .22 .247 .543

1.00 1, 19 1.37

b + 0.78} b + . 78) b + .78)

(c)

Summary

of lift

due

to direel

action

of propeller

forces

O
.......... ,

@
......

@
, ...... Table

5. l.l-l(b)-I Table

5.1.1-10)-2 TabIe (ACL)Np (ACL)T= T_(_) # T c o o. 2 -0. 0140 0.44 -0. 0309 -. 015,t 0 ,0070 0.0140 .0209 (). 0278 .0347 II. 04 16 0.0477 0.0477 .(M_7 .... . 015-t 0.0207 .0460 O. 0[;12 .0761 I). 0915 0.1049 0.10.I9 .1072 O. 1091 0

5.1.1-1('o)-2 = el (_)( _ # T_ (ACL)

............ T + (ACL)Np = (_ +(_

sin _b _b' deg sin@

cos

qb

O_p, deg 1.2 I_)

cos@

+0.78

0.000519 -0.00207 -.000_3 0.001)42 .0016[; O. 00290 ,004 13 0.00535 .006_ 0.00772 0.00_72 0.00_72 ....... .............

0.2 I 0.4_
c 1 0.000756 -0.00302 -.00121 0.00060 .00242 0, 00422 .00601 0.00779 .0n052 O.0tl2,l 0.01270 0,01270 .o129_ 0.00092l -0.00369 -.0014_ 0.00074 .0029_; O. 00511; .00735 0.00952 .01165 0.01371 0.01552 !).01552 .0t5_(; 0.01620 0 -0.0021)7 -. 000_3 0. 0004 2 . oo 16(; o. 00290 .00413 0. 00535 00(;5t 0. 00772 0.00372 o. 00a72 ....... ............

# T e 0.2 0.01702 -. 00_21 0. 00060 . (10942 0. (11 _22 .02691 0. 03559 .04423 o. I}52S t 0, 00040 0. o6o,1o .0616_ 0 44 -0.0345!) .01(;ss 0. 00071 .01S:l[; 0.035'.1; .053:15 0. 07072 . 0_0.3 0, 10524 0. 12042 0.120-12 .1230(; o. 12560

t -2 0 2 4 6 8 l0 12 a13._ bl3._ Cl,t.1 d14.4

0.069_ -.0349 0 .0349 0.0_9_ .IO45 0.1392 .1736 0.2079 0.23B5 0.23S5 .2t36 0.2187

0.9976 .9994 1.000 .9994 0.9970 .9945 0.9903 .9g, t_ I).97_1 0.971l 0.9711 .9699 0.9686

-4.0 -I.6 0.8 3.2 5.6

0 0 0 0 0 0

-. 0070

10.4 12.8 15.2 17.3 17.3 17.7 I_.l

0 0 0 o 0

aS(all angle for t,afm(CLwf_ax prope0et off (u_d only to obtain (CI. x -maxt _ po'weron ). bcd Stall angles for tail-off configuration at T c = O, 0.20, 0.44, respectively.

H-646

231

TABLE WING-LIFT INCREMENTS DUE TO

5. I. I-2 PROPELLER SLIPSTREAM EFFECTS

(a)

Wing-lift

increments

due

to change of the wing,

In dynamic (ACLIA_w

pressure

on

Immersed

portion

Aq w (ACL)Aqw (a)-i Symbol (Ct'w)prop off C L Sw of wing = 172.3 alon( sqlt, (The was C L Description curve of figure to 4.2-i(a), Sw based fiin stall = nKl q--_-(CLw)prop off

Si/prop Sw

Reference on Figure 5. i. 1-8

Magnitude Functlon of fib

re-referenced

= 178 sq

figure was

5. I. i-7 and

Its nonlinear its linear )

portion portion,

approaching to the

translated,

along

stall angles

for power-on n SW Rp Tic/prop Number Reference flight Propeller Net thrust

conditions.

of propellers wing data, sq radius, perpropeller area ft ft Table 3-1 for comparison _2th x_tnd-tunnel and Table 3-1

2 178 3,0 As selected

Aqw Change wing, in dynamic-pressure Sw(T_/prop) ratio on immersed portion of Equation (5. l. 1-7) Function of (T_,/prop)

rmp2
Sw(Ttc/prop) Power parameter for obtaining correlating functions 2.47(T'/prop)

C 1 C2

Factor Factor Propeller

for for

determining determining normal-force

propeller propeller derivative

down,_-ash, dowr,,_sh,

ep ep

Figure Figure Table

5. I. I-5 5, I. I-5 5. i. l-l(b)-2

Function Function Function

of

(T_,/prop)

of (T_/prop) of (T_/prop)

(%;
OC_p C_p Cp

C 1 + C2 (CNc_)p Angle of attack of propeller plane, deg 0_p Propeller downwash behind propeller, Oc u _ Vp, deg

Equation Table

(5. I. 1-13)

Function 1.2c_ f(c_ b, b +

of (T_/prop) . 78

5. I. l-l(c) (5. I. 1-12)

Equation

Tc/prop)

-u

Wing Distance Distance Xp 57.3 Distance mean

upwash from from (c_b from

at

propeller quarter Xb-axis

plane. chord to + z T, to chord of thrust ft

- _ _i to axis

(_w

_o),

deg ft ft

Table Figure Figure Equation

5.1, 5-2 5-2

1-1(b)-i

0.2c_ 6.0 -. 869

b + 0.78

x;
zT zs zW

propeller, at propeller,

Cu - p) Xb-axis

(5.1.1-10) 5-2

f(_b' -. 020

T "./prop)

quarter-chord

immersed

wing

Figure

aerodynamic from wing

zs

- ZW

Distance mersed chord

centerline slipstream mean aerodynamic

to chord

quarter-chord at the quarter

im-

Figure

5-2

f(_l),

Tc/PrP)

bi/prop 5i A i

2 _IRp2 - (zs - Zw) , a 2

Effective (bi/prop) 5t immersed mean chord, ft

Fig-are 5-1(a) Figure Figure 5-1(b) 5- l(a) 5.1. 1-4

f(_b, 5,5 hi/prop) 5.5 f(ki,

T'e/'prp)

Kl

Correlation

parameter

for

added

lift

due

to

power

Figure

,J Ic

prop)

Si/Prop

Immersed

wing

area

per

propeller.

(bi/prop)_

i,

sq

ft

Figure

5-1(a)

5.5(bi/Pr.p)

232

H-646

'i
--,_-,z.,_.,_.,_,z
d ii i fc,l

,,

.... ,__ _

._71= ,

_ _

',

'i
|
i

'_-'-i-: ....... _
@
,r{." N

"'_-. .........

? ' ?'71'7"7177'7,'?1VY,'7

' i "' f.I

"f. I"; el':l :;I/% :;

"'_="d

"'d

"

be

.,4,-:

_d

,J_'

ddld

._

d-"

_g

"d

"'d

"d.-:l_l

41.4 ;I

_i =..a _ ,"d "',_-;'_;_; . " '

ff,_ ? Z

"'d

"d

"

"'d'd'--'

"'

, .d

_{
, ,i . .i , .i , .i ,i .a .!

_ I_._

"

"

"W

"'d

"'d

"'---'"

_'d

I'

',

s:9
Z

I I I

i
n

....

H-646

233

TABLE (b) Wing-lift increments due to change tn

5.1. angle

1-2

(Concluded) induced by propeller dox_-nwash. (ACL) tp

of attack

(ACL)cp

- n -

q_]

(CLa)w

prop

off

(Aa)si

St/pro Sw

(b)-t
Symbol a Sw Si Ratio Aqw Change in dynamic-pressure ratio on immersed wing Table 5.1. I-2(a)-2 f (T_/prop) .0759 0735 referenced referenced to to Sw Sw = = 172.3 178 sq sq ft ft of immersed wing area per propeller to total area Table 5.1.1-2(a)-3 f(_b' Tc/PrP) Number Reference flight of propellers for comparison with wind-tunnel and Table 3-1 Description Reference 2 178 Magnitude

,*ffng area data. sq ft

Lift-curve (C L)wprop off

slope

of wing

referenced

to

Sw

178

sq

ft

Table

4.2-1

Cp 9U Oa

Propeller

do_mwash

behind

propeller,

deg

Table

5. I. 1-2(a)-3

f ((_b' 0. 195 Cp 1.20

Tc/prp)

Upwash Cp

gradient

at

propeller

Figure

5.1.1-3

(Aa)si

_u

Equation

(5.1.

t-151

(ACL). (b)-2

p = -O. 123(p

Aqv._ + _------)

Sf/prop _,

referenced

to

S w = 178

sq

ft

@
......... Table

@
5.1.1-2(a)-3, column 4 Table

@
5.1.1-2(a)-2, column 7 Aq w 1 +-q_o Table

@
5.1.1-2(a)-3, column 10 St/prop (ACL)p Sw / T c/prop 0.22 2.385 2. 385 2,385 2.3_5 2.3_5 2.385 2.385 2. 385 2.385 2.385 2.385 2.3_5 0 0.1834 , 1805 0.17f_2 .1706 0. 1633 .1541 O. l t2_, . 12_g 0.11i0 0.0905 0.0905 ...... ............. 0.10 0.1827 .1801 0.1765 .1721 0.1665 .1598 0. t51S .1423 0.1309 0.1190 o.1190 .1165 0.22 0.1822 .179_ 0.1767 .1728 0.168] .1625 0.1559 .1478 0.1393 0.1302 o. 1302 .1283 0.1264 0 0.00211 .00083 -0.00041 -.00157 -0.00263 -.00355 -0.00428 .0047.t -0.0OA86 -0.00451 -0.00451 ......... ................. Table

5.1.1-2 (b) - 1

Cp, c_b, deg

deg

= -0. , t r c 0,20 0.02910 .0_14_ -0.00561 -.02193 -0.03713 -.0509t -0.06257 -.07254 -0.07921 -0.0_199 -0.0_199 .08212

123

(_)(_)(_

/ T c/prop 0 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 -0. -. 0936 0374 0. t0 -0.7948 -. 3179 0.1590 .6358 1.1127 1.5896 2.0665 2. 5434 0.22 -1.1554 -.4634 0.2317 .9267 1.62l,_ 2.316_ 3.0118 3. 7069 0 1.000 1. 000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1. 0[)0

/ T c/prop 0.10 1.6295 1. 6295 1.6295 1.6295 1.6295 1. 6295 1.6295 1 . 62,(15 1.6295 1.6295 1.6295 1.6295

0.44 0.06192 .02444 -0.0120 -.04700 -0.08000 -.I1044 -0.13774 -.16072 -0. i7990

0.0187 .0749 0.1310 .1872 0.2434 .2995

12
a13,8 b13.8 c14.1

o.3557
0.4048 0..t048 ......

3.0202 4.4019 1.000

3.,t375 3.4375 3.5170 5.010i 5.0101 5.1259 1.000 1.000 .....

-0.19136 -0.19136 -.19293 0.19437

_14.4
tIStall an_e b,c,dstall

.............
for (CLwfn)max for tail*ff propefler conflgumtmn

5.2,t1_ ............
of (u_d at total o_y ,o obtain (C L _ x -max/power rt'_tNely.

_.3_5
on ).

an#_

Tg = 0, 0.20, 0.44,

234

H-646

II

pl

,<..,

Z 0

bl

2
r, _ @ + ........

C
_ @ + _& "'+
o ,-I oo

"'B
_

" +

"

t
i

rO

II

H-646

235

:
O I I

@
il

,.+
I

_
A C_ O0

+--+
O ,'_ CO

lJ

'+"+

II

+
P ,,:.--_
,-.3

[-,
O OCq

,.-,
0 ,-_ c'xl

i
o l= +:,.< ,m

:m T
.,_.;

,:d

E.-,
v I r-.<

+ ..,< [.-.+

+'-'I_3
+.
_t O C::l

i
_

,....; ,+,'+;
,

L_ t'-- O0 U'_ Lr'J +-._ t_ O0 ,_

_t

_.,_, ,o_''_

r.)

N
I I I l

I I _._

OOC,

236

H'646

TABLE EFFECT OF ELEVATOR

5. t. 2-I ON LIFT WITII POWER ON

DEFI,ECTfON

(a)
Symbol S w S h ZhT llp Zh T Reference llorizontal-tall Vertical Propeller distance radius, wing area, area, from ft Description sq sq ft ft thrust axis to

prop off
Reference Table Table 2-1 3.2-1 5-2 .q-1 178 :]2.5 -. 3.0 80 Magmilude

horizontal

tail,

ft

Figure Table

2%
.p Sw(2 c/Prop} A Rp 2

Parameter

for

determining

(A(h)powe

-0.

133

Thrust

aqh
q_

parameter

for

determining

(Aeh)powe

and

, 2.47(T

i c/Prop)

(_h)props

off

Downwash

at

horizontal

tatl

with

propellers

off,

(leg

Figure

4.9.1-7

Function [Zh T

of

_b

_wCP_/prop) _Rp2 off)

(A(h)powe

Downwash

Increment

at horizontal

fail due

to power,

deg

Figure

5.1.2-2 i_2R---p' (Thlprop_

CYb - eu Sh 1 Sh i

- ep

Inclination

of

slipstream X-bod_/ axis horizontal-tail

centerline area, A,]h

behind sq ft

propeller

Table
(,oIueq

5.
ii

1.1-2(a}-3,
5

Variable 15.26

relative to Total immersed

Figure

5-1(b)

Parameter S h

for

determining-

.470

zs

Vertical cente wlng, Vertical ft Distance wing

distance riine at

from ci _-station

X-body of

axis immersed

to

slipstream portion of

Table

5.

l.I-2(a)-_, 6

Variable

column

zh

as shown distance

In figure 5-2 from X-body

axis 5i _--

to

horizontal

tail,

Figure

5-2

1.67

along ares to

X-ho(ly Ch "T- ' fi from

a:ds

from

of immersed

Figure

5-2

i 3.76

Zhef

Vertical

distance

(:h _-

to

slipstream

ceuterline,

Figure

5-2

V a rl able

z;
Zhef f _ za - _ (A(h)po_er [Ceb ] u - zh p - (_-h)prop s uff -

zs

- 0.241

[o_ b

(u

rp

- (-h)props

off

{A, h)powe Aq h

Jrj *

l. 67 /Zhef f Sw(T _,'prop}

q_

Dynamic-pressure power as a ratio

Increment at horizontal of free-stream dynamic

tail due pressure

to

Figure

5.

1.2-3

Shi

(l'

q___)p rop -('Lh off

Propeller-off tail as C L of

ratio

dynamic-pressure of free-stream tail reference(] rail() of on 1.0

ratio dynamic to tail

at

horizontal pressure area and a

Figure

9.

l-7

Funciion

of

(h I))' S h , _ q _

=1.0

horizontal

Vigure

4.13.3-1

fl.h.6e)

dynamle-pregsure Tall-off Sw C L = 178 sq with ft

CLwfn

power

referenced

to

Tabh, column

5.1.1-3, 7

Variable

H-646

237

4_

A_

_Z

238

H-646

i, o,i

_4

rT

&o

H-646

239

6
,f_: _,f _._ dg -_ .. _ ,"
i

e
II

o,+

-,,_

_,_i

_i

_-

o _ ,_1,o, d" _
d_

_"

d"

d"

d'_"

,-t

.....

' d"

_,'

,.,.."

d ,'

_,..:

.4._

2-:

-_&

dM

,4_j
z
1

_
2 II

g
,_i

_q _
I

'

g
_T

o_

.....

,..}_ o_ o

ii I1 _1 I

.n

_,_

_,

_i

.s

240

H-646

/--Centerline _ ///_ / Rp \l I I/ /

of propeller In YZ-plane at wing qua rter-chord mean aerodynamic chord of immersed portion of wing ffig. 5-2)

slipstream "krOutline \ of slipstream tube

b i =24Rp

2 - (Zs - Zw)2

X _'ie -

ct i (Cri) e

A e ro_na:ei:s eCd t er -_ n

I_
I

1 _(b4](i
/

+ 2_,ie._
+ +

wing area =c.il4

,I_

_.._-_

-(Cr i)

e 1

ci=_

2 (Cri)e

Xie _'ie ] + Xie

Si = bi_i _- Center of Exposedportion of J"l I gravity bi Ai=_

immersed area_

__

,..

(a) Figure H-646 5-1. Definition

Single-engine for

airplane, of immersed wing areas. 241

sketches

calculation

.w

A w

I,.,...

i,,,-

242

H-646

11

>

_d
II
_ e"-

il
t-"

1 N

,d
II
X

II
X

I
t_

II

g-

i--.

H-646

243

2.0

1.8

1.6

1,4

--

.2

--

/
1,0--

.6
-.2

r-_--

.2

.4

.6

.8
#

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2.0

SwQ c/prop) 8Rp2

Figure

5.1.1-1.

Propeller

inflow

factor

(ref.

33).

244

H-646

.5

.4 Counter rotation .3 Number of blades .2 Single rotation

=80.7

.1

10

20

30 _'at 0.75 radius,

40 deg (ref. 33).

50

5O

Figure

5.1.1-2.

Propeller

normal-force

parameter I

1.5

Figure H-646

5.1.1-3.

Upwash

gradient

at plane

of symmetry

for

unswept

wings

(ref.

1). 245

Ai

1.5

.6 8

K1

1.2 Figure power 246 5.1.1-4. (ref. 19). tt-646 Correlation parameter for additional wing lift due to propeller

1.0 CI .8
f

J
CI or C 2

.6 j
---_-______

_-PC2 _--_-_p -CI+_(CNO)p

C2

I0

12

14

16

18

20

Sw ffc/prop) 8Rp 2
Figure 5. i. 1-5.

Factors

for determining

propeller

downwash

(ref.

19),

2.2

2.0

1.8

1.6

1.4
/ / /

/
J J J J I

1.2

.I

.2

.3 Si Sw

.4

.5

.6

Figure H-646

5. i. 1-6.

Correction

factor

for

maximum

lift

due

to power

(ref.

i). 247

,.....4

;
II
O O) 9

,.Q

_o

;
II

,.o
v

_<_

0_.._

_2

"_
Ok_

ZIi I

L. OO

I
,,O

I
xj O

I
OO

LO

IZl

_ cd _o
A

.*.-

OO

-_

II

248

H-646

_0.44 D.20

1.0

(C Lwfn)pro p off (Sw = 178 sq ft)

Tc

.0.44 0.20

(c "prop Lw

off

(Sw = 178 sq ft)

o/
-4 0

L
4

i
8

l
12

J
16 airplane angles. for wing (Power-on alone

ab, deg Figure 5.1.1-8. Propeller-off lift characteristics of subject and tail-off conditions with stall extended to power-on stall stall angles obtained from fig. 5.1.1-7.) H-646

249

_.,_ \
"\

1 \ l

I o

i\ \\

\
\

\
\

\ \

"\\

\.\

\\\
o

L i
i

0_,_

_/
I
i

i_l_
i

i
"

"S

ll_l f"

IN i

I ("_1 ......

250

H-646

H-646

251

Sh__i
1.0 .8 .6 Sh , ,2
I

\
!

:A t

_m

-?x

1.6

1.2

.8

Sw(T _:/prop)
8Rp 2

.4

_0
!

2_
I
I _ L

/ J
__ L

..... .8 l_ h __ z ell

1.1/
!

// // /,/ /

77_Z
t l.Z_ /]
q

1.0 7
/

-- Rp
1.2

I--f
L

.9 7

7/'//

.8_ 7 __

7 / / / /

i
i

.7_
.6_ /

Z/l/

zz
_k

1.6

L
..... 2.0

--=_ .... _ _L

oi _ i"4/.L L=L
Effect of propeller (ref. 1). power on the

.2_

I
dynamic-pressure ratio at the H-646

Figure 5.1.2-3 horizontal tail 252

1
1

t
I

12--

T c =0 and propellers off

/

10 / / / //

/ Calculated ----Wind tunnel

J
f t"/ //
f/ i

(_Eh)powe r, deg

4 (AEh)powe r, deg 2
/t d i

/
/I

f J

0
-1

,
0

J
4 ab, de9

1
8

[
12

I
16

Figure 5.1.2-4. Comparison downwash at the horizontal

H-646

of calculated and tail of the subject

experimentally determined airplane at several power

(ref. 2) settings.
253

Original 12' -

calculation percent

(t_h)powe r reduced 40 Wind-tunnel data

T'c
0

10--

0 0.44

-j
i_'/
_7 fj

>d'_1

\///
,.,.-

/
)

6
J ;t J

7-

--

1.3
i

q_h.h 1.2

4=
1.1

1.0 -2

1
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

%, deg
Figure 5.1.2-5. Variation of calculated downwash and dynamic-pressure horizontal tail with airplane angle of attack and total thrust coefficient, wind-tunnel data for downwash at T_ = 0 and T_ -- 0.44.
254

ratio of including

H-646

o0
0 0_0^<3 _ , , o

_+
D

"_o

of> ,_ _

'T"T'

+++ ::
o00

I +o+
"_ t:i:::[

L_:__,

_
o Q 0

I
c

o +l_

I'
I I
H-646

g_ I I

255

5.2

Power

Effects

on Pitching

Moments

Power effects of propellers introduce increments of pitching moments due to direct action of the propeller forces offset from the center of gravity and propellerinduced slipstream effects on the wing, nacelles (or body), and the horizontal tail. Although all the increments of lift due to power (section 5. i) contribute to powerinduced increments of pitching moment, several additional contributions must be considered. These additional contributions include the propeller slipstream dynamicpressure The culations, effect on Cmo and nacelle (or body) free moments. as
effects Horizontal Wing Nacelles tail

pitching moments of the subject can be represented by

Propeller forces Propeller

airplane,
slipstream

considered

in the

following

cal-

i
Cm = (Cmwfn) k /propoff +/ACm_ ' ) T +/nCm_ k ] N p +/ACmo_ k

_ /------_r------x
]A_w+(ACm)wL+(ACm)np +[ACm) h +(i_mh(hf))props off]

(5.2-1a)

or (ACmwfn)power / \

(5.2-lb)

Cm=

(Cmwfn)

prop

off

+ (ACre)T

+( ACre

)Np

+(ACmo)

_w

+ (Acm)WL

+ (ACrn)rip

whe re C section ) is the propeller-off, tail-off pitching moment obtained from

mwfn 4.8.3

prop

off

(ACm) from the ACm peller

T center ) Np

is the

pitching

moment

due

to offset

(distance

zT

in fig.

5-2)

of thrust

of gravity is the force pitching from is the moment is the net effect on pitching moments due and w + (ACre) _pjdynamic :.pressure slipstream slipstream on nacelle free moments pressure and downto change in wing lift resulting on the effect moment center due to offset (distance Xp in fig. 5-2) of pro-

normal A Cm

of gravity slipstream dynamic-pressure increment on

)A qw

of propeller

zero-lift A from the

pitching Cm ) wL

propeller wing,

slipstream-induced = [(ACm)A_ effect net

angle-of-attack

changes

(ACm)wL ) is the

ACm ACre) wash 256

np

of propeller of propeller

h is the horizontal

effect tail

on dynamic

on the

H-646

from

Cmh(hf the horizontal basis rather The

(h

prop

off

is the tail

net

pitching-moment

contribution power-on basis)

of

tail for power-on than on a summation

conditions (the of propeller-off (ACm) T,

is considered and power-on to propeller

on a net increment thrust

pitching-moment

increment,

due

is obtained

zT (ACm) T = n (Tc/prop)
CW

(5.2-2)

where n zT _w The obtained is the is the is the number moment wing of propellers arm of the thrust relative chord (ACm) N, -.p due to the propeller normal force is to the center of gravity (fig. 5-2)

mean

aerodynamic increment,

pitching-moment from

Xp (ACm) where Np = (ACL) Np Cw cos

1 sT (5.2-3)

(ACL)Np peller, Xp gravity c_T The obtained is the (fig.

is the from moment 5-2) angle

increment equation arm

of lift coefficient (5.1.1-2) of the propeller

due

to the

normal

force

of the

pro-

normal

force

relative

to the

center

of

is the zero-lift

of attack

of the

thrust increment,

axis (ACmo)A_w, due to propeller slip-

pitching-moment

stream effects on immersed conditions is accounted for

portions of the wing-body or wing-nacelles by the following equation from reference Aq w Si 5i

at zero-lift 1:

(ACmo)A_w=

S-_ _-w- (Cmo)ipropoff

(5.2-4)

H-646

257

where
w
is the increase in dynamic-pressure ratio of the immersed portion of the _ w(W _/prop) wing,

2
Si is the immersed portion of the wing area, n(bi/prop)5 i (fig. 5. l(b))

_i Sw 5w For

is the is the is the

mean

chord

of the wing wing C

immersed

wing

area

(fig.

5-1(b))

reference reference airplanes,

area mean m ) aerodynamic off may chord be approximated by

twin-engine

iprop

(Cm)iprop where (Cmo)wnprop section and 4.6

off--(Cm)wnprop

off-

(Cm)area

not

immersed

(5.2-5)

off

is the

propeller

off

Cmo

of the

wing

and

nacelles,

obtained

from

Cm

area

not immersed

_(C

Wprop

off

Sw-Si Sw

ntimmersed
W

(5.2-6)

wh e re (Cmo)wprop is obtained off S w - Si Cnot immersed bw - bi (5.2-7) from section 4.5

For which

a single-engine propeller-off

airplane, Cmo

( Cm ) Wnprop of the wing and

off

is replaced obtained

by (Cmo)wfprop from in the lift section of the

off' 4.6. wing

is the The

fuselage due

pitching-moment from power effects

increment, is obtained

(ACm)wL, from

to change

resulting 258

H-646

(ACm)wL=-fACL)A_w+(ACL) whe re xw center is the of gravity w distance (fig. and from 5-1) are obtained and from table equations the aerodynamic center

p]XW 6w

(5.2-s)

of the

immersed

wing

area

to the

(ACL)A_ respectively,

(ACL)_p

(5.1.1-6) respectively

and

(5.1.1-14),

or table

5.1.1-2(a)-3

5.1.1-2(b)-2,

The

pitching-moment

increment,

(ACm)np

due

to propeller

slipstream

effects

on

nacelle free moments (for twin-engine installations) similar to those in section 4.8.1 which considered induced flows with the propeller off. To account to power effects on wing-induced flows,

is accounted for the free moments for the free-moment

by calculations due to wingincrements

due

(ACm)np

=-

36.5

n /
SwS-w w

Wn 2

(_p+eU)

+_

q_

-/dx (5.2-9)

= _ n(Ep + _u) /1 36.5Sw5 whe re (ep + e u} obtained A_w is equal q'_o Wn dx is obtained to 7rRp 2 from table 4.8.1-2 (b) from are propeller-induced (5.1.1-12) Sw(W _/prop) changes and in flow

dx

inclination respectively,

on the

nacelle

(fig.

5-2),

equations

(5.1.1-11),

or table

5.1.1-2(a)-3

For single-engine installations, the effect of power on the free moments fuselage should be accounted for. The procedure is identical to that described power effects on nacelle free moments. The Cmh(hi), net pitching-moment from lh Cmh(hf)5w CLh(hf) contribution of the horizontal tail for power-on

of the for

conditions,

is obtained

(5.2-10)

H-646

259

where Ih mean is the distance chord lift from the center horizontal of gravity tail tail, 5e' and (fig. based Et h -to the 5-2) on S w, as a function from table of 5.1.2-1, quarter-chord point of the

aerodynamic CLh(hf) is the (00prop

of the of the

horizontal

_h

= _b 14

off - (AEh)power'

obtained

column The airplane with the

calculations for the power-on pitching-moment characteristics are summarized in tables 5.2-1 to 5.2-6 as a function of _b, Utab elevator tab geared to the elevator in the ratio of _ = 1.5.

of the subject 5e, and Tc

Tables 5.2-1 to 5.2-4 account for the pitching-moment increments due to the direct propeller forces and power-induced slipstream effects on the wing and nacelles. These increments are summarized and added to the propeller-off, tail-off pitching moments in table 5.2-5 to provide power-on, tail-off characteristics. These characteristics are added to the power-on horizontal-tail contributions in table 5.2-6 to provide the pitching-moment characteristics of the complete airplane. The horizontal-tail contributions include tail-lift carryover effects onto the body which, in accordance with the discussion in section 4.13.4, should have been considered negligible because of the tail-body configuration of the subject airplane. The propeller-off, tail-off pitching-moment characteristics in column 8 of table 5.2-5 were obtained from figure 5.2-1, which is basically the propeller-off, tailoff curve of figure 4.8.3-1 with the stalling portion extended to the stall angle for each power condition considered. This extension procedure is identical to that used in section 5.1.1 to extend the stall regions for CLw and CLwfn in figure 5.1.1-8. Calculated tail-off available (T c = 0.44) pitching-moment are plotted and characteristics compared with for the wind-tunnel largest data thrust condition in figure 5.2-2.

The tail-off pitching-moment and lift coefficients in the figure were obtained from tables 5.2-5 and 5.1.2-1(b), respectively. In figure 5.2-2 excellent correlation is evident for the lift characteristics throughout the angle-of-attack range and for the pitching-moment characteristics at the low and high angles of attack. For some unknown reason, the wind-tunnel pitching-moment data dip at an angle of attack of 3 o to 4 . This dip, although significant in magnitude, does not appear in the tail-on windtunnel data (figs. 5.2-3 and 5.2-4). If the dip can be charged to erroneous data, and thus discounted, the calculated tail-off pitching moments can be considered to be in good agreement with the tunnel data.
#

Calculated 0.44 change _re

tail-on with

pitching-moment wind-tunnel due data

characteristics in figures deflection 5.2-3

for

total 5.2-4.

T c = 0, The

0.20,

and

compared in pitching

and

incremental to be

moments

to elevator

shows

calculated

Cm_ e

larger than wind-tunnel values for all primarily to the inclusion of a tail-lift 260

power conditions. carryover effect

This discrepancy is attributed onto the body in the H-646

pitching-moment contributions of the tail. As indicated earlier, particularly in section 4.13.4, the tail-lift carryover onto the fuselage should have been considered to be similar to zero becauseof the tail-body configuration of the subject airplane and the gapbetween the tail and the fuselage.
t

For generally

T c = 0, good.

the

correlation for

of pitching-moment
J

slopes the

Cma

and

Cmc L as

is by

However,

T c = 0.20

and

0.44,

correlations,

indicated

the solid lines, deteriorate with increasing Several facts were considered in attempting characteristics the source of the deterioration (1) Tail-off pitching moments, with wind-tunnel data throughout (2) tunnel Tail-on pitching data for all power r, was to be essentially similar moments conditions zero, to zero

power at increasing angles of attack. to locate in the predicted pitching-moment in correlation with increasing power: in the wind-tunnel range. data, correlated

well

excluding the dip the angle-of-attack generally at zero had

would have correlated well with windlift, where the downwash due to power, carryover effects onto the body been

(Aeh)powe considered

tail-lift 4.13.4).

(section

(3) Pitching-moment increments between constant 5 e curves correlated consistently with wind-tunnel data through the angle-of-attack range within the linear region of the tail-lift characteristics. An error in dynamic-pressure ratio as a function of angle of attack would have spread the curves with increasing angle of attack if the pressure ratio had been excessive and would have converged the curves if the pressure ratio had been deficient. (4) An error in downwash in an angular rotation of curves due to power on the Cm as a function plot. of angle of attack would result

On the basis of the preceding facts, it was surmised that the deterioration in slope correlation between calculated and wind-tunnel pitching moments with increasing power at increasing angles of attack was caused primarily by inaccurate determination of downwash increments due to power, as obtained from figure 5.1.2-2. The large, wide, faired-into-the-wing nacelles of the subject airplane are undoubtedly not representative of configurations dealt with in correlating experimental data to arrive at the nomograph of figure 5.1.2-2 used to obtain (A_h)powe r.

When

the

downwash

increment

due

to power,

(ACh)powe

r,

was

decreased

by

40 percent for all power conditions and the calculations affected by the change were redone, the resulting modified pitching-moment characteristics showed good slope correlation with wind-tunnel data. The modified calculated pitching-moment characteristics are shown in figures 5.2-3 and 5.2--4 as dashed lines. The reduction in downwash increment due to power, calculated (A_h)power, tail-on lift shown curves in figure with 5.1.2-5, lift also improved the correlation of the as shown in figure 5.1.2-6. The stick-fixed the wind-tunnel wind-tunnel data,

from

neutral-point data and the

cl"aracteristics _f the subject airplane determined m(_d_fied calculat,_d data of figure 5.2-4 are compared 261

H-64 6

in figure 5.2-5 for the three power conditions. The neutral points, determined by the method i technique of reference 36, showa decrease in static margin with increase in power. Pitch-control effectiveness, Cm_e, determined from modified calculated data is compared with that based on wind-tunnel data in figure 5.2-6 as a function of thrust coefficient and trim angle of attack. Both calculated (basedon a 40-percent decrease in power-induced downwash)and wind-tunnel-based values of Cm_e show some increase in effectiveness with increasing power. Throughout the thrust range, the Cm_e based on modified calculated data shows smaller angle-of-attack effects and larger control effectiveness than reflected in the wind-tunnel data. Had tail-lift carryover effects onto the body been omitted from the calculations (as mentioned previously), the calculated Cm_e would have correlated better with the wind-tunnel-based data. Flight-determined pitch stability, Cm_, and pitch-control effectiveness, Cm_e,

are compared in figure 5.2-7 with their counterparts determined from the modified calculated and wind-tunnel-determined pitch data of figure 5.2-1. At low angles of attack it appears that the modified calculated values of Cmc correlate better with _ flight data than with wind-tunnel data. It is possible that the slight scatter of the wind-tunnel data is a factor. Modified calculated values of Cm_e showpoorer correlation with flight data than with wind-tunnel data. Deletion of the calculated tail-lift carryover effect onto the body improved the correlation of the calculated Cm_e with flight and wind-tunnel data (fig. 5.2-7). The flight values of Cm_e were determined from the initial portion of a pullup or rapid-pulse maneuver, as described in reference 37. Flight values of Cm_ were obtained by using the natural frequency determined by the technique of reference 38 in the simple Cm_ expression of reference 37. Flight-determined CL, _b' and 5e characteristics for trim level flight are shownin figure 5.2-8 as a function of calibrated airspeed for an altitude of 6000 feet. Included for comparison are the characteristics based on wind-tunnel and modified calculated data. Close correlation is shownbetween flight, wind-tunnel, and modified calculated data.
5.2. I Symbols bi span of the total portion of the wing streams of the propellers, ft wing lift span, coefficient ft immersed in the slip-

bw CL

262

H-646

CLh(hf)

net

lift 6ta b,

coefficient with

of the

horizontal interaction area alone

tail

due effects

to

_h, included,

6 e,

and

tail-fuselage to the of the of the wing wing tail-off

referenced CL w C Lwfn (CLwfn)prop off lift lift coefficient coefficient

configuration

CLwfn increment

at propeller-off of lift normal coefficient force,

conditions due to the Np change imlift component of the

propeller

( Ce)a w

increment of lift coefficient due to the power-induced in dynamic pressure over the portion of the wing mersed in the propeller slipstreams increment attack, portions of lift resulting of the coefficient from wing due propeller to the in the change propeller

(AC L)cp

in angle _p,

of

downwash,

of the slipstreams

immersed

C m

pitching-moment

coefficient 8C m

Cmc L Cmwfn (Cmwfn) prop C mh (h f) off

static-margin pitching-moment Cmwfn

parameter, coefficient

8C L of the taft-off configuration

at propeller-off

conditions

contribution off propeller-off moment zero-lift not immersed zero-lift wing

of

CLh(hf)

to the of

pitching-moment CLh(hf) to the

coefficient pitching-

(C--mmh (hf)) props

contribution coefficient pitching-moment

Cm

coefficient of that portion slipstreams of the

(Cm)area

pitching-moment coefficient not immersed in the propeller

Cm)iprop

off

zero-lift pitching-moment coefficient of the wing-fuselage or _ing-nacelles immersed slipstreams for propeller-off conditions zero-lift pitching-moment propeller-off conditions coefficient of the

portions of the in the propeller

(Cm)Wprop

off

_4ng

alone

at

(Cm)wfprop H-646

off

zero-lift pitching-moment coefficient at propeller-off conditions

of the

wing-fuselage 263

Cmo)Wnprop off
Cmo_

zero-lift pitching-moment coefficient at propeller-off conditions 0Cm static-stability pitch-control geared parameter, effectiveness, to elevator, per deg 0_ , per aCm _5 e

of the

wing

and

nacelle

deg the elevator-tab

Cmse

, with

(AC m,) h

increment of tail contribution to the pitching-moment coefficient due to the propeller-induced increments dynamic pressure and downwash at the tail increment normal increment effects of pitching-moment force, Np coefficient due to the coefficient due to the

of

(ACm)Np

propeller

(ACm)np

of pitching-moment on the nacelles

propeller

(ACm)

increment of pitching-moment of the propellers

coefficient

due

to the

thrust

(ACm)wL

increment of pitching-moment coefficient due to the net change in the wing lift coefficient resulting from propellerslipstream-induced dynamic pressure and angle-of-attack changes on the wing change in the pitching-moment the propeller-slipstream-induced coefficient of the wing due to change in angle of attack

(ACm)(p

(ACmo)A_

increment of zero-lift pitching-moment coefficient due to the increase in dynamic pressure induced by the propeller slipstreams on the immersed portions of the wing power-induced the taft-off change in the configuration pitching-moment coefficient of

ACmwfn)

power

ci

mean aerodynamic in the propeller mean chord slipstreams mean

chord of the portion of the wing slipstream (fig. 5-1), ft wing ft wing, not immersed

immersed

Cnot immersed

of the portion of the of the propellers, chord of the

in the

CW

aerodynamic

ft of

lh

distance from the the horizontal-tail number free-stream of propellers

center of gravity to the quarter chord mean aerodynamic chord, ft

q oO 264

dynamic

pressure,

lb/sq

ft H-646

_h
dynamic pressure dynamic pressure at the tail as a ratio of the free-stream

increment of power-induced dynamic pressure acting on the portions of the wing immersed in the propeller slipstreams as a ratio of the free-stream dynamic pressure propeller radius, ft wing immersed in the propeller

Si
S w

area of the portions of the slipstreams, sq ft wing thrust area, of the sq ft propellers, lb

T i T

Tc =(_Sw Vc calibrated airspeed, knots center of gravity to the propeller, positive

distance from the forward, ft

XW

distance from the aerodynamic center of the mean aerodynamic chord of the immersed portion of the wing area to the center of gravity (fig. 5-1), positive forward, in. or ft mean width of a nacelle planform Z-body positive segment of Ax the length, X-body ft

Wn

zT

distance, parallel to the axis to the thrust axis, angle of attack, angle angle deg of attack

axis, from down, ft

_b ah

airplane local

relative

to the

X-body tail with

axis, the

deg

of attack equal of

of the ab

horizontal - (e-h)prop

elevator deg

setting astall aT 6 e, 5tab (_h)prop off stall angle elevator value

to zero, a b, deg

off - (A_h)power'

of attack and tab

of the

thrust

axis,

deg deg with the propellers

deflection,

respectively, tail

average downwash off, deg

at the horizontal

H-646

265

(Aeh)powe r

increment of downwashat the horizontal tail due to power, deg downwashangle behind the propeller, deg upwashangle at the propeller, deg

266

H-646

. t
"+ . _++

? ;_m ee. o o+ _," ++

o+

?'?

m g_
m

e._., ++ +' ++ +'

?. ++ +"

_" ++ +"

, t t

+ ,
0

t I

+' @l@ ++

P+ ++

2
,-+ 0

_<_
-_ AI

_+
o B

s_

[.-+

e+
t_

H-646

267

TABLE ZERO-LIFT PITCHING-MOMENT

5.2-2 INCREMENT DUE TO POWER

qw
(_Cm)A_ where w _

si
Sw

_i
6-w (Cm)iprop off

(Cm)iprop and

off

(Cm)wnprop

off-(Cm)area

not

immersed

(Cmo)area (a)-i Symbol

n

not

immersed

=(Cmo)wprop

off

- _w)

2 Sw 6-w

(bw-

1 n(bi/PrP))

Description Number Propeller of propellers radius, area

Reference

Magnitude 2

Rp
S w

ft for comparison with wind-tunnel

Table Table Table chord, ft Table

3- I 3-1 3.2-i 3.2-I

3.0 178.0 36.0 4,96 2 (col. 10)

b
W

Reference wing data, sq ft Wing span, ft Wing mean

_w Si

aerodynamic

Ratio Sw n(bi/prop) ci

of total

immersed

to

reference

wing

area,

sq ft

Table 5.1.1-2(a)-3, column 10 Table 5.1.1-2(a)-3, column 8 Figure 5-1(b) 4.5-1 4.6-1

2(bi/prop) Chord Zero-lift Zero-lift propellers of

= total immersed pitching pitching off

immersed wing moment moment area, of

span, ft wing,

ft

2 x

(col.

8)

5.50 -0. 0240

Cm)

Wprop

off

propellers plus nacelles,

off

Table Table

(Cm)_prop A_w

off

of wing

-. 0240

Power-induced on immersed Sw(T _/prop)

change portion

in dynamic:pressure of wing,

ratio

Equation

(5. I. I-7)

6.30(T_/prop)

Rp2

Summary:

Cmo)area

not immersed

= -0.

861 b w - 2(bi/prop)

= -0.0240 (Cm)iprop off - (Cmo)area not immersed

(ACmo)A_w=

6.99(T_/prop)_w_Cmo)iprop

off

268

H-646

II

F_

Iq

I ,

2
m

F_

_A

'

" d

' _

"' d "d

' d

'

II

' _

' _

d 'd

d_ '

,d ' ,::; ' ,d _.

o

d "d _.-_..
o _

"

, . .
o

__
o

_._
o

_ _ _"

" _ _._ d"

" _ _. _'

' _

"'_

' _ , I,

o"

n_.,i_-1. d" _

i 0

'

_
o ","t. '._.

H-646

269

TABLE PITCHING-MOMENT INCREMENT DUE TO

5.2-3 POWER-INDUCED CHANGE IN WING GIFT

(ACm)wL

= -_ACL)A_

+(ACL)ep]

x--w _w

(a)-I Symbol xw _w Distance to the Wing from center aerodynamic of gravity, De scription center ft chord, due to ft change in dynamic Table 3.2-1 4.96 f(_b,Tc/prop) of immersed wing area Figure Re ference 5-1 (b) Magnitude 0. 712

mean

aerodynamic lift wing

(ACL)Aqw

Change in wing pressure on

power-induced

Table 5.1.1-2(a)-3, column 13

(ACL)ep

Changedirectionin ingonwingliftdue w

to

power-induced

change

in flow

Tablecolumn5.1.5 1-2(b)-2,

f(_b'

T c/PrP)

(d_Cm)wL a)-2

-0.

144

_ACL)A_

w + (ACL)(p]

(9
Table

5.1.1-2 (a)-3, column 13 Table

5.1.1-2(b)-2, column 5 Table

5.2-3(a)-1

(AC L )A_ w _b, deg

(aCL)ep
J

(ACm)wL

= -0.

144
]

( (_

+ (_))

T_
0 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 a13.8 b14 1 c14.4 a,b,cstall 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.2O 0 .0308 0 0602 0874 0. 1124 1348 0. 1533 .1659 0. 1709 .1687 0. 1657 ...... .0623 0.1217 .1775 0.2287 .2763 0.3157 .3481 0.3669 .3762 0.3716 .3658 0 44 0 0 0. 00211 00083 -0. 00042 -. 00157 -0. 00263 -. 00355 -0. 00428 -. 00474 -0. 00486 0.20

T c 0.44 0.06192 .02444 -0.01201 -.04700 -0.08000 -.11044 -0.13774 -.16072 -0.17990 -.19136 -0.19293 , -. 19437 0 -0.000304 -.000120 0.000O60 .000226 0.000379 .000511 0.000616 000682 0.000700 .000649 ......... , 0.20 !-0.004190

T c 0.44 -0.008916 -.012490 -0.015795 -.018792 -0.021413 -.023884 -0.025626 -.026983 -0.026928 -026617 -0.025728 024686

0.02910 .01148 -0.00561 -.02193 -0.03713 -.05091 -0.06287 -.07254 -0. O7924 -.O8199 0. 08212 , ........

-.006088 -0.007861 -.009428 -0.010839 -.012080 -0.013022 -.013444 -0.013199 -.012486 -0.012036 ,

-. 00451 ......... ........

angles at T c = O, 0.20, 0.44, respectively.

270

H-646

TABLE PITCHING-M'OMEN'T INCREMENT DUE TO

5.2-4 EFFECT ON NACELLE FREE MOMENTS

POWER

(ACm)np (a)1 Dose Number Sw Reference Wing Upwash mean of nacelles _'ing area, sq ft chord, deg downwash ril)tion

.... n(,u +_p) (L +-=--) IWn2 dx _w\]j f 36.5_vC w -q,_

Symbol

Reference ........ 'Fable ft Table 3-1 3.2-1 2 178 4.96 As As

Magnitude

aerodynamic

at propeIler,

Table 5, 1.1-2(a)-3 column 3 behind propeller, deg Table 5. I. I-2(a)-3 column 4

per per

reference reference

_p

Propeller-induced

Aq w Power-induced immersed Wn2 (iX integral segments of change portion square of Ax in dynamic-pressure (and wing) planform Table 4.8.1-2(e), of 33.55 per nacelle ratio on Equation (5.1.1-7) 6.30 (T * c/prop) of nacelles of mean length, width eu ft

of nacelle

summation fifth coIumn

(ACm)np (a)-2

-0.

00209

[1 + 6.30(T_/prop)]

(c u + ep)

(!)
Table

5. i. column 1-2 (a)-3, 3 Table

(!)
5.1.1-2(a)-3, column 4 .........

(9
Table (ACm)n

5.2--4(a)-1 p =

ep, _b' deg e u, deg

deg

(e u + ep)

= @

+@,

deg

-0. o02o9[1 + 6.30(T_/pro._]@

/ T c/prop 0 0.10 -0.794_ -.3179 0. 1590 .635s 1. 1127 1.59,96 2. 0665 ?. 7).434 0.22 -1.158-t -. 4634 0.2317 .9267 1.621s 2.316_ 3.011,_ 3. 7069 ,t.4019 5,0101 5. 1259 5.2418 0 -0.093(; -.4_74 -0.7813 -I. 1251 -1.1690 -1.gI2_ -2.1568 -2. 5005 -2.8443 -3. ........ ............. 0952 p T c/prop 0.10 -0.7.94_ -.7179 -0.64 I0 0.22 -I.15S4 -. 8634 -0.56,'.3 -.2733 -0.021S .316_ 0.611_ .9069 1.2019 1. 510t 1.5259 1.,5418 0 0.000196 .000914 0.001633 .002351 0.003070 .003789

T_
0.20 0. 00270s .002446 0. 0021_4 001922 ! 0. 001650 .00139s 0.44 0,005777 .004306 0.0028,'34 .001363 0.000109 -.001580 0.003051 .000906 -. 004522 -0.0059_1 .000210 0.0002_3 -.007530 0.007609 .007688

-[ -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 at3 8 b 14. 144 a'b'cstati 1

0 -. 4 -0.8 -I.2 -l.6 -2 -2.4 -2.8 -3.2 -3.5 -3.6 -3.7 0.44, 0

-0.0936 -. 0374

0.0187 .0749 0. I310 .1872 0.2434 2995 0.3557 .1048 ......

-. 56.12 -0.1873 -.4t04 -0.3335 -. 2660 -0.179_ -. 0625

0.00450s_0.00{136 .005226 0.005945t0.000613 .006469 ........ ................

3.0202 3.4375 :1.5170

0. 0830

angles at T_ = O, 0.20,

respectively.

H-646

271

J
0

r,J [.-,

[,-,

El

272

H-646

Z 0

gg

H-646

273

0 _ 0 0

II II

X Q) 0 _._

II

II II

_._o

_- m

_---

=
_o

.-_
._._

P_

2_
._ L_ r....4

N
0

o_

1 go

? _o gS L_
0 I I

q_J

\
0 _ I 0 I 0 I 0 0

_'_ ?_
,-'4

E c.)

_._

g'_ ,,

274

H-646

0 Cmwf n .2 1.8
O\

io--o--b
0
\

o 1.6

Wind tunnel CaIcu lated

o o

o o o

1.4

/
o

1.2

1.0

CLwf n .8
o

.6

.4

.2

0 -4

I
0 4 %,

I
8 deg
and
!

i
12

I
16

I
20 0

)I
.2 Cm wfn

Figure

5.2-2.

Comparison

of calculated

wind-tunnel-determined

tail-off

lift

and

pitching-moment

characteristics

at

T c = 0.44

and

center

of gravity

= 0.10

c w.

H-646

275

_VI ," / _\1"_ "_/ /

i _i

_1/

, I/ ,/ I/ / o II 9 P /

o V_

P/

"_1'_,_ L/

I_

?,'

-o
T

L_
01 o 0

">a 0

b_/io , ._1",//
O_ _ _ o'_ <_ _ o a

_/,;L,'_ !,,'o11_ l,;

?% l,':X/ ;;

(I;_,' <_/., I/?

P,

Y=

N=

: i_ l._ _,,i ,_z_ " 1

_s _
_., ,-

_ _

_0

__
_ ,

o,_,_

,o

0 Oo

u_
/

'

_o
o_

o
" * I I I I

,--i

E H-646

276

1-I-6_6

32 Neutralpoint, percentmean 28 aerodynamichord c 24

32--

,.,,,,,,-

Tc=0

Calcu lated ((_:h)power Wind tunnel

reduced 40 percent)

28-7 j

Neutral point, percent mean aerodynamic chord

24-ffJ

Jf

20-f f

Tc =0.20 16 28--

24-Neutral point, percent mean aerodynamic chord 20--" 16 0 Figure 5.2-5. calculated 278 Comparison wind-turmel T_ = 0.44

1
.2

I
.4 CL characteristics characteristics.

I
.6 determined Center

1
.8

1
1.0 from modified of gratuity = 0.10 H-646

and

of neutral-point pitching-moment

c w.

I o
0

'1
Jl I iI
0

r-I

o 0
I

tO0

Y
o

w C C

ooO_
0

I-'--

g,
,I

t
0 ""_

> o
O0 0

% _

m m

J 0 0 ! I I !

>

go
E
0

H-646

279

.12
O O

O8
P

Tc .O4
O-

Flight Wind tunnel Ca Icu lat ed, (_E h)power reduced 40 percent)

-. O1
0

Cma, per deg -. 02

-. 03

1
DO
m

-. 02

Cm_e,

per deg _.04

0
m _ w _i _ b

-.06 Lift carryover -.08 -2 0 2 4 ab, deg

Figure Cm_ e,_ Center 280 5.2-7. with of Comparison wind-tunnel gravity = 0.12 and _w" of calculated flight-determined static pitch, values Cm_ as , and control

-\ from Omitted _ -Included

tail to body: 6 8

I0

12

effectiveness, of attack.

a function

of angle

H-646

Tc
0 0 (_)00 0 0 O0 0 (_)0 (_ 0 O0 0 0 0

CL

Flight Wind tunnel Original calculation

(Z_h)power reduced 40 percent

ab, deg

-4 -4

5e, deg

0
O

zl 70

80

90

O0

110 V c, knots
CL, (_b, and wind-tunnel Cw"

120

130

140

150

Figure flight

5.2-8. conditions

Comparison with those Center

of calculated obtained of gravity from

6e and

characteristics flight data

as

for trim a function

level of

calibrated

airspeed.

= 0.12

H-646

281

5.3

Power

Effects

on Drag

The net drag change of the airplane due to propeller power results from: (1) the component of propeller thrust parallel to the X-stability axis; (2) the change in slipstream dynamic pressure on the profile drag of those portions of the aircraft immersed in the propeller slipstream; (3) the change in induced drag due to the lift component of the direct propeller forces and the change in angle of attack of the immersed portions of the wing; and (4) the change in cooling drag due to the power-induced change in dynamic pressure acting on the immersed cooling system. For the subject airplane, well as a portion of the wing summarized by the following where the propeller slipstream and the horizontal tail, the drag expression: immerses with power the nacelle on can be as

ACD)powe / ACDo, / CD _ CDprop off - n(T_/prop) cos aT +[(ACDo)w

r,

change

in drag

due

to power \

change

in zero-lift drag \

+(ACDo)h

+ (AC"'Do)n

+ ACDi

+ (ACD)cooling

system]

(5.3-1)

whe re CDprop section -n(T vector, 4.12) c/prop) a positive is the is the cos a: T is the is equal in profile in induced is the component of total drag thrust parallel to the velocity off is the propeller-off drag of the complete airplane (obtained from

thrust change change system

to a negative drag drag change

contribution due to power

ACDo ACDi

coefficient coefficient in the

due to power system drag coefficient due to

(ACD)cooling power The horizontal change tail,

cooling

in profile and nacelles

drag

coefficient,

ACD o, due for by

to power

effects

on the

wing,

is accounted

CDo CDO)w* ( CDO)n ( ( CDo)h

Si/prop nl_D)wprop off Sw A_t w (_ n(CD)hpropoff Shi/prop Sw Aq h ]_ (C--D)nprop off Aq w q_ (5.3-2)

282

H-646

where n is the number of propellers

(c
of the square

\D/wprop

off'

hprop

off

are

the

propeller-off determined

zero-lift from

drag

coefficients (4.12.1-1), per

wing and horizontal tail, respectively, foot of the respective areas 'D) o nprop is the interference immersed propeller-off effects wing area zero-lift included per

equation

off

drag and

coefficient

of the to the from

two nacelles area 5.1.1

with

nacelle-wing Si/pro p is the

referenced obtained

wing

propeller,

section

and

figure Shi/prop

5-1(b} is the immersed horizontal-tail area per propeller, obtained from fig-

ure

5-1(b)

ACw
CLo
nacelle, Aqh

is the increment

in dynamic-pressure

ratio,

due

to power,

at the wing

and

obtained

from

equation

(5.1.1-7) ratio, due to power, at the horizontal

is the increment

in dynamic-pressure

4oo
tail, obtained The fication equation from section 5.1.2 ACDi, of the wing due to propeller slipstream modi-

induced of the based

drag

increment,

downwash over on the empirical

portions of the wing can equation for power-on

be accounted induced drag

for by the following in reference 19:

/ ACDi =(CDi)wprop off

t[(CDi) I

w/prp] .... (C_)i)Wprop

power off

on

(5.3-3)

where,

from

reference

19,

on a per

propeller

basis

_CDi L_

) w /prop] J power

on _C: Lwpro p off) =_ _ L

(c5
l] w prop off

2[

_2Aw( 1 + 180CLwpropof

]
+

Kf

h _C /prop+ "'w X_(_C L)T

AC

L)Np/prp

"l_l 2

1\2Rp/\

--

cL

,,#

/]
(5.3-4)

and

where n is the number of propellers 283

H-646

Wprop
(C") Di Wprop off off is equal is the 5.1.1-8 is the on a per p lift to of the if'(1 _rAw wing stall alone angles C Lwprop similar to figure having lift

+ 5152} , obtained

from

section

4.12.4

with

no power

effects,

obtained stall angles from

from

plots

extended per

to power-on propeller,

(ACL)T/prop tion (5.1.1-1) (ACL)Np/pro obtained from

component basis component

of thrust

obtained

equa-

propeller lift

is the

of the propeller propeller basis

normal

force

per

propeller,

equation

(5.1.1-2)

on a per

C_

-- CLwprop

off +(ACL)T/PrP

+(ACL)Np/prp

(5.3-5)

Aw, b w

are

the

wing

aspect

ratio

and

span,

respectively,

obtained

from

table

3.2-1

Rp

is the

propeller drag

radius factor, obtained from figure 5.3-1 as a function of

K is a propeller Sw(T _/prop) Rp 2 is the effective

propeller

downwash

angle

averaged

over

the entire

wing,

equal

to

(5.3-6)

where 8ep is obtained from equation (5.1.1-13) and figure 5. i. 1-5 O_p is obtained p _T is the propeller angle of attack relative to the free stream from figure 5.3-2 or figure 5.3-3

The

change

in drag

coefficient

of the

cooling

system,

(ACD)cooling

system'

due

to

the power-induced system immersed proximation, by

change in dynamic pressure in the propeller slipstream

behind the is accounted

propeller acting on the cooling for, to a first order of ap-

284

H-646

w
(ACD)cooling where system (CDcling system)prop off _

(5.3-7)

(CDcling

system)prop

off

is the

contribution

of the from

cooling figure

system 4.12.7-1

to the

drag cooling

of the airplane for propeller-off systems of both nacelles of the

conditions, obtained subject airplane

for the

is the ratio of free-stream

increase

in dynamic pressure,

pressure obtained

behind from

the propeller, equation

due to power,

as a

dynamic

(5.1.1-7) are

Calculations for power-on net-drag characteristics of the subject airplane J summarized in tables 5.3-1 to 5.3-4 as functions of ozb and T c. Table 5.3-1 summarizes the drag increments to power. Table on net drag. The calculated 2) in figures with drag 5.3-4),

zero-lift increments of drag due to power, table 5.3-2 the induced due to power, and table 5.3-3 the change in cooling-system drag due 5.3-4 summarizes all the power effects on drag and lists the power-

ref.

power-on 5.3-4 and increasing due the to power, correlation

drag 5.3-5, power

results, compared with wind-tunnel show good correlation at T_ = 0 at the higher were angles from of attack. the

data (from and an increasing the increments a study

discrepancy of induced of table

When

ACDi,

omitted significantly.

calculations

(after

improved

It is surmised that the large, interfere with the power-induced consequently, affect the magnitude As in the case of the power-induced

wide, built-in nacelles of the subject airplane slipstream in the immersed area of the wing and, of the power-induced increments of induced drag. downwash at the tail, (ACh)power, discussed airplane data to to arrive in is at

section 5.2, it appears that the nacelle-wing configuration of the subject not representative of the configurations used in correlating experimental arrive at the empirical relations used in calculations, in this instance, the empirical equation for ACDi.

5.3. 1 Symbols
A w

wing wing

aspect span,

ratio ft

bw CD CDcooling system)prop off

airplane contribution airplane

drag

coefficient to the drag of the

of the cooling system for power-off conditions

H-646

285

CDpower on CDprop off (ACD)cooling system (ACD)power (C_)i)Wpropoff

(C Lwprop = ?rAw

power-on drag coefficient of the airplane airplane drag coefficient, propellers off increment of airplane drag coefficient due to the cooling system increment of airplane drag coefficient due to power
off) 2 (1 + 5152)

power

on

induced drag due to one increment induced propeller-off tail and areas

coefficient propeller,

of the wing included due

with

power

effects,

ACD i

of drag drag

coefficient

to power

effects

on

(CD)hprop

off <CD)wprop

off

zero-lift drag wing, respectively,

coefficient of the horizontal per sq ft of the respective

(CDo)nprop ff o
AC Do (ACDo)h, (A_o) n' (ACDo)w

propeller-off zero-lift drag coefficient of the two nacelles of the subject airplane with nacelle-wing interference effects included, referenced to the wing area increment of zero-lift drag coefficient due to power (including wing,

contribution nacelle-wing respectively, skin lift lift friction coefficient coefficient

of the horizontal inte rfe rence to ACDo coefficient of the

tail, nacelles effects), and

Cf CL CLwprop
//

of a fiat airplane

ptate

of an isolated

wing,

propellers

off

off off +(AC L) T/PrP +(AC L)Np/prp

CL

= C Lwprop

increment (ACL)Np/prop

of lift

coefficient

due

to the

normal

force

of

one propeller increment of lift one propeller coefficient due to the lift component of

(ACL)T/prop

286

H-646

K k 1

propeller surface

drag roughness

factor height, in.

reference length used in obtaining the Reynolds number of a lifting surface and skin-friction coefficient, Cf, of a flat plate, mean aerodynamic chord of surface, in. Reynolds number free-stream number of propellers dynamic pressure, lb/sq ft

NRe
n

_qh
--,---

_qw

change in dynamic pressure on an immersed'portion of the horizontal tail and wing, respectively, as a ratio of the free-stream dynamic pressure propeller radius, ft and horizontal-tail slipstream of one area, respectively, propeller, sq ft

Rp Si/prop, Shi/prop

portion of the wing immersed in the wing thrust area, sq ft

S w

T t
T c =_

of propellers,

lb

T c/prop t
C

thrust thickness airplane deg angle

coefficient ratio angle

of one

propeller

c_b

of attack

relative

to the

X-body

axis,

of attack

of the for

thrust

axis,

deg

correction factor the quarter-chord the propeller-off and horizontal effective entire
E

the taper ratio and sweep angle of line, respectively, in calculating induced drag coefficient of the wing

tail downwash angle averaged over the

propeller wing, deg c to the

ratio

of

do,_wash the

angle, propeller

e-p H-646

_p,

of the

propeller

slipstream

behind

287

rate

of change the

of the

propeller angle

downwash

angle,

Cp,

with (A e h ) power

propeller

of attack at the horizontal tail

change in the downwash due to power

angle

288

H-646

"1

TABLE ZERO-LII_ DRAG

5.3-1 DUE TO POWER

INCREMENTS

Sl/ProP ACD (a) = n(CD)wprop off Sw

Aq w q----_- + n(CD)'nprop off

Shl/prop Sw

A_ h --q_

__ +(CD)nprop off

Aqw _---_-

Magnitude Symbol Description Number Reference of propellers wing area, sq ft Table 3-I Reference Wi n g 2 178 2 Horizontal tail 2 Nacelles

L
(St/prop) Sw Shi/prop

Immersed propeller Immersed area Surface Reference dynamic in. per

wing as

area ratio

per of Sw

Table 5. column Figure

I. I-2(a)-3, 10 5-I

Column

lO

of

reference 7,63per prop

horizontal-tail propeller, height, sq ft in.

roughness length, chord

mean aeroof surface,

Table Table

4.12.1-2 3.2-1

_0.25 59.50

10 -3, smooth 32.45

matte

fl_sh ............

/
k NRe

...................................... Reynolds sea level number = _2 at (0.65 63.4 mph, 106} of flat Wind-tunnel conditions Figure 4.12.1-1 test

2.38 3.22

I05 106

1.30 1.75

105 106

C l t c (CD)Wprop off

Skin-friction plate Thickness

coefficient

3.65

x 10 -3

4.08

10 -3

ratio

of

surface

Table

4.1-I

15

.08

(CD)hp

rop

off

2cf[1+2(12o( ;] )+
Propelle r-off ccofflclent referenced zero -li R d rag of both nacelles to op) Sw 178 sq ft

Equation

(4.12.1-1)

,00993 of wing

per

sq

ft

. 00951 of

per

sq

R tail 0. 00827 per nacelles two

horizontal

_nprop

off

Table

4.12.3-l(c)

.........................

A_____W
Aq h

Sw(T

tc/pr

Equation vRp--2----where Rp=3.0 ft

(5.1.1-7)

6.30(To/Prop)

............

6.30(T

_/prop)

q_

Change ratio due to

in at

dynamic-pressure the horizontal power

tatI

Table 5.1.2-1(b), column 9

- ...........

Column reference

of

.,t S .... IT: ACD i/pro :0.125CI_P_T _-w z c/prop)+ A0. 000__/

Negligible 052(Tc/prop}

+ 0. _

_ [0.12_

O. 052_T_./prop)

(b) O,
......... Table

(_)
5.1.1-2(a}-3, column 10 ACDo: Table

@
5.3-1(a)

St/prop eCb, deg Sw T_/prop 0 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 a13.8 h14.1 e14.4 0.1834 .1805 0.1762 .1706 O. 1633 .1541 0.142_ . 1288 0. 1110 .0905 0.10 0.1827" .I_01 0.1765 ,172i 0.1665 .1598 0.1518 .1423 0, 1309 .1190 1165 0.22 0:1R22 ,1798 0,1767 .1728 0.1681 ,1625 0.1559 .1478 0.1393 .1302 0.1283 .1264 T = O, 0.20.0.44, rcspecfivdy. _-

[0. (T

125(_ _/prop)

+ 0.

052]_

i T c/prop 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.10 0.007484 .007451 0.007406 .007351 0.007281 .007198 0.007098 0 0 0 0. .000979 006836 .006688 006656 0. 0. 0.22 0.016450 .016384 0.016299 .916192 0.016063 .015909 01572-_ .015504 015271 .015020 014968 .014916

...... ............. angIN for total

0.

0.

0.

........

a'b'csud[

H-646

289

TABLE INDUCED-DRAG INCREM

5.3-2 ENT DUE TO POV_rER

ACDi

= (CDt_" ]Wprop

offn

ff_2(l[\ I (C Lwprp C_

]\

+ 180

CLwpropTr2Awe off)+

Kf_ bw

7_C L)

T/PrP

I_"/Z +(_CL)NP/prp)I

2 -I

(a) Symbol n ce T Number Angle peller b W A w Wing Wing Propeller Drag CDprop ACDo off Zero-lift power drag increment due to of span, aspect of of Description propellers of deg + ft ratio radius, airplane ft with propeller off Table Table Table 3.2-1 3.2-1 3-1 36.0 7.5 3.0 thrust axis and proReference 2 Same as c_b Magnitude

attack plane,

Table 4, column

12.8-I, 9

Column reference Column

of

of

Table 5.3-I(b), column 3

reference

_Lwprop

off_ ;vA w

(1

+ 8152)

Table

4.12,4-1 0. 0432 CL_.pro p

off

(CDl)wprop ff o
Lift C Lwprop off Lift (AC L)T/prop +(ACL) Np/prop

coefficient propeller contribution force s/propeller off w P off

of

wing

alone

with

Figure

5.1.1-8

f(_b) Column 7 of 2 f(c_ b, Tc/prop) reference

of

direct

propeller

Table 5.1.1-1(c), column 7

eL"

CLwprop (ACL)

+(ACL)T/PrP /prop

8Cp Rate Sap eAveraged ep wing span propeller as a ratio dog.wash of propeller over with of change propeller of propeller angle of downwash attack

Table column Figure

5.1, 6 5,

1-2(a)-2,

3-3

do_mwash f::P -_w

behind

propeller,

Sw(T

%2

_/prp)_

/
See Equation (5..2-6) pa.rt (b) of table

:+(+'+p <_T '_ -_p \0_p! f/Sw(T Propeller drag factor, \ c_/prp)_ RP 2 ]

Figure

5..2-I

{b)

o
T e Te z/prp Sw(T

"c/prop) Rp 2

o
Figure Rp b W

5.3-1 Table 5. K

I. 1-2(a)-2, 6 Figure column 0_P O_p

5.3-3 Equation

(5.3-6)

Total

0 = ,20 .44 .10 .22

0 1.978 4.350

0.0833 .0833 0833

4.00 3.43 2.90

0.

0234 .1987 .2896

0.052 .153 .246

0.00122 .0304 .07124

_b a b ab

290

H-646

_ _

_l_ _

__

.
4

ca

I1

"k

I I
I n

"'_

,..j

fi,
t_ ,.-a m

D_
:c

..... '.7,' _
,g .,_ ...,_

_N

-_._._.:

!
I

@
+

,'d"

_"

o
d," _

go
" _

o
" _

=,o
" _ "

z_ g g gg
1_ _ + X
_ .| , .| .i

...... ....
o .| . .

,i

_," ,

" _

'

" _

"i

m_

ao

,:,a

_
_a

1
;

-g

H-646

291

_jx

z_
I

_i _e.

,"_

"'c_

"

"

"

c_

_7 @ __
oo _o oo_o o _

{'o' "_ "_ "_ ",_

I

@!
"'_ "'_ ' c_-._ ,4.4 oo oo o o

.,_
.4 i

,,_

.,_

.,_

,,_

,'_ "_c; "_ '_ "_

Z_
Z ,.q

x _ oo o o_ o ooioo o _ o o

i
i t

_l_

_4
,4

_1_ ,,
0
x

g
n _'c_ "'_, "'_; "': '

ii / /

!
I

ff

i i

,,P

292

H-646

,,@@ _@
II

,+
ol

"'d

"d

"'d

"

"'d

"

@
"ld

_I_
+'_ "'d

'_'_ _
' d "d

_
'

I
i

@
4'-

o_ ..+."+_ ,_...... 0+ _ ,._+,++,=,.+

"'o," "d "',=: " d "',d "

-+

+!

+ r-,

X "'d .'-i "d" _" d "'d "

,_

"

'Id

"

,_

'

"

+-

_ _+, _ ,d _ ,.4,-:
tl

,'+"

.+
r..+

+, + ......
d . z. d dd . d ,

,+I

"'+ '+ '_ "+ '_ " ;+

+.+_ ...... . _++ _ I;2-'_-+.

H-646 293

TABLE CHANGE IN COOLING-SYSTEM

5.3-3 DRAG DUE TO I:_)'_rER Aq w

(ACD)eooling

system

_ (CDeooling

system)pro

p off --_

Symbol (CDcoling Sw Rp Aq w system)prop off Cooling Reference Propeller Sw(T_/prop) 2 drag

De s c ripti coefficient area, ft sq

on with ft propeIlers off Figure Table Table

Re fe re nce 4.12.7-i 3-1 3-1

M agnit f{_b 178 3 )

ud e

wing radius,

Equation

(5. I. 1-7)

6.30(T

c/prop)

Summary:

(ACD)

eooiing

system.,

= 6

30(Tc/prop)

_^1._ _C D cv-A.,s

system)

prop

off

Figure

4.12.7-1

Equation (5.1.1-7) ACt.____W = Equation

(5.3-7)

(AC D) cooling otb, deg (CDcling system)prop off

_o

system

6.30(T_/prop)
/

T _c/prop 0 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 i0 12 a13. b14. c14.4 _ ] 0. 00200 .00340 0. 00333 .00280 0. 00224 .00185 0.00166 ,00310 :_0. 00740 _. 0090 _0. 0090 (assumed) (assumed) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ...... 0.10 0.630 .630 0.630 ,630 0.630 .630 0.630 .630 0.630 .630

Tc 0.22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.20 0. 00126 .00214 0.00210 ,00176 0.00141 .00117 0.00105 .00195 0. 00466 _.00567 0.44
i

1.386 1. 386 1.386 1.386 1.386 1.386 1. 386 1.386 1.386 1.386 [ 1. 386 t. 386

0. 00277 .00471 0. 00462 .00388 0.00310 .00256 0. 00230 .00430 0. 01026 _,01247 _0.01247 _. 01247

0. 630

_. 0090

- _0.00567 ...........

a'b,Cstall angles for total Tcz = O, 0.20, 0.44, respectively.

294

H-646

TABLE POWER-ON DRAG OF THE

5.3-4 COMPLETE AIRPLANE

CDpower

on

= CDprop

off

- n(T_/prop)

cos

ce T + ACDo

+ ACDi

+(ACD)cooling

system

Table column

@
4.12.8-1, I0

Table 5.3-1(b), column 3 Table

5.3-2 16 column

Table 5.3-3, column 4 Equation

(5.3-1)

-n(T_/prop) cos e_b, deg cos O _T CDprop off cos a T

ACD (_) o ACD i (ACD)cooltng system

CDpower

on =

@+@+@-_+

I= -2(T_/prop)

T_ -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 13.8 0. 9976 .9994 1.0000 .9994 0.9976 9945 0.9903 .9848 0.9781 .9711 0.0320 .0327 0.0345 .0408 0.0526 .0697 0.0914 .1203 0.1586 .1840

/ = 0, Tc/pro 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

p = 0, n = 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

_ropelIers) _ 0 _ 0 _ 0 _ 0 _ 0 _ 0 _ 0 _ 0 _ 0 _ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0320 .9327 0.0345 .0408 0.0526 .0697 0.0914 .1203 0.1586 .1840

T / _ 0.20, c -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 13.8 14.1 0. 9976 .9994 1.0000 .9994 O.9976 .9945 0.9903 .9848 0.9781 .9711 0.9699 0.0320 .0327 0.0345 .0408 0.0526 .0697 0.0914 .1203 0.1586 . 1840 ...... -0.1995 -.1999 -0.2000 -.1999 -0.1995 -.1989 -0.1981 -.1970 -0.1956 -.1942 -0. 1939

T_/prop

= 0. 10, 0.0075 .0075 0.0074 .0074 0.0073 .0072 0.0071 .0070 0.0068 .0067 0.0067

n = 2

_ropellers) 0 _0 _0 .0008 0.0024 .0048 0.0079 .0118 0.0164 .0207 0.0214 0.0013 .0021 0.0021 .0018 0.0014 .0012 0.0011 .0020 0.0047 .0057 0.0057 ....... -0.1587 -.1576 -0.1560 -.1491 -0.1358 -.1160 -0.0907 -.0559 -0.0091 .0229

0.44, -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 13.8 14.1 14.4 0.9976 .9994 1.0000 .9994 0.9976 .9945 O.9903 .9848 0.9781 .9711 0.9699 .9686

T_/prop

= 0.22,

n = 2

propellers)

0.0320 .0327 0.0345 .0408 0.0526 .0697 0.0914 .1203 0.1586 .1840 ....... .......

-0.4389 -.4397 -0.4400 -.4397 -0.4389 -.4376 -0.4357 -.4333 -0.4304 -.4273 0.4268 .4262

0.0164 .0164 0.0163 .0162 0.0161 .0159 0.0157 .0155 0.0153 .0150 0.0150 .0149 .0001

0.0028 .0047 0.0046 .0039 0.0031 .0026 0.0023 .0043 0.0103 .0125 0.0125 .0125

-0.3877 -.3858 -0.3846 -.3766 -0.3605 -.3363 -0.3Ot6 -.2607 -0.2009 -.15_I ....... .......

= 0 .0022 9.0066 .0131 ).0217 .0325 ).0453 .0577 ).0596 .0609

H-646

295

10

20 30 t SwCrc/prop) Rp2

4O

50

Figure

5.3-1. 1.0

Propeller

drag

factor

(from

ref.

1, based

on ref.

19).

Rp

0.5

10

20 30 Sw(T_;/prop) Rp2

40

50

Figure 296

5.3-2.

Average

propeller

do,an_wash

(from

ref.

1, based

on ref.

19). H-G46

Ce_

C_ C%

t'xJ

C_

_o o

C_

%
,r-I

,.-.I

OO

_3"

xJ

H-646

297

.32

Wind tunnel Calculation Calculation including omitting ACDi ACDi

O

.24

16

/ /
Tc=

O8

//
/ )

/o

CD

- 08

J/
T c =0.20
0 -C_#

-.16

/
/ / 0 / //

-. 24

-.32 i //
O

-.40

0
Figure CD 298 5.3-4. with Comparison _b at different

Zl
of calculated power

8 ma, deg
and 5 e = 0 .

12

16
variation

20
of

wind-tunnel-determined

conditions.

H-646

.32

Wind tunnel Calculation including ACDi Calculation omitting Z_CDi

.24

.16

.O8

/,
/
#.

CD -. 08 Tc=0.20
{9

-.16

/
-. 24

S
f

/ /

O 0

-.32 T_ =0.44
m

0
CI

-.40

Jl--

-.48 0 .2 .4 .6 .8 CL
Figure CD 5.3-5. with CL Comparison at different of calculated power and wind-tunnel-determined 6 e = 0 . variation of

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

conditions.

H-646

299

5.4

Power

Effects

on Horizontal-Tail

Hinge

Moments

and

Stick

Forces

The procedures for determining the horizontal-tail hinge moments for power-on conditions are essentially identical to those used in section 4.14 for propeller-off conditions. Quantities affected by power include the tail lift, as a result of powerinduced changes in downwash and dynamic pressure at the tail, and the section increment pitching-moment coefficient for larger tab deflections. The effect effect of power on the on the section lift of the tail was accounted for in section coefficient, 5.1.2. The

of power defined

increment In section it was

pitching-moment 4.14.1, indicated 4.14.1-6 based

(A Cmf ),has ,7 (4.14.1-11) conditions large tab de-

not been and the

quantitatively. involving curves of the

in relation that for

to equations propeller-off be used theory: for

(4.14.1-12) empirical

(ACmf)_?,

of (Aemf)_ following

? in figure equation

should

flections

in lieu

on lifting-line

2 (Aemf)_? where : 57.3_\c

/_Ctab_ h

Ft ]11 kl

(Ctab_

(5.4-1)

5ta b = tan -1 (cs ,_

Ah/ tan6tab cos Ab

(4.14.1-13)

However, the portion at the tail propeller-off gested that

because a significant amount of thrust will increase the dynamic pressure on of the horizontal tail immersed in the propeller slipstream, the added energy will tend to maintain full tab effectiveness to higher tab deflections than for conditions. Thus, for significant power-on thrust conditions, it is sugequation (5.4-1) be used in place of figure 4.14.1-6 to determine (Acmf)_
q

for tab deflections up to about 21 . Beyond this magnitude of tab deflection, the effectiveness of the tab may be approximated by empirically extending the results of the lifting-line theory on a trend of decreasing effectiveness tending to parallel the 1 propeller-off experimental curves. For T c = 0, the propeller-off curves of figures 4.14.1-6 hinge and 4.14.1-7 moments are should the still same. characteristics of the horizontal 5.4-1 and 5.4-2. The magnitudes (A __Cmf_ ) and , used in columns which 5 and be used; that is, the Tc = 0 and propeller-off

calculated

tail

The calculations for the subject section 5.4-1

for the power-on hinge-moment airplane are summarized in tables pitching-moment obtained from coefficient, (5.4-1)

of the

increment were

7 of table to

equations

(4.14.1-13)

reduced

(Acmf)r

/ = -0.01105ta

(5.4-2)

300

H-646

on the basis Figure data

of supporting

configuration

data

in table

4.14.1-2(a).

tunnel

5.4-1 shows the correlation / for total T c = 0, 0.20, and the same
J

of the 0.44.

calculated hinge moments with windThe calculated hinge moments for conditions. the results The obtained calculated when hinge using the

Tg = 0 are moments

as those T c = 0.20

for propeller-off and 0.44 include

for total

originally determined tail lift coefficients as well as the results obtained when using the lift coefficients based on a 40-percent reduction in power-induced downwash discussed in section 5.2. The calculated hinge moments based on the modified powerinduced downwash at the tail show better correlation with wind-tunnel data than do the original results. data 0.44, At total at 6e = 4 T c = 0.20,
/

the

discrepancy On the there may

between basis of the

calculated correlations in the

results at

and

wind-tunnel / T c = 0 and

is unexplained. it appears that

however,

be an error

tunnel

data.

Figure 5.4-2 shows the correlation of flight-determined stick forces with the stick forces based on calculated and wind-tunnel stability and control trim characteristics for 1-g flight over a calibrated velocity range of 70 knots to 146 knots at 6000 feet altitude. Calculated stick forces as well as calculated angle of attack and elevator deflection show reasonably good correlation with the flight data. The stick forces were obtained by using the following relation derived in section 4.14.1 for the subject airplane:

Fstic

k = 40 Chh(f)_

(4.14.1-20)

5.4.1

Symbols to the horizontal-tail area and

All lift and moment coefficients are referenced mean aerodynamic chord unless noted otherwise. bh Chh(f) horizontal-tail span, ft

hinge-moment coefficient of the horizontal effects on the tail included airplane net lift 5ta b, lift coefficient of the referred horizontal included coefficient, aerodynamic to the tail wing due

tail

with

fuselage

CL CLh(f)

area to c_h, 5 e, and

coefficient with fuselage

effects

(AC_n)6ta

increment quarter the tab average tail chord

of tail pitching-moment chord of the tail mean deflection tail chord, ft station,

about chord,

the due

to

(Ch)av (Ch)7/ H-646

at semispan

77, ft 301

increment

section-lift station,

coefficient 7/ coefficient rl, referred line of the

due to the

tab deflection,

at semispan

increment section-lift semispan station, chord basic loading

due to the tab deflection, to the constant-percenttab deflection

at

Acmf

)7/

section increment pitching-moment coefficient due to the tab (flap) deflection, at semispan station, 77, about the quarterchord point in the plane normal to the constant-percentchord basic loading line of the tab deflection tab tail wing stick chord, mean mean force, ft aerodynamic aerodynamic lb chord, chord, ft ft

Ctab eh
cw

Fstick

difference in span-load coefficients for two bounding load distribution curves at semispan station, (fig. 4.14.1-3(b), for example) K a factor for estimating the location for the tmtabbed dynamic pressure respectively, horizontal-tail thrust calibrated coefficient airspeed, knots section section center-of-pressure near the ends tail and in the

span-

of the free

tab stream,

qh' q_o

at the horizontal lb/sq ft area, sq ft

Sh Tc Vc

chordwise center-of-pressure location, at semispan V, aft of the quarter chord of and as a ratio of the horizontal-tail mean aerodynamic chord chordwise center-of-pressure tab deflection, at semispan edge of the tail as a ratio lateral airplane angle elevator distance angle of attack from of attack of the tail deg the location station, of the tail

station,

Ch
Y ab ah 6e 302

of the lift due to the V, from the leading chord at the station ff axis, line, deg deg

plane relative relative

of symmetry, to the to its X-body chord

deflection,

H-646

5tab

tab deflection tab deflection of-pressure

normal

to the hinge section

line, basic

deg loading center-

normal to the line, deg at the

(Ah)

power

change semispan

in downwash station,

tail

due

to power,

deg

2y
bh of the inboard and the outboard end of the semispan station tab, respectively increment span sweep deg sweep of the

_i' 770
A_

spanwise

distance

as a ratio

of the

tail

semi-

Ab

of the

section

basic

loading

center-of-pressure

line,

Ahl

of the

tab

hingeline,

deg

H-646

303

_9

3O4

H-646

d "d

"d

"d

"d

"

i ++-0
rj "El _ "C_

-g+

._

S
0

L)

"6

' t ', _;" <d

t or-_

i
g

' d

I d "L d lid

I n d

"

_-_
+ ++__+@ _ x

_, ,++.+ +;: ........ '+d "'+

o o
t +

"d

"'d

"'d

"

.+,,

o ,gl ,_ ":'

_g .... 0o"+'=+ oo go oo +_g ,'/;._ +M oo _ d ,"d ,"d "_; ''d "

_ _

e -_.
,,-+ II

,d _" d ," .::; ," d ," 'd

i i i i

,"

_m_

'

', I d

"'d

"'d

''d

'

2
@~=
_, oo oo _o oo

,,,,+ ,,,,+

,=; "1+ "l ,_ "1+ "I + '

@+
II

"+
,o

_ a +-oi..+.I _-oi., + I+ o
o oo oo gg gg _

+. .1.+.1 +.1 .+.I+.. + +. + +

=,.,..=,",.._ .._ .._ .

_
_-_: N

+p,_

, ,

.-.,_ .+ 0 d ,".d ,"d ,"d _''d ;"

a

H-646

305

II

@
+

@
11

306

H-646

_z

._._

0
+

ii

H-646

307

I I I I

>

308

H-646

.2
P

Tc 0

o _,oo:_Rooq cool _:,I @o ._oo p o i

CL

................

J------I

"O--ooo-o__oo.:o<>_b__o

12( 8

'

I
0

Flight Wind tunnel Original calcu lation

(_.h)powe r reduced 40 percent -4 -4 _, deg

0
4
.O4

I J ....

Ch h (f)
-.

0
04

_" -"_ "--.--.--.........___._.

0 _ Fstick, Ib -20 -40 -60 70

_,_'_-_.. :. "_ ,,oc_ " _'_" - _-_-_: _

00 " _"_

80

90

100

llO

120

130

140

150

Vc, knots
Figure 5.4-2. in level flight speed. H-646 Altitude Comparison with those = 6000 of calculated obtained from ft; center hinge-moment wind-tunnel = 0.12 and Cw" 309 and stick-force flight data as characteristics a function of air-

of gravity

6.0

DYNAMIC

CHARACTERISTICS

The preceding considerations dealt with the static characteristics of general aviation airplanes. Since longitudinal dynamic characteristics are associated with the aerodynamic forces and pitching moments caused by the pitch velocity, q, and normal linear acceleration, w (considered in the form of _), it is essential that aerodynamic parameters accounting for the effects of these two variables be determined. Consideration dynamic of the derivatives derivatives is given CLq, to the Although CLq insight will in the CL_, the following Cmq, discussions and Cm_ and and to the tothe are and CL_ determination appropriate generally of the application oscillatory taken a is deterto be

determination derivatives to the

of windup-turn CLq windup-turn The derivative

short-period

characteristics. negligible, quantitative mined

be applied its

considerations CL_, although

to provide not used,

into

influence.

for completeness. determining the dynamic derivatives are based on conditions and are thus not frequency dependent. prevail for the high-aspect-ratio wings normally the methods are applicable over the linear lift

The methods to be presented for theories which assume attached-flow Fortunately, attached-flow conditions used on general aviation aircraft and range of the subject airplane. It is assumed 4, negligibly throughout influence

and

the following discussions that the dynamic motions, the effects of power on lift and pitching moments. data, but with the availability are referenced to a center

In the absence of appropriate wind-tunnel priate flight data, all calculated characteristics of 0.12 Cw to conform to the flight data.

of approof gravity

310

H-646

6.1

Lift

Due to Dynamic

Motions

6.1.1

Lift Due to Pitch Rate,

CLq nacelles, expression and horizontal tail due to in which the Individual terms

The lift contributions of the wing, fuselage, pitch rate can be summarized by the following are referenced to the wing area:

(a) foIIowing effects:

The lift contribution expressions which

of the wing due take into account

to pitch rate can be obtained from the the mutual wing-fuselage interference

_/Swe\/Cwe\ (6.1.1-2)

where,

on the

basis

of reference

39,

(6.1. (CLq)we = (1 + 2 _-_-e ) (CLo_)We

I-3)

In the

preceding Kw(f),Kf(w) Swe, _w e

equations are are wing-body area obtained slope interference and the from of the mean section exposed factors, obtained from chord section of the 4.5 portion

the wing

aerodynamic 3.2 portion

exposed

of the

wing, CL_)w e

respectively, is the lift-curve

of the

wing

per

radian,

obtained from

section 4.2 x
ewe

Xac
ewe

Xcg (6.1.1-4)
ew e

Xac

is the
ew e

distance

to the aerodynamic

center

of the exposed

wing

panel

from

the

leading edge and from table 4.5-1 Xcg

ew e

as a fraction

of the

exposed

panel

mean

aerodynamic

chord,

obtained

is the

distance

to the

center

of gravity

of the

airplane

from

the

leading

edge 311

H-646

and as a fraction of the exposedpanel mean aerodynamic chord (b) The lift contributions of the fuselage andnacelles, (CLq)f +(CLq) n, due to pitch rate are not as explicitly accountedfor as for the wing. No explicit method is available for obtaining body or nacelle dynamic derivatives for general planforms. The following method, usedherein, is the method of reference 1 which considers the ( C L o_)B 'and body contribution to CLq to be a product of the body lift-curve slope,
the expression from and by for the ratio of slender-body 40. The fuselage chord derivatives, and nacelles referred ---\CL_]slender-body contribution to the to center theory CLq, based

as obtained on wing area is thus given

reference wing mean

aerodynamic

and

of gravity,

(CLq)f

+ (CLq)

n .....2(CLot)f(1

Xmf_ lf]

/f Cw +2(CLtx)

n (i

Xmn_ lnj

/n Cw

(6.1.1-5)

where

(CL_)f, obtained

(CLa)n from section are

are 4.3

the

lift-curve basis from airplane, fuselage

slopes

of the

fuselage flow terms fuselage figure

and

nacelles, per nacelle,

respectively, radian respectively,

on the

of potential the nose

only, and 3.2-1

Xmf, Xmn to the center are

the

distances of the

of the from nacelles,

of gravity the

obtained and

I f, ln table 4.3-1

lengths

of the

respectively,

obtained

from

(c)

The

lift

contributions

of the

horizontal

tail,

(CLq)h(hf),

due

to pitch

rate

are

obtained from the following derivation which takes into account the action effects on the lift-curve slope of the horizontal tail. Because rate will result in a change in tail angle of attack, in radians, of

tail-fuselage intera change in pitch

(A_) h _ q/h V

(6.1.1-6)

where

Ih

is the

distance

from

the

center chord

of gravity

to the

quarter

chord

of the

horizontal-tail

mean

aerodynamic

(aCah(hO)q = 27.3

= 7.3(CL )h(h

q/h) T

(6.1.1-7)

312

H-646

From the preceding

(CLq) h(hf) aC Lh (hi') Ih = 2(57.3)-Oq_w c w (C L_)h (hf) 2V (6.1.1-8)

where with
as

(CLa)h(hf) tail-fuselage

is the interaction

elevator-fixed effects

lift-curve accounted for

slope and

of the

horizontal from

tail, equation

in degrees, (4.10-2)

is obtained

(CLtx)h(hf)

=[Kh(f)

+ Kf(h)](CLo_)he

q_l

Sw she

(6.1.1-9)

In the of the and u

present tail

application slope,

of the based

equation on the

(6.1.1-9), exposed ratio tail

(CLoz) '
n

is the e obtained

propeller-off from table in sec-

value 4.2-1,

lift-curve is the

panels, tail,

qh
power-on dynamic-pressure at the as obtained

tion 5.1.2. Although presented, the caution fuselage configuration

the preceding equation given in section 4.11 of the subject airplane,

was applied to the subject airplane is reiterated: For the geometric the lift carryover from the tail

as tailto the

fuselage (represented by Kf(h)) may be insignificant on the fuselage and the air gap between the tail and Kf(h) that be considered of the (d) subject to be airplane. the preceding methods to the similar to zero

because of the location of the tail the fuselage. It is suggested that configurations similar to

for tail-fuselage

By applying

subject

airplane,

the

lift

due

to pitch

rate, CLq, was calculated and is presented in table 6.1.1-1 as a function of angle of attack and power condition on the basis of original downwash calculations. The results are plotted in figure 6.1.1-1. Included in the figure are the results of calculations which included a 40-percent decrease in power-induced downwash on the tail. No experimental data were available for comparison. Because of the inclusion of the lift carryover from the tail to the fuselage, which is undoubtedly small or nil in accordance with the preceding larger cautionary than it should remarks, be. CL_ the calculated CLq is, in all likelihood, about 10 percent 6.1.2

Lift Due to VerticalAcceleration,

The wing, fuselage, nacelles, and horizontal-tail contributions to the lift due to vertical acceleration, a, are summarized by the following expression in which the individual terms are referenced to the wing area:

CL_= H-646

(CL(_)w

+ (CLo_)f

+(CL(_)

n +(

Lol)h(hf )

(6.1.2-1)
313

(a) The lift contribution of the wing, (CL_)w, due to

cannot be accounted available except for small for conventional to significantly (b) The lift affect for because triangular aircraft, the net

the vertical

acceleration, region are not is relatively would not seem

_,

explicit expressions for the subsonic wings. Because the wing contribution the omission of the wing contribution CL_. of the fuselage and nacelles, (CL(_)f

contributions

+(CL_)

n,

due

to

vertical acceleration, which was arrived contribution mean to aerodynamic

4, are accounted for by the following at in a manner synonymous to the derivation (section chord, If (CL_)f + (CL(_)n = 2 (CLol)f Cw 6.1. l(b)). Referenced to the

approximate equation, of the equation for body area and the wing

CLq

wing

In + 2 (CLo_)n_ c w (6.1.2 -2)

The tion

individual (6.1.1-5)

terms

in the

equation

have

the

same

definitions

as the

terms

in equa-

(c)

The

lift

contribution

of the

horizontal

taft,

(CL_)h(hf),

due

to vertical

acceler-

ation, _, is based on the concept of the "lag of the downwash. " The downwash at the tail does not respond instantaneously to changes in wing angle of attack. Because the trailing vortex is convected with the airstream, a change in circulation at the wing is not felt as a change in downwash at the tail until a time, At =--_-,lh has elapsed ...... (lh is

the distance from the center of gravity to the tail). and, therefore, the lag in change in angle of attack, is accounted for by aeh (A(_)h = A_ h = Dc--- (_At)b The correction obtained from to the tail-lift coefficient to account

The lag in change in downwash in radians, of the horizontal tail

0_h 0ab for

lh _ V the lag in downwash (6.1.2-3) change is

(6.1.2-4)

from

which lh = 2(57" 3)(CLa)h(hf) 2V Cw OZh OC_b (6.1.2-5)

Comparison 314

of this

equation

with

the

equation

for

(CLq)h(hf)

(eq.

(6.1.1-8))

shows H-646

1
i
i

ae h the two equations to be identical except for the _b term. 0Eh

Thus

(6.1.2-6) (CL&)h(h0 where = (CLq)h(hf) -_-b

(CLq)h(hf) 0Eh 0c_b from figure

is obtained

from

equation

(6.1.1-8)

is the

rate

of change

of tail of

downwash c_b and

with power

airplane condition

angle being

of attack, analyzed

obtained

5.1.2-4

as a function

(d) By applying the preceding methods to the subject airplane, the lift due to the vertical acceleration was calculated and is presented in table 6.1.2-1 as a function of angle of attack and power condition on the basis of original downwash calculations. The results are plotted in figure 6.1.2-1. Included are the results of calculations which included a 40-percent decrease in power-induced downwash at the tail. No experimental data were available for comparison. 6.1.3 Symbols All lift coefficients otherwise. and their derivatives are referenced to the wing area unless

noted CL

lift lift

coefficient coefficient interaction of the effects horizontal included tail with the tail-fuselage

CLh(hO

(AC Lh (hi')) q' (AC Lh (hi')) 0C L CLq, CL_= a-_ w 2V and OCL ._ _Cw 2V

increment of lift angle-of-attack , respectively,

coefficient due to the rate, respectively per rad

pitch

rate

and

contribution of the tively, per rad contribution of the

fuselage

to

CLq

and

CL_,

respec-

horizontal tail-fuselage

tail

to

CLq

and

CL_ , effects

respectively, included, per (CLq)n' (CLa) n

with rad

interaction

contribution of the tively, per rad contribution of the

nacelles

to

CLq

and

CL_,

respec-

CLq)we H-646

exposed

wing

panels

to

CLq,

per

rad

315

CLq)w(wf)

contribution interaction

of the effects

wing

to

CLq

with for,

wing-fuselage per rad

accounted

(C_Latslender_body

ratio

of

CLq theory,

and used

CL a

of a body form

obtained of its and

from

slender-

theory

body

in the

mathematical (CLq)n (eq. (6.1.1-5))

equivalence lift-curve lift-curve per tad slope slope

to obtain

(CLq)f per

of a body, of the

rad and nacelles, respectively,

fuselage

(CLa)he (CLa)h(hf)

lift-curve slope of the exposed horizontal-tail panels, referenced to the area of the exposed panels, per deg lift-curve slope of the horizontal interaction effects included, lift-curve to the tail with deg tail-fuselage

per

slope of the exposed wing area of the exposed panels, to CL_, per rad

panels, per rad

referenced

(CL&) w
C m

wing

contribution

pitching-moment _C m , per O q_w 2V OCm , per rad rad

coefficient

Cmq=

Cm =

38 w
2V

CW

mean aerodynamic chord ratio of two dimensions, mean aerodynamic chord

of the wing, in. when used ft when used in derivatives of the exposed wing panels,

in

ew

in.

Kh(O'Kf(h)

ratio of the lift on the horizontal tail in the presence of the fuselage and the lift carryover from the tail onto the fuselage, respectively, to the lift on the tail alone ratio of the lift on the wing in the presence of the fuselage and the lift carryover from the wing onto the fuselage, respectively, to the lift on the wing alone

K w (f), Kf(w)

316

H-646

/f,/n lh

length

of the

fuselage

and nacelle,

respectively, quarter chord,

in. chord in.

distance from the center of gravity to the of the horizontal-tail mean aerodynamic pitch rate, rad/sec horizontal lb/sq ft tail

q qh,

dynamic pressure at the stream, respectively,

e

and the

free

Sh e ' Sw

area of the exposed wing, respectively, wing thrust area, sq ft

panels of the horizontal sq ft

tail

and the

coefficient see of time, sea

t At
Xac
m

time,

increment

ew

distance panels of the Xcg Cwe

to the aerodynamic center of the exposed wing from the leading edge of the wing as a fraction exposed panel mean aerodynamic chord

Xcg Cw

distance to the center of gravity of the airplane from the leading edge of the wing as a fraction of the complete wing mean aerodynamic chord and the exposed panel mean aerodynamic chord, respectively Xcg Cw e distance from respectively, airspeed, airplane time change change r change deg rate ft/sec angle of attack of relative ab, 0a b _, _t of the tail, tail to the rad/sec horizontal rad due to power, rad or tail, rad X-body axis, deg the nose of the to the airplane fuselage center and nacelle, of gravity,

Xac Cw e Cw e

Xmf, Xmn V _b

in.

&
(Aa) h A h (Aeh)powe

of change angle

in the in the in the

of attack at the at the

downwash downwash

H-646

317

8ch 8_b rate of change of the downwash angle of attack at the tail with airplane

318

H-646

TABLE LIFT [Flight (a) DUE center TO

6. i. I-I PITCH of gravity of wing, RATE, = 0.12 CLq Cw]

Contribution

(CLq)w(wf)

ewe

Symbol

Description Ratio Ratio Exposed Reference Mean Mean of liR on wing in presence carryover panels area, area, sq ft chord chord of exposed of complete wing wing, panels, in. in. on sq ft of fuselage fuselage to to wing wing alone alone Table Table Table Table Table

Reference 4.4-1 4.4-1 3.2-1 3-1 3.2-1 3.2-1

Magnitude 1.09 .14 148 178 57.1 59.5

Kw(O
Kf(w)

of wing-lift wing wing

S_e
Sw _w e cW

aerodynamic aerodynamic

Table

Center _w wing wing Center

of gravity

of

the

airplane chord

from as

leading a fraction

edge of the

of

Flight

data

0.12

mean aerodynamic aerodynamic chord of gravity of the

Xcg
_w e

airplane

from

leading-edge a \Cw / Cwe

125

exposed-panel mean aerodynamic fraction of mean aerodynamic exposed panel center edge and as of exposed a fraction chord

chord as center of the

Xac Aerodynamic Cwe leading mean Xac wing panels from of exposed-panel

Table

4.5-1

249

x
Cwe

aerodynamic Xeg

Equation

(6.1.1-4)

.124

_we
LtR-curve to

_we
slope per rad of exposed wing panels referenced Table 4.2-1 1.28

(CL )we

SWe,

Samma_y: ,,(c_w( = 3.14 pe_ rad _

(b) Contributions of fuselage and nacelles, (CLq)f +(CLq)n Xm n (CLq)f+(CLq)n =2(CL_y)f (l-xmf_'f +2(CL_)nlf/cw _--_nL)_w In

Symbol

Description Reference Wing mean wing area, sq ft chord, based sq ft, based sq ft, per per on in. on potential tad potential tad center center of gravity of gravity flow only, flow only,

Reference Table Table Table 3-1 3.2-1 4.3-1

Magnitude 178 59.5 0.121

Sw
cW

aerodynamic slope to slope to from of fuselage S w = 178 of nacelles S w = 178 nose

( L4

LiR-curve referenced LiR-curve referenced Distance of the Distance of the

Table

4.3-1

.089

Xmf Xm n

of fuselage

to flight to flight

Figure Figure

3,2-1 3.2-1

100.33 60. 14

airplane, in. from nose of nacelles airplane, length, length, in. in. in.

If
l n

Fuselage Nacelle

Figure Figure

4.3-5(a) 4.3-5{b)

290 106

Summary:

(CLq)f

+ (CLq)n

= 0.9087

per

vad

H-646

319

TABLE

6.1.1-1

(Concluded)

(c)

Contribution

of horizontal

tail,

(CLq)h(hf)

(C%)h(h_= 114.6_h
Symbol Description Reference Wing mean wing area, sq ft chord, in. tail,

('4(h,
Reference Table Table 3-1 3.2-1 4.10-1(a) Magnitude 178 59.5

s_ Cw
(CLce)h(hi) _h

aerodynamic slope

Lift--curve Sw= 178

of horizontal it, per deg

referenced

to

Table

o.0136 '
\q_/ Table as 172.75 per 5.1.2-1(b), column 11

sq

Dynamic-pressure

ratio

at

the

tail

with

power

on

Table 5.1.2-1(b), column I1 Figure 3.2-2

l h

Distance gravity

from reference to the quarter

(flight) center of chord of the tail, in.

Summa_: ..(C%)h_h =4.53

per_d

(d)

Lift

due

to

pitch

rate,

CLq

:(CLq)w(w +(c q)o q)h +(cLq)f

\q_o/ 4.53 = 4. 049 +

()
-q_

Table 5.1.2-1(b) column 11 ........

_h
-_ _b' deg = 4. CLq 049 + 4.53 (_)

T"
0 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 a13.8 b14.1 c14.4 1,0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1,0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 --.......... TcI : O, 0.20, 0.20 1.0868 1.1028 1.1167 1, 1222 1. 1333 1. 1389 1. 1444 1.1417 1.1361 1. 1278 1.1222 0.44 1.2027 1.2108 1.2216 1.2324 1. 2432 1.2541 1. 2622 1.2676 1.2757 1.2811 1.2811 1.2784 0.44 0 8.579 8.579 8.579 8.579 8.579 8.579 8.579 8.579 8.579 8.579 .....

T_
0.20 8.972 9.045 9.108 9.133 9.183 9.208 9.233 9.221 9.196 9.158 9.133 0.44 9.497 9.534 9.583 9.632 9.681 9.730 9.767 9.791 9.828 9.852 9.852 9.840

........... respectivdy.

a,b,Csudl angles for

power conditions,

320

H-646

TABLE LIFT DUE TO VERTICAL center of

6.1.2-1 ACCELERATION, gravity = 0.12 Cw] CL_

[ Flight

(a)

Contribution

of wing,

(CL_)w

In accordance

with

discussion

in

section

6.1.2(a),

(C L_)w

_0

(b)

Contributions

of

fuselage

and

nacelles, If

(CL_)f

+(CL_) In

(CL_)f

+(CL(_)n

= 2(CL_)f

-_w

+ 2(CL_)n

Symbol Sw
_W

Description Reference Wing mean wing area, sq ft chord, based sq in. on ft, on potential per potential rad flow flow

Reference Table Table Table 3-1 3.2-1 6.1.1-1(h)

Magnitude 178 59.5 121

aerodynamic slope of fuselage to

Lift-curve only, Lift--curve only, If In Fuselage Nacelle per

referenced slope rad in. in.

S w = 178 based

of nacelles

Table

6.1.1

- 1 (b)

089

length, length,

Figure Figure

4.3-50) 4.3-5(b)

290 106

Summary:

(CL_)f

+ (CL_)n

= 1.497

per

rad

(c)

Contribution

of horizontal

tail, 0eh

(CL_)h(hf)

(CL&)h(hO=

(CLq)h(hf)

Symbol
S W

Description Reference wing area, to sq ft CLq with per radian tail-fuselage interaction

Re fe renc Table Table 3-1

Magnitude 178 4.53

_h
--

(CLq)h(hf) Oe h

Tail contribution effects included, Rate of change of

6.1.1-1(c)

downwash

at tail

with

c_b

Figure

5, 1.2-5

f (Ceb,

T_)

O0_ b

qh q_

Dynamic-pressure

ratio

at tail

with

power

on

Table 6.1.1-1(d), column 2

f (c%,

Tc)

Summary:,

(CL'_h(hf) c_/

: 4"53_--'-_3-'_b \qj

per

rad

H-646

321

TABLE

6.1.2-1

(Concluded)

(d)

Lift

due

to vertical

acceleration,

CL_

CL_

= (CL_)w

+ (CL&)f

+(CL_)n

+(CL_)h(hf}

= 0 + 1.497

+4.53 _h

.Oa b Oeh

Table 6.1.1-1 column 2 _h (d) Figure

0
5.1.2-5 0e h 0or b

0
........ CL_ =

,. +4.53 497 T'c

0.44 0 0.20 0.44

_b'

deg Tc 0 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 a13.8 b14.1 14.4 1.0 I. 0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 -_--0.20 1. 0868 i. 1028 1. 1167 1. 1222 1. 1333 1. 1389 1. 1444 1.1417 1. 1361 1. 1278 1. 1222 ...... 0.44 1. 2027 1.2108 1.2216 1. 2324 1. 2432 1.2541 1.2622 1. 2676 1.2757 1.2811 1.2811 1. 2784 0 0.20

0.475 0.475 .475 0.475 .475 0.470 .450 0.425 .405 ..... .....

0.785 0.775 .760 0.730 .680 O. 640 .600 0.530 .475 0.470

0.915 0.920 .905 0.865 .810 O. 740 .670 0.589 .500 0.470 .450

3.649 3.649 3.649 3. 649 3.649 3. 626 3. 536 3. 332 .....

5.419 5.417 5.361 5. 245 5.005 4. 815 4. 600 4. 225 3.924

6.516 6.588 6.549 6. 368 6.099 5. 728 5. 344 4. 901 4.399 4 .225 4. 103

..... 3. 886 ..........

a,b,cstai I angles for Tc/ = 0, 0.20, 0.44 power conditions,

respectively.

322

H-646

i ]

I0.0 Original ---calcu lation reduced 40 percent

J

-- (_h)power

9.8
/ /

f J

T_ =0.44 9.6

9.4

CLq, per rad

9.2
P

T c =0.20
% \

g.o

8.8

8.6 T_ =0

8.4 -z 0 4 8 12 16

.deg
Figure 6.1.1-1. of attack and Variation of calculated power conditions. lift due to pitching moment, CLq, with angle

H-646

323

6.8 Original calculation

(Z__.h)lx_er reduced 40 percent 5.4

6.0

-,..,.,

5.5
\

, 5.2

\\

CI_,

per rad 4.8

4.4 \

4.0

\ \
\ \

T =O
3.6

3.2 0 Figure with 324 6.1.2-1. Variation angle of attack and of calculated power. 4 %, lift due deg to vertical acceleration, 8 12 16 CL_ ,

H-646

6.2

Pitching

Moments

Due to Dynamic

Motions

6.2.1

Pitching

Moments

Due to Pitch Rate, of the to pitch

Cmq and by horizontal tail to the

The contributions pitching moment due

wing, fuselage, nacelles, rate can be summarized

Cmq

= (C-mq) w(wf)

+ (Cmq)

f +(Cmq)

n + (Cmq) h(hf)

(6.2.1-1)

(a) effects,

The

contribution pitching

of the moments

wing, due

including to pitch

the rate,

mutual Cmq,

wing-fuselage can be accounted

interference for by

to the

in which (eq.

the

individual For

terms, low-speed

with

the

exception

of

(Cmq)w

e,

were

previously (Cmq)w 39 and e

defined is

(6.1.1-2)).

incompressible

conditions was derived k:

(M_0.2), in reference

obtained from the following equation, which in reference 41 by the inclusion of the factor

modified

"eL2 _'_"e (8,re) _1 +

(6.2.1-3)

where Clc _ is the Awe table 3.2-1

X CW e

section aspect

lift-curve ratio of the

slope, exposed

in degrees,, portion

obtained of the wing,

from

section

4.2 from

is the

obtained

is the of the

distance

from panel

the mean

aerodynamic aerodynamic

center chord

to the

center

of gravity

as a

fraction

exposed

The factor k is empirical, having been obtained by correlating equation (6.2.1-3) with dynamic model data (ref. 41). For an aspect ratio between 1 and 6, k was determined to be of the order of 0.7. No experimental data were obtained in reference 41 for higher aspect ratios; however, for very high aspect ratios, k approaches 1.0. Reference 1 suggests that for aspect ratios of about 10 or 12, k should be approximately 0.9. Although no experimental data are available to show how k should vary for intermediate aspect ratios, reference 1 suggests that a smooth fairing be used. H-646 325

For subsonic speedsinvolving compressibility effects, (Cmq)we is obtained by applying an approximate compressibility correction factor, derived in reference 42, to the results of equation (6.2.1-3). Thus

= IAweB2_

+ 6 cos

Ac/4

(Cmq)We M>0. ] Awe tan2 Ac/4

We + 6 cos whe re Awe is the aspect ratio of the exposed wing panels (table 3.2-1) Ac/4 + 3

(6.2.1-4)

3B3t

B 2 =_]i - M 2 cos2 Ac/4

(6.2. I-5)

Ac/4 (b) rate, The

is the

sweepback

of the

wing

quarter-chord of the

line fuselage are and not nacelles explicitly due to pitch accounted for.

pitching-moment + (Cmq)n

contributions

(Cmq)f

, as for lift

due to pitch

rate,

The contributions of the fuselage and nacelles were obtained on the basis of equation (6.2.1-6), from reference 1, which was derived in a manner synonymous to the derivation of equation (6.1.1-5) using slender-body theory. Referred to body base area, Sb, body length, lB, and a selected center of rotation (the center of gravity of the airplane),

1- ZB/
(Cmq)BSblB=2157"3(Cm_sbl where (Xm) B plane
r

(6.21-6)
Xm--B-_- VB lB ] SblB

(1

is the

distance

from

the

nose

of the

body

to the

center

of gravity

of the

air-

(Xc) B

is the

distance

from

the 3Cm

nose

of the

body

to the

centroid to

of the Sb/B

body

volume

(Cmo_)BSb/B

is the Cm_area of the

DO_b

of the

body

referenced

can 326

Because the base be reduced to

subject

airplane

is essentially

zero,

equation

(6.2.1-6)

H-646

(Cmq)

(6.2.1-7)

BSblB

"3(Cmz)BSbB] /

\lB

lB ]

Referencing dynamic chord,

(Cmq)B c w,

and

(Cm_)B

to the

wing

area,

S w,

and the

wing

mean

aero-

(6.2.1-8)

Considering

that

(Cm_)B,

when

obtained

from

equation

(4.7-1)

and

applied

to the

fuselage and nacelle components edge of the wing mean aerodynamic requires that

of the subject airplane, chord, conversion

was referred to the leading to airplane center of gravity

(Cm_)B

(Cm_)B/e

Xcg + --_(CL_B -Cw

(6.2. i-9)

Hence,

relative

to the

center

of gravity

of the

airplane,

(6.2.1-10) (Cmq)B=2(57"3)[(Cm_)Ble +(CLl)Bxc--_gl(xc---Bcw J\ _w xm--B/cw /

Applied tribution

specifically of the

to the

fuselage

and nacelles to Cmq

of the is obtained

subject from

airplane,

the

net

con-

fuselage

and nacelles

(Cmq)fn=

2(57.3)

(c mc_)f/e

.. +_L_)f

xt, Kl(xcf _--_wJt_

mf_ (_w ]"

+2(57.3)

Cm_}n/e+(CLr_)n__wjt_.-

_ogl/on

Cw/ -_-_n/ (6 2.1-11)

where

(Cmo_)f I eand of the wing mean only the potential Xcg to the is the

(Cm _)n/e aerodynamic flow term distance from of the

are

obtained

from

section

4.7

relative

to the

leading

edge

chord, per deg of equation (4.7-1) the leading edge

(to a practical degree need be considered) of the wing mean

of approximation,

aerodynamic

chord

center

of gravity

airplane

H-646

327

(CLa)f, (CLo_) are the lift-curve slopes of n

obtained from section are the 4.3 on the basis from airplane, the nose

the fuselage terms fuselage figure to the

and

nacelles, per nacelle, in. of the

respectively, deg respectively,

of potential-flow the nose of the from

only, and 3.2-1, centroid

Xmf, Xmn to the center

distances of the from

of gravity distance

obtained of the

Xcf volume,

is the in.,

fuselage

fuselage

f/0fSxx Xcf = is the in., distance from the nose 12Vf

dx (6.2.1-12)

Xc n volume,

of the

nacelle

to the

centroid

of the

nacelle

/0nsx x dx
Xcn =

12v
of the effects lh horizontal included, tail due to pitch for

(6.2.1-13)

(c)

The

pitching-moment with tail-fuselage

contribution interaction

rate, by

__(Cmq_h{hf)'

is accounted

(6.2.1-14) (Cmq)h(hf)Cw (CLq)h(hf)

where (d) moments

(CLq)

h(hf)

and the

lh

are

defined

in section to the

6.1.1(c). subject and are airplane, presented the pitching in table 6.2.1-1

By applying due to pitch

preceding Cmq,

methods were

rate,

calculated

as a function of angle of attack and power condition on the basis of the original downwash calculations. The results are plotted in figure 6.2.1-1. Included are the results of calculations which included a 40-percent decrease in power-induced downwash at the tail. No experimental data were available for comparison. 6.2.2 Pitching Moment Due to Vertical Acceleration, Cm_ and horizontal tail to the pitching in terms of reference wing

The contributions of the wing, fuselage, nacelles, moments due to vertical acceleration can be summarized area and wing mean aerodynamic chord by

Cm_t: 328

(Cm_t)w(wf)

+(Cm_)f

+(Cm(_)n

+ (Cm_)h(hf)

(6.2.2-1) H-646

(a) The pitching-moment contribution of the wing dueto vertical acceleration, (Cm_)w(wf), with wing-fuselage interactions included, would normally be accountedfor by an equation identical to equation (6.2.1-2) except for the substitution of (Cm_e)We for (Cmq)we. However, in the subsonic region, with the exception of triangular wing planforms, no explicit expression for (Cm_)we is available In the absenceof suitable procedural information, (Cm_)w(wf) is assumed to be zero. This assumption is acceptable as an approximation because, as pointed out in reference 1, tests indicate that this contribution for conventional configurations in subsonic flow is small (b) The pitching-moment
acceleration, which was (Cm_)f arrived to l B, and + (Cm_)n, contributions are of the fuselage and nacelles of the of the base area, of the due to vertical following equation Sb, equation, for body accounted for by the use to the derivation to body center

at in a manner CLq (section 6.1. center

synonymous l(b)).

contribution length,

Referenced (the

and body

a selected

of rotation

of gravity

airplane),

Sb/B\ (Cm_)BSb/B =2(57.3) (Cma)BSb/B [(1

1B

lB] (6.2.2-2)

xm_B___ Sb/B t VB lB ]

k'
Because particularly express tion the base area, subject and for Sb, is essentially airplane, the zero preceding of Sw and in most general can (as was

.l
aviation be readily done and aircraft, modified and to

for the (Cm_)B

equation _w

(Cm_)B With

in terms the

in equa(Cma)B, which

(6.2.1-6)

(Cmq)B.

modification

accomplished

was obtained in section 4.7 about the leading edge of the mean aerodynamic transferred to the center of gravity (eq. (6.2.1-9)), the following format which, exeept for sign, is identical to equation (6.2.1-10):

chord, is arrived

at

(Cma)B =-2(a7.3> [(Cm )BZe +(CL )Bxegl(x--Cw .l\gw

tion Applied (62.2-3) specifically becomes to the identical fuselage and to equation

Cw /

_mB l

G.2.2-3)
equa-

nacelles of the subject airplane, (62.1-11), except for sign, or

(C m _)f + (Cm_)n

= - (Cmq)f

- (Cmq)n

(6.2.2--4)

This result is interesting, inasmuch as, under certain conditions, transient oscillations where both quantities appear in the working H-646

such as short-period equation, the above 329

result indicates that the two quantities cancel each other. (c) The pitching-moment contribution of the horizontal tail due to vertical acceleration, (Cm_)h(hf), with the tail-fuselage interaction effects included, is accounted for by
lh (ma)h(hf)

-from lh

Cw

(cL )h
(6,1.2-6), aEh

(6.2.2-5)

or,

upon

substittition

for

(CL(_)h(hf)

equation

(Cm_)h(hf)An additional substitution from equation

_w

(CLq)h0_0

0% results in

(6.2.2-6)

(6.2.1-14)

(Cm_)h(hf)
where

: (Cmq)h(hf) (6.1.2-6).

0--_

(6.2.2-7)

is as defined

for

equation

(d) By applying the preceding methods to the subject airplane, the pitching moments due to the vertical acceleration were calculated and are presented in table 6.2.2-1 as a function of angle of attack and power condition. The results plotted in figure 6.2.2-1. No experimental data were available for comparison. 6.2.3 Pitching Moments Due to Pitch Rate and Vertical Acceleration in Short-Period

are

Transient

(cmq
Although simple to obtain purpo se s. In flight-test Cmq and Cmq and Cm_ have values been calculated as individual quantities quantities, for it is not experimental of these individual comparison

investigations,

it is generally quantities.

not practical

to attempt

to determine

Cmc _ as individual

To do so requires

a well-conditioned

maneuver and very accurate instrumentation. In this respect, an accurate determination of _ is generally not feasible and proper conditioning of a maneuver is difficult. As a result of these problems, flight test utilizes a control-fixed, short-period transient response maneuver to obtain a combined pitch-damping derivative, Cmq + Cm_.

In control-fixed, short-pe_od transient response maneuvers, the pitch rate, q, and the vertical acceleration, a, are approximately in phase and are similar in magnitude. As a result, for this maneuver, the pitching moments due to pitch rate, q, and vertical acceleration, 4, may be represented by the single combined derivative 330 H-646

Cmq + Cm_

as obtained from

acre
Figure 6.2.3-1

mq 2V +
flight-determined

q%

(Cmq + Cm3) V
and calculated

.qcw
Cmq + Cm_

(6.2.3-1)

compares

as a

function of angle of attack and flight power condition. The flight-determined values were obtained by using the flight-determined damping ratio and frequency of oscillatory transient response, obtained by the methods of reference 38 and equation (143) in reference 37. The calculated values are based on the conditions where the powerinduced scatter downwash at the tail, (Aeh) power of flight-determined the calculated show reasonably be noted that Cmq values good the + Cm_, obtained from larger heavily negative damped values transient than the flight responses, values but reflect somewhat correlation. values of , was reduced 40 percent. Considering the

It should

calculated

Cmq

+ Cm_

include

the

tail-lift

carryover effects onto the fuselage. As indicated in sections 4.13-4 and 5.2, all evidence indicates that the tail-lift carryover onto the fuselage should have been considered to be similar to zero for the tail-fuselage configuration of the subject airplane. Had this been done in the present instance, the tail contribution would have been have This 6.2.4
Aw e

approximately been, would Symbols

11 percent

less

and

the

calculated

values

of

Cmq

+ Cm_

would shown.

in general, approximately 11 percent smaller have resulted in an improved correlation with

in magnitude than the flight data.

aspect 1/2

ratio

of the

exposed

portion

of the

wing

B 2 = (1 - M 2 cos 2 Ac/4) CL (CL_)B lift coefficient slope of the body, referenced to the wing area,

lift-curve per deg (CLa)B nacelle, 0C L

applied

specifically

to the

fuselage

and

the

respectively and 3C L _, OqC'w 2V per of the rad horizontal tail-fuselage tail to CL_ and CLq, effects respectively, referenced to the

CL_

,CLq

0 &C'w 2V wing area,

(CL_)h(ho'(CLq)h(hO

contribution

respectively, included, per H-646

with tad

interaction

331

C m

pitching-moment increment center n net

coefficient coefficient to wing area and and nacelles about the

AC m

of the pitching-moment of gravity, referenced of the fuselage

Cmq)f

contribution

to

Cmq flow

(Cmq)we conditions,

at incompressible respectively

compressible

OCm Cm_O_b , per deg Cma of the wing body area, body about per about chord, the deg the leading edge to the of the wing wing area, mean per center of gravity, referenced

(eme_) B

to the

Cm_)BI

Cmo _ of the aerodynamic deg Cm_ of the

referenced

body

about

the

center Sb/B

of gravity ' per deg

referenced

Cm(_)BSbl

to the (C

volume

parameter, specifically

(Cmo_)fl

e' (Cmot)n/e

) applied m_ B/e respectively

to the

fuselage

and

nacelles,

0C m Cm(_, Cmq

0C m and _, 0 &___...__w OqSw 2V 2V gravity, referenced contribution of the

respectively,

about

the

center

of

to the wing body to Cm_

area, and

per Cmq,

rad respectively

(Cm_)B'

(Cmq)

contribution (Cm_)BSb/B' (Cmq)BSb /B referenced lB (Cm_)B to the (Cm &)h (hf)' (Cmq) h(h f) and

of the to the

body body

to

Cm_ area,

and

Cmq , respectively, S b, and body length,

base

(Cmq)

B'

respectively,

applied

specifically

fuselage of the for H-646 horizontal tail-fuselage tail to Cm_ and Cmq, effects

contribution respectively, accounted

with

interaction

332

(Cm_)B to the

and nacelle

(Cmq)B s

, respectively,

applied

specifically

( m )wo (%)We

contribution respectively, panel s

of the

exposed

wing to the

panels area

to

Cm_

and

Cmq,

referenced

of the

exposed

contribution of the with wing-fuselage section lift-curve

wing to Cm_ interaction slope, per deg

and Cmq, respectively, effects accounted for

mean aerodynamic chord of the wing, in. when used ratio of dimensions, ft when used in derivatives
aw e

in

mean Kf(w)

aerodynamic

chord

of the

exposed

wing

panels,

in.

Kw(f),

ratio of the lift on the wing in the presence of the fuselage and the lift carryover from the wing onto the fuselage, respectively, to the lift on the wing alone a factor equation model used for data of the body, in. (ft when to the used fuselage with and Sb the in SblB) inequation I(Cmq) L (6.2.1-3) | weJ M_0.2 to modify to correlate the theoretical with dynamic

lB lf, ln

length lB

applied

specifically _

nacelles,

respectively Ih distance of the Mach pitch

from the tail mean

center of gravity to the quarter aerodynamic chord, in.

chord

M q

number rate, rad/sec

fih
ratio of the free-stream Sb Sb/B body product wing area base dynamic pressure at the dynamic pressure area, of the area, of the sq ft body base area and body length, cuft horizontal tail to the

Sw
Sw e

sq ft exposed portion of the wing panels, sq ft 333

H-646

Sx
Tc t
X I

cross-section area nose of the body, thrust time, distance

area,

of the body sq ft

at distance

from

the

coefficient see from

S x,

the
in.

nose

of the

body

to the

cross-sectional

Xc B

distance from volume, in. xcB applied

the

nose

of body

to the

eentroid

of the

body

Xcf,Xcn

specifically in.

to the

fuselage

and

nacelle,

respectively, Xcg

distance from the leading edge dynamic chord to the center

in.

of the wing mean aeroof gravity of the airplane,

Xm B

distance gravity xmB

from the nose of the body of the airplane, in. specifically in. to the

to the

center

of

Xmf, Xm n

applied

fuselage

and

nacelles,

respectively,

x
ew e

distance from the wing aerodynamic center to the center of gravity of the airplane as a fraction of the exposed panel mean aerodynamic chord, positive forward, in. airspeed, volume VB ft/sec of the body, cu ft to the fuselage and nacelle,

V VB V f, Vn

applied

specifically

respectively _b 0_ b airplane angle of attack, deg

eh (AEh)power

downwash

angle

at the

horizontal angle

tail, at the

deg horizontal tail

increment of the downwash due to power, deg sweep of the quarter-chord

Ac/4

line,

deg

334

H-646

TABLE PITCHING MOMENTS [Flight center DUE

6.2. TO

1-1 PITCH = 0.12 RATE, 5w] Cmq

of gravity

(a)

Contribution

of _4ng,

(Cmq)w(wf) We -We 2

(Cmq)wo where
Symbol Section clce Aw e A c/4 Aspect Sweepback ratio lift-curve

2 cos o/4 l
De sc ription slope, per portion deg of wing line,

1._

_2

: + 4\ We +6eo,,,oty+ [
Refe fence Table "Fable 4.1-1 3.2-1 3.2 - 1 Magnitude 0.095 6.9 -2.5

of exposed of wing

quarter-chord

deg

Table

i
CW e

Distance center chord

of the of the as

center exposed

of gravity from the wing panels mean of 5We

aerodynamic aerodynamic

Table

6.1.1-1(a)

.124

a fraction

Equation Cmq)w e Per radian for flight center of gravity of 0.12_ w

(6.2. I-3)

-0. 757

Kw(f) Kf(w) Swe Sw _We cw

Ratio Ratio Area

of lift

on

wing

in

presence

of body on body sq ft to

to wing

wing alone

alone

Table Table Table 'Fable

4.4-1 4.4-1 3.2-1 3-1 3.2-1 3.2-1

1.09 . 14 148 178 57.1 59.5

of wing-lift of exposed _ng

carryover wing area, panels, sq ft chord chord

Reference Mean Mean

aerodynamic aerodynamic

of exposed of complete

wing wing,

panels, In.

In.

Table Table

Sammary:(Cmq)w(wO-0 743per ra_ :

(b) Contrtbuti .... f fuselage and nacelles, (Cmq)f +(Cmq)n

(Cmq)f+(Cmq)n=2(57.3_[(Cmc_)fl_+(CLc_)f_(_cf-x-_2(57_3)[ICma)nle_CLc_)_cwj\cw\ cW / cw

c_-_-])

Magnitude Symbol Description Reference Mean ,_lng area, sq ft chord about potential slope sq ft, leading flow of body per deg of the edge only, based _'lng, of wing referenced on potential in. mean to flow aerodynamic Sw only; 178 sq ft to Table 4.3-1 .00212 .00155 chord, Reference Table Table Table 3-1 3.2-1 4.7-1 178 59.5 0. 00216 per dog Fuselage 178 59.5 0. 00147 per deg Nacelles

Sw
_w

aerodynamic

( Cm a)B/e

Cm( _ of body based on

(eL)
Xc_..gg _w Xc B

Lift-curve Sw = 178

referenced

Distance mean chord Distance /Bsxx

of the center aerodynamic from dx In, 12V B nose

of gravity from the leading chord as ratio of the mean of body to centroid of body

edge of the aerodynamic volume,

wing

FI ight

data

0.12

O. 12

147.7 32.4

Xm B

Distance plane,

from in.

nose

of body

to the

center

of gravity

of the

air-

Figure

3.2-1

100.33

60.14

Summary:

_"_j(Cm_f

+ X_/(Cmo_n = 0.220-0.088=

0. 132

per

rad

H-646

335

TABLE

6.2.1-1

(Concluded)

(e)

Contribution

of horizontal lh

tail,

(Cmq)h(hf)

Symbol

Description Reference Wing mean wing area, sq ft chord, in.

Reference Table Table Figure 3-1 3.2-1 3.2-2 178

Magnitude

Sw cw
th

aerodynamic from reference to the quarter of tail rad lift

Distance gravity Rate

(flight) center of chord of the tail, in. with pitch rate,

(CLq)h(hf)

of change per

Table

6.1.1-1(c)

_CL -q5 w

o_V
_h Dynamic-pressure ratio at taft W_th power on Table 6.1.1-1(d), column 2 As per table column 2 6.1.1-1(d),

Summary:

(Cmq)h(hf)

:-13,152(qq-_h)

per

rad

(d)

Pitching

moment

due

to pitch

rate,

Cmq

Cmq

=(Cmq)w(wf

) +(Cmq)f

+(Cmq)

n +(Cmq)h(hl)

=-0743 0.13213152( + "h

= -0,611 - 13.152{qh_

Table _h

6.1.1-1(d), column 2

Cmq ab, (leg

= -0.611

- 13,152(_)
/

W_
0 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 a13.8 b14.1 14.4 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 --.......... 0.20 1.0868 1,1028 1.1167 1.1222 1.1333 1.1389 1.1344 1.1417 1.1361 1.1278 1.1222 0.44 1.2027 1.2108 1.2216 1.2324 1.2432 1.2541 1.2622 1,2676 1.2757 1.2811 1.2811 ].2784 0 -13.76 -13.76 -13.76 -13.76 -13.76 -13, 76 -13.76 -13.76 -13.76 -13.76 ....... .............

T c 0.20 -14.90 -15.12 -15.30 -15.37 -15.52 -15.60 -15.66 -15.63 -15.55 -15.44 15.37 0.44 -16.43 -16.54 -16.68 -16.82 -16.96 -17.10 -17.21 -17.28 -17.39 -17,46 -17.46 17.42

a'b'cstall angles for Tc = O, 0.20, 0.44 power conditions, respectively. !

336

H-646

TABLE

6.2.2-

PITCHING

MObIENT [Flight

DUE center

TO

VERTICAL of gravity

ACCELERATION, = 0.12 _w]

Cm_

(a)

Contribution

of

_dng,

(Cm_)w(w

In

accordance

with

discussion

in

section

6.2.2(a),

(Cm;)_(wO :o
(b) Contributions of fuselage and nacelles, (Cm_,) f +

(Cm_k

Since,

in

accordance

with

equation

(6.2.2-4},

(Cm_)f

+(Cm_)n

= -[(Cmq)f

+ (Cmq)n]

then,

from

table

6.2.

1-1(b)

(Cma)f

+(Cm_)n

= -0,132

per

rad

(c)

Contribution

of

horizontal

tail,

(Cm&)h(h

Since,

in

accordance

with

equation

(6.2.2-7), ae h

(0mz)_ =(Om_)h(h,
then, on the basis of the calculated value of

(cmq )h(h0
-_-b

tn table6.2.1-1(c),

( Cm

_h(hf)

-13.

152k_-_J

where q__hh _)h are obtained from table 6.1.2-1(d)

_j
(d) Pitching

a%
moments due to vertical acceleration, Cm_

Cm_

=(Cm_)w(wf)

+(Cm_)f

+(Cm_)n

+(CmS)h(hi

:0 0
= -0. 132 -

13
/_h\ o_h
13.152/--/

\_j

@
Table 6.1.2-1(d), column 2

,_,

Table 6.1.2-l(d), column 3 ......

0( h

O_b,

deg

q_ / F c 0 0.20 1. 086_ 0.44 1.2027 1.2108 1.2216 I. 232-; 1.2432 1.2541 1.2622 1.2676 1.2757 1.2811 1.2811 1,2784 / T c = 0, 0.20, 0.475 O. 475 ,475 0.475 ,475 0.470 .450 0.425 .405 ..... ......... 0

T e 0.20 0.44 0

T_
0.20 O. 44

-4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 a13.8 b_4,1 c14.4 abe ' ' Stall

1.0 1.0 1.0 I. 0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 --..........

1.1028 I.t167 I. 1222 1.1333 1. 1589

0.785 O. 775 .760 0.730 .680 0.640 .600 0.530 .475 0.470

0.915 "0_ '920 ,905 0.865 .810 0.740 .670 0.589 .500 0,470 .450

-6.38 -6.38 -6.38 -6.38 -6.38 -6.31 -6.05 -5.72 -5.46 ...... ............

-ll.52 -ll.51 -ll.35 -11.01 -10.32 -9,76 -9,14 -8.05 -7.18 7.07

-14.70 -14.91 -14.80 -14.28 -13,49 -12.42 -11.30 -10,01 -8.56 -8.05 7.70

1.1444 1.1417 1.1361 1.1278 1. 1222

angles

for

0.44

power

conditions,

respectively.

H-646

337

0 Original ---4 calculation -- (Z_h)powe r reduced 40 percent

-8

Cmq, per rad -12

-15

0 Figure Cmq, 6.2. with I-1. angle Variation of attack 0 of calcuIated and _ -----4 power.

%, deg

12 due to pitch Cw"

16 rate,

pitching Center Original

moment of gravity

= 0.12

calculation reduced 40 percent

(,_h)power

J
J

0J -8 Crn_, per rad

_,)d,

J
-15 -20 -4 Figure Cm&,
338

4 ab ' deg 8 pitching Center

12

16 acceleration,

6.2.2-1. with angle

Variation of attack

of calculated and power.

moment due to vertical of gravity = 0.12 _w"

H-646

Flight Calculated ((Z_.h)powe r reduced 40 percent)

.2

Tc

.1
0

OOCb
O0 0 0

-10

Cmq + Cm_, per tad (3:)

0 0 0

o%

T_ =0

-2O
0

o
0 4 Ob, deg

c
8 12 15

Figure values gravity

H-646

6.2.3-1. obtained = 0.12

Comparison from c w. transient

of calculated short-period

Cmq

+ Cm_

with

flight-determined Center of

pulse

maneuvers.

339

6.3 During is presumed constrained equations: Lift

Short-Period

Transient

Oscillation

Characteristics transient oscillations, the airplane V. It is thus considered to be by the following small-perturbation

control-fixed longitudinal short-period to be oscillating at a constant velocity, to two degrees of freedom represented

W(Aan) Moment

=mV(Aq-A_

c LoAa

+CLqA

q_ 5w

+CL_A_-_

5w)

qS w

(6.3-1)

IyAq

maA_

+ CmqAq

+ Cm_A_

qSwc w

(6.3-2)

where,

for

present

purposes,

all

derivatives

and

motions

are

in radians. and

Differentiating equation(6.3-1) Aq in equation (6.3-2) provides quantitie s):

the

with respect to time and substituting for A_ following result (after removing negligible

A_ + _

Lo_

(Cmq

+ Cm

A_

A_=

(6.3-3)

where
m

is the is the

mass moment

density

of the

airplane about to the

(W), Y-axis,

slugs slug-ft 2

Iy

of inertia equal

_" is a time

parameter

m pVS--'-_ ' seconds m OSw5 w slugs/cubic foot

Je

is the

relative mass

aircraft

density, air,

P is the V is the Because

density

of the feet/second

airspeed, equation

(6.3-3)

is a second-order

differential

equation

of the

form

A_ then undamped natural frequency

+ 2 _ ahA(_ + wn2Aa

= 0

(6.3-4)

340

H-646

(Cm
and damping ratio

Cn CL .

(6.3-5)

wn

- 2TW n

[c m w' /]
Lo_ 2Iy (Cmq + Cm_ be obtained from characteristics are time-to-damp-to-one-half

(6.3-6)

The

damped

natural

frequency

can

(6.3-7)

When the short-period transient oscillatory in terms of period of damped oscillations and

the

to be expressed amplitude,

p = _27r _n d and

(6.3-8)

T1/2
The T1/2 weight culated was preceding relations of the The the were subject derivatives applied airplane characteristics of 3380 data pounds.

O. 693

(6.3-9)

to the

calculation

of the of 6000 Cm_

short-period feet were tail, and

P a nominal

and

at an altitude Cma, and

CLa, downwash P and

based Ae h show

on calpower' good

in which 40 percent.

power-induced The calculated

at the T1/2

horizontal characteristics

reduced

correlation with reflects the care histories, which Figure shows

flight data in figure 6.3-1. The consistency of the flight data points exercised in applying the technique of reference 38 to the flight time involved damping ratios of the order of 0.7. a typical calculated equations flight time history used in the analysis. time-histories based on flight-determined (6.3-1) and (6.3,2) to which CL_eA6 e The figure and caland

also

6.3-2 shows comparative using

culated

derivatives

Cm_eA6 e, respectively, were added. The A6 e input shown in figure in both calculated time histories. The calculated time histories were computerized solution of the standard linearized equations of motion. 6.3.1 Symbols load factor and perturbed respectively, g units value of the

6.3-2 was used obtained from a

an, Aa n

load

factor,

H-646

341

CL CLo_=
CL& = OO_b 0C L _
OtC w

lift

coefficient

referenced

to the

wing

area

, per , per

rad rad

2V 8C L --, 2V 0CL CL6e _ee with the and elevator accounted tab geared for, per to move tad to the wing wing area with the

CLq

per

rad

elevator
C m

pitching-moment coefficient referenced and mean aerodynamic chord of the 0C m

Cm_

= Oab _C m

' per

rad

Cm& = O_ 2V

, per

rad

Cmq

OCm - --, 0 q_w 2V

per

rad

0Cm Cm_ e 05 e with the and elevator accounted chord tab geared per to move rad ft with the

elevator
CW

for,

mean

aerodynamic

of the wing, ft/sec2 airplane

g Iy

gravitational mass moment axis (pitch airplane period pitch mass, of the rate,

acceleration,

of inertia of the axis), slug-ft 2 W -=-, slugs short-period rad/sec

about

the

Y-body

P q

transient

oscillations,

sec

342

H-646

free-stream

dynamic

pressure,

lb/sq

ft rate, respectively,

q, Aq

pitch rate rad/sec

and perturbed value of pitch unless indicated otherwise and perturbed rad/sec z unless

pitch acceleration respectively,

value of pitch acceleration, indicated otherwise

Sw
T c T1/2
J

wing thrust

area,

sq ft

coefficient transient oscillation to damp to

time for the short-period half amplitude, sec time, airspeed, calibrated airplane airplane unless perturbed perturbed perturbed sec ft/sec airspeed, weight, lb knots

t V Vc W o_, o_ b

angle of attack relative indicated otherwise value value value of ab, rad time rate

to the

X-body

axis,

rad

ArT

of the of the and

of change of a b,

of

ab,

rad/sec 2 deflec-

acceleration perturbed rad unless at the

rad/sec

5 e, A5 e

elevator tion, r increment power, damping

deflection respectively,

value of elevator indicated otherwise tail due to

(Aeh)powe

of downwash deg ratio airplane of the

horizontal

short-period m P Sw_ w slugs/cu , sec of the

transient

oscillation

Pc P
T

relative mass time

density, air,

density parameter,

of the

ft

m pVSw

_n

undamped natural frequency oscillation, rad/sec damped natural frequency

short-period

transient

COn d

H-646

343

I I I
I Q

r/l

0 0
]

I
o.

Iq D
0 I

I I I
0 0

I I I

II

I I
0

!
,I
I
t,--

_o

I
u C..) c_

Iq)

_'! I 1 I
O @

--_
LL

II
_U_ I---

II
I_

$
0

d_
I

!"

_g
I
o

o_
ffl

//
!
o 0-

_,)o_

o_

g_
r-t

344

H-646

an, g

2F o
120 80 _

__---_ I

- ....... I

_ ll

Flight data Flight derivatives Calculated derivatives

40

J\
q, deg/sec 0 2 -40

_,,_

-80 -120 16

q, deg/sec

A
7

-8 4 a, deg 0 -4 0 1

2 t, _ec

Comparison Figure 6.3-2. response to pulse-type H-646

of ealet_I: _,_(_, flight and input. Center of gravity

_tetermined = 0.126 w.

time

histories

of airplane

345

6.4 Windup-Turn Characteristics In considering the calculation of the windup-turn characteristics (expressed as the variation of elevator displacement and stick force as a function of load factor), the airplane is normally assumed to be maneuvering at constant weight, center of gravity, altitude, and velocity. In addition, the maneuver is considered to be performed in steps rather than as a steadily tightening turn, thereby eliminating pitching acceleration, q, and vertical acceleration, _, from consideration. As a result of these constraints, the windup turn is represented by the following two equations when the maneuver is initiated from trim level flight: CL
(6.4-1) + CLStab(Stab)o Sw\ _
00

= CL_(a

b - _o)

+ CLq

2--V + CL_eSe

Cm = Cm o + Cme_(_b

- ao)

+ Cmq

2V qCw

+ CmSeSe

-CLStab(Stab)

Cw

_w_] (6.4-2)

where anW C L = -(6.4-3)

w
and, from reference 43,

(6.4-4)

CL_ e geared

and

Cm_ e elevator

are

control-effectiveness in section to the trim

terms 4.13, setting section

including based

the

effect area

of the

tab

to the

as determined is the lift Sh, from due

on wing when

CLStab(Stab)o on horizontal-tail Ih mean 6.4.1 is the

of the tab 4.13

5 e = 0 ,

based

area, distance

obtained the center

from

of gravity figure

to the 3.2-2

quarter-chord

point

of the

tail

aerodynamic Variation To obtain

chord,

obtained

from

of CQrim and 5etri m the and variation (6.4-2) are of

With Load Factor and 5etri m with load factor, an, equa-

crtrim transposed

tions

(6.4-1)

to the

following

format:

346

H-646

CL-CLq

2V

(ACLtab)o=CLa(Olb-ao)

+CI__e5 e

(6.4.1-1)

-Cmq qcw2V(ACmtab)o : Cmo + Cmo_(_bThe right-hand side of equations moment equations, respectively, sented by the lift curves ures 5.2-3 and 5.2-4. The equivalent Cm obtain left-hand is used versus C_trim of figure (6.4.1-1) and (6.4.1-2) with trim tab at zero 5.1.3-1 and the

O_o) + Cm_e5 e

(6.4.1-2)

are the static-lift and pitchingsetting when 5 e = 0 , reprecurves of fig-

pitching-moment

left-hand side of equations net static lift and pitching CL and plots 5etri (figs. m. 5.1.3-1 The

(6.4.1-1) moments and 5etri m and versus

and (6.4.1-2) to be applied as shown the

can be considered to the C L versus in the point Cm following

as the a and sketch, to of the plot

5.2-4), obtained (6.4.1-2)) _b

from

of intersection versus CL

quantities to obtain

(of eqs. _trim

(6.4.1-1) CL

on the

on the

plot.

CL

_e

_e

F f0
/

CL- CLq 2--'_-

tab/o

//
In applying this procedure, of the being the representative power condition H-646

_b _trim

Cm

1/i
-Cmq -_-

T
Cmtab)o

curves

on the

Cm

versus

CL

plot

are

oriented when the the _trim

to be

center-of-gravity condition being analyzed. Also, analyzed is between two plotted power conditions,

347

and 6etri m are

the desired power

obtained condition.

for

the

two bracketing

power

conditions

and

interpolated

for

There still pitching moment the are altitude

remains the problem (the left-hand side of the for dynamic selected windup

of determining of eqs. (6.4.1-1) turn would

the equivalent and (6.4.1-2)). and

net _trim

static lift Considering and 5etri the of

and that m thrust _trim

and velocity

be known,

to be determined and The the

load

factors, CLq of the moments

a n , it remains and Cmq , which tail trim

to determine are functions required of the involves

coefficient and in the T c.

derivatives, ratio pitching The

dynamic-pressure of lift and

horizontal due to the

is also setting

to be used tab, an iteration

increments and

(ACLtab)o

(ACmtab)o.

determination

of these

quantities

procedure to arrive at trim its application in table 6.4-1

conditions. The procedure is best to the subject airplane as follows:

explained

by tracing

(a) The calculations to be performed are for altitude, velocity, weight, and loadfactor conditions of actual flight data for the purpose of comparing the degree of correlation between calculated and flight characteristics. In the absence of flight data, the velocity, weight, and altitude would be considered to be constant. (b) Table 6.4.1-1(a) lists pertinent known and required parameters. conditions for the and lift coefficients analysis. in

(c) In table 6.4.1-1(b) columns 1 to 4 list the stipulated Columns 5 and 7 list the corresponding calculated pitch rates accordance with equations (6.4--4) and (6.4-3), respectively. (d) figure (e) equal Using 5.3-5 Using for CL determined coefficient total first Tc
l

in column of zero. from

7,

obtain

the

first

estimate

of total

T c

from

a drag CL and the

columns of

7 and O_trim

8,

and

considering 5etri m from

Cm fig-

to be

to zero,

obtain and

approximation 5.2-4 must

and

ures 5.1.3-1 considered. (f) CLq' Using Cmq'

5.2-4.

Figure

be oriented

to the

center

of gravity

being

total and

T_

and

atrim figures

from 6.1.1-1,

columns 6.2.1-1,

8 and and

9,

obtain

the

first

estimate

of

q_h_hfrom Clio

5.1.2-5,

respectively.

static

(g) The results of the first lift and pitching moments the first iterated 15 and values columns

approximations are now used to obtain equivalent net (columns 14 and 16, respectively) which are now used of total 17 to 21. T_, atrim, 5etrim, CLq, Cmq, and

to obtain qh --,

in columns

(h) 348

The

iteration

procedure

is repeated,

as indicated

in table

6.4.1-1(b),

until H-646

satisfactory The

convergence predicted variations

is achieved. of total

Two iterations T tc, _trim, and

will normally 5etri m,

be

sufficient. from pre-

obtained

ceding calculations in figure 6.4.2-1. wind-tunnel data, 6.4.2 Variation

based on calculated characteristics, are Also shown in the figure are the predicted obtained by using the foregoing procedure. and Stick Forces derived by With Load Factor in section

compared variations,

with flight data based on

of Hinge Moments

plane

The equation for the stick forces

stick forces was are represented

4.14.1.

For

the

subject

air-

Fstic The hinge moment ratio of the of 1.0 __ Chh(f ) = CLh(f) where CLh(f ) of ah, 5 e, is the and net 5ta b is the due pitching to tab moment deflection where lift coefficient horizontal were

k = 40 Chh(f ) q_ tail shown, referenced in section - x_/4)h + 6h (ACm)Stab to the 4.14.1, ,, tail area, Sh,

(4.14.1-20) and a by

dynamic-pressure

to be represented

_Xhinge

(4.14.1-3)

of the

tail

in the

presence

of the

body

as

a function

A Cm ) 5tab t aerodynamic For 5tab = 1.5 dynamic-pressure and the

about

the

quarter-chord

point

of the

tail

mean

chord subject

airplane

the

tab

was

geared

to the

elevator

in the

ratio

of

was

also

used included,

as a trim can

tab,

the

above to

equation

(4.14.1-3),

with

ratio

be modified

+ CL6tab(_tab)]

(Xhinge

Ch-x_/4)-h

+ C/m6tabL\--_e/Ff6tab_

5 e + (6tab)o]

} _-_-h q_

(6, 4.2-1)

where (6tab) 5tab o is the is the trim setting of the gearing tab when 5e = 0

tab-elevator

ratio

H-646

349

(Xhinge - x_/4) h is the distance between the

mean table aerodynamic 4.14.1-2 (a) Ch is the chord and the hinge line,

quarter from

chord table

of the 3.2-2

horizontal-tail or

obtained

horizontal-tail

mean

aerodynamic

chord,

obtained

from

table

3.2-1

q(-_-)
\ -loo/

is the

dynamic-pressure

ratio

at the

horizontal

tail,

obtained

from

fig-

ure

5.1.2-5 CLfta b from is the lift effectiveness (4.13.1-2) of the or table tab, based on horizontal-tail area, Sh,

obtained

equation

4.13.1-1(c) of the tab about from the quarter chord of

Cmhta bz the tail column

is the pitching-moment

effectiveness

mean aerodynamic 14, as an average

chord, based on tail area, obtained for 5ta b = 6 , -7.5 , -15 - (ACm) 6tab 5tab

table

4.14.1-3,

(6.4.2-2)

CmSta

_LLh(f))(htab)o=0 the body as a function 5 e = 0 , from

is the of

net

lift he,

coefficient and area,

of the

horizontal setting

tail

in the of the ratio

presence tab equal to

of

(_h,

5ta b with Sh, and

the trim

0 when obtained

referenced 4.14.1-1

to tail for

dynamic-pressure of 1.5

of 1.0,

figure

tab-elevator

ratio

The angle is obtained

of attack from

of the horizontal

tail,

required

to determine

(_h(f))(htab)=

0,

C_h = _trim

eh + (Ac_h)q

(6.4.2-3)

whe

re

atrim obtained _h function

is the from is the of table

airplane 6.4.1-1(b)

angle

of attack

in the

turn

for the

load

factor,

a n,

considered,

downwash and

at the total

horizontal
t

tail,

obtained

from

figure

5.1.2-5

as a

_trim

Tc of angle of attack at the tail due to pitching rate, q,

(Ao_h) q is the obtained from

increment

350

H-646

q/h (Aah)q =
where l h is the aerodynamic distance chord from the from center figure of gravity 3.2-2 of hinge moment and stick force to the subject airplane. The The predicted hinge moments 6.4.2-1. Also shown in the data. to the quarter chord of the tail mean 57.3 _ (6.4.2-4)

obtained

The procedure for obtaining the predicted variation as a function of load factor in a windup turn was applied summary calculations are presented in table 6.4.2-1. and stick forces are compared with flight data in figure figure are the predicted variations based on wind-tunnel 6.4.3 Symbols load factor, g units

an
Chh(f)

hinge-moment coefficient of the horizontal effects on the tail included, referenced aerodynamic chord of the tail lift coefficient of airplane when lift o coefficient to

tail with fuselage to the area and mean

CL (ACLtab)o

increment the tab

referenced
n

6e=0, equal to the wing area of the included, tail

to the trim setting of [ \/ _th \Sh CL6tab(6tab)o[_-_.}{----}, \ w/\ q_o/ _h, 6 e, to the setting and tail 6ta b, area tab equal to with

due

CLh(f)

net

lift

coefficient effects

due to referenced trim

fuselage net lift zero CLa CLq 0qCv 2V airplane 0CL

(_LLh (f)) (6ta b )o =0

coefficient, when 5 e=0

CLh(f ), with slope, to the referenced wing

of the

lift-curve , referenced

to the wing per rad

area,

per

deg

area,

OC L CL6 e elevator effectiveness, 06 e , with the elevator tab area, geared to

move with the pressure ratio CL6ta b tab effectiveness, to 1.0,

elevator, referenced to the wing equal to 1.0, per deg OCL _ , with to the the dynamic-pressure area,

dynamic-

ratio per deg

equal

referenced

horizontal-tail

H-646

351

Cm

pitching-moment

coefficient at zero lift to the area with the elevator and mean aero-

Cm o

airplane pitching-moment coefficient and tab at zero setting, referenced dynamic chord of the wing

increment of pitching-moment coefficient about the quarter-chord point of the tail mean aerodynamic chord due to the tab deflection, referenced to the area and the mean aerodynamic chord of the horizontal tail increment of the airplane trim setting of the tab and
Cm_

ACmtab)o

pitching-moment when 6 e = 0 , chord of the

coefficient due to the referenced to the area

mean

aerodynamic

wing 0C m

airplane static the area and airplane

Cmq

pitch-stability parameter, 0_---b-' referenced to mean aerodynamic chord of the wing, per deg 0Cm pitch-damplng parameter, --, referenced to the q_w 2V mean aerodynamic chord of the OCm wing, per rad

area Cm6 e

and

airplane pitch-control effectiveness, _, with the elevator tab geared to move with the elevator, referenced to the area and mean aerodynamic chord of the wing, per deg b pitching-moment effectiveness of the tab about the quarter-chord point of the tail mean aerodynamic chord, referenced to the area and mean aerodynamic chord of the horizontal tail, per deg tail wing stick mean mean force, aerodynamic aerodynamic lb of gravity, altitude, ft of gravity to the chord, ft quarter chord of the ft/sec 2 chord, chord, in. ft

CmSta

_h _w Fstick g hp lh

acceleration pressure

distance from the center tail mean aerodynamic pitching pitching dynamic rate, rad/sec

acceleration, pressure

rad/sec2 at the horizontal tail, lb/sq ft H-646

352

free-stream
")o

dynamic

pressure, tail and

lb/sq wing,

ft respectively, sq ft

S h, SW Tc t V W (Xhing e - x_/4) h
]

area thrust time,

of the horizontal coefficient sec ft/sec weight, lb

airspeed, airplane distance, chord airplane angle

on the tail mean point to the hinge angle of attack of the ah due

aerodynamic line, in. to the tail pitching lift

chord,

from

the quarter-

o_ b ah (AO_h) q
O_ o

relative horizontal to the

X-body

axls,

deg deg

of attack of angle

(with rate, (with

5 e = 0), deg 5e = 0),

increment airplane o_b

of attack load

at zero a n,

deg

atrim 0o_b a-0t 6e 6etrim 6tab (5tab) o ch (Aeh)powe r

at constant

factor,

in the

turn,

deg

elevator elevator tab tab

deflection, position deg when angle of eh for

deg atrim, deg

deflection, setting

5 e = 0 , deg at the due horizontal to power, tail, deg deg

downwash increment

Flight

Research

Center, and Space July 30, Administration,

National

Aeronautics Calif.,

Edwards,

1971.

H-646

353

TABLE _rINDUP-TURN VARIATION (a) Symbol .......... hp V _ W an T_ c Airplane Pressure True center altitude, airspeed, if/see dynamic-pressure weight, factor, thrust lb ratio, De sc ripti of gravity ft OF C_trim

6.4.

I-1 AND 5etri m WITH LOAD FACTOR

Pertinent on

parameters Re ferene Flight Flight Flight lb/sq ff Flight Flight Flight data data data data data data 5.3-5 e M agni 0.12 6000 Flight Flight Flight Flight See "Description" Table 3.2-1 3.2-1 4.13.1-1(c) 178 4.96 0.0279 per deg data data data data Ow tude

Free-stream Airplane Load Airplane

g units coefficient, - (ACLtab)o area, sq ft chord, OCL ft function of

Figure

C L - C Lq q_w Reference _Jng

cw
CLSta b

Wing

mean

aerodynamic

Table Table

Lift effectiveness tail area, Sh=

of tab, 32.5

_atab'

based

on horizontal-

sq ft 6 e = 0 , deg Flight Figure data 3.2-2 2.0 14.40

(5tab)o lh _h

Trim

setting of tab when

Distance chord

from the center of gravity to the quarter of the taft mean aerodynamic chord, ft ratio at horizontal tail

Dynamic-pressure

Figure

5.1.2-5

f(T_,

_t rim)

Sh/ h
(ACLtab) o CLbtab(btab) S----\q2/, referenced to Sw (ACmtab) o Airplane (5tab) anW CL pitching-moment lh = - (AC Ltab ) o c,_---, increment due to

Equations (6.4-1) (6.4. I-I) Equations (6.4.1-1) (6.4-1)

and

0.0102C-_h

and

-. 0296_) q_

Equation

(6.4-3)

_Sw
DC L C Lq ^ qCw , per rad Figure 6.1.1-t f(C_trim, T_,)

_TgaCm
, per Cmq _qcw 2V rad Figure 6.2.1-1 f(Cetrim, "1"1c)

g V (an

_ 1) an

, rad/sec

Equation

(6.4-4)

f(v, an)

Obtained and flight static

from Cm center lift versus

CL

versus CL plot

c_b (fig.

plot

(fig.

5. 1.3-1) to net

5.2-4)rotated

of

gravity

using qc_,

equivalent (ACLtab,
\

(C L -CLq
/

o)On

the

lift

q_w as per (ACmtal,)o) sketch in

curve versus

and

_-Cmq_ plot,

on section

the 6.4.1

Cm

cL

354

H-646

_'_ _-

(_) _

r_ _ ,,__ _ ,- ....

@ _Z j=_ _

@i_
#####i
iiiii i i i I i

_7

.@_
i ra"_ i I i

_26

_7

@ _.
II r...1

o=
7 ,#
F..q_ ,-1

_T_ =
,N

II o

c'_

.
II o

o_

....

S@
+ c_ ....

_
t I ,'4

N_NN

?1. _ >
? , ? ,

'_.1 _

'_'

"6

io
o. o:;

It o

_.
H o

_o
_ " o o

_ ,2 -_...

_o ,_I _, >
1

2
_ <1 N ,._

o
. . o

,'I ,_!_
!

_ ....

H-646

355

TAB VARIATION OF HINGE MOMENTS AND (a) Symbol .......... hp an V _ q Airplane Pressure Load factor, center altitude, g units ft/secdynamic rad/sec thrust angle angle coefficient of attack in turn, ratio in turn, deg at tail deg pressure, ft/sec of gravity tt Description STICK

LE

6.4.2-1 FORCES WITH LOAD FACTOR IN WINDUP TURN

Pertinent

parameters Reference Flight Flight ) t Selected columns Column Column Column Column Column 5 28 25 26 29 Table 6.4.1-1(b) data data flight 1, 2, data, and 0.126 6000 table 3 6.4.1-1(b), Magnitude w

Airspeed, Free-stream Pitch Airplane Airplane Elevator rate,

T_
trim etrim

_h
Dynamic-pressure Sh _h (5tab) 6tab Tab--elevator gearing ratio Section 3 1.5 o Horizontal-tail Horizontal-tail Trim setting of area, mean tab sq ft chord, deg in. Table Table Flight 3.2-1 3.2 data - 1 32.5 32.45 2.0

aerodynamic when 5 e = 0 ,

(Xhing lh

e - x_/4)

Distance Distance chord,

between from I_ the

hinge center q/h

line

and

tail

quarter to the tail

chord, quarter

in.

Table Table

4.14.1-2(a) 6.4.1-1(a)

1.17 14.40

of gravity

c_h _h

C_trim Downwash

e h + 57.3

---_--,

deg tail, deg

Equation Figure

(6.4.2-3) 5.1.2-5

Va riable ]f(atrtm, T_)

at horizontal

Net (CLh(f)) (Stab)o=0 as tab

lift

coefficient of = 0, qh,

of horizontal 6e, and to _CL

tail

only /6t

in presence _) 6 e = 1.55 sq ft

of body e, trim

Figure

4.14.1-1

f(crh,

6e)

function setting

5ta b = (_e S h = 32.5

referenced

CLsta

Lift

effectiveness Sh=32.5 sq ft

of tab,

_,

referenced

to

Table

6.4.1-1(a)

O. 0279

per

deg

C_6ta

Pitching mean

effectiveness aerodynamic

of tab chord,

about A (

quarter

chord

of tail

Table column

4.14.1-3, 14

For

T_

= 0: - -0. 00908 b value for

_ Cm)Stab t_a b

C I mSta average

, per

deg

5ta b = 6.0 to -7.5 Table 5.4-1, column 14 For T_ = 0.20: -0.0104 value to for -7,5

CmStab average

5ta b = 6,0 Summary: From equation (6.4.2-1) and above parameters,

Chh(f

) =t[(C"Lh(f))(Stab)o=0

+ 0.0558]

0.0361+

CmStab(1.55

e +2)l

_h

356

H-646


'_ +
I

_,
i

8
_
_

@ _. @l@i
d _d _3 7

_ _. _. _2_. ?_,_,

+ oo _l.l. i .

#
i_ ,-, t i_" 'R II

d_###

I:1

.o

"S
m

I I
!

II

g,
+

I
I ! r.9

_@

oooo

o o II 44 o

i A O III

+
,-_

r_

# d

@:

d
+

I
I i

e
--4!

_v

"S

"o

oo00

.i_
_.)

oi_ o o
_ I I" I I

r_

e
8

_oo0,

@J
dd_d_ d

I
I _' I* I" I" I"

H-646

357

.4-

T_
0 12 Flight Wind tunnel m__ Calculated (Z_.h)power reduced 40 percent

%,

deg

-4

ae. eg 0 ........ d
4 .04

Chh(f)

-.04 40

0 Fstick, Ib -,10

-8O t.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2.0

2.2

2.4

an, g unRs Figure 6.4.2-1. Comparison a windup turn -with those Altitude of calculated hinge-moment and stick-force characteristics obtained from v_nd-tmmel and flight data as a hmction of of gravity = 0.12 _w; V = 220 ft/sec. H-646

Iced factor. 358

= 6000 ft; center

REFERENCES

1.

Anon. : USAF Wright-Patterson

Stability Air

and Control Force Base,

Datcom. Air Force Flight Dynamics Oct. 1960 (rev. Aug. 1968). : Full-Scale Characteristics Wind-Tunnel of a Light

Lab.,

2.

Fink, Marvin P. ; and Freeman, Delma C., Jr. Investigation of Static Longitudinal and Lateral Engine Airplane. NASA TN D-4983, 1969. Abbott, Airfoil Ira H. ; yon Doenhoff, Albert E. ; and Data. NACA Rep. 824, 1945. Hamilton Reynolds

Twin-

3.

Stivers,

Louis

S.,

Jr.

: Summary

of

4.

Loftin, Lawrence K., Jr. ; and Smith, of 15 NACA Airfoil Sections at Seven 9.0X 106 . NACA TN 1945, 1949. Stack, John; and yon Doenhoff, Albert Speeds. NACA Rep. 492, 1934. Gault, istics

A. : Aerodynamic Characteristics Numbers From 0.7 106 to

5.

E. :

Tests

of 16 Related

Airfoils

at High

6.

Donald E. : A Correlation of Low-Speed, Airfoil-Section With Reynolds Number and Airfoil Geometry. NACA John; and Harper, Speeds for Wings

Stalling CharacterTN 3963, 1957. Span Loading at Rep. 921, 1948. Lift IncreFlow.

7.

DeYoung, Subsonic Lowry, ments NACA Silverstein, Surfaces.

Charles W. : Theoretical Symmetric Having Arbitrary Plan Form. NACA Edward C. : A Method at Low Angles of Attack

8.

John G. ; and Polhamus, Due to Flap Deflection TN 3911, 1957. Abe; and Katzoff, NACA Rep. 688,

for Predicting in Incompressible

9.

S. : Aerodynamic 1940. Method Numbers.

Characteristics

of Horizontal

Tail

10.

Hopkins, Edward J. : A Semtempirical of Bodies of Revolution at Low Mach Pitts, William C. ; Nielsen, Pressure of Wing-Body-Tail Speeds. NACA Rep. 1307, Etkin, Multhopp, Silverstein, and Wake Bernard: Dynamics

for

Calculating the Pitching NACA RM A51C14, 1951. and and

Moment

11.

Jack N. ; and Combinations 1957. of flight. of the John

Kaattari, George E. : Lift at Subsonic, Transonic,

Center of Supersonic

12. 13. 14.

Wiley

& Sons, NACA TM

Inc., 1036,

c. 1959, 1942.

p.

479.

H. : Aerodynamics

Fuselage.

Abe; and Katzoff, S. : Design Charts for Predicting Downwash Angles Characteristics Behind Plain and Flapped Wings. NACA Rep. 648, 1939. Jr. : Prediction of Downwash NACA TN 3346, 1955. Behind

15.

DeYoung, John; and Barling, Walter H., Swept-Wing Airplanes at Subsonic Speed.

H-646

359

16. Decker, James L. : Prediction

Arbitrary Tail Locations.

of Downwash at Various Angles of Attack for Aeron. Eng. Rev., vol. 15, no. 8, Aug. 1956, pp. 22-27, H. : The Rolling Behind Wings. Up of the J. Aeron. Trailing Sci., Vortex vol. 18,

61.

17.

Spreiter, John R. ; and Sacks, Alvin Sheet and Its Effect on the Downwash no. 1, Jan. 1951, pp. 21-32, 72. Silverstein, Abe; Katzoff, Behind Plain and Flapped Anon. : USAF Control Lab., Hoggard, Untapered 1948. Stability and Aug. 1956. S. ; and Airfoils. Control

18. 19. 20.

Bullivant, NACA Handbook.

W. Rep.

Kenneth: Downwash 651, 1939. Wright Air Dev. Div.,

and

Wake

Flight

H. Page, Jr. ; and Wings of Various

Hagerman, John R. : Downwash and Aspect Ratios and Angles of Sweep.

Wake Behind NACA TN 1703,

21.

Lange, Roy H. ; and Fink, Marvin P. : Studies of the Flow Field Behind Scale 47.5 Sweptback Wing Having Circular-Arc Airfoil Sections and with Drooped-Nose and Plain Flaps. NACA RM L51L12, 1952.

a Large Equipped

22.

Johnson, Ben H., Jr. ; and Rollins, Frances W. : Investigation of a Thin Wing of Aspect Ratio 4 in the Ames 12-Foot Pressure Wind Tunnel. V - Static Longitudinal Stability and Control Throughout the Subsonic Speed Range of a Semispan Model of a Supersonic Airplane. NACA RM A9101, 1949. Foster, Gerald V. ; and Griner, Roland F. : Low-Speed Longitudinal and Wake Airflow Characteristics at a Reynolds Number of 5.5 106"_of a Circular-Arc Sweptback Wing With a Fuselage and a Horizontal Tail at Various Vertical Positions. NACA RM L51C30, 1951. Bandettini, Partial-Span Fuselage-Tail

23.

52

24.

Angelo; and Selan, Ralph: The Effects of Horizontal-Tail Height and a Leading-Edge Extension on the Static Longitudinal Stability of a WingCombination Having a Sweptback Wing. NACA RM A53J07, 1954. Sidewash, and Wake of 6.8 X 106 With

25.

Furlong, G. Chester; and Bollech, Thomas V. : Downwash, Surveys Behind a 42 Sweptback Wing at a Reynolds Number and Without a Simulated Ground. NACA RM L8G22, 1948.

26.

Woods, Robert L. ; and Spooner, Stanley H. : Effects of High-Lift and Stall-Control Devices, Fuselage, and Horizontal Tail on a Wing Swept Back 42 at the Leading Edge and Having Symmetrical Circular-Arc Airfoil Sections at a Reynolds Number of 6.9 X 106. NACA RM L9B11, 1949. Hoerner, Midland Sighard F. : Park, N. J.), Fluid-Dynamic 1965. Drag. Pub. by the author (148 Busteed Dr.,

27. 28.

Benepe, David B. ; Kouri, Bobby G. ; and Webb, J. Bert: Aerodynamic istics of Non-Straight-Taper Wings. Tech. Rep. AFFDL-TR-66-73, Flight Dynamics Laboratory, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Oct.

CharacterAir Force 1966.

360

H-646

29. Frost, Richard C. ; and Rutherford, Robbie. SubsonicWing SpanEfficiency. AIAA J., vol. 1, no. 4, April 1963, pp. 931-933. 30. Furlong, G. Chester; and McHugh, James G. :
Low-Speed NACA Rep. Longitudinal 1339, 1957. Characteristics A Summary and Analysis of Swept Wings at High Reynolds of the Number.

31.

James, Harry A. ; and Hunton, Moments Due to Trailing-Edge TN 4040, 1957.

Lynn W. : Estimation Flaps on Swept and

of Incremental Pitching Triangular Wings. NACA

32. 33. 34.

DeYoung, John: Theoretical Symmetric Span Loading Due to Flap Deflection Wings of Arbitrary Plan Form at Subsonic Speeds. NACA Rep. 1071, 1952. Ribner, NACA Herbert WR L-25, S. : Notes on the 1944. (Formerly Propeller NACA and Slipstream ARR L4112a.) in Relation

for

to Stability.

Well, Joseph; and Sleeman, William Operation on the Static Longitudinal With Flaps Retracted. NACA Rep.

C., Jr. : Prediction of the Effects Stability of Single-Engine Tractor 941, 1949.

of Propeller Monoplanes

35.

Pass, H. R. : Wind-Tunnel Study of the Effects of Propeller Operation and Flap Deflection on the Pitching Moments and Elevator Hinge Moments of a SingleEngine Pursuit-Type Airplane. NACA WR L-411, 1942. (Formerly NACA ARR. Schuldenfrei, Point From RB 3120. ) Marvin: Some Notes on the Determination of the Stick-Fixed Neutral Wind-Tunnel Data. NACA WR L-344, 1943. (Formerly NACA

36.

37.

Wolowicz, Chester H. : Considerations Derivatives and Dynamic Characteristics Part 1, 1966. Neal, T. Method. Peter: Frequency J. Aircraft, vol.

in the Determination From Flight Data.

of Stability and Control AGARD Rep. 549-

38. 39. 40. 41.

and Damping from 4, no. 1, Jan.-Feb.,

Time Histories: 1967, p. 76. Relations TN 1581,

Maximum-Slope

Toll, Thomas Speed Stability

A. ; and Queijo, M. J. : Approximate Derivatives of Swept Wings. NACA

and Charts 1948.

for

Low-

Sacks, Alvin H. : Aerodynamic Forces, Moments, Slender Bodies of General Cross Section. NACA MaeLachlan, Robert; and Fisher, Speeds of the Pitching Derivatives 1948. Fisher, Lewis R. : Approximate the Subsonic Stability Derivatives Seckel, Press Edward: Stability and Inc., c. 1964, p. 95.

and Stability Derivatives TN 3283, 1954.

for

Lewis R. : Wind-Tunnel Investigation of Untapered Swept Wings. NACA

at Low RM L8Gi9,

42. 43.

Corrections of Swept Control

for the Effects of Compressibility Wings. NACA TN 1854, 1949. and Helicopters. Academic

on

of Airplanes

H-646

-- 2

361