\>frihT»'IM7 ■■■.LEAF** NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 1347 REPORT ON THE SPECIAL FIELD "INTERFERENCE" TO THE WIND-TUNNEL COMMITTEE IN FEBRUARY 1945 By H. Schlichting Translation of "Bericht uber das Fachgebiet Interferenz vor dem Windkanalausschuss im Februar 1945." Aerodynamisches Institut der Technischen Hochscbule Braunschweig, Bericht 45/4. Washington May 1953 UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA -.NT N SCIENCE LIBRARY 117011 GAINESVILLE, FL 3261 1 -701 1 USA NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 13^7 REPORT ON THE SPECIAL FIELD "INTERFERENCE" TO THE WIND-TUNNEL COMMITTEE IN FEBRUARY 19^5* By H. Schlichting I. INTRODUCTION I made the last report on my special field "Interference" at the meeting of the wind-tunnel committee in Bad Eilsen on July 27, 19^3» As I explained then, my field can be subdivided into the two main parts: interference for the drag problem, and interference for the remaining aerodynamic forces of the airplane. The first is of significance almost exclusively for the flying performances; the second, for the flight characteristics. Demarcation of my special field with respect to various others is not quite simple. I have arranged with Dr. Kuchemann, who represents the field "special power plants", that all problems concerning the mutual interference of TL power plants and the airplane will be taken up by him. Of the Gottingen program for investigations of TL power plants, formerly set up by Dr. Kuchemann (on October 12, 19^-3) , an essential part has meanwhile been terminated. Pure drag interference is essentially being investigated by Dr. Horner (special field: drag). I, myself, have therefore given most of my attention to the interference phenomena for the remaining aerodynamic forces on the airplane. A great many points of contact with the two special fields, longitudinal stability (Multhopp) and directional stability (Mathias), have been found to exist. Following, I want to report briefly, first, on the .state of current investigations which had been started at the time of my last report, then advise you on recently concluded investigations. Finally, I should like to report on investigations newly started during the last year and a half, and to add suggestions for further investigations. II. STATE OF THE INVESTIGATIONS BEGUN BEFORE THE LAST REPORT 1. For several years a very extensive aerodynamic -center program has been in progress at the DVL. The tests have the purpose of ascer- taining the aerodynamic center about the transverse and vertical axis *"Bericht uber das Fachgebiet Interferenz vor dem Windkanalausschuss im Februar 19^5« " Aerodynamisches Institut der Technischen Hochschule Braunschweig, Bericht k^>/k. NACA TM 131*7 for wing-fuselage arrangements which are largely adapted to practical conditions. The fuselage measurements have been published as partial results in the FB 1516 and 1586. Further results have not been made known so far; however, all measurements are to be published shortly. 2. At the AVA in the wind tunnel Amsterdam, an extensive inves- tigation of pressure-distribution measurements on combinations, wing + fuselage + nacelles in the arrangements, low-, mid, and shoulder- wing monoplane has been started about 2 years ago (fig. l) . The measure- ments themselves have been begun but have been interrupted by the events of war in September l$kk. 3. At the LFA tunnel Al, a fairly extensive program regarding six- component measurements on wing-fuselage combinations (fig. 2) has been worked on likewise for several years. These measurements which resulted from an industrial commission are similar to the interference measure- ments performed at the Aerodynamic Institute of the Technical Academy Braunschweig (AITHB) . All combinations are shoulder-wing monoplane arrangements. On the basis of the results from the AITHB, the program later was shortened, compared to the original one. The measurements have not yet been concluded; a report has not yet been published. k. At the AVA in tunnel A6 an interference program of wing-fuselage arrangements has been started about 2 years ago (fig. 3) which originally was planned as a three -component measurement but has recently also been carried out as a six-component measurement. A fuselage with three differ- ent thick rectangular wings in the arrangements, low-, mid, and shoulder- wing monoplane was measured. The Re number was 2.6 X 106. The measure- ments have been terminated and a report is to appear shortly. 5. Likewise, for about 2 years, a series of drag measurements at high speed on combinations of wing, fuselage, and nacelles (fig. h) has been running in the LFA tunnel A2. The measurements have been approved by the wind-tunnel committee only a short while ago. They are being started at present. 6. About 3 years ago, extensive -measuring series of six-component measurements on a sectional complete model (fig. 5) was performed at the AITHB. The purpose was a systematic investigation of the stability coef- ficients with addition of the tail unit, after extensive measurements had been carried out before without tail unit. The measurements have been terminated and the report has been published as a preprint for the year- book 19^3 of the German Aviation Research (ref. l) . 7. The extensive systematic six-component measurements on wing- fuselage arrangements of the AITHB which were made first on wings without sweepback (ref. 2), have been extended to wing-fuselage arrangements with sweptback wings (fig. 6). To the arrangements NACA TM I3U7 3 with wings without sweepback (rectangular and two trapezoidal wings) three forward-swept wings with constant chord with 9 = 15° , 30° > and U5 , furthermore a pronouncedly tapered trapezoidal wing with pronounced sweepback (cp = ^5°) were added. All models were measured in low-, mid, and shoulder-wing monoplane arrangements as six-component measurements (refs. 3 and h) . I might mention as an essential result that the sta- bility coefficients of rolling moment and yawing moment are only to a small degree dependent on the plan form of the arrow- type wing (figs. 7 and 8) . Figure 7 shows the additional contribution of the fuselage to the rolling moment due to sideslip as a function of the sweepback angle and of the taper. One recognizes that it varies with both comparatively little. Figure 8 shows the total yawing moment of wing plus fuselage. Here the arrangements with pronounced sweepback are somewhat more unstable than those with less pronounced sweepback. This is caused by the posi- tion of the moment reference axis which lies further toward the rear in case of strongly sweptback wings . 8. Systematic pressure-distribution measurements on wing-fuselage combinations also have been made for several years in the AITHB. The model dimensions are the same as in the former force measurements (fig. 5). There exists a certain relatedness to the AVA program mentioned in para- graph 2. The arrangements are low- and high-wing monoplanes without pene- tration as well as low-, mid, and shoulder-wing monoplanes. The two first arrangements (without penetration) have been measured also for unsymmetri- cal approach flow. The rest only for symmetrical approach flow. The rather extensive program is concluded and described in five partial and two summarizing reports (refs. 5 and 6). Figure 9 shows a result from these measurements, namely, the distribution of the local lift coeffi- cients along the span for the arrangements low-, mid, shoulder-, and high-wing monoplane. For the arrangements with penetration, the break in the lift distribution is greatest for the low-wing monoplane, smallest for the shoulder-wing monoplane. This is of high importance for the effectiveness of the elevator unit situated behind the break. III. INVESTIGATIONS CONCLUDED SINCE THE LAST REPORT Since my last report, 1^- years ago, a number of further investiga- tions dealing with this field of problems have been made, which partly have already been terminated. They will be briefly mentioned here and enumerated from the viewpoint: coefficients of longitudinal and of directional stability. 1. A contribution to the problem of longitudinal stability is made by measurements in the wind tunnel of the Technical Academy Graz which were carried out in connection with the Braunschweig interference measure- ments. Whereas the Braunschweig measurements on complete models (see NACA TM 13^7 section II, 6) were performed merely on a model with rectangular wing without sweepback and a rotationally symmetrical fuselage, in Graz addi- tional measurements, have been made also on complete models, with a three- axial ellipsoid as the fuselage, and with a rectangular wing, and with a trapezoidal one with pronounced taper (ref. 7). These measurements have been concluded. A preliminary report exists and will be published shortly as an FB. Unfortunately, several supplementary measurements which had been planned could not be carried out because the Graz tunnel was con- siderably damaged by enemy action. Figure 10 shows a rather interesting result from these measurements: the displacement of the neutral point of stability about the transverse axis by the elevator unit. The fuselage is the three-axial ellipsoid; a rectangular wing without sweepback and a trapizoidal wing z = 0.2 were used as the wing; the tail unit was, selectively, a one- or twii^.- keel arrangement. The very considerable difference in the displacement of the aerodynamic center by the tail unit for the arrangements low- and shoulder-wing monoplane is striking, particularly for the trapezoidal wing. The explanation most probably lies in the fact that the break in the wing lift distribution which is only very slight and the considerable fuselage lifts for the shoulder-wing monoplane produce very large down- wash angles in the region behind the fuselage and thus very greatly reduce the effectiveness of the elevator unit. 2. Within the scope of industry commissions, three- and six- component measurements on wing-fuselage arrangements with very small wings and for far rearward position of the wing on the fuselage have been performed at the AITEB. By enlarging them the industry programs were complemented into systematic measurements. Figure 11 shows a remarkable result of these measurements: the displacement of the neutral point by the fuselage effect for various rearward positions of the wing and various ratios of wing size to fuselage size. In extreme cases there results aerodynamic -center displacements in the order of magnitude of 50 percent of the wing chord. The measurements have been compared with the simple theory of Multhopp. As figure 11 shows, the agreement is quite satisfactory (ref. 8) . 3. When our earlier interference measurements on wing-fuselage arrangements were extended to sweptback wings, a rather interesting result was found concerning the stability about the transverse axis, namely, that the destabilizing aerodynamic -center displacement by the fuselage effect is for rearward- swept wings considerably smaller and for forward- swept wings considerably larger than for the wing without sweepback. Figure 12 shows a measuring result from a report by Moller (ref. 9) • The wing-fuselage arrangements are all midwing monoplanes; the rearward position of the wing on the fuselage is measured from the geometric neutral point of the wing. In the present example the displace- ment of the aerodynamic center is, for the wing without sweepback, NACA TM 13^7 5 8 percent of the geometric mean-wing chord toward the front; for the wing with 30° forward sweep, it is about 15 percent toward the front, and for the wing with ^5° sweepback, 1 percent toward the rear. k. On the mutual interference of fuselage, elevator unit, and rudder unit extensive systematic measurements have been performed at the firm Junkers (ref. 10) . The effect of the geometric arrangement of fuselage, elevator, and rudder unit on the coefficients dcgjj/dag, o'CgjWo'T), Sc a g/Sp, and dc a s/d£ was determined there. These coefficients give the stabilizing and destabilizing effect of the tail units. Regarding the problem of directional stability the following new investigations exist: 5. Extensive systematic measurements concerning the induced cross wind have been carried out at the AITHB (ref. ll) . Figure 13 shows a result from these measurements, namely, the yawing moment due to side- slip of three complete models which differ only in that the wing is situated at different heights of the fuselage. The difference in the contribution of the rudder unit to the directional stability is extraor- dinarily large. Besides the force measurements, direction measurements for the induced cross wind were performed (fig. 1*0; these give informa- tion on the great local difference in the effectiveness of the rudder unit. 6. The great destabilizing effect of a shoulder-wing arrangement on the directional stability must, naturally, exist also for engine nacelles and thus particularly for a twin-engine airplane with a twin-keel rudder unit. The former theoretical calculation (FB 17^5) regarding the induced cross wind of a wing-fuselage arrangement was extended to arrangements wing + fuselage + two nacelles (ref. 12). Figure 15 shows a result of these theoretical calculations. Behind the engine nacelles where normally the twin-keel rudder unit is situated, zones with very slight effective- ness of the rudder unit result. These theoretical calculations were checked by systematic measurements; two-engine nacelles were added to the former models (ref. 13). Figure l6 shows a result of these measure- ments in comparison with the theoretical calculations mentioned. The agreement is satisfactory. 7. The effect of a jet nacelle attached to the wing on the stability coefficients is of a character similar to that of the fuselage effect in shoulder-wing monoplane arrangement. Measurements regarding this problem were carried out at the AVA (ref. 1*0 , figure 17, for various arrangements of the jet nacelle (variation in the rearward position of the nacelle and in fillet). The difference between the various arrangements of the jet nacelle is in most cases slight. NACA TM I3U7 8. The lift distribution on an elevator unit with twin-keel rudder unit in sideslip shows peculiarities which have been known for some time and have now been investigated in detail in a report hy Schmitz (ref . 15) In sideslip the rudder unit, when attached unsymmetrically with respect to the elevator unit, induces very strong additional lifts on the ele- vator unit which produce a large rolling moment. The amount of this rolling moment is a multiple of that of the rudder unit. A simple theo- retical estimate by Schmitz shows good agreement with the measurements. IV. INVESTIGATIONS STARTED SINCE THE LAST REPORT AND SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER MEASUREMENTS The suggestions for new tests to several of which have been started may be subdivided according to the following viewpoints: A. "Scale test (Reynolds number) B. Measurements complementary to the interference measurements made so far on wing + fuselage + tail unit C. Downwash and cross-wind measurements on wing-fuselage combinations D. Measurements on wing-fuselage — tail-unit arrangements with swept- back wings A. "Scale Test" (Reynolds Number) So far all six-component measurements concerning interference of the airplane elements have been performed at small Reynolds numbers. In order to make them applicable to full-scale design it is absolutely nec- essary to carry out some comparative measurements at maximum Reynolds numbers. I have been pointing out the necessity of these tests for several years; however, the wind-tunnel committee repeatedly rejected them. Recently, these tests have been pointed out by others as well (see discussion, directional stability, Bad Eilsen on November 15, 19^*0 • They are now to be carried out in the LFA tunnel A3, however, on several arrangements for which the measurements at small Reynolds numbers do not yet exist. These latter are then to be supplemented in the wind tunnel of the AITHB when required. NACA TM 13^7 B. Measurements Supplementary to the Interference Measurements Carried Out on Wing + Fuselage + Tail Unit It has sometimes been held against the Braunschweig interference measurements that fuselage shapes were used which rather strongly deviate from practical ones (location of maximum thicknesB at 50 percent, in most cases, ellipsoid of revolution). Furthermore, the variety in shape of the fuselage cross sections investigated so far is not sufficient to satisfy all practical needs. Finally, an important parameter, the mutual inclination of wing and fuselage, has not yet been investigated. Thus the following tests are suggested as supplements to the Braunschweig interference measurements: 1. Supplementary measurements on wing + fuselage and partly also on wing + fuselage + tail unit with two further fuselage shapes. (Fuse- lages III and IV, fig. 8.) 2. Additional measurements on wing + fuselage for two fuselages with special cross-sectional shape (fuselages V and VI, pear shaped and rectangular cross section) . The combinations contemplated are compiled in figure 19. 3. Investigation of the effect of the mutual inclination of wing and fuselage on lateral force, rolling moment, and yawing moment. Six- component measurements on wing + fuselage and wing + fuselage + tail unit. The first two measurements suggested have already been started, but not the third one. C. Downwash and Cross Wind Measurements on Wing-Fuselage Combinations The Graz measurements mentioned before showed an unexpectedly large influence of a high position of the wing (on the fuselage) on the sta- bility contribution of the elevator unit. According to this, a very strong interference must exist between wing + fuselage on one hand and elevator unit on the other, which probably is caused mainly by the down- wash and to a lesser degree by the decrease in dynamic pressure. Very little is known, so far, about the downwash of a wing-fuselage combination whereas some information concerning the induced cross wind was obtained by the new measurements (Jacobs). According to the Graz measurements the influence of the wing-fuselage arrangement on the downwash seems to be even larger than the effect of the wing plan form - larger, for instance, than the difference between rectangular and trapezoidal wing; however, the wake of the fuselage and of the wing-fuselage arrangement is certainly 8 WACA TM I3U7 also of significance for the stability contribution of the elevator unit. Another new-type interference effect which is of importance for the dynamics of the airplane is lift due to sideslip and pitching moment due to sideslip. A few force measurements concerning this effect exist; how- ever, they must be supplemented by pressure-distribution measurements in order to obtain more insight into the physical connections. Therefore the following measurements are suggested: 1. Measurements, supplementing the Graz measurements, on the arrange- ments wing + tail unit and fuselage + tail unit with various high posi- tions of the tail unit. 2. Probe surface measurements for determination of the downwash on arrangements wing + fuselage and wing + nacelle (various high-positions of the probe surface) . 3. Boundary-layer and wake measurements on wing-fuselage arrange- ments, especially on the rear part of the fuselage. h. Cross-wind measurements with probe surface on wing-fuselage combinations. 5. Force- and pressure-distribution measurements regarding lift due to sideslip and pitching moment due to sideslip. D. Measurements on Wing -Fuselage— Tail-Unit Measurements With Sweptback Wings Because of the importance of the sweptback wing for high-speed air- planes, the aerodynamic coefficients of wing-fuselage and wing-fuselage — tail-unit arrangements with sweptback wings are of special significance. The displacement of the neutral point due to fuselage effect in case of sweptback wings has been pointed out. (See section III, 3«) Nothing is known regarding the downwash of sweptback wings alone, let alone of swept- back wing-fuselage arrangements. About the effectiveness of the rudder unit in case of wing-fuselage arrangements with sweptback wings, too little is known as yet. Thus the following tests are suggested: 1. Systematic downwash measurements with probe surface on sweptback wings alone. Such measurements for the wings indicated in figure 6 have already been started at the AITHB (Trienes). 2. Three-component measurements on wing + fuselage and wing + fuselage + tail-unit arrangements with sweptback wings. The measurements constitute an extension of the measurements by Moller (UM 213^) discussed in section III, 3. An aerodynamic -center program NACA TM 13^7 according to figure 20 for wing-fuselage arrangements and wing-fuselage — tail-unit arrangements has been started. All arrangements used are mid- wing monoplanes; however, with the Graz measurements mentioned before taken into consideration it appears necessary to expand this aerodynamic- center program so as to include low-wing and shoulder-wing aircraft. Different from the Braunschweig interference measurements made so far, a fuselage with the location of maximum thickness at 30 percent was used in this aerodynamic -center program. 3. It seems to be necessary to carry out for a few arrangements of the aerodynamic -center program just mentioned, six-component measurements as well. In the existing six-component measurements on wing-fuselage arrangements with sweepback (FB I318/U/5) the rearward position of the wing, measured as the distance from nose to ^iA, had been kept constant; in the present new program the rearward position of the wing, measured up to the geometric neutral point of the wing, is kept constant and the tail lever arm also is measured from here which appears more sensible. Also, six-component measurements on wing + fuselage + tail unit with sweptback wings do not yet exist; however, in setting up the program for six-component measurements on wing + fuselage + tail unit with sweptback wing, the extent of the program has to be limited very strictly. h. A similar test program on wing-fuselage combinations with swept- back wings for high-speed measurements has been set up by Mr. Puffert; it is to be carried out in the LFA-A9-tunnel, and has already been approved by the wind-tunnel committee. 5. For further clarification of the displacement of the neutral point due to fuselage effect in case of sweptback wings which are described above, it appears necessary to perform for one arrangement pressure-distribution measurements as well - and, for instance, for the arrangement fuselage I with wing z = 1, cp = k^>° , e*/a. = O.k (midwing monoplane according to figure 6). Above all, such pressure— distribution measurements are useful for providing a foundation for theoretical cal- culations regarding this problem which are now being made. Translated by Mary L. Mahler National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics 10 NACA TM 13^7 REFERENCES 1. Schlichting, H., and Frenz, W.: Systematische Sechskomponentenmessungen uber die gegenseitige Bee influs sung von Fliigel, Rumpf und Leitwerk. Jahrb. 194 3 d. deutschen Luftfahrtforschung. Vorabdruck in den Techn. Berichten; vol. 11, no. 6, I9M. 2. Moller, E.: Systematische Sechskomponentenmessungen an Flugel/Rumpf- Anordnungen. Jahrb. 19^2 d. deutschen Luftfahrtforschung S. I 136. 3. Moller, E.: Systematische Sechskomponentenmessungen an Flugel/Rumpf- Anordnungen mit Pfeilflugeln konstanter Tiefe. FB 1318/4, I9U3. 4. Moller, E.: Sechskomponentenmessungen an Flugel/Rumpf-Anordnungen mit einem gepfeilten Trapezf liigel (Flugel cp = 45°; z = 0.2; Rotationsellipsoid 1:7). FB 1318/5, 1944. 5. Moller, E.: Druckverteilungsmessungen am Hoch- und Tief decker bei symmetrischer und unsymmetrischer Anstrb'mung. Jahrbuch 19^3 C CM n c; TJ rO c CM o < o jC o II to < Tj 5 5 2 TJ ■*"■ «/) CL CL > <{ £ < 14 NACA TM 13^7 a SS a) > Ml 0) Pi r~ ® O °®@® s e ®Q l«® ®®@®8> m o iA O IT\ oj oj c\j cvj cy o o o o o < o 3 m cd a o ro 3 z ir "5 O UJ 0) If) O 11 ■*— '— ID c t— * a>|a * o o .C "» 5 -> 16 NACA TM 13^7 ■a V 1 c o i •h a L- 0) 4^ E 1 | 4> a) 13 £ ID D ai L> P. a a o o +* + £"+" as m gi i^ •H ^J- -rt -J* > ON > ON < rH < ,-. ^ OJ _* f> QUO O OOOO 5 U -. rH i-H H O L. p US C— f- r— jet a) Li ft) r-. -1 H H I, (J oioim m fQmoiot Jm OS E E .:..,.;.■■■■ a i u e u oi s& (x, a a 0) B NO a m o <0 OJ -H -* > OS < rH -^ JG J3 CO O (J * oe so a m O a oj ?-& CVJ fo --.Jd J3 \ CO O O CO .-1 O L. ■-• m ,o 03 m rl 1. 11 •-! FQ ai oi m E » K E -* ^< CO e CO e J- CO e O ?& *-^ Jd J3 CO O (J ^t O U H (. 11 - d ffl 4) 01 E ;-i cc SO a e 1 ! o A OJ •-^ ja ja CO O CJ .H O L, •-< M 4) pq 41 41 E >-< cc CO PQ r * <\ ♦J u o p. c L. K 4-1 Oh 0) +> a a a 1 SIS CO V ss i a ■ a u u ft CO CVJ Pj OJ CO OJ oj *-^ OJ *-*. a) OJ .-t 3 J- _* h a K o o" o" ° II ax O OOOOOO C^ J- C- O O O* O O O O o o O o o O f "\ / * ) f * 1 dj B G to a u < 0) 1 O. 01 0) o c c oi a m « a on ^ a) B ft ft-H O p. w) a §§ a g tu u a C 60 01 n-l ■h a -o > * -H H 1 1 * 3 J3 >fl Oil Q «-l .C *-< MStan 1 & ft) Oi Cad ai c ffl O -H ^ 0) H B Pi 0J p< c oj pi o a o 03 a O 4) M c m C ft •-* 5 aj -h B ft B O P. B -H > O a o Pi i to a oo o d m o u a a a sgccoi-HB -s s ^ Q -a > * W ~i B - ■ i v i ■H q > 60 tt) -3 fti i-Hoqja-d* -a * 1 Ti > -H d J3 d QiB-OBOM O >-J QOl^HOJXI'H JZ - JcqZcocow tn 01 a a ft 4) O a 4) a IS* O ft 60 o o a O C iH B i *, 60 Li q 60 oi * -a o 9 - ■ a m s m 01 a a ft 0) o a ai d ft 60 § S3 e - ■> B i 60 Ih a bo 4) i-* a -o 1 > 3 > -a o 3S;S Oj a p< 4) O a ai d ai d g h m H Pim O Pi 60 O o d g d -h BO* B ■ W Li q 60 « ■h q «o 01 J P. 4) 4) o d d oi c a o) a Q r-l -H a) B P. Pi-H O o ft to a l sa a S Q > B • 60 to u a d 60 ft) -H •h d -a > > T) O tJ Q -H J= -H J I 03 D3 0) 3 ft 4) ft) OP d ft* d a) .1 S 8£ Pi^H O O ft 60 C bo ti q a 60 41 -3 s^3 ■ 1 > 3 J3 > -d O M O -^ J3 -vH 1 ft ft) O a 4j a a] a Q H 111 1 P|.-« O ft 60 a o d o a --< ■ s ? 60 L> d 60 4) ^ a fl ^•3 > -3 Q -H J3 60 c 3 01 p< w o o o o o o Q O o O 8 OJ o 1TN S i I a ai x o NACA TM 13V7 IT 18 NACA TM 13^7 to t> H H H H H rn h-l !h M rn < H CI bO CO ft o ■p to a co ■p a a o o t-I,— * ■P + -p T3 co m co rn CD •H J- •H J- J3 > ON > ON m < -H < H •H CM rH *} .a .M .0 ,£J o cj o u rH 3 o u O Ih CM Oh ,o a U CD CO CO CD CD >H 03 ,0 CO Li CD CO CO CD CD >-< K on H m &H -P U H rH rH H O CO CO CO CO ft O f4 CJ N O N CJ N u •H CO •H CO ■H CO •H CO Ih CO CO -* 5 O 5S 55 S6 CD m rn m on H CJ u CJ u O ^■^^•^ *^^^^, ^^ CD r*^ ^& CD ,>> CD r»= ■H rH rH H rH -=f EH 6 eh a h a 4h -* -=t -=r J- J- ^ CD CD CD 0) tH 4J TJ HJ T3 -p -d ■P 13 o rn CO O O O U O CJ CD ft ^ ® © © ® co u a +> rH H rH rH •H rH CD CD rH CD rH CD S CD CD CD CD 0) CD CD CD a: M CD M CD X A! ■ 1 M i X. 1 >H 1 a d 1 d 1 5 CD CD CD •H CD -o > > d > C > 05 o Eh B o IH o b * r * > 1 * \ r-^ — v r^ " \ i — ' ^ f' \ r \ CD CD CD CD CD CD CD C a CI d d d d CO CO CO CO CO CO CO rH rH rH rH rH rH H P. CD ft a o > a o > a o u "a* a o * a o * i-i H 1 to a i bO B ■ a i a i a i ti 60 in d bo (h bO u bfl Ih bD Ih bfl U bO Ih < 3 bO CD •H S3 bO CD ■H a bo cd •a d tj (3 bfl CD t3 bfl CD d bfl CD d bD CD ■H d t! > •H (3 rd > •h c 13 •H d TJ ■H d -a * -H rH -a d i3 S »H rH 1 > -H rH 1 > >H iH > -H H > vH H >HH 1*3 .a I * 3 fl ■ > 3 I > 3 1 > 3 I > 3 1 U 3 >t) o bO S tJ o bO >T) O > -Cl O Sll o * 13 O SO o JScn w rH 2 CO W Q -H .d JSffl Q H ^3 J S CO ►H £ CO 9 £ ^ ►a s co CQ ID H rH CD CD CD w CO CO d rH M H H M M H H CD o M H M H m > 3 -p Ch 5 •H CM CM O O O O o o 8 O o o o II II o o o o o N N rH rH rH H rH bO a CD CD CD CD CD 13 13 H rH H rH H -H ■H s W bfl bfl bfl bfl O O a C d c d M M CO CO CO CO CO CD CD ■P -P -p +J -p ft ft O o u u CD CO CO CD CD CD CD CD >H IH K 05 03 03 03 H 61 HP d ID a CO 8 Cll o u ft CO 01 ft 03 CD (H H ft CO o bll -H d •H S CD U r" (II H +J d 01 a H-> CD d 3 •H Ih CO ft CO 01 01 u 33 Oh o + NACA TM 13V7 19 Ellipsoid of revolution (fuselage I ) f e ir 10/00 T e J (- 10/00 a b-^ « t ■ t b^ I — ) I > _l _ r ^ » Three- axial ellipsoid (fuselage II) b =750 ) b=600 b = 450 10/00 b Wing : rectangle NACA 23012 -§- = 0.3 to 0.7 10/00 10/OOa E 10/00 b \J A= 5 I 3 20 NACA TM 13^7 w o w CO i cu bO P. o -p bo CO -p u cu Ph -d cu -C CO -H PL. Will be published ^ shortly as FB 2023 en CO rH ro rH P O CO rH •3 f \ -P tH O Pi ai u Cu •H <4H ch O cu -P M CM O -* II •«* ca ^- ro CJ -* II ... ca OJ — ' H ro OJ -=*• II •« ca OJ ^~- l-l ro -=r O II . ca rH ■ o7u~\ rH OJ OJ O -if II -H; .* ca OJ - — rH ro OJ -=t- 11 .» ca OJ — rH CO /■ \ / \ -P c cu cu a S S3 CO <9®® © e@@ eeee S3 O •H CO -H 01 m Pi bO fl -d 'H u > CO * -H rH 1 > 3 * TJ O -h x: JS01 cu s CO rH Pi O a a bO •d •w 01 g CO Pi cu fl cu C co g m a a PtrH p, bO fi O fl O fl -H a > a ■ bo u fl HOC) •rf c-d s -a h 1 > 3 S -d Q -H J3 M S W cu § rH P. cu CU O (3 S3 CU S3 CO CO S3 O rH rH a) B Pi PirH O O Pi bO S3 S3 O S3 O S3 -H a a O > a 1 bo bO ti S3 a bo cu -h ■H S3 -d S > -H rH 1 1 * d j3 > -d bO Q -H J3 -H J2C0W cu d CO rH Pi O S3 O B bO a •H -d •H S CU S3 ca rH Pi O G O B bD S3 ■H >d •H s CU bo to H CU CO f>4 M M H H H M M M bO a a O uS O t- O •-t II 8 CO O OM3 O • 9 „ 0-=* O • O H II O O O rH CO O Q O rH O O 9 ,a r- H II rH a) < a ■d • *\ •H •H 01 ^ CQ M rH Pi > rH O Q> rH u O 4-> -P fl fl (II <1) B a cu 0) 13 3 o ® rii < O u Pi bD NACA TM 13 1+7 21 I 22 NACA TM 1347 o cvj a; bo cfl ft o -p bO as -p V. CJ P< ■d CJ -=f ,P 00 ffi rH •H C\J ■H ■S g Ph CJ O •H -p

a a CO CO -P H H PI & Pi CJ O B a PI -Cl -d •H ■H 2 23 CJ bO CO H H H CJ 9 pt. O O bO m in m m 5 1 O ro J- 1 ro -=T s OOOO OJ OJ OJ OJ H H H H 0000 o OJ <; o <; a CJ H •H a> o -d •w o m Pi B R O II CO II < CJ bO CO Pn -d a) ti co Pi 0) Tl h a) Pi Ti 3 bO rH a O PI 0) O ," O p -P d P CJ (1) S 6 0) CJ a El m CQ CO Cfl CJ a) S3 S O NACA TM 1347 23 b H h- 02/-30 02/00 ~1^S o CO — 1 r I ifv^g^ i=4a -O -125— ! . © 02/30 ^°- , O 1 xi i a -P CD iH ■* a > S O Eh .a -p •H > a cd H ■d CD p a id 3 CO ,!». O 1 & i a ■P V -H £ -6 * S O EH X! -p •H > d CO H ■d a; PCD d co x O 1 x! . q -p > O EH a o i-l CO ca a> o ft to tl C cd S U Ch CO o 0) K -H- o O* o -p a cu S cu so c CO u < a CO ft o a o B bo a •H s 0) a CO rH ft o a g CO C •H •H 2 CD co ft o a CD > >d •H 2 CD 00 a) H CU ca 3 ft M H H H H H M M H a iH O on o o ir\ i O no _h- OOOO rH rH rH rH O no o IT\ 1 O -* VD VO VO OOO O m O O lf> I O co -* CJ OJ CM CM OOOO 4) to -S- ca rH rH ft CO CO a) a o o •H 1) -O p to a CO cd OJ ID p rH R -p a OJ 3 * R a 3 LA o ir\ P II ii < < o ft •H CO £ A g rH rH ID CO ft cu r— B B CD -H ,P 3 Ph HI CJ •H -p -p tH >d Tj § a ■d CD S rH -d CD r-H -P el CD -P P CD ■p p •H 3 CO >S 3 CO M 3 3 CD O 1 O 1 O EH .P 1 a X! 1 p J3 £S ■P CD •H ■p CD -H ■P -p ■h a I* tH P > -H -rl s Eh S O Eh s S P O th aj p"\ tH CD co P. to rn on nn en T3 -3 P * O O O O a) es CO 0) K CD CD CD CD a a P P CO 3 CO co rH rH r-{ r-\ Pi P. Pi Pi CD O CD O CD O CD O P P CD C P cd p a CD P P P c CD 5 S § CO rH p CO S CO H C CO g 5 1 a P. rH P) ^-\ Pi rH Pi CD O P. co O P. CO O P. CO O CO to P O P c p a O p P P a 1 •H P -H P -H O >H CO P 1 g T a O a s a * 1 p CO u tO P CO rl CO p < P CO CD d CO CD p to CD P CD •rl TH £ 5 i * ■d ■H P -d •H p ■d "3 1 S "3 1 •H rH 3 * 3 * -d !* -d > -d > O a 3 CO rA 2 co 3 ■rl as CO .c J CO to CO H M Ph > M > CD H CD 3 (^ O O co O O 5 O O s rH rH rH '-t rH o m CM < o o p Pi P° •rl TJ CD p CO Pi CD (h Pi CD to Pi CO O -d P CD ■P 3 o ■C -P O II .P II < •a 3 rH O P o CJ -P -P P P CD CD a a CD CD 3 3 m m co co CD CD 33 3S O <8> OJ CM -* -* OS CJs rH r-i M M O O O O & £> p U CO CO CD H >H CO CO co m MD to cu D ■> P H O CD -d to CD CO Pi Pi 10 X " CO .P 1 o a co CD CD Pi m CD K > R O CD tH CO+> CO CO rH -rl CD > g < a o o -p m ft. NACA TM 13^7 27 Research order: AVA tunnel NLL Amsterdam Rectangular wing with fuselage and nacelles (construction kits) Pressure - distribution measurement According to drawing L-10001 Figure 1.- AVA pressure -distribution measurements on combinations: wing + fuselage + nacelle. Dia. 1661. 28 NACA TM I3V7 (A) Fuselage quadrangulor Profile NACA 2415 bVF = 7.5 ■> -A—f ^ —^ - U 1 +tfc 5 r ' hroo — | |_ eoodZruSSl {1} Variation of the rearward position of the wing Rearward positions ot the leodng edge of the wing Vim =0.35, 0.70, t.05, 1.40,175 "'lm=l75 Elliptical wing Rectangular wing Trapezoidal wing Trapezoidal wing Trapezoidol wing l:2(y = 0°) l.2(y=10°) t2(y = 20°) (2) Rotation of the wing (rectangular wing) "1m = 0.70 Mmjl.40 t = 5° e = io° e = 5° e=tO (B) Fuselage rotationolly symmetrical (ellipsoid t~ 4,7) Take over the various model arrangements from the quadrongulor fuselage (C) Fuselage rotationally symmetrical (ellipsoid 1:7) -1000 -| -1 Toke over the vorious model arrangements from the quadrangular fuselage Figure 2.- LFA program; six -component measurements on wing -fuselage arrangements. Dia. 1659. NACA TM 13^7 29 O CO 6 -i- o II en c o o CO c O O C7> c 5 o O o o o < c E c o w CD _g CO 3 O w C o •rH •rH £> s o CJ (D hO nj 0) w pi M-H o . ra CO -t-> CD C! CD CD t— I £■* CO CD > < i 0) 3 30 NACA TM 13V7 c c < J 3 hi C> II N TJ "5 M 4> a. o c O 1 2? o o < o o * I m OJ 00 I o o o < o < ■o o o 'J- I m (/> 3 **- I o> c c o o c -Q E o o TJ 0> »- o. O V) o T3 JG t k» £ a. - c a> a> in a> U) a> 2 w o •1-1 I I 1 o o W CD CD s pi CO 0) -a CD CD o it, CD . W CXI 7i _. + < ha •1-1 NACA TM 13 Vf 31 a> o> ,. h- o> c o c rr — T3 c 5 c o 0> 0) 5 Q. O c ,-1.' u. _2 o E o E G" > c o> o> c o a: k_ ir> 5 c c Q. E «♦- ii *- * * L. o o T3 O 10 ■D C a i * o o 'E 3 _l + a. o> 4> «• •— c c 4> o> 10 ._ + n> □ O c c o U- u F f E k_ a> C7> a> L. 'c a> C7> u • • 3 c 3 O a> o> o 3 U) 0) _l to Ul 5 o 1- < o CO 2 <0 3 + I CD Fh CO ctf CD a CD a o o o I X o o CO T3 CD .A I ° c " CD o •rH o CD OP i CD 32 NACA TM 13^7 CD ho U Jh cd CD cd ■ — i Q) W V CQ .Seh ? < CD -a a o cd o cd 0) w S O CO I CD CD NACA TM 13V7 33 in m* 11 c o O S ro •- < O < ■g - o to a. 5 £ 1 1 -_l + 1 O 1 ■ II -_i i> 2 T> -+-> rt . n u S ID Q, hO cd •r-l ho 1 — j a O •r-< si ■a (i) 1 — 1 a ho P ^ O •rH CTl Jh J-l O O <1) W m O Q) rl 2 ■r-t m -*-> O m ■f-i cd •1-1 T) rt Oi Q] f— t rd UJ H 0) T) •rH 1 M c~ 0) h 3 hi) P4 3^ NACA TM 13^7 c/> CD hO a u cd CD hO cd ■ — i > -t-j i o u vi o >» 43 o o CD • t-H Q 0) •r-H NACA TM 13^7 35 1 0) h(l a erf rH rH cd (l) h(l erf . — i 0) !/) 2 4-1 hn •rH G rt a u. a w o hn CO C H-» n a a> cd s a (1) o r i • rH 2 'I cd rO •rH 0) f-H a ..— 1 d t o m rC2 j • rH (h H-> ro W -n C i O m CM 1- o Q. CO E o 0> « c c O CT> O E O J o $ c . C E t © b H 4 \ I 5 \ t i CO { 1 1 e I CD D m CD O T3 O cu o CO E O 3 IT) hJD h- h 6 n 38 NACA TM I3V7 CM I/) ■o O N tt> o. o c 5 o o o en CM <* E o ■0 o v> r~ a. •• 3 u. < -T II 0: 1 1 x Z E - o o '^ a> I I o a> -g Q_ a» A Vj/_ii a> c o a. o c o E o> c E O a? 10 c r>- O O 11 CO o 0. II" J CO lilt a) w cd o o (D CD |o 2 O 1 T3 CO CD ^ o cd ■d -° M £ to o c^ fcuO CO CM I hJD NACA TM 13^7 39 CD I < W JC **- o oo to o Q. 0) «s ;■ I t-jr \ -i \\\ — xj — — -1 0) T) o a 0) CD ft en s i — i o o O fl O (0 a ?H n hi) -*-» i-l •r-H o s a ^ i — t CD -1 T3 o m XI Vi o -^ T) 2 9 T3 hn -t-» fl rt •r-l 0) * B o a hn h0 c fl •i-H -r-l £ S CTl 1 !* £ O CO i-H fl> tH 3 hD Pm ho NACA TM 13^7 E M ♦ o O OO 2 O O O I I II + + + o to o c a o •a w w o o -a 9 ■a I mo, ■a u O a o o w 3 §1 I ho •r-H hD i o NACA TM 13V7 41 to o o CO o" Jo IS) o o' CM O J o CO X) IS) d O CO d Jo CO u o JS T3 w w o o T3 (D H ■a -u a o to c i i r o T3 o :j r O o rrv e + J 1 + CC | 5 7 tt s ° O o - 1 E Ll P k - c a H S f / » / f- h - f <1 r ,> J CM ^ CO _o" - 1 <0. -O 1 o o C7> * CO C * jL_n -* ? a> c CO c o o> o CD Q. *_ c o 3 O O c o * ., o Z >fc >* CO co * in _c 5 T3 o c o E Jkji A_n ^_ 5 E w c o a. o c o E o> c o ■a *3 o Ed •a -a ^ >> a ^ o ° W X! CD "^ CD eg G O CO co •i-H c| rrt hn Q. a H CD o <1> O X +j ■H _? O s 4-j CO •r-i u •iH C £> a> Ol 3 CO I — 4 CTJ a . .2 • -*-> CD O i—i CD CD wH ^ -a •<-H NACA TM 13V7 ^3 — CM < CO 5 tf 00 \- c c c c c c 3 Y 5 7>~ (D 1 > V v \ sf- '"o' 1 n\ ^ — CO \ - _l O \ L 1 ' l \ -> \ I". C\ j 4 \ * p .- " O "] 1 1 N 1 — « 2 1 r 00 O (M < i_£ti rr f !ca /I < / A c D o> C — t / <* * / >l / < / / / / 1 / / , 1 1 CVJ C 3~ ? u c c \ ^ ► 1 1 I ■ 03 / 1 C\J c } c )' \ ^^ i a 1 ^* CD O CTJ CD B CD hJD cd a a m O ra +j a CD O o CD E o o _ o c co o o ■ — c — CO w ■2 § © < < CM ( ( ( - 1 5 3 T 1 o\ 11 = 1 S 1 cu. >■ T5 'ca 1 c 1 > ~c " c 3 j V 00 0" D O <* o 1 1 s - g- O O o> c 00 — < \ 1 . \ - - 1 1 z. \ \ \ * \ l' v/ Oj _l - oa i ^ \ T5 V \ 1 1. } -O- (NJ -O- -^ V — A (M O V ? LJ— 00 0' ■rT. h ?> >" • Z O - ' O ' II < > • A r c cr c 5 pfc r ' t. / ,55 k y /i 03. / 7 -< I / // / / 1 y 1 CVJ ' < c c y 1 % c 3.- 3 i & % 6" c ) 1 t i •*- T3 v> (\J i_ Q> 'J- a> oc o> 3» 0) en _g CD CO Li. e<£ > o w (D ctj ■ — 1 ii >» CD I B 1 00 t-H CD U h0 •i-t NACA TM I3V7 ^5 > o • — 1 in s CD I a CD cd (1) W hD 1 hD •i-H k6 NACA TM 13 ^7 © © gm $ 1/4 \ GNP o/ool/ r H i *5^ 06/00 © © £2*- b H hi • 02/45 Wing : profile NACA 23012 Fuselage : fuselage m (NACA 0015) Tail unit: LI one -keeled GNP - geometric neutral point of the wing All models are midwing monoplanes ST. a = 0.750 m b' = 0.750 m e* = 0.300 m r H - 0.3915m b H = 0.250 m L H = 0.068 m e% =0.4 Figure 20.- Aerodynamic -center program for wing -fuselage arrangements with sweepback. NACA-Langley - 5-12-53 - 1050 x> a o - — * CU *-* ~* i « _; £ ^ 3 o — or: 3 ■ Z 0) i c bO O c -~ ? e ■o m n s. c bo 5 £ 1 3 6 cd O -3 * 0) ,, < c ^ 2 bo X 01 -C s x: a -C in -H XI <0 7. 5 . c CJ 0) tH " CO CJ cd 2 Ed oa CO £ co E C-. aj 3 en 0) ■3 ■a e B □ cd | ! e ■ j T1 3 3 t- CU l. 3 TJ a 01 M J 0) J **■* 3 ti ^ cu "3 "3 « s C HI V c u, cd CJ — •*-. Q. t< k. -1 is £ a o * -c - ai < -S ° OJ W °- « -2 01 t. g o g (0 c «S 2 cm CJ bo XI «> I, id 0) c cd t" r 3 «< Di "8 „ 0) cd 3 a I be •- Z 1 Q en s T xi 3! f= > id c cd 3 o ^ < 3 2— c3 bD §2 < Hz en 2 Z »S.3- — r i -c a h m T3 ffl «aS£ BS ■ w •s K a W 5 t! XI X) ^ n of Institu Molle rans. B x: .2 ■ H r« ■S ■£ w bo B ? = "2; " ST "5 « o-o '« ~ 3 1 - .3 o »TjX CD CO OS "§ X) . s .s t; 01 cd cj cd co m cu .3 »-■ ^ CO u cu t- u cd °- CO CO S ■s P £ M XI ±! 3 CO X! g » &■ "3 < s ■ Z CD e? Si «* H B.2ri OT 00 5 ~-- cu K bo •C h 3 U CJ z> co < -j3 p- ^ -?r £ rt bo o ■ g 22 s b xi -3 Si 2 a 3 qi 3 — ■ & < < z a 3 ou ■* SO O a) IS s < < z m 9 3 o < z E e & o s H % 03 "* £ 01 *- Ih hfi 3 = 3 S "" 75 O 3 — O 03 ?] "2 2"S » If' < z 1 3 3 a S O .2 £ & 3. S Z V U EL 41 h a) t3 n hs5^ K 0) W w Q [* S3 rt w CD bn u S en o R § fa 9 t-. y -C u J o u 5 01 OD o W J u rt 0) u. w z fa 1 d z 5 a! 3 s t") H tn d o W Q CQ •$ U 00 1— J h En W # lO 01 T! o CO as > T3 < Z o H H o C a) « t 3 o w 3 a< u cq rt w z W Z OS W ft, 2 3 « •- v- a ^ s - O B O J 3 -a h .2 S ■s a • S; 9- c M ~ if | S £ a < 7 -a « O £■"*•< o - P3 Z S a • II. •3 >. d a -£ 03 CJ ID oo ai e a -s 3. c CQ oi bo co a U CO si CO CO a " „; .•a oi «h v -g j= a O C H >> »5 5" -4.- n 5S2 I ° - .2 bo o 3 < rt T3 O " cu —. cd «n r3 a -tj si u _ ft rt r ? rt jl co 0) U V L, a s « CO ho 5 c 2 o s 3 2 O id •~ -"5 n > 3 « o f) 3 a! a CJ a OJ M ru \ T3 O nj « "a a a; -^ bo u £ .2 en cu « 1 w s-g *i - H co 3ay| OT S z H =* ■** ^ ^ r in CQ -a PQ co' S W rt h e ■a o ^ ^. S u s =* rt « g > t>- a St" «2 •§ 2 H ~ £j (J 0> tn O •rr ti ^ " co 3 .2 » »< < "5 co ^ rt .5 >,m » 'g£ tb CO hO ~ w i5 - en » »5 » ■^ ^ CO > ° n -2 -a « ° 3 e c to rt rt — ^ f i -1 r 9 a 3 .2 o 71 "o ■£ a> co PS "S -o rt 2 U 3 T-f rt 41 g T3 m u a 2 c m o S a> c o « £ i3 bo c «S a a o S 3 S U 3 rt J2 0) ■■ c « « 2 tu t. a ^ rt gj a o O cu ■3 01 < 3 'ilsS? 3 CO ■< rt 1 Z co ho — •2 1 P? 1 -9 41 3 3 a c fl rt o j* rt HU am o — tT O g« 3 blM 41 .2 «S-g £ C H .2 » ««•< = !■ 3 *4 r 1 -a 3 tj 5 < 4> u co S Z H P3 • riri fe t-H HH HH t-< 03 bb^ Sim ill* a -a a u rt b a ^ xi pa *j m 2 CO 3 £ ■c% ° rt til > -o S "3 2 3. .3 -a 3 3 a ^3 ° rt « £ * «< 15 C 3 ^ 5-° oi c» 7. 5 5 a 3 a O 4) ti 'a f« a rt ■" to C0_g £ ■" a * a o xi o a a co rt rt o 3 •0 3 2 5 co -o -a q> CO os "2 -o L. 41 rt p a v^ "M tu « a y - a. c a, 41 41 t, g o U Si3 bo " a a 3 o •A «H 2 s 10 • 01 "H B a rt 3 O ^ O 41 3 10 •.2 3 E co US' CQ S Z -bSE: to bb-S co U n •= I rt 3 o rt g ^ « h >,« h oa -o pa 3 *> i"3 £ ll 8 o a CO a ? o rt 41 .Sf 3 S rt 3 a 1o * 41 3 5 ™ ■" a a o o a co 2 U 3 41 bO «? n , O « •"a . 3 - 3 ^ M 41 ^ r-« C js rt m a — u, .2 o *j 41 t. ti _ 41 41 ■a to "O -a 41 tu ■" to 3 3 4. a .2 o t. m x) -a S 3 c-a •a rt ^ c *; -a o rt t-. QJ Ct § " S.2 •o £ a. c o O S to 41 2 O 41 t« g 1- rt S " a io -3. .2 ™ a g 3 2 3 js 3 3 to CO < < z to S oo 2 " O. — °» QJ O o '-3 ■g on > I 0) "" a a be 3 S 3 c ■"• 3 o 3 "~ O 0) T3 c C 2 0> 3 r^ Z CO O •a < < z CO H •< o < z CD bfl 3 5 3 C ""• 3 o 3 •— O M II 111 .5 CO O & < z I §• 2 -a s o td •a bE a en 00 c < u < z r- ^ t* eo Z _ o 3 ■— O 01 IS ■n m -O r, » cd a SP 3 CO < Z 1 1 3 o 3 •- O to ll 7, 3 flj 3 — ■ < Si z 1 1 UNIVERSITY OF SjfiSSPjjjj 3 1262 08105 833' UNIVERSE OF FLORIDA .DEPARTMENT si SCIENCE UBRARY 17011 LE.FL 32611-7011 USA