Boundary Layer Measurements at Low Speed on TWO Wings of …naca.central.cranfield.ac.uk/reports/arc/cp/0554.pdf · 2013-12-05 · ON 'IWO WINGS OF 45’ AND 55’ SWEEP bY G.C. Brebner

C.P. No+ 554

MINISTRY OF AVtATlON

AERONAUTICAL RESEARCH COUNC11

CURRENT PAPERS

Boundary Layer Measurements at Low Speed on TWO Wings

of 45” and 55” Sweep

bY

G. G, Sreher and L, A. Wyatt

LONDON: HER MAJESTY’$ STATDNERY OFFiCE

PRICE 1 Is. 4d. NET 1

CLP. No.554

U.D.C. J'Jo, 533.693.3 : 532.526

BOUNDARYLAYERIGASURE~~SAT LOWSPEED ON 'IWO WINGS OF 45’ AND 55’ SWEEP

bY

G.C. Brebner and.

L.A. Wyatt

Bouzxiary layer flow and balance measurements have been made on two sweptback wings. The first wing 62 &o sweep, constant chord and aspeot ratio !5J had a 1% thick R.A.E,lOl se&ion. The boundary layer was measured at a number of different spanwise and chordwise positions for several 3noi- dences up to 6.3’. The wing was tested with and without roughness on the leading-edge. The boundary layer thickness with roughness was of the order of 5C$ greater than with the smooth leading-edge but this did not lead to any significant difference between the value of the Eft-dependent drag fac- tor K obtained from balanoe measurements.

The second wing had 55’ sweep at the trailing-edge, oonstant chord as far as mid semi-span and a curved leading-edge thereafter. It had a &!$ thick R.A.E.101 section and aspect ratio of 3.4, The bounda layer was measured at mid semi-span only, at three incidences up to 7.2 and at various chordwise positions from 4.0$ chord back to the trailing-edge. Wake measure- ments just behind the trailing-edge were used to estimate the sectional prw file drag at mid semi-span, which was oompared with the theoretical value for an infinite sheared wing predicted by the charts of Weber and Brebner. The agreement was poor; the reason for this is not known.

.a-.-----VW_ - - . -U I I - --ve-.e w I .e .& --r-W-- - -

~~~~~~~~~~ is:x.wd 2”s r,n.s. T~I. 1\Toto ITO. Acr0,27O2 - A.RC.22,308.

iY0-t.e on the traversing gear

The traversing gear used in this series of tests was mounted on the turntable in the tunnel roof. The strut carrying the yawmeter was fixed in a vertical alignment and traverses through the botiary layer could therefore only be done perpendicular to the free stream,

It was not always easy to place the point of the yawmeter within 0.01~ or 0.01s of the required position on the wing, because the adjustment had to be made with wind off, This accounts for differences of this order between some coordinates in Table 1.

The displacement effect on yameter position due to the velocity gradient through the boundary &yer could be taken into amount, in prinoiple, aJ.ong the lines of Young and Maas and others for single pitot tubes. MO experimental investigation of this effeot has yet been done for yawmeters however.

LIST OF CONTEWTS

1 INTRODUCTION

2 TESTS ON A VII'IG OF &.5' SWlQX'

2.1 Description of model and tests 2,2 Results 2v3 Discussion

3 TESTS ON A WING OF 55’ SWEhP

3.9 Description of model and tests 3.2 Results and discussion

4 CONCLUDING REMARKS

LIST OF SYMBOLS

LIST OF REFERENCES

APPENOIXI - Betzls method for calculating the profile drag from flow measurements in the wakel3

TABLES 1 - 7

ILLUSTRATIQHS - Figs.1 - &I

DETACHABLEABSTRGT CARDS

Table

I -

2 -

3 -

4 -

5 "

6 -

7 -

LIST OF TABLES

Plazform positions at which boundary layer was measured: 45O swept wing

45' swept wing: balance measurements of lift, drag and pitching moment: R = 2.1 x A06

lt.5’ swept wing: boundary layer measurements

55' swept wing: balance meas r

ements of lift, drag and pitching moment: R = 2 x 10

55’ swept wing: boundary layer measurements at mid semi-span, q = 0.5, a = O0

55’ swept wing: boundary lager measurements at mid semi-span, q = 0.5, u = 4.1

55’ swept wing: boundary laser measurements at mid semi-span, q = 0.5, u = 7.2

Page

4

7 8

IO

1-l

12

14

15-45

n

w

16

l-7-35

36

37-39

40-U

43n45

-2-

LIST OF ILLUS~~IONS --- &

Planform of 45O swept wing 1

CL Y* Q for 45’ swept wing 2

$ v. CL for 4.5' swept wing 3

Cm ve CL for 45’ swept wing 4

Variation of lift-dependent drag factor with incidence, 45' swept wing 5

Relation between k and loss of total lift, 45' swept wing

Determination of (8CI/&)a=Oo, 45' swept wing

Movement of transition point, 45’ swept wing .

Velocity end flow direction in the boundary layer, 45' swept wing

Spanwise variation of boundary layer "thickness", 60 95, 45’ swept a#s

.

Velocity and flow direotiol;f 40

in the boundary layer near the tip: = O.y$, a = .&.2*, 45 swept wing

Planform of 55’ swept wing

Lift and pitching moment, 55’ swept wing

Drag V* lift, 55' swept wing

Lift-dependent drag factor, 55' swept wing

Spanwise variation of wing twist, 55’ swept wing

Movement 02 transition point, 55' swept wing

Velocity profiles at transition; a = O", *q = 0.5, 55’ swept wing

Velocity profiles at trnsition; a h 2', q = 0.5, 55’ swept wing

Oil flow patterns on the wing of 55’ sweep, R = 2 x lo6

Velocity and flow direction in the boundary layer, 55’ swept wing

Vari%tion of total head outside the boundary layer, a, = 7.2', 55 swept wing

Pun&ions of the wake flow used in oaloulating profile drag by Betzfs method, 55’ swept wing

6

7

6

9-24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36-39

40

4-l

-3-

Although sweptback wings have been used on aircraft for more thz:yI a decade, there is s-Cl1 lack of knowledge about the characteristics of the boundary layer on such wings* This is the more regrettable since the behaviour of swept wings is inShem by viscous effects to a greater degree than that of unswept wiws, On the theoretical aide the calculation of a swept rvin~ boundary layer is complicated by the curvature of the stream- lines, which also vary in direction through-the boundary layer, and by the spanwise pressure gradients, On the eqerinental side the measurement of a swept ~$2ng boundary layer requires more oamplex traversing gear and measuring eqxipment, and a more widespread coverage of the wing surface than for an unstvept wing,

Most theoretical investigations on swept wing botiary layers have treated the lrinfinitr sheared wing” without consideration of the centre an3 tip regions. The study of laminar layers has established the "itiependence principle" which relates the Xaminar boundary layer on an infinite sheared tving to that on an inf5nite unswept wing. This has received some eqeri- mentnl verification for a yawed circular cyILindcr at low Reynolds nmbers 1 I At full-scale Reynolds numbers, however, transit ion usually occurs very nnztm -f;,h,f: &&p&g-e&e of & anrn-n+. m-4 ne_ Hence. *he i nd ~nmdet?nr~ mrj npj n7b J.-U& U..YJd" ,m&**D* *rYc*u=Y, VlCY ,,,uy.H, e-w-- -'u J,a--"'-&sL'-i has little practical value since it does not hold for turbulent boundary layers. The development of turbulent boundary layers has recently been treated by Cooke* who has developed an approximate semi-empirical method of oalculation, Some other theoretical work on swept wing boundary layers3B4 has been aimed speoifically at predicting the profile drag of swept wings, without detailed treatment of the bomdary layer.

A number OP cmerimental observations of the bounitary layer oharacter- n A/ Ln

is-tics on swept wings have been made 5,O,~fJ,-lb,=&16 but these seldom seem ta have been associated with corresponding theoretjxal work.

The observ&ions of some earlier work by W.E. Gray illustrate the importance of scale ePPect on swept wing boundary layers, This is emphasised by the results of test s on swept wings over a wide range of Reynolds numbers. For example $ as shown in Fig.9 of Ref,6, the lift-dependent drag factor deoreases markedly with increasing Reynolds number, and this can be ascribed only to changes in viscous effects. It would appear therefore that the design of swept win g aircraft will not be materially assisted by the tedious accummuLation of a large mass of experimental boundary layer data at low Reynolds number. The real value of wind-tunnel results in this field ii*s to assist in the development of botiary layer caloulation methods which would include Reynolds number effects, and which would thm be applied to fullI scale aircrafi, It is not suggested that this will be easily or quickly achieved,

The wind-tunnel tests descrYbed fn this Note comprise velocity, total head. and SZow direction measurements of the boundary layers on two sweptbaok wings, The tests on the first wing were done both with 4232 without leadling- edge roughness, to determine whether or not the change fn boundary layer thickness could be correlated with any differences in lift-dependent drag at moderate (cruising) 13% coefficients, On the second wing measurements were confined to one spanwise position, again in the range of cruising lift coefficients. The results have so far been used only in testing the calcu- lation method of Ref,Z and as w. check on the effect of sweep on profile drag. On both wings lift, dreg and pitching moment were also measured and the mave- merit of trmsitfon position 0lx3erved.

2.1 Description of model and tests

The first model tested was a constant chord wing of aspect ratio 5, 45' sweep, as shown in Fig.1. ness/ohord ratio = 0.12.

The streamwise section shape was R.A.E,lOl, thiok- Apart from the tip shape the wing was identical

with wing A.of Ref.7, which was comprehensively pressure-plotted at inoidenoes up to IO ) and on which boundary layer measurements were made at the trailing- edge8. The present tests on the wing with.smooth leading-edge comprised balance measurements of lif'f, drag and pitching moment up to IO0 inoidence; measurements of the velocity, total head and flow direction in the boundary layer at points on the upger surface of the wing shown in Table i; transition in&I.oation by paraffin evaporation. Similar tests were made on the wing with roughened le adin, n-edge, with the exception of the transition measurements. The rou#ness was applied over the first lC$ of both surfaoes ti consisted of a layer of fine oarborundum particles mixed with aluminium paint. The wind speed w s200 ft/seo and the Reynolds number based on the wing chord was 2.1 x "10 8 . The tests were done in the 13 ft x 9 ft low-speed tunnel at R.&E., Bedford.

The boundary layer flow properties were measured with a Conrad two-tube yawmeter 9 . Readings were taken with the instrument aligned in the ~flow direction and yayed at a known angle to the local flow, and the velocity a& total head calculated as described in Ref.9. The direoticn of flow through the boundary layer relative to the free-stream direction w&a noted. The traversing gear enabled the height of the probe to be located to 0.001 in. and the zero position on the wing surface was determined by noting the point where the probe touched its reflection in the polished surface. The zero readings by this method could be repeated to about f0.001 in. The two tubes of the Conrad probe were I mm (0.040 in.) in diameter, so that the innermost 0.020 in. of the boundary layer oould not be measured. The traverse through the boundary layer was in a direction perpendicular to the free-stream direction at all ticidencss, and not perpendicular to the wing surface. No correction was applied to take acogunt of this. through +W" to an accuracy of 0.1

The probe could be yawed , but it is difficult to determine the

free stream direction to better than 1.0'.

The main supports of the wing were at the tip to leave a clear mrfaoe for the boundary layer tests.

The' balance measurements were corrected for tunnel constraint snd blockage, but no correction was applied to the bound- layer measurements to take cocount of,the transverse velooity gradient and the proximity of the wing surface.

2.2 Results

The balance measurements of lift, drag and pitching moment are tabu- lated in Table 2 and plotted in Figs.2-4. The lift-dependent drag faotor

'D - 'D x=rrA 2 * is plotted against incidence in Fig.5. Fig.6 shows the

3 ; > ,

relation between the theoretical lift slope‘of this wing and the value of the boundary layer reduction factor, k,fo used in its calculation. The method of estimating the experimental lift slope at zero im’idence is shownoin Mg.7. Assuming CL to be measured correctly and ac to be oorrect to 50.05 , the limits of C,./a, at each incidence are marked and the best (estimated) straight line drawn between the limits, on the assumption that the decrease of $/a with G

.c 5-

is linear over most of the incidence range covered. The point where this line cuts the axis a = 0 is taken as the lift slope XL/&, at zero lift.

The movement of the transition point at mid semi-span on both sur- faces of the wing with smooth leading-edge is shown in Fig.8, together with the corresponding data for a two-dimensional wing with I& R.A.E.lO1 section.

The boundary layer measurements of velocity and flow direction on the wing with smooth loading-edge are tabulated fully in Table 3. The corre- sponding results for the rough leading-edge are not tabulated since they are of interest only in comparison with those for the smooth leading-edge and this is brought out best by graphical illustration. A representative selection of velocity profiles and flow angles for both leading-edges is plotted in Figs,9 to 24. The diameter of the tubes in the Conrad yawmeter head is shown relative to the boundary layer profiles.

The estimation of the boundary layer thickness from the velocity pro- files is very uncertain and, to try to improve the acouracy, the thickness,

has been defined as the point at which the velocity reaches 9$ of its ated value at the edge of the boundary layer. The spanwise variation

of So.95 at the trailing-edge is plotted in Fig.25 for various Sncidenoes. Finally in Fig.26 the velooity and flow direction in the boundiuy layer at the trailing-edge is compared for several stations near the tip, at a = 4.2'.

2.3 Discussion

From Fig.25 it is olear that, at all the inoidences at which measure- ments were made, the boundary layer with the rough leading-edge is of the order of 5C@ thicker than with the smooth leading-edge. This is due not only to the earlier transition but to the direct effeot of the roughness. If the earlier transition occurred naturally because of an increase in Reynolds number, the boundary layer thickness at the trailing-edge might well be less thaa with a more rearward transition since the effect of greater R opposes the effeot of earlier transition. The present results for roughened leading-edge cannot therefore be taken as illustrating the effect of higher Reynolds number but merely the effect of a thicker boundary layer.

The thickened boundary layer might reasonably be emected to have two effects on the variation of CL with a, a decrease in the lift slope &+/da at zero lift and a bigger rate of decrease of the quotient CL/u with increasing incidence. 330th these effects are observed (see Fig.7).

The drag at zero lift is naturally greater on the wing with roughened leading-edge because of the increased skin friction but Fig.5 shows no systematic difference in the lift-dependent drag. The values of X measured on wing A of Ref.7 are also plotted in Fig.5. There is a noticeable dif- ference at low lift coefficients between the earlier results and the present tests, which can probably be ascribed to small differences in drag and the etireme sensitivity of K to small changes in s and CD at low lift.

The pitching moment results in Fig.4 differ somewhat from those of wing A? but the differences are small enough to be due to the effect of planform variation and the slight shift of pitching-moment axis.

Nothing unusual is apparent in the paraffin evaporation observations of the movement of transition near mid semi-span on both surfaces of the wing with smooth leading-edge (see Fig.8). The corresponding measurements on a two-dimensional wing of lC$ R.A.E.101 section at a Reynolds number of

3.2 x 10 6 are almost identical with the swept wing results at R = 2.1 x d06. Some isolated observations were made of transition on the lower surface of the wing with roughened leading-edge. At 6' and 8' transition appeared to be well behind the roughness, at 0.45~ and 0.70 respectively.

The velocity profiles and flow angles similar to swept wing data already published-'r*r15,

pl@tedqeq,gtgs.9 to 24 are very

As seen in previous test#, the boundary layer profiles at the trailing- edge of the centre seotion are almost independent of incidence within the range measured (0' < a d 6.3'). The normal increase of boundary layer thiok- ness with incidence is offset by the increasing spanwise pressure gradient with incidenoe, which drains away the low energy air from the centre section and initiates the well-1aown outflow. On the wing with rough leading-edge the boundary layer thickness at the centre seotion actually decreases slightly with increasing inoidence,

60.95' On the wing with smooth leading-edge the boundary layer "thiokness", near the trailing-edge shows a small k&k between r] = 0.8 and Q = 0.9

at all incidencea, (see Fig.25). The profiles at stations in that neighbour- hood at a = 4.2' are plotted in Fig.26, and the kink does not appear to be due to w fundamental ohange in the nature of the boundary layer, The influence of the tip vortex may be the cause, but this seems more likely to account for the difference between the profile at q = 0.930 and the others.

3 TESTS ON& -iTING OF 51' ,?3EZF'

3.1 Description of model and tests

The wing planform is shown in Fig.27. The trailing-edge sweep is 55' and the leading-edge is par&l.lel to it as far as q = 0.5. From there to the tip, the chord distribution is as described in Ref.& The aspect ratio is 3.4 and the streamwise aerofoil se&ion is R.A.E.101, 4$$ thick. The wing was supported at the tips in order to leave a clean surface for boundary layer tests, and on such a thin wing this led to appreciable deformation under load. The amount of twist was measured,

moment The tests comprised balanoe measurements of 19, drag ski pitohing

over a range of incidence from -8.6' to 16.35 ; observation of transit ion by paraffin evaporation; measurements & velooi;Sy, toga1 head and flow direction in the boundary layer at incidences of 0 , 4.1 and 7.2' at various ohotiwise positions at mid semi-span (q = 0.5); and oil flow visualisation tests at the same incidenoes. The model was rigged on wires and the boundary layer and flow visualisation tests were done on the surfaoe uppermost in the tunnel. Thus a positive incidenoe in the boundary layer tests corresponds to a negative incidence in the oonvention of the balanoe measurements. The inoidence was measured from the centre section and the measured aerodynamic twist at other spanwise positions has not been used to oorrect the looal inoidence for the boundary layer tests or to define a mean incidence for the whole wing. The traversing gear and yawmeter were the same as used in the 45' swept wing tests.

6 The wind speed was 200 ft/seo givhg a Repolds number of 2 ,x 10 based on the aerodynsmio mean ohord. The balanoe measurements were oorrected for tunnel constraint and bloc&age. No oorreotion was applied to the yawmter readinga to take acoount & transverse velooity gradient and the proximity of the wing surf'aae.

For the flow visualisation tests, anthraoene powder was ground up and mixed with paraffin. Anthracene fluoresces under ultra-violet light, so that when the model is illuminated by a mercury lamp a sharp picture of the flow

P attern with virtually no bao@round is obtained. Fig.35 shows photographs a> and (b) were taken using white light and photograph (c) using a mercury

lamp.

-7-

3,2 &esults and discussion

The liPt, pitching moment and drag are tabulated in Table 4 and plotted 9n Figs.28 and 29, the results for positive and negative incidences being superimposed. There is a small ciifferenoe between the two sets of readings, probably because of slight asymmetry in the model. The pitching moment shows a characteristic pitch-up at CL = 0.45, The lift-dependent drag faotor,

plotted in Fig.30, is high over the whole range of CL tested but increasers sharply from about 2 to about 3 as leading-edge separation becomes established. The oil flow photographs in $i leading-edge at some CL > 4.1 ?

.35 show that separation takes place at the CL = 0.2) and is fully established by a = 7.2'

(c = 0.4). With attached flow the high values of Ii might be expeoted to de&ease considerably as the Reynolds number is increased towards the full- scale flight range, as shown in Ref.6 This could be ewected to be true also for the present wing in the attached flow regime but not when the flow is separated. The beginning of leading-edge separation could also depend on Reynolds number which further complioates extrapolation to full-scale conditions.

In Fig.31 the aerodynamic twist is plotted against spanwise position for various angles of incidenoe. There is a small residual twist at zero incidence which is not due to aerodynamic load, but this is small compared with the deformation under load as incidence is increased,

The observed movement of the transition point at mid semi-span is shown in Fig.32. The transition point at both Reynolds numbers moves steadily forward as CL inoreases until CL h 0.1-0.13, when it moves rapidly forward to about x/o = 0.1. Xost of the points were obtained by paraffin evaporation, but these were supplemented by examination of the boundary layer profiles in two regions : one at zero inoidenoe when x;rJ o was about 0.80, and the other in the region of' the sudden forward movement at CL m 0.1. At zero inoidenoe

the change in profile shape is fairly well defined (see Fig.33) though about 2% of the profile is missing because of the tube diameter. At x/c = 0.15-0.35 and CL * 0.1 the boundary layer is even thinner and 3% - 5C$ of the profile oannot be meas incidence (0.1

yd. Nevertheless, by taking readings at small intervals of in this instance) with the probe position fixed in plan view,

it is possible to distinguish fairly acourately when the profile changes from laminar to turbulent. The measurements are quantitatively doubtful sinoe no corrections for surface proximity and transverse velocity gradient have been applied, but this should not affect the present qualitative comparisons and their interpretation. In Fig.34 the laminar profiles are marked by open symbols and the turbulent profiles by filled ones. The relative size of the probe is shown in Figso and 34.

The oil flow photographs attached at least up to 4.1 ,

in Fig.35 showothat the flow over the wing is

along the but that by 7.2 separation takes place all

At a, = 7.2 $ea.ding-edge,and results in a coiled vortex sheet being formed.

the boundary lager measyements are of a flow quite different in character from that at 0 and 4.1 . At zero incidence the free transition is at about 8@ chord but, as F&35(a) shows, there are some turbulent wedges springing from near the leading-edge, presumably due to small particles 0f anthracene p0wder. It is interesting to note that there is a marked outflow in the laminar regions not present in the turbulent wedges. the best indication of the state of the boundary layer.

Indeed this gives

-8-

Figs.JG-39 show representative profiles of the velocity and flow diseotion in the boundary layer at mid semi-span; these are tabulated in full, along with the total head, in Tables 5-7. The measurements were made at chordwise positions from x/o = 0.40 back to the trailing-edge end at inoidenoes of O*, 4.1' and 7.2'. At a = 7.2' the most forward point, 31/o = 0.40, is under the coiled-up vortex sheet and therefore in the region of a strong outflow. At the other points further back the air has come over the top of the vortex sheet and become attached to the wing surface. Conse- quently the boundary layer at these points is oomparatively thin, thinner in fact than at cb = 4.1'. Because the outflow exceeded the available range on the ya3eter the actual boundary Layer at x/c = O&J was not measured at a = 7.2 . At all chordwise positions at this incidence the value of the total head outside the boundary layer proper was less than unity, and approached this value only slowly as distance from the surface increased (see Fig&J). This is wesumably due to losses inourred by mixing at the boundary between the vortex flow and the entrained outer flow. The bounda;ry layer profiles at a = 0' and a = 4.1' are unremarkable.

An attempt was made to checrk the method of Ref.4 for calculating the profile drag of a swept wing, (strictly, an infinite sheared wing). In Ref.4, charts are presented for the factor relating the profile drag of an infinite sheared wing to the profile drag of a two-dimensional wing of the same section, at the same Reynolds number, with the same transition position. In the present case the section is LA.E.401, 4$$ thiok, the trpsition position at zero lift is 0.79 and the Reynolds number is 2 x 10 . For the experimental determination of the drag the section at mid semi-span was assumed to be representative of an infinite sheared wing. Measurements were made of the velooity and total head in the wake behind the wing at zero lift and the method of Bets13 was used to evaluate the profile drag (see Appendix 1). The flow measurements were made at three streamwise positions, x/c = 1.00 (immediately behind the trailing-edge), I.05 and 1.10, to see what effect this had on the wake flow quantities and drag coefficient. The flow quanti- ties required are plotted in Fig.41. There is a small asymmetry aboutothe chordal plane which is consistent with the measured twist of about 0.4 (see Fig.3.l) and which has been ignored in estimating the profile drag. The effects of'the small deviations of the flow in the wake from the free- stream direction were also thought to be negligible. The flow quantities plotted j.n Fig,41 show a noticeable effect of varyLng x/o, but the resultad profile drags are all quite similar and no consistent variation with x/o is apparent:-

The profile drag- of the corresponding two-dimensional wing was estimated by the methodof Thwaitesj4.

where u and & refer to upper and lower surfaces 8

= 4 5 at zero incidence.

% c where R = - V

VT = velocity at transition position, xr/ 0.

This gives CD = 0,0035 . 0

Thus in the present oase

\ / uO sheared wing = $f$$$$ = 1.06 .

.

two-dimensional wing

A certain amount of extrapolation is necessary in applying the oharts of Ref.4 for the present transition position. These give the above ratio as 0.83. This large discrepancy has not so far been explained.

The tests described in this Note add to the sum of knowledge of exoerimental swept wing boundary layers at low speed. In the tests on a 45' swept wing no systematic variation of lift-deoendent drag with boundary layer thickness was evident. In the tests on a 55' swept wing, measurement of the local profile drag at mid semi-span did not confirm the "sweep faotor" derived in Ref.&, but further experimental investigation is necessary before a firm conclusion can be dram.

The measurement of boundary layer characteristics on swept wings is time-consuming and tedious, and the effort required to build up a complete picture of the viscous behaviour at low speed would not appear to be justi- fied for direct application to full-scale design in view of the large Reynolds number effect which may exist. Low speed tests can most profitably be used to help in developing and establishing semi-empirical methods for calculating the three-dimensional boundary layer which might be applicable over a large range of Reynolds numbers.

- 10 -

LIST 03' SYMBOLS

A aspeot ratio

0

cL

cD

% cm D

chord

lift ooefficient

drag coefficient

drag coefficient at zero lift

pit ohing moment coefficient

drag force

H total head

'D - % x lift-dependent drag factor = 2 O rui

cL k boundary layer reduction factor

P static pressure

9 dynamic pressure t $pV2

R Reynolds number

Q velocity

Q’ velooity at edge of boundary layer

X$ Y¶ 2 rectangular system of coordinates, x in streamwise direction, y horizontal and z vertioal

a angle of incidence

boundary layer thickness

non-dimensional spanwise coordinate = Y semi-span

angle of flow in boundary layer rclativc to fra:-stroa,,,l Ziection

momentum thickness of the wake from one wing surface at a point far downstream

P density of air

Stifixes

0 free-stream (except in Qo)

'1, 2 planes far upstream of and just behind the wing, respectively

T transition point.

-11 -

LIST OFREFERE?ZES

\To.

1

2 Cooke, J,C.

6 Bagley, J.A.

9

10

11 Kiiohemann, D.

12

13 Betz, A,

A- Title, etc.

Rott, N., Crabtree, L.F.

Simplified laminar boundary layer oaloulations for bodies of revolution and for yawed wings. Journal of the Aeronautioal Soienoes, Vol.39, No.8, August, 1952.

Young, A.D., The profile drag of yawed wings of infinite span. Booth, T.P. The Aeronautioal Quarterly, Vo1.3, p.211, 1951.

Weber, cf., A simple estimate of the profile drag of swept wings. Brebner, G.G. A.R.C. 15,246, 1952.

Wallace, R-E. The experimental'investigation of a swept wing research model boundary layer, Univerrsity of Wichita Aerodynamic Report No.092, 4953.

Kiiohemann, D,, Weber, J., Brebner, G.G.

Brebner, G.G,

Brebner, G.G.

Kiiohemann, D.

Brebner, G.G., Bagley, J.A.

A calculation method for three-dimensional turbu- lent boundary layers. A.R.C. R & M 3199, October, 1958.

An aerodynamio outline of a transonio transport aeroplane. A&C, 19,205, 1956.

Low speed tests on 45' sweptbaok wings. A.R.C. R & M No.2882, May, 4951.

Boundary layer measurements on wings of 45' sweep at low speed. Unpublished M.O.A. Report.

Pressure and bourdary layer measurements on a 59' sweptback wing at low speed. A.R,C, Current Paper No.86, Part II, 1950.

Boundary layers on swept wings: their effects ard their measurements, Unpublished X.O.A. Report.

A simple method of calculating the span and ohord- wise loading on straight and swept wings of any given aspect ratio at subsonio speeds. A.R.C. R & M No.2935, August, 1952.

Pressure and boundary layer measurements on a two-dimensional wing at low speed. A.R.C. R & M N0.2886, February, 1952.

A method for the direot determination of profile drag. Z.F.&, vo1.16, p.42, 1925.

- 12 -

LIST OF RiX?ERENCXS (Contd.)

Author

Thwaites, B, (ed)

Altman, J.M., Hayter, N.F.

Emslie, K., Hosking, L., Marshall, W.S.D.

Ashkenas, H., Riddell, P.R.

Kuethe, A.M., McKee, P.B., Curry, W.H.

Title, etc.

Incompressible flow. oxt'ora University Press, 1960.

A comparison of the turbulent boundary layer growth on an unswept and a swept wing. NfLC.4 Tech. Note NO. 2500, 1951.

Some eqeriments on the flow in the boundary layer of a 45 sweptback untapered wing of aspect ratio 4. College of Aeronautics Report No.69, A=15930, 1953.

An investigation of the turbulent boundary layer on a yawed flat plate. NACA Tech. Note No, 33S3, 1955.

Measurements in the boundary layer of a yawed wing. NAC.h Tech. Mote No. 194.6, 1949.

- 13 -

In the notation of the present Note, the sectional given by

D = J

(H, - H&de +$ (V$ - V2) (Vi + V2 - r I W w

drag force D is

ZvJds -4. Di

where the integrals are taken over the wake, the suffixes 1 a,nd 2 refer to planes ahead of and behind the aerofoU, V* is the velooity at the edge of' the boundary layer and Di is the lift-dependent drag,

Let the pkme ? be far upstream so that H, = Ho. Therefore, at zero

inoidenoe, dropping the stifix 2,

Do = s

(Ho - El)dz +f (Vt - V) (V' + V - 2'Vo)dz I

PI w

Emwe,

whioh can be evaluated graphically From the wake measummen-bs.

- 14 -

!UBLE1

Planform positions o;t which boundary layer was measured: .$Jj” swept wing

Smooth Leading edge Rough lead-a edge

-- v

0:25 0.25 0.32 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.69 0.70 0.70 0.79 0.00 0.80 0.85 0.88 0.89 0.90 0.90 0.93

L %/a

0.98 0.60 0.80 0.98 0.60 0.80 0.90 0.99 0.60 0.80 0.99 0.60 0.00 0.99 0.99 0*99 0.60 0.80 0.99

0.25 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.70 0,70 0.70 0.80 0”:: 0.90 0.90

%

0.98 0.60 0.80

x: Ok0 0.90 0.60 0.00 0.99 0.60 0.99 0.60 0.80 0.99

At all points measurements were made at a = O”, 2,16, 4.2’ and 6.3'.

- 15 -

T&m 2

45O swept ting

Balance measurementg of lift, drag and pitctig moment: R = 2.j x 10 6

(a) Smooth 1eadiz-g edge (I$ Rough leading edga

2

- 2.1 -wH3 ~*Qo75 -0.0012 - 3.6 -WI85 0.0070 -0 .OOQl - I.0 4,061 0.0068 0,0005 - 0.5 -0.026 0.0064 o.oo13

0 0‘004 0,006tl. 0~x25 0.5 0.034 0.0068 CL0033 -l .o 0.064 0*0074 0.0036 1.6 OrnO o*m75 0.0042 2.1 0,124 0.0082 Omo053 2.6 0,153 CL0094 0.0053 3J u/l 81 o,oml 0.0054 3.7 0.210 OJm 2 o.ou55 4.2 O,it~~l om27 0 .oo60 417 0,269 O,OS& 0.0082 5,2 o,zg6 om62 CL0083 53 0.324 0.0179 0.0098 6,3 0,351 0.0197 O*QlI I 6*8 0.379 0.02t7 0.0417 L3 QM5 0.0239 0.0135 7.9 0,434 0.0260 cLOl4.6 8e4 0,457 0.0283 0.0155 8,9 a-83 a*o305 0.0183 9 A:- 0.510 0.0325 0,02oy Ye9 0,535 0*0354 0.0244

IO.5 0,559 CL0383 0.0235

cL

I

- CD

--

--

% 0

a

- 2.1 - 1.6 - LO - 0.5

0 0*5 1.0 1.6 L-l 2.6 3J 317 4*2 4.7 5*2 5.8 6.3 6.3 7*3 7.9 8,4 8,Y 9*4 9*9

10.5

-O.+ll 0,0112 U.00~5 -0.O32 0,0108 0

-0,055 0.0105 -0m47 -0.025 0.03o2 0.000~

0,001 o,o102 O.o04*5 0.032 O,OlO~ 0.0024 Q-059 O+OlQ8 0.0045

oJx7 0.0113 0,0072 om5 0.01~9 0 l m79 0.143 0~x27 o.(JQ73 0.172 0.0137 0.0043 O-197 o,olltb 0.0088 0.226 a.0158 o,oo99 0.255 0.0172 0 l Ol 08 0,281 o.0186 0 JM 21 0.307 0.0201 o,od69 0.335 0.0218 0.0118 0,362 0.0238 o.olg8

0.388 0.0253 0.02m 0.414 0.0279 0.0216 0.439 0.0304 0.0235 0 465 0.0332 0.0253 0.488 0.036t o*o3+i5 0,520 cm406 0 8275 0,549 0.0452 0,0215

%I - ”

50

-16 -

TABLE 3

45' swept wing Smooth leadiq e&ge Boundary layer measurements: q = 0, x/c ;I m

w-y

z/c / @O / v/v0 1

0.041 0.031 0.021 0.011 O.OO85 0.006 0.005 0.004. 0.003 0.002 0.0ol5 0,001

0,041 0.031 0.021 0.011 0.0085 0,006 0,005

E$- 0,002 0.0Ol5 0.001

L

a=O0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1

0 0 0

a=2,1° 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.4

i:i: 0.2

0,985

:*;i; 0:961 0.955 0.9114. 0.939 0,907 0,858 0.792 0.758 0.713

0.974 0.973 0.976 0.972 0.973 0.954 0.941 0.893 0.850 0.798 , 0.767 0.731

0.041 0.031 0.021 O.oll 0 ,O085 om7 0.006 0.005 0.004 0.003 0.002 O.OOl5 0.001

a=4.2O -0.2 -0.2

24 -Q*3 -0.2 -0.1

0 0

-0.1 6.2 -0-3 -0*5

a=6.30

I

0.976 0.971 0.970 0.969 0.967 0.954 0,938 0.907 0.869 0.833 0.772 0.742 0.702

0.041 -0.2 0.031 :*;;2 0.021 2: Ok83 0.011 483 0.979 0.0085 6.3 0.970 0.006 0.2 0.910 o.o05 0.2 0,883 0.004 0.830 o.oo3 2; 0.780 0.002 0.6 0,727 0.0015 0.6 1 0,693 0.001 0.6 j 0.669

t L

-17 -

TABLE 3 (Contd.)

45' swept wing Smooth leading edge

Boundary 1aye-r measurements: q = 0.25, x/o = 0.60

a=o* 0.016 -1.7 1.023 0,0'11 -1.7 1.024 0.0085 -1.7 ? a024 0.006 -1.6 1.026 0.005 -1.4 I 1,010 0.004 -1.7 0.967 0.003 0.002 0.0015 o.ool

!

0.011 0.0085 0.006 0.005 0,004 0.003 0.002 0*0015 0,001

a=2.1* -2.4 -2.4 -2.1 -1.8 -1.4 -1 .o -0*7 -0.5 -0.6

I.049 1.051 1.021 0,987 0,954 0.900 0.837 0,807 0.787

0.016 0,011 0.0085 0.006 0.005 0.004 0,003 0.002 0.0015 0.001

0.016 0.011 0.0085 0.006 0.005 0.004 0.003 0.002 0.0015 0.001

~4.2~ -2.9 I 1.049 -2.8 1 .O@ -2.7 I.036 -2.2 0.983 -1.8 0.949 -1 .3 0.904

2:: 0.854 0.800 -0.2 0.770 -0.2 0.748

I ,046 I .044 0.781 0.880 0.836 0.797 0.737 0.694 0,675 0.648

i

TABLE 3 (Contd.)

45' swept wing Smooth leading edge

~oundaqr layer measurements: v =. 0.25, x/c = 0,80

0,026 0.021 000-l 6 0,011 0.0085 oc.006 o.co5 0,004 0.003 0.002 o*oo15 0.001

0.021 0.016 0.01 I 0.0085 0.006 0.005 0 .OO& 0.003 0.002 0.0015 0.001

-ICI

I

I *

are* t :; 0*3 0.4. 097 1.4 ‘1 .8 2.2 2.5 2.9 3.0 2*9

0.984 0,987 0,996 0,987 o.vh3 0,895 0,863 0082-I 0.784 0.730 0.704 0 .GCr,

a=2,1° -0 .t!. 0.2 I '1.015

5.000

::i; 0.988 0,939 1.7 0,872 2q1i 0.828

4:l 5:; 0.791 0,745 7 1 0.6;34 0.709

4.0 I 0.659

0,026 0.021 0.016 0.011 0.0085 0.006 0.005 0.004 o.co3 0.002 0.001.!5 0.001

a=4.z0 -0.1

0 0.1 0.8

5:;

::;

04932 0.999 0.997 0,942 0.877 0.788 0,754 0.716 0.669 0.630 0.596 0.598

0,026 0.021 0.01 G

1 0.011 0.0085 0.006 0.005 0.004 0,003 0.002 o.oo15

I 0.009

a=6.3o - 0.2 - 0.2

I o*5 I 3.7

5.8 / 8.4

9.4 10.5 11.4

1 12.4

I 12.7 12.7

L

0.986 0,995 0,959 0.828

0.614. 0.589 00554 0.526 0,529

- 19 -

TABLE 3 (C0ntd.)

45' swept wing Smooth leading edge Boundary layer measurements: q = 0.32, x/c = 0.98

0.076 0,061 0.046 0,036 0,026 0,021 0.016 0,011 0.0085 0.007 0.006 0.005 0 .ooi; 0.003 0.002 0.0015 0.001

0.076 0.061 0.046 0.036 0.026 0.021 0.016 0.011 0.0085 0.007 0.~06 0.005 0.004 a.003 0.002 0.0095 0.001

c

c

a=o” 0.8 1 ro 1.4 3 *5 1.8 2.1

I:% 2:; 7:o 7.6 8.4 9.5

;*z .

a=2 .? O 1.3 1.4 1.8 2.1 2.5 2.6

;:; 7.0 8.1 8.8 9.6

j0.6 11.2 11.9 '12.2 12.6

4..

1

0.972 0,968 0.957 0,959 0.953 0.941 0.934 0.885 0.809 0.773 0.747 0.714 0.686 0.652 0.594 0.577 0.574

0,951 0.944 0.940 0.938 0.939 0.93? 0.898 0,800 0.742 0.701 0.675 0.644 0.612 0.585 0.566 0.535 0,531

0.076 0,061 0.056 0.046 0.036 0.026 0.016 0.011 0.0085 0.007 0.006 0.005 0.004 0.003 0.0015 0.001

0.076 0,061 0.046 0.036 0.026 0.021 0,016 0.011 0.0085 0.006 0.005 0.004 0.003 0.002 0.0015 0.001

1

a+20 1 l 5 0.955 1.7 0.955 2.1 0.94a 2.4 o.940

::7 0.934 0.924

4.7 0.858

E 0.756

IO:8 0 ."loo 0.663

11.7 12.7 2% 13.6 0:592 14.7 0.543

i

15.6 0.531 16.0 0.504

a=6.3° 1 .o 1.2 1.6 1.8

;:;

1417 17.5 20.5 21 .7 22.6 23.7 24.5 25.3 25.6

0.965 0.962 0.952 0.947 0.91-l 0.827 0.735 0.638 0.592 0.541 0.526 0.502 0.491 0.450 0.447 o&J+3

- 20 -

TAiEGl3 3 (Contd.)

45' swept wing Smooth leadin& edge

Boundary layer measurements: q T 0.50, x/o = O&O

0.021 0,016 0.011 0.0085 0.006 0.005 0.004 0.003 0.002 0.0015 0.001 I

a=O0 4 .8 -1 .9 -1 .Y L1 .g -1 .8 4.6 -1 .4 -1 .I

Zbi

-017

I.011 1 .Oll 1,017 1 .OiY ? ,003 0.989 0.929 0.901 0,875 0.833 0.822

------

a=2.1° 0.016 -2.9

0.011 0.0085 -2. -2.; 0.006 -2.5 0.005 -2.3 0.004 -2.0 0.003 -1.6 0.002 -1.3 0.0015 -1 .I 0.001 -1 .I

b

I.039 1.039 I.033 1.003 0,974 0.937 0.888 0.828 0.800 0.703

J

0.0085 0,006 0.005 0.004 0,003 0.002

0.026 0.016 0.01 I 0.0085 0.006 0.005 0.004 0,003 0.002 0.0015 0.001

a=4.2* -3.7 -3.7

1;'; -215 -2.0 -1 .5 10.9 -0.8 -0.8

I.043 1.038 7.023 0.965 0.907 0.079 O.@t~ 0.777 0.760 0.693

a=6.3' 4.1 -4.0 -3.8 -2.7 -1.0 -0.1

1 .o 1.8 2.9 3.2 3.4

I.052 ~056 1.037 0.944 0.862 0.817 0.767 0.723 0.673 0.636 0.625

- 21 -

TABLE 3 (Contd.)

45’ swept wing Smooth leading edge Boundary layer measurements: v = O.fiO, x/c = 0.80

0.026 O,O21 O.016 0.011 0.0035 0.006 0.005 om4 0.003 0.002 0.0015 0.001

0.021 0.016 O,Ol? o.ocJ35 0.006 0.005 O&Q4 0.003 0.002 0.0025 0.001

--

a=o” 0.3 043 0*3 0.4 04 1.4 I .3 2.2 2.5 2.9 3.0 2.9

a=2.1° -0.4

0.2 0*3 0.9 117 2*4 2.9 3.5 3mQ 4J 4*0

0.984 0.937 0.996 0.987 0.963 oJ395 0.663 0.824 0.784 0,730 0.704 0.684

1.015 1.000 0.938 0*939 0.872 0.828 0.791 0,745 0*709 0.684 0,659

I I

0,026 0.021 0.016 0.011 O&O35 0.006 0.005 0.004 0.003 0.002 0.0015 0.001

a=4.2' -0.1

0 0.1 0.8 2.0 3.5 4.2 48

2: 615 6.3

0,992 0.999 0,997 0.942 0.871 oJ38 0,754 0.716 0.669 0.630 0.594 0,598

I I

0.026 0.021 0.016 0.01 I 0.0085 0.006 0.005 0.004 0.003 0.002 0.0015 0.004

e6.3' - 0.2 - 0.2

0*5 3.7 5.8 8.4 9.4

10.5 11.4 12.4 12.7 12.7

0.936 WY5 0,959 0.328 0,756 0.681 0.649 0.644 0,581 O-554 0.526 0,529

- 22 -

T~AESE 3 (Contd,)

4.5' swept wing Smooth leading edge Boundary l.er measurements: q = 0.30, x/o = 0.98

0.036 0.026 0.021 o.od6 0.011 0 .oo85 0.007 0.006 0.005 0 .OOl+ o.003 0.002 0.0015 0 .OOl

0.051 0.041 0.03~1 0.026 0.021 0.016 0.011 0.0085 0.006 0,005 0.004 0.003 0,002 0.0015 0.001

I

t

i

GO0 0.2 0.4 0.6 ‘1 .o

22:; 3.5

2:; 5.2

2:; 7.1 7 .I:-

0.942 0.937

Em;:: ok65 0.815 0.784 0.764 0.723 0.702

i?% 0:598 0.598

I a=2.1°

2.3 2.6 2.8

;:; 3.8

2::: 8.3

99:; 10.5 11 .l:. 11.7 12.2

0.954 0.94J-k 0,943 0.943 0.334 0.919 0,834 0.782 0.724 0.697 0.670 0.642 0.608 0.591 1 0.569

/

i i c

0.051 0.041 0.031 0.026 0.021 0.016 0.011 0.0085 0.006 0,005 0.004 0.003 0.002 omoo+I5 0.001

0.05-l 0.041 0.031 0.026 0.021 0.016 0.011 0.0085 0.006 0.005 0.004 0.003 0.002 0.0015 0 moo1

a=4.2O 1.6 1 .Y

2:

E:t 7.6 9.4

11.7 12.7 '13.7 14.5 15.6 16.1 16.4

a=6.3' A.4 l-7

2:;

10:5 15.8 18.7 21.5 22.7 23 .Y 25.1 26.1 26.5 27.1

1

I c

0.947 0.947 0.934 0.930 0.919 0.854 0.748 0.699 0.64.2 0.619 0.593 0.569 0.530 0.522 0.513

-_I__

0.954 0.950 0.942 0.905 0,819 0.723 0.635 0.598 0.577 0.518 0.516 0.498 oe4-75 0.461 0.451

- 23 -

TABLE 3 (Contd.)

45' swept wing Smooth leading edge BOW&WY layer measurements: TJ = 0.70, xjc = 0.60

0.041 0,031 0.021 0.011 0.0085 0.006 0.005 0.004 0.003 0,002 0.0015 0.001

a=o” -2ro -2.0 -2.1 -2.1 -2.0 -2.0 -1.8 -1 .6 -1.3 Ll .o -0.9 -0.9

a=2.i0 1;';

-3:o -38 -2.7 -2.3 -2.0 -1.7 -1 .4 -1.2 -1 .I

--

1.025 1.023 1.025 I.035 I.023 1.021 0.988 0,969 0.927 0.862 0.83E 0.808

1.029 1 l 029 1,038 1.026 0,987 0.945 0.910 0.876 0.835 0,793 0,777

~4.2~ 0,031 -3w9 1.042 0.021

:;*; 1,039

0.011 0.0085 0.006 -==:;

1.045 1.622 0.954

0.005 -217 0.933 0.004 -2.4 0.892 0.003 -1 l 8 0.831 0.002 -1 .4 0.781 o.OOl5 -I,4 0.768 0.001 -1.3 0.741

~6.3' 0.031 -4.6 I.034 0.021 -4.8 1,04J3 O.ol~ -4.5 1.030 0.0085 I;*: 09952 0.006

-1 :3 0,865

0.005 0.818

0.004 0.2 0.003 1.5 x;," 0.002 2.1 0:662 0.0015 2.3 0.614 0.001 2.5 0.607

- 24 -

TH3LE 3 (Confd.)

45' swept wing Smooth leading edge Boundlary layer measurements: q = 0.70, x/o = 0.80 --

z/c I o” v/v I 0

0 l 051 0,041 0.031 0.021 o.oq I 0.0085 o.oo6 0.005 0.004 0.003 0.002 0.0015 0.001

0.051 0,041 0.031 0 .a1 0.011 0 .oosg 0.006 0,005 0.004 0.003 0,002 0 .0015 0,001

a=OO 0.3 0*3 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.8 4.4 1.8 2.2

::: 3.0 3.0

c&=2.1" -0A. -0.3 a.3 -0.2 0.2 0*7 I .6

2: 2.9 3.3 3.4 3.6

0.997 0.996 0.988 0.995 0.987 0,951 0.888 0.857 0,818 0.777 0.729 0.705 0.685

1 .ooo 0.997 0.997 0.995 0.965 0,920 oJ34.7 0,810 0.780 0.739 0.706 0.685 0.657

z/c i I

o* I v/v 0

0,051 0.044 0,031 0,021 0.011 0 ~2085 0.006 o&o5 0 l 004 0.003 0.002 0.0015 0 .OOl

0.051 0,041 0.031 0.021 0,011 0.0085 0,006 0.005 0.004 0.003 0.002 0.0015 0 .OOl

a=4.2O - 1.1 - 1.0 - 0.9 - 0.9

0 1 .o 2.3

:::

2;

i$!l .

~6.3 - 1.5 - 1.5 - 1.4 " 1.3

2.8

;:I

8:9 9.8

10.5 10.7 10.8 I

1

0.999 0.991 0.990 0.991

E;: 0:7y6 0.747 0*731 0.695 0.632 0.612 0.612

0.987 0.984 0.988 0.988 0.812 0.740 0,677 0.647 0.617 0.586 0,553 0.538 0.538

- 25 -

Tm (Coda.)

45' swept wing Smooth leading edge Boukbry layer measurements: q = 0.69, x/o = 0.99

0.076 0.061 0.046 0.036 0.026 0.021 0.016 0.011 0.0085 0.007 0.006 0.005 0.004 0.003 0.002 0.0015 0.001

WOO 1 .I

2 1 l Y 2.1 2.4

::; 4.8 5.5

2: 7.2

78'2 8:9 9.1

0.957 0.953 0,950 0.943 0.940 0.934 0.934 0.874 0.812 0.7-p 0.742

:*i;: 0:645 0.604 0.593 0.589

ad2.i O

FE:: 0:046

0.6 0.9 0,954 0.956

0.036 ::"6 0.945 0.933

0.026 1.9 0.928 0.021 2.1 0.933 0.016 0.911 0.011 0.0085

;:; 0.816 0.753

0.007 712 0.716 0.006 7.7 0.694 0.005 8.5 0.666 0.004 9.5 0.613 0.003 10.0 0.594 0.002 IO.8 0,579 0.0015 11.2 0.563 0 .ool 11.6 0.558

0.076 0.061 0.046 0.036 0.026 0.021 0.016 0.011 0.0085

;*z 0:005 0.004 0.003 0.002 0.0015 0.001

0.076 0.061 0.046 0.036 0.026 0.021 0.016 0.011 0.0085 0.007 0.006 0.005 0.004 0.003 0.002 0.0015 0.001

a=4.2’ ” I.5 - I.2 - 0.8 * 0.5 - 0.1

0.4

2; 6.4

r3'f; 9:5

10.2 11.0 12.0 12.5 13.0

a=6 .j” - 2.4 - 2.1 ” 1.5 - 1.1

0.5 3*7 8.0

12.9 16.0 17.5 18.5 19.8 21.3 22.2 23.3 23.5 24.1

0.965 0.959 0.953 0.948 0.943

zz 0:766 0.716 0,684

:% 0:609 0.585 0.558 0.533 0.522

0.964 0.956 0.951 0.944 0,901 0.798

f?;;: 0:581 0.550 0.535 0.520 0.489 0.477 0.452 0.447 0.437

- 26 -

TAN,% 1 (Contd.).

QP swept wing Smooth lead- edge Boundaxy layer measuremqnts:, q = 0.80, x/o, = 0.60

0.041 0.021 0.014 0.0085 0.006 0.00~ 0.004 o&o3 0.002 0.0015 0.001

0.041 0.031 0.021 0.011 0.0085 0.006 0.005 0.004 0.003 0.002 0.0015 0.001

iWOo -1 .7 -1.8 -1 J3 -1 l 8 -1.6 -1.4 -A .2 -0.9 -0.6 -0.5 4*6

az2.1 O -2 l 8 -3.0 -3.0 -2,V -2.9 -2.4 -2.2 -1 l 8 4.6 -1 .3 -1 .2 -I .o

1.032 LO36 1.027 I.034 1.015 0.988 0.960 0.914 0.863 0.835 0.799

-

1.024 -I.030 4.034 4.034 1.022

:*;z 0:893 0.073 0.820 0.783 0,755

J

~~4.2~ 0.0405 -4.2 0.0305 -4.3 0.0205 -4.3 0.0105 -4.2 0.008 0.0055 1;‘; om45 -2:5 o-0035 -2.1 O.CQ25 -1 ,6

,"::i5 j,, y ::

a=6.3O

. I

0.041 0.031 0.021 0,011

Ez5 o:oo5 0.004 0.003 0 *CO2 o.ooyj 0 .ool

I.039 1.042 1.0~0 1.038 0.990 0,905 0.863 W3V 0.764 0.709 0 JO?

1.017 1.015 1.021 I .m 0,914 0.809 0,771 0,732 0,692 0,634 0.580 o&7

- 27 -

TABLE 3 (Contd.)

45' swept wing Smooth leading edge Boundary layer measurements: n = 0.80, x/o z 0.80

0.051 0,041 0,031 0.021 0.011 o.oo85 0.006 0.005 0.004 om3 0.002 o.oo15 0.001

0.051 0,041 0.034 0.021 0.01 I 0.0085 0.006 0.005 0.004 0.003 0.002 0.0015 0.001

L

a=OO Oa-7 0.7 0”::: 0.9 1.2 1.8 2.1 2.4 2.7

J':: 3.0

ct=2J0 4.3 -0.4. a.3 -0.3

0.1 0.7 1.4 1 .Y

2;

0.990 0,051 0.987 0,041 0.988 0.031 0.991 0.021 0.976 0.011 0.946 0 A085 0.883 0.006 0.854 o.oo5 0,820 0.004 0.784 0.003 0.739 0.002 0.714 0.0015 0.678 0.001

O*YYO 0.992 0.992

:$-; 0:917 0.847 0.812 0.759 0.735 0.693 0.653 0.643

0.051 0.041 0.031 0.021 0.011 0.0085 0.006 0.005 0.004 0.003 0.002 0.0015 0.001

a&2* 4 .5 -1.3 -1.3 -1.2 -0.4

::; 2.3

$5 . ;:i

0.993 0.984 0.990 0.987 0.936 0.872 0.802

0.646 0.620 0.610

a=6J0 -2.3 -2.1 -2.0 -1.8

a:;

6:5

2: 8.7

98'; .

0.985 0.981 0.986 0.975 0.803 0.730 0.666 0.636 0.607 0.570 0.539 0.522 0.521

- 28 -

TABLE 3 (Contd.)

45' swept wing Smooth leading 8dp

Routi~ layer measurements: 3-j = 0.79, x/C = 0,92

:%t 0:046 0.036 0,026 0.021 0,016 0.0-i1 0.0085

Et: 0:005 0,004 0.003 0.002 0.0015 0,001

0.076 0.061

iK$ 0:026 0.021 o.ol6 0.011 0.0085 0.007 0.006 0.005

iKi2 0:002 0.0015 0.001

0.964. 0.956 z;;; 0: 937 0.938

z%~ 0: 805 0,769 0.744 0.746 0,700 0,663 0,609 0.587 0.575

g. 07; 0:046 E:z (021 0,016 0.011 0.0085

E2 oh5 0.004 0.003 0,002 0.0015 0.001

a&2o - 0.8 - 0.5 - 0.2

0. -I 0.5

::; 5.6 7.4 8.6

1::: 40.9 12.1 12.8 13.0 14.1

a=2,1° ~~-6.3'

ii:; 1 o.956 0.953 0.9 0.945 I.1 0.942 1.5 0.934 7.7 0.932 2.5 0.914 4v2 0,820

2: , ) 617

0.758 0.730 0.707

it: ~679

9:1 0.645 o. 6og

9.9 1 0.579 10.2 / 0.558 10‘6 j 0.551

0.046 y3; <

0:021 0.016 0.01-l 0.0085 0.007 0.006 0.005 O.ooL, 0.003 0,002 0.0015 0.001

L

- 0,9 - 0.9

o. 6 3.2 7.1

11.8

'%:: 1714 18.2 19.4 20.3 21.4 22.0 22.4

0.954 0.947

Egg; 0: 935

Ek& 0:7J8 0.676 0.645 0,628 0.601, 0.592 0.558 0,535 0.520 0.509

0.933

3; 0:803 0.716 0.633 0.587 0.555 0.541 0.524 0.502

:g; 0:437 0.437

I

TABLE 3 (Co&d.)

45O swept wing Smooth leading edge

Boundary layer measurements: q = 4 85, x/c = 0.99

B/C Q0 v/v 0

Oko”

0.076 1.8 0.960 0,061 2: 0.954 0.046 0.036 2:6

0.948 0.944

0.026 2.8 0.944 0.021 z*; 0.940 0,016 0.011 418

0.927 0.859

0.0085 5.8 0.800 0.006 ;: 0.733 0.005 0.710 0.004 i?; 0.675 0.003

9:6 0.641

0,002 0.597 o,Om5 9.7 0.584 0.001 IO. I 0.576

ck2,1* 0.076 0.2 0.959 0.061 0.952 0,046 izi

1:1 1.4

0.949

x2 0.9&

0:02-l 0.938

1.7 0.931 0.016 0.884 0.011 0.789 0.0085 ;;

z%z 7:o

0.724

0:005 it; 0.688 0.662

0,004 9:2 E% 0.003 10.0 0:565 0.002 10.9 0.528 0.0015 11.1 0.521 0.001 11.1 0.524

z/c o” v/v,

0.076 0.061 0.046

i?::; 0:021 0.016 0,011 o.ow5

iE25 0:005 O*oat. 0.003 0.002 0.0015 0.001

u=L,2o - 1.3 - 1.0 - 0.7 - 0.4

OY6

$5

;i:;

9:o 10.0 10.7 11.7 12.0 12.0

0.950 0.944 0.935 0.934 0.924 0.916 0.872 0.746 0.681

ii% 0:600 0.574 0.549 0.507 0.502 0.489

z! 0:046 0.036 0.026 0,021 0.016 0.011 0.0085 0.007 0.006 0.005 0.004. 0.003 0.002 0.0015 0.001

ctz6.3' i - 3.2 0.954 - 2.8 0.940 - 2.5 CL 936

d 2.3 - 0.7 E%% ii:; I 0.688 0:788

10.1 0.597 12.5 0.551 13.8 0.547 15.1 0.520 16.0 0.500 17.0 0.484 18.1 0,460 19.3 0.437 19.6 0.4-V lg.8 0.420

- 30 -

TABIiE 2 (Contd,)

4fj” swept Q&q ’ Smooth leading edge Boundary layer measurements: 71 = 0.90. x/o 3 O&Q

Z/O o* v/v 0

0.041 o,og1 . 0.02z. O.O?l 0.0085 0.006 0.005

E$ 0.002 am15 0,001

a=Oo -1.3 -1.4 -1.4 -1.5 -1.4 -1.1. -0.9 -0.5 -0.5 woe.4 -a5 -0.5

1.023 1,026. 1,023 1.026 I.019 0‘ 972 0.942 0.899 0.864 0.812 0.782. 0.764;

0,041 0,031 0,021 0.031

z%z5 0:005

::Eg 0.002 o.m5 0,001

a=2.1* -3.5 -3.5 -3.6 -3.6 -3.5 -3.1 -2.9 -2.6 -2.3 -2.2 -2.3 -2.2

4.034 l.030 1,032 1.032 1.013 0.946 O.Pd2 0.869 0,820 0.773 0.751 0.748

z/o ’ ’ Q0 v/v r

0 I I as4y2o

0,041 0.031

:g 1.036 1.033

0.021 $ I.034 O.Oli 1.033 Ezi5

0:005

-513 47 0.921 a 993

0.004 2: 0.879 0.829

0,003 :>; 0.X' 0.002 0.745 0.0015 1;:; 0. m4 0.001 . 0.7~

a=6,3' 0.04? -7.2 I.027 0.031 :E Lo26 0.02l

-?:I 1.021

0.011 0.981 0.0085 -6.5 0.920 0.006 22 0.822 0,005 0.775 0.004 -4.3 0.738 0.003 -3.7 o. 691 0;002 -3.2 0, a.9 0.0015 -3-o 0.624 G0Q-l -2 8 -t 0.594:

- 31 ”

TABLE 3 (Contd,)

45O swept wing Smooth leading edge Bowiiary layer measurements: q E 0.90, x/c = 0.80

e/c / o” / v/v,

0,051 0.04.l 0.031 0.021 0.011 0.0085 0,006 0,005 0,004 0.003 0.002 0.0015 0.001

CkOO 0.1 0. I 0’ 0:; 0.2 0.7 I.3 1.5 1.8 2.1 2.3 2.5 2.5

0.979 0.979 0.979 0.983 0.971 0.924 0.859 0.829 0.800 0.764 0.721 o. 696 0.660

0.051 0.041 0.031 0.021 0.011 0.0085 0.006 0.005

E$ 0.002 0.0015 0.001

, ck2.1" , -2.1 -2.0 -2,0 -2.0 -1,6 -0.9 -0.2

0.982 0.979 0.975 0.975 0.935 0.878 0,811

0.2 0.777

2: 0.752 0.724

1.2 0.672 1.3 0.641 I.3

I 0.636

0.051 0. a-1 0,031 0.021 0,011 OeoO85 0.006 0,005 o*m4 0.003 0.002 0,0015 0.001

0.051 0.041 0.031 0.021 0.011 WQ85 0.006 0.005 0.004 0.003 0.002 0.0015 0. cm

a&2O -Ic,O -4.1 -4.0 -4.0 -3.1 -2.5 -1.7 -1.2 -0.7 -0.2

0.2 0.2 0.3

k6.3' -5.9 -5.8 -5.7 -5.7 -3.1 -1.7

0.1 0.8 1.5 2.3 2.9 3.1 3 .2

a 968 0.976 0.970 0.970 0.894 0.841 0.776 0.745 0,712 0.667 o. 629 0.613 0.592

0.975 0.965 0.958 a 9% 0,803 0.730 0.663 0.632 0.612 0.577 0,544 0,521 0.517

- 32 -

TABIX 3 (Contd,)

45' swept wing Smooth leading edge Boundary layer measurements: q = 0.88. x/c = 0.99

0.076 0.061 046 E%2 0:021 0.016 0,011 0.0085

Ez oh5 0.a 0.003 0.002 0.0015 0.001

a zoo I*4 1.6 I.8 2. I 2.3

0.9% 0.954 0.956 0.944 0.944 0.947 0.933 0.865 0.817 0.759 0.740 0.710 0.683 0.659 0.609 0.587 0,577

“d:;: 0:046 0,036 0.026 0.021 0.016 0,011 0.0085

h%z GO5 0.004 0,003 0,002 0.0015 0.001

a=2.1° 0.90 a957 0.956 0.942 0.938 0.939 0.916 0.826 0.771 0.?35 0,704 0.672 0.652 0.619 0.583 0.562 0.543

0.076 0.061 0.046

odium 0:021 0.016 0.011 0.0085

Kz 0:005 0.004 0.003 0.002 0.0015 0.001 I

ii:; 8.8 9.3

0.571 I 0.535 0.518 0.512

ti6.3' i?%i - 4.2

0:046 I

I ;*; 0.036 - 3:2 0,026 - 2.3 0.021 - 0.1

0.016 0.011 i?'o' 0.0085 0.006 0.005

I lo:1 12.8 13.9

0.004 1 : 15.0

0.003 f 16.0 0.002 16.9 0.0015

I 17.3 0.001 1 27.8

0.965 0.953 0.949 0.942 0.919 0.829 0.731 0.641 0.590 0.545 0,521 0.497 0.476 0.459 0.449

0.4J7

- 33 -

TABLF: 3 (Contd.)

45' swept wing Smooth leading edge Boundary layer measurements: r) = 0.89, x/ C = 0.99

0.076 0.061 0,046

FEZ; 0:021 o,o-t6 0.011 0.0085 0,006 0.005 0.004 0.003 0.002 0,0015 0.001

2 %i: g:;;;;

0:0265 0.0215 0.0165 0.0115 0.009 0.0075 ~~65 0.0055 a0045 0.0035 0.0025 0,0015 0.001

I

a=OO I*1 1.4 1.7 1.8 a 1 2.2 2.5 3.6

‘;-i 2:;

72 8. I 8.5 8.7 I

a=2.1* -1.5 -1.4 4.0 -0.9 -0.7 -0.5 0.1 1.5 2.6

;fi 42 5.3 5.9 6.8 7.3 7.6

0.947 a 931 a 931 0.927 0.921 0.920 0.909 0.832 0.78G 0.715 0.690 0.655

:;:a 0:552 0,547

0.951 0.947 0.930 o. 926 0.922 0.922 0,883 0.795 0.734 0.698 0.669 0.636 0.608 0.581 0.547 0.522 0.499

Z/C I o* I v/v 0

a=4,2O 0.076 - 3.6 1 0.947

0.061 - 3*4 0.051 - 3.2 i ZE ii%66

0:021

- - 2.9 2.9 0.914 0:931

- 2.6 0.890 0,016 - 1.2 0.815 0.011 0.5 0.736 0.0085 :::, 0.676 0.007 0.645 0.006 3.8 0.614 0.005 L7 Oh85 0.004 0.574 0.003 2:: 0.545 0.002 ;:: 0.510 0.0015 4492 0.001 7.2 0.495

0.076 0.061 0.046 0.036 0.026 0.021 0.016 0.011 0.0085 0.007 0.006 0.005 0.004 0.003 0.002 0.0015 0.001

a=6.3’ - 5.5 - 5.0 - 4v2

1:; - 1:6

ii*; 8:4

IO,1 11.2 12.3 13.6 14.8

22 16:8

0,944 0.940 0.927 0.902 0.845 0.775 0.676 0.598 0.564 0.533 0.516

~ 0.495 ~ 0.488 ~ 0,458

0.431 9.429 0.4-22

- 34 -

TABU 3 (Contd.)

45' swept wing Smooth leading edge

Boundary layer measurements: v = 0.93, x/c = 0.99

0.0765 0.0615 0.0465 0.0365 0.0265 0.0215 0.0165 0.0115 0.009 0.0075 0.0065 0.0055 0.0045 0.0035 0.0025 0.002 0.0015 0.001

i%: Oh6 0.036 0.026 0.021 0.016 0.011 0.0085

Kz 0:005 0.004 0.003 0.002 0,0015 0.001

4

azOo

Z:$

ii:; I.2

:::

::;

,“.i

;:;

6:7 7.1 7.3 7.3

a=2. lo -2.2 -1.9

1;: -0:4 -0.5 -0.5

2; 1.0 1.2 1.6

:::

;:; 3.7

0.979 0.967

:;z’: 0:951 0.951 0.937 0.860 0.807 0.770 0.739 0.712 0.680 0.655 0,607 0.591 0.559 0.550

0.957 0.953 0.941 0.926 0.895 0.878 0.814 0.725 0.680 0.629 0.608 0.592 0.564 0.530 0.508 0.488 0.463

Z/C o* V/V 0

a&* 2O 0.076 -4.5 0.832 0.061 -3.6 0.831 0. 04.6 -2‘4 0.825 0.036 -1.3 0.814 0.026 0.2 0.788 0.021 1.0 0.765 0,016 1.7 0.721 0.011 2.0 0.660 0.0085 A.7 0.625 0.006 1.2 0.572 0.005 1.1 0.559 0.004 0.9 0,512 0.003 0.7 0.512 0.002 o. 6 0.503 0.0015 0.6 0.484 0. ool 0.7 0.472

a=6.3’

32~ 0:046-

-3.5 -5.4 0.703 0.690 -1.8 o. 698

0.036 0.2 0,690 0,026 ;$ 0,661 0.021 0.016 4:6

0,661 0.631

0.011 0.592 0.0085 ;:: 0.559 0.007

;:; 0.540

0.006 0,528 0.005 0.522 0.004 5:; 0.503 0.003 ;*z 0,484 0.002 t 0.472 0.0015 ;:2" 0.463 0.001 0.452

- 35 -

b, TABLF,

55O swept wing

Balance measurements of lift, drag and pitchina mcment: Ii= 2 x IO 6

-8.6 -8.1 -7.55

I$* ;; -6:o -5.5 -5.0 -4.45 -3.95 -3.45 -2.9 -2.4 -1.9 -1.4 -0.85 -0.35

0.15 0.65 I.2 A.7 2.2 2.7 3.25 3.75 4.25 L-75 .

;:i 6.35 6.85

-0.490 -0.458

~ -0.425 -0.389 -0.353 -0.338 -0.283 -0.250 -0.219 -0.1y1 -0.165 -0.139 -0.114 -0.090 -0.064 -0.040 -0.017

0.007 0.030 0.055 0.079 0.102 0.128 0.153 0.180 0.209 0.239 0.276 0.313 0.350 1 0.383 j

0.0764 0.0667 0.0580 0.0488 0.04O5 0.0331 0.0264. 0.0204 0.0154 0.0122 0.0102 0.0086

: ;~~: o:OO54 0.0051 0.0050 0.0050 0.0051 0.0056 0.0063 0.0074 0.0087 0,0100 o.olly o.o1i+6 0.0188 0.0258 0.0330 0.04-07 0.0487

0.0343 0.0358 0.0353 0.0333 0.0305 0.0258 0,0209 0.0181 0.014-l 0.0108 0.0079 O,OO68 0.0057 0.0035 0.0011 0. ooo8 0.0001

-0.0012 -0.0014 -0.0017 -0.0021 -0.0018 -0.0048 -0.0066 -0, om8 -0.0120 -0.0153 -o.ozO& -0.0257 -0.0306 -0.03jy

- 36 -

TABIiEl5

55' swept wing Boundary layer measurements at mid semi-s an: ;

0.00100

4

0.30075 0.00825 0.00575 0.00475 0. oQ400 0.00300 0,00200 0.00175 0.00150 0.00140 0.00130 0.00120 0.00110 0,0010

0,30100 0.01100 0.00975 0.00850 0.00725 0.00600 0.00500 0.00400 0.00350 0,003~ 0,00250 0.00200 0.00150 0.00?25

x/c = 0.60

-0Oe -0:s -0.8 -0.8 -0.8 -0.3

0:6 0.9 1.2 1.4 I.8 2.1

0.991 1.027 1.023 1,027 I.007 0.991 0,901 0,886 0.835 0.819 0.794 0.768 0.726 0.697

L

x/c = 0.70

-0.3 1,016 -0.5 1,016 -0.5 1.016 -0.5 1.016 -0.5 1.018 -0.4 1.018 -0.4 I.013 -0*3 1,000 -0.2 0.984

0 0.949 0.3 o. go6 1.0 0.854 2.3 0.762 3.5 0.678 45 0.607

.L L

0.981 0.997 0.995 0.9% :% 0:818

z;: oh47 0.612 0.573 0.517 0.462

1.000 I.003 1.004. 1.004 1.007 I.003 1.003 0.986 0.963 0.916 0.836 0.734 0.572 0.450 0.354

z/c El0 v/v0 H-P0

T I I I

0.30100 0, OOGOO 0.00500 0.00400 0.00350 0.00300 0.00250 0.00200 o.OO-I50 0,00125 0.00100

0.30075 0.00575 0.00475 0.00375 0.00325 0.00275 0.00225 0.00175 0,00125 0*00100

x/c = 0.78 -0,2 1.007

0 1.025 0.1 1.013 0.2 0.997 0.3 0.984 0.3 0.968 oe6 0.932 1.0 0.885 2.0 0.814. 2.7 0.766 3.7 0.714

x/c = 0.79

-0.2 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.6 1.0 1.3

::A 3.5

1.013 1,006 I.009 1.008 0.993 0,987 0.973 0.951 0.932 0.894 0.888 0.822 0.862 0.766 0.808 0.666 0.754 0.575 0.720 0,530

0.999 1.022 1.011

EF;;: 0: 947 0.885 0,801 0.674 0,597 0.514

- 37 -

55' swept ting

%ABLE 5 (Con-t&)

Boundaqr layer Smeasurements at mid semi-span:- q = 0.5; a = 0'

z/c o”

0,30110 0,02610 0.01610 0,0-l110 0,00860 0.00610 0.00510 0.00410 0.00310 0.00210 o.00160 0.00135 c?*cQ115 0.00100

O.iJOl45 0.25145 0.10145 0.05045 Eb :g:; 0:02645 0.02145 0.01645 0*01145 0.00895 0.00645 0.00520 0,00395 0.00270 0.00145 0,00100 1

x/c = 0.80

0 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 ::; 0.5 0.8 1.4 4.8 2.1

2’::

1.002 0.998 1.004 1.003 I.004 I.005 0.997 0.998 1.011 I.014 5.004 I.007 0.994 0.989 0.973 0.961 0.935 0,898 0.867 0,778 0,830 0.707 0.808 0,667 0.794 0,641 0.774 0.610

x/c =

0. I

::i 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3

i:;

1:6 1.9

i::, 2.7 ;:;

0.99

0.994 0.989 0.995 a 992 0.992 0.993 0.989 0.996 0.991 a 999 a 991 0.998 0.986 0.998 0.986 -Ii001 0.985 0.999 0.981 0.996 0.971 0.977 0.924 0.899 0.889 0.840 0.847 0.769 0.802 0.693 0.75-l 0.603 0.722 0.557

z/c o" v/v I H-p0 0

/ 9,

0,10100 0.08100 0.07100 0.06100 0.051cO 0,041OO 0.03lOcJ 0.02100 0.01~00 0.00975 0.00850 0.00600 0.00350 0.00300 0.00250 0.00200 0.00150 0.00100 0.00050

0 -0. ooofjcl -0.00100 -0.00150 -0.00200 -0.00250 -0.00300 -0.00350 -0, ocqoo -0.00650 -0. oogoo -0.01025 -0.01150 -0.01275 -0.01400 -0.01 go0

x/c = 0.6

2; 0.8 0.8 1.0 I*0 I,2 -I.3 1.3 1.6

::; 2.5 2.7 2.8

5::

:: 4.3 4.2 4.0 3.9 3.7 3.6

5:: 2.5 2.0 1.9 1.8 A.7 1.6 1.4

I.00

0.991 0.991 0.993 0.986

od;;: 0: 988 0.982 0.984 0.973 0.963 0.908 0.833 0.814 0.794 0.77-l 0.748 0,711

x2 0: 674 0.701 0.726 0.760 0.777 0.797 0.814 0. a-1 0.906

:;;i- 0:979 0.9% 0.993 0.982

0.989 0.995 1,001 0.993 1.col 0.994 0.999 0.992 0.997 0.983 0.961 il.869

i$69 Ok75 0.637 0.597 0.545 0.4-88 0.474 0.493 0.532 0.574 0.625

i%$ 0:713 0.756 0.866 0. Ylc8 0.975 a 989 0.997 1.009 0.991

.. 38 -

TABI 5 (Contd.)

55O swept wing

Bourxbrg layer measurements at mid semi-span: q s 0,5; CI = 0'

0.30-I 4-O 0.02'i4.0 o. OI 640 0.01390 0,011c!+0 0,01015 0.00890 0,00765 0.00640 0‘00540 o,owo 0.00340 0.00240 0.00140 0. Km40

-0.00010 -o.00060 -0.00160 -0,00260 -0.00360 -0.00460 -0.00560 -0.00660 -0.00760 -0.00860 -0.00985 -0.01110 -0.01235 -0.01360 -0.01860

OYY 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.2 I.3 1.5 1.6 4.7 I.8 I.9 2,2 2.2 2.4 2.5 265

;:'; 2.1 2.0 1.8 le7 1.6 4.5 1.5

:::

4.05

0.993 0.992 0,993 1,003 0.991 1,001 0,993 1.006 0.988 0.999 0.982 0,988 0.973 0.970 0.951 0.935 0.925 0.889 o. a96 0.839 0.870 0.792 0.838 0.737 0.797 0,670 0.762 0.616 0.742 0.582 0.738 0.576 0.748 0.587 0.774 0.628 0.808 0,683 0.838 0.735 0.870 0.793 0.901 0.844 0.924 0.887 0.947 0.924 0.961 0.951 0.973 0.974 0,986 0.994 0.988 0.998 0.993 A.005 0.993 I.003

I I I

X/C = 1.10

0.30070 0.02070 0.01820 0.01570 0.01320 O.O-I~Y5 0.01070 0.00945 0.00820 0.00695 0.00570 0.00470 0.00370 0.00270 0.00170 0.00070

-0,00030 -0,00130 -0.00230 -0.00330 -0.00430 -0.00555 -0.00680 -0.00805 -0.00930 -0.01055 -0.01 I a0 -0.01305

1: 0": go" -0:0?930

0 0.991 0.7 0.984 0.7 0.988 0.7 0.988 0.7 0.988 0.8 o, 986 0.8 0.988 0.8 0.973 0.8 0.954 0.9 0.935 1.0 0. go6 1.1 0.878 1.1 0.852 1.2 0. a25 1.3 0,803 1.4 0.786 1.6 0.783 1.7 0.794 I.8 0.811 1.8 0.833 I,8 0.860 I.7 0.891 1.6 0,920 I.5 0.942 1.4 o. 961 1.4 0.973 1.2 a 9% 1.2 0.991 1.2 0.988 1.2 0.984 1.2 0,993

0.988 0.990 0.9%

ky;z 0:993 0.993 0.966 0.944 0. a98 0.850 0.801 0.756 0.712 0.673 0.644 o. 6w 0.654 0.683 0.721 0.766 0.820 0,872 0.913 0.947 o. 966 0.988 0.999 0.996 0.990 1,001

TABLE 6

55' swept wing Foundry layer measurements at mid semi-span: q = 0.5: a = 4.1'

0.30075 0.02575 0.02075 0.01575 0.01075 0.00825 0.00575 0.00475 0.00375 0.00275 0.00175 0.00125 0.00100

0.3Oloo ao26oo 0.02100 0.016oo 0.01100 0.00850 0.006oo o.oo5oo o.oo4m o.oo3oo 0.00200 o.oo150 0,00100

-2:6 -2.7 -2.7 -2.7 -2.4 -0.7

0.2 1.1 1.9 2.8

5:;

3.034 1.055 1.063 1.061 1,063 1.029 0.932 0,893 0.860 0.W 0.766 0.732 0.719

X/C = 0.50

0 -1.9 -1.9 -1.9 -1.8 -0.7

I.2 2.0 2.8 3.6

1.020 1.046 I.040 1.055 I.027

E%; 0: 841 0.808 0.783 0.742 0.714 0.697

1.001 0.981 0.991 o. 986

2;;; 0:760 0.690 0.623 0.549

"dEf 0:377

x/c s 0.60

ii* iz?l

0:02100

4.2 0 ~036 I.040 0.997 1,009

-1.3 I.036 0.998 0.01600 -1.2 1.034 0,993 O.Ol350 -1.1 I.025 0,979 0.01100 -0.5 0.995 0.930 0.00850 0.9 0.927 0.798 o,00600 2.7 0.844 0.655 O,oo~O 4-o 0.771 0.540 0.00300

;:: 0.738 0.485

0.00200 0,425 o,oo150 0.00100

65:: %:

oh-i3 0.400

,i 0.356

0.988 0.30100 0.989 0.02600 0. 980 0.02100 0.997 o.oj600 a958 0.01350 0.832 0.01100 0,689 0.00850 0.626 0.006co 0.567 0.004m 0.513 0.00300 0.4-44 0.00200 0,402 0.00150 0,372 0.00100

o" v/v H-P,

0 x-

X/C = 0.70

0 -1.016 -0.3 1.022 -0,3 1.029 -0, I 1.013

0.4 0.991

1:; 0.942 0.872

7.9 0,636

’ 0.995

I 0.999 4,006 0.982 0.936 0.845 0.727

I 0,619 0.523

- 40 "

55O swept wing

TABIS 6 (Contd.)

Bour13ary layer measurements at mid semi-span: q = Cl. 5: M = 4.1'

*

0,30100 0.02600 0.02100 0.01850 0.01600 0.01350 0.01100 0.00850 0.00600 0.00500 0.00400 0.00300 0.00250 0.00200 0.00150 0.00125 0.00100

0.301-I5 0.05115 0.04115 0.03115 0.02615 o.o2"i15 0.01615 0.01115 0.00615 0.00515 0.00415 0.00315 0.00215 o.00165 0.00115 0.00100

A

x/c = 0.80

0 0.3 0.4 0.5 1.0 2.0

$I!

6:7

f:Ei 7.8 8.0 8.2 8.2 8.2 i

L

L

1.022 1.014 1.029 1.016 1.020 I.005 1.016 0.996 0.987 0.949 0.937 0.868 0.898 0.789 0.828 0.678 0.768 0.576 0.738 0.530 0.704 0.480 0.681 0.445 0.668 0.424 0.644 0.395 0.619 0,364 0.604 0.347 0.597 0.334

x/c = 0.90

0 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.8 1.0

;:i .

FibA 915 9.9

10.1 10.4 10.5

1.007 0.992 1,004 1.001 I.004 1.002 0.997 0.993 0.997 0.996 0.995 0.990 0.937 0.886 0.838 0.716 0.717 0.529 0.697 0.498 0.674 0.465 0.636 0.4-m 0.615 0.387 0.597 0.365 0.566 0.331 0.561 0.323

0.30100 0.05100 0.04100 0.03100 0.02850 0.02600 0.02350 0.02100 o.01600 0.01100 0.00850 0.00600 0.005OO 0.00400 0.00300 0,00200 0.00150 0.00100

0 1.2 1.3

:*2 117 1.9

22

c; 10:5 11.2 11.8 12.4 12.9 13.0 13.0

1.011 0.997 0.995 1,022 0.993 0.991 0.977 0.952 0.872 0,786 0.742 0.691 0.671 0.654

ii%: 0:597 0.569

1.008 0.998 1.002 1.012 1.002 1.001 0.981 0.934 0,796 0,649 0.577 0.509 0.482 0.451 0.429 0.399 0.383 0.354

- 41 -

55' smpt wing

TlJX3 6 (Coned.)

Bc,undary layer measurements at mid semi-span: rl = 0.5: a = 4.1'

0,081m 0.071oo 0.06100 0.05100 0.04100 0.03loO 0.02100 O.ol6oo 0.01350 0,Ol loo

E%Z% o:oo35o 0,00225 0,00100

-0.00025 -0.ool5Q -0.00275 -0. oo400 -0.0o650 -0.00900 -0.01 go0 -0.02 go0 -0.03900 -0.04900 -0,059oo -0.o8400 -0, -I 0900

- 0.2 0

0.1 0.3 0.4 a 5 1.4

t; 5.9 7.4 9.1

10.6 11.0 AO.7 6.8 3.1 2.6 2.0 1.8 1.7 I.4 1.3 1.2 I.2 I. 1 1.1 I*1

1.00

0,993 0.991 0.988 0.986 0.988 0.988 0.959 0.878 0.833 0.783 0.742 0.694 :g 0:619 0.600 0.694 0,835 0.932 0.977 0.984 0.991 0.993 0.988 C‘ 984 0,993 0.993 0.995

0.996 0.990 0.988 0.988 0,992 0.9% 0.944 0.803

ix 0:5:5 0.518 ii?:;; 0:398 0.399 0.563 0.773 0.914

2;;; I:004 1.004 1.002 o-992 I.004 I.004 1.005

55' swept wing Bgundqy layer measurements at mid semi-span: II = 0.5: Q = 7.2'

- -_ .._.. -...- - dc cl* Vfi

I H-P, 0

I 9,

0,3o100 0.20100 0.10100 0.05100 0, 0~100 0.03100 0,021OO 0.0~6oo

12.3 23.8 29.9

w-0

-t.o70 1.076 1.078 wW5 1.042 0.956 0.922 O.PlA

Yaw angle exceeded traversing gear limits

I.002 0.977

~~;~ 01678

g.. ok92

0.3Oloo 0.20100 0.10100 0.0~100

t %El 0:031oo 0.0260o 0.02100 0.01600 0.01100 o, 00600 0.004.00 0.00300 0.00200 0.00100

x/G = - 4.2

I :*I” et ::; 7.5

-IO*4 13.5 16.9 20, I 23.0 25.6 26.5 26.8 27.2 27.9

0.50

0.986 I.057 1.082 1.051 1.020 2.016 0.991 0.966 0.942

tg; Cp;

oh54 0.830 0,786

0.910 0,967

E;: 0:821 0.805 0.766 0.731 o-707 0.694 0.675

% 0:618 0.584 0.531

x/c t 0.60

0.30100 - 3.6 1,034 0.972 0.20100

0.10100 I:

:: 1.053 0.977

0,05100 3:9 I.051 I.007 z%i 0.04100 6.5 j.004 01875 0,03-loo 9.7 0.973 0.831 0.02100 ' 12.9 0. 940 0.787 0.01100 . 16.0 0.930 0.776 0.00850 16.7 0.921 0.762 O,OO~CD l-7.4 0,730 o.oo500 j7.7 z%Y 0.705 0.00400 17.9 0:862 0,678 0.00300 18.0 0.838 0.639 0.00200 18.0 0. a03 0.583 0.00150 18.1 0.779 0.547 0.00100 la.4 0.738 I 0.492

x/c = 0.70

0,301cQ - 3.3 1,029 0.380 0.20100

f :*: l.053 0.994

0.10100 I.034 0.972 0.05100 4i5 0.993 0.902 0,041OO 6.4 0.970 0.869 0.03100 a.3 0.959 0.853 0.02100 10.2 0.951 O&3 0.01100 12.3 0.922 0.809 0.00850 12.7 0.915 0.795 0.006oo :;*t 0.896 0.764 0.005~ 0.885 0.747 0. oof!@o .13:7 0.862 0.719 0.00300 13.8 0.830 0.666 0.00200 13.9 0.800 0,610 0.00150 13.9 0.777 0.574 0.00100 13.9 0.744 0.514

55' swept wing

TABLE 7 (Coned.)

~0-y layer measurements a$ mid semi-span: TI = 0.5: a = 7.2'

o" V/"v H-p0

0 T

0.30100 - 2.7 0.2OlOO - 2.3 0.10100 - 0.2 0.05100 5.0 0.04100 6.4 0,03100 7.7 0,021OO 9.0 0.01100 10.6 0.00850 11.1 0.00600 11.6 0.005~ l-l.7 0,00400 j1.8 0.003OQ 12.0 0.00200 12.1 0.00150 12.1 0.00100 12.2

x/c = 0.90

0.30100 0.25100 0.20100 0.15100 0.10100 0.05100 0*04100 0.03100 0.02100 0.01100 0.00600 0.00500 0.00400 0.00300 0.00200 0.00150 0*00100

- 1.9 - 1.5 - 1.0 - a3

719 $5

9.0 10.5 11.5 II.7 11.9 12.0 12.2 12.3 12.2

x/c = 0.80

0.993 1.029 I.027

:;:7 0:956 0.940 0.928 0.908 0.883 0.867 0.841 0.817 0.768 0.750 0.729

1.002 0.969 1.018 0.984 1.016 0.983 1.016 0.988 1.016 0.993 0.965 0.927 0.959 0,915 0.954 0.907 0,942 0.892 0.913 0.848 0.862 0.768 a&4 0.736 0.819 0.706 0.791 0.647 0.7@ 0.579 0.717 0.544 0.720 0.534

0. Yti 0.989 0,988 0.918 0.890 0.885 0,864 0.842 0.815 0.772 0.752 0.712 0.667 0,593 0.562 0.527

x/c = 0.99

0.30105 0.10105 0.05105 0.04lo5 0.03105 0.02105 0,01605 0.01105 0.00605 0.00355 0.00255 0.00205 0.00155 0.00130 0.00100

if:; ;:2”

10.3 11.4 12.1 13.1 14.2 14.9 15.1 15.2 15.3 15.5 15.4

0.986 0,953 0.993 0.979 0.961 0.939 0.961 0.937 0.940 O,Y+lJ 0.933 0.902 0.915 0.879 0.893 0.845 0.838 0.753 0.768 0.645 0.738 0.593 0.729 0.572 0.697 0.528 0.681 0.506 0.681 0.499

-4Jt-

55O swept wing

TABS2 7 (Contd.)

&.nAuy layer measuremerhs at mid semi-span; 7 = 0.5: u = 7.2'

x/c = 1.00 0. o8000 3.3 1 0.991 0,970 o.06ooo 0.05OcO

65:: 0.963 0.938 0,954 0.926

0, OGOOO t: 0.947 0.917 0.03000 0.940 0.907 0.02cQO 9:7 0.922 0,886 0.01ooo 11.7 , 0,870 0.805

0. ~500 12.8 0.817 o.oo400 13.1 0.783 izz 0, 00300 13.1 0.760 0: 619 0.00200 12.6 0.717 a 555 0.00100 10.5 0.664 w&6

0 5.1 0.585 0.409 -0.001 co A.5 0.658 0.499 -0.00200 0.9 0.608 0.551 -0.00300 0.7 0.738 0.610 -0. OOLPO * 2; 0.774 0.6% -0. oopxl -0.00750 0:6

0.814 0,891 z:

-0.01 ooo 0.932 0: 934 -0.01500

3% 0.954 0.965

-0.02000 0:5

0.954 1

0.965 -0,03m 0.956 0,968 -0. NooO 0.6 0.956 0.968 -0. 05ooo 0.6 0.963 0.976 -o,o6000 a 6 0.975 0.989 -0.07000 0.7 0.973 0,986 -o.ogy~~ ; 0.8 0.979 0.993 -0.12000 1.0 0.982 0.996

.W.2078.C. P.55Y. K3 - Printed in England

PlTCHlN~ MOMENT

ASPECT RATIO - 5 .

FIG. 1. PLANFORM OF 45” SWEPT WING.

o-4

CL

/ -0-l

CALC I NVISCID FLOW.

CL/& = 0*0608.

0 Ew EiM00~1-i L.E:.

pi/&&=8= 0.0575 CORRESPONDS

L-L- I

l EXI? t&“GH L E.

[%&ioo = O-056

CORRESPONOS TO k* O-89

X WING A, REFB@=I.7Xlo6)

a IO0

od 5o I IO4

i

FIG. 2. CL v CL FOR 45O SWEPT WING.

0 ROUGH L E

-0.2 0 0.2 c, 0.4 06

FIG. 3. Co v CL, FOR 45” SWEPT WING.

0.04

=rn 8 ROUGH L E x WING A, REF8

x 0.02 a I

FIG. 4. Cmv C,, FOR 45”SWEPT WING.

I.8

I.6

0 SMOOTH L.E

l ROUGH L.C. X WING A. REF. 7

2’

d - X

4”

Q

6’ d 8’

- o-

IO0

FIG. 5. VARIATION OF LIFT-DEPENDENT DRAG FACTOR WITH INCIDENCE, 45” SWEPT WING.

%/A INVISCID

I.00 0.9 08 k 0.7 0.6

FIG.6. RELATION BETWEEN k & LOSS OF TOTAL LIFT, 45O SWEPT WING.

0.07

‘ISCID CALC

SMOOTH L.E.

TTT

1

0’ 2’ 4’ QL 6”

007

--- II*(VISCID CALC. 0.06

.L -37 7

11' IITTiIIT -I- x -r I

0.05 0’ z” 4- od 6” 0’ IO0

FIG, 7. DETERMINATION OF (dCL/d&mo”, 45” SWEPT WING.

0 0.1 0-t c, 0 3 Cl.4 0.5

I 0 SMOOTH LEADING EDGE R= 2.1 X IO6

+ R= l.6X106

Y R=3*i%106 REF. 12.

LIPPER SURFACE 1

LOWER SURFACE.

FIG- 8. MOVEMENT OF TRANSITION POINT 45’ SWEPT WING.

z/c

0.01

d = 2-I”

Atd=O’ SMOOTH L.E

a d = 2.1’ A d=O”

ROUGH LEm

X d--Of REF.8

I = 0,

g= 0.98. ii

/ X i

/’ I/

FIG. 9. VELOCITY 8 FLOW DIRECTION IN THE BOUNDARY LAYER: i! = Om98, 9 = 0, 45* SWEPT WING.

z/c

0 0

X d = 4-2” REF 6.

fl= 0

* = O-98.

Oe4 v/v, O-6

1 I

FIG. IO. VELOCITY & FLOW DIRECTION IN THE BOUNDARY LAYER: ik = 0=98, q f 0, 45” SWEPT WING.

0*02

O-01

0

3z = O-6

I I I I I I/

0 0.2 06 O-8 I.0 v 0 20” @ 40”

FIG. II. VELOCITJ & FLOW DIRECTION IN THE BOUNDARY LAYER: c = O-6, p-O-25, 45” SWEPT WING.

0*02

=/c

001

0 d

0 0.2 0.4 v / 0.6 O-8 0

vo 200 @ 4o”

FIG.12. VELOCITY AND FLOW DIRECTION IN THE BOUNDARY LAYER: + =O-6, q =0*X, 45’ SWEPT WING.

0 ds24I

‘) I

A d=OO SMOOTH L.E

- l ck=iw

A cA=o* > ROUGH L.E

I

t

d - 72 = opzs /

/

t

FIG.13. VELOCITY AND FLOW DIRECTION IN THE BOUNDARY _ LAYER: +=O-8, q= O-25, 4S” SWEPT WING.

O*O!

o-01

04X

%

0 oi

o-01

0 . n 0.Z 0.4

v/ifo o’6 0 20” @I 4-o’

FIG. 14. VELOCITY & FLOW DIRECTION IN THE BOUNDARY LAYER: i! = 0*8, q = O-25, 45’ SWEPT WING.

o-6 y/u,

C

FIG. IS. VELOCITY & FLOW DIRECTION IN THE BOUNDARY LAYER: i! =O-98, q =O*‘S,s, O-31, 45’ SWEPT WING.

045

O-04

o-03

z/c

0-E

O-01

0

1 I

OoL= 6*3O I

A d = 4.2’ SMOOTH L E ~:0.3l,&O.98.

I

0 O-51 O-4 V /

0.6 0.8 I-0 VO

FIG. 16. VELOCITY 8 FLOW DIRECTION IN THE BOUNDARY LAYER: ii-O=98, q= O-25 8 O-31, 45’ SWEPT WING.

5-

I

4

4-

4

3’

lz-

II -

L

s-L* 2~1’ od=OO 5MOOTl-l LIE.

oaC= 2-I’ Ird=cY OUCH LE.

?I = 0,5.

g= 0.98.

0 0.2 0.4 V ~ 0.6 / O-8 IO 0

0 izoo @ 40’

FIG. 17, VELOCITY & FLOW DIRECTION IN THE BOUNDARY LAYER: ii= O-98, q =0-S, 45” SWEPT WING.

o- 05

o-04

0*02

%

0*02

O-01

0

SMOOTH LE.

ROUGH L.E.

0 0.2 O4 v/

O-6 O-8 I*0

VO

0 too @ 4o”

FIG. 18. VELOCITY & FLOW DIRECTION IN THE BOUNDARY LAYER: ii= O-98, q-O-5, 45* SWEPT WING.

I - c2 dzZ*I” I

A cA=O* SMOOTH LE.

0 d=Z-I0 A d=OO

ROUGH LE.

I

FIG.19.VELOCITY AND FLOW DIRECTION IN THE BOUNDARY LAYER: x c-O-6 a ?z = 0*70 > 45’ SWEPT WING.

SMOOTH L.E. SMOOTH L.E.

1 1 = 0.70 = 0.70

t/c t/c X X c= OS6 c= OS6

t t O-01 . O-01 .

FIG.20. VELOCITY AND FLOW DIRECTION IN THE BOUNDARY FIG.20. VELOCITY AND FLOW DIRECTION IN THE BOUNDARY LAYER: x

C= 096, ?=oa70, 45* SWEPT WING.

o-05

0.04

o-03

z / c

0*02

o-01

0 0 o-2 o-4

V O-6 O-8 I*0

/ VO

FIG. 2 I. VELOCITY AND FLOW DIRECTION IN THE 5 c = 0*8, 9 =0*70 , 45’ SWEPT

0 ZOO

0 4oa

w

BOUNDARY LAYER:

WING.

o-05

0.04

o-03

‘/t

O-02

0.01

0

I I 0 d = 6*3O h d = 4~2~ 3

SMOOTH L.E

0 0% o-4 v / 0.6 O-6 I-0 0 zoo 0 H 40”

FIG- 22. VELOCITY AND ;LOVV DIRECTION IN THE BOUNDARY LAYER: + =O-8, 7 =O-70) 4S” SWEPT WING.

0.05

0*04

0.ot

‘/c

0*02

o-01

0

SMOOTH LE.

ROUGH LE.

FIG.=. VELOCITY AND FLOW DIRECTION IN THE BOUNDARY LAYER: 2=0*99, ‘1= 0*69/O-70, 4S” SWEPT WING.

o-05

0*04

003

‘/c

O-02

O*Ol

0

SMOOTH L.E

- @c&=6.3”

0 ZOO 0 4o” n

FIG.24.VELOClTY AND FLOW DIRECTION IN THE BOUNDARY LAYER: e =0*99) 72 = 0*69/o-70 ) 45’ SWEPT WING.

FIG. 25. SPANWISE VARIATION OF BOUNDARY LAYER ‘iHICKNESS”, ib.,, , AT THE TRAILING

EDGE, 45* SWEPT WING.

O-05

o* 04

o-03

%

O-02

0-01

0 0 o-4 0~6 O-8

0

IO0 @ zoo

FlG.26. VELOCITY AND FLOW DIRECTION IN THE BOUNDARY LAYER

NEAR THE TIP: ii= O-98, d =4-Z’, 45’ SWEPT WING .

MOMENT

FIG.27. PLANFORM OF Xi0 SWEPT WING.

0.5

o-4

0’3

CL

0.2

01

0

0 +ue lNClOENCL -ue INClOENCE b

R = 2xio6

0’ 4* 6” 8” IO0 ok

c

0 -0.02 CM

-0.04

FIG.28. LIFT AND PITCHING MOMENT, 55” SWEPT WING.

K=

0.08

Q-06

co

0.04

o-02

0

0 tve INCIDENCE

b - V’2 INCIDENCE

0 0.1

FIG.29. DRAG v LIFT, 5S” SWEPT WING,

b -i/e INCIDENCE

FIG. 30. LIFT - DEPENDENT DRAG FACTOR,

55’ SWEPT WING.

3*r

FlG.31. SPANWISE VARIATION OF WING TWIST, SSO SWEPT WING.

0*4

XT / C

O-6

EVAPORATIOI

0’

0

I0 z" 3* oi

01 C L APPROX.

FIG.32. MOVEMENT OF TRANSITION POINT

AT MID SEMI - SPAN, 55’ SWEPT WING.

o-IC

O*OO!

OOOC

'/c

O*OOL

o*ooe

0 0

FIG. 33. VELOCITY PROFILES AT TRANSITION,

d = o”, ‘? = 0.5 : 55’ SWEPT WING.

0 v 0*8 I*0 v /

I.2 U-8 I.0 v /

1.2 vo vo

43 A= I* ss” LAMINAR e 2-o; TURBULENT

0*8 I-0 Y /

r-2 vo

FIG. 34. VELOCITY PROFILES AT TRANSITION, O(‘L 2O, ?= 05 5S” SWEPT WING.

YAW ANGLE EXCEEDED LIMIT5 OF TRAVERSlNC GEAR

0 o-2 0.4 V/ O-6 0 VO

20” @) +o”

FIG.36. VELOCITY AND FLOW DIRECTION IN THE BOUNDARY LAYER: -i!= Ob40, 72 = 05 : 55” SWEPT WING.

0*02

z / C

O-01

0 0 0-z 0.4 v

I 0.6

VQ O-8 I.0 v 0

FIG. 37. VELOCITY b FLOW DIRECTION IN THE BOUNDARY LAYER: t = Oa60, TJ= 03, 5S” SWEPT WING.

0.02

Z / c

o-01

0 0

-- 0-Z

- - o-4

- - 0’6

- - Q-8 JO’ w

v/v, 0

FIG== VELOCITY AND FLOW DIRECTION IN THE BOUNDARY LAYER: X c = 0.80, 32 = 03.

04x

0.04

0 *02

z / c

0.oz

0.0

0

V a* J

0 0.E o-4 v /

0*6 O-8 I.0 0 IO0 I4 20” 0 vo

FIG. 39. VELOCITY & FLOW DIRECTION IN THE BOUNDARY LAYER: := o-99, T)=o-5, 55* SWEPT WING.

x - 0 c= 04 A 0 B 4

- 0 0

0*5 0*6 o-7 0.0

l---l--

FIG.40. VARIATION OF TOTAL HEAD OUTSIDE

THE BOUNDARY LAYER, c& = 7*2’:

55” SWEPT WING. ‘t = 005.

096 I x/c = I.00

FIG. 41. FUNCTIONS OF THE WAKE FLOW

USED IN CALCULATING PROFILE DRAG

BY BET& METHOD: 55’ SWEPT WING.

533.693.3 : 532.526

BOUNDARY LAYER MEASUREMENTS AT LOW SPEED ‘31 TWO WINGS OF 45O AND 55O SWEEP. Brebner, G.G., Wyatt, L.A. August, 1960.

Boundary layer flow and balance measurements have been made on two sweptback wlngs. The first wing of 45’ sweep, constant chord and aspect ratio 5, had a 12% thick R.A.E. 101 section. The boundary layer was measured at a number of different spanwise and ohordwise positions for several lnci@ dences up to 6.3’. The wing was tested with and without roughness an the leading-edge. The boundary layer thickness with roughness was Of Che order of 50% greater than with the smooth leading-edge but this did not lead to any significant difference between the value of the lift-dependent dreg factor K obtained from balance measurements.

The second wing had 55’ sweep at the traillngmedge, constant chord as far as mid semi-span and a curved leading-edge thereafter. It had a 44%

(Over)

.‘L,I!.C. C.?. x0.554 533.693 3 : 532,526

BOUNDARY LAYER MEASUREMENTS AT LOW SPEED ON TWO WINGS OF 45’ AND 55’ SWEEP. Brebner, G.G. I Wyatt, L.A. August, 1960.

Boundary layer flow and balance measurements have been made on two sweptback wings. The first wing of 45O sweep, constant chord and aSPeCt ratfo 5, had a 12% thick R.A.E. 701 section. The boundary layer was measured at a number of different spanwise and chordwise positions for several inci- dences up to 6.3’. The wing was tested with and without rouehness on the leading-edge, The boundary layer thickness with roughness was of the order of 50%greater than with the smooth leading-edge but this did not lead t0 any significant difference between the value of the lift-dependent drag factor K Obtained from balance measurements,

The second wing had 55O sweep at the trailing-edge, ConStMt chord as far as mid semi-span and a curved leading-edge thereafter. It had a 4&%

(Over)

dr.:i.i. C.;, iiO.5.54 533.693.3 : 532.526

BOMDARY LAYER MEASUREMEHTS AT LCW SPEED ON TWO WINGS OF 45’ AND 55’ SWEEP. Brebner, G.G., Wyatt, L.A. August, 1960.

Boundary layer flew and balance measurements have Seen made on two sweptback wings. The first wing of 45O sweep, constant chord and aspect ratio 5, had a 12% thick R.A.E.lO? section. The boundary layer was measured at a number of different spanwlse and chordwlse positions for several lnci- dences UP to 6.3O. The wing was tested with and without roughness on the leading-edge. The boundary layer thickness with roughness was of the order of 50% greater than with the smooth leading-edge but this did not lead to any significant difference bet’aeen the value of the lift-dependent drag factor K obtained from balance measurements.

The second wing had 55’ sweep at the trailing-edge, constant chord as far as mld semi-span and a curved leadine-edge thereafter. It had a 43%

(Over)

BOUNDARY LAYER MEASUREMENTS AT LCW SPEED ON TWO WINGS OF 45O AND 55j0 SWEEP, Brebnep, G. G. , Wyatt, L. A. August, 19601

Boundary layer flow and balance measurements have been made on two sweptback wines. The first wine of 45’ sweep, constant chord and aspect ratio 5, had a 12% thick R.A.E. 105 section. The boundary layer was measured at a number of different spanwise and chordwise positions for several lnoi- dences up to 6d0. The wing was tested with and without roughness on the leading-edge. The boundary layer thickness with roughness was of the order of 50% greater than with the smooth leading-edge but this did not lead to any significant difference between the value of the lift-dependent drag factor K obtained from balance measurements.

The second wing had 55O sweep at the tralifng edge, constant chord as far as mid semi-span and a curved leading-edge thereafter. It had a 45%

thick R.A.E.lO1 section and aspect ratio of 3.4. The boundary layer was measured at mid semi-span only, at three lncldences up to 7.20 and at various chordwise positions from 40% chord back to the trailing-edge. Wake measurements just behind the traflfng-edge were used to estimate the sectfonal profile drag at mid semi-span; whfch was compared with the theoretical value for an fnflnlte sheared wing predicted by the marts of Weber and Brebner. The agreement was poor; the reason for this is not known.

thick R.A.E. 101 section and aspect ratio or 3.4. The bound? layer was measured at mid semi-span only, at three lncidenoes up to 7.2 and at various chordwlse positions from 40% chord back to the traflfng-edge. Wake measurements just behind the trailing-edge were used to estimate the sectional proffle drag at mid semi-span; which was compared with the theoretical value for an fnffnlte sheared wing predicted by the charts or Weber and Brebner. The agreement was POOr; the reason for this Is not known.

thick R.H.E. 1Oi section and aspect ratio of 3.4. The boundeq layer was measured at mid semi-span only, at three fncldences up to 7.2 and at various chordwlse positlons from 40% chord back to the trailing-edge. Wake measurements just bebind the trailing-edge were used to estlmate the sectional proffle drag at mid semi-span; which was compared with the theoretical value for an infinite sheared nfng predfcted by the charts oi Weber and Brebner. The agreement was poor; the reason for this is not known.

thick R.A.E. 101 section and aspect ratio of 3.4. The boundarg layer was measured at mid semi-span only, at three lncldences up to 7.2 and at varlous chordwise posltlons from 408 chord back to the trailing-edge. Wake measurements just behind the trafllne-edge were used to estimate the seotlonal profile drag at mid semi-span; which was compared with the theoretical value for an lnrlnlte sheared wfng predloted by the charts of Weber and Brebner. The agreement was poor; the reason for tifs is not known.

C.P. No. 554

8 Crown Copyright 1961

Published by HER MAJESTY’S STATIONERY OFFICE

To be purchased from York House, Kingsway, London w&.2

423 Oxford Street, London w.1 13A Castle Street, Edinburgh 2

109 St. Mary street, Cardiff 39 Kiig Street, Mantier 2 SO Fairfax Street, Bristol I

2 Edmund Street, Birmingham 3 80 Chichester Street, BeIf&& 1

or through any bookadkr

S.O. CODE No.23-90 12-54

C.P. No. 554