1 series of 3ipl~~e tii~g ~odels a~·~d - nasa · n.a.c.a. technical note no. 330 2 baok, stagger...
TRANSCRIPT
IE C~-i:i:H OAL rO TES
i·!ATIOHAL ADVI SORY om.: .~ I'::'TEE :s'OR £RONAUTICS
..,,.._
io . 330
1 SERIES OF 3 IPL~~E TI I~G ~ODELS
PART II I. EFFE CTS OF CHM~GES I N TARI OUS CO~·!i5 IKATIONS
Cit' ST AGGEn, GAP, S -i=:EP5AC:'l: A~·~D :JECALAGE
By Montgome r y K:1i ght :md :2. i ch ard vr. ~\Jayes Lung le:r Ee::1ori a l Ae r onaut i cal L.J.borat or y
·1' ash i n gton December , 1929
Rf PRODUCED BY
NATIONAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION SERVICE
U.S. DEPARTMEN T OF COMME RCE SPRINGFIELD, VA. 22161
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19930081130 2020-03-12T19:09:03+00:00Z
I
•
I
NATIOffAl ADVISO.i\ Y Qi;~~~,l:E FOR AEROHAUHc'S
uAll En £.N! ~- LuJ
10:.~ ..... __ ?.7/ 4 ;<' -·---··········-··· ..............
TECHNICAL UOTES
UATIONAL ,AI;VISORY CO:u:i•:I~TEE FOR AERONAUTICS
No. 330
WIND TUHNEL PRESSURE DIS1RIBUTION TES~S ON
A SERIES OF BIPLANE WING ~ODELS
PART III. EFFECTS OF CHARGES IN VARIOUS COMBINATIONS
OF STAGGER, G.AP, S\V3:EPBA<F.:, AND DEOALAGE
By Montgomexy Kuight and aichard W~ Noyes Langley MeooriaJ. Aeronautical Laboratory
FILE COPY To be returned to
the fttes of the lh1:gley Memorial Aeronautical
La&oratory Washington
December, 1929
. .
ERRATA
NATIONAL ADVISORY COMU:ITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS.
TECHNICAL NOTE NO. 330.'
WIND TUNNEL PRESSURE DISTRIBUTION TESTS ON
A SERIES OF BIPLANE WING MODELS.
PART III. EFFECTS OF CHAimEs IN VARIOUS COMBINATIONS
OF STAGGER, GAP, SWEEPBACK, AND DEOALAGE.
On Figures 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18 and 19, after the word
11 monopla_71.e, 11 insert 11 wi thout sweepbacl;:. 11
NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS.
TECHNICAL NOTE NO. 330.
WIND TUNNEL PRESSURE DISTRIBUTION TESTS ON
A SERIES OF BIPLANE WING MODELS.
PART III. EFFECTS OF CHANGES IN VARIOUS COMBINATIONS
OF STAGGER, GAP, SWEEPBACK, AND DEOALAGE. ·
By Montgomery Knight and Richard W. Noyes.
Summary
This preliminary report furnishes information on the changes
in the forces on each wing of a biplane cellule for various com
binations of stagger and gap, stagger and sweepback, stagger and
decal age, and gap and decalage. The data were obtained from
pressure distribution tests made in the.atmospheric wind tunnel
of the Langley Memorial Aeronautical Laboratory. Since each
test was carried up to 90° an.gle of attack, the res:D.ts may be
used in the study of stalled flight and of spinning as well as
in the structural design of biplane wings.
This preliminary r~port presents the results of wind tunnel
pressure distribution tests which were made in order to determine
the magnitude and disposition of the normal air loads on two wing
models arranged in different biplane combinations. The effects
of various combinations of stagger and gap, stagger and sweep-
N.A.C.A. Technical Note No. 330 2
baok, stagger and decaJ.age, and gap and decalage were investi
gated. Two previous reports, Part I and Part II (See References),
covered the effects of variations of dihedral, overhang and each
of the above factors taken separately. A more complete presen
tation of the results of the entire investigation and an analy
sis from the standpoints of spinning, stalled flight, and struc
tural design. of biplane wings will be published at a later date.
The tests were made in the atmospheric wind tunnel of the
Langley Memorial Aeronautical Laboratory. A complete descriP
tion of the models, apparatus, method of testing and procedure
in working up the test data is given in Part I (Reference 1)
and will not be re~eated here. The Clark Y profile was used on
each wing. Figure 1 shows the wing plan-form and location of
the pressure orifices.
T e s t s
The biplane arrangements tested were divided into four
groups as follows:
1. Variations in stagger and gap.
(Decalage hang
= 0, dihedx al - - o.)
GapLchord
a .75 b .75 c • 75 d 1.25 e 1.25 f 1.25
= 0, sweep back = o, over-
Stagger - 0 +25 per cent chord +50 per cent chord
0 +25 per cent chord +50 per cent chord
!f.A.C.A. Technical 1fote No. 330
2. Variations in st~~ger and sweepback.
(Gap/ chord = hang =
1, decalage = 0. )
3
o, dihedral = O, over-
Note: Stagger is ~easured at midspan.
sweep back
~~ 10° upper wing 50 upper wing
~l 0
* 50 lower wing 10° lower wing
*Not run.
3. Variations in stagger and decalage.
(Gap/ chord = hang =
rec al age
!~ +30 +30 +00 _30
~~ _30 _30
1, dihedral = o. )
Stagger
+50 per cent chord +25 per cent chord
0 -25 per cent chord -50 per cent chord
0, sweep back = O, over-
Star.:ger
0 +25 per cent chord +50 per cent chord
0 +25 per oent chord +50 per cent chord
ii.A .. -C.A .. Technical Eote No. 330 4
4. Variations in ?;ap and. decal.age.
(Stagger = hang =
O, dihedral o.)
= O, sweepback = O, over-
Decalage Ga12Lchord
a +30 .75 b +30 .. l.bo c +30 1.25 d _30 .75 e _30 1.00 f _30 1.25
Each test was made at angles of attack of _go '
_40' 00 '
+40 '
gO ' 12° ' 14°
' 16°
' 18°
' 20°
' 22°
' 25°
' 30°, 35°
' 40°
' 50°
' 60° '
70° . ) so0
' and 90°. The dynamic pressure
q, indicated by the 11 service 11 Pi tot~stat ic tube, was maintained
at 4.09 lb. per sq.ft., corresponding to an average velocity of
very nearly 40 m.p.h. and to a Reynolds Numbex of about 150,000.
R e s u 1 t s
ThG results are presented in four groups of comparison
curves from which may be determined the magnitude and point of
action of the semispan normal force on each wing for_ each com
bination of stagger and gap, stagger and sweepback, stagger and
decal age, and gap and decal age tested. The a.11.gle of. attack
range covers most of the angles likely to be encountered in
flight. Following is a list of the comparison curves, all of
which are plotted against angle of attack. (The first, second,
'
N.A.C.A. Technical Note No. 330 5
third, and fourth figure numbers ~efer to the stagger-gap group,
stagger-sweepback group, stagger-decalage group, and gap
decalage group, respectively.)
Figures 3, 12, 21, 30:
Figures 4, 13, 22, 31:
Figures 5, 14, 23, 32:
Figures 6, 15, 24, 33!
Figures ?, ~6, 25, 34:
Figures 8, 17, 26, 35:
Figures 9, 18, 27, 36:
Figures 10, 19, 28, 37:
Normal force coefficient for cellule.
Norffial force coefficient for upper wing~
!formal force coefficient for lower wing.
Ratio of load on each wing to load on cellule.
Longi~udinal center of pressure for upper wing.
Longitudinal center of pressure for lower wing.
Lateral center of pressure of upper wing.
Lateral center of pressure of lower wing.
In order to show the general nature of the interference ef
fects on two biplane wings, each figure, w'ith the obvious ex
ception of Figures -6, 15, 24 and 33, has superimposed upon it
the co~responding monoplane curve for the maximum span wing
without dihedral or sweepback.
The accuracy of the results may be inferred from the fact
that the avercge deviation of the curve points on the figures
from a mean value was-within 2 per cent. This was determined
N,A.C.A. Technical Note No. 330 6
fzom check tests, fairings, and integrations.
In inter~reting the results of this wind tw1nel investiga
tion, the low Reynolds Uumber of the tests (150,000) and the
fact that the results have not bee~ corrected for tunnel wall
effects, should be kept in mind. While the scale effect will
doubtless change the absolute value of the coefficients, the
relative changes produced by variations of each pair of factors
will probably hold for Reynolds Numbers greater than that of the
tests.
Langley ilemorial Aeronautical Laboratory, Uational Advisory Committee fox Aeronautics,
Langley.Field, Va., November 8, 1929.
• R e f e r e n c e s
1. Knight, ~ontgomery 8..i."1.d
Noyes, Richard W,.
2. Knight, Kontgomery and
Noyes, Richard W.
Wind Tunnel Pressure Distribution Tests on a series of.Biplane Wing Models. Part I. Effects of Changes in Stagger·and Ga;p. N. A. c. A. Technical :i.iote No. 310, 1929.
Wind Tunnel Pressure Distribution Tests on a Series of Biplane Wing Models. Part II. Effects of 01}.anges in Decalage, Dihedral, Sweepback, and Overhang. N.A.C.A. Technical Rote No. 325, 1929.
Section E
Section A S·3Ct. on B Sect on C
Orifices
'
~---- 3. 94 11 4. 01 fl ~,....---- 3. 01' ---+-- 2. 06" ~. 89 .. J 5~ 14. 45 11--~---------------i
Fig.l Wing showing orifice locati9ns
~ • Ii=-. 0 . > • 1-3 (!l
0
g I-'• 0 CJ
~ !Zl 0 c+ (!l
z 0
N .A.C .A. Technical Note lfo .330 Fig.2
+50% +25% 0% stagger
------::::::.:-c=----~ /' ./ --.._ --..._ / / --- ::
( ( --- -- .........
'-----"~----- -- .--, . G/c = 1.25
\ / -- -- .
------~~L -,,,.-- \ ,,,..'--\ - ____ -------~--~- - (...________ ---~ { / --.. ----
\ G/c !:: .75
\ \
Fig.2 ~ing model arrangements used in tests on the effect of stagger and gap.
N .A .a .A. Technical Note No. 330 Fies. 31r 4
1.4 ----- - -_... :--
./ ~ .......-'. ~ ----1- -.........
.......... 2 ------ ---•'jJ ~t P'-' -- -- I'--7 -;; i...---· -. _, -- ----I I'll/ ~ "'" ......... ~..:
~~ -. ~ I', \, - ......
-----0 I ~ '~ ;;-
1,j ·~ ,\: f~ : .. ...-,,.
"'\ "· ' ' ' ; \ \ .
i\.
'Ii ..
~ ' ' \ ' \ \. 8
II/I \ ·~ \
' ........ /~ r """"- . -.... ---s
..... __ , ,'/I -
I ~f 4 hrJ Monoplane -- -- -- -- -- --
!I/ 75'7. gap 0% stagger 0 - -2 75 .... 25.. .. -+--0-- -I
- - -- -75.. • 50.. .. -----x------
125 .. -.- o .. - - - ---o------'
.. 0 125 .. - .. - 25. - ··- ---o---
I 125. .. 50. .., -,--,-+ ,--, - i
ti .... - . -Q) 0
·O
l
2 -1cr 0° 10° 20° 30· 40° so· so 0 10° ao• so·
Angle of a Hack, ct. Fig.3 Effect of stagger and gap on cellule coefficient of normal _force.
1.4 .
J 1.2
~ 1.0 .E ~ .8
~ ~ .s 't--t 0
1: .4 (!.) ..... (.)
~ .2 ...... Q)
0 0 0
-.e
i ~i ·--_..... ...... --·--· fJ-
""' ,,,---
~# --- .... -,. __. --v
I fl " v ---c_ I - ·---...., ,,,. I .!/-___ ._, __
I I I~ .... ---- [ -- - ............ '\ I \ i.- -- ...a,.-lj
_ .. _ -~ '
·~; \ - ~· '-, '\. .._ ... -r; ' ·, >-;I" -· -. 1 ....... I\ ' I_/ ... ..... -. \ ',
'/ \-.. ~/ ..... " \ \\ ~ I'. ' \ ....
) \ ~ \ .... \ \ \ ~ ......... ' \
(/ ~ \ \ \ "1
........ ........ '\ \\ \
\
"- ' ' \ 'I\. \ ,\ \ .
J. \, \ \', \ \
II '\ \ \ '·" .......
1 I'- K:: r-.......
-10° 0° 10° 20· 30° 40• 50° so· 70• 80° 90° Angle of attack,d
Fig.4 Effect of stagger and gap on upper wing coefficient of normal force.
N.A.C.A. Technical Note No.330 Figs.5&6
1.6
1.4
Qj u 1.0 .§ ttj .8 E ~ ~ .6
4-1 0
~ .4 Q1 ...... 0 ~ .. 2 ....... Ill 0 tJ 0
-.2
-, v ~ ,/ r-, ... ........-: ?- = -- - r--I ' .. _ --~ -- - -- --r )< "'°/ L.-~ ... -...----
/ l'I : ~? _,.,....
I/ .,, ~ .___..v ,d} / i.--.....-
~
I 'l. I \ :--· ·-::? ,,. a ~ ,_ _ ...... ,.,
v· J
I if.}, \ - l-/ II I 11 I~ ,•
J Ill I r;,t
/J, I
'/}f I 'iii Monoplane -- ---- -- -- --
75.,o gap 0% stagBer 0 .--M. 75,._,._zs .. _ t- .. - --Q--
(I;' 75 .. .. 50 .. .. -----x-----· 125 .-.. - o .. - t- - ---0- - -
/// " 125 .. _ .. _25 .. _ t- " -
---o-----fl 12.5 .. . 50" .. ---~+-,---'
1i -10° 0° io0 20• 30• 40° so0 so0 10° so· so·
Angle of attack, ct. Fig.5 Effect of stagger and gap on lower wing coefficient of normal force.
-.20 1.20
0
'I II
' I ;
f ,,
' -~ ·-a-<:
" ~~ -- _,x
1\ ·--:......x -.'
II
'! I I
\ \ r I
---V/ ,.
/ I v ,. ..... " '/ It/ ./ I/ I '
.-v I ;[/ / '/ ~ /
/J / /' ,' .Y(f -- - i--,. .,,.;, .... ,.
... -- L....-"' -·- -· I~
rr. '>"' -== ~- - -----~-~· ~"
,
75% gap 0% staS"ger 0 -75 H_H_25 H - _,, - --o--- -75n ,. 50~ .. -----x------
125 .- .. - 0 .- - .. - ----o-- -125 • _ .. - 25 •!_
~·'- ~ ---o--- -12s.. • ·,so .. .. ---+---I . I I
1.00 'tS ~ 'tj
.ao.S ~ 8 .... «I e
60] ~
• lie Q) c: ,.Q .... ., !it -.40 i;.. _2 ;~
.20..S • ri
0
.T 0 1.20
-10 o• 10° 20· 30 40° 50° 60° 70° 80° ~20
SO° Angle of attack, ot.
Fig.6 Effect of stagger and gap on wing load ratio.
N.A.C .A. Technical Note No. 330 Fig. 7
1 zo
1 10
Trail- · ing -+1 00
edge
90
80
l 0
70 "E-0
-5 so -0
c 50 ~ k
8. 40 i:: ·-
30
~ .5 2.0 -g -.... l¥l IO i:: 0
....:i
Lad. ~o
e mg edge
- 10
- 20
·- 30
' . I
'
I I I I Monoplane ----
751. gap o~ stagger 0 75 .. .. f.5. .. --Q
75" H 50 .. ----- .. --- ----x 125" .. o. .. ---0 125. 25 .-- _,___ . . ---o 125. . 50. ----- N - --- ---+
1...- ~ i--~ - -l\ -_.. - ·- .• I --- ---- . - -j ... -- -., ,t ,~- ........... ~ r• - ......
~- ·= rl ~ -'\,, ~ .......
."" \,
'\ \ . ~
\ \
\
\ \ \ 1
.
'
1 1 1 ' I
I 1 1 I
I I
\ 1 \ \ \ . \
\ \ \ \. ' ,,, ' ·-...
\ ~-_:::::::-
'\ ~
'"" - ......... ( .......... ' ,·\ .. '
\. .... ' \ ..,;~
'°', \ \' ' ' \ \ \
., \
\ ~ \ \ \, \ .
I \ i ' \ ' . I \
I I
I R I II
! I\ I
I II I
-4
.910 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 " 0 0 • Cl 0 Cl Cl 0 0
Angle· of aHack,a: Fig. 7 Effect of stagger and gap on upper wing lon8itudinal
center of pressure.
Cl
N .A.C.A. Technical Note No. 330 Figs. 8 8. 10
Trailing edge-100
! u 90
'i 0
-5 80 ...... 0
Ci 70 Q) u s... ~so s:: ....
p.; 50 u -Iii .s 40 'ti ;:J .......
"ii> 30 i:: 0
...:i
I I I I I
II I I
I I
I I
I I l
'
~-~
I
I I
i I
I I I
'
-------I
Monoplane_,__ ---- ---_ -- ---+-- - -l-- -
7510 gap 0% stagger . -- -75. .. Z5" .. --o--75 .. -. '--50 .. - I- .. - - ------x--------+-:-
12.5 '!.. o .. _ ---o---.. - >-"- - ' 1---
125. ZS" ! . .. ---o--- !
lZS .. ..._., - 50" -- 1--fC-~ ---+---- -I I i I
f- I I -~
I I--- l ' i -- - - t- ·- I r
l I I . I ~ l -- ·-
l I
~r - ; -- .. r r --+----- _l--- r.:--- I . -1. -" I I
\~: __ - ' >--- I-- - . • ! tU] J, ,'
~"-) ~j/"./~ --t- ·+ ! --+--
'
['~--.. ~- -I - --
t ~. I - - - - - . . -20
Lead- -10° 0° 10° 20° 30• 40° 50° 60° 70• 80° 90° ing edge at 0 Angle of attack, cf.
Fig.8 Effect of stagger and gap on lower wing longitudinal C.P. Tip at IOtO
t! 70 0
c: g_ 60 II) I ..... fil 50 U)
'+-< 0
..... 40 r:: ~ ~ 30 Q..
s: .... ~ 20 ti -~ 10 s.. QJ -«!
I 11
~ /
J ~
. ,_
o-1 0 Rootf'-10•
1 ~ -- l.+ .. ' - I
-- .-L-.- ,___ I I -t -- 1 .
£~--~- L....-.-~ -
' I J ~- -·1-·i 1--
~- -~ ' -t-- -- >----- • I ! I -' -~ t -- -1 /~- -:!= -- ·I I -1 1~: ~ - 1-- L---- - -t- --- - ~ =---:: ---
k:.. • .• i.--- -- - ·- ·t- I- - I I j l I l 'fl!J ;
-~- ·+ T . - +--- -- •" +---. - --
i-1 -_ .. I l
J ~ ,__ ---=-~- ~--i-- --I I
Monoplane -- ------ -1 75'7.. gap 0% stagger . l 75· l 25.. I· i J--o--75 " ,_.. - 50 • _J'" - - - - - - x- - - - - - -
125" • 0 ~ .. ~---0---- ll~S • " • 25 • i · 1 1---0---
I
f-;l:_~··-rr: ·-, -.J. ___ -+--- -I . .
-L-- ' t I l : . . . - I I
: I -oo 10° 20· 30° 40° 50° so· 70• 80° 90°
Angle of attack, d Fig.10 Effect of stagger and gap on lower wing lateral C. P.
N.A.C .A. Technical Note No. 330 Fig. 9
140
I 130 I
' Monoplane
I ----------75'1. gap o,; .9tagger 0
lt?.O
75 w .. ZS w " --0-- I 110 75 ,.- .. -50 .. - - .. - ------X------
125 .. - .. - o .. - M - ---0-'--- ·-i25 .. .. 25 .. .. ---1::7---
Tip 100 125 U -,. -so M - .... " - ---+-. ---.. .
90 '
·-I I I
f ' I
J ! I I I I I
I I I
' I I I I J_ I ; '
'/ I I -
i I ~I ' -
~ 80 5 g.
I 70 .... s Q) f/J
..... 60 0 .... ' "'V _;1 -. '- ~~- ~
_...- v/ ' . ./ . I ~~ ~~ -- =- - ·- - --- --- ... _ '1 -
f~ ···r:--.... -- I ' . '
\ ~- ~ ~
,__ >--- -
s:: QI
50 u t ~ s:: 40 .... ~
I l--< ., ...... ....-- r--. rv
' I ' ~
/,.., I /
i ....
I . I
I I /i ;i I
ci - 30 ; .... !IS 20 ...:i
I I I I I I
I u_ - I 10
~
I I
I : I I
I
Root 0
-10 -I
I r I I
-20 . I I I
-10· o· 10· 20· 30° 40• so· so· 10· 80° 90° Angle of attack, d
Fi!. 9 Effed of stagger and gap on upper wing lateral center of pressure.
N .A.C.A. Technical !fote No.
--- --Upper ioo sweep back - - + 50% stagger
~ - ---=--=--=-- - - - - - -- - - -c===============~ .I. --- --------:-1- - ----- - __ _.___
\, t---____ .g.
..... _--=-=--= ~-= - -- - - - --t - - - -- -- -- - - - -Upper 50 sweepbac~ - -- - - +25% stagger
- -- --- - --- - ---- -- -1------------------/
I I
\
' ------------------------------~ ooaweepback 0% stagger
,,.,,----=----- - - -------/- ---------- j ----~-----
/ -- ,- - (Not run)·
- ( ~ - I ~·- ==--=-==-=----=r=-
~' . I ~~~~~------------·~==========:==~=-' ------- ---
Lower s0 sweepback -25% stagger
- -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1------------...,.----~ - - - ----
/~/ ------ . L ------ ', ·- II ----- -- ---::;:;:=- - - - . -7--=---=-- - - ! - - ----- I
\ ------ ~ I. '"t: ~- - - - - -- - - - - - --==---~i-=:...___-_-__________ ~ --- --- ---Lower 10° sweepback- - -·- -- stagger
Fig.11 Wing model arrangements used in test-a on the effect. of stagger and sweepback.
N.A.C.A. Technical Note No.330 Figs. lZ & 13
1.4
1.2 ~
0
Q) 1.0
~ ....... 8 ti! a J..c g .s
'+I 0 ..... 4 s:: cu ..... 0
:;: . 2 ...... (I.)
8 0
-.z
. ---/ l.. ~·.,........
,,,......
I "'I\ l l--~-~ ~,j I / -· .--- ,.. __
i JI \\ '\ / ... ~ ... -- ·--:- ----- .~ ... ,
.~, ;- r--- I'-
I (I \ .:\· 7;: [.....-""' .............. "' ... ...
r-..... r. ', J ' ..__v- ---- ~ '\r . ' '- -'
// "' 'I "' .... ' '-· r-. ,_
// -~-.... .... . - [./'
// ,/
·-I .,__ ,___
- I- -- - 1--~-1---
"' r- ·•·-~I--~- - -1--
h' Monoplane : r.:; ·. • .J"., We ------------,_ 0° sweep back · -- I I 01. stagger --0 -I 5°-.-~ r-1~·1upper wing +25" .--.. ----A-,___
J 10° .. .. I I • I .. +50 " . "· .-------x -! . 10° • ·· I lower " -50" - · .. ---+ ' I I I I I I I I I I "I :i: I I
I
-10· 0° 10° 20· 30• 40• 50° so•,. 70° 80° 90° Angle of attack,d
Fig.12 Effect of stagger and sweep back on cellule coefficient of normal force.
.. :z;
tJ
1.4
1.Z
~ 1.0 i,.
.B - .8 ~ e 1-t 8 .6
'+-< 0
..... .4 . i:: cu ..... .~ .2 ..... '+-I Q) 0 t.) 0
-;2
.,__
... -··
/1, & -· ~fA __ ,__
1WI lil'
/!ii ~I
i u " -~
IJ , 1 ll .,
. ~+ ...............
fr ,_ .
I .. . ,____
l/ - --- --i --· ---- --· ---- ·-- -· ~ ;;::-" ~,"-
\ ~""--~ . .._
"' j'-,
I'-'\
' \ \
' \
I
1-- f--I'--- 1-----1-
v ~- -·
·-.....
~-- ... ' ' ..
' ~ ' ' ... .., '\ ' -
" \
"' \ \ \ I\ \
\
\ \
\ \
\ ', \
\ \ \ ' \ \
., .... ,, ' ' y. .,
', ~ f--
-10° 0° IO 0 2.0° 30° 40° 50° 60° 70• 80° 90° Fig.13 Angle of aHack,d Effect of stagger and sweep back on upper wing coefficient of normal force.
N.A.C.A. Technical Note No.330 Figs. 14 & 15
1.6
1.4
... 1.2. r:!' .u-0 1.0 s... .£ tii .8 a s... 0 i:: •• '-0
~ .4 Q) ..... v ;:: .z .... v 8 0
~-~-
i I
~; ·-,_ __
I '
,__ - ~ I r
)
II l
"r"' ... I v~. ', "~
6~ j z /_,(
/ ~ '\ I/ ~ j I I L I/
r \f
~
.JI I ':
/A
~! --
-~ ' l.l -- Monoplane ·
0° sweep back s· • "
10•-.. - -. t---• -
/' .......... , ,-' ----.... ~ - .
-;::--tr "' --...., -- L
L ~ ........ -,,.....--
~- i----.......--.....
-.... .\: .,; -------O,. sta.gger Q_
upper wing +Z5% 9tagger--6 .. ---:- .-.-+so"- .. -~------x-
.lower_ ·- .. ---..L ,.. J0.li- ~-jo j-I I I -.
2 -10° 0° 10° 20• 30• 40• so• eo• 70° ao• 90°
Fig.14 Angle of attack, ex Effect of slagger and sweep back on lower wing coefficient of normal force.
-.20 1.20
0
-I +--
I - .___ ----- ,......._
I" ........ I
\ (f ',,I
\ - .-;::-- '""" I . _, ,.,,
I
j
I! o· sweep back 5• .. ..
10·-......... - - .. io· .. •
,/'' r--·._
,/ v v . . Ir
J I/ _,v' / ·- - v v v / ./ ./ ,•
./v -.....--; v ,,/
loo'" v _,,. -- __,, ...- ..... -- __ .... ,_ --- ----·
..
01. stagger 0 upper win!' + 2.510 stagger -·A
.. - -··-~50'·-" ------x I -so.. .. ---±
,
-,...--
-
1.00 ~ ~ 't!
.80 .Q ~ E ..... «i a
.60~ ~ i= ,.0
..... QJ ~ ,_.
.40 s... .2 QJ .....
~~ 0
.20....:i II
..:I
0 ex::
1.20 -:20 -10 o• io• 20· 30° 40• so0 so· 70• so0 90°
Angle of a·tta.ck, c1..
Fig.15 Effect of stagger and. sweep back on wing load ratio.
N.A.C.A.Technical Note No.330 \
Figs. 16 & 19
Trail~100.---...... -r----r---i.--....--.----r-~.--....--.----r-~..--...--r--..--,.---....--r---rl,--,,---, ing ! edge
~ t.l
i 0
ii '()
1: <» u lo... cu I)...
t: .... ~ t.i
I I
901---l!ll--l----l---l-~l---l--+----l---l-+--'l---l--+---+~~--+--+--+-----i~.-1-----1 I
80 I
70 \
\
60 \
I
50
~ 40 \~ I \
:~
'(~ :; 30 II
r---
I
··-'. .
·',
J /~ . i,,.P, ~ ~~ "· -· -..... / ~~ l
----_i.-- -
~4--- --
\ \ \ \
- --
I
I
\ \ \ .
\ \
'
.
\ i \ \
\ .. I
\ ... ~~ 1--~ -·r-__ i.....--
---'.'-'
_ _.__
I
N.A.C.A. Technical Note No. 330 Figs. 17 & 18
120
110
Trailing-.,..100 edge
so
~ 0 80 -a s... 0
..c: 70 u
...... 0
10 -1 0
Leading-a edge 60
Root 0
~
ll
I
i I I I l I I I I I
Monoplane 0° sweep back O"to stagger
,___
11 u
50_1-1t - - n - upper wing + 25% stagger - -A -10° .. . .. .. +50· .. -------x -10° .. .. lower u -so .. .. ---+
Fig.17 Effect of stagger and oweep back on lower wing longitudinal C. P.
\ ---\ ..... -~ ?--== -,\ ~-
......
r ""' ,. - t...--
\~--- I' f J Tip 100 !'-.~
I A ~ ri -; F'I"
so
Arigle of attack, d 80
oo 100 20° I .300 40° S'o" 60° 70° 80° 90 0
/ I 70
/ I ---
_,,/' v -0 l-· v 110
\ '+..... ~;;>--., F'-- ·-'--~ --------~
- 120 :--- - -.,
·-~ - -- -- \ l
- ' ...... I
'\ l '...:i. ..... _ I
I
' I
/ ~-. \ I \ I
/ I\\ ~ ....... • ...__1 ...._
I I \ \\ --.... -"' \
Fig. 18 Effect of stagger and I I i I
sweep back on upper I
I I I I
wing lateral C. P. ; I I
I l I . I
:
I
+ 50% stagger +25% stagger
G/c == 1
--------.,- - - - - - - -:.._--=----..- - -
1-3 <ll 0 g I-'· 0 [!) I-'
2: 0 ct O>
~ 0 . VI C,;J 0
/ / .-~ .,-- - - - ----- - - - -0 ,,.. • + 3 ,,- -- ........ -· ..._ ....... !Xl
1---,;<.. - - - - - "':::..---=:: - - ::. 0 \,. , - ---- ..... ---\; - - - -.... • --.-:....=:::.....;::.. _____ __,--==-
_30 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ,..__ - - .:::"4 Fig.20 Wing model arrangements used in tests on the effect of stagger
and_deca.lage.
:N .A.C.A. Technical Note No. 330 Figs. 21 & 22
1.4 -------~
r.. 1.2 :z:;
CJ
~ 1.0 k 0 ...... ~ .8 (tj
s i:.. 0 .6 i::
<+-(
0
11 .4 Cl>
•..-! tJ .2 ....
4-1 4-< Q) 0
t.) 0
/, [h ..........-1 ~
,.... __ _ ..... ---'f!. Qi:f~. ~ ~
........ ·~
~
/ IA \1\ \~ - F/ ·- ~, I\ ...-- ;..--_,.... .-~-)
/11 I ~~-..j ~ v;;-- ----~ ~ ,,
i\ ~ \:, w r - ........ "'"-~ '\ ...
~
1 "' "'· J ~ ' II I "" i"':::::.:
.I .~I
" ,{ I Monoplane --------~-
fj J
~--- - 3° decal age, 0% stagger 0 --
30-t··· z5 .. _ _ .. ----Q--_ -i~ I 30 50 .. .. - ----- x------
J, { ---301: o .. - ~ ----0----- --3°-+-1• 25 .. _ - .. ---o------;, .... 3~ .. 50 .. .. ----+----;--
-2 . -10 0 10 zo 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
I z 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Fig. 21 .. .Angle of attack, d (Upper wing) E Hect of stagger and decalage on cellule coefficient of normal force.
1.4 ~ .... -- f-- - - -
---J 1.2
~ 1.0 Lo 0 ......
Cd .8 E
I f) _..,........ v-
Ill ! ~ ....... --~
Jf/ v ----= ~- ::-::.. ~ fJ,V /' ~
~__i.--- "'"\ !II ~ r- .--( ~ \ v---::t::-: - - - r-~
ll/ \t~ ~/" - i"---. ~' \ J -
J... 0 .6 i::
'+-I
AW " :::_:....-,_.._ ~t--, ~ ~- \
1f11 "~ ~ \ 0 +' .4 i:: Q)
fl/ ~- :~. \\ It'/ ~- -~ ~
•..-! C)
.2 •r-1 '+-I LH Q)
11, ~ ·~ l
y !/ \ ~\ 0
t.) 0 ~ ' \
~w \ ''-a \,. ~ --.2
-10° 0° 10° 20° 30° 40° 50° 60° 70° 80° 90° Fig. 22 Angle of attack, Ci (Upper wing) Effect of si:agger and decalage on upper wing coefficient of normal force.
N.A.C.A. Technical Note No. 330 Figs. 23 & 24
1.4
1.2. I>. ~
t)
Q1 1.0 u ~ .s
.-< . 8 ~ E s... 0 .6 i::
A /(,/
t 'l ....... 0
....... .4 i:: Q) ...... u .z ....... ...... ...... Q)
l II i~
j / ;/ t I "(
0 t.)
0 .f I I
-.2 I '" //
-.4 I .-10 oo il '
-.20 l
I I l
I
' I 0
' ' j \ :\.
I \~.'\ 1<.\ \ . .40 .... , ..
II p
i:i:: J.00
1.20 I
.' I //1 ':i
r
< ..... -.......... -,...
-/~ ~ •'/ I
--- -- ~~ -.-~ ~ . -- =· -·' ...... ~
.,,.,-/ ~
~ --~ 11"\ /,., \ .- ~
r x ' ' ~ v i...-- -I ,_ \A
__ _,. ~-
l
/). ~·- ~;- i--- --· ~ "" // { ) / ._.'
) ·-
fl ~ ...__ v fl/ , . J
I / Fig. 23 E f ec o stagger and
fl : decalage on lower wing
coe ~ficient of normal force .
l Monoplane 3° decalage 0%stagger 0 30 .. 2.5 .. " ----Q----30- - - -so .. -.. - .. --------x--------
-30_ ~·'- .....__ o .. _ r--'t - -- - --0--· --·
-30 .. 2.5 .. u -.---o----30-~ - ,__ 50 .. - ~ .. -----+-----" I I I I I I
A~gl~ o,f a1tta
1ck1 d (Upp~r -rin~)
10° 20° 30° 40° 50° 60° 70° 80" 90°
I J
~~
i--::: ~·
A.
[:::::: .__. ~ ~"' ~-,,... -- ---- : ---rr' - .;;... .. _ -· -...... {;,
::-;.:;: ---~ .......
I
..
1. - -
v /
1.
l
J ' 1.'
/ /' .
-:-""' v .....
.
.
-.
20
00
~ 80 ..9. ~
E .8 ~ E
60..0 ~ bO ,.a .5 Q)
40 ~ '3 1-. ....... qJ .--. ~ Q) 0 t.)
2.0 .....4 n
20
D 0 0 -10 0 . 10 20° 30° 40° 50° 60° 70° 80° 90° Angle of attack, d. (Upper wing)
Fig.24 Effect of decalage and stagger ·an wing load ratio:
N.A.C.A. Technical Note No. 330 Figs. 2.5 & 2.8
Trailing~lOO edge
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
Leading ->O edge
-10
-20
i:: ~ -~ ....... t.'l p... 0 • ti+' i::
~ \l:l - Q) P.. mo (J')
S... I Ill i-. ..... +' v Ei id p.. QJ
...:I lo
I! II
Monoplane ----3° decalage 0% slagger 0 30 __ • -~ 2.5 v - ...... ----Q
30 . 50. .. ---------x \\ 30-,__ - .__ o .. - ~., -----0 \\ ..
i -30_ ,__., _ '--- 2.5 .. _ ,_ .. -----~ \ \\ -30 .. 50. .. ----+ \
11 I\ I
\ ,\ ) \.
\ / K r---.... ~ - - l ~\ ~~ L--
~l\ L----1.--
~ ~--- ---~----•-. ---x.::..-::.::
·-"- -, . ... ~ M r f---..., r--:::: ...
~ t"'- ~ "-· - ~ ~: \ - ..........
'\ \ \. ·"-
\ 1\\ •
i\ \'.
\\ . \ \ \ .. \ '
\\ \ \ \ ,~ \ \ \ \ \ '\ t
l
I Fig. 2.5 Effect of decalage i I and s-l:a.gger on upper . I wingngitudinal C.P. ' .!. I Angle of attack1,ol (Upper wing) I .
10° Z.0° .30° 40° 50° . 60° 70° 80° 90°
60 Tip at 100
.
50 [) ,.,_ ~ ;:--_
F+=-: r-...... ~ ~ '-· ·-,._
~ .
40 4-~{ -
If .
30 Root at 0
-10° 0° 10° 2.0° 30° 40° 50°. 60° 70° 80° 90° Angle of attack, cl (Upper wing)
Fig. 28 Effect of decalage and siagger on lower wing lateral C. P.
N.A.C.A. Technical Note No.330 Figs.26& Z7
Tip at 100 j -/) J so~~~>--1>---1--1---1---1---1---4---4-~-l---4-+'~'-l----l-~
17~--1-__,
~ ~ ·~t+-4t.) p..; 0 -t3 ...... i::
I ~ /.
k «! ..-I Q) p.. ~um ~ ~ I ' \ ~~-~ 301--+--f---1----+--l--+--+--l-+-+--+---l--+--l--+-/-R-->ri--1--i---l
~ ~ ~ 1---1---+--Fig. 27 Effect of decalage -l----+---1--.j......-<t....1---.i::.[>._...:::, . ....,~~l~:::,,.·.:::.i,,. H Ul and stagger on upper 7 \ ·/
201---1---1---1-+---1---+- wing later a 1 C. P .-1---i---+--+-1-/.<--1--1---l/Ju.--1 Ir "•,
! I! , 1Q1---1---+--!---+--l'--+--+---+--l---l-+---l---+--+--+4~++--1---1-ll--l--I
'
" Rootl... Trail- O ing-<>1001-+-+---111--+-+---1---+--1r----+--+--+-t---+--+--+-+--t---+--ir--+---1
edge
....... c Q) u s... QJ p.. c .....
r
SOi--+-+-+---H--+-+---1---1---1-+---+---+-____,1---1--+--+-1---1---1---1-+--~ I 'Monoplane
.........._..._..._I~+---+- 3° decalage, 070 stagger 0"---80 l--i-+-+--+'-+--i----+-3° _,_ .. +--I-- 25 .. - - .. ----o--1---1---1
3° " 50 "· .. ---------x-------!--;'4--.-----ll-~-·-30 -~ .. 0 If. -- •• ----0----+---+---I
701--1+-'--+l-+-+--3 ° - - .. +---I-- 2 5 .. - - " - - - 0 - -·1---1---1
I -30 50.. .. ----+----
601--l-l-~\-<-+--l--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--l--l--l--l--l--l--+-----I \
I
201-fr+--+--+--l'---+--+--+-+-+--l--+--+---l,____+....-:.-+--l-----+--1---1-~
10 ii l:
Lead- :11 ing~>Ol..---IJ"'"----'---'--"'---'-----'---'-.L_---'---'-___,'----..J...._---'---'--'---1...---L..---1._.L_.~ edge -10° 0° 10° 20° 30° 40° 50° 60° 70° 80° 80°
Angle of attack, d. (Upper wing) Fig. 2.6 Effect of decalage and .stagger on lower wing longitudinal C. P.
N.A.c.A. Technical Note No.330 Fig.29
c G/o = l aOO
c G/c::.75
----------- - - -- - - -----=---------::::::....- - -- -/ - ---( /,,...
\. /'
o"""-- l"·-+3 L ------------30 ....... ________ _ --- -- - --~-.--:--~" ==- - ........ -------- '-:..
Fig.29 Wing model arrangements used in tests on the effect of gap and decalage.
N.A.C.A. Technical Note No. 330 Figs.30 & 31
1.4 --,__ - -~
i..-- ,___
~ 1.2 0
I ' i....--,..., __ ..
f "'.J. l !...---,_
.rt'!I \', /'
~ 1.0 i... 0 .....
,..... .8 ~
8 !.... 0 .6 s::
'+-< 0
...... .4 i:: QI .... u
.2 .... 'H ..... Q)
0 u 0
I 1/j f\ \\ v ..... ~ --~ - """"' ~
N 11,+ ~ \:·~ ~ ....-
·~ ~ ": / \\ ---i'/i, 'I
_..., .....- ~~ -...... ~\ ., Ii/ .. ..
-::~ ~' -!! I - -- ---
l.i ---~
r JI Monoplane ----- ------
3° decalage 100% gap - i--
11 J 3° -- • ,___-_ 12.5. .. __ ;;: __ t f / 30
~ 75 H .. ----- ----~x----------/J I
30-~ ,_ - 100 u u ----o---- ! .. r
I -30 - 125 H .. ---e7-----;-I - >-" ,_
1/J I I -3• " '15 .. H ,-, --,-,+-. 7-- I
-.z 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 so 70 80 90 'I
- y 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Angle of attack. d (Upper wing) Fig. 30 Effect of decalage and gap on cellule coefficient of normal force.
1.4 - -~ --,_-
- .• 2. -10° 0° 10° 20° 30° 40° 50° 60° 70° 80° 30°
~ 1.2 t:Jz
~ 1.0 s.. 0 ..... - .8 ~ 8 !-. 0 .6 I'.::
'1-1 0
"""' .4 s:: Ul ..... u
• 2. ..... ..... ..... ClJ
8 0
/ rirr ........... --v ,, f I .....----.....
I (fl / ..
I
Ile I I l/ ,[ ·, I
·v//,' \ \._~ ~ .--- ... ___ ~_
'f/1 '\ ~ ~ - -- ' ..
----- "-.... ~' 11
I \" k ---. I'--.. ........... ~· I
~ I \ ..... . f-··
ti!: ' -- '~ ~\\ ' '>0----""-.. i'-. I I
1
. I I
I!. ', ~ \,\ - t·
........... I i ' ' \\ i
I
"" ~\ '{, -- - •. i' I
J. I ..... I J ....
1~; ..... , '· ~ I\ '{
. :.. ., I
'fl ' ,, \ :· ' ', i ' \
~, ' ' '+ ~ ,\ \ r, I I I ·~:·., ~\
. I J ,' ,__ ···-- - . ~ ~-
I I ~ ... :\ ~" ~ J I
Fig.31 Angle of attack, d (Upper wing) . Effect of decalage and gap on upper wing coefficient of normal force.
.,
N.A.C.A. Technical Note No. 330 Figs. 32 & 33
1.6 ..-- i.--- -- - .
1.4 1-t< i....-::: .--- --~
~,,I~ ~ r_:.-;:; r=-- v- ,__.. ,__ ,._ ....--/ ' , ·"
1.2 r-. )!:;
I \ ·v· [7_.¥/ v· l-- .--} ./ -~ ~/ ~ ~ -,R- 'le /
'J
0
Q)- l.O u s....
'h ,- '(J' Ii) _.,,, ,._.
·~
f f 'J v l/ ...... --
0 ...... ...... .8 ti;!
E s.. 0 .6 s::
ll '.I
:I! V,f (// A
!JJ ! -0 ..... .4 i:: Cl.I ..... u .2 ...... ...... ...... Q)
11 Ii
if I ) I I l Monoplane ------ --fj
fj I ~ w 3°.decalage 100% gap . 3" - ,_ ~ 125 ... _ .. _ -- --o----
0 t)
0
. 2.
J! 3" d 75,, .. ____ .;. __ -x'---------
I I 30-,___ ,__ '--100 .. - .. - ----b----..
-3"-,_ .. ,__ .___ 12.5 •- .. - ---o------I j -3" .. 75. .. ----+-----j
~ - r--
I .4 -10 0° 10° . 20° 30° 40° so· 60° 70" 80° 80°
Fig.32 Angle of attack, ci.. (Upper wing) Effect of decalage and gap on lower wing coefficient of normal force.
-.20 . 1.20
'Cl ttj rel 0
..9 ro eB ~ E .20 .0 «! 00 QI i:: .0
.... Q) .40 ~ '5 1 s.... ::::
2L ~ .do g. II ::> .80
ll:!
~ I ., t' I I
0
x ' \
'
~-. '~,
't:
/~
Ii l'
0 0
~~t ?/ , 'JV ~·'/. /" I I ,-~ -- // - .. ...- --- ..
~ • f/
_ ....... 'I.,./ ~ A , ..
----~ ..--- -- v .. L...---,,._,./ :::- .- ·-~
I F
~~ f~
. .<Ill lfi -~
0 0 0 0 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Angle of attack, d.. (Upper wing)
-- ---
" 80 0
r:::::::.-"~
1.00 "g 0 'd
- co E! ..9
.80 ~ E Q) ti;!
.0 Q)
tlO .0 .60.8 Q)
~ '3 s.... ....... QJ ......
.40 ~ ~
.20
900 0
0 .....:1
n
Fig.33 Effect of decalage and gap on wing load ratio.
•
f
'
'
..
N.A.C.A. Technical Note No. 330 Figs. 34 & 37
. llQl---1--l---+----1--4-.i----1--+--+---l-~1--+--l---+----+-+-!--+--+--+--i
Monoplane Trail- f--+---1-3c decalage 100% gap 0 ing-100 i----.--1-3 o - - .. --125 .. _ .. ___ --Q +--+---+-+--+---+-+----1 edge ' 30 " 75. • ---------x
I -3° - - ->- 100 - -- ------{) -l---l---li---l---+---l--..J..---1
a t..)
~ 0 ;:::: u
..... 0
...... s:: Q1 u i.... Q1 p.
s:: ......
, ~ I o " .., ... so f--~-"'"',-3 - - .. --- 12.5 • - ,,_----- 0 -1-.:.-,• --l---lf----1--+---l--+--l
. -3° .. 75 w .. -----+ : : ' ' I
' 80 : l I \ • 70 . l l i '
\ ~. '. II \ I
I
60 I • \I
50 \, '
40 \ ~
I\\\
___ l--
30 ~~
20 \ \. \' \ \ \ \ \
10 ' I I I I
\ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \ ~
Lead- .\ .. · \ \ ing---0~"-+--1----+--+-+----1--+-1-----1-----+---1~+-1---1-~1-++--+--+--1----+--+---1 edge I: I \ \ \ \
_._Fig. ~4 Effect of decalage \ \ \ \ I 1 and gap on upper -1----+-.:.....i---11-+--1---1-----1-+--+---+--1
wing 101gi,ucynjl f .P. -10
-ZOi--r-+--+--+-1---1--1--+-+---+--+---1-+--+-~>-+--i---,...-1---1---J.-+-----1----1 Aqgl~ ot atta.'.ck~ d (Upp~r ~1 ng)
-100 60 Tip at 100
J l ==i<" ~\ _.
~ _.-¢' ''"\/ /Rodt at 0
40
-100
20° 30° 40° 60° 70° 80°
r~ ::-... _,,µ o/.....:: ~ """"'-
-
10° 20° 30° 40° 50° 60° 70° 80° Angre of a Hack, d (Upper wing)
90°
--
90°
Fig. 37 Effect of decalage and gap on lower wing lateral C.P.
-_.
f
,
N.A.C.A. Technical Note No. 330 Figs. 35" & 36
Tip 100
90
~ 0 i::~ 80 11'! p,. lfJ I 70 ..... s QJ !O
..... 60 0
"E Q) 50 u s... Q) p.. 40 i:: ....
p..; 0 30 ..-< ro s... Q) +' 20 It! ~
IO
Root 0
70
10
I· I I
Monoplane I I I I I I
,_____ 3° decalage 100%gap 0 ~ 3° ~- ~~ IZ5 • " ---Q
I -3° .. 75. .. ---------x J I
I ..___3o ,, L--1- 100. ,. ----0 Ii I---30 - • ,__,_ 12.5 .. .. -----o I I
-30 75 ----+ . " .
111 II I
// rA
' "" l/
,~ ,., 'JI \ 11_ ~ ~ ---:t:2t ...... ..... i,....--- V...?!.1 \ "<;:___ -~
11-~ l,dP1 - - - - >-- i--~ _.... _,____ -I \
~ ,•J 1--
~ T
110 i I h( v ~. t--....
I I , ~ ~-1, ~~ c> 100 Trailing edge /r f./ ~---~ ~----I I I I ,'
I I I I I /I Ji ! \ I l
90 -Fig.36 Effect of decalag·e , I I I and gap on upper wing :' I I . lateral C. P. : i I
80 I I I :1 I
I I 1 I I
I II I I I
I
I ! I I -10 I I I I
I
I I x I I -20 ~\ - _._
\\ -
\ q - - ;.::.---
r-. ~ .,,... '/ -- ----
~- '\. f, '/ j.
.,.""-~ [) ,h -.... -
l !
~ Fig. 35 Effect of decala~e and ga¥ on
"' I, lower wing longi udinal C. .
Lead- 0 ing edge
- 1E10 I 0 I
0 1 0
I I I 1 I I I
I I Angl~ of attack, d. ( I I • J )
UppEir "o/In$ 10 0 20 0 30 0 40 0 50 0 60 0 70 0 80 0 90°