Note that the flap deflection shifts the lift curve far to the left giving a zero lift angle of attack of roughly minus 12 degrees while it increases the maximum lift coefficient (Re= 6 x 106) from just under 1.6 to 2.4, a huge increase in lifting capability that can contribute to large decreases in takeoff and landing distances. They also show what happens when a 20% chord flap is deflected 40 degrees. These graphs show test results for several different Reynolds numbers and for “standard roughness” on the surface. Note that for the symmetrical shape the lift coefficient is zero at zero angle of attack. The airfoils presented represent a cross section of airfoil shapes selected to illustrate why one would select one airfoil over another for any given aircraft design or performance requirement.įigure A-1 shows data for the NACA 0012 airfoil, a classic symmetrical shape that is used for everything from airplane stabilizers and canards to helicopter rotors to submarine “sails”. In the following appendix material a selection of airfoil graphical data is presented which can be found in the Theory of Wing Sections and in the non-copyrighted NACA publications which are the source of the Dover publication’s data. While the date of original publication might lead one to think this material must be out of date, that is simply not true and the Theory of Wing Sections is one of the most valuable references in any aerospace engineer’s personal library. ![]() Many of the more important airfoil shapes have their test results summarized in the Theory of Wing Sections, a Dover paperback publication authored by Ira Abbott and Albert Von Doenhoff and first published in 1949. This data is most conveniently presented in plots of lift coefficient versus angle of attack, pitching moment coefficient versus angle of attack, drag coefficient versus lift coefficient, and pitching moment coefficient versus lift coefficient and is found in literally hundreds of NACA and NASA Reports, Notes, and Memoranda published since the 1920s. Lift, drag, and pitching moment data for hundreds of such airfoil shapes was determined in wind tunnel tests by the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA) and later by NASA, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. In Chapter 3 of this text we discussed many of the aspects of airfoil design as well as the NACA designations for several series of airfoils. The percentage of total drag due to skin friction drag is 93.8 %.\) What percentage of the total drag is due to skin friction drag? (Round the final answer to the nearest whole number.) Assume the skin friction drag on the airfoil is essentially that for a flat plate with the boundary layer over the model being turbulent and incompressible. A wing with a NACA 2412 airfoil is mounted in the tunnel at an angle of attack such that the section lift coefficient is 0.2. Consider a series of tests where the tunnel is pressurized to 3 atm with temperature of the airstream in the test section at 60 ☏ and flow velocity of 160 mi/h. The Low Turbulence Pressure Tunnel is most noted, however, as the testing facility for the NACA Laminar Flow Airfoils. ![]() ![]() ![]() When the tunnel became operational, the four- and five-digit airfoil series, originally tested in older tunnels, were retested in the new tunnel. The wing models spanned the entire test section of width 3 ft, so the flow over the model was essentially two-dimensional. The tunnel was specifically designed for airfoil testing with a test section 3 ft wide and 7.5 ft high. The airfoil data shown below were obtained in the NACA two-dimensional Low Turbulence Pressure Tunnel at the NACA Langley Memorial Laboratory.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |