Nasa Technical Memorandum
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
NASA TECHNICAL NASA TM X* 73,231 MEMORANDUM LARGE-SCALE V/STOL TESTING David G. Koenig, Thomas N. Aiken, Kiyoshi Aoyng' Ames Research Center Moffett Field, Calif. 94035 nnd Michael D. Fnlorski Aines Directornte, USAAMRDL Ames Research Center Moffett Field, Calif, 9403: (NASA-TM-X-7 3231) LARGE-SCALE V/STOL N77-23OG 1 TESTING (EASA) 36 p HC A02/NP 801 CSCL 01C . 1. Woport No. 2. Governmmt Accarlon No. 3. Raclpientt* btelop No. NASA TM 2-73,231 4. Titlo and Suhlltlo 6. Rcport Oslo LARGE-SCALE V/STOL TESTING 8. Parforming Organlretlan &do 7. AuthorC1 0. Periormlng Orpnlzmlion Roport No. David G. Koenig,h Thomas N. Aiken,* Kiyoshl Aoyagi* A-7002 and Ml..cchaol D , l!alarslti** to, Work Unlt No. 0, PerformingOrgsnit~tton Nams md Addrsu 505-10-41 Wmes Research Center, NASA and 11. Conlnct or Grant No. h*Ames Directorate, USAAMIU)L Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA 94035 13, Typa of Report ond Period Covercd 12, Sponrorlng Agency Namr and Address Technical Memorandum National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 14. Sponsoring Awncy &do Washington, D,C. 20546 and U.S. Army Air Mobility R&D Laboratory, Moffett Field. Calif. 94035 16. Supplumantary Notes 16. Abstract Several facet8 of large-scale testing of V/STOL aircraft configurations are discussed with particular emphasis on test experience in the Ames 40- by 80-Foot Wind Tunnel. Exariple~of powered-lift teat prngrame are preeented in order to illustrate rradeoffs confronting the planner of V/STOL test program. It is indicated that large-scale V/STOL wind-tunnel testing can sometimes compete with small-scale testing in the effort required (overall test time) and program costa because of the possibility of conducting a number of different tests with a single large-scale model where several small-scale models would be reql~ired. The benefits of both high- or full- scale Reynolda numbers, more deta,tled configuration simulation, and number and typs of onboard measurements increase rapidly with scale. Planning must be more detailed at large scale j.n order to balance the trade-offs between the increased costs, as number nf measurements and model configuration variables increase and the bendfits of larger aTounts of information coming out of one test. -- 17. Kay Words isu~gestodby Author $1) 18. Dirtrlbution Stutcment Aircraft Unlimited Design Testing STAR Category - 05 19. Security Uauif, (of thls roportl 20. Security Clorsif. (of this pgel 21. No. of Pages 22. ~ricc* Unclassified Unclassified 15 $3.25 'For solo by tho Nationol Tochnical Informnuon Sorvlco, Springflpld. Vlrginia 221 61 LAROE-SCALE V/STOL TESTING Dovid C. Koenlg," Thomas N, ALkcn,** rind KiyatihL Avyngi* hmes Rcscnrcli Cnntor, NASA, Mo Efct t Plcld, ClilI farnitr und Michael D, Fnlarekl U.S. Army Aviation Systems Command Air Mobility RbU 1,rtloratory hme~1)irecturatc Ametr Hevenrch Ccntar, Moffett Field, California hbatrnct FX = axial farce L = lift Scverc' 'ncets of large-scole testing of V/STOL aircraft configurations are discussed with particu- 11 = 11u1nburOF lifting elements lnr ampllusis on exporionco in tlrc Amos 40- by tust PNL = percoivcd noiso lovul, dU 80-Foot Iflr I Tunnel. Exan~plcsof powered-lift test programs u J ~n+esentedin order to illustrntc trsde- l', = irtmosplreric pressure of fs confrot~tingthe planner of V/STOL test programs. P7 = total pressure It is indicated that large-scale V/S'rOL wind-tunnel testing can sometimes compete with smull-scale tost- q = dynamic pressure ing in tho effort required (overall test time) and program costs because of the possibility of conduct- S = wing area ing n lrumber of differont tests with a single large- T, = total thrust (fan ut a = oo)/q(nd2/1) scale modcl where several small-scale models would be required. The benefits of both high- or full- V = airspeed, m/sec (knots) scale Keynolds numbers, more detailed configuration = jet velocity, m/scc (ft/sec) sirnulatior., and number end type of onboard measuru- Vj ments increase rapidly with scale. Planning must a = arlglc of uttack be more detailed at large scale in order to balance fiy = deflector vane setting the trade-offs between the incronsed costs, us numbor of moasurcmolrts and model confj guration vorinbles 6 = flap deflecti.on increase and the benefits of larger amounts of in- formation coming out of one tcst. I. Introduction Nomenclature Development of V/STOL aircraft is becoming more dependent on large-score wind-tunnel test pro- grams than has been tho case for the davalop~nentof AE = nozzle area conventionnl aircraft, Interaction of the pawcr- plant and the airframe introduccts udditional test = AL n (TID,,/~)~,area oE powered lifting pnriuneters, and analytic tools in the process of areo; fully expanded being developed to handle the effect of this inte- nb2/4, momentum area of aircraft gration have not yet been proven, Because of the Am - cornplcxity and costs of some V/STOL models and their AN = nozzle area components as well as costs of flight testing, it is felt that large-scale testing at low speed must AT = cross-"ctional area of wind-tunnel test section become a more significont port of aircruft devel- opment. It is, therefore, tho objective of this b = wing span paper to give the reader soar: insight into the major = width of test section considerations nssociated with large-scale V/STOL bT tcs ting. CD = drog/qS Cd = discharge coefficient The paper is divided into two parts: reasons for testing at large sculc, i.e., scale effects, detail, and acoustics; and test considerations, i.e., C, = pitching moment/qSc planning, sizing, model constructiort, and operu- tions, The presentation makes use of ns many ex- amples as possible from t=st results and from ex- Cv = velocity coefficient periences in testing large-scale powered-lift models. Most of the examples are from programs at = mean aerodynamic chord the Ames 40- by 80-Foot Wind Tunnel and the static = diumeter of lifting element test sites nearby. It is felt, Ilowever, that mony DL of the considerntions discussed are applicable to d = fnn diameter other large-scale testing hcijities where powered models arc involved. *Research Scientist, Member AIAA. **Research Scientist. lI, _Hya-yon~_f_q~f,L_rpe-SculeTesting Strong sculu affects had bocn notud in past in- v~~tifi~t~utlsof slotted flap configurutlons, hut 'Ihu rcilsorrs for tosting ut luryc sculc ilrc tliesc occurrcd prin~arilyvi tli the power off. llcrc, many, but mucll of the Justifirution can bc plucud wl tli 11 bloutr Fli~p!iys tern, own though instrumenta- sithin the oI)J~~tivosof obt~i~ringclose to full- tion was completu t'or uatli models, ut least toh'ilrd seulc llc!.nolds t\umbcrs, requircmu~~tsfor detni led meeting the objvct ivcs of ttrc resl~cctivotests, rcp~~cscntstionof mode 1 confl guruti ons, and tho tlicrc sti 11 NUS not e~rouglidocun~cntlttlon to slroti possibility of obtaining n Lurge variety of illfor- 1c11y the differelices in lift occurred, TIM prlnci- mat ion from one model, including noise evnluation, pal complications wore probably tlie scnlc cffcct l'u milril~ll:c tho costs and time required for tcst- or1 the rcactton of the jet with tlic flnp systom, Lng botlr large- rind smnll-scalc morlcls, these rca- cornbitled with tlic use of two different power sys- JOnS rnust be clorely cvulurrtcd. 'fb help in cvnl- toms fol- tho two nladels. Those effccts und sirnilnr utrtjan, brief oxurnl~los follow. ones have to bc separated and wcll defined if re- sLIts from smull-sculc powcred ~nodelsure to be Scalc Eft'ecg uscd . In muclr of tlle work that tuns bccn dono in urrtc- Even though with small sizc It is difficult to Igzing scale ofFocts 011 the chuructcristics of lift- provide sufficient lristru~ncntatjon to docun~ent propulsion s!.stelns, there has been di fficul ty In sep- scnle effects, it is continually bcing attcml~tcd. aratlng the combined effccts of ~;~itrgfrom one modcl One program where good correlation bctwaari lurgc and test installiltion to nnotlwr model and test in- nl~dsmall scale was obtoirrcd was in the dc\+elopment stal lntion. For V/STOL uircruft model testing, this of tllc Advanced llarricr and is tllc subjsct of trqa is o continual problem becuuse of tlrc strong effect otl~crpapers in this conf~rencc.~1~TLI a ccrtuin of the simulated propulsion systcm on t1.c acrodyrlamic extent, that case was more straightforward ill that characteristics involved. Exiimplzs of comparisons full-scale results were used as verlficatlon of tllc which indicate such scale offccts are presented in small-scale results in order to quantiFy such Figs. I, 2, and 3 for components of iifting systems things us flap lift lncrcn~cntsand iritcll control, ~hlchare do~umentedin Refs. 1 und 2, and unpub- Purtllcrmi 742, the f lup nnd propulsion systems were lished data, respectively, Even for thesc cor- not complctel!. integrated as was tllc caso for tllc relations thuro are always questions: How ac- exturnnl bloa~~-fiaii(EDF) models uf i:lg. 4, and curate are the surface contours for the inlet tests7 small-scale flap pc~formanccwas not influenced 11)' \$as the grit large enough snd upplicd far enough small dlcfcrenccs in the simulntior~of the engiilc forward on the slut for the case in Fig, 37 But efflux. for testing complote powercd-lift configurations, Jocu~nentingsuch things as similarity in contour, Mode 1 De tai 1- simil~rit!~in flow conditions, or deflections under load can be an order of magnitude more difficult. Vrc comparison in slat effcctivcness shown in Fig, 3 is believed to dcmonstrutc the effect of Problems In correlating tcst results for corn- Ileynolds number; however, there is a chance that plete configurations may be illustrated by the in- slat details such os the mechanicnl reprcsentntion vestigation of an externally blown flop SWL con- of the slat nose and wiper plate thickness may figuration completed by NASA 4 years ago.