Assessment of a Conceptual Flap System Intended for Enhanced General Aviation Safety
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
NASA/TM-2017-219639 Assessment of a Conceptual Flap System Intended for Enhanced General Aviation Safety Bryan A. Campbell and Melissa B. Carter NASA, Langley Research Center, Hampton, Virginia July 2017 NASA STI Program . in Profile Since its founding, NASA has been dedicated to the • CONFERENCE PUBLICATION. advancement of aeronautics and space science. The Collected papers from scientific and technical NASA scientific and technical information (STI) conferences, symposia, seminars, or other program plays a key part in helping NASA maintain meetings sponsored or this important role. co-sponsored by NASA. The NASA STI program operates under the auspices • SPECIAL PUBLICATION. Scientific, of the Agency Chief Information Officer. It collects, technical, or historical information from NASA organizes, provides for archiving, and disseminates programs, projects, and missions, often NASA’s STI. The NASA STI program provides access concerned with subjects having substantial to the NTRS Registered and its public interface, the public interest. NASA Technical Reports Server, thus providing one of the largest collections of aeronautical and space • TECHNICAL TRANSLATION. science STI in the world. Results are published in both English-language translations of foreign non-NASA channels and by NASA in the NASA STI scientific and technical material pertinent to Report Series, which includes the following report NASA’s mission. types: Specialized services also include organizing • TECHNICAL PUBLICATION. Reports of and publishing research results, distributing completed research or a major significant phase of specialized research announcements and feeds, research that present the results of NASA providing information desk and personal search Programs and include extensive data or theoretical support, and enabling data exchange services. analysis. Includes compilations of significant scientific and technical data and information For more information about the NASA STI program, deemed to be of continuing reference value. see the following: NASA counter-part of peer-reviewed formal professional papers but has less stringent • Access the NASA STI program home page at limitations on manuscript length and extent of http://www.sti.nasa.gov graphic presentations. • E-mail your question to [email protected] • TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM. Scientific and technical findings that are • Phone the NASA STI Information Desk at preliminary or of specialized interest, 757-864-9658 e.g., quick release reports, working papers, and bibliographies that contain minimal • Write to: annotation. Does not contain extensive analysis. NASA STI Information Desk Mail Stop 148 • CONTRACTOR REPORT. Scientific and NASA Langley Research Center technical findings by NASA-sponsored Hampton, VA 23681-2199 contractors and grantees. NASA/TM-2017-219639 Assessment of a Conceptual Flap System Intended for Enhanced General Aviation Safety Bryan A. Campbell and Melissa B. Carter NASA, Langley Research Center, Hampton, Virginia National Aeronautics and Space Administration Langley Research Center Hampton, Virginia 23681-2199 July 2017 The use of trademarks or names of manufacturers in this report is for accurate reporting and does not constitute an official endorsment, either expressed or implied, of such profucts or manufacturers by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Available from: NASA STI Program / Mail Stop 148 NASA Langley Research Center Hampton, VA 23681-2199 Fax: 757-864-6500 Contents Nomenclature 10 Abstract 12 1. Introduction 12 2. Description of Model 14 3. Test Conditions and Instrumentation 15 4. Computational Method and Description 16 5. Results and Discussion 16 5.1. Trailing-Edge Split Flap ................................................................................................. 17 5.2. Auxiliary Flap Independent 45° Deflections .................................................................. 18 5.3. Auxiliary Flap 45° Deflections with Split Flap .............................................................. 18 5.4. Auxiliary Flap 45° Deflections with Split Flap and Aileron .......................................... 20 5.5. Emergency Descent Configuration / Auxiliary Flap Independent 90° Deflections ....... 20 5.6. Emergency Descent Configuration / Auxiliary-flap 90° Deflections with Split Flap ... 21 5.7. Emergency Descent Configuration / Auxiliary-flap 90° Deflections with Split Flap and Aileron ...................................................................................................................................... 21 5.8. Preliminary Deflection Optimization ............................................................................. 21 5.9. Auxiliary-flap Leading-edge Modification .................................................................... 22 5.10. Auxiliary-flap Trailing-edge Modification .................................................................... 22 5.11. Auxiliary-flap Simplification ......................................................................................... 23 6. Summary of Results 25 7. Recommendations for System Maturation 25 8. References 26 Appendix A: Instrumentation Accuracy and Data Repeatability 101 Instrumentation Accuracy ....................................................................................................... 101 Plots of Repeat Runs ............................................................................................................... 101 Appendix B: Computational Fluid Dynamics Discussion and Results 121 Grid Generation ...................................................................................................................... 121 USM3D Flow Solver .............................................................................................................. 121 Conditions Analyzed ............................................................................................................... 122 Unsteady Conditions ............................................................................................................... 122 Computational Results ............................................................................................................ 122 Appendix C: Tuft Flow Visualization 142 List of Figures Figure 1. (a) Plan view, side view, and sketch of variable incidence auxiliary (via) wing; (b) Photograph of model mounted in the 12-Foot Wind Tunnel. (Shown are both inboard and outboard auxiliary flaps (red) deflected at 45°, and the split flap (white) deflected at 60°. ......... 28 Figure 2. Comparison of trailing-edge split-flap deflections: q = 4.0 psf. ................................... 29 Figure 3. Comparison of 45° auxiliary flap deflections; q = 4.0 psf. ........................................... 33 Figure 4. Effect of split-flap deflections on 45° auxiliary flap performance; q = 4.0 psf. ........... 37 Figure 5. Effect of 60° split-flap deflection on 45° auxiliary flap performance; q = 4.0 psf. ...... 41 Figure 6. Use of aileron as flap with 45° auxiliary flap; q = 4.0 psf. ........................................... 45 Figure 7. Comparison of 90° auxiliary flap performance; q = 4.0 psf. ......................................... 49 Figure 8. Effect of split flap deflections on 90° auxiliary flap performance; q = 4.0 psf. ............ 53 Figure 9. Effect of 60° split flap deflection on 90° auxiliary flap performance; q = 4.0 psf. ....... 57 Figure 10. Use of aileron as flap with 90° auxiliary flap; q = 4.0 psf. ......................................... 61 Figure 11. Effects of mixing 45° and 90° auxiliary flaps; q = 4.0 psf. ......................................... 65 Figure 12. Comparison of baseline and sharpened leading edge auxiliary flaps; q = 4.0 psf. ...... 69 Figure 13. Comparison of auxiliary flaps with Gurney labs; q = 4.0 psf. .................................... 73 Figure 14. Comparison of 45° auxiliary flap with lower surface spoiler; q = 4.0 psf. ................. 77 Figure 15. Comparison of 45° auxiliary flap with lower surface spoiler; TE flap deflection = 60°, q = 4.0 psf. .................................................................................................................................... 81 Figure 16. Comparison of 45° outboard auxiliary flap with lower surface spoiler; q = 4.0 psf. .. 85 Figure 17. Comparison of 45° outboard auxiliary flap with lower surface spoiler; TE- flap deflection = 60°, q = 4.0 psf. ................................................................................................. 89 Figure 18. Comparison of 90° auxiliary flap with lower surface spoiler; q = 4.0 psf. ................. 93 Figure 19. Comparison of inboard 90° auxiliary flap with lower surface spoiler; q = 4.0 psf. .... 97 Figure A-1. Repeat runs, cruise configuration; q = 4.0 psf. ....................................................... 102 Figure A-2. Repeat runs, take-off with only inboard auxiliary flap; q = 4.0 psf. ....................... 105 Figure A-3. Repeat runs, maximum drag landing configuration; q = 4.0 psf. ............................ 109 Figure A-4. Repeat runs, take-off with lower surface spoilers; q = 4.0 psf. ............................... 113 Figure A-5. Repeat runs, approach with lower surface spoilers; q = 4.0 psf. ............................. 117 Figure B-1. Computational grid definition of aircraft. ............................................................... 124 Figure B-2. Lift versus angle of attack (degrees) comparison. ................................................... 124