DOCSLIB.ORG

A Study of Gurney Flaps and Their Influence on an Airfoil in Ground Effect

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Study of Gurney Flaps and Their Influence on an Airfoil in Ground Effect A STUDY OF GURNEY FLAPS AND THEIR INFLUENCE ON AN AIRFOIL IN GROUND EFFECT A Thesis by Eric Fred Davis Bachelor of Science, Oklahoma State University, 1996 Submitted to the Department of Aerospace Engineering and the faculty of the Graduate School of Wichita State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science December 2010 © Copyright 2010 by Eric F Davis All Rights Reserved A STUDY OF GURNEY FLAPS AND THEIR INFLUENCE ON AN AIRFOIL IN GROUND EFFECT The following faculty members have examined the final copy of this thesis for form and content, and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Master of Science with a major in Aerospace Engineering. Scott Miller, Committee Chair . Roy Myose, Committee Member . Karman Rokhsaz, Committee Member . Ikram Ahmed, Committee Member iii ABSTRACT As an aircraft wing approaches the ground, within a chord-length distance, it experiences an increase in lift and a decrease in drag. This is known as ―ground effect.‖ Furthermore, a Gurney flap positioned perpendicular to an airfoil’s trailing edge (with a 1% to 5% chord length) will also increase the lift. This thesis addresses the following question: Are the combined effects of these phenomena additive to any significant degree? Specifically, can the addition of a Gurney flap to an airfoil during ground effect increase the lift substantially, and are there any tradeoffs to be considered? Notable performance improvements could impact wing-in-ground-effect (WIG) aircraft. Such vehicles fly close to the ground (in ground effect [IGE]) to produce more lift than the wing would normally (out of ground effect [OGE]). WIG aircraft can be a small one-person aircraft or large transport aircraft like the Russian Ekranoplans. Currently, because these aircraft fly only IGE, they are literally inches off the surface of the ground. Further Gurney flap research could be beneficial for improving similar future aircraft. If the effects are additive, then WIG aircraft could be constructed to fly more safely at greater heights. This thesis was completed in three phases. First, a literature review was conducted to better understand ground effect and Gurney flaps. Interestingly, only one article was discovered that discussed combining both phenomena (for race car down- force enhancement applications). Second, basic and available two-dimensional computer codes were evaluated as potential tools for analysis and design. Only one was capable of analyzing an airfoil with a Gurney flap in ground effect. Third, iv experiments were conducted in the low-speed wind tunnel at Wichita State University to directly evaluate the effect of a Gurney flap on airfoil performance in ground effect. Based on the results of this investigation, the following can be stated: JavaFoil, a computer program available online, reasonably models airfoil performance trends with Gurney flaps while in ground effect. Experiments indicate that the addition of a Gurney flap to an S7055 airfoil improves its lift, both in and out of ground effect (by up to 68%). Interestingly, the effects vary with angle of attack and are most pronounced at small values. But there are also tradeoffs to consider. Specifically, an increase in drag (approximately 48%) and a more nose-down pitching moment (about 85%) accompanies the lift improvement for the S7055 airfoil used for testing. v TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Background ............................................................................................... 1 1.2 Goal ....................................................................................................... 2 2. LITERATURE BACKGROUND RESEARCH ....................................................... 4 2.1 Ground Effect ............................................................................................ 4 2.2 Gurney Flap .............................................................................................. 5 2.3 Contrasts and Comparisons ..................................................................... 8 3. COMPUTER PROGRAMS ................................................................................ 10 3.1 Background ............................................................................................. 10 3.2 XFoil ....................................................................................................... 11 3.3 JavaFoil .................................................................................................. 11 3.3.1 JavaFoil Background .................................................................... 11 3.3.2 JavaFoil and Ground Effect .......................................................... 12 3.3.3 JavaFoil and Addition of Gurney Flap .......................................... 20 3.4 Comparing XFoil and JavaFoil ................................................................ 23 3.5 Combining Ground Effect and Gurney Flap ............................................ 24 4. EXPERIMENTAL RESEARCH .......................................................................... 26 4.1 Overview ................................................................................................. 26 4.2 WSU 3-by-4-Foot Wind Tunnel ............................................................... 26 4.3 Two-Dimensional Testing ....................................................................... 27 4.4 The Model ............................................................................................... 27 4.5 Testing Matrix ......................................................................................... 28 4.6 Expected Aerodynamic Forces ............................................................... 29 4.7 Expected Uncertainty or Errors ............................................................... 31 4.7.1 Construction Errors ...................................................................... 32 4.7.2 Wind-Tunnel-Blockage Errors ...................................................... 32 4.7.3 Installation Errors ......................................................................... 32 vi TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) Chapter Page 5. RESULTS ..................................................................................................... 35 5.1 Wind Tunnel Corrections ........................................................................ 35 5.2 Results from First Configuration (OGE) .................................................. 36 5.3 Results from Second Configuration (OGE02GF) .................................... 39 5.4 Results from Third Configuration (15% IGE and 25% IGE) .................... 40 5.5 Results from Fourth Configuration (15% IGE02GF and 25% IGE02GF) ....................................................................................... 44 5.6 Discussion of Results.............................................................................. 47 6. CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................ 61 7. FUTURE WORK ................................................................................................ 63 REFERENCES ..................................................................................................... 64 vii List of Tables Table Page 1. Comparison Summary of Gurney Flaps and Ground Effect ................................ 9 2. Off-Angle Airfoil Comparison with Upper Airfoil at 10º, 25% Method of Images . 19 3. Off-Angle Airfoil Comparison with Upper Airfoil at 0º, 25% Method of Images .. 19 4. S7055 Airfoil with 2% Gurney Flap at 10% IGE .................................................. 25 5. Testing Matrix ..................................................................................................... 29 6. Preliminary Load Determination in Free Air ........................................................ 30 7. Preliminary Load Determination IGE .................................................................. 30 8. Preliminary Load Determination with Flap in Free Air ......................................... 31 9. Preliminary Load Determination with Flap IGE ................................................... 31 viii LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Ground Effect of NACA 0005 Wing Approaching Ground (from NACA TM-4044, Ground Effect [3]). ................................................................................................ 5 2. Gurney Flap on Airfoil Trailing Edge. .................................................................... 6 3. Lift Behavior of NACA 0011 Airfoil, Heron [6]. ...................................................... 7 4. Pitching Moment Behavior of NACA 0011 Airfoil, Heron [6]. ................................ 7 5. Pressure Distribution of NACA 0011 Airfoil, Heron [6]. ......................................... 8 6. IGE Distance Definition ...................................................................................... 13 7. Ground Effect on S7055 Airfoil. .......................................................................... 13 8. Drag and Lift Coefficients of S7055 Airfoil IGE. .................................................. 14 9. AOA 0º at 25% IGE S7055 Airfoil. ...................................................................... 14 10. AOA 4º at 25% IGE S7055 Airfoil ....................................................................... 15 11. AOA 7º at 25% IGE
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Final Annual Activity Report 2014
    Final Annual Activity Report 2014 This report is provided in accordance with Articles 8 (k) and 20 (1) of the Statutes of the Clean Sky 2 Joint Undertaking annexed to the Council Regulation (EU) No 558/2014 and with Article 20 of the Financial Rules of Clean Sky 2 Joint Undertaking. ~ Page intentionally left blank ~ CS-GB-2015-06-23 Doc9 Final AAR 2014 2 Table of Contents 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5 2. INTRODUCTION 7 3. KEY OBJECTIVES AND ASSOCIATED RISKS 10 3.1 CLEAN SKY PROGRAMME - ACHIEVEMENT OF OBJECTIVES 10 3.2 CLEAN SKY 2 PROGRAMME - ACHIEVEMENT OF OBJECTIVES 16 4. RISK MANAGEMENT 18 4.1 GENERAL APPROACH TO RISK MANAGEMENT 18 4.2 JU LEVEL RISKS 19 4.3 CLEAN SKY PROGRAMME LEVEL RISKS 23 4.4 CLEAN SKY 2 PROGRAMME LEVEL RISKS 24 5. GOVERNANCE 26 5.1 GOVERNING BOARD 26 5.2 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 28 5.3 STEERING COMMITTEES 28 5.4 SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL ADVISORY BOARD/ SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE 28 5.5 STATES REPRESENTATIVES GROUP 29 6. RESEARCH ACTIVITIES 31 6.1 CLEAN SKY PROGRAMME - REMINDER OF RESEARCH OBJECTIVES 31 6.1.1 General information 32 6.1.2 SFWA - Smart Fixed Wing Aircraft ITD 34 6.1.3 GRA – Green Regional Aircraft ITD 40 6.1.4 GRC – Green Rotorcraft ITD 47 6.1.5 SAGE – Sustainable and Green Engine 52 6.1.6 SGO – Systems for Green Operations ITD 55 6.1.7 ECO – Eco-Design ITD 60 6.1.8 TE – Technology Evaluator 64 6.2 CLEAN SKY 2 PROGRAMME – REMINDER OF RESEARCH OBJECTIVES 70 6.2.1 General information 74 6.2.2 LPA – Large Passenger Aircraft IADP 75 6.2.3 REG – Regional Aircraft IADP 79 6.2.4 FRC – Fast Rotorcraft IADP 82 6.2.5 AIR– Airframe ITD 86 6.2.6 ENG – Engines ITD 91 6.2.7 SYS – Systems ITD 95 6.2.8 SAT – Small Air Transport Transverse Activity 99 6.2.9 ECO – Eco Design Transverse Activity 100 6.2.10 TE – Technology Evaluator 100 7.
    [Show full text]
  • Effects of Gurney Flap on Supercritical and Natural Laminar Flow Transonic Aerofoil Performance
    Effects of Gurney Flap on Supercritical and Natural Laminar Flow Transonic Aerofoil Performance Ho Chun Raybin Yu March 2015 MPhil Thesis Department of Mechanical Engineering The University of Sheffield Project Supervisor: Prof N. Qin Thesis submitted to the University of Sheffield in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Philosophy Abstract The aerodynamic effect of a novel combination of a Gurney flap and shockbump on RAE2822 supercritical aerofoil and RAE5243 Natural Laminar Flow (NLF) aerofoil is investigated by solving the two-dimensional steady Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) equation. The shockbump geometry is predetermined and pre-optimised on a specific designed condition. This study investigated Gurney flap height range from 0.1% to 0.7% aerofoil chord length. The drag benefits of camber modification against a retrofit Gurney flap was also investigated. The results indicate that a Gurney flap has the ability to move shock downstream on both types of aerofoil. A significant lift-to-drag improvement is shown on the RAE2822, however, no improvement is illustrated on the RAE5243 NLF. The results suggest that a Gurney flap may lead to drag reduction in high lift regions, thus, increasing the lift-to-drag ratio before stall. Page 2 Dedication I dedicate this thesis to my beloved grandmother Sandy Yip who passed away during the course of my research, thank you so much for the support, I love you grandma. This difficult journey would not have completed without the deep understanding, support, motivation, encouragement and unconditional love from my beloved parents Maggie and James and my brother Billy.
    [Show full text]
  • Wake Vortex Alleviation Using Rapidly Actuated Segmented Gurney Flaps
    WAKE VORTEX ALLEVIATION USING RAPIDLY ACTUATED SEGMENTED GURNEY FLAPS by Claude G. Matalanis and John K. Eaton Prepared with support from the The Stanford Thermal and Fluid Sciences Affiliates and the Office of Naval Research Report No. 102 Flow Physics and Computation Division Department of Mechanical Engineering Stanford University Stanford, CA 94305-3030 January 2007 c Copyright 2007 by Claude G. Matalanis All Rights Reserved ii Abstract All bodies that generate lift also generate circulation. The circulation generated by large commercial aircraft remains in their wake in the form of trailing vortices. These vortices can be hazardous to following aircraft due to their strength and persistence. To account for this, airports abide by spacing rules which govern the frequency with which aircraft can take-off and land from their runways when operating in instrument flight rules. These spacing rules have become the limiting factor on increasing airport capacity, and with the increases in air travel predicted for the near future, the problem is becoming more urgent. One way of approaching this problem is active wake alleviation. The basic idea is to actively embed perturbations in the trailing vortex system of an aircraft which will excite natural instabilities in the wake. The instabilities should result in a wake which is benign to following aircraft in less time than would normally be required, allowing for a reduction in current spacing rules. The main difficulty with such an approach is in achieving perturbations large enough to excite instability without significantly degrading aircraft performance. Rapidly actuated segmented Gurney flaps, also known as Miniature Trailing Edge Ef- fectors (MiTEs), have shown great potential in solving various aerodynamic problems.
    [Show full text]
  • Hangar 9 Ultimate Manual
    TM® WE GET PEOPLE FLYING 46% TOC Ultimate 10-300 ASSEMBLY MANUAL Specifications Wingspan ..........................................................................................100 in (2540 mm) Length ................................................................................................110 in (2794 mm) Wing Area.........................................................................................3310 sq in (213.5 sq dm) Weight ...............................................................................................40–44 lb (18–20 kg) Engine.................................................................................................150–200cc gas engine Radio ..................................................................................................6-channel w/15 servos Introduction Thank you for purchasing the Hangar 9® 46% TOC Ultimate. Because size and weight of this model creates a higher degree for potential danger, an added measure of care and responsibility is needed for both building and flying this or any giant-scale model. It’s important that you carefully follow these instructions, especially those regarding hinging and the section on flying. Like all giant-scale aerobatic aircraft, the Hangar 9® TOC Ultimate requires powerful, heavy-duty servos. Servos greatly affect the flight performance, feel and response of the model. To get the most out of your Ultimate, it’s important to use accurate, powerful servos on all control surfaces. In the prototype models, we used JR 8411 digital servos with excellent
    [Show full text]
  • Aircraft Circular No. 103
    NATIONAL ADVISORY COifuciITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS. AIRCRAFT CIRCULAR NO. 103. THE BRISTOL II BULLDOG" (BRITISH)* - A Single-seat All-Steel Fighter. The Bristol "Bulldog" was designed on the Bristol princi­ ples of metal construction by The Bristol Aeroplane Co., Ltd. The entire structural portion is of high tensile steel (Figs. 1, 2, and 3). The airplane is powered with the IIBristolll Jupiter radial air-cooled engine, either the "Bristolll Jupiter Series VII supercharged engine, when exceptional. speed and performance at high altitudes are espeGially required, or the IIBristol" Jupiter Series VI.A engine when the normal operating area of the airplane is not expected to exceed, say, 15,000 feet. The two types of engine are entirely interchangeable when desired. The speeds maintained at altitudes with the rate of climb. and the ceiling are given in tables at conolusion of this Circular. Fu s e I age The fuselage structure comprises three ·main parts, the front and rear portions and the stern frrune. Of these, the front ~or­ tion and the stern frame are constructed of high tensile tubes and the rear portion of members built up of high tensile steel str ip in special "Bristolll sections. Front end.- This portion extends from the front bulkhead *From circular issued by The Bristol Aeroplane Co., Ltd., England. N.A.C.A. Aircraft Circular No. 103 2 to the end of the tubular longerons, and acc~mmodates the pilot1s seat, controls lli~d most of the military equipment, etc. No bracing wires are fitted in the side frames and transverse brac­ ing is fitted only in the foremost panel.
    [Show full text]
  • Numerical Investigation for the Enhancement of the Aerodynamic Characteristics of an Aerofoil by Using a Gurney Flap
    International Journal of GEOMATE, June, 2017, Vol.12 Issue 34, pp. 21-27 Geotec., Const. Mat. & Env., ISSN:2186-2990, Japan, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.21660/2017.34.2650 NUMERICAL INVESTIGATION FOR THE ENHANCEMENT OF THE AERODYNAMIC CHARACTERISTICS OF AN AEROFOIL BY USING A GURNEY FLAP Julanda Al-Mawali1 and *Sam M Dakka2 1,2Department of Engineering and Math, Sheffield Hallam University, Howard Street, Sheffield S1 1WB, UK *Corresponding Author, Received: 13 May 2016, Revised: 17 July 2016, Accepted: 28 Nov. 2016 ABSTRACT: Numerical investigation was carried out to determine the effect of a Gurney Flap on NACA 0012 aerofoil performance with emphasis on Unmanned Air Vehicles applications. The study examined different configurations of Gurney Flaps at high Reynolds number of 푅푒 = 3.6 × 105 in order to determine the optimal configuration. The Gurney flap was tested at different heights, locations and mounting angles. Compared to the clean aerofoil, the study found that adding the Gurney Flap increased the maximum lift coefficient by19%, 22%, 28%, 40% and 45% for the Gurney Flap height of 1%C, 1.5%C, 2%C, 3%C and 4%C respectively, C represents the chord of the aerofoil. However, it was also found that increasing the height of the gurney beyond 2%C leads to a decrease in the overall performance of the aerofoil due to the significant increase in drag penalty. Thus, the optimal height of the Gurney flap for the NACA 0012 aerofoil was found to be 2%C as it improves the overall performance of the aerofoil by 21%.
    [Show full text]
  • Aircraft Circulaels National Advisory Committee For
    AIRCRAFT CIRCULAELS NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS No 119 THE AVRO TRAINER AIBPLAE (ERI T IS H) A Training Biplane Washington June, 1930 NATIONAL ADVISORY COlvilvITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS. AIRCRAFT CIRCULAR NO. 119. THE "AVRO TRAINER" AIRPLANE (BRITIsH)* A Training Biplane. Although the "Trainer" has scarcely a single dimension in common with the "504," the "family likeness" is quite striking. The two most marked changes are: the different shape of the rudder and the different landing gear. This airplane is primarily intended for training purposes and the requirements of -training have quite obviously been kept prominently in view throughout the design. Large, comfortable cockpits, good view, effective windshields, wide track are some of the features (Figs. 1, 3, 4) of the "Trainer." Constructional Features One of the innovations introduced in the "Avro Trainer" is that it is of all-metal construction (with exception of the fabric covering and the wooden fairings of the fuselage) in order to conform to thb requirements of the Air Ministry. In the tt Trainer" fuselage the modern form of Avro welded tube construction is employed (Figs. 5,6). Uniform stress is not easy of attainment in any aIrcraft structure, and the welded tube fuselage is no exception. In the "Trainer," however, an approach towards it has been made , by *From Flight, My 2, 1930. N.A.C.A. Aircraft Circular No. 119 2 having the longerons of thee different diameters, largest in front, medium from cockpits to about halfway towards the tail, and smallest in the tail end. The smaller tube is inserted a short distance into the larger, and the joint is then welded.
    [Show full text]
  • A Design Study of a Proposed Four-Seat, Amateur-Built Airplane
    University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Masters Theses Graduate School 8-2003 A Design Study of a Proposed Four-Seat, Amateur-Built Airplane D. Andrew Moore University of Tennessee - Knoxville Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes Part of the Mechanical Engineering Commons Recommended Citation Moore, D. Andrew, "A Design Study of a Proposed Four-Seat, Amateur-Built Airplane. " Master's Thesis, University of Tennessee, 2003. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes/2113 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Masters Theses by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by D. Andrew Moore entitled "A Design Study of a Proposed Four-Seat, Amateur-Built Airplane." I have examined the final electronic copy of this thesis for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science, with a major in Mechanical Engineering. Dr. Gary Flandro, Major Professor We have read this thesis and recommend its acceptance: Dr. Louis Deken, Dr. Peter Solies Accepted for the Council: Carolyn R. Hodges Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School (Original signatures are on file with official studentecor r ds.) To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by D. Andrew Moore entitled “A Design Study of a Proposed Four-Seat, Amateur-Built Airplane.” I have examined the final electronic copy of this thesis for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science, with a major in Mechanical Engineering.
    [Show full text]
  • General Aviation Aircraft Design
    Contents 1. The Aircraft Design Process 3.2 Constraint Analysis 57 3.2.1 General Methodology 58 1.1 Introduction 2 3.2.2 Introduction of Stall Speed Limits into 1.1.1 The Content of this Chapter 5 the Constraint Diagram 65 1.1.2 Important Elements of a New Aircraft 3.3 Introduction to Trade Studies 66 Design 5 3.3.1 Step-by-step: Stall Speed e Cruise Speed 1.2 General Process of Aircraft Design 11 Carpet Plot 67 1.2.1 Common Description of the Design Process 11 3.3.2 Design of Experiments 69 1.2.2 Important Regulatory Concepts 13 3.3.3 Cost Functions 72 1.3 Aircraft Design Algorithm 15 Exercises 74 1.3.1 Conceptual Design Algorithm for a GA Variables 75 Aircraft 16 1.3.2 Implementation of the Conceptual 4. Aircraft Conceptual Layout Design Algorithm 16 1.4 Elements of Project Engineering 19 4.1 Introduction 77 1.4.1 Gantt Diagrams 19 4.1.1 The Content of this Chapter 78 1.4.2 Fishbone Diagram for Preliminary 4.1.2 Requirements, Mission, and Applicable Regulations 78 Airplane Design 19 4.1.3 Past and Present Directions in Aircraft Design 79 1.4.3 Managing Compliance with Project 4.1.4 Aircraft Component Recognition 79 Requirements 21 4.2 The Fundamentals of the Configuration Layout 82 1.4.4 Project Plan and Task Management 21 4.2.1 Vertical Wing Location 82 1.4.5 Quality Function Deployment and a House 4.2.2 Wing Configuration 86 of Quality 21 4.2.3 Wing Dihedral 86 1.5 Presenting the Design Project 27 4.2.4 Wing Structural Configuration 87 Variables 32 4.2.5 Cabin Configurations 88 References 32 4.2.6 Propeller Configuration 89 4.2.7 Engine Placement 89 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Explanatory Note to TCDS IM.A.120 – Boeing 737 Issue 11
    Explanatory Note to TCDS IM.A.120 – Boeing 737 Issue 11 This annex to the EASA TCDS IM.A.120 was created to publish selected special conditions / deviations / equivalent safety findings that are part of the applicable certification basis: Table of Contents: Certification Review Items: A-10: Additional requirements for import ...........................................................................................3 A. 11-02: Pressurised Cabin Loads ......................................................................................................5 A. 11-04: Emergency Landing Dynamic Loads ...................................................................................6 A. 11-05: Fatigue and Damage Tolerance ............................................................................................7 A. 11-06: Fasteners ...............................................................................................................................9 A. 11-08: Lift and Drag Device Indicator ..........................................................................................10 A. 11-11: Doors ..................................................................................................................................11 A. 11-12: Seat, Berths, Safety Belts and Harness ..............................................................................12 A. 11-13: Direct view and cabin attendant seat ..................................................................................13 A. 11-16: Equipment Systems and Installations ................................................................................14
    [Show full text]
  • Equations for the Application of to Pitching Moments
    https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19670002485 2020-03-24T02:43:10+00:00Z View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by NASA Technical Reports Server NASA TECHNICAL NOTE NASA TN D-3738 00 M h U GPO PRICE $ c/l U z CFSTl PRICE@) $ ,2biJ I 1 Hard copy (HC) ' (THRU) :: N67(ACCES~ION 11814NUMBER) 5P Microfiche (MF) > Jo(PAGES1 k i ff 853 July 85 2 (NASA CR OR TMX OR AD NUMBER) '- ! EQUATIONS FOR THE APPLICATION OF * WIND-TUNNEL WALL CORRECTIONS TO PITCHING MOMENTS CAUSED BY THE TAIL OF AN AIRCRAFT MODEL by Harry He Heyson Langley Research Center Langley Stdon, Hampton, Vk NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON, D. C. NOVEMBER 1966 . NASA TN D-3738 EQUATIONS FOR THE APPLICATION OF WIND-TUNNEL WALL CORRECTIONS TO PITCHING MOMENTS CAUSED BY THE TAIL OF AN AIRCRAFT MODEL By Harry H. Heyson Langley Research Center Langley Station, Hampton, Va. NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION For sale by the Clearinghouse for Federal Scientific and Technical Information Springfield, Virginia 22151 - Price 61.00 , EQUATIONS FOR THE APPLICATION OF WIND-TUNNEL WALL CORmCTIONS TO PITCHING MOMENTS CAUSED BY THE TAIL OF AN AIRCRAFT MODEL By Harry H. Heyson Langley Research Center SUMMARY Equations are derived for the application of wall corrections to pitching moments due to the tail in two different manners. The first system requires only an alteration in the observed pitching moment; however, its application requires a knowledge of a number of quantities not measured in the usual wind- tunnel tests, as well as assumptions of incompressible flow, linear lift curves, and no stall.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Aircraft Stability and Control Course Notes for M&AE 5070
    Introduction to Aircraft Stability and Control Course Notes for M&AE 5070 David A. Caughey Sibley School of Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering Cornell University Ithaca, New York 14853-7501 2011 2 Contents 1 Introduction to Flight Dynamics 1 1.1 Introduction....................................... 1 1.2 Nomenclature........................................ 3 1.2.1 Implications of Vehicle Symmetry . 4 1.2.2 AerodynamicControls .............................. 5 1.2.3 Force and Moment Coefficients . 5 1.2.4 Atmospheric Properties . 6 2 Aerodynamic Background 11 2.1 Introduction....................................... 11 2.2 Lifting surface geometry and nomenclature . 12 2.2.1 Geometric properties of trapezoidal wings . 13 2.3 Aerodynamic properties of airfoils . ..... 14 2.4 Aerodynamic properties of finite wings . 17 2.5 Fuselage contribution to pitch stiffness . 19 2.6 Wing-tail interference . 20 2.7 ControlSurfaces ..................................... 20 3 Static Longitudinal Stability and Control 25 3.1 ControlFixedStability.............................. ..... 25 v vi CONTENTS 3.2 Static Longitudinal Control . 28 3.2.1 Longitudinal Maneuvers – the Pull-up . 29 3.3 Control Surface Hinge Moments . 33 3.3.1 Control Surface Hinge Moments . 33 3.3.2 Control free Neutral Point . 35 3.3.3 TrimTabs...................................... 36 3.3.4 ControlForceforTrim. 37 3.3.5 Control-force for Maneuver . 39 3.4 Forward and Aft Limits of C.G. Position . ......... 41 4 Dynamical Equations for Flight Vehicles 45 4.1 BasicEquationsofMotion. ..... 45 4.1.1 ForceEquations .................................. 46 4.1.2 MomentEquations................................. 49 4.2 Linearized Equations of Motion . 50 4.3 Representation of Aerodynamic Forces and Moments . 52 4.3.1 Longitudinal Stability Derivatives . 54 4.3.2 Lateral/Directional Stability Derivatives .
    [Show full text]