l\jf\'CPiL-i'6l^ ABE No. lXU.1t NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS WARTIME REPORT ORIGINALLY ISSUED October X^hh as Advance Restricted Report lAlllf WISD-TOKREL INVESTIGATION OF CONTROL-SURFACE CHARACTERISTICS XX - PLAIN AND BALANCED FLAPS ON AN NACA 0009 RECTANGULAR SEMISPAN TAIL SURFACE By I. Elizabeth Gamer- Lan^ley Memorial Aeronautical Laboratory Langley Field, Va. UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA DOCUMENTS DEPARTMENT 120 MARSTON SCIENCE LIBRARY P.O. BOX 117011 GAINESVILLE. FL 3261 1 -701 1 USA AC A WASHINGTON NACA WARTIME REPORTS are reprints of papers originally issued to provide rapid distribution of advance research results to an authorized group requiring them for the war effort. They were pre- viously held under a security status but are now unclassified. Some of these reports were not tech- nically edited. All have been reproduced without change in order to expedite general distribution. L - i86 NACA ARR No. iJ+Ulf NATIONAL ADVISORY COmiTTKE FOR AERONAUTICS >» " ADVANCE RESTRICTED REPORT WIND-TTJNML INVESTIGATION OF COJITROL- SURFACE CHARACTERISTICS XX - PTAIN km BALANCED FLAPS ON AN NACA OOO9 RECTANGULAR SEMISPAN TAIL SURFACE By I. Elizabeth Garner SUMMARY Force-test measurements have been made in the Langley Ij.- by 6-foot vertical tunnel to determine the aerodynamic characteristics of an NACA OOO9 semifipan tall surface of rectangular plan form equipped with flaps of various nose shapes and overhangs. The flap chord was JO percent of the airfoil chord. A few tests were r.iade to determine the effectiveness of a balancing tab on various flap arrangements . The test results indicated that the slope of the lift curve was affected little by the amount of overhang and the balance nose shape but was Increased by sealing the gclp at the flap nose. At zero angle of attack, the variation of lift with flap deflection for the sealed-gap condition v;as the same as or slightly greater than for the unsealed-gap condition. The change in the hinge - moment coefficient v/ith angle of attack or v/ith flap deflection generally was mads more negative with sealing the gap. The effectiveness of the balancing tab in reducing the flap hinge-mom.ent coefficients was approxi- mately the same for both the sealed plain flap and the unsealed 55-PS^'cent-f lap-chord elliptical overhang; also, the variation of lift coefficient with tab deflection was about equal for the plain flap and for the flap with aero- dynamic balance. In three-dimensional flov/, the measui^ed values of the lift -curve slope were slightly lovjer and the measured values of the hinge -moment parameters v;ere more positive than the values of the parameters calculated from the data of previous investigations in two-dim.enslonal flow . by lifting-line theory, modified by the edge-velocity correction. Application of aspect-ratio corrections ITACA ATiR' ^lo.. Lli.Il If determined from a lifting- surface -thpory solution for an elliptical wing made the computed values of the variation of the hinge -moment coefficient witli' angle of attack very closely approach the m.easured values. INTRODUCTION The ^i-.CA is conducting an oxterisive i:\vestlgation of the aerodynamic characteristics of contrcl surl'acos in t\7o-d linens lonal and three -dir.iensional f Lew in order to provide c^esign data and to determ.me fir.p arrangements suitable fov .i^e 33 control surfaces. A sQvies of tec'-.s has been made to determine the effects of overhang, noi:e shape, and g;jp on ■■he ae^rodynaiaic charr-cteriptlc? of f.n NAOA 0009 air Toil in t>«o-dimensional i'j.O'N', the results are proi^ented in references 1 to Ij, and sur.u.iarized in reference S- Tbe present investigation consisted of tests in three-dimensional flo^.v of an NAOa OOO9 rectangular semi- span tail surface. The purpose of this investigation was to help establish a correlation between aerodynamic char- acteristics in two-dimensional and three-dimensional flow. Through the use of a rurface having constant airfoil, flap, and balance chords, only relatively simple plan- form corrections were required 'vhen approximiate correc- tions vvere used. SYMBOLS The coefficients and the symbols used in this paper are del'ined as f ollov/s ; Cl lift coefficient (L/qS) C-Q drag coefficient fD/:-i?) Cj^ p itching-moment coefficient about 0.55^ axis (M/qSc) Cji^ flap hinge-moment coefficient (Kf /Tc^'^b^'") (H NACA ARR Mo. lUlllf where L twice lift of semispan model D twice drag of semispan model M tv;ice pitching moment of semispan model Hf twice flap hinge moment of semispan model q dynamic pressure S twice area of semispan model bf. twice flap span of semispan model c chord of airfoil with flap and tab neutral c^ root -mean-square chord of flap p mass density of air V velocity and A aspect ratio b tv^/ice span of semispan model c^ chord of flap c-^ chord of overhang a angle of attack of model 5f flap deflection relative to airfoil; positive v/hen trailing edge is deflected downward 5^ tab deflection relative to flap; positive when trailing edge is deflected dov/nward k constant used in determining jet-boundary hinge- moment correction E edge-velocity correction factor (see reference 6) i^ NACA ARR >Io. Lii-Illf 'Ar-.. \ 'I^a ~ Vd'al f.f The subccri-nt catrids the parentheses indi'^atea the factor held constant in dctenrilnln,^ the rara:neter . AFPAPATTJ3, I.'T'DT^L, k'<0 T'ISTS 'Che tests vvere raade in the Langley li- by 6-fcot vert icJal tunnel (refe'^ence 7) --^'^-i-ifisd £..s discussed in reference 2. The 2-foot-chorQ by J-foot-se'.iispan ncdsl was inade of laminated nahogany and conforined to tliO di:iiens.Lons of flg-'xre 1 and to the lAGA 0009 profile, the-, stations and ordinate s of"7:hieh- are ^iven in table I. Since the tall surface h.ao a tip of revolution, thi.e tip plan forir. v;as the same as the contour of the upper and lower Giu'faces of the airfoil. The flap chord v;a3 30 percent of the airfoil chord at each spanwise station. For- the coinplete tail surface represented by the stmispan model, the aspect ratio was 3 and the taper ratio, 1. NACA ARR No. iJ+lHf 5 The plain unbalanced flap and the flaps with overhang balance are shown in figure 1. The O.J^Cf and 0.50of overhangs were tested with blunt and elliptical nose shapes. (See fig. 1 and table II.) The elliptical nose was a true ellipse faired tangent to the airfoil contou.r at the hinge axis. The gap was fixed at 0.005c and for some tests was sealed with a sheet-rubber seal. A linked balancing tab constructed of brass and having a gap of 0.001c was tested on the plain sealed flap and on the flap with O.J^c^ elliptical overhang with open gap. The tab had a chord of 0.20c£' (fig. 1) and a span RO percent of the flap semi span. The ratio of the tab deflection to the. flap deflection was -1;1. The rectangular tail surface was tested as a semispan model by mounting it horizontally in the tunnel with the inboard end adjacent to the wall of the tunnel, v>fhich thereby acted as a reflection plane (fig. 2). The model was supported entirely by the balance frame with a small clearance at the tunnel v/all so that all forces and moments acting on the model could be measured. The flow over the m.odel simulated the flow over the right semispan of a complete tail surface consisting of the test panel and its reflection mounted in an 8- by 6-foot vdnd tunnel. The flap hinge moments were obtained by measuring the amount of twist In a long flexible torque tube, one end of which v;as attached to the flap by m.eans of a linkage arrangem.snt and the other end of which extended outside the tunnel to a calibrated dial. The tests were made at a dynamic precsure of 15 pounds per square foot, which corresponds to an air velocity of about 76 miles per hour at standard sea-level conditions. The test Reynolds number was 1,14-50,000 and the effective Reynolds number of the tests was approximately 2,760, 000. f Effective Reynolds number = Test Reynolds number x Turbu- lence factor. For the Langley l\.- by 6-foot vertical tunnel, the turbulence factor is l.QJ.) It is estimated that the angle of attack was set within ±0.1° and that the flao deflection was set within ±0.2°. Jet-boundary corrections, theoretically determined according to the method given in reference 8, have been applied to the data. No corrections have been m^ade for ITACA ARR ITo. L::Illf the effsct of gap betv;een the root section and the tunnel wall or the leakage around the supporting torque tube. The over-all corrections applied (l)'j addition) to the tunnel data are as follows; /\a = 2.13i4.c;j_^ fin de£) AC L = -O.OlT^.Cn ■"tunnel AC D — O . 03>^ Lit ACpj = 0. 0072c j_ -%_^ = kCL where k is a constant dependent on the chord of the overhan/s: as follows:; %/-f k 0.09 .35 .50 0.0100 . 0078 .00S5 DISCl^ Li rSSIOLI ft Sealing the gap at the flap nose increased the slope of the lift curve Ct . (See fj^-s, 2, to 12 and table ITT.) With the gap either cealed or unsealed, the balance nose shape and the amount of overhang appear to have negligible effect upon the values of C- . ^ -'a k smnxnary of che lift effectiveness paraiiieters ag for the various, flap conf Ig-urations is given in table III. The lift effectiveness vjas greatest for^the unsealed flaps with blunt-nose overhangs; hov;ever, stall occurred at MCA ARR Fo. Ll^I-llf lower flap deflections on the "blunt nose than on the elliptical nose. ^Vlth gap sealed, the values of the lift effectiveness parameters were approxliTiately the same for all flaps except for the 0.50c-[> elliptical-nose over- hang, vjhlch had a value somewhat smaller. At zero angle of attack, the change of lift 'vith flap deflection for the sealed-gap condition was the same as or slightly greater than for the unsealed-gap condition. Hinge Moment The curves of section hinge-moment coefficient v;ere shown in reference 5 to he linear over an approximate range of angle of attack of ±5° and for flap deflections up to 15°; whereas the curves for the finite-span tail surface (figs, ? to 12) were, in general, nonlinear. ■'^lap oscillations (noted on the hinge-moment- cosfficient curves by dashed lines) occurred on some balance arrangements as a result of buffeting due to an alternately stalled flow condition. The oscillations increased with flap deflect ion^ overhang, and unsealing the gap. The elliptical-nose flap gave oscillations over a larger range of angle of attack and flap deflection than the blunt-nose flap. Since a flexible torque tube was used in measuring the flap hinge moments, the oscil- lations depend partly on the torque tube and partly on the mass balance of the flap. 3eca\ise of the heaviness of the model, the oscillations may be more severe in the wind tunnel than in flight. The hinge-moment parameters for the various arrange- ments tested are given in table III. The parameter C]^ was measured at a = 5^^ = 0° and Ch^. , between 5f = 0° and 5°- Although measured at only one point or over a small rano-e , the values of the .oarameters are useful in comparing som.e relative merits of the various balance arrangements tested. Sea].ing the gap at the flap nose, except on the plain flan, made the value of Chr- move in a negative direc- nf ^ tion; sealin.s: the gap m.ade the value of C^ move in a negative direction, except on the 0.50c^ blunt overhang. 8 MCA ARR No. iJililf The O.SOc^ overhang produced overbalance throu^^h a parb of the range of flao deflection regardless of the nose shape and gap. (See f le:s . 9 to 12 and table 111.) Overbalance occurred over a v^dder range of angle of attack and flap deflection in the section data presented in reference 5 than in the finite-span data of the present investigation. Drag Althcigh the drag coefficients cannot be considered absolute because of an unknown tunnel correction, the relative values may be independent of tunnel effects. The drag coefficients as functions of angle of attack at various flap deflections are shown in figures 5 to 12. The minimum drag coefficient was obtained with the plain sealed flap and had tne value of 0.0110. At large flap deflections for positive angles of attack, the drag coef- ficients generally increased with increase in overhang and were higher for the blunt nose than for the elliptical nose . — The drag coefficients are plotted in figure 13 against the lift coefficients for the O.Jtc^ blunt and elliptical overhangs, sealed and unsealed, with a = 0° and 5.p ranging from 0° to 30°. for all these arrange- ments, the drag coefficients were the same at small lift coefficients and flap deflections. At large flap deflec- tions, the elliptical nose gave .nore lift than the blunt nose with approximately the same aj-icunt of drag. Pitching I.Ioaent The pitching-iuoffiont parameter's /C,^ \ and /C,^ N (table III) Indicate the position of the aerodynamic center of the airfoil v/ith respect to the 0.55c point, v'jhen the lift was varied by changing the angle of attack -with the flap neutral, the aerodynariic center was located at the 0.22c ± 0.01c station for t"ic various flap arrange- ments tested. The aerodynam.ic center of lift due to flap deflection was located at the O.^lc ± 0. Ol;.c station, but there was no systematic variation with chc-nges in balance arrangement; the point moved rearward approximately l8 percent with a decrease from infinite aspect ratio to an aspect ratio of 3. MCA ARR Fo. Lklllf Tab Characteristics Previous investigations have shown that the tab characteristics of a balanced flap are similar to those for a tab on a plain flap and are generally independent of flap nose shape; hence, only a United investigation of tab characteristics has been made. This investigatiou consisted of tests of a balancin,c tab with — - = -1 on the plain sealed flap (fig. lb.) and the unsealed 0.35Cf elliptical overhang (fig. IS ) • The value of Cy,^ , vifhich shows the effectiveness ^«t of the tab in reducing the flap hinge -moment coefficients, was approximately the same for both flaps tested; the value was -O.OO5 for the sealed plain flap and -0,00l4. for the unsealed O.J^Cf. overhang. As was expected, the use of the balancing tab resulted in smaller increments of lift when the flap was deflected. The variation of lift coefficient with tab deflection ?ras approximately the same for both the plain flap and the 0.55Cf overhang. The overbalance of the flap with O.SOc^ overhang, which has been previously discussed, could be overcome by the use of a differentially operated unbalancing tab deflected in the sane direction as the flap. Comparison with Data in Tv/o-Dimensional Flow The lift and hinge -raoment parameters of the airfoil ■ and flap v>fere computed from data in tv.'o-dimensional flow according to the method of the lifting-line theory pre- sented in reference 5- i-dge-velocity corrections to the lifting-line theory for the effect of the chord (refer- ence 6) v;ere applied in the computation of Cr v^ilth the substitu.tlon of values for E for the elliptical plan form of the same aspect ratio, where E is the ratio of the semiperimeter to the span. Corrections for streamline curvature for an elliptical plan form 'were applied to C, ^a (reference 9)° These m.ethods of computing C^ and C]^ 0- fa are believed to be the most accurate methods available at the present time. 10 IIACx^ ARR No. L^Illf Ths lift and hinge -mor.ient parameters, both the measured v?lues and the values ccTipiited from section data, are r;;iven in table III. The medium-nose overhang referred to in reference 5 ^13-"^ the saine nose phape as the elliptical- nose overhang tested in tlie pre^^ent investigation. Tunnel corrections, theoretically determined in a manner similar to the method presented in reference 8, v;ere applied to the section hinge-mom.ent coefficients of reference 5 before the parameters were calciilated. The calculated slope of the lift curve generally v/as slightly higher than the measixred slope. The values of the secticn lift effectiveness parameter a^ for the plain flap and for the flap with O.J^Cf overhang agreed reasonably, well with the finite-span values, but the section values for the flap with 0.50c^ overhang v/ere more negative than the finite-span values. Because the flap chord was a constant percentage of the airfoil chord, no corrections were necessary for aspect ratio. The computed and measured flap hinge-moment parameters f are compared in ficure 16. The values of 0%-, and C-u computed by use of lifting-line theory v;ere more negative than the m.easured values. Anplication of additional aspect-ratio corrections, determined from a lifting- surface-theory solution for an elliptical wing (reference 9)» made the computed values of C]^ more positive so as to approach more nearly the measured values of Ch„ . Aspect- ratio corrections determined by lifting-surface theory are not yet available for Cj-^ f5f> COMCLIJSIOITS Tests have been made in throe -dimensional flow of an MCA OOO9 rectangular semispan tail surface equipped with a plain flap and with balanced flaps of blunt and elliptical nose shapes. The flap chord was 50 percent of the airfoil chord. The results of the present tests and a comparison with previously published results of tests of the same airfoil in two-dimensional flow indi- cated the following conclusions: NACA ARR No. Ll^Illf 11 1. Sealing the gap at the flap nose increased the slope of the lift curve, but the balance nose shape and the amount of overhang had little effect on the s-lope. 2. The effectiveness of the flap { ; was greatest for the unsealed blunt-nose overhangs, but stall over the flap occurred at lower flap deflections on the blunt-nose than on the elliptical-nose flaps. At zero angle of i:ttaclz, the variatloii of lift with flap deflec- tion rejiained the =3ame or incx'eased vi/lth sealing the gap at the flap nose. 5. Sealing the gap at the flap nose made the varia- tion of the flap hinge -moment coefficient v>fith angle of attack or with flap deflection generally move in a nega- tive direction. J. The 50-P®3^cent-f lap-chord overhang was over balanced over a part of the flap deflection range regard- less of the nose shape and the gap at the flap nose. 5. When the lift was varied by changing the angle of attack at a flap deflection of 0°, the aerodynamic center was located at approxlnatelv the 22-percent-chord station for all arrangements tested. The aerodynamic center of lift dxie to flap deflection (the aspect ratio being 3) was located at or near the 51-P^-^cent-chord station and shovifed slight but not systematic variation with balance changes. •6. At large flap deflections for positive angles of attack, the drag coefficients generally increased vrith an increase in overhang and were higher for the blunt nose than for the elliptical nose; at large flap deflec- tions, the elliptical nose gave more lift than the blunt nose with approximately the same amount of drag. 7. The effectiveness of the tab in reducing the flap hinge-moment coefficients was approximately the same for both the sealed plain flap and the unsealed Jfj-percent- flap-chord elliptical overhang; also, the variation of lift coefficient with tab deflection was approximately the same for both these flap arrangements. 3. The calculation of the finite-span lift and hinge- moment parameters from data in two-dimensional flow 12 MCA ARR ITo. lAlllf according to the method of llftlnj-lire theci'-y, modified by erire-^c], ocity corrections, showed that the values of the laft-ci^rve slope v>;ere sli,'ihtly ]ii£her and the hin,"e- mo.nont Darameters .vere vaove negative than the value? iixeasTTSd ?n three-diruensioral i'^O'-v. Application of aspect--^at3 o coi-rectlcns determined frc:n a liftin^-ruxf acO' theory solution for an elliptical plan forrr made tho coiiinuted valaos of the variation of the hirge-ivicr^iont coefficient with anr?:]e of attack triore positive r.o as to apox'oai.ch ir.cre nearly the Kieas'ired values. Laagley I'ciTorial Aeronautic^ Nat i oral ix^vi^or^^ Oorv.it tee fo?" Aeronautics Ian-]cy Picld, Va , , ' NACA ARR Wo. iJilllf IJ REFERENCES 1. Soars, Richard I.: Wind-Tunnel Investigation of Control-Surface Characteristics. I - Effect of Gap on the Aerodynamic Characteristics of an ITACA 0009 Airfoil with a 50-percent-Chord Plain Flap. NACA ARR, June 191^1 = 2. Sears, Richard I,, and Hoggard, H. Page, Jr.: Y/ind- Tunnel Investigation of Control-Surface Character- istics. II - A Large Aerodynaiaic Balance of Various Nose Shapes with a 50-Percent -Chord Flap on an NACA 0009 Airfoil. NACA ARR, Aug. 191^1. 3. Araes, Milton B., Jr.: Vflnd-Tunnel Investigation of Control-Surface Characteristics. Ill - A Small Aerodynamic Balance of Various Nose Shapes Used with a 50~Percent~Chord Flap on an NACA OOO9 Airfoil. NACA ARR, Aug. I9I1I. i^. Ames, Milton B., Jr., and East-^nan, Tonald R., Jr.: ^''iind -Tunnel Investigation of Control-Surface Charac- teristics. IV -• A Medium Aerodynamic Balance of Various Nose Shapes Used with a 30-Percent-Chord Flap on an I-taCA OOO9 Airfoil. NACA ARR, Sept. I9I4.I. 5. Sears, PMchard I.: Wlnd-Tunnel Data on the Aerodynamdc Characteristics of Airplane Control Surfaces. NACA ACR No. 3L08, 19i;-3. 6. Jones, Robert T.: Correction of the Lifting-Line Theory for the Effect of the Chord. NACA TN No. 817, 19il. 7. Wenzinger, Carl J., and Plarris, Thomas A.: The Vertical Vvind Tunnel of the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics. NACA Rep. No. 367, I93I. 8. Swanson, Robert S., and Toll, Thomas A.: Jet-Boundary Corrections for Reflection-Plane Models in Rectan- gular Wind Tunnels. NACA AFiR No. 3E22 , 19lf5 . 9. Svmnson, Robert S., and Gillis, Clarence L.: Limita- tions of Lifting-Line Theory for Estimation of Aileron Hinge-Moment Characteristics. NACA CB No. 3L02, 191^3. NACA ARR Fo. iJ+Illf 14 TABLE I ORDINATES FOR NACA OOO9 AIRFOIL (All dimensions in percent chord) Station j Ordinate s Upper 1 Lower 1.25 2.5 5.0 7.5 10 15 20 25 I|0 50 60 70 60 90 95 100 100 1.1^2 1.96 2.67 5.15 3.51 4.01 il.^0 i^.50 i+.55 3.97 3.I12 2.75 1.97 l.OQ .66 (.10) -1.96 -2.67 -5.15 -3.51 -li.oi -U.^-6 -^.50 -U.35 -3.^7 -3.1^-2 -2.75 -1.97 -1.09 -.60 (-.10) L.E. radius = O.89 NATIONAL ADVISORY COMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS MAC A ARR No. iJ+Illf 15 'ABI'I II E LL I PT I C A L - OVERII A FCt PR CF I U'] (All dlmonsions In percent chord) o.55cf station overhang Ordinate o.50cf overhang station Ordinate .15 .55 .88 .50 .97 .85 1.26 1.00 1.33 1,65 1.68 2,00 1.79 2 . 85 l.'^o 1 1 3.00 2.00 5. 85 2.15 l+.co 2.30 I1..85 2.30 5.00 2 . 1^5 3. 85 2.]|2 7.00 2.61^. , 6. 85 2.52 1 9.00 2.71 8.85 10.65 2 , 6/.1. 2.70 12.85 2.72 L.E. rad: us = 1.05 L.L. radi us ^ 1.23 ^■ s o 1 1 1 >' 1 i i i 1 1 ! © o © © ■0 1 o CO CO 00 ^o O CO o f— ^O O CTn rH © UJ W rH .H C\J rvl rH IC oj CM nj K> (\j (« * oc « rH O rH rH rH rH rH rH rH rH rH rH rH rH i 1 o s O a C t ■a a o ^ s O m O 1 l' 1* • • • 1 1 t 1 oil & 8 o 1 1 1 p o •d © < 1 O 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 > • Hi M << S 3 ■a c , o Eh (J) O vo 1 C- rr\ s -s-B 1 rH O so OJ © o -p a -^ o n O 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 « o cH s M o 1 1 © •O C 1 4J (0 *H o o KV 1 K\ f-l J- ON r- H rH iH i 3 ?i^ £> D 5 .f ^ 3 pi 0*J 4^ C- .H g, t, O 01 ^ O 1 O O o o o 1 o o o o 'd • O 1 O O o o o 1 o o o o a LTN ij ■o oj S 4h Q) TJ • • • 1 • • • • p \„^_^^ > o n O 1 r l' I 1 1 1 9 t O . © £ o I 1 - — — » O NO NO c < ■a © © o o ^ in S 31 8 o o O LTN \0 KN ON o © u H ^§ rH CM K\ O O O CD O O O o c o c; © H M K d oj o o o o o o o o o o o © © © © © •a: ») > o r r i" 1* o 1 i* a O S 1 © © s CQ ■o c! 1 Fh < V o CO 1 o _^ 00 O LTV 1 CM K^ O rH Vl e^ Oi IB C g •H 01 ur* 1 "^ -sO \0 ^O ITS 1 C^ t- D- NO a . 1 • . • • • B n CQ rH 0] tt O ca O 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 a c 43 (X4 0] -iJ ^ 0) -CI > J3 0) 1 t » -d -d o •rt o «rt O o > o 1 43 43 o O O a hr\ -o £ ■a © © • o^ o (h u 43 o ^-^^ n r— 1 \3 ir\ ^o \o r- CM CO vo nx> ir\ NO _d- ir. CO CTN _j- v3 NO iTN ITN o © 43 01 a d r r r 1 r 1 1 1 1 1 1 Dd o > 1 >> t>» H o s 43 +3 6 ■a c 1 1 O o £ CO © o C^ 1 ITN iTv rH ir\ OJ 1 NO dj NO pH 1 iTN _d- IfN uS 1 o o o o O o i © 4J B -i-i ol 3 3 O *J « 'T rH a.fH CI 01 S ITS 1 ITN ITN O 1 o o & &£- rH © r-t O iJ • 1 • • > > o ^o > O m 1 1 © © 43 ^'^ o t 1 •d © w 01 Tl © ■d © o a s ^*-.-_-^ ^§ ir\ ir\ ^ ^ O ITS O rH _d- O _zf CM Xi ^ ITN LTn ITN LTN LTN l/> UA IfN l/N lTn LTn l^^ 4-> 43 F^ s m r-i a a © > o o o o o o o O O O O O "S ^ » •p c 45 K © •a: o ' * ' * * * * ' ' * * (I* s cd 43 (d ♦3 •H O 43 © H rH i~i r-i f-i a) Cd P. c o. 01 C0 (0 0) Cd -d T3 © O 01 o o o o o 09 H ■« C C C -P 43 ^ *H *H +S 4J «H ^ C c c © C 13 *H *H «H fl « td d p C 4:> 4i 7 a a +> C C 4J 43 a 3 p a a o o in u 0! •«H •H rTN a iH O r-i r-i r~i T~i iH ^ •H •H rH rH -rt *H 43 43 © 03 n a, p- (L, tn CQ W .H rH CQ CD rH rH O O o tl en o fH W M i-i r-i © © C H W m w u « O 3 n -d -d o -d o -d o o -d O T3 o s a © 3 • 5 OJ © LTn © LTN © LT* ITn © ITN O ITN O o O rH O i-l i-t O iH O rH O O rH O rH O ^4 h ^ at »-t aj cd O (C O aJ O O OJ O OJ O -in ^H a > o © ID • 0) • Q) . © . © . o e/: CO o (0 O CO o O (y5 O CO O -o ■d ■a ■^ r^' © © © © o *>i tl O rH O O o o o rH O O O O 43 43 I 43 O |iO 1 3 3 P & t a • e a 1 1 1 li-\ ITN li~N ITN LTN O O O O CO 1 1 I K> rr\ rO\ KN M~\ LP* LTn LTN LfN o o u o © O OJ E O C o -d © ! ! ! o 1 NACA ARR No. L4Illf Pig II -<5 ^ -3^ro- ,>Z = 5 ■ -Wi5=-='3- J ll NACA ARR No. L4Illf Fig, si ^ I J CV2 NACA ARR No. L4Illf Fig. 3a /4 IZ 1.0 .8 0^ .6 •\ -K ^ .4 43 '•V VJ S .2 ^ >>l t2 -.4 -.6 -8 -/^ -/2 ,^ ^^ [a eg/ O ^ A 5 D 10 t> 15 OZ5 <130 'V ^ ^ :r' ^ \ ve •^ / K h^ 'if^ V / N / r1 r# / ^ r V ^/ '/ ^M / / /^ \ A r / >^ / / / ^ ^ / / / L/ / / ^ V / / / /I / / A / / / / / A / f, / / / / / / < Y / K / A / / / / E- V / i / / A / / / Y / / / /" / ,^ / A / / / / / / <^ 1^ f/ / / / / / / / / /' / / / / / /. / / Q / / 5 / \ ya / / / \ y / x !(' / \ y COMnI nEEi )RAE1 ]NAUT 3 /2 /6 -2^ -/<5 -/2 -& -4 '^ e> Angle of afiack , OC, deg ^igure 3.- Aerody/iamic characfen'sfics of a recfangu/ar sem is pan "tail surface. Plain flcfp-, sealed gap; 6^=0° 0.30c f/ap; A^3 . NACA ARR No. L4Illf Fig. 3b .06 .04-^ oS o -20 -16 -IZ -Q -^ ^ 6 IZ Anqle of affack. OC, deg Figure 3- Confinuea . NACA ARR No. L4Illf Fig. 3c -20 -/6 V2 -6 Angle of Figute 3.- Concluded. -^ O ^ e> /2. 16 attack f OC , deg NACA ARR No. L4Illf Fig. 4a 1.4- 1.2- 1.0 .6 G* .6 •\ -K ^ ^ «J >. . 4) C» V) 'K V •■^ ^ -z -4 -.6 -1.0 1 A s Rr y A / r\ id&g) G A 5 D 10 t>/5 V ZO <>ZS <] 30 {deql ^y V ^ r \ y^/ / ^ ' \ /p? V / ^ /' \ A V '^ X / /^ \ /. '/ J^P / / ;' / /. ^y / 'P / / / ■" // V / / { / / / i^ (A / / /y / // ^ / / / / r J r/ / / /■ / / / ,/ V ^ / / i / J y\ \X y / / / / J V / A / / / ^ ^/ a K y / *f / / / / p / / ^— / / / / / / <^ / ,/ / / / / ^ ^^ / / / / \ f^ / y / \ / /^ \y r \ C NAT ilNAL LEFOF lUVISU AEROI AUTICS iz le -20 -16 -IZ -6-^0^6 Angle of aitack , OCy deg Figure f .- Aerodynant/c chat-acfer/s^/cs of a recfangular semi span fail surface. Plain flap'^ 0.005c gap) S^ = 0] 0.30 c f/ap; A =3. NACA ARR No. L4Illf Fig. 4b OQ -20 -16 Figure -f - -/£ -Q -4 4 d 12 Anctje of ,ciHach, a, dea Continued . 77:3 .04 it: -it -zo-" NACA ARR No. L4Illf Fig. 4 'ZO -16 -IZ -6 -4 ^ 8 IZ 16 Angle of aHack^ 0( , deg F/gure f.- Concluded. NACA ARR No. L4Illf Fig. 5a 1^ f /.z 1.0 .5 'o .6 o ^ _ -.4 -.6 -.& -ID IZ /6 -20 -/G -IZ -& -4- O ^ Q /\ngle of atiack, ffi , deg Figure S .- Ae roJ yna/v/c characfe ri s f i cs of a recfatigu/ctr sem /span /^/'/ surface. Flap \^/fh 0.55 Cf blunf overhang; sealed gap , <^t = 0} 0.30c flap; A=3. NACA ARR No. L4Illf Fig. 5b D& .04 % ^ •\ •H^ n s: to (J -.04 ifc «) o o -08 ■i-. C «J 5 -IZ o 5 ?>^ V- -.l(p -zo Q. -IZ -6-^0 ^ S /Z /6 _ ^ Angle of aiiack. cc ^ deg Figure 5 .- Coni^ inuca. NACA ARR No. L4Illf Fig. 5c o ZO .16 .IZ .Od .04 -.04 %-06 l-JZ ^-,16 -ZO <-. £4 -.ad tJ2 -2D -IG -IZ -5-4 4 Q Angle of affach , OC^ deg /v^t/re 5.- Cone / uded . NACA ARR L4Illf Fig. 6a 1.4- IZ 1.0 .8 .6 -o 4- «; »i •■X Z s V 0) o s. s. -z -.4- -.6 -a -1.0 i (^^ 1 \aeg/ O A 5 □ 10 t> 15 VZO <] 30 ,^ >? / dc, F / / 3 ''/ / ^ }^* / )" A y \ J / / / / J / \ /^ Y y ii Y / A / Y^ :^ / / / / ^' A / / .5 / tf K / / /' / / / 30\ /Oct ^ t/ / / / / / / /° / / / / / 1^ / / / / ,t; /' ,/ / / 1 y,< / IS r / J X y ^^ I' / / '.•^ / A / ^ o- V / / / / / / / / / / y / N / / / / / 1 V / / / / \/ A / / \ / / \ / lONA! .UMSI IfiT ^ 0MMI1 [£EfO UERC Munc s d iz lb -ZO -16 -IZ -8-^0 4 Angle of aifach, 15 V 2^ 025 <] 3^ \^ ^ Jw / / \ A W/ ^ / \ ?^ V V" ; / / '\ / 9 r / / ' [/' / / ^ V / / / / / i r / / / / fi / ,.< ^ / / / / r .^ r A ^ / f ,^ ^ / / / / / • k / / ^ / / I /' .<' x^ / 1-/ r / / < / A y / » / / / / / IK z / / y / / / / / ^ M / V / / / / / r V / / / / / ^ / ! V , / / / / / / C Y / / ;: / A, / / / S*^ / \ /' \ / COM NATION lintE W AD FOR A mm mm. rics IZ /6 -ZO -le -IZ -& -4 4- 6 Angle of ci'fl' oich ^(XL , deaf Figure 7 .- Aerod ynam ic characierist/cs of a rectangular sern is pan fail surface. Flap with 0.3Scf cll/pt/caJ ove rhan^ ; sealed goipi Oi^ = 0; 0.30c flap; A=3. NACA ARR No. L4Illf Fig. 7b .09 -20 -16 -IZ -a -4 ^ (3 /£ IS Angle of aHacA , OC , deg Figure 7 .- Conri irUed ■ NACA ARR No. L4Illf Fig. 7c t26 -.32 Flap -osc i llci flon rangG ^M I STTOK nW SORT" COMMnEE OR AE lONAUllCS -::^t^_ Figu -20 -IS -/^ -b -4 ^ 6 IB Angle of afiack ^ OC , c/sg re 7.- Concluded. IG NACA ARR No. L4Illf Fig. 8a O' (J St u o 1.4 I.Z 1.0 .(3 .6 .t -Z -4 -.6 -lO -ZO -lb ■ -IZ -d -4 4 6 It l(b Angle of affack, OCj deg Figure 8 .- Aerody namic characferisfics of a reciangular se/n Is pan fall surface. Flap w/fh 0.S5 c^ elliptical overhang; 0.005c gap; 6t=0°; 0.30 c flap; A = 3. 6 f - — ■ [a eg J O A 5 □ 10 > /5 ^ ZO 025 30 / -/ \ / V > / V ?\ ^ / ^ > / / / {^ ^ / / / / A z ' / ^ / / y A A f/ / / / —r/. / V ^ A / / / / / A 6f (dkg) ^ ■/' / ; / / c / / "^ / / / / / / / .4"/ y / / ^ / / / / ) >, / y / / ,/ V\ < V / / / / A 9 / / r ^ /' } / / d / / / -15 / / / / / v } / V / 1 \ f / JO / / ' V / / / 3 / > A / / .0 / r — ' M NAT MMin )NAL IFOR IDVISC AERON Y WTICS NACA ARR No. L4Illf Fig. 8b .o u Q O -ZO -IS -IZ -d -'f 4 d /2 Angle of ai-tack y OC , deg rigcii^e. a.- Conf/iiued. NACA ARR No. L4Illf Fig. 8c ./6 ./Z j06 m > vj •» -m •>^ V) > -08 S *< «) Q o -./z -w ^ -ye ^ o \ -zo « ^> s; -2^ <^ ^■ -'^H •i: rJZ 736 -.4-0 Flap -oscillaiion range ^- 2jO -/6 -/Z -8 -4^ O 4- 8 An^/e of attach f OC, oieg Figure 8 .- Concluded- /Z /6 NACA ARR No. L4Illf Fig. 9a 1.2 1.0 .d .6 hT ^ ^ » "-S. o 2 s* 15 V 20 <^ 25 ^ -V \A |A b /^ V t ^_ h^ ./ ^ / / / p ^ ^u ^ // / / / ,/ ^y V / / / 2 y / A / > f / / dr / ;> / / / (d^<^. / J^ / / a / f ^ / / i / AM 7^ / / / / .^ 7 A b / / / A r \ ^ / / 1 / / / / 7 \ ^ // / / / >H r / y / / G -tr- y / / P / A > / J / \ / \ /' CO nATII (MIHE NAL i LFOR )VIS>UK hERON; UTICS /2 /6 Angle of aifach , o: , deg Figure 9 .- Aerody/iamic characfaris-^/cs of a reef ang u lar semispan fail surface, f^/ap wifh O.SOcf blunf overhang ; sealed ^cip ^ ^t~^) 0.30c flap; A = 3. NACA ARR No. L4Illf Fig. 9b m 04- 5 01 z04-^ o u r/^| ■ r it -20 -16 f/gure 9 ■ -IZ -Q -^ 4 6 IZ /(, ^ Angle of, affack , OC , c/eg ComT I'nue a . NACA ARR No. L4Illf Fig. 9c 2.4 20 J6 \^6 O ^ ^^ 'Z4 (a eg J O A 5 □ 10 > 15 V ZO O 75 \ \ \ \ \ \\ V-^ ^ \ \ \ S -^ _^- \ /r. \\ 6. "- r-^ \^ \ id^ \ ^ -o- ti — H -^ V -u— ■^ ""//J \ t~«^ :^ "T~ ^ — tf X^ -A k ^ -^ N \ \ **--, ^ — _ \ ■3 v ^ o-o. -C Sft ^ V \ w-* ^ o ^ ^ "^ — \ \ "N N^ \ \ 1 \ s, \ fl. V. \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \, \ S5 \ \ s l-J k / ^~^ -V \ s ^ ^ ^ ^6 v^ ~-~ '-?.( / ■V ^. ^v ^- ~^ . , / l-lap-oscill ation range ■^ ^ ■ • ^^ ^- ^S- rk c NA OMMIT lOKAL t£FO AUVI» JAERO UUTIC 1 F ia u ■€0 -/S -/a -6 -4 4 & /Z /6 Angle of afiacif y OC , deg re S '- Concluded. NACA ARR No. L4Illf Fig. 10a 1.0 .8 ^ .5 o -Z -vi _. ■4- -6 (deg) O A 5 □ 10 /5 V ZO C>25 ^f~ 7 t,/ / n y :/ < A \ / r / ) ^ 1^ ^ / / A ^ y / / / / / / / id^g) / '\ y y / / A i V / / / / f> V rC / / / / / } ?/ / / / A / ^^ b V / •i / /" /p A ■J' / / t"—^ / / / / / / 9 ■ / / / ,s / / ^ 7 ^ / / / J -sr / / / c , / / /^ / \ d / / \ / / >■ / / / c NAI )MMIT UNAL EEFO AUVIbL AERO KT lAUTIC -1.0 -ZO -/6 -/Z -d -4- 4. 6 /Z Angle of a/fctcM ,00, dcg F/gure /O .- Aerodynamic char ac fert sf ics of feci a ngu la n sem I span iail surface. Flap 0.50 Cf blutif overhang; 0.005 c gap-, S^^O; 0.30 c flap ; /I-3. /6 a wifh NACA ARR No. L4Illf Fig. 10b Od 5 <;j .0^ ri ~K ^ t) s^ "^ -01- o •v» -.06 ^ Xs 5 O -JZ 5 1 ^ t -.16 ^ -10 -10 -/a Figure 10. -IZ -8 -1- ^ a IZ 16 ^ Anq/e of attack, CC , deq NACA ARR No. L4Illf Fig. 10c ^0 ./6 ./Z ^ /5 C>>25 <1 30 / ^ "7 / / A ^. y. k V A ^ y / / \ ■^ / / / / >^ / [ /■ r /' / / /" V 16 / / / \ / / ,5 / / w -^ n / 9 / P \ / ( NA' JMMIT lONAL E£FO ADVISC AERO RY lAUTIC 'ZO IZ /6 '16 -/Z -6-4046 Angle of aHack, (X , deg Figure //.- Aerodynamic characf erisiics of ci reciangular semis pan iail surface. Flap with 0.50 Cf elliptical overhang -f sealed gap; St'O-, 0.50c flap ; A = 3. NACA ARR No. L4Illf Fig. lib r- ., ^^n,^^<^ of, a Hack, CC . deg Figure //. - Coaf^inued. ^ ^ :i NACA ARR No. L4Illf Fig. lie Z4 20 .16 .IZ ^.(98 ^ .? 0^ r/6 "^-TD t2^ 1 6 f O A 5 D 10 ^15 ^ZO OZ5 30 7 1 \ ■ V NAT DNAL C( MMin ;E fOf wviso AFRflf Y AllTip \ y^ v -r-^ " i U ^fr \ ^— -^ \ r ci V, \ f/' t s ' \ ^ ~C- \ :fr-^ -ft 1 \ ideg ^ \ '^-^ -#H IB -E>* -^ r^ L . 5 ^ 0^ ^ Q~— <3' I ^ \ ^^ J- 10^ ■" VJ \ A \ \ \ i— - --& •/c ^ N \, \ \ \ H, \ 'A ^it> \ I \ ^ ^, 3 \ \ \ > \ \ ^~. ff' ^• % < \ >< \ \ -^20^ V o — — s>- ~^Z5- >> r'^ k. 7^ <1 — - ^v 1 1 1 1 1 1 " FIcfo -n'icHlaiinn rant ^ ^ IZ Angle of a-^fac k , oc , deg Figure II.- Con dud e d . 16 NACA ARR No. L4Illf Fig. i2a lA 12 1.0 .8 .6 'J ^ •\ A- -♦^ c: .2 ^ ^ ^ -z '4- -6 -.6 [aegj G ^ A 5 □ /l9 > /5 V 20 025 <1 30 .-^ \ -^ / ^ A ^ A • < / 3 /^ V* / ^ ^ T- \ ^ ^ ? n / / \ • y^ '^ 1^ If / / -* / y • / / r / / / ■1^ ^ / / / / /' < V =5^; ^z- ^ ^ ? / / / / / Id ^ / / / / / / rf/ / / / / / ^ / ^ / / / / / / ./ ^ / 4 ^ / ^^ /• 1 / > / / A / / / / 4 / / / / / / It Ang/e of attack, (X , deg Figure /Z.- Aerody na rni c characferis-fics of a recfangt^/ar sem i s pan fa// surface. F/crp wifh OSOcf clliptica/ overhang; 0.005c gap; 6^*0; 0.30 c f/ap i A^3. NACA ARR No. L4Illf Fig. 12b 08,^ ^ «> V .04^ V *>». o OC V _ o -04^ ■v> s: -03^ ^ o -/£? Cr, c: -20 Figui re ^ Anaje IZ- Conimue of a^^acM, (X , dcg d . NACA ARR No. L4Illf Fig. 12c >^ 24 20 .16 .It .06 D4- « I 6 f {a eg) ^ A 5 □ 10 t> /5 V 2D OZ5 < 30 '\ 1 \ <\ \ \ " \ \1 K Hr M* \ 'eg 1 °S \ \ \ ic ; ^ ^ ^ ^^ rrr== d ^ ^ 26? F -o- ) T ' ~l — ili- \ 10 ^ ^^ ?.5 id^f^ ^^ J^ 7, N \ /, y?ci ^, L/ r \ /. us / / / \ •fK /' ^ / / y / A 7 / y ^ / <] 30 / / ^/ / / / / (f / 1 ^ / / / / / / 7 Y / / / / / / ^ / / / / / 'x / / / / / / / < A / / / / / /; / / / / / V / / / / / A / / / / / / / *s y u ,/ / / / / 8 ^ k/ / ^ /' / / / V y / / / / ^ ^ ./I d \ / » ^ / 1 / / 1 / e co:. NAilU MIHE lAL A fOR* lSONA ITICS -ZA -ZO 12 16 -16 -/2 -6-4 4 6 An^/e of aHackjOCp deg Figure /-f-.-Aerodyna mlc characferisiics of a rectangular semis pan fail surface . Plain flap-^ sealed gap:, dS^/dSf = -1 , 0.30c flap ; A = 3. NACA ARR No. L4Illf Fig. I4b s: .12 « •■n^ u .10 s.. (0 c> .Ob ^ <0 I. .06 Q 1) o I o -20 -16 -IZ -8 Figut-e /-f .- Conrinued. ■4- 4- 6 /Z /6 f aHack , oc , deg NACA ARR No. L4Illf Fig. 14c -Z4 ~Z0 -16 -/Z -& -4 O 4 e> Angle of atfach , oc , deg F/^Lire /^ -Conc/u de d. /Z /6 NACA ARR No. L4Illf Fig. 15a C C: « it: r" (deg) O A 5 □ 10 ^ 15 ^ ZO OZ5 <] 30 ^ .^ X ^ ^ A ^ r ■ > A '/ ,/ / \ / y / / y A l^' b ^ / V .P" / / Y / ^9 1 A ^ / / / / V [a A / / A y / / ?? y / / / / / / y '^b' / r / p' / / / k. A ?(( / / / / y A y / 2 / A / ,/ y / / / '5. }" /' / o ^ <^ (f / / y / / '>,/ / / / > / / / ^(r / / /^ Y / V / / / ^ Y d / — d / /' / / / V / / 1 k ( OMMIT lONAL ItfO ma tAERO r lAUTIC » /6 /£ / 15 ^ ZO 015 <] 30 _M, ^1 ^ s\\ r,nM» mm ITTFF iL AD( "flRflf ISORY mm IGS \k fe fc^ ■:f-~. <^ 6f ieg I ^ ^ L. ""Oi - A {c ; 1 \ ^ ^ ■L?S M ro-x toe: =^ -0^ -fV \ "^ ^ ^ M "^ ^^ ;;^ "^ \ o >s "^ ^ \0. k ^ \ ^ ^v ^£Cf^ \ "to ^ N \ \ \ ^ ^ ■~>i; ^ >rt< \\ \ N, ~~~ ^25---. r-~ -^ ^ \\ N X 1 I N ^ \ \ 1 1 ric ip- ■05 Cih 'af ion rt 7nt ie 4 si 4 j(( ■>^ N N, ^ ■ ) 1 -24 -20 -16 -12 -6 -^ O ^ 6 /Z IG Arxjle of affacky OC , deg Figure 15 .- Cone lud ed . NACA ARR No. L4Illf Fig. 16a -oot -.006 S..008 "^ .OOf E//Jpi iccil nose □ MeasKred Computed from section da ta edge - ve loc ity correc t/o/is W/6A Computed from section data w/th/ edge- ve/oc ity and sireamline-:^ cur vat are correc t/ons -.oof- -.008 -.oiz .1 .Z .3 Overhang ^ c^ /Cf (a) Sealed gap. Figure 16.- Variat } on of flap hinge-momeni para meters with overhang for a rectangular semispan tail surface . O.30c flap; A = 3. NACA ARR No. L4Illf Fig. 16b -oot -006 .008 $ ^ •^ c * 5 .ooi- -OOi- -.008 tical /7osaE\ jy.oo/c ^a^El Measured Computed from section data wHh edge-ve/ocity corrections Computed from section data with edqe- velocity and stream/in e- curyature correc t ions Fig ure V .Z 3 Overhang f c^/Cf (b) 0.005' c 0a p. 16.- Con c/uded. UNIVERSITY 0';,,')h9{jj',|?/|ii|| 3 1262 08106 514 5