r AD-AIlS0 324 ARNOLD ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT CENTER ARNOLD AFS TN F/6 14/2S TING I NTERFER ENCE EFFECTS ON THE SOM AIRCRAFT AS DETERMINED RT--ETCIU)OCT 80 F B CYRAN. M J CHANEY

UNCLASSIFIED AEDC-TSR-80-P70 N

11&11.25 '.4

AEDC-TSR-80-P70

LEVELI,_STING INTERFERENCE EFFECTS ON THE SDM AIRCRAFT AS______DETERMINED BY MEASUREMENTS OF

DYNAMIC STABILITY DERIVATIVES ANDBASE PRESSURE FOR MACH NUMBERS 0.3 THROUGH 1.3

F. B. Cyran and M. J. Cbaney

_____ARO, Inc.

_

LmFEB 01982

___ o October 1980

_lUM _ Final Report for Period June 2, 1980 - September 10, 1980

_Approved for public release; distribution unlimited.

ARNOLD ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT CENTERARNOLD AIR FORCE STATION, TENNESSEE

AIR FORCE SYSTEMS COMMANDUNITED STATES AIR FORCE

• i(

a 82 114Oman

NOTICES

When U. S. Government drawings, specifications, or other data are used for any purpose otherthan a definitily related Government procurement operation, the Government thereby incus noresponsibility nor any obligation whatsoever, and the fact that the Government may haveformulated, furnished, or in any way supplied the said drawings, specifications, or other data, isnot to be regarded by implication or otherwise, or in any manrer licensing the holder or anyother person or corporation, or conveying any rights or permission to manufacture, use, or sellany patented invention that may in any way be related thereto. "T

References to named commercial products in this report are not to be considered in any sense -"

as an endorsement of the product by the United States Air Force or the Government.

APPROVAL STATEMENT

This report has been reviewed and approved. -.

RONALD 1. HILL, 2Lt, USAFTest Director, PWT DivisionDirectorate of Test Operations

Approved for publication:

FOR THE COMMANDER

ROGER A. CRAWFORD, Lt Col, USAFActing Director of Test OperationsDeputy for Operations

I, - -. '!

UNCLASSIFIEDI ' READ INS"TRUCTIONS

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE BEFORE COMPLETING FORM

I I, REPORT NUM1ER 2. OVT ACCESSION NO, 3. RECIPIEN'S CATALOG NUMBER, DC-TSR-8O-P7O 4 34, TITLE (end Subtitle) S. TYPE OF REPORT & PERIOD COVERED

Sting Interference Effects on the SDM Aircraft as Final Report - June 2 -Determined by Measurements of Dynamic Stability September 10, 1980Derivatives and Base Pressure for Mach Numbers 6. PERFORMING ORG. REPORT NUMBER

0.3 through 1.3 .__._ONTRAC _OR G ANT NU __R __

AUTHOR(S) CONTRACT OR GRANT NUMBER(s)

F. B. Cyran and M. J. Chaney, ARO, Inc.,a Sverdrup Corporation Company

9 PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS 10. PROGRAM ELEMENT. PROJECT. TASKAREA & WORK UNIT NUMBERS

Arnold Engineering Development Center/DOTAir Force Systems Command Program Element 65807F

Arnold Air Force Station, Tennessee 37389I. CONTROLLING OFFICE NAME AND ADDRESS 12. REPORT DATE

Arnold Engineering Development Center/DOS October 1980

Air Force Systems Command 13. NUMBER OF PAGES

Arnold Air Force Station, Tennessee 37389 4914. MONITORING AGENCY NAME 8 ADDRESS(iI different from Controlling Office) 15. SECURITY CLASS. (of this report)

UNCLASSIFIED

15. DECLASSIFICATION DOWNGRADINGSCHEDULE N/A

16. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of thia Report)

Approved for public release; distribution unlimited.

17. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of the abstract entered In Block 20, if different from Report)

I,18. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

Available in Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC)

19. KEY WORDS (Continue on reverse aide if necessary and Identify by block number)

dynamic stability sting interferencepitch damping yaw damping as a function of angle of attackyaw damping Standard Dynamics Model (SDM)forced oscillationtransonic flow

20. ABTRACT (Continue on reverse side If necessary and Identify by block number)

An investigation was conducted to determine the effects of sting-support

interference on the measurement of pitch damping, yaw-damping, pitching-momentslope, yawing-moment slope, pitching moment, and base pressure. The model was

the Standard Dynamics Model (SDM). The forced oscillation technique was usedto obtain data at Mach numbers 0.3 to 1.3 and Reynolds numbers, based on themodel mean aerodynamic chord (MAC), of 0.3.million to 3.1 million. Amplitudesof oscillation were 1.0, 1.5, and 2.0 deg, and the reduced frequency parameter

DD JAN 73 1473 EDITION OFI NOV G5IS OBSOLETE ./.-,

UNCLASSIFIED .

UNCLASSIFIED

J . ABSTRACT (Continued)

ranged from 0.009 to 0.032 radians.A The test was conducted at a nominaloscillation frequency of 5.2 Hz. a a were-obtained at angles of attackfrom -6 to 25 deg. The effective sting length was varied from I to 6 modeldiameters for sting diameters of 0.40, 0.65, and 0.73 model diameters. Thedata shows that sting interference effects are most pronounced near Machnumber 1.0 and are more subtle at subsonic and low supersonic Mach numbers.

Accesion For

DTL TA [7]F

Dist speoc 1

~~1

.IdA t 1

I j . AIl FIT m

UNCLASSIFIED

1 16

I

CONTENTS

Page

NOMENCLATURE ............ ....................... 21.0 INTRODUCTION ............ ....................... 52.0 APPARATUS

2.1 Test Facility .......... .................... 52.2 Test Article .......... .................... 62.3 Test Mechanism ......... ................... 62.4 Test Instrumentation

2.4.1 Forced-Oscillation Instrumentation ... ...... 72.4.2 Model Base Pressure Instrumentation .. ..... 82.4.3 Flow Visualization Photographs .... ........ 8

3.0 TEST DESCRIPTION3.1 Test Conditions and Procedures

3.1.1 General ......... ................... 83.1.2 Data Acquisition ....... ............... 9

3.2 Data Reduction .......... .................. 93.3 Uncertainty of Measurements .... ............. ... 10

4.0 DATA PACKAGE PRESENTATION ... ................... 10REFERENCES ......... ........................ ... 12

APPENDIXES

I. ILLUSTRATIONS

Figure

1. General Installation Arrangement .... ............. ... 142. Standard Dynamics Model (SDM) Dimensions .. ......... .... 163. Standard Dynamics Model (SDM) Details . ......... 174. Details of Model Support Configurations, DS/D -0.40 . . . 255. Details of Model Support Configurations, DS/D - 0.65 and

0.73 .... ' ....... . ..................... .... 266. Details and Photograph of VKF I.C Forced-Oscillation Test

Mechanism .......... ........................ ... 277. Location of Base Pressure Orifice ... ............ ... 288. Typical Tuft Flow Visualization Photograph .......... ... 299. Data Comparison Plots ...... .................. ... 30

II. TABLES

1. Standard Dynamics Model Configuration Designations . . .. 322. Test Summary ........ ....................... .... 343. Estimated Uncertainties .... ................. ... 40

I1. SAMPLE OF TABULATED AND PLOTTED DATA

1. Tabulated Data . . . . . ................ 482. Plotted Data ...... . ............... 49

V 1-I

NOMENCLATURE

A Reference area, 0.90702 ft2

AD Rate of change of angle of attack, rad/sec

A/D Analog to digital

ALFI Model support angle-of attack, deg

ALPHA Model angle of attack, deg

AMAPS Automatic Model Attitude Positioning System

B (a) Bias limit or

(b) Wing span, 1.65 ft

BD Rate of change of angle of sideslip, rad/sec

BETA Sideslip angle in the stability axis system, deg

CBAR Wing mean aerodynamic chord, 0.62233 ft

- CG Model center of gravity

CLN Total pitching-moment coefficient, pitching moment/Q-AoCBAR

CLM-A Slope of CLX versus ALPHA curve obtained fromfrequency measurements, rad -1

CLM-AD a(CLM)/a (AD) (CBAR) rad-1

2V r

CLM-C CLM corrected for tunnel flow anomalies (not used)

CLM-Q a(CLM)/a Q)V(BAR) rad 1

2V

CL?-QAD Pitch-damping coefficient, (CLM-Q)+(CLM-AD), rad -

CLN Total yawing-moment coefficient, yawing moment/Q-A.B

CLN-B Slope of CLN versus BETA curye obtained from

frequency measurements, rad

CLN-BD B(CLN)/3 (BD)(B) -12V 'rad

o-r

IC(CLN)/ (R) (B) -1

CN-R 3 /a 2V rad

CLN-RBD Yaw-damping coefficient, (CLN-R)-(CLN-BD).cos ALPHA,

rad 1

CODE or CONFIG Configuration code number

CONFIG Model configuration designation

D Reference diameter, (model fuselage diameter),0.36458 ft

DATE Date that data were obtained

DDAS Digital Data Acquisition System

DELE Stabilator deflection, positive trailingedge down, deg

DS/D Sting diameter to model base diameter ratio

FREQ Frequency of oscillation, Hz

F.S. Model fuselage station

GAMMA, GAM-M Phase angle between the forcing moment and theangular displacement, deg

IY Mass moment of inertia about the pivot axis, slug-ft2

L Reference length, model fuselage length, 2.55208 ft

L.E. Leading edge

LS/D Sting length to model base diameter ratio

M Free-stream Mach number

MAC Model mean aerodynamic chord, 0.62233 ft (same as CBAR)OC Oscillatory componentP Free-stream static pressure, psf or psi

PB Base pressure, psfa

PBI, PB2 Ratio of base pressure to free-stream static pressure

PHI-I Model support roll angle, deg

PN Data point number

POS Total amplitude of the model oscillation vector, deg

Lk,

PROJECT Project number, P41C-H7

PT Free-stream total pressure, psfa

Q Free-stream dynamic pressure, psf

Q, Angular velocity in pitch, rad/sec

RE Free-stream unit Reynolds number, million/ft

REL Free-stream Reynolds number based on CBAR,million

RFP Reduced frequency parameter ((OMEGA-W)-CBAR/2-V) forpitch oscillation and ((OMEGA-W)-B/2.V) for yaw oscil-lation, radian

RHO Free-stream density, slugs/ft3

RUN Run number

S Sample standard deviation

SC Static component

SDM Standard Dynamics Model

T Free-stream static temperature, *R or *F

T.E. Trailing edge

THETS Sting flare angle, 15 deg

TT Free-stream total temperature used in datareduction, *F or *R

It95 The 95th percentile point for the two-tailedStudent's "t" distribution

U Measurement uncertainty

V Free-stream velocity, ft/sec

W.L. Model water line

WT Model weight, lb

XBAR Distance from model c.g. to dynamic balance pivotcenter, in. or ft

4

ail

I

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The work reported herein was sponsored by the Arnold Engineering

Development Center (AEDC), Air Force Systems Command (AFSC), ArnoldAir Force Station, Tennessee, under Program Element 65807F, and ControlNumber 9R02-00-0. The results were obtained by ARO, Inc., AEDC Group(a Sverdrup Corporation Company), operating contractor for the AEDC.The test was conducted in the Propulsion Wind Tunnel Facility (PWT)Aerodynamic Wind Tunnel (4T) under ARO Project No. P41C-H7 from June 2to September 10, 1980. This test provided data in support of theresearch project "AEDC Dynamic Stability," ARO Project Number V32F-09.The AEDC Research Monitor was Capt. Al R. Obal ('-F), and the TestProject Monitor was Mr. Tony D. Buchanan of ARO, Inc. This work is acontinuation of the work reported in Ref. 1.

The objective of the test was to determine sting-support inter-ference effects on the measurements of static and dynamic stabilityderivatives and base pressure on the Standard Dynamics Model (SDM).This included: (1) defining critical sting length by the measurementof pitch-damping derivatives and yaw-damping derivatives for threesting diameters and various model oscillation amplitudes, and (2)obtaining baseline pitch and yaw static and dynamic stability data

on the SDi for two center of gravity (CG) locations.

Data Twere obtained at model oscillation amplitudes of 1.0, 1.5,

and 2.0 deg using the VKF (von Kirmin Facility) 1.C Forced OscillationTest Mechanism. The frequency of oscillation was nominally 5.2 Hz.Data were obtained at angles of attack from -6 to 25 deg at Mach numbers0.3 to 1.3. The sting length was effectively varied from 1 to 6 modeldiameters by extending a conical flare to various stations along thesting for sting diameters of 0.40, 0.65 and 0.73 model diameters. TheReynolds number per foot ranged from 0.5 x 106 to 5.0 x 106 and thereduced frequency parameter varied from 0.009 to 0.032. In addition,limited amounts of flow visualization data were obtained for severalconfigurations and test conditions.

A microfilm copy of the final data has been retained in PWr atAEDC. Inquiries to obtain copies of the test data should be addressedto AEDC/DOT, Arnold Air Force Station, Tennessee 37389.

2.0 APPARATUS

2.1 TEST FACILITY

The Aerodynamic Wind Tunnel (4T) is a closed-loop, continuous flowvariable-density tunnel in which the Mach number can be varied from 0.1to 1.3 and can be set at discrete Mach numbers of 1.6 and 2.0 by placingnozzle inserts over the permanent sonic nozzle. At all Mach numbers,the stagnation pressure can be varied from 400 to 3400 psfa. The testsection is a 4-ft square and 12.5 ft long with perforated, variableporosity (0.5- to 10-percent open) walls. It is completely enclosed ina plenum chamber from which the air can be evacuated, allowing part ofthe tunnel airflow to be removed through the perforated walls of thetest section.

~5

. ~i.

The model support system consists of a sector and boom attachment whichhas a pitch angle capability of -7.5 to 28 deg with respect to the tunnelcenterline and a roll capability of -180 to 180 deg about the stingcenterline. The general arrangement of the test section with the test

.article installed is shown in Fig. 1. A more complete description ofthe tunnel may be found in Ref. 2.

2.2 TEST ARTICLE

The Standard Dynamics Model (SDM) represents a 1/18-scale typefighter aircraft. Dimensions of the SDM are shown in Fig. 2, anddetails are shown in Fig. 3. The model has a 19.8-in. wing span anddouble-taper leading and trailing edges on the wing, stabilators andvertical tail. The stabilators may be deflected in increments of ±5deg. All external components, i.e., wings, stabilators, inlet, ventralfins, canopy, etc., may be removed for buildup test as desired. Table1 lists the configuration codes for the test reported herein. Designand fabrication were performed at AEDC.

For the smallest sting diameter configuration (DS/D = 0.40), thesting length was effectively shortened by positioning a conical steelflare (Fig. 4) at 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, 5.0, 5.6, and 5.7 model diameters tothe rear of the model base along the sting. The effective sting lengthwas 6.0 model diameters without the conical steel flare installed. Theflare was mounted to the motor housing of the test mechanism withouttouching the sting forward of the motor housing.

For the larger sting diameter configurations (DS/D = 0.65 and 0.73)the steel conical flare was positioned fully aft of the model (up againstthe motor housing as shown in Fig. 4b). Two different sets of splittubes were mounted to the front end of this flare. These sting diameterconfigurations are shown in Fig. 5. The tubes were designed in twohalves to facilitate installation of the tubes without removing the model.The split tubes were installed such that the parting line of the tubeswas in the vertical plane. The sting length was effectively shortenedby positioning a Lemxan® flare on the split tubes at 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, and 4.0model diameters to the rear of the model base along the sting. The effec-tive sting length was 5.6 model diameters without the Lexan flare installed.No part of the sting diameter hardware touched the sting forward of themotor housing, even though the sting was subject to static and dynamicdeflections within the tubes.

2.3 TEST MECHANISM

The VKF 1.C Forced-Oscillation Test Mechanism (Fig. 6) utilizesa cross-flexure pivot, an electric shaker motor and a one-componentmoment beam which is instrumented with strain gages to measure theforcing moment of the shaker motor. The motor is coupled to the momentbeam by means of a connecting rod and flexural linkage which convertsthe translational force to a moment to oscillate the model at amplitudesup to 3 deg (depending on flexure balance) and frequencies from 2 to

6

8 Hz. The cross flexures, which are instrumented to measure the pitch/yaw displacement, support the model loads and provide the restoringmoment to cancel the inertia moment when the system is operating at itsnatural frequency. The moment beam is not subjected to the static loadsand can be made as sensitive as required for the dynamic measurements.

Data from this test were obtained with the 0.180-in.-thick crossflexures, which have a stiffness of 962.5 ft-lb/rad. The moment beam usedto measure the pitch-damping moments had a thickness of 0.047 in. and itis capable of measuring a total moment of 11.3 in.-lb. For measuringthe yaw-damping moments, the moment beam thickness was 0.036 in., vbichis capable of measuring a total moment of 7.1 in.-lb.

The cross-flexure pivot, moment beam, and flexural linkage assem-bly are supported by a long, slender cylindrical sting with a 1-degtaper. The sting is instrumented with strain gages to measure thestatic and oscillatory deflections of the sting in both the pitch andyaw plane. A penumatic- and spring-operated locking device is provided

on the balance to hold the model during tunnel startup and shutdown.

2.4 TEST INSTRUMENTATION

2.4.1 Forced-Oscillation Instrumentation

The forced-oscillation instrumentation (Ref. 3) utilizes an elec-tronic analog system with precision electronics. The control, monitor,and data acquigition instrumentation is contained in a portable consolethat can be easily interfaced with the instrumentation of the variouswind tunnels at AEDC. The control instrumentation provides a systemwhich can vary the oscillation amplitude of the model within the flexurelimits. The oscillation amplitude is controlled by an electronic feed-back loop which permits testing of both dynamically stable and unstableconfigurations. Data are normally obtained at or near the naturalfrequency of the model flexure system; however, the electronic resolverspermit data to be obtained off resonance.

All gages are excited by d-c voltages, and outputs are increased tooptimum values by d-c amplifiers. Typical balance outputs from anoscillating model are composed of oscillatory components (OC) super-imposed on static components (SC). These components are separated bybandpass and lowpass filters. The SC outputs are used to calculate thestatic moment coefficients and static sting deflections. The OC outputsare input to the resolver instrumentation and precise frequency measuringinstrumentation. The resolvers utilize very accurate analog electronicdevices to process the OC signals and output d-c voltages. The outputd-c voltages are proportional to the amplitude squared, the in-phase andquadrature (90 deg out-of-phase) balance components (forcing torque),and the in-phase and quadrature sting components. An analog-to-digital(A/D) converter converts these outputs to digital signals. The data arerecorded for a selected interval from approximately 2 to 60 sec ata sample rate appropriate to the type test and wind tunnel.

.7

- ° " ... ... .............................. ........... . ... " " " ' . .. . J ;- i ' - : ' '

-- "- J - < - - * .

I

2.4.2 Model Base Pressure Instrumentation

Model base pressures were measured with 2 Sunstrand (Kistler) 314DServo Pressure transducers located on the tunnel plenum chamber wall.The locations of the orifices with respect to the model and sting areshown in Fig. 7.

2.4.3 Flow Visualization Photographs

A camera was installed on the top and side wall of the tunnel toprovide flow visualization data. Fluorescent tufts were attached tothe upper port side horizontal stabilizer of the model, and photographsfrom both the top and side cameras were obtained using an ultravioletflash. A typical photograph obtained in this manner is shown in Fig. 8.

3.0 TEST DESCRIPTION

3.1 TEST CONDITIONS AND PROCEDURES

3.1.1 General

A summary of the nominal test conditions at each Mach number islisted below.

PT, psfa T * Q,_p. V, ft/sec REx1O 6 ft-1 Z 0-6

0.30 575 102 34 540 346 0.5 0.30.30 1112 89 66 1045 342 1.0 0.60.30 2017 111 118 1867 349 1.7 1.00.30 2966 123 180 2812 354 2.5 1.60.30 3670 132 217 3441 355 3.0 1.90.60 641 99 127 503 671 1.0 0.60.60 1608 103 318 1261 674 2.5 1.60.60 3374 123 664 2642 685 5.0 3.10.80 723 84 212 474 861 1.4 0.90.95 486 91 172 273 1004 1.0 0.60.95 754 102 267 420 1019 1.5 0.90.95 823 86 291 460 1002 1.7 1.00.95 1207 89 427 676 1004 2.5 1.61.05 849 88 326 424 1089 1.8 1.11.05 1201 98 463 596 1104 2.5 1.61.10 1196 97 474 561 1141 2.5 1.61.20 983 90 409 409 1215 2.1 1.31.30 1200 94 512 434 1296 2.5 1.6

Testing procedures for yaw oscillation were identical to thosefor pitch oscillation, except that the test mechanism has rolled +90deg from the pitch plane to the yaw plane. In addition, guy rod stif-feners were attached to the sector and boom assembly to help dampenvibration of the boom in yaw during the yaw phase. Flow visualizationphotographs were only obtained during the picch phase.

Definition of the configuration code is given in Table 1. The testsummary is given in Table 2.

8

3.1.2 Data Acquisition

After establishing tunnel conditions and model attitude, the modelwas unlocked, and brought to a constant oscillation amplitude of 1 or 2deg by using the Forced-Oscillation Control, System. The system wasallowed to stabilize at the system resonant frequency before data wererecorded. At each angle of attack, generally one data point was taken.

Data were obtained over a 30-second time interval at each data point.The balance and sting gage outputs and frequency instrumentation wereread from the forced-oscillation instrumentation console by a DigitalData Acquisition System (DDAS), at a rate of approximately 200 samplesper second.

The Automatic Model Attitude Positioning System (AMAPS) was used to

control the model position. A list of model angle-of-attack require-ments was programmed into the AMAPS prior to the test. After data wereobtained at a given angle of attack, the AMAPS was manually activated,

and the model was automatically pitched to the next angle of attack onthe AMAPS list.

At test conditions where flow visualization photographs wereobtained, both top and side photographs were obtained simultaneouslyafter tunnel conditions were established and prior to unlocking the

-model.

3.2 DATA REDUCTION

Data from the DDAS were combined with tunnel model attitude andbase pressure instrumentation data and sent directly to a DEC-10 SystemComputer. Average values of the balance and sting gage outputs werecalculated by the computer and used in conjunction with the remainingDDAS outputs to calculate the dynamic derivatives. Both the SC and OCsting gage outputs were used to correct the data for sting bendingeffects. The method used to reduce the data is given in Refs. 3 and 4.

A printout of each reduced data point was obtained approximately2 minutes (real time) after the DDAS sent the unreduced data to thecomputer. Summary data were printed out at the conclusion of each angle-of-attack sweep. Reduced data were also plotted during the test, usingthe IBM-370 computer Interactive Graphics System, which received thereduced data from the DEC-lO. Usually, the data were available forplotting on the IBM-370 Graphics System within the same amount of time(2 minutes real time) as the reduced data printout. This enabled closemonitoring of the data during the angle-of-attack sweep and allowedcross plots (cross checksl to be made with similar configurationsobtained earlier in the test.

9

I

3.3 UNCERTAINTY OF MEASUREMENTS

In general, instrumentation calibrations and data uncertainty esti-mates were made using methods recognized by the National Bureau ofStandards (NBS) (Ref. 5). Measurement uncertainty is a combination ofbias and precision errors defined as:

U - 1 (B + t95S)

where B is the bias limit, S is the sample standard deviation, and tis the 95th percentile point for the two-tailed Student's "t" distri-

bution, which for degrees of freedom greater than 30 equals 2.

Estimates of the measured data uncertainties for this test aregiven in Table 3a and b. The balance data uncertainties were determinedfrom in-place static and dynamic calibrations through the data recordingsystem and data reduction program. Static load hangings on the balancesimulate the range of loads and center-of-pressure locations anticipatedduring the test, and measurement errors are based on differences betweenapplied loads and corresponding values calculated from the balanceequations used in the data reduction. Load hangings to verify thebalance calibrations are made in place on the assembled model. Staticand dynamic calibrations of the dynamic stability balance system allowedthe measurement uncertainty to be that which is due to the amount ofnonrepeatability of the calibration constants. The sting and parts ofthe balance not dynamically calibrated were calibrated by static loadhangings over the range of anticipated loads. Uncertainties in themeasurements of sting effects were included in the error analysis.Structural damping values were obtained near vacuum conditions beforethe tunnel flow was started to evaluate the still-air damping contri-bution.

Propagation of the bias and precision errors of measured datathrough the calculated data was made in accordance with Ref. 6, and theresults are given in Table 3c. The uncertainties are for steady-stateconditions. Occasionally vibration and noise of the wind tunnel environ-ment caused the scatter in the data to exceed the estimated uncertainty.

4.0 DATA PACKAGE PRESENTATION

The data include tabulated and plotted data, a test summary, andflow visualization photographs. Tabulated data include summary data,point-by-point data, wind-off tare data, zeros data, torque calibrationdata, and a listing of constants. Plotted data include (1) individualplots of CLM-QAD, CLN-RBD, CLM-A, CLN-B, CLM, and PB1 data as a functionof angle of attack, and (2) comparison plots which depict sting lengthratio (LS/D), Reynolds number, oscillation amplitude, sting diameterratio (DS/D), and configuration effects. A sample of the tabulated dataand plotted data is presented in Appendix III.

10

I.N.1b

The data package is comprised of the following four volumes:

Volume No. Run Nos. Description

1 31-221 Summary data (pitch phase only)2 297-437 Summary data (yaw phase only)

3 31-221 Plotted Data (pitch phase only)4 297-437 Plotted Data (yaw phase only)

Plots of CLM-QAD, CLM-A, and CLM are shown in Fig. 9. TheoreticalDATCOM (Ref. 6) predictions are compared with the experimental data;comparisons are favorable at the lower angles of attack. The CLM-Adata compare well with the data obtained from a curve-fit of CLM versusALPHA.

,I

REFERENCES

1. Cyran, Fred B., Uselton, Bob L., and Marquart, Ed. J. "Evaluationof Critical Sting Length on a 7-deg Cone as Determined by Measure-ments of Dynamic Stability Derivatives and Base Pressure for MachNumbers 0.2 through 1.3." AEDC-TR-80-17, September 1980.

2. Test Facilities Handbook (Eleventh Edition), "Propulsion WindTunnel Facility, Vol. 4." Arnold Engineering Development Center,June 1979.

3. Burt, G. E. "A Description of a Pitch/Yaw Dynamic Stability, ForcedOscillation Test Mechanism for Testing Lifting Configurations."AEDC-TR-73-60, June 1973.

4. Schueler, C. J., Ward, L. K., and Hodapp, A. E., Jr. "Techniquesfor Measurements of Dynamic-Stability Derivatives in Ground TestFacilities." AGARDograph 121 (AD669227) October 1967.

5. Thompson, J. W. and Abernethy, R. B. et al. "Handbook Uncertaintyin Gas Turbine Measurements." AEDC-TR-73-5 (AD755356), February1973.

6. "USAF Stability and Control DATCOM," Flight Control Division,Air Force Dynamics Laboratory, Wright Patterson Air Force Base,revised January 1975.

12

- |

APPENDIX I

ILLUSTRATIONS

L 13

D.Ae* E~*.@* *I .0**!.*eee.W~~ee*@ * ,

9~~4 %.* .. ,,.

*** tI; of 6

* of .. w .4~ 9~ §~i**#9Ot 4 *,w 0- 9 r

0 0

A 191

1. I4

tt44

'5 . 4

u -4 0

1.1 00--0

"44

2E- -4 (

Ia24* 0)

iI~1w 0

I- Icc

4 (4c

cct0U.*

75CL

oc 4

9L-z

a.. - -

1-5

II

WINGArea 0.90702 ft2

Span 1.6500 ftMAC 0.62233 ftAspect Ratio 3.0L.E. Sweep 40 degDihedral 0Incidence 0Airfoil Double Wedge 4.5 percent thickness at root.

L.E. Angle 15 (half angle)T.E. Angle 15 (half angle)

HORIZONTAL TAILArea 0.30707 ft2

Aspect Ratio 3.0Taper Ratio 0.213L.E. Sweep 40 degDihedral -10 degAirfoil Double Wedge 6.4 percent thickness at root.

L.E. Angle 14 deg (half angle)T.E. Angle 15 deg (half angle)

VERTICAL TAILArea 0.30846 ft2Aspect Ratio 1.093Taper Ratio 0.362L.E. Sweep

Tip 47.5 degRoot 15.0 deg

Airfoil Double Wedge 5.6 percent thickness at root.L.E. Angle 15 deg (half angle)T.E. Angle 15 deg (half angle)

VENTRAL FIN (Each)Area 0.0263 ft2Span 0.150 ftAspect Ratio 0.86Taper Ratio 0.70L.E. Sweep 26.5 degDihedral (cant) 25.2 deg (outboard)Airfoil

At Root Modified Wedge 3.8 percent thick at root.At Tip Constant 0.003 r

FUSELAGELength 2.55208 ftDiameter 0.36458 ftCenter of Gravity 1.49125 ft from Nose at 35% MAC

1.36667 ft from Nose at 15% MAC

Pig. 2. Standard Dynamics Model (SDM)'. Dimensions

16I. ,-. .

0

co 0

Cldtko 4. CI)o

00 40 .

1.h cv)0

.- Q t t C 0

1 4 '% .V

100

011) 0

0 Id 0

C4.

C

0,"Cl 4-

174

14

"A

U

H

H

z0H

zSMzH

-J-J

o 0.4 I., a= ~Jo

.1-I ~I

N

05', ~

Cu______ I _______ ___

-I--K---- -____

bC~i.~ ~Vas

-4N K. I

4. I

0vi

0

_________ $5?

18.. ~. I

UI-

N4

4-

U. U

Lj19

M- -"WO 0

I C6w0

qLI0-up

200

I w

zIN

a.4z 0

-J ,0-

U-

I

U2 ~)-4 ~

Cu .~44 4.3

U

a)-4

N -

-~ *q~~ I~., ~-'1*

"4

K! 1

Ck '0 N

4 I

'a

N

o* I')

-d 0

U

21

I

00

-rZ

3 '-4--

'-4

144

.,A I~~-

I1*

zH *1

zH

2

N0I'U

'.4

-~ '~ 00 ~ ~0

00

-F--U,'-4

- -~ -4Cu

00o*.4 £40

0 ~3 N

.,-4 .M.7v ,-4 4-a

-4 ~.~ 0~uC..)

.4-a

Cu

+ '-4 ~I. 4-a -4

00

a

'4

"ii

~ II

23

'I

z

0

4

-4J

$. .0 W

LCC

244

,' .,

"7. .o

0

- 0r-

- 24,

I L.3

a ca

2'00

oal km 4A

.4 4

SD1 4cO

0 0

I U

251

9~ 1"

C4Q vI '. - 0%0C

C4 en

I 0

~ 44 44

9-4 wl-

IA

z~~4 0 0I..Uml

Aj 0

q4 .441~ .

-4 43 I .aq*C

-~~~~ 264~ ~ 4 4

Cross Flexure ~ Sting Motor Housing \ E1Dim

3.750 /Can FlIa re -\,15 deg __ ___

D i a - Lo king rm Ideg Sting Taper

I .so- L1.76 Diam5.50 10.00- .--- ___

38.671041.5

All Dimensions in Inchies

a. Details of test mechanism

b. Photograph of cross flexure pivotFigure6 . Details and photograph of VKF 1.C forced-oscillation

test mechanism.

27

I.

Sting(DS/D - 0.40)

ModelPivot Axis /0.093-OD Stainless SteelModelPivotAxisTubing Attached to Sting

PB2 with Spotwelded SichromeStrips

10 To PressureTransducer

PB I

BASE PLANE Top View, LookingDown on Model from

Orifice ID - 0.062 the Tunnel Top Wall

All Dimensions in Inches

For all sting configurations thebase pressure orifices were in thesame location with respect to themodel; all orifices located in thebase plane

Figure 7. Location of Base Pressure Orifice

L 28

in.Io fg r t o h w : D / .5 S D .SDN ofgrto I1111OSF1

Io

Im 41b AlIAId

RuIumePon Nme

I4I 4

Ph.I

.LIN F- SOUR~CE CnN.F~uPATO0d M= o. 6

Gs- PRE.SENT.DATA -+32CjW1VTCSIF1Z1. R EL=.5 xI

-- RE F. 6 (.DArCOP4)*LM~-A DA1rA OBTAINED FROM'PR.ESENT CLtI DATA

-12.

0

ALPHA) c~

.5

L'-4 * 0 Z. 4 ra 8 10 12. 11 -1 -8

A LPHA, d94~

Fig.~~~ 9...t.Comar.o...ot

0.10

I

I APPENDIX II

TABLES

31.

II

Table I

STANDARD DYNMIICS MODELCONFIGURATION DESIGNATIONS

EXAMPLE CONFIGURATION DETAIL

BICOWOVOT99 BASIC FUSELAGE BODY (CG at 35% MAC)

BICIWOVOT99 BODY + CANOPY

BICIWIVOT99 BODY + CANOPY + WINGS

B1C2W1VIT99 BODY + CANOPY + WINGS + VERTICAL TAIL

tBlClWlVlTXX BODY + CANOPY + WINGS + VERTICAL TAIL+ HORIZONTAL STABILIZERS

±BlCIW1VITXXS1 BODY + CANOPY + WINGS + VERTICAL TAIL+ HORIZONTAL STABILIZERS + STRAKES

tBlC1W1VITXXSlFI BODY + CANOPY + WINGS + VERTICAL TAIL+ HORIZONTAL STABILIZERS + STRAKES+ VENTRAL FINS

!BlClWlVITXXSIFIIl BODY + CANOPY t WINGS + VERTICAL TAl+.HORIZONTAL STABILIZERS + STRAKES+ VENTRAL FINS + INLET

±BlCIWIVITXXSOFII1 BODY + CANOPY + WINGS + VERTICAL TAIL+ HORIZONTAL STABILIZER + VENTRAL FINS+ INLT NO STRAKES)

SEE KEN (TyP)

+B - C - W_ - Y_- T xx S_ -. F_ - I-T STABILATOR DEFLECTION (DELE) Angle, deg.

Stabilizer angle direction. Positive Trailing edge down.

NON-ZERO INDICATES COMPONENT ON EXCEPT FOR

TAIL WHERE 99 WILL SIGNIFY TAIL OFF

32

! ,

I.Table 1. Continued

Standard Configuration Key

KEY MODEL PART

1 B BASIC FUSELAGE BODY CG at 35% MAC

2 B BASIC FUSELAGE BODY CG at 15% MAC

1 C CANOPY"

1 W WINGS - LIGHT TIPS

- - HEAVY TIPS

1 V VERTICAL TAIL

*XX deg T HORIZONTAL STABILIZERS - DEFLECTION

99 signifies tail off

1 S STRAKES

1 F VENTRAL FINS

1 INLET

33

I

Table 2

Test Summary- - - .- .-..... 1 -. . . . ...

a. Pitch-Damping

RE pr PS FPtLPARUN D,%L~,D CONFIGURATION M pT ±05 rcPl

,3 0 ,,1 j -rCjr I- .G ros - / 0 a l

3 . O., 0.0 2.5 /O2. /.0 0 015

3_3 o.401. 0 ___ .0 .s r, 29. 2.0 0.0/5 0

,34 0-016 .0 1 . 60. S. 0 -73 r.(. -/- -040-

+z. .4o10 _ 060 -.5 1/,5. 2.0 0.015 i-q, 5

4,23 001,.0 o.60 Z-5 IS1 2 .B 1.0 0.05 0

14 , 0 060 ..40 Q . 32.9, 1.0 O.O1 -r- 75 0.4 . O.__0 O .0 /0o. /.o 0 0 -. 4OL04 G.0 O. 95 2-- c 1207. o. 0 .0/01 0,-4

,54.iGo _ _ 0 Oq5 /.0 4g7. /.0 0.00-,--P

_5 .r 10 95 1.0 500. Z.0 0.0/0

5r .10406.0 0.30 2.5 2-89. . 0 0.030 n

o I o.- 0 __O 0.30 2.6. 2930. /.0 0.030 - -- 15

2_O4.O ____ 0.30 2.5 292. 2.0 0.Q1 063 ._6._0 0.,30 2.-S 217. /.0 0.030 0

G 4, 0 .0 _0 6. 0e. 30 3.. 3C63. /. 0 0.030 0

r. 0 1_o , 030 1._7 1 q8q . /.0 0.032 06ro 0.oi G. o o.-30 0..5 1595. 1.0 9.-31 0

6 7b. 4, 1.o 0.0.5 2.-5 12oo. /.0 0.010 0

(8 0.0 i 0 /0 2-5 . /Zoo. /.0 0. 10-4-- _

70 0.101 G.01/. 1 . /ZOz. z.0 0.010 0

72 o.4016 _ 1.30 2.5 1200. /.0o o.oQ0 -2-'3

73 0.4016.0 _ .30 2..5 /O.zo. 1 .- 0.009 0

830.405.0 0.30 2.5 2874. L.0 0.030-4-) 154 0€0 ,.. 6O 2..5 (a 3?. /.o 0.o0 s -6 1 15

85 0.41.5.o 0 .75 1.0 +AC,. /.Q ().Oil -4"-, 48G o.0 5.0 0.96,5 /-0 486. 2.0 0.oS-804D,5. 0 ./0 Z.5 o . o0 .0104 .-

88 o.4O!.5.0 1.0 o z.5 1,80. 2-0 (0.010 089O. iS01.30 2..5 1185. /.0 0.00q-2.

. _ -t 0______- ___

II

Table 2 (continued)

a. Pitch-Damping (Continued)

1/.t PT PoS R FP A PHARUIN 0)D 'D, OFG R-IN j" on_____ A___t Ps~ AL f r.A4 de

90 pj01.Q,/C wIVIT,)OSF Ih 1.30 2 .5 11 .5 J--.0 0.009Ii b.±LO .. __0.30 2.5 2-84 6 .0 0.3I -4- u.

0_ 0.30 5 : 46 z.O 031i

95 4 02. 0 ___ 0.60 - . § /o9 - 0 . o 5[4 ,

0. ,v4) ;Z.. 0. )O 2.-5 _ /C,07 Z. o 00;5/01 0.0i2.0 0. s /.0 44 sj o 2 oI. 0

0 / 2 -0 0.95 /.0 4q5 I " 3"1! --"l

,O-- _1 _._ 1. 0 / '8 h. 10,.., -2-->

!041OA20 1.J30 2.5 /1 7 8 1.0 oo0- -- 105 __ 1 0 /.30 2.5 /182. z.o 0.Ooi n

10 8 D.4)13 0.30 2 888 1.0 0. 030 00 .413.o Q.30 2-. 5 2-9/5 .0 o0 - ,03 -./ ./0 3 4 o o 2 .5 2,,Cf 2 .. . ',

(, 43. 3.1 _ o.o. 2.6 /6 Z3 z.O 0.0 o5-3-601. o._o 2.,5 /624 ,,. 0.015 o114 L/ . L.5 I 0 500 L1 .0 11 I - -4-4

0...L75 /.____oo .0 0 1 0.0 10

r.A~I~ __. 4--l 30.9. 1.002 5 / 8 ,0 . 0010 -Z. 2t6 94613.0 1I./0 Z.5 IBT Z.0 O.-z 3

/180.401,3.0 _ .Io z.,5 1195 1.0 0 o9-z--

/19 LI.401,3.0 1.3Q 2.5 /1/ 7 .0 0 0.OO120).40 3. 0 .O0 2.5 / r o .0 0 015 3 11/aZ T.4 Q.. 0.30 2.5 z../4. .0 .L,,, 0 0. 4.12-8 9.40140 0 3 1Z. 5 Z935 2.0 1 o03C) 0

/z m04,io _0_r_1 z-s /.40 0 o.oj5 0130 2 ,.4 0 0.9.5 /.0 500 /.0 o.010-4-14

/31 .40 +.0 0. 95 /.0 So5 2.0 000o

/32 qU^ 4.0 1,_tO 2___ . , q 2.. 0 , 0 ,

133 . 4,0 1 _ 01 1 / Z.5 i I4 1.0 0 .o 010

1,34 .4 0 _ _ ___01 2_.. 1/?( /0 1 0, .oQ oo .-2,C 1 .5 40 4. 1.30 ,.5 l q2. .0 0.O-] z

35

4!

-- .-,.-. _. , _ . 1

Table 2 (continued)

a. Pitch-Damping (Continued)

~~~w,.i~~~~ r) > OFGPAIQM t1Io~~~ PO.S R FP AL PMARUN CON__ ______- id ratL de

.. 0. 7J .5. IP/tlt -i . F 0 0 .15 (,)2 _ . 05 - -/

Q.5 o7-1. 1- _ ___ 0~.&0 _ 62 1. 0 2)JIL--,

4 31.7 -5.G 1.0 2.5 l 0 G0 _.0

147 0 7-'15. G. /0 2 11., 1 .0 o001 o -z)1

,4cd 033 /.__ _ __0 2.s 1/8,4 L0 02 2 -14 9.731 5.6 I3,n 2- - "184 . 0 0.9, - % 3162 '07_ 'LO Q. 0 1 o -- .S 2,90 5 . .0~3 -,!t,15

/53 07314. 0. GO 2.5 1589 ). 0 005 -S-/5

/57 70 4.0731 1 0.20 . 0 ,0 .4.4/ /

16/~~~~~ rii4~ ____ I1 5 Ji L ~/~2~/.5 3 .0 _,_ 1,0_ 0 2so 5 162,5 1.Q 0.01s-4.

/ 1 0.9.5 /. 1, 4 14

16a 0.731,4,0 __._ /___ ?__5 2. .U qJ I .1 ,0 0_'

162 G 9.73 .0 1.30 2-5 190 1.0 -1)41 '-2-)/gj Q. 7 .l " 0 1 LI. 30 :-. - 1r 28 q I n . 029 .0 1 -1 -,*

166 -17313-.01 0.60 155 S 3 ). 0 0 10/5 1-,; /S3

16 7o.7J-J3. 0 0.9 41 z. 0 (:3-1 I. o . i-4.+/ 4168 l 0 .73l, .o I0 /,o 2..5 qt I J0 n). o /01 -2

169 0.731I,. 1.30 2. 5 as 8,c n o.oo? --2--t

/72 0.73 2.0 0.30 2.5 2 .I .,0 )3oI-±),5

17-30.72 1Z. 0.0 _._5 / 4 1.0 . .

L71 9.7.112.0 0. 9,5 /.0 486 . 0 0.!0 -4 /r

17-50. 0 .5 /88 1.0 0 .- 010 -_

17C- -0 1..30 2-5 1l8 !.0 0.00 -2-->-I

/187 9.10 5.7"BaCIWIVIT__.F51F I o. iO i. o 6/ 4. $. - Z4./A '4015.7 0.9o 1.4 723 /.,1 1O_OI 01 -44 15

/ -74015.7 1 - .). 95 /-.7 8z- . n r). o _I_ -i -I. O0 . .40L5 - .1-05 1 ., 4 9 1 ,0 Q. 010 n. Z,4

Iql 0.4d .7 1.' 1.2-0 2- I qS3; 1.0 0 , 0 I --.s Ief9 z . [S. o .201 /..0 /1112 1 ,0 02. -4.-9

36

m, ,- ,,,. S

I

Table 2 (Continued)

a. Pitch-Damping (Concluded)

t pDT Po.S RF P ALP14A

RN ~___C014FIGURATION~ M d~tio~ v!5 ± red des

qj 0.40 5.1 -2CIWIVITOSSiF/Ih 0.30 /. 0 1112. . 0 O. 0 ? 0 -20

I 0.5 0.40,5.7 O.80 /.4 7Z9. /.0 0.01,12-

03 0.", 0.-30 2.6 3 012. I0 0. 030 0. -4

ZOO5 o.651.o 0.,30 12.5 .q. /.0 0.030 -- 15

. 5 o.5. GO.q5 . 4,85. 1.0 o.d15 -44 /4ZO 70.6 5.G 1./0 Z.5 /,/87. /.0 0.0/0 -2-

0 8 0.651.5.6 1.30 z.5 88. 1.! o.oo1 0,32 0.651.3.0 0.0 z 5 1570. 1.0 0.01

2-/3 .. ,3.0 0.9,5 1.0 4192. 0 0.0/0

2140.6513.0 /.10 2.5 /1 97. /.0 0.010 0

Z5 f0.6 3.0 .30 2.5 //74. 0.0 o.o

218 0.6. 0. 0 P..5 /s3. 1 0 0 ____

Z / 0.o5 20 O.55 1. 0 4,90. /.0 0.0/0 r

ZO oG5 Z. 0 1 /./ .2.5 /1 9O. /.0 o.oo

ZZ1 0.6512.01 1 2.3 2.S /1/85 /.0 0.009 0

A97 O.'IC G.C 5tCIWIVITO5sIFIL 0.GC I.0. 6,a 1.0 0.01f A'04=0

37

TABLE 2 (Continued)

b. Yaw-Damping

R P pr POS RP ALPHARUM LY/ CONFIGURA-TION M MilibOrV" ps, r Jet "

aC, _7'rrto~sII, 0.20 1.0 110 R 1.0 o.o0 q -q-. -'I_ 0. _ q I.-7 O.(O 1.0 (" 10 0.Ols--4-/3!7 9.415.7 0. W) /. '1 7 4G 1. 0 _. 1 2.- 4- 1

a§ E. .7 0,76 7 q4,6 n.l -e 4

,39 2,. .7 =.0, 2S /.7 ;43 2. n In -

,?2.- 4 . 7 /,0_ /.R 16 F 3 J. 0 0. o09 - -15

_322 .0_1 .T-7 1.20 2.1 /..1007 /,0 0 --_0 2. 21_ /o q . 0

0___oo.6o 2. /.2 /.5 o.nlG - -,'8_QAO. G _ __ 0.60 2.-5 16/l( 2.0 1 .Z0 0

. _.O .0.15 /.s _ 1 .0 0.011 - r/

4 -1. 0 0., 1/.,5 748 1.,5 0.0/ o11 0,, -4 _ 0. 2.. . 4.o 0.s1/ 0

344.. . 53 /.o . o0/ 0 /Z0, 1.I 4 101 2-_ Z0 .Q 0.0/0- -- P4

3 0.7. Q g 0 21. i 1 2-.6 121 !Q ,o 10 ,-F /5el. 1.20Q.. n . 0 0 Is

o LA 1_. oo0 2 .,5 1 .oo 1.0 0.0/5

13r. ~ ~ ~ z2. L. JQ_ 1, _5 a .loo ./0[3Q -o.4p Lo O. Z I-5" 7 i~ O.L o

-0-. 2.0 . Z ,o 25 /0,:; /. 0 0.0/s 0.41,sr7 , .4 2-ol 6. 15 II,. Is 752 /.0 0 Ole n1 .ols /,374 -A . 2.0 /. / 2.5 /12-15 /. o . 'O mI o ,3Z61 o.4 .2. 0 1.,30 2.5 1 2.2 /.o -0.oo .E- =,18c o.4 2.C n0.60 2..5 IS9 7 .o 0. 016,n d) ,.

;204,.0o 0. q1,5 /.,s 75 7 1.(0 0.01o r) -4

,39, Q .n , ,. .0 0. 6/0 2.S- /5_0?S /. 0 . 0 /0 -c '/

:-/" a.6A4.01 0.90, 2.5- 1595 L. Q9 0.O/ CIS .

L94 . [. ./0 2.6 IZ04 /,Q -0.0/0: "/

38

I

TABLE 2 (Concluded)

b. Yaw-Damping (Concluded)

S k Pr PoS RFP ALPmARVu .. ___ D CONFIGURATION M 1_,,, fk PPo .f rl des-

5 !0.-' 4.0 -B/calytf'rosz 1. 30 2-.,5 1l2_ /.0o . r-rg t 14IM 0.65 2.0 Q -60 2-5 lsL3 /.0 --- /;0,141

4Q2 0. -. 0 0.a0 ? .,5 7 56 /.0 o.o1 6 -- .4404 Q 220 L./0 2 1.- , / 1 I 0 0. 10 0 -r44 0.6Z-2. 0 1. 30 1.-o I,, /7 -7 /A0 /. - 441/a0. rl 0.6o z .5 126'? /.0 0.015 --'14-D11 L a . . 60 2.5" /2-6q / 0 0.015 n

Q___ 0. 1 .,5 74- I. 0 0-0/o 4/4,1, . /./0 2. 5 /Z/'7 /.0 0.0/0 -- /4/6 1.1. .[ ,301 Z. , 120o8 1.0 0 -co a .- 3. 14

4_ .. 60 2.5 I 1j 1.0 0 / 6 0o- 14

4j-.6 . 5. 0,9, 15/-I 740 0./ 1. l Q 14

427 5.' . 1.30 2.S /12 1.0 Q J.a Q -. 14

.. o 0.20 2-S 2_6__ /,0 0. 02.. o

431 0I.60_ 2- 1610 1.0 .0/16433 0 -/ o,.?,< 2-5S 768 1.0 0.011t42 n.& -0, I.-0 --. zz 11_.0 0.OIO! 0481 1o._ __ 130 2-5 121,9 1, L) 0.009 0

39

o 0 0 511 Cc vs I

I sV: z~ CC 0 -'' - . -

c 1 0 s-t Q . 2 i -M > 4 M .u Ms Lo v

600 >55.', ol0 xC .5

30 O. A V

00- 0 "S a

MO C.-0~ t

0.54 0. --I9-00 07 ,0 a Oa ea s

I. ~ Na- CS ~ ~ t,>

o - 3 (5 )

- -- a..S55 3..so

12. 1). 1 5 0 C- .

0.'U N 0545 40 0 I

62 +t +t +

0 . e. st v) m

d s 0 a 944 t aai~ .. 5

lose a 0-O L0

CA'3 314s s S I. 5.4

lo esiseao 04J

w FA-

a~~V a,0 .

S .'06 N 40

I

VS N

s 1

~ 0

a, , -

50 4

to r

-"m oolion

e*xM

0 O o

U,- -o- 4-

o Sulso

;o1

to loss

A AN Ac AA

6 loss__ lot

- .5

It 9 v.V

*Jt4SV~f IN

S 04)0 IUO 0 ~ V 1

a 2 O WO 0O - t

00 0A AA' V 00

2-~0.0 0U- ___________4

0 ONV" 3 h O C O

000 000000 0

.0"68 Mi M0 0 0 * MC S0

- o Wo.llNC 00 00.Vl0 00000 M 0 On"

R. a

1. -000

0626

! ZeiUwon g-o COO ooocoo e ; 0 M

a ~ ~ ; 31911ISUOCOCOCO hICOCOC 0

jo .0je4

flu -__ ____ ___ ___or)_

- a -42

.1 lot m . a - -' h

II 00

p ~~~~~ ~ N CClW 30.~ N a a . ,

o~~~~~0 0000 0000.-000

C4__ _ * *C4 .

301 1 Axwo" 0 a, WZ-t.2t*

%gem .0""

a a. "an .U . . . 'R

a.4 0

aloom

* 0 ane COCC00 0 . .. .. ..To.- lion,5 M054 rnlO C% -0 m MO*UIron n.*

'o go 1

*suy: aU

- ~ Sulpual

moe'lo 6:0

U.,Mo

luoil

o0 Al

435

- -. - -- --

000000000 000003000000

00000000 0 000 0 00 o=0

Pll . . . . . .

el m 090~00N 500000,0so

00000 0000 000800000-

JUIBUSI0d 0 00 00 - - 0 0 0 0 0

IIe00 1 1 II Il g l

!CS a'.N = g. ~ n ~ *0 g.V N~.gi

00 M000 0.000000 000000000.;o 1150 P . . . . ...C!P P P P Pl . ...

00000 00000 00000 0000

______________ ____________________

0 G

)CSU f *~ne.OI-0

U YfSU - 0 0 0 0 gAg g

I

. .. . . ........

2. .. . ... # .4-.OO coo .000 -.a,,.

i ,.,,1" " ......o. oocoo '

e 0 0;a000 lio0 00

* a

TGoIan

* ul U ..... ooooo'

0 sea____

- ~.. .......o o°°°°° .,0° 0o

COO ,O.0000J..

C -- Ie

"0

a- coo"

1 C!1 P p . CpcIc

S.- O Mo ~ tfll~~N

* * *JlSoilwe

- Jolun oO~ooe~ aoa oeooo45

OOCON 2 C t-O- - Nmff 0 N

. . . . . no. n

0 1 0 0o,0N 4 4 00 0ICCCON2C6O6

I . i i *- I I c

+ 0 00 0 w 00 00 0 0oo 4 0 0

6!

A '

00 00 0 0 000

o

IQoi o oo o o oouo ~ o o

, aw0 00 0 00 0 0 0 00 0 00

-- -

IQ

S- , ,. I. I ~46

- a!KMK6 K K

'" "" ... .. J .... .. . .. .... , K, - a a '. ..nC O-" .. 0 2f - a.. .- .. " ± -''"-

APPENDIX III

SAMPLE OF TABULATED AN~D PLOTTED DATA

47

06 0

=.w CK o9L. ,, .

=Oww ,. o oo o

w w ma

w- L. W.

f.

0 C.

00.

I- Z. ot "

0. - 0 0z - W.--C

MO I-C 0000000

;Z&O W t 0. SI S

C, I

urn48

r

CONFIGURATION LS/D 05/0 m REXIO- RFP RUN#BICIWIVITCOSIFII 2.0 0.73 0.60 2.5 0.015 173

POs0 .99

LcuH- On CLM-16- o -0|6- , ,

- "-0.12

-12 -0.08

-10 -0.04

.8 0

-6. 0.04 o

-4 0.08

-2 0.12/ml

-1.00 - 1.00 - d o .050.95 -

0.90-0.50 0.85 .

-0.25 , 0.80

0 0.750.70

0.25 .1 0.85 -

O.SO - 0.60--S0 S 100 1S 20 2s -5 0 s 10 IS 20 25

.I ALPHA ALPHA

Pr SAMLEZ 2. Plottd Data 42

49