jul princk menu~hh~h - dtic.mil file-wind tunnel experiment ... results and discussion ... r...
TRANSCRIPT
P Ta 5aa DAVID W TAYLOR NAVAL SHIP REARC" AND' D6WLOPMMW CC-gic p/ao AQADA XMRININTAL INVESIATION OF A CIRCULATION CONTROL AILEON3(UIJUL 79 5 0 PRINCKUN1AhhhgoOTNMhhE"/ N
MENU~hh~h
00
EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION OF A CIRCULATION
CONTROL AILERON
by
Steven W. Prince
APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE: DISTRIBUTION UNLIMITED
SX1VIATION AND SURFACE EFFECTS DEPARTMENT
0jr
i DTNSRDC/ASED-79/08 JA 3U4
CID July 1979
80 31..'.
UNCLASSIFIED
SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE (When Data Entered)
REPORT DPAGE READ INSTRUCTIONSDOCUMENTATION BEFORE COMPLETING FORMI REPORT NUMBER 2. GOVT ACCESSION NO. 3 RECIPIENT'S CATALOG NUMBER
, DTNSRDC/ASED-79/ 8 84 TITLE (enduhtWj_ 100 COVERED
S XPERIMNTAL.INVESTIGATION OF A V7 ial~ptCIRCULATION CONTROL AILERON . Oct i77 Sep 78
6. PERFO AMIN ORG. REPORT NUMBER
7. AUTHOR(s) 0. CONTRACT OR GRANT NUMBERe)
/ , : Steven W.jPrince9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS 10. PROGRAM ELEMENT. PROJECT, TASK
AREA & WORK UNIT NUMBERS
David W. Taylor Naval Ship R&D Center Program ElementAviation and Surface Effects Department- Task AreaBethesda, Maryland 20084 Work Unit
1 . CONTROLLING OFFICE NAME AND ADDRESS 12. REPORT DATE
// Jufy : -J 13. NUMBER OF PAGES
14 MONITORING AGENCY NAME & ADDRESS(Idlflere.,t from Controlling Office) IS. SECURITY CLASS, (of thie report)
UNCLAS S IFIED5Is. DECL ASSI FICATtON/DOWNGRADING
SCHEDULE
16. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of this Report)
APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE: DISTRIBUTION U17LI1ITED
' /i/ ,
17. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of the ebstract entered in Block 20, If different from Report)
1. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
I19. KEY WORDS (Continue on reverse side It neceeery and Identify by block number)
I- AileronCirculation Control
20 A kRACT (Continue or% reveras el$ If necoesry and Identify by block number)
--,A Circulation Control (CC) aileron was tested on, Asemispan wing- A
fuselage model at a dypamic pressure equal to 20 lb/t L'(957 N/mg) and aReynolds number of 0.3 x 106 /ft (2.62 x 106 /m)). Three different trailingedge geometries were used on CC ailerons of 10 and 20 percent of the halfspan. Blowing was controlled to produce jet momentum coefficients fromr 0.0017 to 0.0124. Rolling moment coefficients as high as 0.035 were recorded
for the 20-percent CC aileron for angles of attack between 0 and 12 deg. The 10f-
M (Continued on revprne aide)
DD I JAN 7 1473 EDITION OF I NOVGS IS OBSOLETE UNCLASSIFIEDS/N 102-014- 6601
SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PACE (W en Date Sntor ;);. t --- ,,
!MNCLASSIFTED.-LLUIJ1Y~ CLASSIFICATION Of THIS PAGE(M7,.n Deg@ Entered)
(Block 20 continued)
-ICaileron was at least three times as effective as a pure reaction jetfor the same amount of bleed air. Adverse yaw was large, on the order ofone-half of the rolling moment.,
.Ac,r
UI
UNCLASSIFIED
SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE(Wbhfl Does Entered)
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
I LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................... iii
I NOTATION ............................................................ iv
ABSTRACT ............................................................ 1
ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION ........................................... I
INTRODUCTION ........................................................ 1
MODEL ............................................................... 2
- WIND TUNNEL EXPERIMENT ................................................... 3
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION .............................................. 4
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS .............................................. 6
j LIST OF FIGURES
1 - Semispan Wing-Fuselage Model and Groundboard .................... 9
2 - Fourteen-Percent Supercritical Airfoil with CirculationControl Trailing Edge ........................................... 10
3 - Geometry of Circulation Control Aileron Trailing EdgeConfigurations .................................................. 11
I 4- Wing Fence Inboard of Circulation Control Aileron Section ....... 12
5 - Smispan Wing-Fuselage Model with Double Slotted Flaps .......... 13
6 - Rolling Moment Coefficient Versus Angle of Attack ............... 15
7 - Rolling Moment Enhancement ...................................... 21
I 8 - Adverse Yawing Moment of the Twenty-Percent CirculationControl Ailerons ................................................ 24
i,tit
I I
NOTATION jA Area of slot
AR Aspect ratio
b Wing span
C Rolling moment coefficient
C Yawing moment coefficientn
C Momentum coefficient based on wing area
C Momentum coefficient based on aileron section area
jiA
m Mass flow IPd Wing plenum total pressure, psig
P Free-stream static pressure, psig 1q Free-stream dynamic pressure, lb/ft
2
R Universal gas constant IS Wing reference area, ft I
s 1715 ft 2/sec 2 R
Td Wing plenum total temperature IV Jet velocity
S Angle of attack (deg) Iy Ratio of specific heats I
iI
ivi - I |i
ABSTRACT
A Circulation Control (CC) aileron was tested on ajsemispan wing-fuselage model at a dynamic pressure equal
to 20 lb/ft 2 (957 N/m2 ) and a Reynolds number of 0.8 x 106 /ft
(2.62 x 106 /m). Three different trailing edge geometrieswere used on CC ailerons of 10 and 20 percent of the halfspan. Blowing was controlled to produce jet momentumcoefficients from 0.0017 to 0.0124. Rolling moment coeffi-cients as high as 0.035 were recorded for the 20-percentCC aileron for angles of attack between 0 and 12 deg. TheCC aileron was at least three times as effective as a purereaction jet for the same amount of bleed air. Adverseyaw was large, on the order of one-half of the rollingmoment.
ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION
This study was authorized and funded by the Naval Air Systems Command
(NAVAIR) 320D under Program Element 62241N and Task Area WF 41 421 000.
The work was completed in FY 79 at th6 David W. Taylor Naval Ship Research
and Development Center (DTNSRDC) under Work Unit 1-1600-079.
INTRODUCTION
Insufficient roll control power is a problem with many vertical/short
takeoff and landing (V/STOL) aircraft at transition speeds. A large amount
of roll control power is required to trim out a lift-jet induced rolling
moment due to sideslip. Rolling moment coefficient can approach 0.3 in a
30-deg sideslip.' A Circulation Control (CC) aileron is a potential method
of providing adequate roll control power at transition speeds without exces-
sive bleed air requirements.
A CC aileron is a powered roll control device in the same location on
the wing as the aileron. The CC aileron uses tangential blowing over a
round trailing edge to produce increased section lift coefficients. The
jet blown over the round trailing edge stays attached by the Coanda
principle. It moves the trailing edge stagnation point to the underside,
increasing circulation.2 Roll control is achieved by blowing the CC
aileron on one wing to raise the wing. The trailing edge can be retracted
or faired in by various means for high-speed flight.
II
MODEL DESCRIPTION
The model is a semispan wing fuselage mounted on a circular ground-
board. The principal dimensions of the model are shown in Figure 1. The
Circulation Control airfoil is a 14-percent thick supercritical wing with
a circulation control round trailing edge (Figure 2). The wing had an
aspect ratio of 4.0. Blowing air was supplied through a wing plenum. The
CC aileron section was made by closing the slot over the inboard section
of the wing with gasket material so only the outboard section was blown.
The gasket material extended approximately 0.25 in. (0.64 cm) out of the
slot to insure separation of the flow over the rounded trailing edge.
Intermittent flow attachment over the round unblown section was suspected
to have caused the considerable scatter found in the previous data. Two
CC aileron spans were investigated; one of 20-percent half span with a
slot extending 4.94 in. (13.56 cm) from the tip and the other of 10-percent
half span with the slot extending 2.47 in. (6.27 cm). Three different
trailing edge geometries were investigated; see Figure 3. A fence was used
to separate the blown CC aileron section from the rest of the wing as shown
in Figure 4.
The wing-fuselage model was mounted in the wind tunnel test section
such that only the wing was attached to the balance frame. The wooden fuse-
lage was mounted to the groundboard and was independent of the balance
frame with a small gap existing between the wing root and the fuselage body.
The forces and moments measured by the balance frame were essentially wing-
alone data in the presence of a body. A large fence was installed around
the wing root area very close to the fuselage. The fence is shown in fFigure 2, and its position is noted in Figure 1.
The circular ground board is 8 ft (2.33 m) in diameter and serves as ja reflection plane for the half model. The groundboard is constructed
from 0.5 in. (1.2 cm) plywood and is mounted to the test section floor on
2.5 in. (6.35 cm) wooden spacers, leaving a gap between the groundboard and
the tunnel floor for boundary layer bleed. The groundboard is shown in
Figure I and additional details are shown in Figure 5.
2 I___ __ _ ,_
IIf
WIND TUNNEL EXPERIMENT
The investigation was conducted in the DTNSRDC 8- by 10-foot north
subsonic wind tunnel. The model was floor mounted in a vertical position
using Strut System 8. Blowing air was supplied through a pipe in the
center of this strut. The strut system is located beneath the tunnel floor
and transfers the aerodynamic loads to an external Toledo mechanical
balance system. The Toledo balance system records six-component force and
moment data on magnetic tape using a Beckman 210 high speed data acquisition
system.
Three total pressure transducers and one thermocouple temperature
probe were mounted in the wing plenum. Due to the difficulty of actually
f measuring the jet velocity, it was calculated assuming isentropic expansion
of the air from the total pressure in the wing plenum to free-stream static
pressure. The jet velocity can be determined from the expression
(Reference 2):
The mass flow of the jet m was measured by a venturimeter in the airsupply line. The blowing coefficient C is determined from the expression:
i qSIFor each configuration, the model was set at an angle of attack and
data was taken at different blowing coefficients by varying the plenum
pressure. The model was then set at the next angle of attack, and the
process was repeated.
All forces and moments were resolved about the mean aerodynamic
chord and reduced to standard coefficient form using the stability axis
[system. Coefficients were based on twice the reference area of the semi-span model to simulate the case of a full-span model. Net rolling and
3
"II
yawing moments (AC, and AC ) are the differences between the momentncoefficients with and without blowing.
Each data point was taken as the average of 10 data samplings over a
5-sec interval. Model weight and air pressure line tare corrections were
applied to the balance data. The only aerodynamic corrections applied to
the force and moment data consisted of the standard downwash corrections
as outlined in Reference 3; angle of attack and drag coefficient were the
two parameters affected.
All data were recorded at a dynamic pressure of 20 lb/ft 2 (957 N/m )
with a Reynolds number of 0.8 x 106 (2.62 x 10 6/m). The 20- and 10-percent
CC ailerons were each tested at five momentum coefficients. Angle of
attack was varied from 0 to 24 deg in 4-deg increments.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The rolling moment coefficient about the centerline of the half model
for the configurations evaluated is shown in Figures 6a through 6f. The
application of roll control to lift one wing is modeled as blowing on one
CC aileron and no blowing on the other. The net rolling moment that would
be felt by a whole model with a certain amount of blowing on one CC aileron
is the difference between that blown curve and the unblown curve.
The four 20-percent CC ailerons show a net rolling moment that is
fairly even with angle of attack for each momentum coefficient. A much
smaller net rolling moment was generated by the two 10-percent CC ailerons
with blowing. Scatter in the data is probably responsible for most of the
unevenness of the increments.
Figures 7a through 7f show net rolling moment versus momentum coeffi-
cient for all six configurations evaluated. Lines fanning out from the
origin represent levels of constant rolling moment enhancement. Rolling
moment enhancement is the net rolling moment achieved with the device
divided by the net rolling moment that would be produced by using the air
for a tip jet (assuming no losses in the tip jet).
4
!)
i AC qSb
Enhancement = ZV.(b
AC~qSb
C qS(b/2)
2AC )
C
For the 20-percent CC aileron, net rolling moment increases nonlinearly
with momentum coefficient, with less incremental net rolling moment being
gained by additional blowing. At the maximum momentum coefficient tested,
the device was still showing increasing net rolling moment with increasing
blowing. A rolling moment enhancement greater than four was achieved by
the 20-percent CC ailerons in most conditions, and enhancement greater than
12 was achieved by the short edge configuration at low momentum coefficients.
The rounded edge and square edge configurations performed better than
the long edge configuration with a maximum net rolling moment of 0.037
compared to 0.030. Removing the fence from the round edge configuration
decreased maximum net rolling moment by 10 percent, from 0.037 to 0.033.
The fence increased the performance of the low aspect ratio blown section by -
making it more like a two-dimensional section. The 10-percent CC ailerons
showed similar nonlinear trends with momentum coefficient, but performance
jwas only one-third as good as the 20-percent CC ailerons. The comparatively
poor performance of the 10-percent CC aileron is probably due to the very
low aspect ratio of the blown portion of the wing. Again, the square edge
configuration performed better than the long edge configuration.
Adverse yaw plots for the 20-percent square edge and long edge
configurations are shown in Figures 8a and b. The adverse yawing moments
measured were large, on the order of one-half of the rolling moment. The
square edge configuration shows increasing adverse yaw with angle of attack
with the exception of zero angle of attack.
5
4,
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
A CC aileron was evaluated in a low-speed wind tunnel test for
potential use on V/STOL aircraft. A large amount of roll power for a small
expense of bleed air was desired. (The highest rolling moment achieved was
Cz = 0.037 for a momentum coefficient of C = 0.014, which represents a
rolling moment enhancement of 5.29. The adverse yawing moment measured was
approximately one-half of the rolling moment.) The 20-percent CC aileron
performed three times as well as the 10-percent CC aileron. A fence on the
inboard edge of the CC aileron increased performance. The rounded edge and
square edge configurations performed better than the long edge configuration.
Various improvements are recommended for further investigation. A
spoiler raised on the opposite wing would increase rolling monent and reduce
adverse yaw by increasing diag on that wing. Up blowing on the opposite
wing from a slot on the underside of the trailing edge would also increase
rolling moment, but its effect on adverse yaw is uncertain.
6
)
I
REFERENCES
1. Marguson, R.J. and C.L. Gentry, Jr., "Aerodynamic Characteristics
of a Five-Jet VTOL Configuration in the Transition Speed Range," NASA
Langley Research Center TN D-4812 (Oct 1968).
2. Englar, R.J., "Subsonic Wing Tunnel Investigation of the High Lift
Capability of a Circulation Control Wing on a 1/5-Scale T-2C Aircraft Model,"
David W. Taylor Naval Ship Research and Development Center Report ASED-299
(May 1973).
3. Pope, A. and J.J. Harper, "Low Speed Wind Tunnel Testing,"
John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York (1966).
I.7II
NMNLCHORD SWEEP Ideg)
ASPECT RATIO TIP ROOT L.E. T.E. SEMISPAN
(21.34cm) (46 .58cm) (0.582m)
4 .40 in. 18.34 in. 25.8 0 .12 ft
(16.31cm) 146.58cm) 2. 0 (0.646m)
________________AR =_______ 4_______ ___
AR =43
I ROOT FENCE\
ITUNNEL FLOOR. SIDE VIEW 8 ft (2.4384m) DIA.SPLITTER PLATE
.1 TOP VIEW
Fiue1-Smsa ig-Fuselage Model and Ground Board
Al
LU
00
02Z
040cu
"-4
0 4-4
z -4w :13LA-J
'4-4
4-J
94S-A ,-00
P4.J
LUU
z to4Lu)
100
m _ _ _ um _ _ _J
3.5 deg-
I CIRCULATION CONTROL AILERON
1/16 in.
CIRCULATION CONTROL AILERON WITH SIMULATED SHORT FLAP
i J 90 deg
CIRCULATION CONTROL AILERON WITH SIMULATED EXTENDED FLAP
Figure 3 -Geometry of Circulation Control Aileron1Trailing Edge Configurations
1 11
If
'I
Figure 4 - Wing Fence Inboard of CirculationControl Aileron Section
12
Figure 5 - Semispan Circulation Control Wing-Fuselage Model
t1.3
1t
Figure 6 -Rolling Moment Coefficient versus Angle of Attack
0.22511
Pd (09i) A
0 0.00.200 -l 1.95 0.0030
L.8.50 0.0099
Q.7 12.90 0.0141
0.150
zU
LL 0.1250
zLU
0.100
0
0.075
0.050-
0.025
10 40 4 8 12 16 20 24ANGLE OF ATTACK, ot (deg)
I Figure 6a -Twenty-Percent CC Aileron, Simulated Short Flap
15
Figure 6 (Continued)
0.225 111
Pd Ipsag) C M
0.200 - 0 0.0 0
o 2.0 0.0030
A 3.95 0.0050
0.175 f 8.60 0.0099o 13.00 0.0141
S0.150
zLUULA.LA.LU 0.1250
0S0.100-
-j-j0
0.075
0.50-
0.024
ANGLE OF ATTACK, a (dog)
Figure 6b -Twenty-Percent CC Aileron, Simulated Extended Flap
16
Figure 6 (Continued) WT EC
0.225
0.200 - pd (09i) CY
o 0.0 0
o 13.0 0.0141
0.175
0.150
Ui 0.125U.U.0.0
UZ 0.100
0.05
0
-4 00751216202
ANGLE OF ATTACK, a (dog)
Figure 6c -Twenty-Percent CC Aileron, with Fence
17
Figure 6 (Continued)
0,225111
Pd (psiq) C IjNo FENCE
0.200 0 o.0 0Q 13.0 0.0141
0.175
0.150
2
U.. 0.1250
o 0.100
2j
0cc 0.075
0.050
ANGLE OF ATTACK, a~ Ideg)
Figure 6d -Twenty-Percent CC Aileron, without Vence
18
I Figure 6 (Continued)
I 0.175
Pd (psig) CUI 0.0 00.150 0 2.0 0.0017
I A 3.95 0.0032L 8.65 0.0060
0.125 Q 13.1 0.0084
I LUj U 0.100-
U-
0
2 0.075-0
0 0.050
II ANGLE OF ATTACK, a (dog)
Figure 6e -Ten-Percent CC Aileron, Simulated Short Flap
1 19
Figure 6 (Continued)
0.200
Pd (pseg) CM
0 0.0 00.175 - C 2.05 0.0017
4.0 0.0032
L 8.7 0.0060
0.150 - 13.1 0.0084
LU 0.125
Uj0.U
0.0Ui
0
0.0750
0.050
0.025-
00 4 8 12 16 20 24
ANGLE OF ATTACK, a (deg)
Figure 6f -Ten-Percent CC Aileron, Simulated Extended Flap
20
IFigure 7-Rolling Moment EnhancementENHANCEMENT =24 16 12
0.3I PARAMETE R//
0.020
.0
0I Figure 7 a -Twenty-Percent CC Aileron, Simulated Short Flap
12z ENHANCEMENT
PARAMETER8611W 0.03
4-
1 0.02
~10 0.005 CM 0.010 0.015
10 0.05 C JAA 0.10MOMENTUM COEFFICIENT
I Figure 7b -Twenty-Percent CC Aileron, Simulated Extended Flap
21_ ___1
Figure 7 (Continued)
0.04
6ENHANCEMENT-
PARAMETER ool-
0.03 - loe--
0.02 --o l o o
Il Ce - (deg)
0.01 4---
z- 8
o 0I16
0
20.04z-j _j ENHANCEMENTo PARAMETER8
'U~ 0.03
2 - a-o
0.02 -'0, o,.1 o
0.001 C A3 s 0.1 0.015
0 0.06 0.10
MUAMOMENTUM COEFFICIENT
Figure 7d -Twenty-Percent CC Aileron, wi~thout Fence
22
Figure 7 (Continued)
0.04
ENHANCEMENTPARAMETER
12 8 60.03/
U 2
0.021
z
Zj Figure 7E,- Ten-Percent CC Aileron, Simulated Short Flay!
0
~0.04o (deg)-j ENHANCEMENT
0PARAMETER Q
I- 04Z 0.03 <
ts,16
0.212 8
0.02 2
0.005 C 0.010 0.015
01.1 0.20
MOMENTUM COEFFICIENT
Figure 7f -Ten-Percent CC Aileron--Simulated Extended Flap
i2
-0.03a(dg
0 05 4
-0.02 L16f24
U0 -0.01
zLU
U-U-LU0 0
z Figure 8a -Simulated Short Flap
o 0.03
z
-0.02
-01
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04
NET ROLLING MOMENT COEFFICIENT, ACC
Figure 8b - Simulated Extended Flap
Figure 8 -Adverse Yawing Moment of the Twenty PercentCirculation Control Ailerons
24
I Copies
1 NASA/Dryden/Klein
4 NASA/Ames
1 A. Faye1 Full Scale Res. Br.1 Large Scale Aero. Br.1 R. Pressley
1 Flow Research/Dvorak
3 Grumman Aerospace Corp1 Moore1 Siegal1 SeredinskyI
I Douglas Aircraft/Posch
1 Kaman Aerospace/Barnes
1 Lockheed Aircraft Corp/Hippler
1 LTV/Sherrieb
1 Rockwell International/Palmer
CENTER DISTRIBUTION
iCopies Code Name
2 522.3 Aero. Library
1 16
1 1616
3 1619
j 1 166B
10 166 Prince
'I2
1'
I
II
I DTNSRDC ISSUES THREE TYPES OF REPORTS
1. DTNSRDC REPORTS, A FORMAL SERIES, CONTAIN INFORMATION OF PERMANENT TECH-NICAL VALUE. THEY CARRY A CONSECUTIVE NUMERICAL IDENTIFICATION REGARDLESS OFj THEIR CLASSIFICATION OR THE ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT.
2. DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS, A SEMIFORMAL SERIES, CONTAIN INFORMATION OF A PRELIM-INARY, TEMPORARY, OR PROPRIETARY NATURE OR OF LIMITED INTEREST OR SIGNIFICANCE.THEY CARRY A DEPARTMENTAL ALPHANUMERICAL IDENTIFICATION.
3. TECHNICAL MEMORANDA, AN INFORMAL SERIES, CONTAIN TECHNICAL DOCUMENTATIONI OF LIMITED USE AND INTEREST. THEY ARE PRIMARILY WORKING PAPERS INTENDED FOR IN-
TERNAL USE. THEY CARRY AN IDENTIFYING NUMBER WHICH INDICATES THEIR TYPE AND THENUMERICAL CODE OF THE ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT. ANY DISTRIBUTION OUTSIDE DTNSRDCMUST BE APPROVED BY THE HEAD OF THE ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT ON A CASE-BY-CASEBASIS.
I
ij44
iii