ImageVerifierCode 换一换
格式:PDF , 页数:13 ,大小:397.09KB ,
资源ID:1017585      下载积分:10000 积分
快捷下载
登录下载
邮箱/手机:
温馨提示:
如需开发票,请勿充值!快捷下载时,用户名和密码都是您填写的邮箱或者手机号,方便查询和重复下载(系统自动生成)。
如填写123,账号就是123,密码也是123。
特别说明:
请自助下载,系统不会自动发送文件的哦; 如果您已付费,想二次下载,请登录后访问:我的下载记录
支付方式: 支付宝扫码支付 微信扫码支付   
注意:如需开发票,请勿充值!
验证码:   换一换

加入VIP,免费下载
 

温馨提示:由于个人手机设置不同,如果发现不能下载,请复制以下地址【http://www.mydoc123.com/d-1017585.html】到电脑端继续下载(重复下载不扣费)。

已注册用户请登录:
账号:
密码:
验证码:   换一换
  忘记密码?
三方登录: 微信登录  

下载须知

1: 本站所有资源如无特殊说明,都需要本地电脑安装OFFICE2007和PDF阅读器。
2: 试题试卷类文档,如果标题没有明确说明有答案则都视为没有答案,请知晓。
3: 文件的所有权益归上传用户所有。
4. 未经权益所有人同意不得将文件中的内容挪作商业或盈利用途。
5. 本站仅提供交流平台,并不能对任何下载内容负责。
6. 下载文件中如有侵权或不适当内容,请与我们联系,我们立即纠正。
7. 本站不保证下载资源的准确性、安全性和完整性, 同时也不承担用户因使用这些下载资源对自己和他人造成任何形式的伤害或损失。

版权提示 | 免责声明

本文(REG NACA-TR-695-1940 Determination of ground effect from tests of a glider in towed flight.pdf)为本站会员(eveningprove235)主动上传,麦多课文库仅提供信息存储空间,仅对用户上传内容的表现方式做保护处理,对上载内容本身不做任何修改或编辑。 若此文所含内容侵犯了您的版权或隐私,请立即通知麦多课文库(发送邮件至master@mydoc123.com或直接QQ联系客服),我们立即给予删除!

REG NACA-TR-695-1940 Determination of ground effect from tests of a glider in towed flight.pdf

1、REPORT No. 695DETERMINATION OF GROUND EFFECT FROM TESTS OF A GLIDER IN TOWEDFLIGHTBy J. W. WETMORE and L. I. TURNER)Jr.SUMMARYAn investigation was made tojind the e$ect of the groundon the aerodynamic churacteristtis of a Franklin PSI?glider. The lift, the drag, and the angle of attack of thegltier

2、in towed flight were determined at several heightsfrom 0.14 to 1.19 span lengths and at various speeds foreach height. Two wing arrangements were tested: theplain wing, and the wing with a nearly full-span 30-percent-chord split flap de$ected 45.For both wing arrangements, the results showed adecrea

3、se in the drag coefiient and the angle of attack fora given liji coefiient when the wing was aected by theground; for the $apped wing, which was the only onetested at two di$erent heights near the ground (0.14 and0.33 span length), the reduction in drag was greater atthe smaller height but the chang

4、e in angle of attack wasapproximately the same at both heights.The experimental results for the plain wing were in goodagreement with theoretical values calculated by the methodof Wieselsberger for both the angle of attack and the dragcoefiient at a height of 0.21 span length; Tanis refine-ments of

5、the theory had a practically negligible eect onthe computed values in this case. .For the jlapped wing,the ground eJect on the drag coefiient as calculated bythe extended treatment of Tani was in better agreementwith experiment, in general, than the predictions byWieselsbergers method. With regard t

6、o ground efecton the angle of attack oj the wing with split$ap, the resultsdid not indicate either treatment as definitely preferablealthough it appeared that, in this case, Wieselsbergersmethod probably agreed better m“th experiment.INTRODUCTIONThe fact that the close approach of an airplane tothe

7、ground is accompanied by substantial changes inits aerodynamic characteristics has been known forsome time; and a considerable amount of research,both theoretical and experimental, has been the appear-ance of the smoke in the phototheodolite photographsthus afforded a means of synchronizing the reco

8、rds.During the tests, the wind speed near the ground wasmeasured by an indicating vane-type anemometer.TESTSThe towing tests were made on a concrete runwayabout one-half mile long. Approximately one third of theavailable distance was used in accelerating to the desiredspeed, attainiig the prescribed

9、 height with the glider,and then establishing as nearly steady conditions aspossible before taking records. During the secondthird of the run, the phototheodolite and the gliderinstruments were switched on for a period of 6 to 8seconds. The rest of the course provided space inwhich to land the glide

10、r md bring it to a stop. Testswere made only when the wind was less than 5 milesper hour and parallel to the coume in order “to avoid,as far as possible, discrepancies due to vertical currentsand yawing of the glider. This precaution also per-mitted making test runs in both directions.With the plain

11、 wing, two groups of tests at diflerentheights were made, each covering a range of speedsfrom 36 to 54 miles per hour. For one of these groups,the average height of the wing above the ground was0.21fI and for the other, 1.17b. Three series of tests atdifferent heights were made with the split flap.

12、Thespeeds ranged from 30 to 38 miles per hour and theaverage heights were 0.14b,0.33b,and 1.19b.The towing tests were originally expected to show theeffect of the ground on the maximum lift as well as onthe aerodynamic characteristics in the unstalled-flightrange. It was found impossible, however, t

13、o obtainsteady conditions in towed flight near maximum liftbecause the longitudinal control was insticient toovercome the nose-down pitching moment of the towingforce, which became relatively large at the higherangles of attack. Special tests made to investigatenaximum lift consisted in dete rmining

14、 the lift coefE-fient in actual landings and in simulated landings at aconsiderable altitude to which the glider was towed withm airplane. Before each of these maneuvers, the$.ider was released from the towline so that the difficultyiue to the moment of the towing force was avoided.Lhe simulated lan

15、dings at altitude were made onlyvith the plain wing because it was considered inadvis-ble to attempt an airplane tow with the split flapnstalled.REDUCTION OF DATAInasmuch as the duration of the instrument records)btained in difTerent runs varied appreciably, the.ecords of the glider instruments were

16、 divided into;ections, each covering 2 seconds of time in order that;he final values computed from the data might all bef equal weight. Mean values of the quantities meas-ed by the various instruments were then determinedior each 2-second period.r!FIGURE 4.Forms on glider in towed fright.The forces

17、acting on the glider in towed flight arehown in figure 4. The symbols used in reducing thedata are as follows:wLDTRRzA.e*AY;v,hi$0.CDgross weight.lift.drag.towing force measured by dynamometer.resultant of L, D, and T.component of R along normal, or Z, axis of glider.ratio RZ/W measured by accelerom

18、eter.angle of R relative to Z-axis measured by pendu-lum inclinometer.angle of T relative to X-axis measured by dyna-mometer.attitude angle of X-axis relative to horizontalmeasured by photoinclinometer.flight-path angle.angle of attack.air speed along flight path.vertical velocity.height of quarter-

19、chord point of wingaboveground.density of air.wing area.lift coefficient.drag coefficient.Provided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-298 REPORT NO. 695NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICSThe X axis and the Z axis of the glider were define

20、das parallel and normal, respectively, to the angle-of-attack reference shown in figure 3, which was a linetangent to the lower suxface of the wing at two points.Values of Iift, drag, and angle of attack were derivedfrom the instrument data for each 2-second interval inaccordance with the following

21、procedure:The value of the resultat_obtained from the relationsR,= WA=andof L, D, and T wasB=- i. e., in the lift and the dragdirections, orL=R cos (e)+T * (1#-cx)andD=T cm (+cY)-.R sin (L9-a)The lift and the drag coefficients were found from theusual reationsc,.= andDc.= $V2.RESULTSThe experimental

22、 values of lift and drag coefficientsand angles of attack for all the test conditions areplotted in figures 5 to 9. Figures 5 and 6 present theresults obtained with the plain wing at heights of 1.17band 0.21b, respectively. Figures 7, 8, and 9 show theresults with the split flap at heights of 1.19b,

23、 0.33b, and0.14b, respectively.The faired curves for various conditions, defined bythe experimental points of the foregoing figures, areplotted together for comparison in figures 10 and 11.Figure 10 shows the effect of variation in height on theaerodynamic characteristics of thefigure 11 gives corre

24、sponding resultsplain wing, andfor the split flap.K additi and, consequently, the fairingof the data for the split flap was less certain. Thisdifference is probably the result, in part, of considerableunsteadiness in flight, apparently due to a reduction inlongitudinal stability of the glider caused

25、 by the splitflap.The probable deviation of the results, as defined bythe faired curves, is estimated to be as follows:With the plain wing: With the split flap:c., +0.01 c., thedifferences increased with increasing lift coefficient.With the split flap, the range of lift coe5cientscovered in the test

26、s was considerably higher thanwith the plain wing, as shown in figures 10 and 11.As previously explained, the reliability of the results atlift coe5cients above 1.5 is very uncertain; hence,such results will not be considered in this discussion.Below this value of lift coefficient, the angle of atta

27、clcand the drag coefficient for a given lift coefficient weredecreased when the wing was near the ground, as inthe case of the plain wing, but the reduction was con-siderably greater,Provided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-GROUND EFFEOT FROM

28、TESTS OF A GLIDER IN TOWED FLIGHT 299(a) Variation with angle of attack.FIGUBE 5.Lift and drag e.hamcteristfc h/b=l.19. Franklin PS-2 glider.and as a means of calculating its effect with reasonable results. Ground-effect theory is a particular case ofaccuracy. More recently the theory has been exten

29、ded multilane theory; the actual system composed of thoby the method of references 4 and 5 to include factors airfoil and the ground is assumed to be replaced by aProvided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-GROUND EFFECThypothetical biplane cellu

30、le consisting ofFROM TESTS OF A GLIDER IN TOWED FLIGHT 301the real wing I The change in the aerodynamic characteristics of theand its image reflected in the gr0 Q%0/.2 .28; L2%ukb“ 2 Go .24: -/.D.Q.$? t ub Qal $0 QJ8 o*. .20 U.8w $4.6 .16 .6.4 ./2 .4,2 .08 .2.(a) (b)4 o 04 0Angle of %fork, n!,8deg /

31、2 ./8 .22 .26 .30Dmg coefficient, CD .34(a) Variationwith angleofattsck. (b) Polar diagram.FIGURE 8.Lift and drng chamctcristi split flap deflected 45”; f=o.33. Franklin PS-2 glider.equal spans, equal chords, zero stagger, and a gap twice induced vertical elocity at the real wing due to thethe dista

32、nce of the real wing from the ground. The lifts. trailing vortices of the image wing; (2) reduction of theof the wings are of equal magnitude and opposite sign. longitudinal velocity at the real wing due to theProvided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from

33、IHS-,-,- . . . _302 REPORT NO. .695-NATIONAIJADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICScirculation about the image wing; (3) change of circula-tion about the real wing due to the bound vortices ofthe image wing; and (4) change in the flow pattern due1.8 .40011.4H- Vlllll-xillt/i “ iI eH-+-t=Y”&v .8 .204.6 .

34、f6.4 ./2.2 .08(a)Q4 o .044 8 /2Angle of uffuck, e/, deg(a) Variation with angle of attack.(3),and (4) in the case of a, and (2) in the case of CD.The results of the investigation, as subsequently dis-cussed, indicate that the refinements had a practically1.800-.- 0f.6 YD 00 0 001.4 0/o(t1.2 & 0e 0*.

35、C1.o-w().-O.3c.1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.10.11.12.13.REFERENCESLe Sueur, Maurice: Ground Effect on the Take-Off andLanding of Airplanes. T. M. No. 771, N. A. C. A., 1935.Pistolesi, E.: Ground Effect-Theory and Practice. T. M.No. 828, N. A. C. A., 1937.Wieselsberger, C.: Wing Resistance near the Ground.T. M.

36、 No. 77, N. A, C. A., 1922.Tani, Itiro, Taima, Masuo, and Sirnidu, Sodi: The Effect ofGround on the Aerodynamic Characteristics of a Mono-plane Wing. Rep. No. 156 (vol. XIII, 2), Aero. Res.Inst., Tokyo Imperial Univ., Sept. 1937.Tani, Itiio, Itokawa, Hideo, and Taima, Masuo: FurtherStudies of the Gr

37、ound Effect on the Aerodynamic Char-acteristics of an Aeroplane with Special Reference to TailMoment. Rep. No. 158 (vol. XIII, 4), Aero. Res. Inst.,Tokyo Imperial Univ., Aov. 1937.Sears, William R.: Ground Effect with Special Referenceto Pitching Moments. Jour. Aero. Sci., vol. 5, no. 7,May 1938, pp

38、. 281-285.Ti5nnies, E.: Effect of the Ground on an Airplane FlyingClose to It. T. M. No. 674, N. A. C. A., 1932.Recant, Isidore G.: Wind-Tunnel Investigation of GroundEffect on Wings with Flaps. T. N. No. 705, N. A. C. A.,1939.Reid, Elliott G . A Full-Scale Investigation of GroundEffect. Rep. No. 26

39、5, N. A. C. A., 1927.Nutt, A. E. Woodward, and Richards, G. J.: Cine-Photographic Measurements of Speed and Attitude ofSouthampton Aircraft When Taking Off and Alighting.R. & M. No. 1621, British A. R. C., 1935.Hutchinson, J. L.: Further Measurements of Ground Inter-ference on the Lift of a Southamp

40、ton Flying Boat. R. & M.No. 1747, Britiih A. R. C., 1936.Wallace, Rudolf N.: The Effect of Split Trailing-Edge WingFlaps on the Aerodynamic Characteristics of a ParasolMonoplane. T. N. No. 475, N. A. C. A., 1933.Reid, Elliott G.: Applied Wing Theory. McGraw-Hill BookCo., Inc., 1932, pp. 175 and 176.Provided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-

copyright@ 2008-2019 麦多课文库(www.mydoc123.com)网站版权所有
备案/许可证编号:苏ICP备17064731号-1