NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE F R AERONAUTICS O

ORIGINALLY ISSUED October 1944 ae Advance Restricted Report I h J O 5

m--

-GATION

OF

rn ~ A C A23021 P~IFOIL
FIJQ

WITH A O.~~-AIRFOIL-CHORD DOUBLE SIXFIZD

By Jack Fiechel and John M. Riebe

Langley Manorial Aeronautical Laboratory Langley Field, Va.

WASHINGTON
NACA WARTIME REPORTS a r e reprints of papers originally issued to provide rapid distribution of advance research results to an authorized group requiring them f o r the war effort. They were previously held under a security status but a r e now unclassified. Some of these reports were not technically edited. A l l have been reproduced without change in order to expedite general distribution.

NACA RRR N O * L4J05

t

NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AEROIJAUTICS

*,
AEVANCE RESTRICTED REPORT
L)

:*JIXD-TTUNA~EL INVZETIGATION OF A N HACA 23021 AIRFOIL

* J ~ I T H 0.32-AIRFOIL-CHORD DOUBLE SLOTTED FLAP A

By Jack F i s c h e l and John M. Riebe

An i n v e s t i g a t i o n was made i n t h e L M L 7- by 10-foot wind t u n n e l o f a n ITACA 23021 a i r f o i l w i t h 8 double s l o t t e d f l a p having a chord 32 p e r c e n t of t h e a i r f o i l chord ( 0 . 3 2 ~ ) t o determine t h e aerodgiianic s e c t i o n charact e r i s t i c s w i t h the flaps deflected at various positions. The e g f e c t s o f moving t h e f o r e f l a p and r e a r f l a p a s a u n i t and of d e f l e c t i n g or rernoving t h e lower l a p of the s l o t w e m a l s o determined.
Three p o s i t i o n s were s e l e c t e d f o r t h e f o r e . f l a p and a t each y o s i t i o n t h e maximuii l i f t of t h e a i r f o i l was obtafned w i t h t h e r e a r f l a p at t h e naximum d e f l e c t L o n used a t t h a t .fore-flap p o s i t i o n . The s e c t i o n l i f t of t h e a i r f o i l i n c r e a s e d as the, P o r e f l a p was extended and maximum l i f t was obtained with t h e f o r e f l a p d e f l e c t e d 30' i n t h e a o s t extended p o s i t ion. T h i s arrangeinent provided a rilaxI!i~m s e c t i o n l i f t c o e f f i c i e n t of' 3.31, which was h i g h e r t h a n t h e value obtained w i t h e i t h e r a 0 . 2 5 6 6 ~o r a 0.li-O~ s i n g l e - s l o t t e d - f l a p arran-ement and 0.25 l e s s r t h a n t h e value obtained w i t h a O.L+OC d o u b l e - s l o t t e d - f l a p arrancement on t h e same a i r f o i l . The v a l u e s of t h e p r o f i l e - d r a g c o e f f i c i e n t obtained w i t h t h e 0 . 3 2 ~ double slotted f l a p were l a r g e r t h a n t h o s e f o r t h e 0 . 2 5 6 6 ~ or O.I;OC s i n g l e s l o t t e a f l a p s f o r s e c t i o n l i f t c o e f f i c i e n t s A t a l l values of t h e between 1.0 and approximately 2.7. s e c t i o n l i f t c o e f f i c i e n t above 1 . 0 , t h e 0 . 4 0 ~double s l o t t e d f l a p had a lower p r o f i l e d r a g t h a n t h e 0 . 3 2 ~ double s l o t t e d f l a p . A t various values of t h e m a x i m u m s e c t i o n l i f t C o e f f i c i e n t produced by v a r i o u s f l a p d e f l e c t i o n s , t h e 0 . 3 2 ~ double s l o t t e d f l a p gave n e g a t i v e s e c t i o n p i t ching-moment c o e f f i c i e n t s t h a t were h i g h e r than t h o s e of o t h e r s l o t t e d f l a p s 011 t h e same a i r f o i l . The 0 . 3 2 ~ double s l o t t e d f l a p gave a 2 p o x i m a t e l y the same maximum s e c t i o n l i f t c o e f f i c i e n t a s , b u t h i g h e r p r o f i l e -

NACA ARR No. a0 J5

drag c o e f f i c l e n t s o v e r t h o entire l i f t range t h a n , a s i m i l a r arrar-gemect of' a 0.3Cjc dcu'ble slotted f l a p on an NACA 23612 a i r f o i l . I
TKTHODUCTIOX

The National Adv! s o r y Covmi.ttea f o r Aeronautics has undertaken en s x t e n r j i m i n v e s t i g a t i o n of v a r i o u s highl i f t devices i n o r d e r t o r'urrdsh i n f 3 m . a t i o n a9plicab2-e t o t h e aerodynamic design of' wirq-flap coinhinations t h a t w i l l improve t h e z a f e t q and peri'ormarxe o f a i r p l a n e s . F o r use i n take-off anc?. i n i t i a l climb, a h i g h - l i f t device capable o f producing h i g h l i f t w i t h low d r a g i s d e s i r a b l e . F o r x s e i n l a n d i n g ? , k\.owsve:ll, h t g h l i f t w i t h v a r i a b l e drag i s belleved d e s i 7 a b l e . Other d e s i r a S l e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c ? are: no i n c r e s s e i n Craz wit3 t h e f l a p n e u t r a l , s m a l l change i n p i t c h h g norwit; w i t h f l a p d e f l e c t 2 0 L i , low f o r c e s r e q u i r e d t o o g e r a t s t h e flap, and frc:sdom f r o m p o s s i b l e hazard due t o icing. The r e s u l t s of v a r i o u s InvestfgatLons on t h e
NACA 25021 z 9 r f o i l a r e preserited i n r e f e r e n c e s 1, 2, and 3. R e s E l t s f o r the NACA 22021 a i r f o i l . w i t h a s i n g l e s l o t t e d f l a p h a v i r g a chord 25.66 percefit o f t h e a i r f o i l chord ( 0 . 2 5 6 6 ~ ) a r e given i n r e f e r e n c e 1; r e s u l t s for the same airfoil w i t h a 0 . 4 3 ~ single s l o t t e d f l a p and w i t h a 0 . 4 0 ~ double s l o t t e d f l a p a r e given i n r e f e r e n c e s 2 and 3 ,

respectively. The p r e s e n t i n v e s t i g a t i o n , i n which t e s t s were made of a 0 . 3 2 ~ double s l o t t e d f l a p 0x1 t h e NACA 22021 a i r f o i l ( f f g . l), 5 s a c o n t i n u a t i o n o f t h e i n v e s t i g a t i o n r e p o r t e d i n r e f e r e n c e 4 of a 0 . 5 0 ~ double s l o t t e d f l a p on an WkCA 23012 a i r f o i l .
APPARATJS AED TESTE

Models
An NACA 23021 a i r f o i l wfth a 3 - f o o t chord and a 7 - f o o t span was t h e b a s i c model xeed i n t h e s e t e s t s . The o r d i n a t e s f o r t h e N X A 25021 a i r f o i l s e c t i o n a r e g i v e n i n table I. The a i r f o f l w a z c o n s t r u c t e d o f lamin a t e d mehogany and tempered wall board and i s t h e same

__

~ ~ _ _ _
~~

NACA AFR RO.

~ 4 ~ 0 5

a i r f o i l previously used f o r the i n v e s t i g a t i o n s r e p o r t e d i n r e f e r e n c e s 1, 2, and 3 . The t r a i l i n g - e d g e s e c t i o n of t h e model ahead of t h e f l a p s was equipped w i t h l i p s of s t e e l p l a t e r o l l e d t o t h e a f r f o l . 1 contour and extending back t o t h e r e a r flap i n order t o provide t h e b a s i c a i r f o i l Coilto~W when t h e f l a p s were r e t r a c t e d ( f i g . 1).

The double s l o t t e d f l a p c o n s i s t e d of a f o r e f l a p and a r e a r f l a p . The f o r e f l a p ( 0 , 1 4 6 7 c ) , t e s t e d was the same one d e s i g n a t e d f o r e f l a p B i n t h e i n v e s t i g a t i o n reported i n reference an6 had a n upper surface and t r a i l i n g - e d g e of d u r a l and a lower s u r f a c e o f laminated wood. The f o r e - f l a p p r o f i l e i s shown i n f i g u r e 1 and i t s o r d i n a t e s a r e given i n t a b l e I . The r e a r f l a p ( 0 . 2 5 6 6 ~ )t e s t e d was t h e one used i n t h e i n v e s t i g a t i o n s r e p o r t e d i n r e f e r e n c e s 1 and 3. I t s p r o f l l e i s a l s o shown i n f i g u r e 1 and t h e o r d i n a t e s a r e given i n t a b l e I .

i!
I

Both t h e f o r e f l a p and the r e a r f l a p were a t t a c h e d t o t h e main p a r t of t h e a i r f o i l b y s p e c i a l f i t t i n g s t h a t p e r m i t t e d them t o be moved and d e f l e c t e d independently. Each f l a p a l s o p i v o t e d about i t s own nose p o i n t a t any p o s i t i o n ; increments of ' d e f l e c t i o n were provided f o r 5 t h e f o r e f l a p and increments of 1 0 deflection for the ' r e a r f l a p . The nose p o i n t of e i t h e r f l a p i s d e f i n e d a s t h e p o i n t of tangency o f t h e leading-edge Erc and a l i n e drawn p e r p e n d i c u l a r t o t h e f l a p chord. The d e f l e c t i o n of' eLthor Flar, was measured between i t s r e s p e c t i v e chord and t h e chord-of t h e main a i r f o i l . The model vias made t o a t o l e r a n c e o f JcO.015 inch. Tests The model was mounted v e r t i c a l l y i n t h e closed t e s t s e c t i o n o f t h e LMAL 7- by lO-foot t u n n e l and completely spanned t h e j e t except f o r m a l l c l e a r a n c e s a t each end. (See r e f e r e n c e s 5 and 6 . ) The main a i r f o i l was r i g i d l y a t t a c h e d t o the balance frame b y torque tubes that extended through t h e upper and lower boundaries of t h e t u n n e l . The angle of a t t a c k o f the model was s e t from o u t s i d e t h e t u n n e l by r o t a t i n g t h e torque tubes with a c a l i b r a t e d e l e c t r i c d r i v e . This type of i n s t a l l a t i o n c l o s e l y approximates two-dimensional flow and t h e s e c t i o n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of t h e model being t e s t e d can t h e r e f o r e be determined.

NACA ARR No.&JO5

A dynamic p r e s s m e of' 16.37 pollnds per square f o o t was rrieintained f o r most of' tbe t e s t s b u t , a s t h e f l a p s n e r c extended and t h e r a a r - f l a p def3.ection was i n c r e a s e d t o bo0 and 70, i t was' n e c e s s a r y t o reduce t h e dynamic p r e s s u r e because of t h e l i m i t e d p m e r of t h e t u n n e l motor. Yith the c o n f i g u r a t i o n f o r maximn l i f t , a dynamic p r e s s u r e of 14.84 pounds per square foot was maintained. These d p a n i c p r e s s u r e s correspond t o v e l o c i t i e s of 80 and 76.2 m i l e s p e r hour under s t a n d a r d s e a - l e v e l cond i t i o n s and t o average t e s t Reynolds, nu_lnbers of approxlmately 2.245 x lo6 and 2.140 x lo6, r e s p e c t i v e l y . Because of t h e turbiilence i n the wind t u n n e l , t h e e f f e c t i v e Reynolds nun;bers Re ( r e f e r e n c e 7 ) were approximately 3.6 x 1 . 0 ~ a~ ~J,+Z x I O ' , respectively. I n each c a s e , Re 1s baeed. 03 t h e ehord o f t h e a i r f o i l w i t h the f l a p s r e t r a c t e d acd on a Cuw-bulence f s c t o r of 1 . 6 f o r t h e LMAL 7- by 3.0-Toot wind t u n n e l .
I

N t e s t s were made of t h e p l a i n a i r f o i l nor of the o model with t h e f l a p s coa@.ete3$ Pekaocted because t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of t h e p l a i n airfoil had p r e v i o u s l y been i n v e s t i g a t e d and r e p o r t e d i n r e f c r c n c e 1.

The optimum f l a p p o s i t i o n s f o r t h e v a r i o u s f l a p d e f l e c t i o n s were considered, f o r purposes of making t h e b e s t s e l e c t i o n , t o be t h e p o s i t i o n s a t which e i t h e r maxinwn l i f t , minimum d r a g , OT' minimum p i t c h i n g moment w a s o'stained, although, a s p r e v i o u s l y i n d i c a t e d , a variable drag i s d e s i r e d f o r landing conditions. Three p o s i t i o n s of t h e f o r e f l a p were s e l e c t e d i n determinina v a r i o u s extended p o s i t i o n s of the f l a p s o r a p o s s i b l e u p a t h f o r t h e e x t e n s i o n o f t h e f l a p s . ?he l e a s t extended f o r e - f l a p p o s i t f o n , having a 5 O d e f l e c t i o n ( p o s i t i o n l), and t h e chordwise l o c a t i o n of t h e i n t e r mediate p o s i t i o n ( p o s i t i o n 2 ) were chosen a r b i t r a r i l y . The l o c a t i o n p e r p e n d i c u l a r t o t h e chord and t h e 20' d e f l e c t i o n f o r p o s i t i o n 2 w e r e optimum a s determined from a maximum-lift survey w i t h t h e rear f l a p d e f l e c t e d 500 and 600. Because of t h e l a r g e nu.nber of t e s t s involved i n d e t e r x i n i n g t h e optirnun-lift p o s i t i o n of t h e double s l o t t e d f l a p , a p r e l i m i n a r y survey w a s msde t o determine t h e optimum p o s i t i o n and d e f l e c t i o n of t h e most extended posLtio2 ( p o s i t i o n 3 ) of t h e f o r e f l a p with t h e r e a r f l a p d e f l e c t e d 600 and 70 a t v a r i o u s p o s i t i o n s . T e s t s were t h e r e a f t e r made w i t h t h e f o r e f l a p a t each of t h e t h r e e s e l e c t e d p o s i t i o n s i n o r d e r t o determine t h e m a x i m u m l i f t

IJACA ARR no. L4J05

c

and t h e optimum p o s i t i o n of t h e r e a r f l a p a t s e v e r a l d e f l e c t i o n s . Data were obtained f o r r e a r - f l a p d e f l e c t i o n s . of loob 20, 30, and a t g o s i t i o n 1- 30, bo0, 50, and 60 a t p o s i t i o n 2; and 4-0 , 50, 606, and T O 0 a t p o s i t i o n 3. 1nasmuch.as i t appeared l i k e l y t h a t only s m a l l r e a r - f l a p d e f l e c t i o n s would be used w i t h t h e l e a s t exteaded f o r e - f l a p p o s i t i o n and t h a t o n l y l a r g e r e a r - f l a p d e f l e c t i o n s would be used w i t h t h e most extended f o r e f l a p p o s i t i o n , t h e t e s t s were confined t o t h e s e configur a t i o n s . I n order t o determine t h e e f f e c t on t h e aerodynamic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , t e s t s were a l s o made w i t h t h e lower l i p of the s l o t i n i t s normal p o s i t i o n on t h e contour, d e f l e c t e d l 9 O w i t h i n the a i r f o i l contour ( a t f o r e - f l a p p o s i t i o n 2 ) , and completely removed ( a t f o r e flap position 3 ) .

4' 0

No s c a l e - e f f e c t t e s t s were niade because t h e r e s u l t s of e a r l i e r t e s t s of t h e NACA 23021 a i r f o i l with a s l o t t e d f l a p ( r e f e r e n c e 1) a r e considered a n p l i c a b l e t o t h e r e s u l t s of t h e p r e s e n t i n v e s t i g a t i o n .

A a n g l e - o f - a t t a c k range f r o m -60 t o t h e angle of n a t t a c k f o r maximum l i f t was covered i n 2 O increments over most o f t h e range f o r each t e s t ; however, when the s t a l l c o n d i t i o n w a s approached t h e increinent was reduced t o lo. Very l i t t l e d a t a were obtained f o r a n g l e s of a t t a c k above t h e s t a l l because of t h e unsteady c o n d i t i o n of t h e model. L i f t , d r a g , and p i t c h i n g rnonent were measured a t each angle of a t t a c k .

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION C o e f f i c i e n t s and SpnboLs

A l l t h e t e s t r e s u l t s a r e given i n standard s e c t i o n nondimensional c o e f f i c i e n t f o r m c o r r e c t e d f o r tunnel-wall e f f e c t and t u r b u l e n c e a s explained i n r e f e r e n c e 6.
Ct
*

section l i f t coefficient

(t/qc) (do/qc)

CdO

section profile-drag coefficient

Cm(a.c.

lo

s e c t i o n pitching-moment c o e f f i c i e n t about aerodynamic c e n t e r o f p l a i n a i r f o i l

6
[C"(a-c*

XACA ARR NO,

4 ~ 0 5
r*

1.3

s e c t i o n pitching-nomont c o e f f i c i e n t a t m a x i ; n i m section l i f t c o e f f i c i e n t
CZ,,X

maximum s e c t i o n lift c o e f f i c i e n t
Cd

minimum section profile-drag c o e f f i c i e n t

Omin

where
Z
d0

s e c t i o n lift section' profile d m g s e c t ion g i t c h l n g momenk about aerodgnanic c e n t e r of p l a i n airfoil ( f i g . 2 ) dynamic pressure
(2+pV2\

m(amc. ) o
9
C

chord of basic airfoil w P t h f l a p f u l l y retracted v e l o c i t y , f e e t per eecori6 mass d e n s i t y o f a i r

V
P

and Re e f f e c t i v e Reynolds xumber d i s t a n c e from aerodgnariiic c e n t e r of a i r f o i l t o c e n t e r of p r e s s u r e of t a i l , expressed i n a b f ' o i l chords angle of a t t a c k f o r i n f i n i t e a s p e c t r a t i o f o r e - f l a p d e f l e c t i o n , measured between f o r e f l a p chord and a i r f o i l chord

zt

=0

6f2
.

r e a r - f l a p d e f l e c t i o n , measwed between r e a r f l a p chord and a i r f o i l chord d i s t a n c e from a i r f o i l upper-surface l i p t o f o r e - f l a p - n o s = p o i n t , measured p a r a l l e l t o a i r f o i l chord and p o s i t i v e when f o r e - f l a p nose p o i n t i s chead of l i p

x1

*
S'

PACA ARR No. 4 J 0 5

71

d i s t a n c e from a i r f o i l upper-surface l i p t o fore-flap-nose p o i n t , measured perpend i c u l a r t o a i r f o i l chord and p o s i t i v e when f o r e - f l a p - n o s e p o i n t i s below lip d i s t a n c e from f o r e - f l a p t r a i l i n g edge t o r e a r - f l a p - n o s e p o i n t , measured p a r a l l e l t o a i r f o i l chord and p o s i t i v e when rearf l a p - n o s e point is ahead of f o r e - f l a p t r a i l i n g edge d i s t a n c e from f o r e - f l a p t r a i l i n g edge t o r e a r - f lap-nose p o i n t , measured perpend i c u l a r t o a i r f o i l chord and p o s i t i v e when rear-flap-nose p o i n t i s below f o r e f l a p t r a i l i n g edge
P r e c is i o n

x2

The accuracy of t h e v a r i o u s measurements i n t h e t e s t s is b e l i e v e d t o be within t h e following l i m i t s :

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . f0.1 *0.03 'Zmax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .~0.003 'm(a.c. l o . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . fo.0003 Cdonlin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . *0.0006 Cd"(cZ = 1.0) . . *O.O02 Cd = 2.5) 6 4 aqd 6 degrees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . f0.2 f2' F l a p p o s i t i o n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . f0.001~
a , degrees ,
e

N c o r r e c t i o n s were determined ( o r a p p l i e d ) f o r the o e f f e c t of the a i r f o i l o r f l a p f i t t f r r g s on t h e s e c t i o n aerodyiamic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s because of t h e l a r g e number of t e s t s r e q u i r e d . It i s b e l i e v e d , however, t h a t t h e i r e f f e c t ?.s s m a l l and t h a t t h z r e l a t i v e v a l u e s of the r e s u l t s would not be a p p r e c i a b l y a f f e c t e d .

a
Flain A t r f q i l

KACA ARR No.

d+JO5

.
*

The complete aerodynemic s e c t i o n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of t h e p l a i n EACA 23021 airfoil ( f r o i n rleference 1) a r e presented i n f i g u r e 2 . S i m e t h e s e d a t a have a l r e a d y been d i s c u s s e d i n r e f e r e n c e 1, no f u r t h e r comment i s be i i e v e d ne ce s s a r y

Determination of 0p.tbu-m Flap Configurations Maximum l i f t . - The r e s u l t s of t h e maximum-lift invest i g a t i o n w i t h t h e for5.e f l a p a t each of t h e t h r e e s e l e c t o d p o s i t i o n s and with t h e rear f l a p d e f l e c t e d and l o c a t e d a t p o i n t s o v e r a c o n s i d e r a b l e area w l t h r e s p e c t t o t h e f o r e f l a p a r e p r e s e n t e d I n figures 3 to 5. The r e s u l t s a r e presented a s contours of l i f t c m f f l c i e n t f o r v a r i o u s p o s i t i o n s of t h e rear-f'3ap-nose polnt a t various r e a r f l a p d e f l e c t i o n s . TlrJe rs$u3Cva show t h a t a t each f o r e f l a p p o s i t i o n , t h e c o n t o w s 61j.d not c l o s e a t t h e srnaller r e a r - f l a p d e f l e c t i o n s i n m s t i p i t e d , A t p o s i t i o n s 1 and 2 , i t i s i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e open conccurs xould c l o s 3 a t p o s i t i o n s of t h e r e a r - f l a p nose t h a t would be i m p r a c t i c a b l e because o f t h e l a r g e gap b e t w e n t h e t w o f l a p s .
A t each of t h e t h r e e f o r e - f l a p p o s i t i o n s , a s t h e f l a p d e f l e c t i o n i n c r e e s e d , t h e p o s i t i o n of t h e r e a r f l a p for m a x h m s e c t i o n l i f t c o e f f i c i e n t generally

czInax became more c r i t i c a l - t h a t i s , a g i v e n movement of t h e rear-flap-nose p o i n t caiised a g r e a t e r change i n t h e value of Since t h e p o s i t i o n of t h e r e a r - f l a p nose Czmax t e n d s t o move f o r w a r d and upxard a s i t s for c

Z X ,

d e f l e c t i o n i n c r e a s e s , t b e gap between t h e two f l a p s i s reduced. The v a l u e s o f o b t a i n e d a t each f o r e 'Zmax f l a p p o s i t i o n and t h e approximate p o s i t i o n of t h e r e a r f l a p nose w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e f o r e - f l a p t r a i l i n g edge a r e given i n the f o l l o w i n g t a b l e :
Fore - f l a p position

1
2

P o s i t i o n of r e a r - f l a p nose Ahead of l i p 1 Below l i p ( p e r cent (percent a i r f o i l chord) a i r f o i l chord) 1 6

'

2.71

0 2

3.06

3.31

PACA ARR No.

&JG5

From t h e contours of 1-ear-flap-nose p o s i t i o n f o r , t h e b e s t p a t h t o be followed by t h e r e a r f l a p a t czmax a l l d e f l e c t i o n s w i t h i n t h e ranse i n v e s t i g a t e d , from a c o n s i d e r a t i o n of alone, can be determined. The '%,ax range of f l a p p o s i t i o n s covered w a s considered s u f f i c i e n t t o allow f o r any d e v i a t i o n s or compromises from the b e s t path. Complete aerodynamic s e c t i o n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s f o r t h e optimum-lift and optimum-drag r e a r - f l a p - n o s e p o s i t i o n s a t each s e l e c t e d f o r e - f l a p p o s i t i o n a r e p r e s e n t e d subsequent ly h e r e i n . Minimum p r o f i l e drag.- Drag d a t a obtained w i t h the f o r e f l a p i n the t h r e e s e l e c t e d p o s i t i o n s and t h e r e a r f l a p d e f l e c t e d a t v a r i o u s pDsitions over a wide r e g i o n a r e p r e s e n t e d i n f i g u r e s 6 t o 8. The d a t a are p r e s e n t e d a s d r a g contours f o r t h e r e a r - f l a p - n o s e p o s i t i o n a t c e r t a i n s e l e c t e d s e c t i o n l i f t c o e f f i c i e n t s and r e a r - f l a p d e f l e c t i o n s . A comparison of t h e s e c t i o n p r o f f l e - d r a g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of t h e p l a i n a i r f o i l ( f i g . 2 ) . w i t h t h e p r o f i l e - d r a g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s g i v e n i n t h e contours of fi.gure 6 ( a ) and 6 ( b ) shows t h a t t h e p l a i n a i r P o i l g i v e s t h e lower d r a g value a t c z = 1 . 0 . Inasmuch as o n l y a v e r y few o f the c o n t o u r s were c l o s e d about i n d i c a t e d optimum-drag p o s i t i o n s of the rearf l a p nose ( f i g s . 6 t o 8 ) ; i t i s obvious t h a t a s u f f i c i e n t r a n e e of r e a r - f l a p p o s i t i o n was not covered and t h a t the t r u e optimum v a l u e s may e x i s t a t some o t h e r p o s i t i o n s . A t each of t h e f o r e - f l a p p o s i t i o n s , however, it fs i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e contours would c l o s e a t p o s i t i o n s o f the r e a r - f l a p nose which would be somewhat c l o s e r t o the l i p of t h e f o r e f l a p than t h e p o s i t i o n s t e s t e d . A s the f o r e f l a p w a s extended and a s t h e rear f l a p was d e f l e c t e d , the optimua-drag rear-flap-nose p o s i t i o n g e n e r a l l y moved forwayti and up, c l o s e r t o t h e f o r e - f l a p t r a i l i n g edge. Yore than one r e g i o n of miniiimni drag e x i s t s a t v a r i o u s v a l u e s of' s e c t i o n l i f t c o e f f i c i e n t cz and v a r i o u s rearf l a p d e f l e c t i o n s and t h e minimum d r a g i s seen t o be p r i n c i p a l l y a f u n c t i o n of s e c t i o n l i f t c o e f f i c i e n t and r e a r f l a p d e f l e c t f o n and r e l a t i v e l y independent of t h e f o r e - f l a p p o s i t i o n . I n each p o s i t i o n of t h e f o r e f l a p , as t h e section l i f t coefficient or the rear-flap deflection i n c r e a s e d , the contours g e m r a l l y became more c r i t i c a l or c l o z e l y spacsd; t h a t i s , a given movement of t h e r e a r f l a y - n o s e p o i n t g e n e r a l l y caused a Greater change i n t h e value of t h e s e c t i o n p r o f i l e - d r a g c o e f f i c i e n t cdo* (See f i g s . 6 t o 8 . )

10

NACA A-RR T o T.

&Jog

Inasmuch as t h e r e a r - f l a p - n o s e p o s i t i o n s f o r maximum
l i f t and minimum drag g e n e r a l l y 20 not c o i n c i d e , a comproiii3se i s necessary. The c u m e s f o r t h e cornplete a e r o -

dynamic s e c t i o n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s a r e t h e r e f o r e p r e s e n t e d f o r b o t h conditions.

cf s e c t i o n p i t c h i n g moment c o e f f i c i e n t f o r the r e a r - f l a p - n o s e p o s i t i o n s at s e l e c t e d s e c t i o n l i f t c o e f f i c i e n t s and r e a r - f l a p d e f l e c t i o n s a r e given f o r each of t h e t h r e e f o r e - f l a p p o s i t i o n s i n f i g u r e s 9 t o 11. These contours i n d i c a t e t h a t an i n c r e a s e i n the n e g a t i v e value of c at a m(a.c. ) o given c7, was obtafned v i t h increase6 r e a r - f l a p d e f l e c t j o n an3 t h a t t h e m a x i m i n e g a t i v e vzlues of were Cm(a.c. l o usually obtained a t o r n e a r t h e p o s i t i o n of t h e r e a r - f l a p nose point f o r maximm l i f t a t each r e a r - f l a p d e f l e c t i o n (coxpare w i t h f i g s . 3 t o 5 ) . At 6f = T O O , 600, and T O 0 2 at Dosition - - however. a d e c r e a s e 2n t h e vglue 3. was i n d i c a t e d when cl i n c r e a s e d . of cm(a.c. l o
A t a given l i f t c o e f i ' i c i s n t and r e a r - f l a p d e f l e c t i o n , t h e negative v a l u e s of p i t c h i n g moment a l s o i n c r e a s e d as the f o r e f l a p wrs extended from p o s i t i o n 1 t o p o s i t i o n 3 . It appears d e s i r a b l e t h e r e f o r e t o use the nifnimum flap d e f l e c t f o n o r e x t e n s i o n n e c e s s a r y t o o b t a i n any g i v e n l i f t c o e f f i c i e n t . I n addition, the contours indicate that the pos!.tion of t h e rear-flap nose becomes more c r i t i c a l w i t h increased r e a r - f l a p d e f l e c t i o n and l i f t c o e f f i c i e n t .

--Pitching-moment .- Contours

~(aoc.)o %n f i g u r e s 9 t o 11, t h e d e s i g n e r can deteFmine or a n t i c i t o be encountered a t a p a t e the v a l u e s of c y a . c . lo w i t h i n the range of p o s i t i o n and given value of d e f l e c t ion
Aerodynamic S e c t i o n C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of S e l e c t e d
O p t i m u m Configurations

With these c o n t o w s of flap l o c a t i o n f o r

The complete aerodynanic s e c t i o n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of

the a i r f o i l w i % h t h a r e a r f l a p a t t n e optimum-lift and

3ACA ARIi No. L!!JOS

11

optirnux-drag p o s i t i o n s a t each f l a p d e f l e c t i o n and a t each of t h e t h r e e f o r e - f l a p p o s i t i o n s a r e p r e s e n t e d i n f i g u r e s 12 t o 1 . Ttle consecutive f l a p - n o s e p o s i t i o n s 4 a= 6f2 i n c r e a s e s a r e i n d i c a t e d il? t h e f i g u r e s by t h o s e key symbols that a r e connected b y dashed l i n e s . The l i f t - c u r v e s l o p e s decreased w i t h i n c r e a s e d r e a r - f l a p d e f l e c t i o n , although a t r e a r - f l a p d e f l e c t i o n s below 50, t h e l i f t - c u r v e slope was sometimes a s much as 0.03 g r e a t e r t h a n t h a t of t h e p l a i n a i r f o i l . A t each f o r e - f l a p p o s i t i o n , t h e angle o f a t t a c k f o r rnaximun l i f t u s u a l l y decreased w i t h increased r e a r - f l a p d e f l e c t i o n but i n some i n s t a n c e s remainea f a i r l y c o n s t a n t . the position A t p o s i t i o n 3 ( f i g . lk) and 6f2 = 50, of t h e r e a r f l a p f o r maxirium E f t and minimum d r a g c o i n c i d e . I r r e g u l a r i t i e s i n the curves a t t h e l a r g e r f l a p d e f l e c i n d i c a t e changing flow c o n d i t i o n s . t i o n s ( f i g s . 12 t o

1) 4

A t t h e small r e a r - f l a p defLections and l i f t c o e f f i c i e g t s , t h e s l o p e s o f t h e pitchinqpxoment curves were n e p - t i v e and, a t h i g h f l a p d e f l e c t i o n s and l i f t c o c f f i c i e n t s , were u s u a l l y p o s i t i v e ; mailer n e g a t i v e values were t h e r e f o r e sometimes obtained w i t h a Of m(a.c. l o l a r g e f l a p d e f l e c t i o n t h a n with a s m a l l one a t h i g h l i f t c o e f f i c i e n t s . (See f i g s . 13 an6 1 . 4)

Increment of ,naxin;um s e c t i o n l i f t c o e f f i c i e n t . - The increGgnt o f t h e maximum s e c t i o n l i f t c o e f f i c i e n t Actmax, based on t h e value of czmax of t h e p l a i n a i r f o i l , i n c r e a s e s a s t h e r e a r f l a p i s d e f l e c t e d and as t h e f o r e f l a p i s extended ( f i g . 1 5 ) . A t each f o r e - f l a p p o s i t i o n , t h e v a l u e s of Actma, a r e higher f o r t h e optimum-lift p o s i t i o n t h a n f o r t h e optimum-drag r e a r - f l a p p o s i t i o n , as was a n t i c i p a t e d . !?he maximum i n c r e n e n t of l i f t c o e f f i c i e n t obtained was a t p o s i t i o n 3 w i t h 6f2 = 70, where a value o f 1.96 i s i n d i c a t e d . The s c a l e e f f e c t on t h e v a l u e s of Ac Zmax was not i n v e s t i g a t e d but it i s expected t h a t t h e values would incpease s l i g h t l y w i t h Xegnolds number with t h e 0 . 3 2 ~ double s l o t t e d f l a p a s d i d t h e v a l u e s for t h e s i n s l e - s l o t t e d - f l a p arrangenents o f r e f e r e n c e s 1 and 6.

12

NACA ARR No. 4 J 0 5

Envelope p o l a r c w v e s The envelope p o l a r s of a t each f o r e - f l a p s e c t i o n p r o f i l e - d r a g c o e E i c T e n t Cd, u p o s i t i o n , obtained from f i g u r e s 12 t o l+ f o r t h e optimum, ! l i f t and. optimum-drag c o n f i g u r a t i o n s , and the p o l a r of . t h e p l a i n a i r f o i l ere p r e s e n t e d i n f i g u r e 16. These curves i n d i c a t e t h e C d a v a i l a b l e a t any c7, when Omin (fig. 16(a)) t h e r e a r f l a p i s l o c a t e d t o give c~max and cd ( f i g . 16(b)). Omin For both t h e maximum-lift and minimum-drag conf'igur a t i o n s ( f i g . 16), t h e plain a i r f o i l g i v e s t h e lowest f o r values of c7, l e s s t h a n 1.3, and f o r values of above 2.6 t h e lowest value of C d o i s i n d i c a t e d a t p o s i t i o n 3. Comparison of F l a p Arrangements When t h e l i f t - d r a g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f t h e 0 . 2 5 6 6 ~ and 0 . 1 ~ 0 ~i n g l e s l o t t e d f l a p s (refez-ences 1 and 2 ) afid s t h e 0 . 4 0 ~d o u b l e , s l o t t e d f l a p ( r e f e r e n c e 3 ) a r e compared w i t h those of t h e opt imum-lift and opt imum-drag conf igur a t i o n s of t h e 0 . 3 2 ~double s l o t t e d f l a p ( f i g . l ? ) ,it i s apparent t h a t t h e 0.kOc d o u b l e - s l o t t e d - f l a p arrangement produced t h e h i g h e s t l i f t c o e f r i c i e n t ( c t = 3.56) ob t a ined w i t h on t h e X4CA 23021 a i r f o i l . The clraax t h e 0 . 3 2 ~ double s l o t t e d f l a p i s c o n s i d e r a b l y h i g h e r t h a n that; obtained w i t h e i t h e r s i n g l e s l o t t e d f l a p but i t i s approximately 0.25 l e s s t h a n th8.t of t h e 0 . 4 0 ~double slotted flap. The 0 . 3 2 ~ double s l o t t e d f l a p had a l a r g e r Cdo t h a n e i t h e r s i n g l e s l o t t e d f l a p for v a l u e s of c b between 1.0 and approximately 2.7 and had a l a r g e r than the 0.4-Oc d o u b l e - s l o t t e d - f l a p arrangement a t QO all values of cz above 1.0,
Of

.-

CdO

cb

The 0 . 3 2 ~d o u b l e - s l o t t e d - f l a p arrangement h.ad v a l u e s Cdo for t h e envelope p o l a r s t h a t d i f f e r e d b y

NACA ARR No.

a0 J5

13

about 0.02 f o r t h e opt imwn-drag and opt i m u m - l i f t conf i g u rat-f-ons a t a value of' c Z of about 2.5. A t v a l u e s of cz l e s s t h a n 1 . 3 and g r e a t e r than 3.1, however, t h e two p o l a r curves p r a c t i c a l l y c o i n c i d e . When t h e p o l a r s of t h e 0 . 3 2 ~d o u b l e - s l o t t e d - f l a p arrangement on the NACA 23021 a i r f o i l a r e compared w i t h a s i m i l a r arrangement of a 0 . 3 0 ~ double s l o t t e d f l a p on it i s apparent that t h e TTACA 23012 a i r f o i l ( r e f e r e n c e t h e c7 obtained w i t h each i s aDproximatelg t h e same ax 8. however, are h i g h e r a t ( f i g . 1 ) The v a l u e s of Cd,, U a l l v a l u e s of c z f o r t h e arrangement on t h e 21-percentt h i c k a i r f o i l t h a n f o r t h a t on t h e 1 2 - p e r c e n t - t h i c k a i r f o i l b u t t h e r e l a t i o n between optimum-lift and optimumd r a g c o n f i g u r a t i o n s i s about the same f o r each arrangement.

41,
I _

A f u r t h e r comparison of t h e v a r i o u s s l o t t e d - f l a p arrangements on t h e EACA 230.21 a i r f o i l i n d i c a t e s t h a t a f a i r l y l i n e a r v a r i a t i o n e x i s t s f o r each arrangement a t a g i v e n f l a p conf igui-at i o n between t h e and cZmx ( f i g . 1 9 ) and t h i s v a r i a t i o n the [Cm(a.c. c 7 "max appears dependent on t h e f l a p arrangement. The 0 . 3 2 ~ double s l o t t e d f l a p gave h i g h e r v a l u e s of

)J

C'Imax

a t any value of

ct

t h a n any o f t h e s l o t t e d f l a p s .

Inasmuch as t h e r e will be a t a i l l o a d r e q u i r e d t o t r i m t h e n e g a t i v e p i t c h i n g moment o f t h e wing o f an a i r p l a n e , t h e l o s s i n maximum s e c t i o n l i f t c o e f f i c i e n t i n trimming t h e a i r f o i l s e c t i o n pitching-moment c o e f f i c i e n t has been c a l c u l a t e d , for t h e case when t h e c e n t e r of g r a v i t y is a t t h e aerodynamic c e n t e r of t h e p l a i n a i r f o i l , f r o m t h e following e x p r e s s i o n and i s i n d i c a t e d i n f i g u r e 1 9 s

Loss of
'Zmax

-.

bmax
'It

m e loss in c has been presented f o r t a i l l e n g t h s Zmax of 2, 3, and 5 a i r f o i l - c h o r d l e n g t h s and, by means of t h e can be c u r v e s of f i g u r e 19, t h e e f f e c t i v e c tmax determined.

XACA ARR NO.

~ 4 ~ 0 5

E f f e c t of Various X o d i f i c a t i o n s on t h e Aerodynamic Sect i o n a a r a c t e r i s t i c s E:ffect o f moving t h e two f l a p s- a u n i t . - The as e f f e c t on t h e a e r o d y n m i c s e c t i o n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of moving t h e f o r e f l a p and r e a r f l a s a s a u n i t p e r p e n d i c u l a r and p a r a l l e l t o t h e a i r f o f l chord i s shown i n f i g u r e s 2 0 and 21, r e s p e c t i v e l y . A 0 . 0 1 ~ displacement downward of t h e f l a p s , perpendicular t o t h e chord, was q u i t e c r i t i c a l i n t h a t a l a r g e decrease i n l i f t and a n i n c r e a s e i n d r a g r e s u l t e d ( f i g . 2 0 ) . Figure 2 1 i n d i c a t e s t h a t a movement of t h e f l a p s p a r a l l e l t o t h e a i r f o i l chord had a conside r a b l e e f f e c t on t h e a e r o d p a m i c c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s ; t h a t i s , a t p o s i t i o n s of t h e f o r e f l a p dov\lnsl;ream f r o m x1 = 0.70 ( p o s i t i o n 3 ) , l a r g e d e c r e a s e s i n lift and i n c r e a s e s i n d r a g r e s u l t e d and unsteady f l o w coilditions e x i s t e d . A colnoarison of f i g u r e s 20 and 2 1 w i t h t h e contours of figures and 7 and 5 and 8, r e s p e c k i v e l y , i n d i c a t e s t h a t t h e p o s i t i o n of t h e f o r e f l a p is morc: c r f t i c a l t h a n t h e position of the r e a r f l a p .
M_c_-

Moving t h e two f l a p s approximately a s a u n i t f r o m p c s i t i o n 1 t o p o s i t i o n 2 and t h e n t o p o s l t f o n 3 along two d i f f e r e n t p a t h s , A and B y gave a n i n c r e a s e i n l i f t , d r a z , and p i t c h i n g moment. (See f i g s . 22 and 23,) Since t h e model f i t t i n g s only allowed Increments of l o o f o r t h e d e f l e c t i o n of t h e r e a r f l a p , it was n o t p o s s i b l e t o have a 6f2 of 350 f o r f i g u r e 22 and a 6f2 of 4 5 O f o r f i g u r e 23 a t p o s i t i o n 1 Although motion of t h e two . f l a p s a s a u n i t i s onl-37 approximately simulated, f i g u r e s 22 and 23 a r e thought t o be s u f f i c j - e n t l y i l l u s t r a t i v e . E f f e c t of t h e a i r f o i l lower -_l i p . - The e f f e c t s of d e f l e c t i n g t h e lower l i p of t h e a f r f o i l from i t s normal p o s i t i o n a t f o r e - f l a p p o s i t i o n 2 and o f removing t h e lower a i r f o i l l i p a t p o s i t i o n 3 a r e shown i n f i g u r e s 24 and 25, r e s p e c t i v e l y . D e f l e c t i n g t h e l i p upward l9O decreased c z and irrcreased over most o f t h e Qfi .# a n g l e - o f - a t t a c k range, p o s s i b l y because o f t h e p o o r l y shaped s l o t e n t r y ahead of t h e f o r e f l a p when t h e l i p i s d e f l e c t e d . O t h e o t h e r hand, removing t h e l i p a t t h e n extended f o r e - f l a p p o s i t i o n ( f i g . 2 5 ) had a s l i g h t l y favorable e f f e c t on t h e aerodynamic s e c t i o n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s a t low v a l u e s of c b y causing a r e d u c t i o n i n t h e p r o f i l e d r a g , and a s l k L h t l y adverse e f f e c t a t high

i$iACA ARR No. L4J05

15

values o f C Z . Such a r e s u l t I n d i c a t e s t h a t a smoother s l o t e n t r y ahead of t h e f l a p s may be 6 e s i r a b l e , provided available. i t does not reduce t h e v a l u e s of C7mP.x Althouph no d a t a were obtained a t small f l a p d e f l e c t i o n s , i t i s probable t h a t t h e smoother s l o t e n t r y would be even more f a v o r a b l e under such c o n d i t i o n s .

c ONCLUSIONS
An i n v e s t i g a t i o n via3 made 5-n t h e LMAL 7- by lO-foot t u n n e l o f ar, XACA 25021 a i ? f o i l n i t h a double s l o t t e d f l a p havfne a chcrd 52 porccct cf t h e a i r f o i l chord ( 0 . 3 2 ~ ) t o deteriqlns the a e r o a y z s m i c se:..l;lo9 c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s w i t h t h e f l a 2 s defle-cted a t va.?icus p o s i t i o n s . The results of t h i s i n v e s t f g a t i c n show izliui,:
1 Ti 0 . 3 2 ~dm.bl3 slottec?. f l a p on t h e NACA 23021 . !e a i r f o i l gave a maximin71 silct-lon l i f t c o e f f i c i e n t of 3.31, which was l a r g e r t h a n t 5 e valas. obtaine2 with t h e 0 . 2 5 6 6 ~ or 0 . 4 0 ~ s i n g l e s l o t t e d f l a p s and 0.25 l e s s t h a n the value o b t a i n e d w i t h t h e 0 . 4 0 ~d o u b l e s l o t t e d f l a p on t h e same airfoll.
2 . The values of t h e p r o f f l e - d r a g c o e f f i c i e n t obtained w i t h t h e 0 . 3 2 ~dcuble s l o t t e a f l a p were l a r g e r than t h o s e f o r t h e 0 . 2 5 6 6 ~ o r 0.f;Oz s i n g l e s l o t t e d f l a p s f o r s e c t i o n l i f t c o e f f i c i e n t s betwfjsn 1 . 0 and approximately 2.7. At a l l v a l u e s Gf t h e s e c t j o n l i f t c o e f f i c l e n t a%ove 1.0, t h e p r e s e n t arrzngement hed a hfgher p r o f i l e drag t h a n t h e 0 . 4 0 ~ double s l o t t e d f l a p .

3. A t a gfveri va1v.e o f the maximum s e c t i o n l i f t c o e f f i c i e n t pso?-ic.e% various f l a p d e . f l $ c t i o n . s , t h e 0 . 3 2 ~ d m b 3 . e sL~:~:,t:.:~C .fi,?.p Gave negative soction p i t c h i n g mornen2 c o e f f i c i e n t 3 t P z t w e y e h?.&er t h a n t h o s e o f o t h e r s l o t t e d f l a p s 02 t h e same a i r i f o f l .
The 0 . 3 2 ~do1lbl.e s l o t t e d f l a p t h e s a m mazinum l f f t coeffictent a s , d r a g c o e f f i c i e n t over the e n t i r e l f f t s h i l a r arrangsment of 8 0 . 3 0 ~double NACA 23012 a i r f o P 1 .

4.

gave approximately but h i g h e r p r o f i l e range t h a n , a s l o t t e d f l a p on a n

5. Moving t h e f l a p s s l i g h t l y from t h e i r optimum p o s i t i o n s sometimes proved c r i t i c a l agd r e s u l t e d i n 8

16

NACA ARR No. LkJO5

l a r g e i n c r e a s e i n draag arid. a r e d u c t i o n i n l i f t . The p o s i t i o n of t h e f o r e f l a p appears t o be more c r i t i c a l than that of the r e a r f l a p .

6. D e f l e c t i n g t h e lower l i p of t h e a i r f o i l l9O upward g e n e r a l l y decreased t h e s e c t i o n l i f t c o e f f i c i e n t and increased t h e s e c t i o n p r o f i l e - d r a g c o e f f i c i e n t over most of t h e a n g l e - o f - a t t a c k range; removing t h e l i p a t t h e extended f o r e - f l a p p o s i t i o n reduced t h e p r o f i l e d r a g s l i g h t l y i n t h e l o w e r - l i f t range but was s l i g h t l y unfavorable a t h i g h s e c t i o n l i f t c o e f f i c i e n t s .
Langley Kemorial A e r o n a u t i c a l Laboratory National Advisory Committee f o r Aeronautics 'Langley F i e l d , Va.

. . . ... ..

_ I

.~.-I_

. -

NACA ARR NO.

d+;r05

17

1, Yienzineer, Carl J., and Harris, Thonas A . : Wind-Tunnel I n v e s t i g a t i o n of a n F.A.C.A. 23021 A i r f o i l w i t h Various Arrangements of S l o t t e d F l a p s . ITACA Rep. No. 677, 1939.
2. ihischik, Frank: Yiind-Tunnel I n v e s t i g a t i o n of an 1T.A.C.A. 23021 A i r f o i l with Two Arrangements of a 40-Percent-Chord S l o t t e d F l a p . NACA TN No. 728,

1939

3 . l a m i s , Thomas

d., and Recant, I s i d o r e G.: Wind-Tunnel I n v e s t i g a t i o n of NACA 2 312, 23021, and 23030 A i r f o i l s Equfgped with 4O-Percent -Chord Double S l o t t e d Flaps. NACA Rep. h o . 7 2 3 , 1941.

4. P w s e r ,
5.

Paul E., F i s c h e l , Jack, and Riebe, John 14.: 'Vind-Tunnel I n v e s t i g a t i o n o f an VASA 23012 A i r f o i l w i t h a 0.30-Airfoil-Chord Gouble S l o t t e d F l a p . FACA ARR NO. 3 ~ 1 0 ,1343.

H a r r i s , Thoinas A . : The 7 b y 1 0 Foot \!rind Tunnel of t h e F a t i o n a l Advisory C o r n i t t e e for Aeronautics. NACA Reg. No. 412, 1931.
J . , and H a r r i s , '~'honasA . : ITind-Tunnel 23012 A i r f o i l w i t h I n v e s t i g a t i o n of an N.A.C.A. Various Arrangements of S l o t t e d F l a p s . NACA Rep. No. 664, 1939.

6. J e n z i n g e r , C a r l

7. Jacobs, Eastman N., and Sherman, A l b e r t :

Airfoil S e c t i o n C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s a s Affected by V a r i a t i o n s of t h e Reynolds Number. E I C A Rep. No. 586, 1937.

YTACA ARR TO. ~ l 4 ~ 0 5

18

h 4

I
orlrlrlrl I
I

.I.

ILiiia i

O c u ~ L n pa3coa3a3a3 E - L n z j - c U r l a
1 1 l 1 1 1 1 l 1 1 1 l 1 1 1

..................
I
1

N A C A A R R N o . L4J05

Fig. 1

Chord line

Fiy u r t /.- S e c fions o f the N A C A 2302 I a i r f o i l and the 0 . 3 2 ~ double s l o f f e d flap.

Fig. 2

N A C A A R R No. L4J05

.-

N A C A A R R No. L4J05

Fig. 3

Percent ui/foilcbord
@J

sf,-10:

Fig. 4

N A C A A R R No. L4J05

NACA

ARR No. L4J05

Fig. 5

8 6

0-&-4-6

Fig. 6a

NACA

ARR No. L4J05

percent

ahfoil c h f d la) c c - 1.0; 6&-10:

WAlWWAL ADVISOIV

MYYllltE FO1 AEROWLUIICS

Percent uirfoiil chord

69 cz-/.5;

20:

N A C A A R R No. L4J05

Fig. 6 b

Percent &a cw f7

(el cz = 1.5;

+= 2

40. ..

Flyore 6.- ConcJuded.

Fig. ?a

NACA

ARR No. L4J05

NAllUNAL ADVlSOlV

I%MYlIltt FOR AERONAUTICS

NACA ARR No. L4JC5

Fig. 7b

NATIONAL ADVIWRV
CUYYIIIEE FOI rtRollAUIIc)

0-Z-e-6

figure , - Conchded. ?

Fig. 0s

N A C A ARR No. L4J05

NACA ARR No. L4J05

Fig. 8 b

Figure8.Concluded.

Fig. 9a

NACA ARR No. L4J05

Percent airfiil chord

Percent oihWf cbord

(6) = /.Oj cr

a4 * 20:

N A C A A R R No. L4J05

(e) ct

11.5~

4: 0

Figure9.- Concluded.

Fig.

10a

NACA ARR N o . L4J05

Percent airhi/ chord

-Percent a/ifoi/chord

NACA

ARR No. L4J05

Fig. 10b

NATIONAL ADVISORY
COMYlllEt FOR AtRONNITICI

f iyure

1 . Concluded. 0-

Fig.

118

N A C A ARR No. L4J05

NACA AR!? No.

L4J05

Fig.

llb

Percent u;rfoil cbord

(e) -25, sf,6' c , 0.

Pefcent airfoilchord

Cf) Cf=30;b 6 ' 6 0

f / y u r e / / . -Conc/uded.

F i g . 12a

N A C A ARR No. L4J05

N A C A ARR No.

L4J05

Fig.

12b

Fig. 13a

N A C A A R R No.

L4J05

N A C A ARR No.

L4J05

Fig. 13b

Fig.

14a

N A C A ARR No. L4J05

8

N A C A ARR No. L4J05

Fig.

14b

Fig.

15

N A C A ARR No.

L4J05

N A C A ARR No. L4J05

Fig.

16a

Figure /6.Prof/'/e-drcrgenve/ope p o / p ~ curves f o r the NACA 23021 a/rfo/'/w;fh a 0 . 3 2 ~ doubie s / o f t e d f/ap.

Fig. 1 6 b

N A C A ARR N o .

L4J05

Section

lift c o e f f i c i e n t , c2
Cdomin.

(b) Rear- flap positions for

f/gure

/e-- o n c / u d e d . C

N A C A ARR N o .

L4J05

Fig.

17

Fig.

10

N A C A ARR No.

L4J05

Section

lift coefficienl-, cz

flyuric 1 . Compcrr/j.an of section prufi/Q 8-drag coefficients f o r simi /ur doub/e-s/offed-f lap arrony Q ments on t h e N A C A 230/2wnd NACA 23021 a/rfo//s.

N A C A A R R No.

L4J05

Fig. 19

Fig.

20

N A C A ARR No.

L4J05
,

N A C A ARR No. L4J05

F i g . 21

Fig.

22

N A C A ARR No.

L4J05
,

N A C A ARR No.

L4J05

F i g . 23

Fig.

24

N A C A ARR No.

L4J05

N A C A A R R No. L4J05
I '

Fig. 25