,. .

TECHNICAL NOTES XATICNA2 /iiISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERX)NAUTIGS.

.
1

. . .

TEZ DETERMIMATIOX OF DO?2WWH. - By Lt. M3J.ter S. Ili.ehl. & RepP.i2,?J*S*N. Bureau of f2u33s%ructicJ?

..,

Jamlazy , 1922.
. . . .

TECHNICALI NOTE~0. 42. THE DETERMINATION OF DOWW!7ASH, By Lt. Walter S. Diehl, 2hmeauof Construction & Repair, U.S.N.

?nt roduc% ion. =

=iihl?e wt onts sec It is obvious that2in accordance tmdlaw,thelifton.m aerofoil mustbe equalto thever%icalmomentum comrmnicateti per second to the aixmass a liftin~ aerofoil in. flight is affeoted,c~rlse~uenti~ %railed by a washwhich has a definite ticiinat ior. corresponding to the factors producing the lift. lt is thOUght
that

icaland experimental, are sufficient data,iheoret

now available fora complete deterrzinat ionoi tiiswash wit h respect to t-he var iat ion of itsangleof inci inat ion which governs itsdecayin space. Ilukt s Formula forDownwash.
artgle it haslongbeer. knonnthattune Although of aown

.-

wash c , as observed a% a givenpointbehind the aerofoil,is diractly proportional to the liftof the aerofoil proportional to (Bz.A.C, A. R. & M. NO ,296) and inversely

Aezial Flight ~ VO1,1, Chap the aspeot rat 5.o (Lanctie Mer \:

-2terVIII,Br. A.C.A. R. & M. No.261), Munk (Teclinische Berichte111-1) seems to havebeenthe firstto propose a quantitative solution, He asse-tis tha.% c mustbe rejrssented as thsproduct of scnue constant and the angleof attack as expressed by the formula (Beizj T.13.I-4),

. .

where b is the span, ~c is the liftcoefficient and S is %he areaof the aerofoi.1. The formula fordownwWh then beccmffies
E

=C , a=

5?.3C ~ . 2LC ( :2)

the valueof the constantc 3eingdetermined by experiment. The formula as givenapplies to zonoplqnes butzay . be applied to nultiplaneg, according to Munk,by the intro

duction of another constant k whichreduces the span b to the spanof theequivalent monoplane. . Thevaluesof c w.redetermined far several models by photographing a series of streamers. Owing to thelack of certain vitaldata,the results havenotbeenincluded in thisstudy, but the conclusions are giveninstead.It appears thatthe equation, as givenabove, is not. general. The values of c varysomewhat morethanis allowable for a l[oonstantfl. No attempt wasmadeto deterinine thevariation of c withaspect ~atio, nor wasany allowance madefor the inevitable dying wt or thewa~heffect in space.It
appe~s, however, thatthe angleof downmash iS substazzti-

-5*

,. ally

constant overabouteigbz-tenths of the span,with

sudden changes nearthetips. N, P. L. Formula. Themostcomprehensive series of testson downmsh, which havebeenpublished, arethoseby Sandison, Glauert , and Jones(Br.A.C. A. R. & M. No.426). Ip thisinvestigation thevariation of downwash wasdetermined in space fora rnnzber of points behind, above, andbelowthetrailing edge. , of theaerofoil.It wasfoundthat,in accordance with hydrodynamic theory, * the angleof down~shdecreases ex ponential.ly withthedistance fromthe aerofoil (ab.i-

Flanein thiscase,) andmightbe expressed by theempirical formula c = ccllo= -008c where.

behind the wingin chordlengths, t.is thedistance thedistance belowthe-chord of theupperwing c isin termsof thegap> and K* is a constant foranygivenarrangement. Thisappears to havebeenthe firstattempt fo express

thevariation of ,Co frompointto point. Witha s.atis. factory law forthe variationof co it wouldhavebeen ~ complete. Derivation of a Comprehensive Downwash Formula.
.

It is now possible to derive a comprehensive doma-wash formula basedon theG8ttingen theoretical and theN.P. L. * SeeManchester, Aerial Flight, Vol. 1, Chap.1X1.

-/ . -

4-

empirical formlae. It is kno?m definitely thatdownwash varies exponentially withdistance fxorn thetrailing edge, The plotied results of N,P. L. investigations, whichshow tilis variatiop. verti~aily andhorizontally, aregiven in Thedatain Fig.1 havebeen Figs.land 2, respectively. replotzed on a logariihrd.c scale in Fig.3, %bh theverticaldistance fromthe trailing edgeexpressed in ~i~~rd. .
. ,

lengths plusonechordlength* as abscis~a and angles of do~~~s~as ordinates. It iS found thatfora given?-nglf2 of attack, the angles of do:m~shat various vertical distances fromthe trailing edgelie on a straight line. The linescorresponding to thevarims angles of attack This are all. parallel andhavea slopeof -i3 * 0.50. indi.cazes thatthevariation of angleof downwzLsh rithverticaldistance fxomthetrailing edgecanbe represented by an equation of the form: C=c ~ (y .+1% wherec1 = a constant, .

distan~e, of thepointundercon7 = the vertical fromthe trailing in chordlengths, sideration, edge, and n = -tan (-13 * 0.5) = -0.23 * 0.01. In a si~ilar manner the daiafr~ Fig.2 havebeen plotted in Fig.4. The points againfallnear parallel straight linesbut their. slope, -21*,0.5, is steeper

variation oftheangle thanthatin Fig.3. The indicated * Thisis aecessazy so as to provide a finite valueat the trailing edge.

,, t..

-5of dovinwash withvariation of horizontal distance from the trailing edgeis of the form
(x+ =C2 -.. , where~ = a constant E

I)n

x = the ho~izontal distance, of thepointunderconsideration in chordlengths, . fromthe trailing edge, and

.

+ 0.5) n = tan (-210 = -0.38 + 0.01.

thecalculations involving fracIn orderto elii.ninate . tional exponents thefunctions, and

z = (y+
.
*J

~)-ozs JO3*

(x

havebeenevaluated andplottedin Fig.5. Datafromfiveseries of downz=sh determinations have anglesof downwash as ordibeen plotted in Fig.6, with The slopeof natesand liftcoefficients as abscissae. i L passes through thepoints reprethe straight line,which determines thevalueof AC /ALc senting a series of tests, for arrangement andthepointin space at .thatparticular ratio, the whichthe observations weretaken. The aspect andthe coordinates of the observation valueof AC/ALc, of tests, in TableI. pointaregiven,foreachseries It is evident frominspection of Fig-. 6 thatc var It hasalsobeenshown iesdirectly withliftcoefficient. by datafromthe testsof Sandison, Glauert, and Jones (Br.A.C. A. R. & M. No.426) how c variesin space.Munk! s

:. .

--6equation ratio,
II.

Indicates thatc variesinversely as theaspsct Therefore the angleof downwask should be given

by whereK is a cGnStarit, numerically equal to &/ALc at the :railing edgeof a wingof aspect rat io unit~y, Thevalueof K is determined foreachof the fiveser. , iesof tegts. Xfiich areplotted in Fig.5> by substituting theproper valuesforthe functions of x and y and for the aspect ratio n. The procedure is indicated by the headings of columns in TableI. It is foundthatK is substantially constant, varying from164to 176;a single exception of 158corresponds to a series of testson a biplane arrange~eni, the wings of whichwereequi~ped withflapsand represent abnormal condit ions. It therefore appears thattheangle ofdown-wash canbe represented-to a goodapproximation by
t

.~a n

(x + 1)-038

. (y -t 1)-023Lc

F~. Y
which aregivenin Fig.5.

Lc

Fx andFy beingthevaluesof the functions of x aridy Thevalidity of thisfornula is obviously confined to that rangeof angleof attack orlift coefficient inwhichtheair flowaboutthe aerofoil is not abno~wally turbulent.
.-

-1

-?.

Application of theDownwash Formla. The chiefuse of a domiwash formula is the calculation of theaerodynamic angleof attack of thehorizontal tail surfaces. For thispurpose a reference pointis takenon the leading edgeof the horizontal tailsurfaoes andtthe values of s obtained fromthe formula.Theaerodynamic
.,

angleof attackof thetailsurfaces willthenbe % =a- B-c where Q is the angleof attack of the wingand ~ is the between the chordlinesof the wingsandhdriacuteangle considered positive (intheequation) zontal tail surfaces, anglethanthe wings. if thetail is setat a lessapparent The datafromtestsseem to indicate thatin case of a biplane themximum angleof downwash occurs in the \ horizontal planemidway betmen thetwo wings. Theeffect

thattheabovemethod may be used, is so slight, however, pointto thenearreferring the of the refe~ence .coordinates est wing(preferably to theno liftline)> ithheassurantethatthe results so obtained will be as precise as it is practicable to calculate themwiththe data now available.

-8TABLE1. DETERKINATION OF K IN THEEQUATION

.
.

Source of: Aspect: : : : : G(+) Data :Ratio:~~ :x: Y:Fx:Fy:ALcFx-Y. :~~c::::: ., . . . n: . . . . . . NC-1 : : : : : : : 0 :.625:1.00:17.9 Curtiss : 9.5 :11.20:2.5: Tests : : : : : : : C:2.3:0.55: .64: .90: 26.4 R&M#196 : 6 :15.2
R&M#426 : 6 R&X#426 : 6 :14.70:3,0:0.61:.595: .89: 27.8 :16.00:3.0:0.43:.595:.915: 29.3

~*cK~. .~(Fx.FY~. n . , . . . ; 170 . . 158 :

: : : 167 176 164

RN #515 : 7.73:11.8:2.6:0.6 :.62:.895: 21.3

NOTE : Therewillbe a slight decrease in thevalueof AC/ALc withincrease in liftcoefficient if thereference by the pointis not fixedin space. Thisis caused change in thecoordinates of the point~th,cha~e in a~~leandtheeffect may easily be aocounted for. fromtrailing exe, T, to ~fLet D = distance erence point P e = Inclination to horizontal of line
then x=

D. Cos e
~ - sin Q

Y=

..