von KARMAN INSTITUTE

FOR F.,

UID DYNAMICS

GRANT AFOSR. 80-0177

9! Final Scientific Report
1980 May 01-1981 April 30

0PTIMIZATION OF MULTI-ELEMENT AIRFOILS

K.P.

ieas

mAyI 198

4This

5:

doc=iegt has bee app

for public release and nale; its
distcibution is unlimited.

R1HODE SAINT GENESE BELGIUM

*15

19 031

Best
Avai~lable
Copy

READ INSTRUCTIONS

REOR

(,EOARD
4.

.Rep

BEFORE COMPLETING FORAM

t Number

-81

3 v'-

2. Govt Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog Nurber

'

"

Title (and Subtitle)

_'__

*-~FinaL

OPTIMIZATION OF

__

Type of Re. o__t_&.er.ioi Covered

cientific Xept L
Org.-R-eprt Taib-or

(.....VKI-PR-198P-5 V
Coat

7-8.

NMLTI-ELEIENT
AIRFOILS,

TON
'IT,
OFMULTIELDIEPerformin

i.P

__

ox--G mL-Numbdr

.iFSR--17

Msegades

10.'-W6gram Element, Project, Task

Area & Work Unit Numbers

9. Performing Organization Name and Address

von Karman Institute

Chaussee do Waterloo, 72
B-1640 Rhode Saint Genese, Belgium

Program ,lament

Task

-7

12,. Report Date

981036
Apr

11. Controlling Office Name and Address

European Office of Aerospace Research
and Development

box 14, FPO NY 09510

4~~61102F1

Number of Pages

a13.

14. Monitoring Agency Name and Address1.

European Office of Aerospace Research

and Development
Box 14, FPO NY 09510
16, & 17. Distribution Statement
Approved for public release; distribution unlimited.
18. Supplementary Notes

19. Key Words

4I

,
. .. ..

-"

airfoils; wing flaps; lift devices; flight pptimization

" -J ' %for multi-element
/
Abstract
20.
A review
of techr iques- aiined at maximi,.ing Cg,-n
airfoils:
configurations of flap
ssib
testing
showed the need for Lnore exhaustive

dflection, slot geometry and airfoil angle of actack. For a typical 4-element
aiLfoil, the nun.,er of possible configurations can easily be in the billions. A
new technitite, based on evolution strategy, has been developed for the problem of
optimizinoa multi-clement airfoil w1th respect to its envelope of riaximun/ I/Cd-T,This Lechuique was applied to an airfoil having a slotted leadi
versus
'

edge flap and a double-sloLted trailing edge flap using an existing computer

program fo: 2D subsoniL multi-elEiaent airfoils to provide values of aerodynnir c

co.fficient.s. Althou,it limitations of the program precluded th? full determination cf Lhie envelope o! (fiICAivs Ci the problem of madimizig y 1.; fored. The result of testing approxi'a)-eiy 400 con!
-nIu,L w,.o
C costr
"Igc..1tio;; ,ener:ted by the random mutatioa-naLural selet: "n proccdure of
evolut.ion sratey was an 8-fold increase in

~FOM@
1473

.9

'i
-

ith a 12 % increase i4

Cont.inued on Reverse

''

'M

Continu d..

over t1e initial geometry.f2 he conclusions reached from this work are 1)
evolution strategy applied to the optimization of julti-element airfoils can
yield substantial improvements in aerodynamic performance, 2) the number of
configurations required to find the optimum can be reduced from the total
number possible to a small fraction of the total with the same final result,
3) the inherent simplicity and speed of the technique develoed lends itself
well to further application in wind tunnels, 4) evolution thecry appears to
be the best choice for techniques aimed at the optimization of systems defined
by a large number of degrees of freedom.

.1

A
,4

41
...

..

P..........

This report has been reviewed by the EARD Information Office and is

releasable to the National Technical Information Service (NTIS). At

NTIS it will be releasable to the general public, including foreign
nations.
This technical report has been reviewed and is approved for publication.

C:1RN W.BAILEY
Major, USAF
Chief, Electronics

FOR THE COMMANDER

SGORDON L. HERMANN'-

Lt Colonel, USAF
Deputy Commander

*14

St

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

'1

The author extends his sincerest appreciation to

the supervisor of this work, Professor Roland Stuff, who
first proposed the application of an evolution strategy based scheme to the optimization of complex aerodynamic

*i

*.1

configurations. His enthusiasm and unselfish counsel was

largely responsible for the promising results of this work.
Alsoto be recognized is the assistance of Professor John
Sandford with regards to the fundamental concepts of multielcment airfoil optimization and to his review of the
Yeport manuscript, and to MBB Hamburger Flugzeugbau for
the contribution of a realistic aerodynamic design problem.
Finally, the author would like to acknowledge
the sponsorship of Detachment 1, Air Force Office of
Scientific Research (EOARD/AFSC), USAF.

"But it can't fly, Newtonz taws prove it 1"

Th. von Karman, early 1900's

T fY.2 bg

A-J
-.

MTIQ!

TTTT1

___

Intro~uction1

:t.3

3 elf- Ot irin-

Thcorr4
EThCtntill

Airfhill

7o).utior '?eo>niri,7

Y7voutton 3trtr,,p !3olut

2v~tion Str'ate-"r
v'.r--It-

of~ erme'r.-ic Copfiie~et

4.ttTh'~

onnc

A.3

11

Cto'n

novii'1.tr

ji

eol

14

Connluaionp'

17

1~foci~'19
Fi'm'.ro

21

8
9

jcnnu

efric-irtn

(NiI-:-~- 7"-nr-o
'D.t" fIralrni-vcio

1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Multi-Element Airfoil Optimization
It is no secret today that comoetition among civilian and

"

military aircraft manufacturers in the international marketplace is

tough. This competition has demanded improved flight efficiency, and
as a result a strong emphasis has been placed on dcign optimization

4.

with respect to take-off, cruise, and landing aerodynamic characteristics.

Design considerations for take-off and landing aerodynamics

are primarily directed towards the reduction of wing area, inj,rase in

maximum take-off weight, improved fuel efficiency, reduced field
length requirements mnd lowerl, arouui

nnir q

levn1 s.

ThP rIntivR

importance of the nondimensional coefficients of lift and drag, 01

*f

and Cd resnectivelv, for toke-off and landinp are shown in figure (I)!

Over the entire regime of flight, the nerformance at take-off,

when aircraft weigh+ and enrine noise are at a maximum for the flight,
is the most critical facter in the design of lifting surfaces. To
achieve the maximum rate

O1 angle of climb, thus reducing runway

renuirements and noise footorint, meximum Cl/Cd is desired for a

given C 1 .

The envelone of values of maximum Cl/Cd versus C 1 for the

Boeing 727 wing, obtained from flight measurements, is given in figure

(2), and is more or leos- similar to the envclone obtained for all
other airfoils2 .
The complexity of multi-element airfoils, as seen in figure (2)
and in more detail in figure (3A), has been dictated by the need for
h miaooth, and ior high-speed transnort aircraft shock-free airflow
at cruise conditions, combined with the high-lift configurations required at take-off and lanaina , 3 .

Although significant effort has

been devoted to the study of advanced high-lift devices such as

those employing blown f1rps, jet flans, boundary laver control or
4C.-

augmnentor wings, it is reasonable to expect the continued use of

mechanical devices for the next generation of civilian and military
aircraft.

Indeed,

as shown i-:. figure (4),

values of Clmax for large,

high-subsonic aircraft nearly doubled between 1950 and 1970 as a

result of imnroved desig-,n of mechanical flao sl: tems 4 .

Once the

choice of high-lift system anO associated flan and airfoil oeometries has been ,r:ade, the relative nositioning of the elements must
be determined such that the obtainable values of C1 and Cl/Cd are
sufficient to meet performance demands (or preflight promises!)

The ideal set of configurations would be those that would result in

the largest Cl/Cd-vs-Cl envelone.

The number of all possible

2
configurations, however, is very large even for the typical oase o

an airfoil having a double-slotted trailing edge fiap and a,stf,

as depicted in figure

leading edge flap,

O B)

,'

" .. .,:"

r"

1.2 Empirical Methods

The most common means of determining the best airfoil-flapI"',
,,
configurations involves many hours of wind tunnel testing for a,rep.resentative set of variations of slot gap width and overlap,, flap
deflection and angle of attack. Optimum configurations are then
made by adding to the main airfoil the leading and trailing edgedevices, whose individual slot geometries have been optimized with
respect to on!- one .djncent element. An expiple of thie empirical.
method, renroduced from the work of LjungstroM5, appears in figure
(5). Althoug-h this emniricel method can greatly improve tli aero-

dynamic performance of a multi-element airfoil, there are two significant disadvantages that must be considered. First, the accuracy of
an empirical method is dependent on v large number of test configurations; however, for oven'the most well-funded design relatively
few different configarations are actually tested.
For instance, for
a 4-element airfoil, 500 test cases is only 5.10-6 % of the number
of possible cases, if each of the 10 doegrees of freedom can be
varied across 10 increments. Increasin4 the number of test cases
comes at the exnetse of time and ilirect onerntin- cost of wind
tunnels. If wind tunnel time and cost trends increase at the rate depictedl in figure (6), however, it is doubtful that empirical methods
will produce better results than at the nresent time, when a great
6
emnhasis is being nlaced on im-nroving high-lift device performance .

4JThe

second disadvantage of empiricPl methods is that by combiningA

elements ontimized with resnect to only adjacent elements, the

imi)ortant viscous interaction between r7ll elements is unaccounted
for. This interaction, however, is strong end tests have shown that
the combination of individu .y-o-tioized
co-,'onents raely results

,;

in an ontimum overall configurntion 5 .

1.3 Self-Ontii, inr Airfoils

It would be desireeble then to have a self-optimizing scheme,
where the syite-n seeks it3 ovin best confimszrrtion without the need for

testi".

every nosiibilit-.

Far fro-,

ec'f,'ve, such sche-As hsvp

been used with a good deal of succass in several different problems

where systems are described by several degrees of freedom and
4

F r. I

relative 'factors of fitness' result for each variation of narameters. Ono such anlication described by Levinsky 7 attempted to

maximize Cl for a fixed maximum C d and minimize Cd for a fixed

minimum Clfor a flexible 2-dimensional airfoil mounted in a

'

transonic intermittant wind tunnel.

Results of this work, and

results of further investigation of a 3-dimensional flexible airfoil 8

in a transonic continuous wind tunnel are given in figures (7) and
(8).
In both cases, the hydraulically-actuated leading and trailing
edges were modified automatically by on-line computers programmed
with a gradient-strategy ontimization scheme.
in section 2.

This is described

The only human input was TGhe factor of fitness to be

maximized or minimized (Cl,Cd, or volume) and a constraint.

strategy has also been used in the work of

Hicks 9 ,

Gradient

where 2-dimen-

sional transonic airfoils were modified to improve C1, Cd or

maximize volume. Some of the more significant results of this work,
performed numerically as onnosed to the above mentioned wind tunnel
work, are shown in figure (9).
Although these examples have resulted
in substantial imniovements in airfoil performance, the a&olication
of their ontimization methodolo"y was found to be more clunbersome
than the method described in this work.
flxisting ontimization
methods are comnored below to a new scheme based on 'evolution
strategy'.
This scheme hus been developed to determine the configgiving maxirmn Cl/Cd for each value
urations of a 4-elerent airfil
of Cl,

where only the r-eo-itry of e .cb e!.me-ot is

i/

I
4!
*g 1

kno,,:n inititlly.

2 THFOR"
2.1 Simrle OTtimization Problem-Existing Solution Methods
Conside, the ontimization problem faced by an experimentalist
*

standing above a room in which there is a single geographical peak

whose location with respect to a 2-dimensional coordinate system is
to be determined.

In this problem, the 'system', this being the hu-

man, has two degrees of freedom, his location with respect to the
x-axis and the y-axis. At each x,y coordinate positioi, the value
is determined of the geographical 'fitness factor', or the distance
between the x-y rlane and the surface below.

The most rudimentary

method to find the peak would be to make a number of random soundings

in order to obtain a rough impression of the surface.

In order to

improve accuracy, the grid could be divided into a fine mesh and the
height is then recorded at each mesh point.

Although this scheme

guarantees that all possible x,y cobinations have been checked,

the number of posnible combinations increases with the seuare of the
number of grid divisions and with a rower e-ual to the number of
derzrees of freedom for higher order systems.

Figure (10)

denicts

these 2 basic schemes along with two gradient-based strategies that

were develoned to converge to the -eak with a reduced arnount of
effort1 0 .
In the first of these two gradient-based strategies, knownm
as the Gauss-3eidol Strategy,

the experimentalist,

trying to find the

neak with the least s-rount of effort, simnly proceeds in the direction of the stee-nest positive graOient, determined at the starting
noint,

until t':e gradient becomes zero or negative.

noint,

he turns in

the direction of a new,

.nd continues in this now direction.

From this

locally-stee-est gradient

Thisi orocedure is continued

until the Peak is found, that is, r nosition hns been reached on the

x-y nlane where no nositivA wrrdients exist below.

The second of

these technioues,

known

ilar to the fir.t

excent that at etch sto-) the mar.niturle of gradients

s the 'gonerv!

in all directions is re-evpluatec.

r-redient strate-y',

is

sim-

Although the second scheme may

result in the shorter total distance betw:,een the stertinT -oint and
the nceak with resnect to the first
-oer sten).

Clearly,

renresents a substnti!

scheme, it renuires more work

the use of eithe" of the pradient stretegies
i!nrove,!ient over the insnection of every

oossible co:nbination of the vtriable parameters.

It

in order to reduce the a,-ount of effort involved in

figure (10), one is teinnted to incres- the

is

noted that

scheme B of

-rid s-acin-.

The

danger of this, of course, is that there is a stton,,4-os6sib

that the peak will be completely missed- this is precisely the
point mentioned previouxsly related to optimizing airfoils by
empirical methods. The danger of using gradient strategies inmore complicated systems is that only a relative optimum may be
reached, as the smaller of two peaks for the simple problem just
described.
2.2 Simpole Optimization Probl em-Eivolut ion Stategy, Solution
A fifth, and relatively new optimization scheme that may
further reduce the effort reouired to improve a system described by
trat e y.
1 bac ad on Iov olut ion -a numb cr of dogr ^-cao f fro o 4-.
'Relatively' new is stressed, because the basis of this strate.!y, is
derived from the theories of natural selection first postulated by the
10th century biologint, Charles Darwin. As in biologicvl systems,
which in their simnlest claspifications can be grouped according to
a nunber of naramiote-'s, siich as size, number of anpendaaes, means
of renroduction or mobility, en enginonrinr system survives if the
combrltion of each of' its definin.! Paraeers results in a 'beast'
that is surerior to all other combinations. Only reenntly has this
concept been anplied to realintic nhysicl-I problems$ thb majority
of the work to dvte being attributed to Professor Ingo flechenberg,
of the Technischen Universitaxt Berlin. In ord r to describe thin
Tjoing
scheme, wie considr'r agisin the tasic of the oe:nerimentri'ist.
evoluition stratepy, rs deinoted in firu--o (11A), a number of test
points are sel~ected randomly over a region noer the starting noint.
The heipht is recorded at eRCh point, then tVie P. eririentv-list
'ro-i there, the, same num~bsr
moves to the hi .hest of thnse noints.
of rev. noints are rendonly chosen, and the norocedure continues as
before.
The distance fromi one Ihir,'h -point' to enanh now noint in a
succes!aive set is contr~lle6 by the nrevious distance, that is if a
large sten resiulted in a,lar~er heig'ht thvan a smaller sten0, all new
points wiould be deter*.ined using steps anroximately enual to the
large step. This im-nortent factor of' evolution strateiy allows
1ar',e stens to be t.akcen ear 1 v in the o-otimization process, and
The
decreasinp sten sise as the ontinu nopition is aponroached.
inclusion of lar.7e mutation steps elso nrevents the convergence to
local maxi"na, a nroble- associated w,.ith gradient strategies. In the
cane of a locel maxim~a or small ba~rrier in the ontiinization process,
evolution strate~y will iiunn aher-d as the result of a large

'

mutationa length.-6
2.3 Evolution Strategy Examples
Several examples of evolution strategy an-lication are shown
in figures (11) and (12)

As a simple verification test, figidre,

(11B) depicts a segmented plate having 5 degrees of freedom thai

is mounted in a wind tunnel. The objective is to reduce the 0vdrA-l
drag of the plate as measured by the momentum defect between the' - ' "," "
leading and the trailing edges.

From the initial configuration,-

several new configurations, or cases, were created by random modifications of the angle of each segment with resnect to an adjacent,
nI.
hAC.nA n IRly plarar,
rgenter pl.A
Afte. 1.40 csips, tbA s
mgment.,
the expected result.

The important result is that 140 cases reo-

resents only 4.06"j0-5% of the total possible, 345 million.

The second example is an attempt to modify a system whose op-timum configuration is unknown l l .

In this case, shown in figure

(12A), the objective was to maximize the efficiency of a two-phase

supersonic nozzle constructed from a number of discs. The optimal
configuration is radically different from conventional designs and
verifies the ability of evolution strategy to converge to unknown
It is also interesting to note that flow mixing regions
seen in the figure have been previously suggested for improving nozsolutions.

zle efficiency.
The third exm nle, tht of reducing the head loss for a 900
bend of flexible tubing, also has an unpredictable result. As
depicted in figure (12B) the final shane is a subtle change from
the initial, a standard circular arc, but the result of 300 mutations is a halving of the head loss l l .
2.4 Selection of Ontimization Mlethod
The advantares of using evolution strategy over an exhaustive
evaluation of every noscoible configuration ere clear, excent perhaps
for the case of a system having only one derree of friiedom. The
advante-es of evolution strategy over a 'strictly determined
mathematical stratej', such as gradient methods, have been summarized by Rechenberg'O:
When a large number of warameters are involved, the
1
evolution strategy attains the desired result more ranidly
than the more fe,-iliar strictly determined search strategies,
assuming the size of the search steps to be the same in both
cases. So far, this could only be nroved for the case of an
n-dimensional hyperplane risin- in any arbitrary direction.
A more general proof is being attempted.
2

'.Vhere-s the mathematical search strategies used so far

require very small stops (in the Sensetheof evolution

the truncation
the ' I
ca'6method o!I'
Taylor series after the first term),
and should operate also with much larger steps Which exceed the

linear region in the neighborhood. Taking larger stepss ignifies

(a) in many situations a more rapid advance towards the

'.

desired aim, and

(b) a shorter time to decide whether the step taken has been ',-:".
successful or not. (The change in the value of a function willgenerally be greater in the case of a large parameter :hange
than in the case of a small change.)
A so-called "steady signal" in the measurement of the
3
value of a function is a mathematical fiction. Disturbances are
always present, which give rise to errors in measurement. The
effectiveness of the strictly determined mathematical search
strategies is markedly reduced by small errors of measurement.
It is of the nature of the evolution method (as a stochastic
search method) that small random errors of measurement
cannot have a decisive influence on the develonment of the
procesr.
4
There are esses in which the more familiar mathematical
search strntegies must each deadlock. Such ceases are frenuently observed in nhysics, exanles are hysteresis phenomena
and locally limited extremal values, The evolution rethod can
generally cone with such situations without difficulty.
5
The algorithm of the evolution stratery is extraordinarily simple. This imnlies that the effort reouired for an
autoriintion of the search process is relatively low.
Since the work associated with this renort was strictly numerical, as onnosed to experimentnl, the small error effect noted above
related to the use of mathematicsJ. '-trategies could not heve eny
significance; thus an arru-ent could stil. be retde in frvor of gra-'
dient methods,
Rechnnberp, how:ver, hrs founOd that o cross-over
point exists at which seprch effort for innroved configurations
using evolution strategy is loes than the effort required for
gradient strategies 9 . This noint is for systems having 5 or more
degrees of freedom.
The s,-tem of interest in tbe vi:rk described 11ore i- a Aele pnt airfnil described by 10 parameters Ps shown in figure (13).
Three 'oivot noints describe the relative nosition of adjacent elements. The individual reometry of an element is given with resnect
to a local coordinate system with the origin on its leading edge.
Pivot points 1 and 2 are fixeo with resoect to element 2 and are
vrriable with resnect to elements 1 and 3. Likewise, pivot noint
3 is fixed ,vith resnect to element 3 and variable with resnect to
element 4. The two deprees of freedom for each of the -ivot points
olus the reletivp deflection between adjacent elerents define 9
degrees of freedom. The 10th de7cree of freedom is the angle of

-8attack between the mnin airfoil anO the fre',tream vplocity vector.
As previously stated, the objective of this optimization is
to obtain the best envelorie of Cl/Cd-vs-Cl values.

The fitness fac-

tor for this system is the magnitude of C1'/dd for each value of C1,
which is equivalent to minimizing C d for fixed C1.

This implies a

series of individucl ortirizations over all desired values of C

The flexible nature of evolution strato
dure, however.

allows a two-step proce-

First Cl/C d is maxi-ized while maintaining C 1

above the initial value; the limit of this mnaxiizntion is P point

on the envelone.

The second ster is then to mnove P.loni

this envel-

one with moeerate mutntinn len!rths, nelectin! those eonnfi,7urations

havi n

the beqt combination of 01/(d Pm ('..

It

in

becruse of thisC

flexibility counled with the eboveme.tioned asnects of evolution

strateg-y th t this method wnr- chosen over grndient stratVgies
bvsis for multi-eleent

I'
4.4

-.
"

,irfoil o,t~miz-tion.

P.s

3C-AlCULATION OF ARRODYNAIA'C COEFFTCIR'NTS

3.1 Description of Program Theory-and Us e,Aerodynamic Coefficients are cacltd

btg

rad

detailed in reference 13.

This prograrn is composed of .the-followin
task areas:
A. Potential Flow Solution
B. Ordinary Boundary Layer Solution
CConfluent Boundary Layer Solution
D. Slot-Flow Analysis

B. Combined Solution
The itiviscia, potentip&. flow solution inales use of the distributed'
vortex concert with the vortex singularity con~nrising the f-unda*1mental
solution t ) -the ILanlace equation.
Airfoils, arbitrarily
arranged and comnosod of fron ono to four elements, have surfaces
ep'nroxirated by a dlosdi-olyron whose linear segmnents are represented
by distributed singu).aritios.
Airfoil contours are limited to smooth,
regular shanes with shorn or -nointod trailinr edges. The only*
restriction on the slot formed by two adj&,cent elements il that the
magnitude of flan ovorlsr must be grepter then abotit l1/of the
airfoil chord.
The ordinary boundary layer solution is comprised of mathsmatical models for laminar,
layers in subsonic flow.

needs of the nrogn'am.

ofthe pr

transition,

end turbulent boundvry

The Iiinc~r boundary layer model is based

Lanine r stall criterion develonmeO by the author

ora
relict ' the formation of short or long senexation

bubbles or bubble burst, a flow condition which causes the tcrintinat~.on

the further -orofriin execution.
The transition model, evolving frontv
theinsabiitycritei-ia of Schlicting end Ulrich , establishes
limiting codtosfor
dnfininm *t-he, DositioA of transition on the
airfoil. Two septarate mcthemeptical models for ordinpry turbulent
boundsry layer develornirnt are used. The first, an approximate
m'odel develoned by Goradia, is used in the initial iterative calculations. The second and more accurate model, based on the methods
of INash, deter-ines the turbulent boundary layer in the final, viscouo solufion.
A significant feature o~' the nroprom i8 the inclusion of a
confluent baundEary l~yer model thet reflects ihe merging of an upper
surface boundEary layer with slot efflux. This model, developed from
the exneri-rnental an"' -cn,-lvticel wor'k of Uroradia, accounts for the
.4

-'Associated

-10highly complex viscous phen~omena as-ociated with slotted. airfoils.

with-n the confluent boundary layer,, a slot-f-low: model
is defined for flow between slot regions.
-combine the inviscid solution with the boundary layer calculations'!
The geometry of the 'equivalent airfoil', reflecting local bounday
layer thicknesses, is successively define oe a aibennb
f
iterations until. oressure distributions have converged to a steady,
condaitiont. As the work described in this renort was more of a

rqualitative

nature than

uantitative,

only one iteration between

vi-Scous and inviscid calculations is miade, in the interest of

reduced computation time. A com-orrison of -predicted and experimenta.
pressure coefficients using the progrum for a two-element airfoii
appears In figure (15).
A listing and descrintion of nrograminu
is given in ainnendix (i) for the 4-eleiaent airfoil considered in
this work.

C4?4
K4

: ,

J
IL

1I1

S0PTIMIZATION PROCEDURE
4..l Geometry Modifications
The choice of evolution strategy required the preliminary
development of the following:
A. Scheme for Random Geometry iodifications
B. Mutation Iength Control
C. Criterion for Convergence to Optimum
D. Initial Airfoil Geometry
Of fundamental importance to the effectiveriess of evolution strategy
is the combination of largo and small mutation lengths.

o.4

If only

small., sizes are used. the number of imoroved cases will. be hig.h, but
the rate of progress will be slow. On the other hand, if only large
sizes are used, the optimum mey be entirely skioned over. For this
reason, new cases were divided into 3 groups, one having all mutation
lengths of a base value, the second group having lengths of 505 of the
base value, and the third groun having lengths 150O of the base.,
The control. of the value of this base mutation length will be
described below. For each new geometry, then, 18 new configurations
are generated, divided into 3 groups of 6 cases each. The choice of
18 cases per set was somewhat arbitrary, but it was felt that this
would be a good trade-off between effort and resulting improvement.
As the optimization nrocedure was carried out, it was found that 18
cases was a safe choice, as the orogran used to determine C1 and 0 d
had certain limitations. Tn oxoeriment, a smaller number of eases
per set migbt be desireable.
All mutations were generated by a computer program, whose
listing appears in aonendix (ii) and is described by its logic
diagram in figure (16A). The random choice requioP by this Oro ran
is made using a.random number generator that determines. for each
case! -ich of the 10 -wrameters is to be modified, and in the event of
a modification, whether the increment is positive or negative. As
seen in figuire (160), two coliumns of mutation lonoths are printed.
The first gives the three lengths used to modify the x,y position
of pivot points. These values reoresent a percentea-e of the range
defined for each nivot noint, as shown in fi-nire (16B). The second
colu'nn ip derrees of muitation for flan deflection and angle of attack.
The Random number generator is a comouter system function that
returns an even distribution of rep! values in the range 0.0-1.0.
descrintion of its algo&ithm is given in awnendix (iii).
k

-1A

12

-"

4.2 Mutation Length Control

As described above, three modification lengths are xsed 'for
each new set of configuprations.

The control of the base, or

middle length is critical, as rapid convergence to. an optimum requires

an expansion of mutation size far from the optimum and a dompression
close to it.

In this optimization problem, the base length for a

new set was controlled by the best case from the previous set.
For instance, if case 1 , a member of the third mutation length group:,
is the best in its set, its mutation length will be used as the base
value for the next set. In this way, increasing lengths will be
favored. On the other hand, if case 3 is the most improved, smaller
lengths will be favored in the next set.

Using this scheme, the

optimization straterzy self-adjusts to the distancn from convergence.

4.3 Convergence Criterion
Concerning the question as to when convergence has been
reached, a criterion is used that recognizes that mutation lengths
will automaticelly compress as the noint of convergence is apnroached.,
When the modification of an im-nroved configuration fails to increase
0l/Cd for a minimum C 1 , the airfoil. has 'apnroximately converged'.
For absolute convergence, an additional sot of configurations is generated, based on the best case of the set that failed to improve
over the point of apnroxiirate convergence. If acraiuq there is no
improvement, convergence is said to exist.
The procedure proposed to determine the envelope of aerodynamic coefficients is comprised of the following two basic steps:
1. TLaximize 01,/Cd while maintaining Cl g'eater than Clmin
the value obtained from the initial geometry

2. Nove across the envelone from the maxima point found from
ste- 1 to the maximum Cl limit, when flow separation occurs
Results from this -rocedure are presented in section 5.
4.4 Initial Airfoil Geometry
The initial airfoil configuration was an arbitrary but
realistic placement of elements so as to guarantee good flow con~itions through -the slots.

The value of the 10th parsmeter, angle of

attack, was determined from the polar shown in figure (14).

t.n

angle of 0.50 was used as it resulted in the maxi.-um Cl/Cd.

This

initial configuration and angle of attack thus set the value of

Slmin at 2.71. In all subsequent program calculations, mach number
and Reynold c number, refetrenced to.'an-airfoil chord of 350mm,
were 0.125

Ltnd 1.26.106, respectiv-ly.

lement

.rofiles were

-13 -

taken from reference 14, with aw ropriate moaification to meet

tho requirement of smooth contours.

.!

71

"A

Itt

-145 RE SUMIS

5.1 First Three Configuration Sets

The first sten of the optimization procedure, the maximization of C1/C d with the constraint of
was started at
the initial geometry. Figure (17) shows the scatter of data.)
points for the first three sets (54 6ases) of airfoil configurations.
ome points have been omitted for clarity. Circled data points are
'best cases for 'each set; these cases serve as the bases for subsequent modifications. "'The automatic mutation length &ontrol reacts
well in these first sets' far from the point of convergence, with
:

an increase in bese lpnghb hetwqen sets nn. and two and a onntant,
base length between sets two and three. As exnected, points scattere

in the innediate vicinity of the initializing case were from the firs"
mutation length group, and points scattered further away were from the
second and third groups. As seen in figure (17), the ratio Cl/Cd
apnears more sensitive to airfoil modification than C1. This effect
continued for all other sets, with most points locate,,' in a narrow
Cl band between 2.0 and 3.0 and a scatter of other points in a relatively low Cl/Cd - low Cl region. The tabulation of all configurations
(37 sets, 666 cases) is given in Appendix (iv) to-ether with initial
and final configuration data.
5.2 Descrixtion of Complete Ontimization
.Figure

(18)

showis the result of continued maximnization'of

Cl/Cd, plotting the best case for each of 37 sets.

Up to set 11,

mutation lengths genorclly expanded or remained constant. Sets

12-14, however, resulted in a comprossion of lengths, and convergence
was thought to be imminent. Beyond set 14, lengths began to expand
again until the base value stabilized at approximately 2% and 10
for pivot point location and deflection angles, respectively. This
effect was considered to be a 'small barrier' in the optimization
procesr, which the evolution strategy was able to step over with the
A gradient strategy-based
larger of the three mutation len,ths.
technioue would have converged to such a barrier, or local maximum.
Beyond set 22, the accuracy of the aerodynamic coefficients
beca~ne questionable, resulting in erratic behavior of the optimization nrocess.
When the nrocess was continued without the Clmin
constrrint, lrge ch.nges in Cl/Cd and Cl occurred for relatively

k.-. -

small -eometrv modifications.

As an attempt to return to smaller
of coefi~_ci-ens, the nrocess was restarted at set 24
variations
.

with a: forced reduction of step Sizes, as shown by the dotted lines ,

of figure (18).

This reulted in sets 27 and 28

Which againyere

characterized by large variations of cefficientq for smali m dii

cations. This sequence of forced length Compression and optiniization restart wb.s continued to the 37th, but by this point values of Cl/Cd were unrealistically high, even for the simplified twodimensional airfoil model without induced drag or body interference
effects. Indeed, during the process of optimization, numerous
configurations resulted in unsuccessful program termination or
extremely high values of Cl/Cd,and in several cases, negative 6d,'
The reasons for this inaccuracy are thought to be one or a combination of the following:
1 Invalid geometry; i.e.,

overlap less than 1% of chord

2 Confluent boundary layer or slot flow model failures for

small slot cross-sections
3 ~Inadeauate
roambauhsfr4-element
small verification of ~program
by authors for4-len
(note-the frenuency and severity of
airfoil confiurations

inaccuracies were substantially les

for the preliminary

optimization of a 2-element airfoil)

In the further presentation of results, sets 21-22 are taken to be the
aproximate limit of data accuracy, althouph all points are shown.
!t

Cl/Cd and C 1 are shown with rosnect to set number in figure

(19). The points again nre from the beet cases for each set.
As
seen in this figure, the result of 22 sets of configurations and
_

296 total cases, Cl/Cd has been increased from 4.28 to 36.6, a factor
of 8.55.

At the same time, C1 has been increased from 2.31 to 2.59,

a result that evolved by fPvoring the configuration having the larger
Cl when two or more hrd a-orocimately the same Cl/Cd. Increasing
Cl, however, was not the priiary objective of the ontimization.
Because of the li-iit of data accuracy, the optimization process
nas terminate.

at the 37th set,

thus riakinr it

impossible to find

the envelope of aerodynamic coefficients and thus carry out the

s,)cond sten of the nropose3 ontimization.
5.3 Initial-Finri

onfi.irption Comnarison

P -ure (20) shows nolars generated for the initial configuration end the configurations rasulting from the process of Cl/Cd

Smaximization.

The resulting draiatic improvement in

-aerformance is aoarent.
-,

aerodynamic

During the process of ootimization, a num-

ber of configurctions produced values of Cl/Cd and Cl that when plotted fell to the right of the polar for maximized Cl/Cd.

A polar

74

-16-

was generated from the point th.t

was furthest to the right and. i

denoted as the 'optimized Cl configuration'.

This c6nlfiguration, it

is interesting to note, was a member-of the optimum dl/!

The dotted lines have been added to these poiars to show

number 22.
I

set,

the real flow behavior for multi-element airfoils such as shjown, in

figure (2).
A comarison of initial and final configurations is given in
figure (21).

A noticeable effec't of the. optimization is the

reduction of slot area and improved contour smoothness of the trailing edge flans. Both of these effects have been shown experimentally
to improve aerodynamic performance.
for the leading edge flap.

The same changes did not occur

It was found thiat the multi-element

airfoil program was very sensitive to reduction of slot aree. of the

leading edge device when both trailing edge flaps were present.

It

is suspected that the reasons for this sensitivity are the same as

those mentioned above.

A comparison between the optimum Cl/Cd configaration found
using evolution strategy and that suggested by the eripirical reconmandations of reference 5 was a~ttemapted', but the slot geometries

Irequired
j

ere not capable of bing

modelled byt

airfoil program,

Any change from these recommendations so as to suit program input

requirements would have resulted in a meaningless comparison.

V AI-.7

;!JA

CONCT~USIoUS

,-

Although the inaccuracy of the program used to determine a4erodynamic 6oefficidnts prebluded the full solution of the airfoil performance envelope, the problem of maximizing Cl/Cd was easily handled
by the evolution strategy.-based optimization techniaue. A review of,
existing techniques showed that evolution strategy is the best choice
for systems described by 5 or more degrees of freedom, due to its
relative incomplexity, flexibility to handle a wide variety of problems, and to the knowledge that the converged solution is an absolute
optimum within the range of variation of these degrees of freedom.
The problem exnerienced with the use of the above-mentioned
program reinforces the opinion that as of yet numerical solution
methods are severely limited in their range of apnlication.to complex
engineering systems, such as for a multi-element airfoil with ito
large number of configurations. The value of numerical methods,
however, lies in their ability to provide preliminary results to be
used as a starting point for further design refinement in the
laboratory. Of course, as long as the limits of numerical methods
are not exceeded, experimental optimization may be well predicted.
The next logical step related to the work described here is the
apnlication of evolution strategy to optimization in a wind tunnel.
A setun is envisioned, similar to those of references 7 and 8, where
modifications to the airfoil,

analysis of aerodyhemic coefficients,

and optimization procedure are carried out by on-line computers.

The importance of using the wind tunnel is that all configurations of
an airfoil are capable of being tested, as onnosed to computer modelimposed restrictions such as slot geometry and separation-free flow.
An important note is thr-t multi-element airfoils often are designed

to perform with senarated flow and negative overlap, two conditions

that can not exist for the successful use of the program of reference 13.

14

The effect of increasing Cl/Cd through the modification of

I

slot geometries while at the same time maintaining adeouate C1 is

best seen for the design trade-off between take-off and cruise flight
Increascd Cl/Cd at take-off allows increase6, rate or angle of climb,
decreased overall distance to reach a requireO screen height,
increased teke-off weight for the same runway requirement, or a
combination of the three. An increase in Cl/Cd at take-off also has
a stronr, influence on cruise flight efficiency througa the reduction
of the installed nower needed for take-off.

I-

ia

By using an evolution-based strategy, the converged 6ptimum

is an 'absolute' optimum within the range of Variations of the
degrees of freedom era particular system. The question of Whether
convergence has been obtained or not is

thus eliminated'i this W~as'

not the case for the design Of the Boeing 73.This is seen in

figure (4) by the 3 increments in 0lmax for its high-lift devices.

At each point, the design was probably considered to be aia optimm!
Other areas of aerodynamic design that should lend themselVes
well to evolution-strategy optimization arc. the wing-fuselage
junction, empennage, sunercritical airfoils, engine nacelles, and
fuselage rear up-sweep. These design areas are currently anproached
using procedures similar to those of flap design, the wind tunnel
"*!

testing of a relatively small number of different configurations.

Each of these problems is described by many degrees of freedom, a
characteristic that has been shown to be well-suited to evolution
strategy. The technioue described in this work is by no means restricted to aerodynamic desirn,

however.

A wide range of annlications

can be imagined; the examples included in this roort are only a few
preliminary oases whose results show promise for this new technique to
be used as a powerful tool in the design process.
One can consider the development of evolution strategy as a
result of man learning from his observations of nature. Figure (22)depicts what might result if nature learns from the Perodynamlic
achievements of man.

I
"I

High Speed Aircraft," the Boeing Company, Ren-6on, Yladhington,

D6-.16168, June 1.965.
z

2. Steiner, J., et.a.., "Case 'Study in Aircraft Design: The j3 6eIrn t

727,t" AIAA Professional Study Series, Sept 10,78.

3.Bruner, G., "Le Boeing 747,"1 DOC-AiR-E.sp-AcE., No.112, Sept. -196,8,Y

P9. 7.
4. Technical Staff, AEDO (USAF) and ARO, Inc., edited by
J.D. Whitfield? J.P. Hartin, and S.R. Pate, "Aerodlynamic
Testing-a Look at Future Requirements," AIAA No.78-765, 1978.

5. Ljun ,strbm, B.Tj.G., "Exp~erimental High Lift Optimization ofIA

Mulutiple Element Airfoils," Proceedings of the AGARD Conference

on V/ST0TL Aerodynamics, AGARD-OP-143, Apr. 1974, pn. 13-1
1 6,.

13-16.

Rottie, I.H., "Air Transportation for the 1980's: Aerodynamic

Design," from collected Daners of the 1975-76 Seminar Series
supnorted by the 1Minta N'artin Fund for Aeronautical. Research,
University of 11,aryland, College Park, De-oartment of Acrosiace
Engineerinw, June 1976, w). 115-152.

7. Levinsky, E., Schanpwelle, R., and Po-Lntney,

S.,

"Airfoil

Ontiinization Through the Adaptive Control of Camber and

Thickness, Phase 11: Transonic Wind Tunnel Test and Programi
Sumi ,ary," General Dlynamnics Corporation, Convair Divisioh,
CASD-NSC-75-004, Sept. 1975.
8.

Iievinsky, E,.S., 1'allko, R.L., "Semispan Wind Tunnel Tert of a

Comnnuter Controlled Self-Optimizing Flexible Technology Wing,"
AIAA Daper 78-786, 1978.

9. Hicks, V%
, F~urman, E. , and Variderplaats, G., "An Assessment ofA
Airfoil Design by Numnerical Ontirnization," NASA TV~ X-30921
July 1974.

10. Rechenberg, I., "Cybernetic Solution Path of an Expnerimiental

Problem," Royal Aircraft TPstablishment Library Translation
No. 1122, Aua. 1965.
AA

REFERENCES (cont'd)

-2

11. Rechenberg,1. , "Evolutions strat egie , Optirnierung Teclhisoher

Systeme nach Prinzi-pien der Biologischeni Evolution," No. 1"5
of Problemata Series, Friedrich Frommanin Verlag, StuttgartBad Cannstatt, 1973.
12. Discussion between Professors I.Rechenberg aand R. Siu Cf',
Technischen Universitat Berlini, Feb. 1980.
13. Stevens,, W., Goradia, S., and Braden, J., "1Nathematicai Mdodel
for Two-Dimensional I~ulti-Component Airfoils in Viscous Flow,"
TLockhond-Georgia. Company, ?Marietiua, Georgia, NASA CR-1843 and
Su~nlement to NASA CR-l843, July' 1971.
14. Hertha, K. and Scheerer, J., IlKonstrukt ion des ZICP-Panelhalbmodell
r,esserschmitt-Bd5lkov-Blohm- Gmbh, Hamburger Flugzeugbau, ILFK 7512,v
Ergebnisbericht Nr.19, Arrbeitspaket:E-I.4, April 1977.,

A
7

15. Schwefel, Hans-Paul, "Numerische QOtimierung von CompOuter1,odd11en mittels der Evolutionsstrategie, volumne 26,
Interdfisciplinary Systems Research (ISR 26), Birkh~Iuscr Verleg,
Basel, 1977.

44
A

TAKEOFF
GROUND

RUN .

]WEIGH

WIUST

QS

CLIMBOU-JI

WEIGHT

WING I OADING
t TAKEOFF

IIFT

AG

CD
ROLLING FRICTION

At TITIIDF

{I

OW L ,kx

FLARE--CLIMBOUT
_
,LAR

- ,-

HIGH L/

,oc ,

HGH

GNOUNO R(IN

LMAX

LOW L5R0C

DISTANCE

LANDING
AUkr)L".0
R

t
AN uL

1,

Lk

[INGwlG
I.UAOI.U

SAt

,lK"I

IIIIULLi

APPROACH

KGO

API6rAPO
d

GUO,4%kOLL
- jIn

TAKEOFF AND LANDING

AERODYNAMICS

kARI

A -6

DIG

SLAT -FRFA
;k-k

LANDING

MIOFLAP
\--..AFT FLAP

TAKEOFF

FL APS UP

raJt
CRUISE

0 727 TAKEOFF
") 727 LANDING
CL

20

'

HEEORETICAL DRAG
" \FLAPS
UP

C0 50--

\~J-A PPROXIMA TE
"0ENVELOPE

2
25,

".

150o4---.-'%*

40'o FLAPS"'

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.5

2.0

LIF T COEFFICIENT-

3.0

CL

BOEI:"l
NG-727 DRAG POLARS

FIGURE 2

--

A- A

10w

~5

2A

BARL

AELA

t-o

DEGREES

OF

FREEOM

A.LHIG-LIFET DEVI DETAILS3

%44

w
z

L
44

ww
W\0

>4,

CL

VU

>.4

fl~
II~~~

uzw

CD~z
0

a.
a.1

In

w
'-N

rw

Li

\'

22

DEFLECTION

A AP

c-ANGLE-ow"
40

4.4

CLI x/

22.

r
4%ofC/
SLATGAP

4.1
4.0 /

4s

tot gap

'

2-..

CL

-3.0

2.9.

3 5-

No itot

_,-.

-.

0'$00

4 SLAT Soo
GJP

L.E. SLAT GAP & DEFLECTION EFFECTS

FLAP M,

CLmox .

4.5

4.ol
0

/L_.__

0'

"" 7
3

T.
E FL AP GAF

FLAP cMRAP
FI0RSI

OVERL AP EFFECTS
0

CL/

SLAT AND

-COMBINED

,,

FLAP EFFECTS

//"
S//

101-_______
0

10 -

20

FOUR ELEMENT A IRFOIL OP TIMIZA

METHOD
TiON BY EMPIRICAL

A ...

..

CIARAP

THIROL

106

1000

100 YEARS
F 111 ,.
5

~04

10 4 -.

3-2

DF11

:,---10ER

SHUTTLE

l10o

0-52

61)

F15

TIME, HR
13-

(f

737
DC.9

DC-3

C..

72/

707
102c-

DC.7

B-7

10 WRIGHT
10
-I

FLYER

1920

1900

DC.0

1960

1940

I
1980

. .01
2000

TIME, YEAR

WHAT PRICE ACCURACY ?

....

1010 CONFIGURATIONS
1 MEASUREMENT/30 SECONDS

....
...

I:

TOTAL TIME

9.51.10 5 YEARS

TOTAL COST $8.331010

I
WIND TUNNEL TEST PROGRAM
TRENDS

i.

FIGURE 6

.44

V'

4d

LI

It

-,

-,
,,,O

'

'4-

tnQ

ca
I'Q

CLL

-.

Co LO
0i

AIRFOIL

...

MODEL

IDEG

START OF TEST

END OF TEST

~A

PROBLEM:.MIN. CD
'FOR CL=O. 5, M=0.85

CL

'7

AS

.CHOSEN

OP TIM UM

START OF TEST
END OF TEST

CD

V
MfIn

10

15

20 ITERATION NUMBER

THREE- DIMENSIONAL FLEXIBLE

AiRFOIL OPTIMIZA TRON

FGR

cI

*1

-110

11

-.

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

IITIAL X/CPERCENT CHORD

IIILAIRFOIL., CD=O.OO& 93, V='0.721I
_--FINAL AIRFOIL, CD=O.OOO 1V=0.756
VOLUME MAXIMIZATION, CD40001 CL= 0.0, M=O.6
-

~-.i
-.

toO

I'%
-

j---

---

.4A3
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

X/C, PERCENT CHORD

INI TIA L AIRFOIL, CD= 0.0524, V=0.680
--FINAL AIRFOIL, CD=O.OOO 7, V=0.654
DRA G MINIMIZA TI ON, V.>0. 65., CL .Oj M=0.85
TWO-DIMENSIONAL TRANSONICFI
AIRFOIL OPTIMIZATION,. GRADIENT ST

E9

MODEL FOR SIMPLE OPTIMIZATION PROBLEM

N I-I

. V.

C .

....
. .

.S-EE

... .. ..

D.GAIN

STATG
SP

COM.:SO
FOR

OF OPIIZTO
**A

.TGE

.lf-L

PROLE

FIUE1

00
_

__

Q0

0L

jU

80

c2

ON

0) c0 M

L'1

-.

(444
ctN

*11

'4

U
0L
L

'J1

Cl.

IA

Z-13Jl

31

_6
~..

o..-~
is 01-

36

......

beo

bem..0Nem

I3

-d

s~_~pj

19 ~~~4
440

Iswp'fl

A. TWO -PHASE SUPERSONIC

NOZZLE

IN-h

KA&;
,~ ..

)2.4A

.. . . .

. .. .

10

9 0
aLEXBLETUBNG

(CONTINUED)

ENDmutation number

EVOLUTION STRATEGY EXAMPLES

*

IGUE1

N'

AIRFOIL WITH 10 PARAMETERS

5.0

C=.lCL~

*4.0-

FIGURE 13

2 ~S

= .2

CD
:1

3.0-

2.0.
2.0

Iluj-

3.0

POLA

C,

FO

4.0

INIIALGEOMTRYFIGUE

5.0

'-

:.1:..::;

F~b::2;
4

QUj

rrz

Vt'

.9

LU

0'I..

707
0
D
0O

.4
.

0 i

1~~JLJ

%4

1-C

Ci

KL

6
-

S___

Al

yes

cals

call
A.~

LE NGTH
10
~

A~

tdd

PRGAMFOWHR
no

oh

armtelo

or

ial

iit

A~II.I

AA

IA.b

pbi~~bA.

LENGTHOGROUP FUMOWCHART
CASEr~',
NUML'E'-lt

I)-

I '

ICA I

P-491
I~z

-STNME
~
.

1)t, 1 4

10PAR3 M T RS"

I.,

-V..IIl,

I..

Ph

..)I

B..
PARAMETERSU

'.

27~

I' NO,~
6L3

S~

A..iihIA.b

(.*

.NI
.a'I.

PA.'i,3.

.)

v.LA

A P'

.i

AIA.,

1 .

VIE OF,
CO.
PORAOUTU

GEMER
MO//CTO

PRGA

FIGURE).- 5.16.)
.!-

w- 30kJ ,Z..,

0 ."

7.0

3
3

6.0

3 BEST CASES
31

502

INITIAL GEOMETRY-. 4 2
3
11

CL

3.0

31
2

20

1.0

22

32

.03
*

U..
L.

0.0

1.0

CL

FOR
OPTIMIZATION
SETS
FIRST THREE PROCESS

2.0

30

FIGURE 17

._
'
IJ

100.0CL<CL

,I

80RESTART WITH
REDUCED MUTATIONI
LENGTHS .................

60.0FOR

POINTS SHOWN
ARE BEST CASES
EACH SET

CL
CD
40.0I

CD/I-

20.0

TIA L GEOME TRY

*1INI
0.0
1.02.

L.L

I
1

mi30

-22sLIMIT OF DATA
ACCURACY

CL

2.0

1.5

60.0

500LIMIT OF DATA

CL
CD

400. ACCURACY

SET 22

30.0-

20.0t0.0

04 POINTS FOR CL 'Lm~n

16

24

32

40

SET NUMBER
CL AND CLVS. SET NUMBER

FIGURE 19

CDI

-'1

-.

50.0

40.0-

4.7

OPTIMIZED CD
CONFIGURATION

30.0-

V-OTHER POINTS

C-

OBTAINED DURING
OPTIMIZATION
20.0

REAL FLOW

OPTIMIZED CL
10.0

IlTA

CONFIGURATION

CONFIGURATION

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

CL

-VS, CL POLARS FOR INITIAL AND

CD OPTIMIZED CONFIGURATIONS
.4l

FIGURE 20

I)

Q~

0~

t-4J

LII

LLU
I--

11

-Al~'tBTD-LX (i)

100
200
300
400
500
60O
7o0
800
900
100Q
1100
1200
1300
1400
1500
1500
1760
I80
1900
2000
2100
2200

11
n"-600.... 1

.,:
:* l"7boo

P~O~?

-OrYCPY,
A7 R0D~T~I

SbOTTED KRUEGER
A-bB-PRFILE Al-725-146
4
85
1
23
1
23
-Q.4200
1.610)
0.1378
0.0344
0.0689
0.0000
o.qbb
O.0b90
0.8261
0.5512
1.9291
2.0670
1.ob35
1.7913
0.7441
0.5994
Ob.683
0.4134
0,902o
0.9232
0.9163
0.9232
0.7303
0.6890
0.189
0,7923
0.1378
0.0)344
0.0689
0.0000
0.964
0.6890
0.828
0.5512
2.0670
1.0535
1.7913
1.9291
0.0689
0.4134
0,2070
0.1378
0,3445
0.2t94
0.09o5
0.24)70
b
0.b512
(0. 443
0.5512
0.523b
37
37
2
0.0000
12,0000
0.0000
-0.50O0
0.1722
0.1033
0.0344
0.000
0.8304
0.58tb
0.bl4
0.5107
3.t571
4.35.13
2.4145
2.9929
H.9264
9.1901
8.2181
80.122

A1A

DOUBLE-SbOTTED TE FLAP OP'IlIZATION

0.2067
1.1024
2.2047
V.992
0.8888
0.b407
0,2067
1.1024
2.2047
0.0207
C,3258
0.5512

0.2756
1.2402
2.3,125
0.b543
0.8o12
0.5925
0.275t
1.2402
2,3425
0.00(9
0.4272
0.5512

0.3415
1.3780
2.4459
0.8h19
0.8406
0.5512
0.3445
1.3780
2,4459
0.0000
0.4b1b
00b512

0.4134
1.5157

0.2411
1.0480
5.39868
9.0870

0.3100
1.3049
t4433
10.1004

0.3789
1.6150
7 140b
10o003

0.4478
1.989U
7.735d
11.2110

0.4079
0.0b48
0.9156
0.6228

0.4396
0.7372
0.9467
0.5314

0.4685
0.789b
0.9007
0.4258

0.3100
1.3U49
).4433
10.1004

0.3789
1.6150
7.1406
10.6033

0.4478
1.989V
7.7358
11,2110

-0.5140
-0.8157
-0 8312
-0,246!

-0.5484
-0,d681
-0.7427
-0.1o95

-0.5787
-0,9163
-0.6476b
-0.0897

0.4134
1.5157

0.8951
0.8130
0.4134
1:5157
0.0207
0.49bi

2300

II.559b

l.l0

12.2252

12,b091

12.5394

2400
2500
2000
2700
200
2900
3)1p0
3100
3200
3300
3400
3500
o0o
3700
3800
39v0
40U0
4100
4200
4300
4400
451 0
4o00
4700
4800
4900
bu0O
b100
5200
5300
5400
5500
bbo0
b'lOO
5800
5900
6000
o1OO
b200
b300
6400
b500
000
6800
6900
7000

0.0000
0.4919
0.8433
0.8654
0.3596
0.0000
0.517
2.4445
8.2181
ll.bb9o
0.0000
-0.6063
-0.9577
-0.6o
-0.u551
2
23
-0.10)00
0.0000
0.5h12
1.653b
0.0000
0.3l20
U.27,h
0.0000
0.5512
1.o53b
0.0000
-0.1419
-0.1033
1
11
-0.100u
0.)()00(
0.52 6
2.7559
0.0000

0.16b4
O.lb4
0.8929
0.8254
0.2921
0.0344
0.5d5o
2.4929
U6122
11.9110
-0.2287
-0.b311
-0.9894
.4974
00344
23
0.2200
0.013d
0. 890
1.7913
0.09bt
0.385d
0.2343
0.013"
0.6890
1.1913
-0.0344
"(.146b
(0.0)5o
17
o.0000
0 .0202
0.n283

0.2o32
0.5374
0.9384
0.7896
0.2301
0,1033
.o~ol4
3.o571
8.9264
12.2252
-0.3514
-0.6559
-1.0031
-0.4437
0.1378

0.3238
0.5843
0.9701
0.7551
0.1791
0.1722
0.8364
4.3513
9,1951
12.5091
-0.4203
-0,70bg
-0,9921
-0.3982
0.1o54

0.3707
0.h339
0.9894
0.6862
0.1722
0.2411
1.0486
5.39b8
9.6870
12.5394
-0.4713
-0.700b
-0.939N
-0.3142
0.1722

2.06b9
0.0413
0.H2b8
1.9291
0.137b
0.3927
0.1929
0.0413
0.8208
1.9291
-0.0ob9
-0.
-0.04b2

-0.1378
0.089(
0.9646
2.0O09
0.129
I1.3g51
0.1516
O.Ob6
09646
2.Out9
-0.1033
,151
-0021

U.1516
1.1024
2.2047
0.2343
0.3'179
0.1033
).IbIb
1.1024
22047
-0.1240
-0.1526
-0.0138

0.2136
1.2402
2.342
0.2756
0.3583
0.0482
0:213o
1,202
2.34!!
-0.139
-0.14o1
"0.0069

0.275t
1.3780
2.4803
0.3031
0.3307
0.0000
0.27bo
1,31h0
2.4803
-0.1378
-0.1419
0.0000

0.0524
0.8378

0.1047
1.0472

0.1571
1.2567

0.2094
1.3180

0.3142
1.7913

0.4189
2.2047

0.082

0.1171

0.1557

0.1846

0.2343

0.201
0,2130

0.2659

0.2d6b

0.2673

0.2425

0.2s60

0.140o

0.0799

0.0262
0o2b3

0,0524
0.8318

0.1047
1.0472

0.1571
1.25o7

0.2094
1.378)

0.3142
.17913

0.4189
2.2047

-0.0482
-0.02u7

-0,020
-0.0069

-0.0758
0.0009

-0.075H
0.013u

-0,0690
0.0207

-0 0620
0.027b

-0.0413
0.0207

7100
7200

1 0.00

74uj
7t)Ou

0,2797

0.0000
0.0000
0b23o
2.7559
0.0000
-0.0276
O
2 000u
1
1
3
1
1
4

0.120
1.1483
51U.70

2
2
3

1
2
2

IIT

SLOT DATA

S7300
0.0833
1.20

8300

8400

0.710

1.0

0
. OI

....

7900

8600

-22.8700
11.bo0
15.loOO

[HE ENE

T\'

......

3445
30
0.4134
1,5157
-0.1378
-0.1309

200
400

.3ii

500

600

C
C
C
C
c

70 u
h0 0

11 uO
00O

h11300

C
C

V15001

In)UU
I0 )
I u

C
C
c
L;
C

VOW)
0I
210
I (J

Cil

%i,-1 2

5U( IRAl-

kj

CA1
PAz fli.
., I f I 1.,I.
6
A
0.

I
'2

C
C

1400

19 u i

C
C

240(i
2bo(

C
C

2310 0

32ov

~O

3kiov

1), -1,:t,(IIj11.%v Nit fo LN AIF fj

CiV
All~"%i
~ Wt. o/.
U j IF II*
L,6 t,.
A) oS
IlOi .Urk

II

,Ulp.

:1,*U'5

,lj"1I OtiJuJLI
Lit
U
III
L'c'r. #I P Ii k'IU"

3300 C=6

Uu)01OW1
Iu

I bv

.1AK
Ito zlA.jr,
,g
(

IL I

l.i

jI

,L'

ItJ

L4g,.e'ki J

Adi
1U PS, Ai

11C 1( (1)-

c'ilesi' Iju 5.
AL..,t T5 3u.J
III it

ht~~~~tJ)1ta
C- - -

--- uj-' 5

(I
I Ioitl<

I I1

.t

I * z 9 1. 1. u

1.' u u

/s

,I.v

AI'k.(UI V

I C1

C CIL 1121)u

54QA

b!)

.P 1%

1iIij
I

(IU

. .II.
II 4U ,i 'I I. I ;% 1 V i:.I I I ILA,~b AA I A ta oiI ,~C- IUIN1,
ti' ~Uill
.A
uwi~i
C-w- - --CAR4 OL mui)1jhI
I I) ,I ."If 1.,I I,!) ,I
I)O(
uj CiA X I , 4 1 , Ai,/ 4 1,A3 , 3 , Ouit.1/,I~
I)
I ii
iiC,A, ,ir.
Ur A2,/
Ti u.%
,/, wi , I I 12,
10
C
uAI

55 0

'4~~~

A,01

C#.,

~ ~ L~~

t: j<

I 1%t\ b

IJiiC,

o-A 1, Vl
ii i%,
(d5

C)

5 tl 0

o500

I'2

PAhId

0u..'ltA
a:s
I$

Iu

I 'I Ih '3vIt

5 14u )

~~'44~~~

1.wC.

LPAR (I

'i b 0U

60ut;
t) I l~jJ

I A
'L'.
Io J

ihIU

L
L.

5110
U-I

tL

I STrfPA~
i' I mU. i
T
I ,TVP VUT VU ti

N,IJ
I

wu'

1.0 1'AiitE
RA11~
tIL114 ibix iGrI ~(.;R~dS
MA*~iX
L-Mll-I 10 CAS..S/hi%;i'.s'UTk (OWiUiP

A- Luc &1 IU.,

f - aaUCAY L.v,

4 iOL

Iu

If Y-

3 9 1)u
'l2m)

&hj
I

'iX
1% I MU 11 1) .,I1'I'

3300

lit,

'IC

4~)P1Jvo
k'Ulu.1
'I A- U1CWLJ u.,
N1)L111.0 i1i;'
~b
Y-;)f J'J 0.
ir) tIAP i V PtMA Ai A) RUI II
Q ~),J*uk:u1ptN,
I v (I I, PUo i w
A -LW(C WC j ( w , .3<Iu
I
I I~~
.U I. 3I )~ 111 V i O 1') J.a'.
k
t od r I. k
11A I310)
J'L~'
I; h
9
'AJ 14 A. KP tJ 1,
LQ A14I 1, Uj 40"'ACIN
till'
.101K6i~. 1,11 vI.j1A,I\ hIS.
Li Ar1A~jiI

)2,I)'

S:u~q iUUI
KD1

Pu

0~~TiI

li'u

IA'

.~iLI

I.t

'tJ

ttjA u

UU

01
1
) 1,.bj5
k
r. =I 1(.
C----buI I~t
I J A~'
&ItEI
-1 ~
tt, 1
~i ~
Si~'
C---I-P -- -- C
I, 'l k~
1111,.iutr
7 bOO
CUsk)
A1L9

IU)---------- )( )~AI

t)90t

,.,L

------. J.

I'#,.-

u% 1

*,"b

P K~ L lt,

.r'i

C.
dlxI~I
L'

k3K<Q~C
UV

Ui11

1,t)

I3 I
i, i
I1~10

8100
8200
8300
8400
8500
8600
8700
8800)
8900
9000
9100
9200

9300

9400
9500
9600
9700
9800
9900
10000
10100
F10200

10300u
10400
10500
10)0(1)

C
C
C

I)#X I)
iF(I,3.bO.1) PAR (biIL2,L3) =IPAIR(1)+(MULi'~j.NcR(L
I)*Vl)
CRij
R(2)+(MLJ1,14H)
L3)=1PA
IF(iW.O.2) PAk~(b~I,2
R3+?~jffiC(1+0N)
Jt'(WL..3) P1,,:,3=
11AL3:EU.4) 'l(il,,j)IA()+MI,~lil(1*2
1F(L3.E0.5) PAIdl,lll2,LI3)=IPAR(5)*I-'ITj*C(lj1)*ZI)
W1p*NR(Ll+IC
6
3)IA
l,6
4 3)
1'(L3.EAJ~b) PA
X
iF(L3.E0.7) PAI<(I ,I12,b3)=1PAR(7)+(M1i~'L*IJCR(b1)
IF( L3 .FU. 8 PAR(L1 L2U)iAd)(MiiIJRL1*3
h14
A ()+(UL*INR(
21 ,3)=
1
IF(L3 .EO(.9) PA
C) )
(IJC(jl+t4iI
PARUJl1,b2,L3)=PA(10)+(ULT
10)
IF(L3.E0.
500
GOT(J
,I210).Lr.0.0)
(PAR(bj1
U
GOTO 750
b4=64+1
600
OF 11ILI.JAbj GEOMETRY
C ------- CHECK\ TI PREVE~NT 1)UP1L1CATT~f'
1F(L4.EO.rwAR) GOTO 400
A(,,L2,i3)1PAtdt.3)
700
CONITINUOE
750
COi'TI1UK
80o
CIT'f NIUoE
900)
CONTINUE
boo
WR1TI!. (6, 1100 ) mL)0NI.,1 2e12 NINC, ICASK12,2/
,7X Ill=
FUR 14AT (~/ / / , X , IuUMKTH Y MU DI FiCA1T1LUr
1100
; kLt 'I
,3,r x
WUM ,3X, Iwr h'(:
Nc
I IrC
A

~'IMAT (l2A,12,7AFS .2,,5.3)

11200
11300

iTI:(,24)11IC(),UC(1N
er<iTE (t),IzOO) ((d'ARO) 1=1,10)

1240

WRIT'E

lino
11700

1300

11900

14o0

12000

~-A12600

(6,1300)

(uIAR(i)pJ=1,10)

2)
(
~Ft.
10
( 1 l0 .(,E.
CS
FWi(MAT (I 114 ,NIwc
c0 1-100 [,1=1
FURMAT

12200

bj3=(L1-1)fNCAS1IW+b

12300
12400
12500

Li13(i~i1L4~l-h
6150
WIc1T1 ,Oh.)/J~
FUIU4AT (/ f
1 2 1 Xi
)
CM,
IcL)= 1,6x* '.L/ (I.U= ',o
CUI~N~iU
C1)HT14 Uh
COMPLET'
STOP ' ,UD)WICAT1IOi

12700
12800

1500
x
1600
17M0

NL

12900

;44

tA

'

, , ; , ,-'
RAITni, ",G7

AT,1,1"DIX (iii)

..OR
,, .. r'-.' -'A,,M

RANDU Subroutine

D.4.9

The RANDU subroutine computes a pseudo-random number,

precision value uniformly distributed in the range:
value .LT.

.LE.

0.0

as

single

1.0

Format:

CALL RANDU(il,i2,x)
4

Arguments:
il,i2
INTEGER*2 variables or array elements that contain the
computing the random number.

seed

for

x
a real variable or array element where the computed random number
is stored.
Notes:

1.
1

The values of il and 12 are updated during the computation to

contain the updated seed.

2. The algorithm for computing the random

number

value

as

is

follows:

If

.I=0,

I2=0,

X(n+l)

set generator base

2**16 + 3

otC~her wise

X(n+l)
t

X(n)mod 2**32

generator base X(n+l) in 11,12.

-Store

Result is X(n+l) scaled to a real value Y(n+l), for 0.0

4w
4_

Y(n+l)

.44

(2**16+3)

.LT. 1.

.LE.

* .~IJJ.i4.
".

'/

a;

4VLL

.~
-

~~~
AA

3o
3

3-

A. N

C'

N0
lIf

Nj~'~

-x
I

30

i
11ii1
I

0o

x
3-

30
C

4V

ll
1
XI

I3

NCN

Itl
7

1IfIi
y

a1
1

1
I
z.

Il it
X

X.

A~~

'73....

AN
-0)

33

-U,3-N'

Inl3
3

NU;

4-..

3D

D3
)

33
Lif

.3

N
.3
N

'7JN

.6

zI

it

-L)
C,

-0

L1

NV

?~~

N;
o5

4.3
0

3-0'

N
...

... ...

11
N Z

LII
N3

L)

IL

A. 4
N Z
N

.IL

~~~
"1(4

xl
NZ
"

l
NO

11a
N3

wit
51

'I)

IL)

0 l
NO

IL

11
NO

It.1 -!,1,

N,4N
114 Ni

it

al
it

N Z

N~
N3
0.1

D~11
-Q

IL
IL

IL)

N -'

Nt4
.1

N7

N)
N

NN

0
3

Z, IN
0

z, <

0,

to

iI

- Q

3
U

z,5

NI

000

--

Ilit
x

03
L

j
V
."U N 4
.0
.L
.~3r .3
L
-->J
q
P1) 0L
0())
N0,
...
...

C.AO

nil
mo
NO

0()N'

3
U

NJ

.7

3.1

'a

...

0O
'

'.

NoN

-33

33
U

30
L)
It)
)

--

0N
-3
3D

it
x.

.v

-0~3

ill
X

An
-0

.4

-.

LL)U11.,Q

3z

en3'.7

Ut..Ji
U'L
I IJ.

Oil

V
.L
L
00

v N
u
4.
.3A)A)A)A)A)A)A)
.

oil
NZ

311
INM

IL

M'
P

31
N M

"

r-1'

I N i

M'
C

M
A

.51
N.3

I)

L)

sj 6~

3
I

Z- 0

~)

M'3'

InI
0o

00

3QO
0,

.%D

3,
I
11

33

ta
.5

ZL)
3U
A

I il

vs.
A'

o V'. 0 uL
A

o-i

IAI

1u

SC
.7

of

. ;

~~

3
3

IL
7

~o3. ~ N1
AI

A;

.44NU

3
.

1 "'0

IL
I
Aa NO A3
.

~~

0L)T Do,.
L)- D)L)
NA
N\
N

A.

0iis

3n

Ill

11

o0Q
A

m
o

OL)
0

Os.N I~

oo

1..C'
3

1i" .5A

OL)
3

Ni

11
II

it

Il

11

OL) 0L0L0L

OL)o
0
3

IN
3

gll

r4

Il
off

Ill

au)

OLV

3L

ON'

ZtjA~A

3
A

It

CN

C0-N

If

O
3

NL)

IL)

0
L)
N9
.
NJ

O l

.31
o Ill a~

I)

IL iL)
0
33
A-. AV

~A1

N~
0

L
Nm
)
L)

)
N
3
IL)

1i

I)i IL) of
A
I

A )n
33

3
3

L
N
L
N)

-11

L
3
-0

A)
N)

3
-)

11

0.I-I C:Ii

I)

IL)f
' -7

~0~ ~

IL
3
7
-7
'~'

0
)
N

C'
3

m
V.

"
OL)

LC4A~" .
NL) '7L

L
NL

NI

a, ll

311

C It

Nol

Mil

z it

IL) IL) 1

i)

:~&

L
N

IL)
o
IL ) i
)
if
3 -o
0
A
3A
"2
-,
*'
l~

)
N

L
N
L)
NL

IL) i
i
A
3-7
"-'~
14
*

2511

.;CIJ

'V.

A4.Z

00

.0

. .0

-N

Il

. I

'.

00

0.N .NN N N1

,40
S
-~~~~~~I
g1

,o

"1"1

I111 II

0.0

Mq 'n

D*

)0

,.x
.

.0

S.

NO-D N..

NO

UNOw
DN

-.

Oco

o~

G
0(1.

06j

i-N m

ii~~O'

..

"
0

N0Z.

NZ

NZ

.
0.2
VI

'1N'J

.N

0L

Vf

.=

.'

0V

N
0-

N
zqt
Ill
"

O N

N'7
3

o~j~

.7i1i

. L.)

N0,N

.
o..

i -nl

01 01

7r N
~.oP
-

'N
t,

~ .0

M 11

11

11

NN

0AD tA
0
a
=
"

,
0f

'-

1
v'
if
-Ti
Au
ll
-71
'1
'15
-,-.l"l
u 0

'1 0

N'

IB
Oi

.Z0.
LAr

i not

1 )

-1

01

Il

ji

Ii

li

6#

'199(

i 4i

N4

N
ON

N
ItI

O N

'1

51

Il
1

11

-AIt

N Z

N-a

-P
Ii
ii -"
v if
- ,"
')"
'7
' -11
, .-

Si

11

lii

l
-1

iil

c.'0
N

1' O

N"N

DO

.6

.0

O N.

..

:>
-,

'1)w

'D0

.N .O

7:>0N

c u

O.

.0

.P

.0

,.X , X , ,. ,,,,. ,. ,.X , .11 .

V,
%)%Df

"-

0 UP

'~

'7

"00 -00 00.00.,0.00.0. 00..0.0..

.. .
00
-1 ;I 14
.n
.2(p
-

.:
0 N
.'"

i0

CN
0C)4

z, f li

Zoo

oiil

0. 4

..

0.

0.

O
N

'.

,, .
.W.

,
1.

~~ ~ N ~ NO~

.S

-c

)
N

-4
00m
..-MI-0 'Di
0 -~"'"

o"-

i-z-

C, U

,,

it OIl

/ll

lirll

Li I

m
JLn

ii 1

ON

,?O 0,o

I 11

.0- .

6 0.6

Ii

li11llll
"ll

all
SIB

.0

oil6511000000I.'6115

'1

?O
. -.

NOIt6

oil

"l 11

N m

"x

.1"

.n

~-

II

..

-o

S- ..

00 *O

OV) SO

oa~ C, 1

o4

=:;
0iri

- .

'

4-.I20
V

' r'

n'

1"

0
0~ii,

A00

10

Ln I

L)
N

L0

N
-0-

- 0
vi
r, so '1
n'if
J~l
7i Ol
'-

O 4B
i

-B

i
0

a9

AN

0A

0'

A A N

if

InA

N A

-W

0~

.3~C

4.ll

\-

11

X-4

Ill

11

44

44

0 .

vN, 10

40

9j

Il

N'0

A'

444

Nt.
A

~~.9iN

A.it11

441

A4

N
.

N
A3'0
3N

N
~~~
0

3N

x 939

O
9

.3
0,3

N
93
0U

-~~~~~~~
I.

N
'

14

3,3

NU

A4441

N
-3~3-

~~ ~

.44

3.

NU

.44

Ni

'r
N9

.1 U3.
-

17

"1

14
N

~N
N

II

All

All

All

I,

o44 il its

.. .. ..
....
"..

-- q.:

, V) 4.0U
g~l~'

I4 it

44
DI

41

.4

In

.. )-U

lfl

U
, IN3 -,

9$

~0A

ll
z3 a

iN

'04
a it
3

4 it

40
N

Nv

4il
o x3

4 1
is4l
0 1
o x

in

4 C:Q 4:

N-q

_;.
N
'I4
A3

-.

-U

00I

IIo

-11

-113 tit

.3

N0

Do4

fq~)r

1'.5

~I'

1r'

:;

S.

60"

4;(

C.

'7

A'

I'

11

0U

'.'Do

4 t Alt
ol
. :
4.3

74

NN

J-'A
@0

I N.

s0

D-I 0

O44l

In
O

~N

(14

N o N

Alol

. .

43

-:

3-

lp

0039303..

N.)

ot

.
N
; A

No

N
N

N 0

I
43

U1

1 1

.7

l
I444

44s

NN
9U

oto~ofr

4.3

NN

I 4 t

04

-N'

'7

411

A4

0 it4

-494
.

~~~

:(:2O24v~7'.

flNg

Ill

~~:~2

00

'4

N~~~

it4.4

'46

-n

Nm.

a0

4-

44'

r7

AN'
c;

A4

4G

A
N

I,

Nn NO

(N

-IT.N2N
N

11441

A4

I44t

NN
4'II

.N0

1
441Ill-TI Ill

"
t

N
'N1

Il

C44

-4ON

NN

NN

441

444

444

JCONi
:it

Tl
ll

'nJ

-j)A
-

Q A
N

Ci

-4

j;

A
-

Z-

In
-

LA

Ln
-

'in

A.

wr

Ali

I II

..u

-~

I-,

-Z

X,

-n

II

AVU

'n

r,
'7r

.3
'o-

NJ

N~ '

I I

33
3

00

C
AJ

.Au

y- -C

"o-

Na

In- I0
Au1

'D

N
14N

;*
to

Ie

il, Al

All

z0

:1

Oil

.-.

"NI

C;

':

01

Allit

Oil Aim

11

i '7ll

Oil

7'

'

.if

In

a.

t.

.1

A400

.3
41

. fj

.i (Ii

~ ~~4'

'

ZN
L)

N-4L
'7

1.

-1
A

ZV

=.
I

i%

.C

",

1'

MQ"

N
00

mm
U4

37'.~~CS
N

'A
A-

M 'IM

Nc
'n4m
-

'S

It

mV

1 v

-"

.)

uVi CiL)

mm

U~U-zuuu

u3

"t0 In
z69.

6 ..

1 V

vS

VC
A

-0

'

"S .-

'

'

u I %J I

z.3

vi0mi

3 I-A

AO

u_
'

C; -1 r
A It

.t

A~
It

wi

-2

o.

,'

-6 '

IN

J2A

ic

W~0

1.

V
M

u0.

--

11

.0N

mu
3O.
'Q

-IA AN
*

Nt At'1

UA

'rN .t0Q3 7

ui

u.
'S

-' 0

~ :2U

N3

SID
)

N -.

I-

.
3

N
4

N4

-.-

SD

S--

.,

mI~A

LA

"

'
N
N A 0J
-~3m
~~~~~~~~t
3Iu
i 1U u -u

3j-

NN

.1

i
w u

Nz

03

AU

81

7"~'~

3~0'.

o l

.0U
uL

Gs

u
A

o l

oil

A u

'

'03

IT

Nq

V2
-

MU
;

-ju

.. iqM-

.0

M .
0

il

flV

0qm-

30

'7

o l

O~

II I i IllI

-T

nI

II

~ In

" J

_
U

-a~

Ou

LA3

A;.)

A,
-x

A4)

I0

ze5Q

I II
.0.l

A
-

~~~~-~~
6

N Z6

In
-

-0

U
4-

I'

. 1

I'N
n

C, u,
S

I4*u

CN

0NN

itA

OD

'

ni

.
.

-, .- -

DI

-.

-l
O

V,

,,.

~~~~~~
3

.3

...

3.

In-""

'

. 14 4

0'

4Vg
t.)

iiI0,
AV

uL

.2N -Z

N a

N,_ N ZN

N.M

-v

i ..

N Z

3+

zl

If

('

zN'
,

)~

~U

---

~~

.4.11

,'
-III

,- .

,,I

"I .

U1).).-U

...

It.3I

9
.-

ItI I

if i

;. I

;,1

'

. 43

'

.i3"

.U

I.

t I if I

N
&I33

"'3

If

.~~~~~~.

71

I I

IN I iN ,

II

,-

it
(~

ara-

ia
_.
j

3.)

..

*.A3N

'

'a

3.

0"
-.3

'71

'a 3 a i
i.

-UIII V1-

zo

11a 'a

.ig

3
-. 3 . C ..

.11 '711

11

to -'3f

-J

-,, -3

" 3

('4

*..l

3~~~

3 .

-+
" -" "-

-"

"

11U

Un

t'

-.-

4Uiu

,N:..
N Z

,'

~ ~41 i
. ~ ~aa ~ 71
~~~'I~ ~4l ~Il ~ "l~~.71
z,LAz3. z

j
6I)l
4IIu~

3)0

".

71

0--

Il

; -z Z+_.
z z vz z
z..
D .3

oC ,,.0 ' 3

....

Ii
fo

Un

"

i,
ii
Av.

0,

C4

".

.rO .

.oo1
-;
0:'F
x, ,o

"

%
r

-,

.D

...

vi 'n,") iii
Ii
af
IIi
I
mv) rl
x,.+
I vi
V:Ln

V
n

'A

.
-

'

. A

3N

-0

..

'7 ' C1
3

'

-17 X

. ...
u

33

:
i

00-

.0,

X~~~ 4

r.

r, :

.1

71

al

N
S
A

.11~

71

.a

1
Q

-I-

a 11%i. it
'
A0~~~~-wA2A''A
A)

r-

-J

:1
.

al

'al

.1

NS

al

.1

i.'

Na

71

.1

'

7.

.X ..

. -.

0 0

- .,

q . -:
. .J

XL

.-

I'
"0N

A.

"
-

Al
SIC

'q

> 10'

L-

4iILl

:
z

'CON
D

S,

N 0 . U
,

"

z,

X)%)

4cu

All)
i

3 l"
t,

-T

3
Dz

'0'4'"

'

"-

Au
i,

1 o

3t

A1 m4

..

Ol
al

U
u
4

~~33

.3

....

'.

.3

.3

7-~C~3

*.

ln

43

.11

r',#

33

30
.

-3

'3

-. --

*vil
_3

o ***.

''

0- 3mNN

'n L,

oil

".

o-

ci 1

Z0

I.

1,.)

''1
"

41
a'

4 1
.1'

NU

-N

N D

-"-

4'

0-

0
"

zi

-='Q'
q

C.

SU

Iu

CU
'

'q

34

Il .

114 1

z7 0N1

.fl

ii 11

.311

1 1

r.

11i Oil

'

0.

03 0
,3

'

'3

'p3

0.3

73

03

30

'7

41

, m'

IT

-N

'.,
,

'

"9?
q_3

41
vI

41

_;7
'4 7'l
4

-- I

41 rI
'
=1

%7-

l 11 n l
3'

Ti
3'

i
01

:>

c4NNN

'

'

N4

33

"4.1

a-33

33.
.
.

"~-

"o

It

nib

.OD
'
'

'
it

04

.
>Z

oU

1 '1)I)
'

N - -N - N.,,3NN
.,,N
., ,, .,,N
.,,.,,N3,,
-.
4,
-

'

7.

N N

1 -3.3
o)'j
I

giAgu

x3

-1 few

.33 3

In 41 41
N "
0-

4ii

i).

.7

t3
l

-N,

'iu
el

f4

17

4-:o40

, .

'o'z, a

Cot

?.d. " .

C4.*
(4M N

i
u

1-N''

C."

Q3

UI
.

S0'.

-*

Z''~
"

..

'

'n

:,'q

01A
V .0

" "

Z'--

I .Z
TI!I
N

N/

4013n.
a.

403

" .

C;.

N;,~

' '

...
.a

4 if.

l' f.,

'

'

3z

-~

A4.

-I

-~

4
1

'41

"1

0
m"

''

tm

-N

z .4

21
v

tj3
I I

Z'N
3

i
_N)

8_1)

AI

2.

'

AI
I

I3
r

tN

N5

P r3

.DJ

'

It
3

33

II

'~

'N

it

:p
D:;l.
V-.3~ 1)..,-

v z~

ZN:/1
3_

'3(3

'3

IV.
3

~~'4~

*s-If

1l
*s-

.
N1.

a1
3

I.

1.

Ills-u
'3
40

-I
4
I..

'3
I.)

s-t
4
43

IsI
'jo
4
I,)

4
4

'3
4.3

sI
1.
I.)

10

-l
13
40

O l

54

'1

4.

.3

4I
4
4

s %.I
4
4
40 ID

-In

VIfN.~~

.5.
'.'D

I
"e

_D

'

3 r3

011

41

II0

03

'N

Cie

at.1

41

>

oil

Ditol

N1

JD
-1

'7

ii.

~ ~ ~N

*'N

-.
*

~ .3

'

~ ' ~ ':p~

3
7 A

-4

.1-

41

3
7

~ .'0

- 0

CA

111

0
.

3
7

-'.

i1
=.

=0
Z0

4.4.j

3.:

3vz

3Im:

P9

~...

71.

:I

tN

x3..

~~~'~

Ai

z'

'.D7.1.

C03
11

3.3L 3.

3.

4-

-11

3.

'711 11

'7

N7

D3 W4
zZ,4
I. )D4m

at

=.:i

-Z)

AC

02

N
P 11

fi

I it

.v

4O-

=V
O

*...

iii
N)

C.g.1
on) m

-~

lii -1i
N C1

r
No

Zz

~~
33
~'3t;
N

-'

T.. ..

u
.

..

.3
A

3
.

NZ

NNN)

.D1
C11

-.

N
N.J

N.J

3. j0

D'.--

11 71
-rg
N

N C1
0.

r..

.1

.3

'oil
N.11

11l

it

N
Oil

ou
.

11

all

'i
43

'1
N J

71
N3

I.i

'i
N1C

gj

71

IN.

-6 3 '
~~I'.'

'

3
t

'
Oi

I] A Oil
.

I l

7
D It
.

'
c it

7
2

. Oi

'1

9I

0c
At01i
..

71
-11

Ii

oil

[N

A 4D 1 A
.

N
.3q

'

Nd
DU*Z N

N LN,

'7i 11
N 31

3 9

3.3..:~r

I~~

.,.

n
. 11

j-'

n N
Oil

101
.

C11

6*1
..

N.;

CU

N..

N:

-jL/

NI

0
.112
ID)

=IV

0.3

Ii It33 fi

-t

NZ

NZ

N-

3
.

.
.

n-

vC
Ao

'.0

C4

'7

4'

N;

m'

N0

CIO0
.0L

'7

x34

.0

'

AA
0

A4
4

.A7

Ln
4

A1 11

A t

01 1

A t

.4.

LI

IS)

I0 is
It~~~~-

I
A:

.0

.0 1

n3

3.

.0'Z

1 .ll

11

il.l

'

~ N1

*
Z0.~.3
4.
0

x3

'

<

I'14 1

t
N
I3 d

1
'

-II u

if

NN

"C3

3D

3_

0C

Ao

142

4a

Ir

ItI?It
N

N
I~t.)

I .j

J-(1. -J

71I

oi

*N4

I144.

Ci

II

II

'P3

'7

Ci

IL)aI IL)

414

11

3'

NN

it

it

%1

IN~t

"4

'~

0~

n3

'n3

3o

0.

1Vi
4111
1
z
N4
IU%J Id
3L
IIIU

l
I' z
I U

'a.~'

Ij

T11
.i

1
N

.1
N
I~ v'

oil

N'I\

OIl

O'l

it

N
N

. .3

I j

'

it 3

'7N

)1

I)I

I.

4l

Oil

N
0 1! 3

11

1!

4c -.

14

13
I.I 1340L1.31

F'-I

Oil

it

11
A1

.4.7
'3-~~~N

Nn

1A

-'

I
-Ir
Nz
IUvU IUv

("

A1A1A

2:

'

aI

. rL 0

) it

(I

I'

ID l.NN'

it
-

'3

4D

x4

f.

.0

O1l

11

N41

'1

-3 it

0-lIT F-Il

~~I

C-

CI

34

.1

1-

'

K31

I-

-A

-A

r'D

X 0Z

Z;' N0 0C,
0

mCo

'0

'

-C

0 tl

C4

-V
0;

C-.

0' D
-A
0

-r

CMt

-4

.-

A4-4

4
3r

..

-P

.L6~

'tCr

*M

CA

:. N'~

-U

-U

-U

-U

-C
*

C
'T

~'~" m

A-*

uN

0,

CN
-

00 0 0D

..

r4

C~

LA

ON

C 0
C

C) :C

'C

L).j

-~~~0

-7

'D~

CO.I?

00
3~

14

C-i

-U

-C

~~

U -CU
%

"I

-U

-U

e-

1..J

'N6

'1).

4G

-9IC

CN )

Z;zI

e~'

'

~ ~ ~

it a., - J%

NN2,'
. NNZNN ZN NN

N nI'
.

r
Oi

z7 if

D7it' '01

A.~~~

C.'N

I C

olA

'

to

el

oi

~~~~

If'

11

D711

CIO

ZE

'

.0

-1

.0

-n

A.

L7~

41

11

1.0

Z,

:*

0*

-*1vo

zt1jlj0'

n.'

N~

A
1A

N
NAP) N

3'
XAA
.0

U'"~z0
ZZ

r~

IN

~ ~

~N

zA.'
Nz

"

z..
3

0)0

.3

4
A

(7N

AN

IN.~

N1

z zN

z'~z

'A

Z0.

NN

N
A (3.

4 mN
1.

Z.:

D'

N
.

Z.
,;A.

1,~

U.

J~C~

'D3o'

t6

~4.
~

'7

~c*
~

*7

ll

0,'v1

r ,'

"I

,O

Nil
l N

Ai A1 'A A
I'u0 I
x

NNN

z-

.0.
r

"

NN4N1

.0

**N

~ ~~

j2

D Q~

. 2.

4 r'

01)

cu1

LA 4

10
C

1 s1

I.-

.c

Ac

AA NN
A Nz
N.) 1111
N.;I ZNZ Ti
- A A A A A A '

- -t Ao-------------------l
Ol
1............I.t..D......................

t Al Al 4
1- NZ

I~

'*~~~~~

3.3 N

3 3...
e3

:..

jl

'T

z.

n1

In

z1

D7

An

..

O.Q)0

Z.

~
~~7

. 7
-

14

'

(3
-.

3 I

. % .1z~I. C .)n.
3-

(3
7

~~ . ~~ 3 ~~~~~
0
3 3

00-

(3

'

N N

013~
3
-

.3
.

k.

Y.

'

rr
NI

-L
03

.13
-1

'4 '1

z *I

Zoo

It

- N

.',,

-7

NN1.

oInil.01.II.

~~N N

A1

"4~AN

11

n1

~Nc1

'1~

Oil

N-t

NI

3'Cl
,

'3'.

Dz

''0D'

!:e3N

,SN

or*it

il

1 1

NI

A10 Lee

is

Ci

304

A ,

to

it

it

1 1

.1

31-.~~
'(1'14

(33

it

' 1N

1 1

-i

-i

(3

NZ

A
-1

'tI 4

I I

3~

1
.3

I~Ol
V71

I
.3
Ii

(3

-~~~
It

Z' to

Il

11
N~

,~

1l
'3
.

L'~ - z.

N.

6:%d
71
.

III

fAll
vi
N3 3

N-.-I
i.-I
,

Jj

J~

~
31
I

j3

Nl

I
N3.

I.I'

oI

C~

~ .0
It Di

C
Nz it

t4

,.oil

~
Nc t
C4

~ 20 it
.

3
3t-

Di

3'

1T

.7z3

n'

J) 0

3D

f-

,.

.
II

..

'o

il l I

..

tj

3
7

-.

-3'

('
I

ill

--

.-

t U.

..

I.

...

..

Au

.. . .

.. .. .

.
3

IIl

N
v7.j.

.7.

"5

..

.
I

,,

Nz

N
*._a

.t

N
I

"5

"o3
.3

lt

N1.

it

..
.

Nil

NZ

"

- T it

NiNp

.)

30
I LA

'

"

..

.3

.
.

. ..

lt

.. .

..
A

'

I i

1ill

ll

....
.

.-

'

.
'

.
-

If
I .

..

N
0.31

Mo

I r

N0 ""

N.
'o0.3

N
3.3

It
Cu

V3

.If
NM

Ill

D'.

..

N
33

3',

4
'L)

DC.J

"5*

l it

.f

ll !1

3'

ZI

..

.0O

III
D

3'

..

ll Iii

'*..,'..

1-

..

ItNO
7 .

Nn

.. .
j

7',

I3

o.

lit 1

3'

..

J)

Nil ., Ni

5. . v

IILI

..

tU I

AIt

il

Nit

NZ3

- -

I-

lt

)k

.t

MX

o~~i

N Ni

NO:

_'

if

Ifi'

Il
z *

" 3 " 3

11

il

'

I.

"3

m'

- ,

3u

)it

N?

.. ) "3

-34.
3

'7.

. j

CL.3

..

'

"3'.P

.5..

o~~~

.. ..

N
23

t
N l
N.*.
NP3
Nz
I.) I.)
I.3 tI

f.

..

"a.

A'+

ll II i

ll I

3'

*d'

N
N1.

6 7.J'0 1;

'*N

.,

3,

..'

t
7.

33

1.

,-

N
N6

D3%.) D)v

'"';

'..N-

'I11
z) u)

N..

'r

l
D)

,%~3

N.

J)

S3

,.

3n

A'

A'

r i

A4.14

C
.7

'70:D

'0

<"1
10

0,

a.

1:
.7

"i

4)

'.i

U,
--z

b
'.,',.,-

-N

,4'1
,)
U

a. 0
.J3N"

Ia'

,*,

N"}S

'd

iil
2

N
N

10

"I

,,

.1-1.4

-I
_,

I L.

.'

J-U

llI Il
N..,3N

a .
.4

>

"(

,,

.
.-

" ,.

-"

-..

-- '

T
-'

5,,,

7 jIi
N. zN

<""
14
.

II

,,,ii

N)
.

Io

Ii

I is

N..

% ii'

----------------------------1

'a3

-i

.i

I s 11

'

.NZ.'

N n
-- )

-6
N..
;

oi.'i
i

.-

" +

.0

'

44

-9

N.z

Us-.

Z00
N4

;Ap.L"
.
I).

.',
N11
41
' "

; 1,
."Z..

I -.

+,,

. . . . . NN. .

.3

-.

'-'.-

-~.

-"

"

.3

"

-1

ILI

I I

iU

I I

'<'

I J
I v

1-

,7

,7

+ . i . ..

11N

'5

t
e

3.o
' -'<
'N

N_.~ N )
) .% w
ii-

,-

S.

..''--li ;") "'-0 ;

"

'
I

S.o

,.

'7

it

to

-- I I

S . +<5 <
- "

" ,

N3.
-I3

II

I ilt

1i

_j

N1
4'It
-N..

miii1

5
..

."

"-0. '.

.011
..

'
'7

""z
tj
.'3

0
0
z'1A
0
, c '... X~.t
'o. .
,

.U

U .

'
U

+.

;i

.'

--

"

5
.VpJ .J ... -j
..0 U-+'
."

"o"0

Cr
Ii

otU

Uv

+'. .

<>

II

-"-N

o
-'

=.
t.

l'

r,.4

.,

'I

N ,

-is5
4 ,'.Ig .4
. ,,Ili.

-..

,U u;""
- "'"

'"

..Uj-

",
i
NQ-3 .

,'

-.

I/*

"'

;."

'D~"

c U

+'

"

-'.

'11
a

+ +

-.
> 4+

-4

I
'

P C+

~NIN

-.

-=+"

N.
-.

r' I0"(

-ch.'

:11
0,
U

m'

'

+,111

I 11* l

+
'
": "'"+';" .. . ".. ' ... ..JJ" -

S.

t.

-'

Ii

It

. 0

ilI l I
NG'

."

,+,++

+N

'c
lII .-..

0 .3 -

..
'

'

" N.
q~

IN
".

N,,

C.."

..

..

I it

'

...
...3 / , ,

N.
.

-~J

(C

..

,.

w
4

. .

"

Zg ',

v-'

I v
N
- "4I

cc

NA-"
.3(U

UU

.3*** .4

0 3,,

'U

'U

.0

:4

DU.
M-

Nz
In

C-n'4
.0

II
r",

4C
I4

j o0

Zo

OL
N

C4

41

N '

C4

In

N
0

I
(,

3..3r3

.o

37N

'',o

',,)"

(In

,{

o7
3

.,'1)

0
7

10

7'

0:

1.
aJ

'

.4
NNil 'A

Nil

^:i

N_:y

Noz
1- rI

6"II
6.3
"i~

3o N'.'NJ
)

NZ
i .

I. %
II.

+x

-D

'

.7 .

zu

0.0

IO

Du

10

10
'

0~

z0

.7u

c U

01

0%

au

II
n0

-J

U0
00
Z

3n

'

N
au 00

04.

C3.

30
.00

U0.00

C610

N
0..
3333

00 .

Du
0

r 4N

-333
0I

6'1 CQ1

i
-41
NoNz

NNN

Na

N1.

**o

3U'0...U U

7'.N
!
U

4
u

N1
3I,:3
0~

N t

Ni
Nm

X'7

D 'T

ID

10

10

10

'0

'7

'

..

'

17

iu
0

z0

--0N

m4

NO

I 'Jl
it

III Il

.1

-, v.

pu
-0

-'0

.(ii

&'ll

1~l

*'.

,-

Z3

0, -3

!.

0x

w3
O

ii--

41

-46
-11vj

IQ

Nn

C 1
14

-1
N~I~

To

'40

N ,
03 z

ll

f~i

-D

L,

~ ~10

pIt

Inll

.11

'03~ 0

1 n.1

wI

I l

JIill o ill
0

lii

r433
UU

c4 6

01
N zN

UUt

c- 6

N1-1

NZ

I0 O

O-

N
I0

IJO

.01

11i

oili

Q
-C

JII

JII

-'0

-..

Ni

N 11

'

.-, at

a. I

%5
I
rl

1001
i

ll

Il LIl

III1
ov

4.j
.

-'.1

it

a.0

1~~~ 13
nj

1
43

-V

'7

1Q'.3 .

'

N l

' v

-U

'

'

C41

-4-9

N1
33

a3
U

.0 _a

-3N .0

In4

.
0-3

U0u0u.0d.U0u3U.u

NC.

O
Q

,Dv

a0

10141040C

'D

4D

'.N

10

N
N z

1
.7

'033).

'N

IN

if

11

113

rIit

A 1ll

~~

N3&

2.2

r It

7 i

'l

0'

j...

IU

3
lin

lii

ni

it

Illu

--

--

t -q

0t
A

3
A

3
A

3
il

3
1

'

enI.

3-I

t
jC

.0

L41

91

LAm

mo

In
LA

LA

In

INN9

3..'.

2,.0

00
Nil
'n
It

Nil

"9

II

33

-0

'0

Oil
.1
N

1Z 1
0

-I

*Ii
Ai

'

N1
.1

Nz

N~~~~~r

N*II

'1U4

4cX

11 N

3N

C'

0 z

0 m

.1

91

-I

,ZN

-q"9
IN

I'C~'
N
N

3'u0'3 0'

L.3

33

NOC
Q0
CO

N1*I

NZ

'

rr
N

tm 4

Ait

~"9r

n ilt

N 11Ni

*I

NQ

NZ

.)

.1

*I

.9~

.0

.1
N

.'

.U

-o

40~f

l i

11

INIt

Nit

Nil Ilti

"9"

30

3.3
0'
4D
.

'0
.

C)

C1j
01
r,

--

a..
N

..

C4

C'

Z'4

CJ
"9

"9

Z0
N

..

~~ ~ ~3.L ~ ~ 1,A
n-- -

it*

..

- - -

--

.2

a 1,

r5a3L

--

A
-

..

7
-

LNL

-C

nit
l

il

a
N

-0

X It
l
-..

..

35i
N' 00

N'
NZ3

C,

"4D
.

L
-

N3

'

N
31

N
3.L

li

N.
3

3 IT

3 0'

N~
'

9.
N

3 z

N
3zz

34-

N3

6 't

1
a. n

CU
N

Ca

q3

01
99
..

Ii

.9

3 x

1
D'

CC
3

..

3
J

-4

-30

3~

p.r'

--

..

A
-

2
C

lit
-..

lii
-O
(3

3Z.

~
3

li
it
U

C
C10

40
Ali

Ij

C'

ni 1
3

JI
.ll

.)

ni
li

itn1

-NC1

'D

30

'o
A

I'D

f4

0
o.

'0 0

4.

30

7,0

0A

JA
,

jz

;z

=;.

D.

o0

40
o0
0

.4

00

'1

-fl

.01

'.0

3.4

-11
c3:.

4D

o0

.0 0,

.0

it
zQ

- 1

0.1

.0

o
-ne

tJ

.
7'

A0

' I -1-1
.::
z

.0

a,

a,

- 1

-1
cOz0

Cr4

J)

NA
n0
j)i

0-

.0

n.11

0t

'

I
nIit

~N

'

NA
r.

N
n1

'-

I~ it

if

I.'N

nI 1

n11

-i

at

45~C

N
1i

w
i

JN',
A1II

NON*N kAN...

Nm
0
A it

11

D
4 1

O
L

o
n11

'-

'-

Nl~C

"~C

2.5

.0
3
3

3N.

N
J

-~.'

1'

N.
I I

No3

N3

~ ~ ~U 1~

Nm

~'~0-'

UCL

-t

'

.-

'

"4

~ U ~9

M.n

IfI
5

0l

i.
.

.0

3
.0 .. *~.

4 1

'.

I If

n11

'~'~

13N.N.N.Nc.N z\
01
0

~ ~

r-.N-

i 01 Nit
C

~'
~~01
3

.4

ri f

AJito'

011111

:Z

C.v

'

0--

11)

tj

Lm0

ZO'C0..43Z

1z~
DI

to-

I i

~~N

:at

Ii

3'

i ll

04'
N

J
4D~N

ifr

Il

~I

Iltol

0.

If

I Jni
S
~ PIt~

zr'N

.i

t
1'

xN

zN-

0-

D'

4C

D-

z~

4D.

VI

0
...

N~~~~~N
-~~~

~~

04

i
%

NON
-i

.N

I!

-1

11

k
.

'm 11

1
O

t
U

.'.

, 1

.2

5~0

zI
U

Gil3
3
.

~~

It

Pi

. ;11 33

31?-113.13

7-5N

373

Y:3s

7-

7.2

Al

Al

j)

'..

~ Al

A4
s1

ANGL.E 0? ATTAC~k
Decee
01

4,25

1.0

2.39

-4.2 52.

1.5
2.0

-4.22--]

3.0

2.45
2.-52
'2.,,4

44,0

2 .7t

1390

6.0

3.03
3.-11

3.70-3.57-

7.0

NI G0B

INlitTi-A1 G301tsTilY

&.20'
4.102.0

0.

2.

)5
.4

9.0

3.iKL

3 -25i

.76
?I P

10.0

3.tB

12.0
14.0

3.77

3.IT
2.-73

4.0'3r
4.33

16.0
18.0
20.0

2
.
.2
2.06
4.-4 1
4590
1.87

8.0

4.00

tI

04

1.

5.97
5.27

4e84
3.91
3.29l

.04.60
4.384

5.06

2.414

5.V5

2.14.

A3?PE' TDIX (iv-c)

Cj,/.-

?I

4 .4

OTORAL OOF(t101ONs

Gil'.

0i 'r'
.10

IF'-

54

IIi

-C[r-*.-

F--

LII

-- I--IF'

it

7TI
Vj17FV
--T

4J.0

.0
7"

.30

/0j

'

i
--

-1

P-6

'

t - **t

-~~

Ii

- .- I .

All~T

11

~31

1*1F'
71
1~~~~

'

'~ 1
3tii.

*oil-

-I''

l..j~1/

ma

i1H-~

I2

0 .--

-;4

F1

11

A.0

r-

[7I

It

I-

T4 C.I

17

-0

cx

-SS

3.0
.,

4.0.:
t,

4,

- r-

T-

-44

48.0

i62

Z.0
a3

20 A,

1.