62 6 5 0 9 4

CA

ACR No. L5C08a

8

AERONAUTICS

WARTIME REPORT
ORIGINALLY

April
Advance

ISSUED

as
Report L5C08a

FLIGHT INVESTIGATION OF BOUNDARY-LAYER TRANSITION

AND PROFILE DRAG OF AN EXPERIMENTAL LOW-DRAG
WING INSTALLED ON A FIGBTER-TYPE AIRPLANE
By John A. Zalovcik and Richard B.

Ley Memorial Aeronautical Lafcorat

Langley Field, Ya.
^

OCT1978

".

UU STi FACiLITT

F
c-^i
V-*

EO
^?J

^r\?*4'

%S18U^'

A ^* A

(NASA-TM-79833) FLIGET INVESTIGATION CF

BODNCABY-IAYF.B TEANSITICN ANE PEOFIII DBAG
OF AN EXPERIMENTAL LCVJ-DBAG WING INSTALLED
OR A FIGHEB-TYFE AIBPIANE (National Adviscrj
Committee for Aeronautics.) 3U p
00/05
WASHINGTON

N78-78568
Dnclas
32209

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

NAG A ACR No.

L5C08a

NATIONAL

ADVISORY
COMMITTEE
- 'FOR
> AERONAUTICS
*

PLIGHT INVESTIGATION O'P BOUND ART- LAYER TRANSITION

AND PROFILE DRAG OF AN EXPERIMENTAL LOW-DRAG
WING INSTALLED ON A FIGHTER-TYPE AIRPLANE
By John A. Zalovclk and : Richard. B. Skoog

SUMMARY

A "boundary-layer-transitl on. and profile-drag investigation was conducted in. flight by the National Advisory
Committee for Aeronautics on an experimental low-drag wing
installed on a P-J-j-7 airplane designated the XP-1|.7F and
supplied by the Army Air Forces. The wing Incorporates
a i r f o i l sections that vary from an NACA b b ( 2 1 ^ ) - l ( 1 6 . 5 ) ,
a = 1.0 at the plane of symmetry to an NACA 67(115)a = 0.7 at the tip.
The surface of the wing as constructed w a s . found to have stich a degree of wavlness that
it had to "be re finished in order to obtain the performance
generally expected of low-drag a i r f o i l s . Measurements
were made at a section outside the propeller slipstream
with smooth and with standard camouflage surfaces and on
the upper surface of a section In the propeller slipstream with the .surface smoothed.
Tests were made in normal flight - that is, In level
flight and. in .shallow dives - at indicated airspeeds
ranging from about 150 to 300 miles per hour and "in steady
turns at JOO miles per hour with normal accelerations from
2g to l|g.
These speed and acceleration limits were
Imposed, by structural considerations. The tests in normal
flight covered a range of section l i f t coefficient from .
about 0.58^0 0.15, of Reynolds number from about 9 x 10
to 18 x i(p,
and of Mach number from about 0.27 to 0.53.
In the t e s t s in turns at 300 miles per hour, the range of
section l i f t c o e f f i c i e n t was extended, to 0 . 6 3 .
'The results for the section w i t h smooth surface outside the slipstream were in reasonable accord, with the performance expected of low-drag a i r f o i l s and indicated a
minimum profile-drag c o e f f i c i e n t - o f O.OOl.j.5, which corresponded to 'the most rearward p o s i t i o n of transition
observed at about 50 percent of the chord on the upper

NACA ACR No.

L5C08a

s u r f a c e . With a s t a n d a - r d - f i n i s h , - a minimum profile-drag

c o e f f i c i e n t of 0.0063 was obtained.
The results obtained
in turns with the smooth surface showed an increase of
about 6 to ll|. percent in the profile-drag coefficient
above that obtained in normal flight at lower Mach
numbers and corresponding lift c o e f f i c i e n t s ; whereas,
w i t h the standard finish, no increase was observed..
The results on the smooth upper surface of the wing
section in the slipstream indicated that, with normal
engine operation, the most rearward position of transition
was between 20 and 25 percent chord. The attempt to
measure the profile drag of the smooth upper surface by
means of a. half-wake trailing-edge rake was not successful
because a large lateral component of boundary-layer
flow
existed at the trailing edge of this section 1 .
INTRODUCTION

An investigation of boundary-layer transition and

profile drag of an experimental lew-drag wing installed
on a P-If.? airplane designated the XP-lj-7P and supplied
.by the Army Air Forces i s - r e p o r t e d herein. This wing
incorporates a i r f o i l sections that vary from an
NACA 6 6 ( 2 1 5 ) - l ( l 6 . 5 ) , -a = 1.0 at the'plane of symmetry
to an NACA 67(115 )-213,
a = 0.7 at the tip and is the
type used on several current airplane designs.
An investigation of the aerodynamic performance of
the complete 'airplane was not undertaken because the
surface of the wing, as constructed, was found to have
such a degree of -waviness that extensive laminar boundary
layers could not be expected. 'The results of performance
tests of the complete airplane, therefore, would have had
no particular significance in evaluating the merits of
low-drag wings having surfaces that conform closely to
the requirements for extensive laminar boundary layers.
The investigation was consequently limited to t h e - s t u d y
of boundary-layer transition and profile d r a g - o f sections
of the wing w i t h the surfaces in the original wavy condition and also with the surfaces refinished to reduce
the waviness to tolerable limits.
Previous flight investigations of low-drag a i r f o i l s
have been concerned entire3.y with the determination of
boundary-layer and profile-drag characteristics of

NAG A ACR No. L5C08a

sections: located* ctutfitfeS.ije: UYOp.e, 1 ];e f s3.pst;rsam; hence,

no information is available on the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of
such airfoils located in the propeller slipstream, which
may cover 20 percent or more of the wing area depending
on the type of. airplane. Boundary-layer-trarisition and
p r o f i l e - d r a g tests were consequently made at two spanwise
stations of the low-drag wing of the XP-i}-7P airplane one outside the propeller slipstream and one behind the
propeller - to determine the extent to which low-drag
a i r f o i l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s may be obtained in these two
regimes of air flow with the s u r f a c e s of the wing carefully finished.
Measurements on the wing section in the
propeller slipstream we're limited to the smoothed upper
surface because irregularities on the lower surface due
to the landing-gear cover could not be f a i r e d . Tests
were also made of the section outside the slipstream on
the production surfaces with a standard camouflage
finish.
Measurements on the section behind, the propeller
were made in level flight and in shallow dives over a
range of indicated airspeed from about 155 to 310 miles
per hour.. Measurements on the section o u t s i d e , the propeller slipstream were made in level flight and in
shallow dives over a range of indicated airspeed from
about 150 to JOO miles per hour and in steady turns at
JOO miles per hour w i t h normal accelerations from 2g
to Ij.g to obtain high wing loadings.
Some measurements
were made on both of these sections in glides w i t h the
engine t h r o t t l e d . The speed and a c c e l e r a t i o n limits
observed in the tests were imposed by structural considerations of the airplane.
SYMBOLS

section chord

distance along chord from leading edge

distance along surface from leading edge

deflection of curvature gage

q
1

impact pressure in boundary layer at O.OOo inch

above surface

If.

-e-ONPIDBMTmi/

NAG A ACR No.

L5C08a

q
GJ

section lift coefficient

C;io

section profile-drag coefficient

pressure

Vj_
3

R
M

coefficient

correct service indicated airspeed; that is, the

correct reading of an airspeed indicator cali
brated in accordance with Army and Navy
standards
section Reynolds number

M OT1

Mach number
critical Mach number

W JL

acceleration of gravity

Subscript:
t

transition
PPARATUS

The XP-lj-7F airplane tested is a low-wing, single engine monoplane with a Pratt & Whitney R-28GO-21 engine
and a four-blade Curtiss electric propeller (fig. 1).
It is equipped with a low-drag wing, the master airfoil
sections of" which are NAGA 66(215)-l(16.5), a - 1.0 at
the plane of symmetry and WACA 67(115)-213, a = 0.7 at
the wing tip. The airplane has a gross weight of about
11,600 pounds, a wing span of l\2 feet, and. a wing area of
322 square feet.
Two sections of the low-drag wing were tested - one
on the right wing located 21 inches outboard of the flap
and the other on the left wing located 12 inches within
the edge of the propeller disk (fig. 2). The right
wing section had a chord of 88.5 inches and a maximum
thickness of llj-.7 percent at lj.5 percent of the chord.
The ordinates of the right wing section measured relative
to an arbitrary chord are given in table I. The left
wing section behind the propeller had a chord of

NAG A ACR No.

L5C08a

flPITriKJilTTIAIi

108.3 iifches arift* sJ.BiE&iTifasi IttiiaknaSjJ fcf !>. Percent at

i|5 percent of the chord.
Two surface conditions of the right wing section
and. one of the l e f t wing section, were tested - the
right wing section with the surfaces having smooth and
standard camouflage finishes; the upper surface of bhe
l e f t wing section w i t h only the smooth finish.
The smoothed and faired surfaces were obtained by
building up w i t h glazing p u t t y the base provided by the
refi.nish.ing done on the wing at the Air Technical Service
Command, Wright Field, and then sanding to reduce the
surface waviness. These surfaces were then sprayed with
four coats of white lacquer as a protective coating and
sanded lightly. Surface waviness was measured by a
cur vat lire gage ( f i g . 3) w i t h logs spaced. b r percent of
the chord. The waviness condition of the final smoothed
surfaces is indicated- in figures l\. and 5 oy the plot of the
waviness index d/c against, s/c . The values of d/c
include the curvature of airfoil 'surfaces free of
waviness as well as the departure of the actual surfaces
from the waviness-free contour. .
A f t e r completion of the tests of the smooth right
wing section, "the paint and glazing putty on this section
were removed, to the metal skin w i t h acetone and a
standard- camouflage f i n i s h was then applied. The
standard camouflage finish consisted of one coat of zinc
chroma te primer, one coat of gray surface r, and two
coats of olive-drab camouflage. The surface with this
standard camouflage finish is hereinafter designated
"standard s u r f a c e . " The surf ace-waviness index for this
surface condition is shown in figure 6.
Boundary- layer racks, each consisting of a totalpressure and a static-pressure tube, were used in.
measuring boundary-layer transition. The tubes we're
made of --j^- inch brass tubing w i t h a inch w a l l thickness.
The upstream end of the total -pressure tube was filed and
f l a t t e n e d leaving an opening 0.003 inch deep and p, inch
wide and a 0.003-inch wall t h i c k n e s s . The s t a t i c - p r e s s u r e
tube had six orifices 0.02 inch in diameter equally spaced
around the periphery at ly inches downstream from the

NAG A ACR No.

.%

_; .fc

4^

* ^t

*'

hemispheVlosti *end. * ^ke*fSf*9c>1l ve>*pilsVre cen*^r of

the total-pressure tube in contact with a surface was
at approximately 0.006 inch from the surface. The
total-pressure tube was connected to an "WAGA recording
manometer and referenced to the static pressure obtained
-1
from the static-pressure tube' set about j- inch from the
surface to measure the impact pressure next to the surf a c e . The static pressure measured by the s t a t i c pressure tube v;as -referenced to f r e e - s t r e a m t o t a l pressure
riving the impact pressure oxitside the boundary/ layer.
' Wake surveys were made on the right v/ing section by
the rake shown in figure 7 mounted l8.1 percent of the
chord behind the trailing edge. The rake consisted of
2lj. total-pressure tubes spaced O.J inch and five staticpressure tubes spaced equally across the rake. The
total-pressure tubes w e r e , connected to an NAGA recording
manometer and referenced to free-stream total pressure
in order that the total-pressure loss at each point in
the wake could be obtained. The static pressure in the
wake was measured with the central static-pressure tube,
which was connected to the manometer, and referenced to
the static pressure obtained, by means of a sniveling
static-pressure head mounted on a boom 1 chord, ahead of
the leading edge of the right wing tip.
A half-wake trailing-edge rake ( f i g . 8) was used in
an attempt to measure the profile drag of the upper surface of the l e f t wing section. A full-wake rake, such
as described in the preceding paragraph, was not used
because surface irregularities on the lower surface due
to the landing-gear cover coiald not be faired. The
trailing-edge rake consisted, of 21 total-pressure tubes
spaced about y- inch and. three static-pressure tubes.
The total-pressure tubes were connected to an i\ T ACA
recording manometer and referenced to slipstream total
pressure as measured by the rake total-pressure tube
5 inches above the surface. The slipstream total pressure was referenced to f r e e - s t r e a m t o t a l pressure giving
the total-pressure component due to thrust in the survey
plane. The static pressure in the wake was measured by
a static-pressure tube T- inch above the s u r f a c e ; this
tube was connected to the manometer and referenced to
the s t a t i c pressure measured by the swiveling staticpressure head.

ACS: MO. L5*?esr

.*gy|frjtfiitf.!.'jg* : :* : : :*.
^

Wool tufts were used, on the upper surfaces of the

right and left wing sections over the trailiiig-edge area
to determine whether any cross flow, that would invalidate
the wake surveys existed in the "boundary layer. Chalk
lines indicating angular deviation from the thrust axis
of 0, 10, 20, and 30 were marked off in the
region of each of two tufts located 3 and k feet, respectively, on each side of the fuselage -and about 10 inches
from the trailing edge (fig. 2) to enable the .pilot to
judge the angularity of the tufts at those points.
All pressures were recorded on NACA recording
instruments. The position of the ailerons during the
tests was recorded on an HACA control-position, recorder.
An indicating accelerometer was used to indicate normal
accelerations .
MSTH OD

In order to obtain free-stream static pressure,

corrections determined from an airspeed calibration
were made to the static pressure measured by the
swivelin? static-pressure head mounted on a "boom ahead
of the right wing tip. These corrections were applied
to all measurements for which reference to free-stream .
static pressure was required.
;
The section lift coefficient at which transition
occurred at a given chordwise position was determined
from the .boundary-layer measurements of impact pressure. qc.n at 0.006 inch above the surface and the impact
1
pressurei qc
outside the boundary layer. The
ratio

q,cl

was plotted against section lift coefficient

%2
as determined from airplane lift coefficient and theoretical spanwise lift distribution by the method of
reference 1. The section lift coefficient corresponding
to transition was chosen at the elbow of the curve as
q
ci suddenly increased from its laminar level
the ratio %2
to its turbulent level. In the transition measurements on
the wing section in the propeller slipstream, the measured
qc
was corrected to slipstream conditions by adding

Nj?. L5C08a
to it the increment of total pressure due to propeller
thrust in the survey plane.
The profile-drag coefficients were determined by
the integrating method of reference 2; that is, the
total-pressure loss was integrated across the wake and
then multiplied by factors depending on free-stream
impact pressure, maximum total-pressure loss, static
pressure in the wake, and flight Mach number. For the
wake surveys on the section in the slipstream, the field
of flow was assumed to consist of free-stream static
pressure and of total pressure increased by the increment
of total pressure due to thrust of the propeller in the
survey plane.
TESTS
Transition measurements were made at. 20, 30, 1|.0,
and ij.8 percent of the chord on the smooth upper surface
of the right wing 'section and at S 10, 15, 20, and'
25 percent on the smooth upper surface of-the left wing
section. Wake surveys were made on the smooth right
wing section and on the smooth upper surface of the left
wing section. Wake surveys were also made on the right
wing section with standard surfaces.
Transition tests of the smooth upper surface of
the right wing section were made in normal flight; that
is, in level flight and in shallow dives, when necessary
to attain the higher speeds, over an indicated-airspeed
range from about 180 to 300 miles per hour. Some of .the
tests were made with power .off, that is, with engine
throttled; others, in steady turns at an indicated
airspeed of 300 miles per hour and normal accelerations
of 2g and i|g. .
Transition tests of the smooth upper surface of the
left wing section in the slipstream were made in normal
flight over a range of indicated airspeed from about
1S5 to 310 miles per hour. A few test runs were also
made with-power off.

Wake surveys on the.right wing section with smooth

and standard finishes were made in normal flight within
a range of indicated airspeed from about 150 to 310 miles

MCA ACR. No. L^QOSa.

, iliTTrTir^T f Tj.
*tt

per hour and in steady turns'at an indicated airspeed of

about 500 miles per hour and normal accelerations from
2g to 4-g. Some of the test runs on the smooth wing section were made with power off.
Wake surveys on the smooth upper surface of the left
win.;:-; section were made in normal flight over an indicatedairspeed range from about 185 to 310 miles per hour. A
few test runs were made with power off.
PRESENTATION OP RESULTS
The results of the investigation are presented in
figures 9 to IS. The pressure distribution over the
smooth right wing section is given in figure c) . The
theoretical pressure distribution: was calculated from
the ordinates given in table I by the method of reference 3
Transition results obtained on the smooth upper surface of the right wing section are shown in. figures 10
and 11. In figure 10, the section lift coefficient chosen
as corresponding to transition at a given chordwise position" is indicated by an arrow at the elbow of each
--curve. The Reynolds numbers corresponding to the
q
e2

cT
section lift coefficients of the --curves are plotted

qcn

above the --- curves.

'2

The variation of the position of

transition with section -lift coefficient is shown in

figure 11; the Reynolds numbers corresponding to the
section lift coefficients are plotted above the transition curve.
The variation of profile-drag coefficient with section lift coefficient for the right wing section with
smooth and standard finishes is presented for normal
flight in figure 12 and for high-speed turns in figure 13.
Transition results obtained on the smooth upper surface of .the left wing section in the slipstream are presented in figures ik and 15.

10

rOfl?TTDI]TJ5LIAL-

. MCA

ACR No. L5C08a

During the tests of the right wing section, it was

found that the right aileron trimmed up from ^ to 1 in
normal flight and from 1 to 2 in high-speed turns.
Corrections for these aileron deflections have been made
to the section lift coefficient for the right wing section computed by the method of reference 1.
DISCUSSION OP RESULTS
Right Wing Section outside Slipstream
Pressure distribution.- In figure 9 the theoretical
pressure distribution for the right wing section is shown
with a few experimental points determined from the staticpressure measurements in the boundary-layer-transition
tests. The theoretical pressure distribution for incompressible flow was computed for a section lift coefficient
which the right wing section v/ould experience in incompressible flow if if retained the angle of attack it had
in .compressible flow for a section lift coefficient of
0.200 at a Mach number of 0.1|.6. The section lift coefficient for incompressible flow was- taken as c,-\A
- M
u
or 0.177- The theoretical pressure distribution for compressible flow, as determined by dividing the pressures
for incompressible flow by vl - M^ or 0.887, agreed
closely with the few experimental points obtained.
An analysis of the theoretical pressure-distribution
characteristics, computed by the method of reference 3
with use of the measured ordinates of the right wing section (table I), indicates that the characteristics of this
section may be best approximated by the NACA 66,2-2( lij.. 7)
airfoil section. The mean camber line as determined from
the measured ordinates of the right -wing section cannot
be specified by the usual a-desigriation.
Boundary-layer transition.- Transition from laminar
to turbulent flow in. the boundary layer as occurring on
the smooth upper surface of the right wing section and as
affected by engine operation and high wing loading is
indicated in figure 10. As the section lift coefficient
decreased, the point of transition moved progressively
rearward up to and beyond x/c = Ool.j.8, which is about
7 percent forward of the calculated minimum pressure
point. With further decrease in section lift coefficient,
the point of transition appeared to move forward as is

NAG A ACR. No'. LS.QOS.a. .O^liri^IjII^JA^.

11
.!
II I*
*
ll
*.
* I I*

I

indicated by the occurrence of transition from laminar
to turbulent .flow at x/c ~ Q.lj.8 at c^ = 0-. 16. The
forward movement of transition is attriouted to the
increased Reynolds number which accompanies increasing
airplane speeds and decreasing.section lift coefficients.
It is possible that, although, a considerable improve'
merit was made in the'surface vvaviness by the very careful
re finishing of the wing section (figs, k and 6), a still
further red.uct.lon in waviness may have resulted in the
movement of the point of transition at least up to the
m i nimum pr e s s ure po in t.
The .transition results obtained with power off that is, with engine throttled/- indicate that, allowing
for experimental error, the extent of the. laminar
boundary layer was no greater than with normal operation
^1 c "J at a given lift
of the engine. (Two values of ^icoefficient (fig. 10) indicate an unsteady boundarylayer condition in which the total pressure next to the
surface varied from one level to the other.) In the
high wing-loading condition, as obtained in a steady
turn at an indicated, airspeed of 300 .miles per hour and
.a normal acceleration of 2g, transition appeared to be
as far back on the iro-oer surface as in normal flight for
the same l i f t c o e f f i c i e n t s .
x/c = O.liO

(The value of

for the 2g turn is o f f - s c a l e ;

a ci
= at
C
2
that is,

- = 0 . 5 . )

The variation of the point of transition with section

lift coefficient is given, in figure 11. Transition
appeared to reach the most rearward position at x/c = 0.50
or a.bo.ut 5 percent of the chord forward of the calculated
m in imum press ure point.
Profile drag in ^ normal^f1ight.- The proflie-drag
coefficients oBTaineci in normaI"~TTight on the right wing
section, with smooth and standard surfaces are shown in
figure 12. Because tuft surveys over the upper surface
near the trailing edge of this section indicated no cross
flow in the boundary layer, the wake surveys are valid.
For the smooth surfaces, the profile-drag coefficient
decreased, with decreasing lift coefficient and. increasing

12

-x .

r^Oyj'TP^nj^^
- - - - - -

vv

w v

m-m w

.JiAC/v ACR No, L5C08a

*.

speed until a minimum'of O.OQi.j.5 was obtained at cj = 0.185,

R = 16 x 1C>6, and \^ = 275 wiles per hour; with a
further decrease in lift coefficient, there was an
increase in the profile-drag coefficient that corresponded
to the increment in.profile-drag coefficient estimated,
according to the method of reference !>., from the noted
forward movement of tha point of transition. As may be
expected from the transition results, no favorable effect
on profile drag was observed due to airplane operation
with power off. With the standard surface finish, a
minimum profile-drag coefficient of,0.0063 was obtained
at about GJ, = 0.22, R = lij.,7 x 10, and Vi = 250 miles
per hour. At the higher lift coefficients, the profiledrag coefficients of the' surface'with the standard finish
tended to approach the values, obtained on the smooth
surfaces.
Profile drag at high wing loadings^- The profiledrag coefficients of the right wing section with smooth
and standard surface finishes, as measured in steady
turns at an indicated airspeed of about 300 miles per
hour, are .shown in figure 13. Paired curves representing '
the results obtained in normal flight are included for
comparison. The comparison of the results for the
standard surfaces in turns and in normal flight is
limited to .lift coefficients, corresponding to 2g and
2.5g turns, because the tests in turns and in normal
flight were conducted over different ranges of lift
coefficient that overlapped from cj = 0.32 to cj, = O.Ij.0.
At c7it = 0.32 and c7(J = 0.3i|, for which a direct comparison was possible, the profile-drag c o e f f i c i e n t s for
the standard surfaces in turns and in normal flight were
about the same. At cj, > O.lj.5, the profile-drag coefficients of the standard surfaces in turns were about the
same as the profile-drag c o e f f i c i e n t s of the smooth surfaces in.normal f l i g h t .
The proflie-drag c o e f f i c i e n t s of the smooth surfaces
in turns were higher than the profile-drag c o e f f i c i e n t s
in normal flight throughout the range of l i f t c o e f f i c i e n t
t e s t e d ; the increase amounted to about 6 percent at
GJ. = 0.30 and to about li}. percent at
cj, = 0.58. The
nrofile-drag coefficients for the smooth surfaces in
turns were lower at l i f t c o e f f i c i e n t s less than O.Lj.0
and greater at l i f t c o e f f i c i e n t s greater than O.ij.0
than the profile-drag c o e f f i c i e n t s , of the standard

NAG A ACR Mo. L r )C08a

OOIiriDCTITIAC"

surfaces* In turtls AO sart?is*facrt?or^ erxpl aH.at?i or? of this

result, which is contrary to general expectations, has
been found.
In order to determine how closely the critical Mach
.number of the right wing section was approached in the
high-speed turns, the critical Mach number M cr Was
e s t i m a t e d from, pressure distributions calculated for
section l i f t c o e f f i c i e n t s of cj yl - M- by the method
of reference 5, i n which the .measured, o r d i n a t e s ^ o f / t h e
right wing section are used, and from the von KarrnanTsien relation (reference 5) between M c r and static
pressure for incompressible f l o w .
The ratios of the flight
Mach number M to the estimated critical Mach number M cr
for the various normal accelerations experienced, in the
tests are as f o l l o w s ;
'. ' '"
Normal
acceleration
(g)
n
.

2.5
-7

LI/Mcr,
.
For standard
For smooth
surfaces
surfaces

0.7k'
.6
R<v
c.89
99
}

?-5

;i
r

0.70

75
.81
.88
91

he results obtained in high-speed turns therefore indi

ated that, for the range of values of M/M cr experienc
in the t e s t s , no increase occurred- In-the profile-drag
c o e f f i c i e n t of the standard, surface s above that obtained
in .normal flight at lower Mach numb rs and corresponding
section l i f t c o e f f i c i e n t s ( f r o m 0 . 3 2 to 0 . 6 5 ) ; whereas,
at
ne r
for the smooth s u r f a c e s , increases of about 6 percent
= 0.5o were obtained.
cy -- O . J O and about llj. percent at
Left Wing Section in Propeller"'Slipstream
Boiiada_ry--T.ayer t r a n s i t i o n , - The variation w i t h
section l i f t coeTTTcient of the p o i n t - o f transition on
the smooth U"ope.r surface of the left wing, section in
the slipstream and the e f f e c t o f ' e n g i n e operation on
transition are. shown in figures llj. and. 15. With normal

NACA ACR No. L5C08a

v P -i.LViIj.Oi X J_rilJ

engine orrerarbion; the- pwirtt* of* 1srans4tirDn moverd rearward

from x/c = 0.05 to x/c = 0.20 as 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 was decreased from about Oj|l|. to 0.21).. The
most rearward position of transition for the range of
l i f t , c o e f f i c i e n t tested lay between x/c = 0 . 2 0 and
x/c = 0.25; however,, it is highly probable that, if the
test with the boundary-layer rack located at x/c = 0.25
were extended to slightly .lower l i f t c o e f f i c i e n t s such
as were experienced i n ' t h e tests for other chordwise
locations of 'the racks, transition might have occurred
at x/c = 0 . 2 5 . With the engine throttled, transition
at a given l i f t c o e f f i c i e n t occurred approximately [^ percent of the chord farther rearward than with power on.
Profile drag.-- A f t e r the wake surveys on the upper
surface of the left wing section in the slipstream were
completed, tuft surveys were made at positions a, b, c,
and d.
(See fig. 2.)
'These surveys 'have shown that
cross flow in the boundary layer existed and was directed
toward the fuselage with angular deviations (in d e g )
from the thrust axis as follows:
""^
Tuft
^:U
T
"
\
J>
o
s "~^> s i t i on
( mph ) . ^"~~\^^

Power on

185
255
310

28
20
20

20 | 5
5
15

15

10
10
10

Power off

185
255

18

18

15
12

10
10
.,

Because of the cross flow, the wake surveys on the

upper surface of the left wing section in the slipstream
cannot be used, to determine the profile-drag c o e f f i c i e n t
of the upper surface of this -section. If the presence
of cross flow is ignored, however, as it would be if
the t u f t surveys were not made and there were no reason
to suspect the measurements, the evaluation of the wake
surveys by the usual methods would.
an apparent

NAG A A C R ' N o . L5C08a

*

'',

OOl^nCTiTT.IAL

'*

\ 9 9.

'

15

profile-drag c o e f f i c i e n t of O.OOi.i.5 v/ith normal engine

operation and O.OOlj.0 w i t h engine throttled at a section
l i f t c o e f f i c i e n t of about 0.20 and a Reynolds number, of
about 19 x 10. Thia d i f f e r e n c e in the apparent p r o f i l e drag c o e f f i c i e n t s -as obtained, v/ith normal engine operation and w i t h engine throttled would be expected from
the t r a n s i t i o n results, which showed, a more rearward
position of transition with e n g i n e . t h r o t t l e d .
In order to obtain some idea of the magnitude of
the profile-drag coefficient to be expected on the
upper surface of the l e f t wing section, the profliedrag c o e f f i c i e n t was computed for a. section l i f t ^ c o e f ficient of 0.20 and a Reynolds number of 19 x I0b by
the method of r e f e r e n c e '4. and. by using the position of
t r a n s i t i o n as measured on the upper surface of this
section with .normal engine operation.
Profile-drag
c o e f f i c i e n t s computed in this manner have been found
.in other investigations to agree -rather well w i t h
profile-drag c o e f f i c i e n t s measured in absence of cross
flow.
The results of the computations indicated a value
of .profile-drag c o e f f i c i e n t of O.OOJ5 ^or the upper
surface as compared with the apparent value of the
measured profile-drag coefficient of O.OOij.5 for the
upper s u r f a c e . 'It should be mentioned, that the p r o f i l e drag c o e f f i c i e n t s computed from the observed transition
points were based, on slipstream dynamic pressure and
that the profile-drag c o e f f i c i e n t based on f r e e - s t r e a m
dynamic pressure may be obtained, by multiplying the
computed profile-drag c o e f f i c i e n t s by the ratio of
slipstream dynamic pressure to f r e e - s t r e a m dynamic
pressure.
CONCLUSIONS
The results of the flight investigation of boundarylayer transition and profile drag on the l o w - d r a g ' w i n g of
an experimental f i g h t e r - t y p e ' a i r p l a n e , the XP-h.'jF, have
shown t h a t :
For the specially finished right wing section, which
was aerodynamically smooth but had measurable
residual w a v i n e s s ,

16

u JJimiiJJIITTlMJ

NAG A ACR No. L5C08a

1. The drag characterist*i*cs**re*a*liz*ed were"*in reasonable accord with expectations for the type o-f section
tested.
2. The point of transition on the upper surface
moved rearward with decreasing lift coefficient to about
50 percent of the chord and then moved forward again
with a further decrease in lift coefficient. This
forward movement of the point of transition, was attributed to the increasing Reynolds number that accompanies
decreasing lift coefficient in flight. The section lift
coefficient and Reynolds number corresponding to transition at 50-percent of the chord were O".l8 and IS. 7 x 106,
respectively.
3. The profile-drag coefficient decreased with
decreasing lift coefficient until a minimum of ,0.00l|_5
was obtained at a section lift coefficient of about 0.19
and a Reynolds number of about 15.9 x 10.
With further
decrease in lift coefficient, ths profile-drag coefficient
began to increase again by an amount corresponding to the
forward movement of transition on the upper surface.
k. No difference in the point of transition on the
upper surface or in the profile-drag coefficient was
observed when the airplane was flown with normal engine
operation and with engine throttled.
5. An increase in profile-drag coefficient of 6 to
lij. percent, at lift coefficients of 0.30 to 0.58,
respectively, above that obtained in normal flight at
lower Mach numbers and. corresponding lift coefficients
was measured in steady turns at an indicated, airspeed
of 300 miles per hour with normal accelerations from 2g
to Ij.g.
For the standard right vying section with camouflage
paint and normal construction waviness
6. A minimum profile-drag coefficient of 0.0063 v*ra-s
obtained at a section lift coefficient of 0.22 and- a
Re7molds number of lit..7 x 10.
7. No increase in profile-drag coefficient above
that obtained in normal flight at lower Mach numbers and
corresponding lift coefficients was measured in steady
turns at an indicated airspeed of 300 miles per hour.

NAG A ACS No. L^Ctffta' . 'g'lftgVlMV.LAtfr ' . " '

_

'

IJ
'

For the specially finished-upper surface of. the l e f t

wing section in the propeller slipstream
8., The most rearward position of transition measured
w i t h normal engine operation was between 20.and 25 percent chord at a section l i f t c o e f f i c i e n t between 0.2k
and O.l8 and at a Reynolds number between 18.7 x 10"
and 21.5 x 10, respectively. With the engine throttled,
the position of transition was [[. percent of the chord
farther rearward, from the leading edge than that obtained
w i t h normal engine operation.
9. The attempt to measure the profile drag
UDper surface by a half-waks trailing-edge rake
successful because a large lateral component of
layer flow existed at the trailing edsre of this
Langley Memorial Aeronautical Laboratory
National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics
Langley Field, Va.

of the
was not
boundarysection.

i8

:: *"
Tsci8^^**4ftr
: **t?A
ACR N;
. L5co8a
. ...
* .
REFERENCES

1. Anders.on, Raymond P.: Determination of the Characteristics of Tapered Wings. NAGA Rep. No. 572,
1936.
2. Silverstein, A., and Katzoff, S.: A-Simplified
Method for Determining Wing Profile Drag in Plight.
Jo<ur. Aero. Sci., vol. 7> no- 1> May 19*4-0,
pp. 295-301.
3. Theodorsen, T., and Garrick, I. E.: General Potential
Theory of Arbitrary -Wing Sections. NACA Rep.
No. 1^52, 1933.
[j.. Squire, H. B., and -Young, A. D. : The Calculation of
the Profile Drag of Aerofoils. R. & M. No'. 1838,
British A.R.C., 1938.
5. von Karman, Th.: Compressibility Effects in Aerodynamics.' Jour. Aero. Sci., vol. 8, no. ,
July 1914.1, pp. 337-356.

NAG A ACR No.

L5C08a

19

ORDINATES OP RIGHT WING SECTION OP XP-l^F AIRPLANE

[All values are given In f r a c t i o n s of chord. Ordlnates
were measured relative to an arbitrary chord and
with inboard T.S. of aileron in line w i t h T.E.
of flap.]
Ordinate
Station

Upper
surface

.0189

. 02)^9
. 03*14.1
. oil IS
.oL8b
.0585
.0662
.0725
.0770

. .30

.oSolj.
.0829
.O8ki
.o8lj.o
.0796
.0671
.014.62
.0196

4"o
45
.so
.So
.So
.90
1 . 000

.0125
.025
.050
.075
.10
.15
.20
.25

Lowe r
surface

-.0163

-.0213

-.0273

-.0333

-.0^79
-!o50i
-.051+6
-.0581
-.0605
-.0620
-.0629
-.0629
-.0600
-.0506
-.0.129
0

NATIONAL ADVISORY
COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS

N A C A ACR No.

Fig. 1

L5C08a

>

o
CO
0)

0)

c
J
iH

fX

i-l

I
0,
X

EH

i-H
0)

bo
-(

ta

Fig. 2

N A C A 'ACR No. L5C08a

Propelleir
rotation
clocKwiset
pilot's view

Airspeed boom
with sw/vff//n
static-pressure
head
of section
C = 88.3 in.

of section
C = 108.3 in.

WaKe- survey
rake

NATIONAL ADVISORY
COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS

Figure 2.-SKetch

of

location

test sections.

of

wing

XP-47F

airplane showing

: : : . : : :/. \

N A C A ACR Bfc. L5CO&a :..

. : :- : : : :

Fig. 3

to
(0
<u
c

H
>

I
0)

o
0)

CO

bo
C
3
(0
(I)
0)

TJ
(1)
CO

3
V
bo

<a

to
Ui
3
J
0)

o
I

to
0)

3
bo

Fig. 5a,b, c .: ..: :

. L5C08a

.-*.'
4-Ox/O

*# * .

(a) Measurements 6 inches outboard of s e c t i o n

center line.

sL
c

2.0

\ ^v

V ^^_

V."%

>k

"x.

(b).Measurements

at section center line

4.Ox/d

2X)

'I- N
.

^"

L^- k-**" kx% _>>

(c) Measurements

<-v.

,
^

6 inches .inboard of section

center line.

F i g u r e 5.- Surface-waviness index of smooth upper

s u r f a c e of l e f t wing section in s l i p s t r e a m .
XP-47.F a i r p l a n e .
.
NATIONAL ADVISORY
COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS

NACA ACR No*: L5C08a ' '

^MB

: :.. I.'

F i g . 4a, b, c

Lower surface

Lower surface'
(a) Measurements 6 inches outboard of section
center line.

4.OxlO

Lower surface^
(b) Measurements at section center line.

x Upper

surface

(c) Measurements 6 inches inboard of section

center line.
F i g u r e 4 . - S u r f a c e - w a v i n e s s index o f s m o o t h s u r f a c e s
c f r i g h t w i n g s e c t i o n . XP-47F a i r p l a n e .
NATIONAL ADVISORY
COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS

Fig. 6

N A C A ACR No;* L5C083.* *!. ".:

>

.,

<M

it
>a

9 0)
J O

/"* C7

3 cd

06
5

D 07
X S
X O

C_ ~~-^

^- -

\f

0)
(X
p.

C~ j

'*^

1
1

(4

/
/t

>

1I

>

f"

>.

LI

c>

^^

5 JS

- **>
to
tQ
00 JZ

d) *3

a -H

>?

t
^

dC

* 0
<U +J 4)
O (J C
cfl <U fl3
<M (0 -H
t-i
CX

4
^

CO C H

M.
On

-^ <d

, >

a'

c
tv

< "

a c

.. f >
.--

C.
1

^2

o d

X cd

<D
O
J

^
[x *"'

Q M
< *

tt) T3

3
0
to N s^
*T

f--<

55 s

O
r p
5 E

^^u 21
8

>-^ t

A
**^
<**
^

bo u
c 3
o co

a
o o
J ^

J,
^^ -

2
OS

03 <M
V>

ecu

3
JD

14

ft

a) o

r ,-" >-"
(0

0 OB
4

W)

^ *.,
<>

0)
O

4 (4

TN
~P
pj>

O
X

**- ^^

H 10
"1 --H

U)

,
<v

' *
. B,
e.

<O ^ l>45 "

0 bo 1
LI -H a,

3 UX

bo

NACA ACR NK. L5C03a* '... *.. I..

Figs. 7,8

Figure 7.- Rake installation for wake surveys on right

wing section. XP-47F airplane.

Figure 8.- Half-wake trailing-edge rake used for wake

survey on upper surface of left wing section in propeller slipstream. XP-47F airplane.

Fig.

N A C A ACR N J J L5C08&

/
<
.

Upper surface

.6
v/
/C

Experimental
Theoretical
Theoretical

.8

1.0

NATIONAL ADVISORY
COMMITTEE FOB AERONAUTICS

Cj 0.200, M 0.46
Cj - 0.177, M - 0
c f - 0.200, M = 0.46

F i g u r e 9.- P r e s s u r e d i s t r i b u t i o n over, smooth right

winir s e c t i o n . X P r 4 7 F a i r p l a n e .

9-

r: ..* ..: *.BACA ACR~NO.

F i g . 10

> . Q' BOerf

...
On!
.: I I

-p pover arf

"

A NorraaJ. acceleration of 2g
2OxfO

15
10

X/c-0148

X/c=0.3O

f
* J

0*

./6

.34

*"l

.32

/" >

^O .mfl

NATIONAL ADVISORY
COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS

Figure 10.- Transiti'oh as determined on smooth upper

surface of right wing section.
XP-47F airplane.

N A C A ACR N.9.
L5CO?
'
SJOJftl

20x10

Fig. 11

6T

10

GT

"
yV~>

,40

\1
s

.30

b -20

.10

()

NATIONAL ADVISORY
COMMITTEE FM AERONAUTICS
1
i

.2

.3

Figure 11.- Point of transition on smooth upper surface

of right wing section as function of section lift
coefficient. Reynolds numbers for corresponding eectj-on lift coefficients plotted-above. XP-47F airplane.

Fig. 12

..:;

flAC

.I ..' .!
A ACl . No. L5C08a
O Smooth s u r f a c e s , power on
;4-.6mor)ljh; sujrfajieg:, jpCower ojr
X*'6tandard"sur?fae^s*,* power *on

300
20^

0-

.0070
.0060

.0040
./

..4

.5

NATIONAL ADVISORY
COMMITTEE FOft AERONAUTICS

F i g u r e 12.- P r o f i l e - d r a g c o e f f i c i e n t of right wing

s e c t i o n w i t h smooth and standard s u r f a c e f i n i s h e s ,
in normal f l i g h t .
XP-47F airplane.

UA

HL/tt

Ann
*K/0

nu

-L,

o^y Cit*

::

A ,.

Fig. 13

<j

st*

"f

'.

;0: :

Ha*
irt/5
1 W
.6 ,

4 )X><

iA

5>

0,

t)

0 X

p
t-

-xi

5
0

19-

Smooth surfaces, with high wing loading

-Standard surfaces, with hi-gh wing- loading
-Smooth surfaces, in level flight
Standard surfaces,,in level flight

.0050
.0070
.0060

x
^
^

.2

.5

Figure 13.- Pro'file-drag coefficient of right win.g section

with smooth and standard surface finishes in the high
wing-loading condi-tionsi XP-47F airplane.
NATIONAL ADVISORY
1MITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS

: ..: .. .: NJJCA ACRIJIO

Fig. 14

t5
10

Power on
Power off ,

CK

!"

X/c=0.20
O
.3
P

./
0
.3

'O

kw>**C

f>~ -^

A
1

.08

./*

.24

.32

.40

.48

-56

Figure -14.- Transition as determined on smooth upper

surface of left wing- section in slipstream.
XP-47F airplane.
NATIONAL ADV.SORY
COMMITTEE FOD AERONAUTICS

Fig.

N A C A ACR Nq.{ L5C08*.:

20x|0

10

Power off

.20

,/TV

PH

'Powe r on

' X

\,

NATIONAL ADVISORY
COMMITTEE F< AEBOMAUTICS

,
O
1

.4

.5

Power on
Power off

Figure 15.- Point of t r a n s i t i o n on smooth upper

surface of left wing section in slipstream as
f u n c t i o n of section l i f t . c o e f f i c i e n t . Reynolds
numbers for corresponding section l i f t c o e f f i cients plotted above. .XP-47F airplane.

15