NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS

MEMORANDUM REPORT

for the

Army Air Forces, Materiel Con~and

WIND-TUNNEL INVESTIGATION OF A BEVELED AILERON SHAPE

DESIGNED TO INCHEASE THE USEFUL DEFLECTION RANGE

By R. T. Jones and W • ...I. Undervvood

INTRODUCTION

The useful range of deflection of a control surface is ordinarily limited by the occurrence of flow sepa­ration on the convex side of the surface behind the hinge. After this separation occurs the hinge moment increases rapidly, making it extremely difficult to deflect the aileron beyond this point at high speed. An aileron following the shape of the original airfoil forms an outside corner on one side of the flap hinge when it is deflected through a small angle. The increased local velocity around this corner, which is followed by an adverse pressure gradient, is responsible for the flow separation.

Wilen beveled ailerons were constructed for the XP-51 airplane, the bevel was built up by spreading the upper and lower surfaces apart behind the hinge (see fig. 1, configuration B, and fig. 2 of reference 1), making a slight inside corner on each surface. During the flight tests, it was noted that these ailerons showed a somewhat greater useful range of deflections and gave slightly better control at low speed than did the original ailerons.

In an attempt to further increase the u3eful range of angular deflections, the aileron shown in figure 1, configuration C, was designed. The more pronounced inside corner at the aileron hinge point causes an initial posi­tive pressure peak, so that a certain amount of deflec­tion is possible before the pressure curve becomes flat. The purpose of the present investigation made in the . Langley Memorial Aeronautical Laboratory two-dimensional low-turbulence tunnel was to determine the general

r

2

aerodynamic characteristics of this aileron and, in particul ar, to determine its useful angular range.

APPARATUS AND METHODS

A scale mode l h aving a 36-inch wing chord and 35.75-inch span was made to correspond to the me asured ordinates of an intermediate sec ti on of the "aileron portion of the wing (16 inches ou t board fr'om the inboard end of the ri ght aileron) of t he XP-51 airplane. The " wing section was modif i ed aft of t he 70-percent chord point in order to fair i n the 0 .150-chord a ileron. (See fig. 1, configurati on C.) The ordina te s of the modified wing section forward of the ai l eron hinge line and the original measured ordinates of the plain wing are given in table I .

The aileron shapes t ested ar~ shown in figure 2. The three ailerons were hinged at the 85 -percent chord point . The r efore, with the o .145-chord aileron the wing chord was reduced approximately 0 .2 i nch. In the sealed condi t ion, t he aileron n ose gap was sealed with thin rubber dam .

For the low-drag condition, the model was finished with number L1-00 waterpaper to produce aerodynamically smooth surfaces . For the high-drag condition, the model surfaces were the same as in the low-drag condi­tion; but roughness s trips , made of carborundum g r ains embedded in g lue on a I- inch strip of Scotch tape, were placed on the upper and lower surfaces near the l eading edge of the model.

Lif t and drag measurements of the mode l were made by the methods described in reference 2. The profile­drag and lift coefficients were based on a nominal wing chord of 36 inches. The aileron hinge moments were measured by means of a calibrat ed torque rod and the coefficient is bas ed on the actual chord and span of the aileron.

All test s were made at a dynamic pressure of 59.7 pounds per square foot , which corresponds to a velocity of abou t 150 miles per hour and a test Reyno lds number of approximately 4 , 000,000 . The test program is given in the following table.

3

Ai l eron deflection, ±30o, for a ll runs

Run Aileron Qo Gap condition Surface no. (deg) condi tion

1 1 0 Seal Smooth 2 1 0 No seal Smooth

3 1 0 Seal Roughness strips·

L~ 2 0 Seal Smooth

5 2 0 Seal Roughness strips

6 3 0 Seal Smooth

7 3 0 Seal Rou ghness strips

8 3 0, ±t~.l Seal Roughness

8 . 3 strips I

, ----.L- I

RESULTS AND DISCUSS ION

Effect of hinge-gap seal.- The effec ts of sealing the hfnge gap on the aileron characteristic s can be seen from the results presented in figure 3. With t he gap open there is a tendency for aileron 1 to overbalance for small deflections. A similar tendency has b een found in other tests on beveled-trailing-~dge ailerons. As shown in figure 3, this tendency to ove rbalance was eliminated by sealing the gap to stop the flow of air. Apparently the pressure difference resulting from a small deflection of the aileron is sufficient to cause a large portion of the boundary layer to flow from one side of the airfoil to the other through the hinge gap , accentuating the effect of the bevel. In addition to eliminating the overbalance, sealing the gap a l so reduced the increment in lift for the larger aileron def l ec t ions. This is not in agreement' with the usually favorable effect of sealing the gap of contour ailerons or less severely shaped ailerons. In a practical installation the effec t of the hinge gap may, of course, be influenced by the internal pressure in the wing.

4

Effect of surface condition and Reynolds nl~ber.­Because the balancing action of the bevel depends on the boundary-layer thickness and profile, it is to be expected that the amount of balance obtained may vary considerably with surface roughness and Reynolds number. Because the boundary-layer thickness near the trailing edge of the airfoil is intimately related to the drag coefficient and because the form of ,the boundary-layer profile near the trailing edge varies little for thin airfoils at small angles of attack, it is to be expected that the balancing action of the bevel can be related to th~ drag coefficient of the section. The effects of ­Reynolds number, position of transition, and surface condition on aileron characteristics may therefore be correlated with their known effects on ~rofile drag.

The effect of changes in profile drag on the aileron characteristics is indicated by the results presented in figure 4. The presence of the roughness strips approximately doubles the drag of the airfoil section in each case. A comparison between the high- and low­drag conditions for the three configurations shows that the slope of the hinge-moment curve is reduced for small deflections and the increment of lift is reduced for almost all aileron deflections by the addition of the roughness strips near the leading e dge of the model.

~ For a conservative design, the control surface should be proportioned so as to avoid overbalance with the hi ghest profile-drag coefficient the wing would be expected to have in service.

Although these results (fi g . 4) may be taken as an indication of the effect of drag on a moderately thin airfoil, it is not thought that the results can be safely applied to airfoils of greater thickness. On thicker airfoils the boundary laye r at the trailing edge is often considerably nearer the separation point, and the behavior of the aile ron unde r these circum­stances may be quite different.

Effect of aileron profile.- The effects of aileron profile on the aileron characteristics are presented in figures 4 and 5.

In figure 4(a) the hinge moment and lift charac­teristics are given for aileron 1, which had a trailing­edge bevel angle of 27 0

• In the smooth condition, the

5

results show that for this moderate bevel angle t he hinge-moment and lift characteristics are approximately linear unt il a down deflection of 25 0 is reached . For upward deflections near _10 0 , an abrupt change occurs in the slope of the hinge-moment curve. Al thou gh ai l eron I woul d give the required lateral contro l at low s~eeds, the large negative value (-0.0053 ) of (oeh/ OOa ) a combined with the characteris t ic posi t ive

value of ( OCh/oa)Oa for beveled-trailing-ed8e a ile r ons

woul d resul t in too large stick forces a t h i gh s peeds -to su i t present-day control requirements. The results in figure 4 (b ) , win§ smooth, show that ai l eron 2 with a bevel angle of 30 , an increase of 3 0 in the beve l angle of aileron 1, would also fail "to give the required lateral control at hi~h speed because of the too large ne gative value ( -0.004Lt ) of (och/ooa ) a. The results in figure 4(c ) , wing smooth, show that "ai l eron 3 with a beve l a n g l e of 33 0 , an increase of 3 0 in the beve l angle of ai l eron 2, combined with a reduction in ai l eron chord of 0.005c had a value of -0.0020 for (OCh/OOa ) a which should be l ow enough to give the required l ate r a l contr ol at high speeds on a pursuit plane of conventional size.

A comparison of figures 4 ( a), 4(b ) , and 4 ( c ) shows that by increasing the bevel angle from 27 0 t o 33 0 the slope of the hinge-moment curve is progress i ve l y reduced at smal l deflections, resulting in conside r a ble curva­ture of t he hinge-moment curve, while t he l if t ­characteristic curves remain about the same fo r t he three a i lerons.

No contour aileron was tested for comparison with the modified aileron; hence, it is not possible to state definitely that the results of these tests show an increase in the range of useful deflection over the usual contour aileron, although low values of the hinge moment appear to be extended to greater def l ections th~n is ordinarily found for conventional shapes. .

Figure 5 gives a comparison of drag p o lars for the modified aileron section and the plain wing section with and without a 0.187c contour aileron. This com­parison shows that in the range of test Reyno l ds number an increase in mininum profile drag cdo . of a b ou t

mln

TABLE I

•• •••• •• • •• •• • • ••• •• • ••• ••• •• •• • •• •• ••

AIR~IL ORDINATES OF INTERMEDIATE WING SECTION OF XP-51 AIRPLANE

Plain wing section Modified wing section x/c yt!c yr!c x/c yr/c Yr!c

0 0 0 0 0 0 .0125 .0184 -.01;4 .0125 .0184 -.01~4 .025 • 026~ -.0191 .025 • 026~ -.01 1 .05 .Ol6 -. 024K .05 .046 -. 0244 .075 .0 ;8 -.0;0 .075 .0 ;8 -.0;0 .10 .0500 -.OE49 .10 .0500 -.Ol49 .15 .0528 -.0 12 .15 .0528 -.0 12 .20 .0664 -.046~ .20 .0664 -.046~ .25 .0717 -.050 .25 .0717 -.050 .;0 .076; -.0546 • ;0 .076; -.0546 ·Z5 .0787 -.0550 .£5 .0787 -.0550 • 0 .079; -.05a2 • 0 .0793 .. 05E2 .45 .0790 -.05 5 .45 .0790 -.05 5 .50 .ot69 -.0540 .50 .OJ69 -.°aE° .60 .0675 -.04 7 .60 .0 75 -.0 7 .~o .0520 -.0;1~ .~O .0520 -.0;19 • 0 .0;;8 -.016 • 0 .0;28 -.01~; .805 .0;26 -.0163 .85 .0220 -.00 0 .8125 -.0156 .815 -.0154 .8175 -.01a1 .82 -.01 ; .85 .0228 -.011; .90 .01;; -.0066 .95 .0056 --.0024 .998 .0011 -.0011

1.000 0 0

• •• • • • •••

ft .

A - ORIGIN,-91- (REF..3 ,.qND 4)

,81.3c

---67-

B - I?E-FEI?ENCE I /lND 3

•• •••• •• • •• •• . . ... . ... ••• ••• •• •• • •• •• ••

.008c GAP

C - PRESENT RE-POI2T OF ..36-INCH

CHORD MODEl..

/lgure I. - Comparison or aIleron shape.s t.ested for KP-S/ airplane. ConF'iguration C IS model conrigurat/on reported herein.

.007c

• •• • • • • ••

•• • • •• • •• • •

• •• •• • •• • • •• • •• •• • •• • •••• •••• • •• • •• ••

.esc

~ .. ---------- ./50 c ---------~ +----.0625 c--~

.125 cEo

No.1

.8Sc

II------------.ISOc ---------~ r-.0556C

~-------~~------------~~-

--1---t o-YM.

No.8

.BSc

1

t-... ----------·14SC -------~

r--.OS06C

No . .3

Figure 2. - Aileron shapes te..sted on 36 -inch chord model of XP-5/ wing section.

••• • •• • • • • •

• •• •• • •• • ••• • •• •• • •• • •••• •••• • •• • •• ••

I · + I-- 1--1- - I--- - .- - -I- I-- -

l-I--- . --I-- --

I .'"

r No eeal ,

L.-l~ . ~

-. l/:;: ~ -- -f-- 1- 8

~ ~ ,

l-t- .. - /-- --1...-:: Seal

1 '-' ~ l-t] :. ~ .• l- V' ,

I-- ~ I- .... , ~ I-I- ~ j

-..... ~ r- t- ... +- ~~ I Ii I I .,

l-I- g . l- I- "" ..... '1-1- :::1 --I- § I-I- ~

C)

I--1- 0) IQ

,I

11. 11 t~ tf

1

I J. "

,Fli i jl

- .!L ' tl .- :j •

- -' '' Q

r:r ~ . .... C)

l- t! , :f-i. ~ ! ~ I , 0 , I- ' c) .. I- ~ Q 0) I- ~

II '1- , I

I- t, '

I--fj !l i

~ .<l I-- !- Q

0

I--H .... i_ ~

I- 0) IQ '

\' I I i, I J

1 ,

I ,/

~ L)

k9' i' A'~

,

;.) kl' ~

I J

~ ~.

- -db d l , ,Ili"! f' d ~- - -Seal -Il>---No eeal - - - -

III p .• ,

I_~. f )1, 1314 "

I' 1 ' :L , Ifi

-t;-F;11 i" r i+ t 1X H.

r' " "-" , ~

, ,

~ !&. J 't I I- Seal

I' Iii,· I :~ ~~ .~ t ,

, ,ll }i~~1 I~r 1[#1 I'tl IflJ l It!:tl j ~ ~ ~ '1,1 '( 1.-prJ T '3 j 1 ,.. , " +

,;t tj 1 ,

""~ Iak -, . .~ ~ l::' fR1: I, I ~ - L- ~

1 " U IT No eeal t--. ( -

,1 1"'1110..

~, "" t

tl:i1; kII lil 1

I' I " ' , ,

F.' ~ rJ " , !', .1, lC ~ 1£ - 1

,_~ IP .. , 0 , • e 0 ,0. 'l .• . 1 Ie-1't8 I 'J Aileron

~

deflection, 0., deg ,

" 1 1 1 ·±rtti 1 1 1 I 14t I~~ 1'.

I I J Iii '.,

Figure 3. - Effect of hinge gap on section aileron charac ter istics of ai l eron 1 on a sca le model of the intermediat e wing s ect i on of the XP-51 airplane . BO'Oo; wing smoot h (Cdo = . 0045 ) ; R, 4 ~ 106 •

l-

, c :

CL

:

f , ,

+ I

r i

t r

, t '-t

r

, i 1

" ,-

--,.;

1'3 ,,-

fl

-' -

t

I-

~~ .

f] tj

I

'1

• •••• • ••••

• • •• •• • •• • • •• • •• •• • •• • ••• • •••• • •• ••••• t

L

111 >iHm! 'H' ir I ~~ i'J' 1,\ :111 ir ~!ill~ -'j, 111 \ it, '·hf I 1 : 1:1;'] I 11'i! - f±H.l±tI

o - - - Wing leading-edge rough (cd !!! .009')

, M'N ,'j . 0

• •••• • ••••

. • •• •• • •• • ••• • •• •• • •• • •••• •••• • •• • •• ••

r-~~~~~I~Orr~~--'--~·~-~~-~~--r-.-.--.-r-~~-r-.-.-'r-·r-.-.--r-r-.-.--~

-------1--1--,--1--1--1- -1---1--1-- ---- -- - -- - -I-I-I--+--I-I--~-I--I--l--I

-- -----"--I--+---~-I--f-·-+-1-__l-I-- I--i-+_+-_t-- f- - - - - 1-+- -1- + + -+-1--1--1--1--1

f-+-+-+--I-_I-+-+_-I_"""",r_~_-!-++-I--+_I_I-+-+-++-I--I--fr_+ __ W~i_ng smooth .1 / ' .1

-- .s:: ()

---- .,"

c II> -- .... ()

I-- .... .... f--

.... II> 0

I-- ()

., c 1--,

r---J :l 0

I-- ~ ., I-- ~ c 1-- :2 I-- § .... - .,

()

I-- ., r1)

l 1

j:'

_-11"_-1--1-1:... .. '-1-+-++' -I hlkA:z fP'+ -+-+--+-:-t-t---t-I--+-:-+-+-+-+--I- 1-+-+--1-_+-+ + -1

I l-r 11, 1 ~ 'I~ 'I I I (, I

If,

, ,. ,J>

+-1 i! 1 -' f, ,: r 1 '.

, , , '

.... "" . '!J

1

.1 I -+-,3+-,j+';-I- r 'llil tN I 1 l~T I , ,i J I, ,I, Hff. '1+1~+ " !!:.i . ... ~

, I~

'iTL. ,.

Wing leading-edge rough "~l ", ~

I ! . 'TI' 1 ,I , I:f., - n <tFi:. ~

~ ~~ -f ':r B 1 ['4 (:{± It'"': -rmf· J il$J r-.... ........ r-,.,. , t 1 ' i·'.tI

,:' '" I' " IiI]: II i I I 'i'" 'gh ' It¢lll'-rll. l , '1',,: '"' b -tt' lft1-l4-1, ,"t --I--'+:';'I-'-+-+-I-~j-l'-'+-I-+-J1-4-+--I-+-I'I-'-+-++-~,~~""-l. f-t," ~ I H ~:

-\-- t-t---ll--+-+-+ + -I--I--t---,I--+--!-+ + +- Wing smooth ,' ,''''<>f0 :td 1, fil:t! ,' ~ :-f:3.

-+-+-t~I--+-+-+--l;-, +-++-~-I---I~-I-+-+-++-+-I--I}I-I-+--Ii"~ar~?l ~~~' ~+T-':+-I d~I-'-' ~ffi~ ~ , ,JI '" 7

'T 1

i 'tt,

(b) 4ileron 2. Figure 4. - Continued • f'

. 11 ' 1+1 1 I r I I I I

~-I--+-I-_--IJ::::b-I"--r~ ~J::_L ~~_L_ 1 F

• •••• • ••••

· • •• •• • •• • ••• • •• •• • •• • •••• •••• • •• • •• ••

I , : I " ' !'" 'I ' d,'; ~ l I I': ' j,1 'I IIH' I" " ' I !hi

I II l '" 't '

' 1 ,I ' I 1'1 I I,.~ !', fd bY, I ~ ilil I;i+dc ' " .! ", 'I' 'Li ,Ii' !i ii :;:: II, ,": ,I ' I,

'" l'ril1)1 jtt ! [if :p ': fFl

I," ;! 'JI : I ' i" 'Il! ;1 ' 1 1 fij~ II, ,

j ,'I ' It! ill ,'J: ; ~,' ,Ii', ' , ii icri ll

: !m"" V I'li 1! 1 it!!, Lp t'fll I ~J t,t, ~Ij 11I 1 ~H l i ! 1:::1.. " ' . '" '11 1 ' I,' li':L/ ::: :li, II ,I qt< ' I Htf I fiji ! :!H} I _Wi.ng SIllO O !~ .

:r I l 'tM lr~ '~13 :: :(, il'it :i:1~lilfl 11' l'ttil1if fj.'J i;{i :mtlhjl', JW i~

I 1::i, l:j; " If·:, ' II'! ' , i' l;:fll:t , 't'I"+ i": ~I r' , I'; ;'1 11:! \ " ' lil: ' I I ,j ~# IH :,' u . 1; I,r l+jl ' 1 r 'r ' I : ~'f lil"" ,

~ f' I.;I' ',' IH" I,J , IIIJ '< , ii " y i' r4, ! :rd Pt

~:: It1.' I:" 1 9itf, I ;~ ,'T't, 1'1:i:tf q 't: {t,

~ ~ .:, oJ .' t H ',in Il+,i I,q {f, "

I?i' ru' ·m :tJ 'til ''': , .. ~tl1 n ...... "~ .. rO'ugh

ff E> , J[ ." I ,

" ,'ii il' E : "

C!'! i :if g ~~I '* ,I " , :!~: I l'H !J:n '1 'v

~ ,~ '. ,"" 15<1:7 ';t i I

~t' H~ !1f ~i b; ,

,

ral ill IJf : "~"

.,'tr.,

0- Wing smooth (~o := .0045)

(;) Wing leading-edge r ough (Cd = .0094)

0

f

III I

1 Wing' I .. " r ough [#

II • [E 'c'.'

~; ~ '4 1m ,-" lli ' , , , ,; '., flf: iJ'i, ' ' 1"1-1." 1 14'1'+ t';" n~g smoo th ,

Iil u

ct-'±'ct I ~ ;'il: IfHI£!:, k f,ri l;,+. II ell

~"t l;}IiJ 11:~ +,~

>-Hj j+l~ ,'H II I1f Ail, 19 l ,/,

>tfffJj R- F " I' I' I~ ::(,

:'!: GI 'H- i7+ ' ', Ij( i T I"ITI: I If,.. I-I-'i ;"'I't'

;"1" (c) Aileron 3. ri [hl " ,.! , i ~t"

h- [i :+P Figure 4.- Concluded . fl j "tt 1.11',1,11 yl .Ihr' Itt, " .'cUi i

~J I-li1i.Jl ct!1 II [,iftffiL H '"++'H,' '''-~ 1ft '

:tttllllt! itfj l';"i1 I'I:H fr

• •• •• • •• • ••• •

• •• •• • •• • • •• • •• •• • •• • •••• •••• • •• • •• ••

o o

Modified aileron section - aileron 1

o -- Seal + --No seal

Plain wing section: R, 6 x 106 (fig. 5 - ref. ~) - - - - - - Plain wing gection wi th 0.187 e con tour aileron:

R, 6 x 10 : no seal. (fig. 10 - ref. ~)

Section lift coefficient, c,

P1gure 5.- Comparison of the drag polars of the modified wing section with aileron I and the plain wing with and without a contour aileron.

•• • • • • ••••

• •• •• • •• • ••• • •• •• • •• • •••• •••• • •• • •• ••

-----[ -I-

E I

I r I t i I t , i

t I ~

G:

~ ~

[ -;-r-

[

,

....k ,./'

/" , --./ ..---

" , pi /~)j .1-> · f· f,

, 'pI' , I I ~ > ;x/ [\ y ;A-- ···li

lI' .c 'i , ,I . J<r . 'I ;.- ;1;1 ,1 ,A ,i lli ~,J

L V , ~ . ~

/' ./ pr<' , ,~

~ ;V'

/ ,B.3, .7- / . "'./ ,/: ,/ -,', ,..,..-(

R 1. 1:'1 ",1, . [-iii ~ . t! .,. 'l " r ~ 4: 'til 4' , ,:;g ;~ t ••

, '~ , I,:J..- tfrJ ii', 4: ,{ J.- -<,,; , ~B" ,

c.ti' "~I I ,.,/ .' '~' "~I'

'" I~ " , :.,...-<I ttA '~< , . ~ _4;~ .A / ,f :, . 'B" ':t" , fl ", fill y h-it 'H , V ji/ , , . -a

: 1.,-,.' ~ @I i" /" ,'-' ;;: "e; , .-f'- f.-' I;P l..% ~

vl W --:-; P f-' 0 IiV - 1.- '/'

G:r , 1<1' I', " j1' 1 IR! r-:I' , ,)' Ilhi 'i'

" 11<1. 11, , ~ ' .1. F 'j, ~ 1ft :, . , i. @ 1:4- V "" 1;, , " ./f-{',-4, l ti '~ , I:· , :.> ,

t-< .t!-" ' .~ :;r. II'.:: 1·+ ri rr.:- .A "S ' f IJ' 1,1 Clo i ~ I ,

.~ , ,;

L.u---V j:;.; deg , , '4 ",1 'f! 'r- ,J II----11 -;- ,,' i l ~1 ." I '''tl '- o - - 0

~.l - + .;1" 'j '.J: :;

~ :": ",

Jjl I"'

'1,1 t .,

r ~ rl

~ I

~ i ['

fii1

Cl

i'i ~ !

[-'. t -

J ',j

~ J: Ili l :

,UI! ti': ilj~ IU ~nl it 'l' rE!

I,

" :':{ • I "i I f: 'u .3 - x , J: q • .j: H tl . . ' ~1 'j' hi Ik!: ,iH I

' t, -4.1 - 1::1 J,' ." i,' ri :1 .I Ii

i; 'j , T Pij t.' t~ '" ld :t fiJ j'r:' 1 ' I!' " :it , ,'1 Jil- N, ffb tii ,1i --,' ; '

'ie M : 113.1 Po] j:;:j \iY ,H "-!-' :,': 111 '. F j:,f! fifi 1-f1 I~~ . '" " ,i.;:i . .(, rut Ilj' " r ttl \'J' ' In fh~ , J" I i,JtT r; ., ",:

-xft WJ -ILk, fl' lt 1;+1 jt jj# ri' I,;, Iff! t-r'r tW ~ ' IW . i , I; ,~i T ' .1~, fin i ,~ I l'i' " t1': 1! I' ! I:,L It ,'"

!" p..,1 t!, , j 8ft ' , Ij ,,-'-, ;i' ,:f .l- 't :,

4 ~ (~ iw T;

1" ;l t~f' ~ 1(;: " n ' '-1 ," ':;' .',ii

, !:L 18 J ~

" "," , ' , j "-i'

~ "-;,, . ff Ii]T I~ ,;:; .'

"",,4 " . ,

I;;} 1--, ' I I .iT m ~ "l'ill ~ lot... ',I

\, Ih. . [1,9 IT liD TIT m fir lW tm: "ltl1i: " 1 ~ ~ " ,f ,'.1 I" , ~ j;i jI '. ,,'j ) ) 'F' It r '!1~ ,"'" ~ , :'

11' , 1'8 l~ i ~4 . 1'" ~ i

, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

.1. d H' !I ilt ';:J ;'.' , 1,1, , , I" , ~ I I tIl I' I It l, ~ , ," , i~; "' :', I~f. [,i ii,; IIJ Il,lt ]j •

. Aller~~ den ect1on, 0., de~ 2~ 1 , ~

l11 .It ; " I, I, ' ,I

+i,' \:' : ' "I' , ,

Figure 6.- Sect10n a1leron characterietios or a1leron 3 on a scale model or the intermed1ate wing section or the ~-5l airplane. Wing leading-edge rough, sealed; R, 4 x 10 •

'< .

4.1 3t1-

:~1# 4

f'.~

"

:t

1M :,F

~* ~ er

I~ ;t

l'Lej

.3

'Itt

.t1;:i l-

'Tt ;.j:

;fJ

't-JO" :il '1' 'f

11,1

J in ~

- !

~

,'1

'm ,'}

,1

I

~S" .JC ~ 6 - S- c."o +- ~"'OG. N 5 S '()'iV~t ()~oG

~ ()-y~ ~l c: ~

~ ~13 ~ II 'S 'Or;:>(-

- - -

- -t - -f fr b C

c:

. +, 0' :::-

(',It c~ 6 (I - !s c-S"T =- -~

c· 0-

11

\ . , ,.. (. l -= . <- I I S1 ) -

! 1- 3

\ I

~ B~;.e

C\~

I

( - ~ct~~-'9j e cu

~