Sie sind auf Seite 1von 9

REPORT

No.

537

TESTS

IN THE VARIABLE-DENSITY

WIND

THE

MAXIMUM

CAMBER

TUNNEL

UNUSUALLY

OF RELATED

AIRFOILS

FAR

FORWARD

By

EASTMAN

N. JACOBS and ROBHRT

M. PINKERTON

HAVING

SUMMARY

AfamiJy of relatedairjoi.h havingthe position OJmaxi-

mum camber unusually far forward w

the variabletiy

recently completed of a large number of relded aiqbii%. The new airjoils gave improved characttiticc over those prm”ou.slyinvedigated, especially in regardto the pitching moment. Some oj the new sections are markedly mpm”or to well-known and commonly used sectw~ and should reptuce them in appli.cbons requiring a 81i.ght@cam- bered 8ection oj moderate thickm?w, having a d p“tching-moment coe&enL

inve&g&ed in

tunnel as an aziension ~f the 8tUdy

INTRODUCTION

The investigation of n large family of related airfoils, reported in mferonce 1, indicated that the effects of camber in relation to maximum lift coefficients were more pronounced with airfoils having the maximum camber forward or aft of the usual positions (0.3c to 0.5c). The scope of the investigation, however, was not extended to include airfoils having extreme camber positions because the mean-line shapes originally em- ployed could not be sntisfrmtorily extended. A con- sideration of a program to include these extreme posi- tions led to the elimination of the after yositions because of the rtdvemepitching momenta to be expected- The investigation reported herein deals with a family of related airfoils having mean-line forms derived to extend the camber position from normal to extreme forward positions. These airfoils are divided into two groups, each group containing five airfoils of the same thickness (0.12c) and covering a range of maximum camber positions from 0.05c to 0.25c. One group is based on a simple mean line (mean line without revenml of curwzture) and the other on a reflexed mean line. Instmd of investigding each mean-line shape through a rrmge of camber ratios as in the previous investigation of related airfoils, only one camber ratio is used for each type, the value of each be~m selected to give an optimum lift coefficient of 0.3.

DESCRIPTIONOF AIRFOILS

The airfoils described herein are designated by the

following numbers preceding the number designates the thiclmeas:

Z1O,220, 230, 24I3,25o,

211,221, 231, 241,251

12, which

Following the designation system previously employed

for the N. A. C. A. family airfoils, the fl.rstdigit of the airfoil number is used to designate the reIative magni- tude of the camber. The various mean-line shapes

are designated by the

remaining two diggts as follows:

I~\\RWonof~.

I ,.w

I ,*& I ,,&

I ,a

I ,=

I

I Shpb-—--.–-

RdklL

-

-.

-––

-

-.–

;!

20

21

I

f

I

40

a

I

K1

61

I

The ordinates of the airfoils were obtained by the method described in reference 1, which consists briefly in disposing the desired thickness fom about a given mean line. The thiclmess form used is the same as that used for the U-percent thick airfoils of the earlier investigation. The airfoil profiles are shown in figure 1. Each mean line is defined by two equations derived so as to produce a shape having a progressively decreas- ing curvature from the lead@ edge aft. The curva- ture decreases to zero at a point slightly behind the maximum camber position and, for the simple mean lines, remains zero from this point to the trailing edge. The following expressions taken to represent the simple mean lines are chosen to satisfy these conditions:

nose:

(3=0

to z=m)

tail:

(z=m

to z=l)

~=kl

(zm)

g=o

The mean-line equations are derived from them expres-

sions. The constants of integration are by the following conditions:

determined

x=()

X=m

y=l)

YN=’l/T

x=1

y=o

where the subscripts ~ and T refer to the fore and aft equations, respectively. The solutions of the equa- tions then become:

nose: y=~kJ&-3m&+m2

(3 —m)z]

tail: y= ~k1m3(1—z)

The values of m were determined to give five positions of maximum camber, namely, 0.05c, O.1OC,0.15c, 0.20c, and 0.25c. Finally, values’ of k, were cahmlated to

521

-

.

522

RDPORT

NATIONAL

ADVISORY

give a theoretical lift coefficient of 0.3 (cLr = 0.3) at

the “ideal”

presentsthe values of m and kl for convenient reference.

Table I

angle of attack

(reference 1).

N CA. 2!0?2

 

.—

.—

.—

.

 

 

lvAcA 22012

 
 

.—

.—

.—

.—.

 

NJ.CA. 230J2

 

.—.

.—-—.

 

NACA.24012

 

.—.

.—

-—-—

 

/?&f.GA25012

 

—-

—-—-—

 
 

.

~

 

NALM 22112

 
 

.—.

——-—

 
 

N/1.CA.23112

 
 

.—.

—-—.

 
 

NA.CA24112

 
 

.—

-—-—-—

 
 

h!ACA 25112

 

HQUEEL—AIrfeilPI’oflk&

 
 

TABLE

I

Mean-linedesfgnntlon

yii

 

m

t,

k~k,

 

kg

 

.

210--------------------------

::

 

am

33L4

----------

m

-

-------------------

.rm

5L 64

----------

m--------------------------

.15

 

.202s

1s.9.57 --.--–-–

m--------------------------

 

.m

a.o’n

–--

_--. 211---------- ------------- El--------------------------

m.-_

:3

.0s

.10

.15

 

.amo

ml--------------------------

 

241--------------------------

 

BE -------------------------

%

 

.4410

,

Ie data for tbh afrfoflare not Includedbwanse the afrfofltakil

was sak-

1

fennd to differfrom tb

lntend6drdrfeflthroughen errorin derivingthe

la.

COMMZFI’E E FOR

AERONAUTICS

The equations for the reflmed mean lines are derived from the following expressions again taken to give progressively decreasing cnrmture and to give zero curvature where the two parts join. The tail part, however, is represented by an expression giving a curved mean line permitting of adjustment to give zero pitching moment.

nose:

(z=O to z=m)

d% ~=kl

(z—m)

taih

(z=m

to Z=l)

ti ~=kz

(Z–m)

Determiningg the constants of integration by the same conditions as for the simple mean lines, the solutions of these equation9 are:

nose:y=+kl

[

(Z—m)s—rl k, (I—m)s Z—maZ+ma

1

tail: v=+

k,

[

~ (zm)a$

(l—m)az—nzsz+m 1

The ratio & is expressed in terms of the position of

maximum camber p and the juncture point m.

k,_3

(m— )’—ma

K–+

For each of five values of p (0.05c, O.1OC,0.15c, 0.20c,

and 0.25c), m was determined to give G&J=O

holly, kl “wascalculated to give CLI= 0.3. Vrdues of

k, ~1, m, and kl, are given in tnblo I.

and,

The models, which are made of duralumin, are rec- tangular and have a chord of 5 inches and a span of 30 inches. They are constructed from the computod ordinates by the method described in reference 2.

TESTS AND RESULTS

- Routine measurements of the lift, drag, and pitching moment about the quarter-chord point wore made nt n Reynolds Number of approximately 3,000,000 (tank pressure, approximately 20 atrnosphercs). A descrip- tion of the varitibledensity tunnel; in which the tests were made, and of the method of testing is given in reference 2. The discussion of precision in reference 1 points out an error in the velocity measurements due to a change in the apparent density of the mrmometer fluid with a change in tank pressure from atmospheric. This source of error has since been eliminated by correcting the manometer settings used in iking the tunnel air speed. The data axe presented in standard graphic form (figs. 2 to 10) as coefficients corrected after the method of reference 2 to give airfoil characteristics for infinite aspect ratio rind aspect ratio 6. Included in those

tigures are tables of airfoil ordinatas ot standard sta- tions and n plot of the profile.

1

t

1

AIRFOILSHAVING

TRE M44mMuM

CAMBER

UNUSUALLYFAR FORWARD

523

n

I

Angl.

Angle

L

w

of

of

L&lI)4

11

II

I

I

I

I

Ill

OW

-It

Ofcbord

11

I

60100

1/(

2.0

.44

.40

.+WW+WWH

.11

.10

.09

&

*

O3

.07

I

I

,

I

I

!Il

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

.05

.=

!2:.24*

~ &.04

=141

l.o~

.20$ .:.03

I

I

I

I

1111

I

I

I

I

I

I

1

I

,

I

I

,

I

!

I

,

I

. -----

I I I I ii~~il

-----

.

.

-----

offack,

a

(degrees]

offack,

ff

(degrees)

---

Fmum

Fmum

,2

o

.04

0

j

o

1-.1

I

$-.2

-.3

-.4

74

I

I

.2

I

2.—N.A. O. A. !MO12afrfoil.

.44

.40

.36

I

0

I

I

I

I

I

I

Aidoil:

Dofe:

Correcfed

N.4CA.

4-24-34

.4

L H

io

.6

we

.2

I

I

!

I

I

21W2

in fhiie

.8

f7icied,

.08

.04

0

>

-.3

I

ii I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

AlrJOll:kA.C~.

.

.

.

22’0/2

E Dofe:

$ .2

-.J

-.4

4-23-34

Co~cf~d

0

.4

Liff

#q in fip!fe

.6

.8

coeft7cient,

.2

8.—N. A. O. A. ZOll tiU.

48

44

m

,

I

I

I

I

iii

,

I

I

Ii

iii

R./’i320QOO0OO

40

-8 ~

-K

-12

Tesf:

osp+f

LO

12

k D.Z 1126 .-/6 raiio

L4

L6

M

C.

/7;).!: 3; 170,bO0

Test:

pspqc/

1.0

1.2

K D. Z 1125.

rqfrn

1.4

,

f.6

CL

c

-,6

1.8

524

.

O?

.

-4.:

R

6

-8

REPORT

NATIONAL

ADVTSORY

COMMITTEE

FOR

. f2

“Jmll

&ORONATKIZCS

I

I

I

48

44

I

tQ

.60.12

q

.44.08

u

I

i .02

.01

I

I

-h

,

,

,

I II

I

/1

I

I

!

,

I

!

,

I

I

8

I

I

I

I

I

1

,

r

k

1

1

1

?-+-

1>

in

.2

.04

00

Size:

Fx30-

Vel (f

R=es(stkiafm)2iM

m%l

Where

Correcfed

fesfed:LK4.L

-.

-—

fw

Ted

funnel-wall

-8&=P%-

4

8

12

f6

20

-.2

.

ERZ

_

.

1124

effecf

4-4

I

24

28

32

Angle

of

.+fo&,

&

(degrees)

FmuEB A—N. A. 0.

o

20

Ill

I

E/Dl

.44

.40

.36

80

.6

‘.12

~

.4<.08

.2

00

-

/00

‘M Airfoil:

I

I

I

I

Cmecfed

I

-8-404

8

~A.C~

24012

I%W>J2QOoo

Vel [fi/sec.):

636

Do fe:4-20-34

Ted

I

_-2

~

KD.% 1123

e ffecf.

funnel-well

16

20

24

28

I

32

Size:

Pres

5X30

(sthdofm+2114

Where fesfed:LMA.L.

fbr

12

Angle

of

ofiack

a

(degrees)

.04

<-

~-.2

0

I

,

,

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

:-3 1!1

I

I

I

I

!

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I 1++-1

I

,

I

I

I

,

I

,

I

I

I

I

I

I

,

I

!

Ill!

I

,

I

,

-8

~---

.

A. m

.12

./1

.10

.09

&

%- . Ck3

.$

$.07

L

0

o-m

u

p.os

-0

,$.04

~

:.03

a

.02

.01

J-.;

~:

U-.2

o

%. ‘-3

$74

s

.4

,ii

alrfdl.

.2

Airfoik

M.KA.

23012

[.&r;

Dofe:

4-21-.34

-.

0

 

ecfed

to in fini+e

Ljff

coefficlen~

.2

.4

.6

.8

Liff

coefficient

/

R. A!: 3,230,000

-----

asDect ‘e”+:

v rofio D T

’12

‘1P4 - -16

C=

‘“

‘“-

““-

/2

/.4

i6

1.8

CL

FIGUEE5.—N.A.O.A.24D128kfOfL

~

T

AIRFOmtsHAVING

THEl

MAxumJM

CAMIIDR

.01

0

J-.1

%’ -.2

:

0,

-~

UNUSUAILY

Angk

of

offack,

e

(degrees)

 

Fmms

&-N.

A.

O. A. W12 afrfdl.

Angle

of

affack

Q’ (degrees)

 

Fmmm 7.—N. A. C. A. Z212airfoil.

FAR

FORWARD

 

,

I

,

 

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

 

i

!

,

,

1

L iff coefi7cien~ C=

L iff

coefficient.

CL

I

4

525

.

.

.

.

-.

—-- ——

526

-----

REPORT

NATIONAL

ADVISO13Y

COMMITKEE

.44

.40

.36

FOR

AERONAUTICS

~-”z

Where

fesied:L.MA.L-

Airfoil:

~A.I+A.

23112

,-

404

8121620242832

R.h!:3,

110,000

7ZSf: ED.Z

1129

Angle

of

atfack

w (degrees)

 

—20

 
 

02040

 

~80100

Angle

of

oftack,

a

(degrees)

~GUES

_-4.

./2

.08

.04

0

Lift

coefficient

C.

.44

.40

.36

.32

u’

. 28%-

.24

.20

./6

-12

.08

.04

0

5

“>

!.<

<.Q.

~

~

~

Q

I

Q.’l

~

,

,

,

1

,

,

,

I

,

,

,

,

I

,

,

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

L#

 

L i+

coeficied,

 

C.

9.—N. A. O. L

24U2airfd.

In

addition

to

AIRFOIIS

HAVING

TECEl MAXIMUM

the standtird plots the important

chrmcteristica of these airfoils are presented in table

II, including also the N. A. C. A. 0012 and the N. A. C. A. 2212 airfoils for comparison. These tabulated characteristics me corrected for turbulence and tip effects as discussed briefly in the succeeding para- graphs. The more accurrh section chamctaristim thus obtained are designated by lower-case instead of cnpitfd letters, e. g., c~O~i~instead of CDO~m,etc.

Section clmracteristim derived from ‘wts of airfoils having square tips are subject to small corrections made necessary by tip 10SSW. hfaking the reasonable assumption that more acccrate section characteristics can be obtained from tests on rounded-tip airfoils, corrections have been determined from comparative

CAMBER

UNUSUALLY

FAR

FORWARD

527

an effective value. The data given in table H are therefore directly applicable at the effective Reynolds Number and, when supplemented by additional infor- mation to be published about the character of the scale effect as indicated by the scale-effect cla&iica- tion, will enable improved predictions of maximum lift coefficients at other values of the Reynolds Number.

DISCUSSION

The important independerit variable, as mentioned in the introduction, is the camber -position. The varia- tion of the aerodynamic characteristics with camber position, discussed in the following paragraphs, is shown by cross plots (iigs. 11 to 16) of the character- istics taken horn the standard plots (figs. 2 to 10).

 

.12

48

.11

44

.10

40

 

2

.44

.09

3,5:

 

&

.40

<-.08

32$

ii

c

L

.36

&07

28

~

L

@

24:

 

L

 

t.

05

20j

+

4.04

16$

~

:.03

/2$ k

‘1

 

.02

.C

8<

.12

.01

 

4:

.08

0

0?

 

o

.04

c1

-. I

-4 &

0

K U-.2

_8 $

 

o

U

T

Angle

of

ottack,

a! (degrees)

*

-.3

g -4

 

3

:4

72

0

.2

.4

.6

.8

,!0

12

1.4

16

FIGURE

10.—N.

A. O. A. 25112airfotl.

L ;ft

coefficient

C=

-12

-16

1.6

tests of several airfoils with and without rounded tips The slope of the lift curve for each airfoil is less and the corrected characteristics are shown in table H. than the theoretical value for thin airfoils, 2r per

The maximum-lift values given in the table may be considered as applicable to flight at the value of the

Reynolds Number given as the “effective Reynolds lift is only slightly ail-ected by change in camber Number.” As discussedin reference 3, agreement with position as shown in figure 12. Zero lift occurs at

flight is to be expected when the results me thus applied

on tho basis of an effective Reynolds Number in order values based on the mean line, the values of the

to allow for the effects of turbulence present in the

wind tunnel. The tabulated drag coeflicienta have from the theoretical values. been corrected for the change in skin-friction drag Previous tests have shown that reflexed mean-line corresponding to the change in Reynolds Number to airfoiJs produce a slightly higher minimum drag than

rad+m, and is practically constant over the range of camber positions tested (fig. 11). The angle of zero

slightly greater negative rmgles than the theoretical

experimental angles difTering by approximately 0.2°

——.

—------

.

528

RDPO13’P NATIONAL

ADVISORY

COMMPITOB

FOR

AERONAUTICS

simple mean-line airfoils. This conclusion is further confirmed by &u.re 13, which rdso shows a slight increase in drng as the camber position changas from

The variation in maximum lift is ~hown in figure 15 and supporta previous findings that reflex airfoils hnve a lower maximum lift. Movirg the camber position

.16

.8 -

 

I

I

 

O Simple

 

mean

line

x

Reflexed

*

*

 

I

I

 

I

X---

-%lculafed

 

CL1

 

1

d

11

8

 

!

 

JO

 

.15

.20

position

 

in

fraction

of

chord

CLW,

.4

o

$

~

.12

%

G .08

g

b“

u

‘um

I

’04

----

--4:

::%

FL’’-.fw!

?---

-----

-----

-----

----

 

1

 

I

 

o

bimple

meon

line

x

Reflexed

=

-

 

.05

.10

./5

.20

25

Comber

position

in

fracfion

 

of

chord

11.-Variatf0n

of Mft—mnmSlowWfth mmber pc-sith.

-----

.05

Carder

c

.25

FIOUEE14.-Variatbnof oRtInmm Uft with cmnlmrposition.

forward from 0.25c to 0.15c tends to increase slightly the mtiurn lift. With the “maximum camber po- sition forward of 0.15c, the maximum lift of the sim-

2.0

1.6

1.2

FIamw

,)

 

~

x

 

0

Simple

m eon

line

x

Reflexed

v

.05

.10

.20

.25

CWnber

posifion

in

frc%ion

of

chord

15.—V8rfatIonof mo.dnmmlift with mxnbarpcoltbn.

0

Fmwm

0.15c to 0.25c. The optimum lift (&. 14) for both

types is about the same but increases as the position

Them

of the camber moves aft in the range tested.

2

i ~ $~ ‘‘;‘ ~<~

Q

b tk

go

.2

t!

~

-20

.05

Camber

o

x

Simple

Reflexed

Jo

pOsIfion

in

mean

=

.15

fracf;on

line

=

of

x

20

chord

25

G.u

.8

.4

Fmum

12-Var+atIOn

of angle ofm-o Ilft wfth camkr pmftion.

vtiues may be compared with 0.3, the theoretically determined vnlue of the lift coeiiicient at the “ideal” nngle of attack for the merm line, i. e., the angle of

0

.0/2

ple mean-line airfoils wns unaffected but the reflexed mean-line airfoils showed a decrmsed maximum lift.

.006

CDod

.W

o

)

6

 

o

Simple

m eon

line

x

Reflexed

.05

Jo

.15

timber

pasiflon

in.

fraction

o f%hord

4:

.25

attaolc for which the thin-airfoil theory gives a iinite

velocity at the nose.

The optimum lift coefficients

for these airfoils me smaller than the theoretical

value of the ideal lift coefficient (C%= 0-3).

:.02

L

2

ti~o

[

c

b

QI

0

Simple

m eon

line

x

Reflexed

–--Theore

iicol

C&I

(Simple

mean

line)

~

I

~

:~~ ‘-‘-~

-.

---

---

---

----

‘ -- ~~

----

-.020

.05

.

.(0

.1s

.20

,25

Camber

pas

I tIon

in

fracfion

of

chord

FmuEE l&—Vi3rlati0n

of puchIngmomentwith camberwltfon.

The measured pitching moment (fig. 16) for the reflexed airfoils remained praoticaliy zero with varin- tion of position of maximum camber in accordance with

AIRFOIIS

HA’VRTG

THlil MAXIMUM

CAMBER

UNUSUALLY

FAR

FORWARD

529

design calculations. The simple mean-line airfoils gave exceptionally low pitching moments, somewhat lower than the theoretical valuea based on the mean line. Both the measured and theoretical curves for the simple mean-line airfoils are given in @me 16. The analysis of these charts and the data of table

teristic over well-how and commonly used airfoils of this class. It has a high maximum lift and a low pitching moment. Furthermore, the minimum dragi9 practically as low as that of the corresponding sym- metrical airfoil, the N. A. C. A. 0012. More generally, other sections of this group, such as

II

show that the reflexed airfoils, although comparing

the N. A. C. A. 21012 and 22012 having an even lower

fnvornbly with other reflexed airfoils, are surpassed by the simple mean-lime airfoils. I?urthermore, the air- foils covering a range of camber locations forward

pitching moment than the 23012, should supply the need of many applications requiring a slightly cam- bered section of moderate thickness having a very low

of

normal positions possess improved characteristics. A comparison of the N. A. C. A. 24o12 with the

pitching moment.

N.

A. C. A. 2212 indicates the d.iilerenceathat maybe

attributed to the dlerence between the mean-line forms. These airfoils having the same camber loca- tion but diiferent mean-line forms possess approxi- mately the same lift and drag characteristics. The angle of zero lift and the pitching moment, however, are quite different. Especially noteworthy is the very much lower pitching moment produced by the airfoils reported herein.

One of the promising airfoils of this group, the

N. A. C. A. 23012 airfoil (previously referred to as

“the N. A. C. A. A-312”), has been further i.nveati-

gated by tests in the full-scale tunnel and over a range

of values of the Reynolds Number in the variable-

density tunnel. These results (reference 3) confirm the conclusion that this airfoil has improved charac-

LANGLEY

MEMORIAL

NATIONAL

LANGLEY

ADVEORY

FIELD,

AERONAUTICAL

COmTTEE

LABORATORY,

FOR AERONAUTICS,

VA.,

May 7, 19$6.

REFERENCES

1. Jacobs, EastmanN., ~ard, ~enneth E.,

and Pinkerton,

Robert M.: The Characteristicsof 78

Related Airfoil

SectionsfromTestsin theVariable-Dtity wind Tunnel.

T. IL No. 460,N. A. C. A., 1933.

2. Jacobs,EastmanN., and Abbott, ~ H.: The N. A. C. A.

Variable-Densitywind Tunnel. T. IL No.416,N.A. C.A.,

1932.

3. Jacobs,EastmanN., and Clay, Wii

C.: ChmmterMas

of the N. A. C. A. 23012Airfoilfrom Testsin the Full-

Scale and Variable-DeneityTunnels. T. R. No. 53o,

N. A. C. A., 1935.

TABLE J1—AIRFO~ DATA

Claaocatfrln

FMdamaaMwtfon~

Ikfvd

rmd additional

~c3

n.wlforrtrn@ml

dos&n

tkat

may

be

AIrfou

N.

A. C. A. 21012

N.

A.

C. A. 2E)L2-.

N.

A. C. A. 2W2

 

N.

A, 0. A. 24012

N,

A.

C. A. 250Lz

 

N.

A.

C. A. 0012

-.

N.

A.

C.

A.

N.

A. O. A. 22112

N.

A.

CL A.

‘2311Z.

N.

A. C. A. 24112

N.

A.

C.

A. ‘2611! l

 

-a

Q

.

~

.-’

 

c1

 

(312

D2

o

o12

D2

(JL2

%2

g

012

c12

03

o

Clo

00

A

C12

03

B

011

D2

B

011

D2

A

Cll

03

A

Cll

C3

B

a

s

.— 0“

(9
L07

L09

L07

LIM

61

L69

L

L@3

LE3

L67

61

L

L&3

‘i!

g

a o

0:

z

f’

i

#

15 ,%!

16

16

16

15

17

16

15

16

;:

Kc

,Km

,Km

,m

,W7

,m

ml

m

!%

1 TyfmOfObOrd.A#femfeu&oborddajlned as a ho jofnblgthe axtrandtk Of tba

S

TyfM

Of ~

J

TSW

of amle

effaot

On mdnhrn

Mt.

tT~ofll(tuwm

penk.wtiown Inthaskotohw

 

/.

L/B/C/D

h’om.-The

to

oIng clasblcatkma am gfvan bare for mnvmdent futnra rafemnce. to dmfga mblams.

OfafrfOnobamcter%k

JTurbrd8nm factor k Z04. 6Tham data bava bean amwtai

for Up affecL

a. c. (parent

a

i

O*

c kom

c/4)

g

<

c. p. at

CL

(m-

cent e)

L1B

f?)

20

(93

 

ad

L8

8

w

L7

8

013

L7

3

019

L6

8

)

2

 

022

H

2

 

.

ml

3

219

’23

25

.(W2

HI

‘4

m

23

%

)

L9

4

218

22

26

.

W2

L8

3

all

23

27

mamlha.

Wfngobar-

a@Jf6u

mnndwltips

km

.m

.mi’o

:%%

.mn .mm

.Cm3

. m%

.

.

m’s

~b

Tbld%a+F-

10.

10.

10.

10.71

Ian

m

@a

@a

lo.6a3

la@

E:

m. n

10.73

s

~.

am

8.24

8.2s

a26

a%

M

8.27

8.2a

a 26

a%

1

z

12

12

Iz

12

12

:

12

12

12

12

A detaflad df.wnmfonwfll ba pnMLtbadfn a kdarrapmt dmllng with the applkatfon