General Disclaimer One or more of the Following Statements may affect this Document

This document has been reproduced from the best copy furnished by the organizational source. It is being released in the interest of making available as much information as possible.

This document may contain data, which exceeds the sheet parameters. It was furnished in this condition by the organizational source and is the best copy available.

This document may contain tone-on-tone or color graphs, charts and/or pictures, which have been reproduced in black and white.

This document is paginated as submitted by the original source.

Portions of this document are not fully legible due to the historical nature of some of the material. However, it is the best reproduction available from the original submission.

Produced by the NASA Center for Aerospace Information (CASI)

"A TECHNICAL TRANSLATION

NASA TT F-17,201

PRESSURE: LISTRIBUTION OVER SYMMETRIC LIT I:G PROFILES FOR TRANSONIC FLOW
I

J. C. Rotta

(NASA-TT-F-17201)

PRESSURE DISTRIBUTION

N75-31194 Unclas

OVER SYMMETRIC W'NG PROFILES FOR TRANSONIC

FLOW (Scientific Translation Service) 23 p CSC L 01A HC $ 3.50

G3/02 01968

Translation of "Druckverteilung an symmetrisehPn Flugelprofil p :, be transsonischer Strotn,ung", _ .. Symposium Transsonicum (Transonic Symposium)(Sponsored by the International Union of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics, Aachen, Vilest Germany, September 3-7, 1962) Edited by K. Oswatitsch, Berlin, Springer Verlag, 1964, P p . 137-151.

RE^^`^FD
kjj

-^

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS ARID SPACE ADMINIS,R, TIdN ^I

f OOR

WASHINGTON, D. C. 20546

AUGUST

P4 GF
1

$IA14DAWD T11t.( PA4E 1. i : re.1 No.

1. Gevernrnent Atteseun No.

Rouprenr'o Ce+11e9 11e 3.

140per1 Uete

NASA T'r F-17,201

4. 7.110 en/ SV6611e

_
_^ AUfCtll;L W6
6. Porler ,no 0roon,le1.on Ceee

PRESSURE` DISTRIBUTION OVER SYPL`4FTRIC WING

PROFILES FOR TRANSONIC FLOW

t
7, Aulhor(s) Perlerre,no 0,oen,sehen Reeer# 140.
10. Werir unit Me.

J. C. Rotta
i

--

---

9. Pe01ern,ln9 Or9enrselron Nome end Ao'-..e

11. Connect or Orono No. NASw-2701_ 13. Typo el Rrperr and Per,o1 Covered

SCITRAti Dvx 5456 Sz=-Z rbsr:.3.,_C.^1__^^^1uH I 12. S

nq A en y p ia-e onJ Add,**%

Translation
`

ICiona^ l^eronautics and Sparc Administration z0546 Waahington, D.C.

^14, Spensering Agency Ce4e

15.

Suppiemonto r y Notes

Translation of "nruckverteilung an symmetrischen F1ugelprofilen bei transsonischer Stromung", In: Symposium Transsonic_um (Transonic Symposium)"(Sponsored by the International Union of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics, Aachen, West Germany, September 3-7, 1962) Edited by K. Oswatitsch, Berlin, Springer Verlag, 1.964, , gy p. 137-151.
16. Abst,ect

A report is given on theoretical and experimental, work done on pressure distributions over symmetrical profiles for ransonic flow at the Aerodynamic '.test Facility in Germany.

17. Key word. (Se1eCted by Author(t))

19. Distrrbulron $ty

Unclassifi
f

19. Secioly CO366.4. (of Ohio report)

10. Security Cletsil. (e( 1brs poye)

11 No. of p e90e

11.

P'. C*

Unclassified

Unclassified

23

ii
^'..4rw-wry'swwe..wM1t-+.w.1e/+M... .^..wr+w_..+'^"^T.. ..... .-^--..^ .^^._..

..

_.._..^.... ..w_.___.-....._...-...... . ._. ...-.^ ++._.,. ...^.... ..._

r-

PRESSURE DISTRIBUTION OVER SYMMETRIC WING PROFILES FOR TRANSONIC FLOW

i

J. C. Rotta* 1. INTRODUCTION

/ 137**

At the Aerodynamic Test Facility in Gottingen (AVA) over the last few years we have done theoretical and experimental work on the pressure distributions over symmetrical profiles for transonic flow and we will now report these briefly. Most of
4

the lecture will be a discussion of the theory. 2. NOTATIONS

X, z, Y, n ' t C) d = d/Z
U

Coordinates, x and ^, in flow direction Transformed coordinates Wing chord Coordinate of profile contour Thickness ratio d = greater thickness of profile. incident velocity of flow Perturbation potential Perturbation velocity in x-direction
Density of urdiscurbed flow

U =

0x

Local static pressure

+eroayriamic Test Facility, Gottingen, Germany Numbers in margin ir.-'icate pagination in original foreign text.

,I

rl-

P"'
W

Static pressure of undisturbed flow

Resistance

Too

Temperature of undisturbed flow

r

Local Mach number

t 1

Incident Mach number Adiabatic exponent

ti

c Reduced pressu)^e coefficient,Equation (3.1) Reduced Mach number, Equation (4.1)

ma,
X * X*

Characteristic coordinate, defined by condition Equations (5.9), (5.12) empirical fac,;or, Equation (5.10) Entropy per unit mass Dimensionless distance of largest profile thickness from leading; edge

Y s x d /Z

(x/ r,) s Dimensionless distance of position of compression shock from leading edge.

/138

i .

EXPERIifENTAL Il'NESTIGATIGNS The experiments were made at the high velocity wind tunnel,

::i.ich

operates according to the vacuum storage principle and corners

i_as a :'ree jet test section with a cross section of 750 x 750 mm2 i^. A doubly symmetric c_.rcular ire profile with
t ,ho

.-:as used as a wing cross section with a thickness ratio of = 0.06. The rectang.ilar wing with a chord of Z. = x'00 m:

was imr.(^rsed ent lroly into ti-,d free J r.t ana was supported outside
of the -et. The investigations extended in the flow region between the critical Mach numbers and the supersonic Mach numbers up to

R1^'1N-9L PAGE LY
;i{

.^

In Figure 1 we give a comparison of the pressure distributions and the experimental results of Knechtel

[5]

for,

various angles of attack. The latter measurements were per-

formed at the NASA Ames Research Center in a wind tunnel with a closed test section, but with a perforated upper and lower wall with a corresponding profile. The results were recalculated

J J
-.:T.
:r....^-r.-:n.,,

according; to the transsonic similarity rules to the reduced pressure coefficients:

(3.1) Figure 1. Reduced pressure coefficient according to experi- Except for systematic differences ments of AVA [2] and NASA [5] 0 ,. AVA, Reynolds Number NASA,

in the ;;, values near the trail-

ing edge at larger Mach numbers and in the backward displacement of the shock front, the agreement /138

between the two measurement series is good. Considering the pressure taps which have to be applied very close to the trailing edge, certain deviations were tolerated when the model was built in the shop. After accurate measurements, it was found that the average cross section was consistently 0.2 to 0.3 mm thicker than planned. The effects of this deviation are shown in Figure 2, which snows the comparison with theoretical Investigations. According to the approximate method of Spreiter and Alksne [6], we calculated the pressure distribution for the symmetric circular arc profile at M. = 1. In addition, for ' PAGI,; IS OF PUUP 4'liAi j
UFt* INAV

^; ^^

i(

Figure 2. Comparison of calculated and measured pressure distributions in the AVA free. ,jet at M . ti 1 and in the blockedchannel [8] p y,,: = measurement cabin pressure (tip.) measurements: --0 AVA free ,jet - - o 0 1 - - blocked channel NASA. I Calculations: d = 0.0615; ---Circular arc profile (Spreiter/ Alksne); AVA model (Prandtl-Meyer)

,:is in the local supersonic region at x/Z = 0.7, we used the calculation-according to the simple wave theory (Prandtl-Meyer flow), which is based on the true contour of the model. Both curves show differences near the trailing; edge,which t ''tatively and quantitatively demonstrate the differences at the hasher Mach numbers between the measurements at the AVA and at NASA. The reason for the differences in Figure 1, therefore, is probably caused by the differences in the profile contours. The finite dimensions of the wind tunnel have an effect en the flow in the vicinity of the model, so that the measured pressures do not necessarily correspond to those in free flow. According to the theoretical treatment of Marschner [73 for the symmetric doublo edged profile in the free ,jet at X. ^ 1, the expected influence is small. A quantitative est1mate

ORIGMAL PAGE I ')F Poolt QUALn-4

Is possible for the close(,

ked wind tunnel becau3e of their

measurement - by Spreiter and ..ollaborators profile, .ti 0 , 4W..

[8]

for a circular arc

These measurements are shown in Figure 2 as

well. In agreement with the calculation of Marcchner, we find pressures which are too small In the free Jet, and they are too large in the blocked channel*. The pressure distributic' or free incident flow will lit between both curves, and clos^. , to the curve for the blocked channel, because the ratio of the height h of the tunnel to the depth Z of the model for the blocked tunnel will be greater (h/l = 5.83) than for our free Jet (n/1 a 3.75). From this comparison one can derive that the measurement results for transonic flow in the free Jet channel of the AVA will well reproduce the condi'-ionn for free incident flow. Further details about this investigation are contained in an extensive report [2]. PRESSURE DISTRIBUTION OSCILLATIONS The theoretical investigations which are restricted to zero lift flow, assume that for experiments phenomena are found, which cannot be explained solely using frictionless flow theory. Some o: these phenomena are not ,yet well understood. Therefore, we combined the theoretical approximate solutions with empirical facts. { According; to the already published method C31, we calculated the pressure distributions for a number of symmetric wing pro-

/140

I.

files with different thickness backward displacement

These are the same profiles which were investigated by ONERA [9] ain experiments and for which Spreiter, Alksne and Hyett [10]

Calculation differences in the free Jet are 14% greater than

in the blocked channel with the same dimensior s for the double
wedge profile.
ORIGINAL' PAGE M OF POOR QUA =,

^.
z

f
I 0
riar

+ --

/140

`^;

i1'

ss

^ ' J

r.l

. .

Figure 3. Reduced pressure coefficient according to experiments of NASA 151 and calculation with reduced pressure increase in the shock or the circular arc profile ,,.,. Thickness ratio d = 0.06.

--00
'0

Topside ) Experiment Bottom side Calculation according to

[4]

made calculations of pressure distributions. First in Figure 3 we present a few of the calculated pressure
t

distributions using the reduced pressure coefficient according to Equation (3.1) for various values of the Mach number parameter
/141

I/
,,.

( 4.1)

This iE compared with the already mentioned experimental values

1 1

of Knachtel 151. Also Figure 4 gives a selection of the results from report [4], the calculated Mach number distributions 0RTG't1AV FA l OF ^'^R QU^^

6
1

1^

Via.

^L

re-;

/141 ..'.. ..(^^

4,'

....^ ..
^1

:d

Wes.: '1 :-rri^l ,.. CA

Fi f ure 4. Distribution of local Mach number according; to experiments of ONERA [9] and calculations with reduced pressure increase in the shock. Thickness backward displacement .,.r. Thicknes, ratio d = 0.08. 1 0 Experiments: ---Calculation according to [4].

and the corresponding experimental values according to

[9]

for

the profile with

0,1 .

5.

DISCUSSION OF THE THEORY Since the pressure distributions ahead of and behind the

shock must be calculated separately and then must be joined together in order to satisfy certain conditions at the shock, it is natural to consider the individual elements and their agreement with experimental results separately. Therefore, we will now investigate the theoretical foundations of the calculation i t method used and will evaluate them again.
i

5.1. Pressure distribution upsteam of the Shock

For the pressure distribu , an at v_ : 1 , Spreiter and collaborators gave an approximate method for solving; the nonlinear potential equation, which we have slightly modified and uoed to determine the pressure distribution ahead of the compression shock. We will give a new derivation of the Spreiter theory, which will demonstrate the deviations between the results of this theory and experimento, and point out a method of ir.provement .

/142
The potential equation for transonic flows r:!th weak per-

turbations

i-jere for K we usually use

..r

,.11

(5.2)

can be transformed into a parabolic differential equation by means of the coordinate transformation
n K (5.3)

r, Equation (5.1)

'1,

and

q,.

are partial derivatives for constant

Z. whereas in the new equation .r, is required for constant y. After dividing by 1^ V-j U and performing the transformation, Equation (5.1) becomes

const.
1

ti'

r_onst.

Th'_s form can be used in the region in which q^

solved using the Green's theorem in the well-known manner. {

This

aifforentiul equation id of thr heat conduction type and can be If the coordinate origin is placed at the wing's leading edge,

8
C

ano if we impose the condition .41 in the region i, . - t . , assumed to be true there, than
the integration moat tse extended

over the r,-[ ,,Ion ABCDEFOA (Figure 5) if one wishes to calculate the
v r'1
f

vhluc of ^ at the point x,y. For a symmetric profile whose chord cuincides with the x-axis,

i ,

one must satisfy the following boundary condition at the surface rr, y
^ .

d.,,!. ^K
91, (5.5)

Figure

5. Integration region.

`q),

and one must assume that the value ,,(n,,^^ is formally given along the path DE. This latter function in reality is unknown. Therefore the integration of (C.^+) gives the following for the velocity u(x)- profile contour
M ,
Vp

at the
/14-3

Costs t.

qf i n , 101 ) ,1,, u
K d+

(5.6)

* and q"(r, then is integrated again over x. If for simplicity we set

This equation is squared, multiplied by

Along the x-axj s we have . Y

const . - (r,'. - const `

const .

N iv;. a const .

g
ORIGINAL PAGE IS ' F POOR (QUALITY

N,
r

I,
'

n !^

A0

fj ./
1)

.
u

^ uMl

ry ! )

then we find
r

La,

lh

A.

+t

900 ^1
(5.8)

"

The point x = x* 1.s characterized by the fact that the intej;rand on the r.Lght and left side becomes zero simultaneously,. that is. by

Ir, ^ r

'

.Ir^__,1^rr,) ^:

+r

for

(5.9)

The Equation (5.8) is still exact in the sense of the initial equation 5.1. One obtains the Spreiter result if we set

g = q, , ,

const .

and

it = ^

From this we can see that there are two reasons for deviations of the Spreiter approximation from the exact solution: 1. The it could probabl y be covered with with x; variation of t a reasonable amount of computation effort, by taking a first i approximation for it from the Spreiter solution and therefore according to (5.8) a second approximation would be calculated, etc. s 2. The influence of the subsonic range upstream of the proile which is expressed by n, which is also ignored in other apprcxi:ration methods. However, it does not seem to be a simple matter to consider it, out it seems to be one of the important :sources of the discrepancies observed, the more M. deviates from the value of 1 on the downside.

/lu4

10 ORIGINAL' PAGE [a OF POOR QUM.ri'Y

/144

rirur` 6. Depenaence of reduced pressure coefficient C'n for x/Z - 0.5 (ahea6 of shock) on Mach numerical parameter m m for circular are profile, thickness ratio d a 0.06. NACA y according to AVA [4]; ---( y = 1; Calc++' n tions: TN 4148 (107 Prandtl-Clauert Rule. A -- AVA [2]; Experiment - . iesults: --0--- NASA [5]; - - o - ONERA [9] The calculations were based on the relationship
^l^ Ill

(5-10) ,rich Deviates froc, Spreiter's formula, and the factor y was introduced to consider the perturbation influence from the subsonic range. A linear variation of y with the transeonic Mach numerical parameter ma, was assumed, Equation (4.1), so that for M -1 1. The pressure distribution at the critical Mach

numoer extends known computation results. As an illustration, Figure

gives the reducea pressure coefficient for the circular -ji

are profile for lation for

as a function of m a, compared with

experimental results. Tor completeness, we also show the calcu-

1. the ,.alculation ro5-alts of Spreiter and

co-workers [10] and tho solution uning the Pranatl-Glauert rule. in the vicinity of m. -0, th0 change in '^, is quite well approximated by the line f- 1. On the left side of the diagram /14

11

the experimental and computation results converge to the Prandtl-Glau ,--rt rule. The experimental results have differences which in part are larger than the deviations among the individual calculations. The suggested calculation fits here very well. 5.2. Pressure distribution downstream of the shock The same ideas which wc. re used to formulate Equation (5.8) can also be used for negative values o" and one then obtains solutions for which the flow tra p:;forms continuously from the supersonic velocity to tha sutsonic velocity. Mathematically, the two solutions are equivalent; if one wants to use the solution with negative
j

to determine the pressure distribution in the

sabsonic range behind the shock, one- must consider the fact that the perturbation velocities behind the wing do not decay to zero because of the finite form -rag, and the flow is no longer irro*ational. One will attempt to consider these influences by means of an additional constant c, so that , , ne obtains the following for the perturbation, velocity at the surface

`^^

3r,;

j.

d I dr' '

d,, d; (M _ r' l tt

d.r,

(5.11 )

and for ^, ^

fdzeld .,, d

I I -- r

(5.12)

Ii no further information about c is given, one at the same time has a free parameter with which it is possible to adjust the pressur` distribution with the conditions at the shock. The experimental pressure distribution behind the shock is s quite well approximated by the Prandtl-Gl.auert rule in many cases, which establishes the pressure distribution for pure subsonic flow. This po aibility is used in the method suggested by Sinnot [111.
i 12

Both approximations aro questionable from the theoretical point of view and can only be Justified under the assumption that the :shape of the pressure distribution is primarily determined by the geornetry of the rear part of the profile. The approximation, based on the subsonic solution is not very useful, when the shock approaches very closaly to the trailing edge. Therefore, in the present calculations, we
us,e

the distribution according to

Equation (5.11), which was found to be useful compared with experimental values; this is especially true when a relatively large part of the profile is behind the shock front (Figure 4).

/146

5.

3.

Flow in ti, vic'r,.Ity of the shock

The prenSure distribution at the surface in the vicinity of

f

the compression shock is controlled by the interaction of the shock and the boundary layer. The typical form o:' the shock is shown in Figure 7. The pressure increase of the shock produces a stron,; thickening and often separation of the boundary layer, so that the streamlines at the edge of the boundary layer are deflected and a forked shock is produced. Even though interesting expertmental investi,.ations about this structure of the flow have been made, for example, [121, the calculations are still missing. The following simple model can be used: Behind an oblique shock, the flow " s eparates and makes the angle c with the surface. A secondary shock perpendicular to the streamlines brings the flow to subsonic velocity. When the. Mach number ahead of the shock and the pressure increase

p, - 1, of the front shock are assumed to be given, then the pressure distribution .t /,, l,, -- p, of the secondary shock is speciI ,,.

fie c.

'igure 8 shows the pressure increase of the secondary

1p, ; Jp, assuming

shock i J,, :ind the ontirc hreouure increase .I^, o

the transsonic approximation compared with the pressure increase I 1 ., of the normal smock. If the front shock is very weak, they,
')p POUR QUA

} I{IGIN I AL PAGE IS

13

the secondary shock h43 the :;ame intensity as the normal Vhock. AS , J ,,
ip 1i,,

increases,
ti,., we have

1pi /oji,. and

become Smaller and at

I Normal Khc,rk
V(I t( x

/147
For

Ir,,

even stronger front shocks no , layer Separation

bubble

secondary shocks are formed and

Boundnr y layer

1,Secondnry ichock

for .1^^,'.'1^,,

1 the front shod

finally becomes the normal shock. Therefore the pressure increase for flow separation is always smaller than for the normal shock; in the extreme case it is one-half as large. Ti,is agrees with experimental observations. In audition to the pressure ratios, Figure 8 also shows the deflection angle E, reduced with the transsonic similarity rules,

Figure 7. Compression shock at a fixed wall.

:."

shock ^ i `^ .shack N^, v "' ^;9 v

IlnU1^lP

Simple

aft

t Ali __ I)-[$ ^ .tr

\. y ^ AAN ^ U 61

r(5.33)

(M = Mach number ahead of the

shock) as well as the ratio of

41 I's 1J

the entropy increase compared

with a normal shock 1s t..,
Ap o - P, -I'

r >r

"

drk - rs -r,
J;71 .. re - a
Normal shock ;;;,_^,,

The deflec ion angle has a

maximum at
.1p, , i ,, :, :1 . ?or

r,
04

the

:'figure 8.

product of the temperature' % and the of the undisturbed flo::

Compression shock wi.th entropy inerca3e for a per-penflow separation at the wall. dicular shock we have the , following relationship for transsonic approximation
1 i^ ORIGINAL PAGE I OF Pc^uP r)T TA

i 1

^'..^ A ^

-( itf -

1) ,^

(5.14)

Since the entropy increase is proportional to the third. power of the pressure jump in the shock, the division into several partial shocks results in a substantial reduction. The entropy Increase according to Figure 8 has a minimum at' 11 ' I,., 0,3 and only amounts to 7% of the value for the nor,na1 shock. The mentioned pressure distribution calculations were perfo-med for the limiting cases of complete pressure increase of the perpenUicula.r shock and for a pressure increase reduced to one-half, The latter case, based on the results of Figures 3 and 4, is closer to reality and therefore is more important from a practical point of view than the calculation for the full
r

! k 1

pressure increase. The reduction of the entropy increase was

3

not considered. This corresponds to the idealized assumption that the bifurcation is only restricted to a relatively small region near the body, which is not true in reality. 5.4,- Backward deflection of the shock The backward deflection of the compression shock is deuermined from the requirement that the air resistance W calculated from the pressure distrihution :!quals the resistance W3 which J results from the entropy change caused by the compression shocks.
According, to Osivatitsch

[14] we have

the following for this

resistance

I1'^

P.

T j .1.. ^. da

(5.15)

shock
i a

15

F,

if one only considers the entropy changes caused by shock., and when the shocks a-e assumed to be normal ones. The Idea of using the fact thac the resistances W by Betz [13]. are equal for-

/ 141

r 1.

determining the position of the shock was first formula+.r-&- No practical applicationo have become known.

Qualitative,,y, first one can conclude from the 3etz :, esistanco condition for very thin profiles that the lie at the trailing; edge for incident Mach numbers of
S hock

can only

11 . .* I If, in fact, the shock is located at the trailing edge for

;i.

i and then if one uses somewhat smaller incident velocities,

then the Mach number distribution at the surface and therefore W remain unchanged, if the shock continues to lie at the 41 trailing edge. Because of the increased pressure at infinity, the integral of the entropy changes decreases. Therefore, one

.could expect that the increased pressure of the ,surroundings

would push the shock forward, until equilibrium W S = W' again, prevails. It is true that the conditions over a profile with a Finite thickness with a boundary layer are very complex, cut-the experimental results point to a continuous migration of the shock with Mach number, so that the shock reaches the trailing edge close to MCO = 1. This can be seen from Figure 9 which shows the ,)ressure at the trailing edge of a circular arc profile with o 0.04 according to a measurement of NPL 115J and the pressure at x, 1 71 = 0 .995 of a profiles investigated at the AVA, as a function of M,, , . The Mach number at which the shock is located at the measurement point is characterized by the greatest curvature of the curve. f f

In order to exploit the resistance condition for calculating the pressure distribution, it is necoso ry to have guan.titative fnformat4on on t:ho volocity field ,unt ahead of the shock. If the velocity distribution u(x,0) at the surface is known, it is
O IV-4L p^,GF^ Poo l, ^U^L11

js

f
AVA

^,
Shock at meas urement Point
1,/r

^-

I;'

1
.P iOol

I
i

AY;,

/^

^1 (i

Bi

N e w--

Figure 9. Pressure over and near the trailing edge o . f the circular arc profile according to experiments of hPL [15],ar.d
AVA [2]

/ 149 possible to determine the velocity field with an arbitrary accuracy, it is only a question of calculation effort. The first derivative of the velocity at the surface follows from the condition of irrotationality of the flow
(.5.16) by differentiating the potential Equation (5,1) with respect to x ana z several times, higher derivatives can be calculated so that u(x,z) can be expanded into a Taylor series with respect to I. ^n addition, certain integrals of the potential equation.can be used; Gullstrand [16] has pointed to this. The calculations made so far are based on the relationship of Oswatitsch [17]

M^r1''r

(5.17)

where the quantity a is assumed to be independent of x and Mw or each profile and it is specified in such a way that the Betz condition is satisfied when the shock lies at the.trailing edge for M,, = 1. This is about the simplest assumption . one can make. Fa.1 ;ure 10 shows the distances ;r'! i . of the shock from `,he leading edge calculated in this way for the two limiting; cases of pressure increase in the shock. We also showed the calculation results of Spreiter and co-workers [10], for which the shock reaches the trailing edge already for
M0 < 1.

Po(^ p9 QU 6,

17

rAd

Since in a real flow there is no exact defined position of

1

a shock, in the following we

i
R

will define the position in the region ^^,,^, where the local Mach number reaches the value f

^^,.,., t r

(5-18)

- a

4_...

tilt;, --

ro

The shock positions determined in this way were plotted in Figure 11 for several measurement series for the circular arc. profile as a function of vim . according to In addition the calculated positions

/150

?igure 10. Backwards displacewent (x/Z) s of compression shock for profiles of various thickness backward displacement as a function of Mach numerical parameter m.: ---- Complete pressure increase in the shock [4]. Reduced pressure increase in shock [4] According to NACA 41+8 [10].

[4]

and Spreiter The measurements

[10] are shown.

made by Malavard [9] and the results of Knechtel

[5]

show

very different shock positions. The curves drawn through the measurement points, however, run approximately parallel and qualitatively agree with our

calculated curve

(reduced pressure increase in the shock);

one

could not ask for more because of the arbitrary definition of The fact that the reasonsfer the different shock positions of the individual measurement series are not . the shock position. accessible to the theory seems to be an important gap. Apparently the thickness of the cioundary layer influences the position of the shock in a very sensitive way. The measurements of the AVA have quite a different vari,ation than the other experiments. Because of the increased Reynolds
t

18
i

Ifs

as

, ! .

^ ,^-

..

i
t

^'Theory
AVA

.
Theory accord. to

Spreiter [10) -

.Z9 661 QFt JV 4,. : 1

ar'. 4A .4v

Figure 11. Position of compression shock over circular arc profile, thickness rati 6 = 0.06. Experimental points: AVA [2]: x ONERA [91
.1 Smooth

0 Trip fence 0.2 mrr, 0 Trip fence 1.5 mm

With roughness)

) NASA 153
r

number, one would expect somewhat greater backward deflections, but the main reason for the differences is probably the different profile shapes. Theoretically one should explain that the curvature of the surface at the rear part of the profile Is very important for the migration of the shock near M^ =1. 5. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION In the first part we discussed pressure distribution measure ments for flows close to the speed of sound in the free ,jet wind
a

tunnel of the AVA. We found that the results come very close to those in free flow.

In the second part we discussed a calculation metnod for

a

the pressure distribution for two-dimensional flow. It-is important that the pressure distribution ahead and behind the shock are determined independently and the position of the shock is determined by satisfying two physical conditions, that is, the pressure change over the shock and the Betz resistance

1 t
r

19

condition.

These principles are a..sumed to be useful, because

the approximate calculation of the pressure distribution ahead of the shock is possible, at least for certain profile shapes. In this way, in principle, it is possible to determine the velocity field ahead of the shock which J.s required to apply,the Betz rrsistancu condition. Also then the pressure distribution behind

the snock can be estimated.

The method in its present form should be improved. Improvements are especially possible in determinitig the velocity field ahead of the shock. The effect on the entropy change caused by the bifurcation of the shock is not yet capable of quantitatiVe analysis. According; to my opinion, this is one of the greatest regions of uncertainty when calculating transsonic flows. If it becomes possible to calculate the development of the shock with the influence of a local boundary layer, then it would become possible to implement' the method using these results.
F

REFERENCES Z. Flugwiss, Vol. 7, 1959,

w
c

1.

Ludwieg, H. and Th. H,)ttner.

pp. 2 9 4 - 299 2. 3.
4. Rotta, J.C. AVA - FB 62 - 01, 1962, pp. 102 - 109.

1 - 36.

Rotta, J.C. Jb. WGL, 1959, PP . Rotta, J.C. AVA - FB 61 - 02, Knechtel, E.D. NASA TN D-15,

1961, pp. 1 - 102.

1959. NACA Rep. Vol.

5. 6.
7. 8. 9.

Spreiter, J.R. and A.Y. Alksne.

1359, :958.

Marschner, 3.n1. J. Aero. Sci, Vol. 23, 1956, pp: 368-376. Spreiter, J.R., D.W. Smith and B.J. Hyett. 14ASA.TR B-73, 1960. Malavard, L. Jb. WGL, 1953, pp. 96 - iO3.
1

2 G

ahIGINA L

'p

PAVE

IS

PO ()R QUAI.1T'r

 `", - _.'. iY^

1 _ _-_

i0.

Spreiter, J.R., A.Y. Alane and B.J. Hyett. NACA T,i 4148, 1958.

11.
12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17.

Sinnott, C.S. J. A,-ro/Space Sci., Vol. 27, 1960 9 pp. 767 778. Seddon, J. RAE TM No. Acro, Vol. 667, 1960. Betz, A. Lecture at the German Academy for Aerodynamic Research. 1943. AVA Region, Vol. 43 A 31, 1943. Oswatitsch, K. Nachr. AKad. Wiss. Gottingen, Math. Phys. il., 1945, pp. 88 - 90/ Henshall, B.D. and R.F. Cash. ARC R & M 8180, 1961. Gullstrand, T.R. KTH - AERO TN 24 1952. Oswatitsch, K. Acta Physica Austriaca, Vol. 4,.19509 pp. 228 - 271.

ORIGINAL PAGE IS AF jeWlt QUALITY