NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUnCS
ORIGINALLY ISSUED
Auewst 1942 a.s
Memorandum Report
AERODYNAMIC TESTS OF AN M- 31 BOMB
IN THE 8-FOOT HIGH-SPEED TUNNEL
By Donald D. Baals and Norman F. Sm1 th
Langley Memoria.l Aeronautical Laboratory
Langley Field, Va.
OPERT'f OF JET PROPULSJO ~ BORATDRY U \'
C IL l,. Jf< l'i l INSTITUT OF TECHNUlOGY
WASHINGTON
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 pre-
viously held under a security status but are now unclassified. Some of these reports were not tech-
nically edited. All have been reproduced without change in order to expedite general distribution.
L - 132
MEMORANDll·1 REPORT
for
Army Ajr Forces, Materiel Cormno.nd
AERODYKAMIC TES'l'S OF i'.N H- 31 BOMB
IN 'rEE 8 - POOT HrCH-SPEED TU1'T~L
By Donald D. Baals and Porman F . Snith
INTHODUCTIon
In connection with a study of tle bomb flir,ht path ,
the nateriel Cor.lPland of the Army AL1 Porces reques ted
t.he EACA to conduct aerod.yna.mic test:::; of a 300-pound M- 31
demolition bomb .
Force tests at angles of attack from - 15 0 to 30 0
were made up to n. Mach nu.'11ber of 0.725 , which corresponds
to a spEad of BIO feet per sscond at s~a level . TheDe
tes ts V' ere nade in the Hi\CA 8-foot high-spoed wind tmmel
at Langley ~emorial Acrolautical Laboratory .
SYl1BOLS
V free - strean velocity , feet per .:lecond
p free - strea'!J. densi t:r , sluGs per cubic foot
q froe - stream d~namic pre~sure , pounds per square
foot G pv )
2
a velocity of sound in a ' r , feet pe r econd
M r.lach nL1Jllber , V/a
D drag , pounds
L lift, pounds
M pitching moment measured about the point of support ,
inch- pou':1d.s
- 2 -
F mCLx5.lilu.m area of cros s se c tion of bomb , 0 . 707 square 1'0 0 t:;
L over - &ll length of bomb, 50 . 375 inches
a angle of attack of hor1b , <les:,:,ees
D
drag coaffici9nt,
qF
L
lift coeffi~iellt ,
qF
1~".,
pitching - noment cO Bffl cie~t ,
Cli?7.,
'nl,:) case of a 5CO - ?ounc. 1'1-3 1 demol ition bor:b with
al'.:u .lL1.1.JJi~ fin'" \'iuS sl.'ppl';"od by tho~'bteriel D1.vi,si')n for
the tests . The tomb was sU_,1)ort 8d or: t:'.e tunnel center
lino by a single vertical stre ~na i n8 strut of NACA sectIon
0009 - 6~, ( fIg . 1) . A s t£' EHimlL1.8 f airIng shie lded the
v e rtical strut to wIthin 11 i n c h e s of t~ e b~nb case . A
sido brace housed ,·,1 thLl a stJ:'0ac~lLr:.e fairlnl:; br'ac3:1 tho
ve~~i cal strut . Because a~ditional lateral support was
fo'Cud necessary duping the te::1ts, C'."O horizontdl guy wires
Wv~C attacbej at the po 'L;].t of S'L 1"port of th8 bont> . Tba
ve::'tical SUfport stl"ut , sid.) ')1'[.c0 , G.nd stays \' ere attached
to the oal£!.nc3 ring and w'-:)l"e i-").chlQCQ in the force
measurem8nts .
Th.:: anglo of attL,c k VJas v L"lriablo throug h fj,x0d inc I'e::me n t3
rotat ed. about its pO.'_nt of su ·::-, '::o:.- t, 'the c8ntor of gruvity
for the loaded condition .
3
TESTS
Li ft , drag, and pitching moments were measured at
angle.:: of attack from -150 to 30 0 u.p to a r:~ach number
)
, , These test~ were run with the tail vanes set
-I
at an angle of 45 0 to the horizontal (fig. 2) in order
to minimize the effect of the wake of the support strut
on the tail. One run V'!as made at t:le 5o angle of attack
wi th the tail rota ted L~5 a • Additional tests were made at
50 , 15 0 , and 30 0 angles of attack ~ith the tail removed .
Tare forces on the strut ere measured with the
bomb 3uyed in position (fi g . 3). Forces on the two
side stays were determined 1J~/ measnring the forces at
zero angle of attack with and without stays .
RESULTS A1D DISCUSSION
Figures 4, 5, and 6 show the drag , lift, and pitching-
moment coefficient o; of the comp lete bomb at ansles of attack
.0 a
from -l S to 30 through the speed range of the tests . It
will be noted that the maximum speed of the tunnel VIas
considerably reduc(~d at the hi["h anc l es of attack due to
the large increase in dra[ at this attitude . All of the
data presented have been corrected for tares . The
magnitude of the tare forces for a = 0a is also shown in
fieures 4, 5, and 6 to ei v e an indication of the probable
accuracy of tho bomb force data . The tare forces did not
change appreciably with angle of attack .
- L~ -
Figure 7 i s a cross plot of f i gure 6 show i ng the var i at io n
of pitching - ~oment c oefficient qi th angle of attack for var i ous
rviach nnmber0 . F i gures 8 , 9 , and 10 show the drE:.g , l i ft , a n d
pit8hing-morrent coeffic i enus of the bomb without ta i l and
the increments from the addition of the tal] . F i gure 1 1
is a ~)hotoc;raph of the bomb ta i l after struc tural failure .
Drag . - The drae; coeffici"3nt of the complete bomb f o!'
a range 0 positive and ne8at i ve ansles of attack i s shown
in figure L~ . The tare drat" for the mode::!.. suppo!'t is shown
to be approx i mate l y one - half of the minimUr:1 bomb drag .
Where corre spondin ) pos i t 1 ve and nego. 1.,1 ve angle s vrere run ,
the drag coeff i cients were approximately 0qual exc ept for
the 1 5 a an f31 es . At tr.e hiC1:l Bach nunbers the drag for the
negat:i.ve ane l e , 'lhere the tail is well vlithj.n the wake of
the support strut , is l ess than tl'l.e drng :'01" t:1.8 correspon d i ng
pos i ti ve an['; l e . I n free air '.vhpre no support s tru t in terfer -
ence is present , the drag for the negative angle would like l y
be the same as that for the positive an[lo .
J~ t l ow an gle s of n t tucl-r the critical 0peed of the bOPlb
was reached at a bach number of appl'oximatoly 0 .725 (fig . 5) ,
a v alue whlch is h i gher 'chan i s u s ually obtn i n 3d on stream-
l
line bodies of e qui va l ent fineness ratio . In view of t he
ve r y h i gh drag c oeffic i ent of the bomb at the sub - critica l
Mach l11..l.Inbors , it appeo.rs that the floV'! ove r the bomb has
5 -
separated . rEhis separation has r educed the local velocities
and therefore increased the critical speed .
Lift . - The lift coefficient remained essentially
c onstant at low Mach numbers (fig . 5) but increased
sli::;htly at the higher s!Jeedo . This increase in the
value 0":" the lift coefficient (;orl'esponds to the shift
in the 1 i'cching - mom::mt-coefficieni:. curve in magnitude and
direction (fig . 6).
Pitching moment . - An analysis of the pitching-moment
coefficient for a gi.ven angle of attack (fig . 6) shows a
decrease at the hibh Mach numbers through the angle range
from - 15 0 to 20 0 • This decrease is not considered a
c ompressibility effect but instead is believed to be an
interference effect of the strut wake on the bomb ta:i.l .
For the runs wi th the tail rel~lOved, the pi tching-l'1onent
coefficient remained essentially constant through the
Mach number range of the tests .
The moment decrease is most pronounced at the nega -
tive angles of attack whero the bomb tail is in the wake
of the supr,>ort strut and f.::tiring . The magnitude of the
pi tchinc - moment - c06ff'icient j.ncrements due to the addi -
tion of the tail (fig . 10) indicates that a change in load
0
on the tail cqui valen t to a l~ change in angle of flov!
would be suf.:'icient to account for th0 maximum momGnt
- 6 -
coefficient decrease at the high Mach numbers . The int e r-
ference offe c cs of the su>!,ort '" trut and fairing , and
the end flow out of the strut fairlng gap could account for
a momen t c_~an.3e of t~1i s magni tude . The tare forcos as
measured d id not include the in terference effects on the
flow over the body .
0
For t~e aneles of attack from 20 to 30° , the pitching -
moment coefficients remained essentially constm t with lRch
numb e r except for t~e 30 0 ansle where the tail definitely
deflected under the aerodynamic load en countered .
o
Tail fai l ure . - Durinc the 30 ~ln structural failure
of the tail occurred at a T1ach number of 0.575 (q = 395 l b / sq ft) .
From extrapolation of the tail lift and drag increment curves
(figs . 8 an~ 9), the r esultant normal load on the tail was
comput E::d to be about L~20 )ounds at the point of failure .
A reaximum tail load of 510 pounds was attained at a
Mach number of 0.675 (q = 50h Ib/sq ft) at an allE le of attack
The subsequent failure of the taiJ at a l.ower load
indicates that the tail was weakened durinG the 25 0 test .
Bending of tho tail at this angle is indicated by tho s li Cht
incraase in moment coufficient nartr th8 maximuJl1 load .
The n at ure of the tail failnrc can be observed fr'om
figure 10 . Two fins failed at the :,oint of attachment to
. ~
--~- ~-"~- - -- - --~---
- 7-
t he tail ring , one in shea~ throu~h the support ing web ,
and the other i~ shear at the riveted joint . The re -
l:lct.ininG two 'Nebs buck18G. b'lt did not fE'.il cor.:plctcly .
Langle? Fe:!i0rial Aeronautical La"jord i: ;ory,
Na tlono.l Ad vi or~r Caro'"ll t too l'or _-I.era,ltl.1lt ics ,
Lc...ngle y Fieid, Va ., l~.u,~1.:.st 25, 191.~2 .
L
•••••••
• •
"•• ••
• ••• •
.
• •••
•• •• ••
•• ,FLOATING BALANCE RING
•••••••
• •
I
I
I
I
TVNNEL WALL I
I
5TREAML/N£ FAIRING I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I
I
STReAMLINE 5 TRUT
NACA OOO!)-64
COVER PLATE
I/vDE X/Na PLATE
MAIN S{/PPORT PIN
AT e.G. OF80MB
T U'NNEL1..
N~110NAl ADVISORY
COMMlllEE FOR AERONAUTICS
Figure I.-Installotion de/ails of M-3/ bomb.
•• •
•• • ••
•••
••••
•• •••• ••
••• •••
••
••
••
•
••••••
• •
.0
E
o
.0
c....
o
•••• •
•••
• ••
·.,. .
••••
••••
•
•••• ••
••••••
.0
E
o
.0
OJ
1-4
al
E-<
•
•
••••
•••••
, ...
•• •
•••• • ru t£'
••••
•• ••
It. ••
•••••••
• •
:?.. "'••
ir:
4J
it
H dl"
r:
~1
m !j ·rtf ~! " Itti.
~ I'
1":J 1tl
'"
... .ltj
fu i lJ r~
t,
~
'~
,'t!"kif
tI:.,tr r: R
'tJ
fj'~
!~
I
Fr .d .'f
H: E ~ ~; , l• . tH $ !J= 'of
I~ ~, Ifi1 ii~ :fIf;!!
~ Iti: f I
~-: i¥+: ~ 'EP~ T. ~... '\.. tr~ ,'1:
;It Iff ~ di ,-,.,'j,
~t r.\ :!ik' ....
r·· ,.;l lli:ffildHm ::J Hi IN ':;,.. l I III
1!i .! ~ i;)of
J N; H.;: &
"", tf8
~~ ~ : ,!-l • ij! r' fl"J:! i;jj
..." :Cj'
'n ... . ~~ ~ I' " 'H·; '.'1:' f":' :;~ ill =' ~ j litl
.~
t~·- ~i". lll'j ;';.1; ':
.""' 1"'- ~
r;.,., ~:p.:::"j!
1-+-
.... .1'1; F IjJ
H ~
" !1:l#- ,r,: , . 'j
"'Pi
ftf ft
.
"il f" . ai Ii" ,:: .!, tr :• ..J .
or. '"
rJ:" P' 'I' ~
l-vrJi'iE """'
\c.
> .>1 :~}T:
.. :
~ . 1" ; .';'= :rtiif: .
" I.
, r, '~"; I "" "- ~"t foF "~1 C:-.
l' ~ ;;:,;-, ;~J1 ~"roy r~~.7 l:;::: ' ~;-';'
"
-' ,; ."', "t-T"'''r-' I~~I ''! I"di ''11 i :rtt
I~ ~ . ;i ~' j: jt tF r t ,; Ill'; ',r,
- ~
h
.,
"
.,to-
h
.. I'"
'v. ~:
it-- 'I :t:--
'~~ .
.,;
''",
I.tf;
'i,
,"t
.:¥,~:Jj Io'q:l#~
1~ .:;'~
I.e; '7( vr. <_ 14. il7. 'J;'" ';";;" .,. -Iii <:I'" k tJ~
':i,; ,. ...ii ~JJ' ;t""" j 1~
If. !itij
i" ", ?1 "og!t- f.,I..:)rt """ ~ IC,h."".!ct.,1r W m: m ~ th, If, ! ; ~
••• •• •
.... •
•• -
.... •
••
•••• •
' ..
•• ••••
••
••
•••••••
• •
_. •
•• ••
l..... . ·..
,
'
• •••
•
•• • •
....".•.
·...• .. •••
. .• ••
• •••
··•••••..
• .,
• •••••••
... ... .
-,.. ...
.
•••••••
• •
r'~->
I;:tj:;
lp-
,11'
...
i4
~.:.+
.1,
1''<
1h
':If f
.it;
~
It:'
'4 -- • -
~.. ,." tt
.'l. ::t!! 'g ~
~r;Tf "
." rp: ;fT.!
~ E" .
'!
iJ:fj
fl! :j:t:
t;
~
r t+l r- "\ '1t
R ;; '-.. til!",
.. rr
r\ I 'l! "+~,
~
-;iTl.±l.'
. \ ~ r< ., -. ~. .'" ....
,... .; IfflIltt
"
...
.#I "-1-: ,..,:, t:: r; H
r-mr:m : :
;;. ~!h;,tf: ~ I;:.r :' thi: I=' ~:i;
. ;I .
:: f4r: 'tr .f~'~ · H
, "- '+ if'tll E' l~ .. ~~ ~ 'C
~ [.=.. =.,P ' '::~ F ;:'',
., \" f'" '''f.f. ·FT:;.
1\1'-. 'c="', ~
~
~. ~
.. I~~ ...
.+!! iF'"
"iLdf
~~ ~~ ..: ti
..
. ;: kI· H~
"-
.it: ,..",, '* , :ffi: .•"l F.:
.a.
:R ~ l' c
;r<~ cp: it "", .::'
Itf:::i .•, .]I ,"'- -:¥l ~, 1:1 , ~ "j!J
" = -F ':;:::'!: :" . "" .. l -"
:-t I:$I ?"<. ;:;;, ;ffi"t'.tt ;
:if.' liiHf!:. :;;~~ .;
n ~. ~ . ~ ~ .,.. :::::;:i ,..... 1~
.j
-""fOo ..:: "f' I A~ .. . ~ ~ .~ .~
Figure 8. - Varia/fen 01' tail and bom/:l case dl7'.J1 with /'tx:h number.
•,•• ••
•••• ..
r+il ' ffH f'Ti1" IUm~,mHI
It!J:l:tti:l1tl:l w: hi, it ! I"
~~1
r,;t;
IJ:
•••• •
"-':'
• • '.q;tV tiW:
::::
I •• ••
. 0•• 1!.It
>4.
I iI!Im
•
•••••• ~
• • 1m
"
gj
hlf
,n ,ttl
}- ,
,{ Ig:: :
t i:F. 1 ~1 !:dli
ilii'l ?~ t;J ii'
fF:. 11 I~lf Ilf ~ '; Ill; '1-1 1 4~ ~i~ Fi2" fhC
I tl · . ·.; 1,8 fBi: It! ::.1 1;1," ,t lu' fH~ .~ ~~ I-j' . i~ hJ fl:loB
'~ r-;l. F"'IOJ '1 F ·-J,'iF 'i t;;;
IF 11· it ' !Hi i,.i ~ r l~ ' i;: 1.1 ',1 'HI A "rFI,-' ' ~ :" l 'C :1.; T!1
I' V· ·~ ctt 11Ti' 1';.1 '~
!I- 19 ' ." :c,' !t~ ,,", ,', :: / -: ;;~ , [#ji;1'
'· Ili I " 11"" 1; n1f1 1~ 1 " tnt: ~
· I..JE l ; . 1: ··.:Ib:t ";q I"; .:tt
I m=
!! ~Ji hi ~J
U!1:
':
-/
~~.
'l1
' 9 '
:.
~~ :l:'rf~
I'::;
. Ilf'i
I ~ '1. h
l:IJ
ttl'
it. :
1m
,1:
IT!! ii;~
IB
,
1 :'~; .. 10-;; 1",'
." I ' "''-'!?fi: . ';; ttr~"; 1mI nr.
~ Ii: , tl::l fIfu "1# ~, , .Ffii ~,~ l:if. I",
~ llTf+til ' ItI .. r.~ f': J:J ~;j r;, Iii' IF' !411f1i IH W '
Il,-' "1 r. I\, II,
, ~ ,
II Ill'
,t
~I ,Ii 1'1"£11' It:; i': 1rl ~~~ :~hll iii
"ttl 1:1 ',, ''f:' ' ,
1.11 1"" 51 E..l "' 1'-< ':! ~
"'I \1-, ~j I±: }:.r, ::i. '" ~:i. 1+1 1,1• ..::i
'r p.. rJt l1E I~ L' ~ 'li:'J ! r:
>r~ ~i! Iri ~ itt : ~t·b
- -
f!
