1960NASA Technical Reports Server (NASA)Open access

Investigation at Mach Numbers of 0.60 to 3.50 of Blended Wing-Body Combinations with Cambered and Twisted Wings with Diamond, Delta and Arrow Plan Forms

George H Holdaway, J. A. Mellenthin

Open full text 0 citations

Abstract

This investigation is a continuation of the experimental and theoretical evaluation of blended wing-body combinations. The basic diamond, delta, and arrow plan forms which had an aspect ratio of 2 with leading-edge sweeps of 45.00 deg., 59.04 deg., and 70.82 deg. and trailing edge of -45.00 deg., -18.43 deg., and 41.19 deg., respectively, are used herein as standards for evaluating the effects of camber and warp. The wing thickness distributions were computed by varying the section shape along with the body radii (blending process) to match the prescribed area distribution and wing plan form. The wing camber and warp were computed to try to obtain nearly elliptical spanwise and chordwise load distributions for each plan form and thus to obtain low drag due to lift for a range of Mach numbers for which the velocities normal to the wing leading edge are subsonic. Elliptical chordwise load distributions were not possible for the plan forms and design conditions selected, so these distributions were somewhat different for each plan form. The models were tested with transition fixed at Mach numbers from 0.60 to 3.50 and at Reynolds numbers, based on the mean aerodynamic chord of the wing, of roughly 4,000,000 to 9,000,000. At speeds where the velocities normal to the wing leading edges were supersonic, an increase in the experimental wave-drag coefficients due to camber and twist was evident, but this penalty decreased with increased sweep. Thus the minimum wave-drag coefficients for the cambered arrow model were almost identical with the zero-lift wave- drag coefficients for the uncambered arrow model at all test Mach numbers.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This investigation is a continuation of the experimental and theoretical evaluation of blended wing-body combinations. The basic diamond, delta, and arrow plan forms which had an aspect ratio of 2 with leading-edge sweeps of 45.00 deg., 59.04 deg., and 70.82 deg. and trailing edge of -45.00 deg., -18.43 deg., and 41.19 deg., respectively, are used herein as standards for evaluating the effects of camber and warp. The wing thickness distributions were computed by varying the section shape along with the body radii (blending process) to match the prescribed area distribution and wing plan form. The wing camber and warp were computed to try to obtain nearly elliptical spanwise and chordwise load distributions for each plan form and thus to obtain low drag due to lift for a range of Mach numbers for which the velocities normal to the wing leading edge are subsonic. Elliptical chordwise load distributions were not possible for the plan forms and design conditions selected, so these distributions were somewhat different for each plan form. The models were tested with transition fixed at Mach numbers from 0.60 to 3.50 and at Reynolds numbers, based on the mean aerodynamic chord of the wing, of roughly 4,000,000 to 9,000,000. At speeds where the velocities normal to the wing leading edges were supersonic, an increase in the experimental wave-drag coefficients due to camber and twist was evident, but this penalty decreased with increased sweep. Thus the minimum wave-drag coefficients for the cambered arrow model were almost identical with the zero-lift wave- drag coefficients for the uncambered arrow model at all test Mach numbers.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

This investigation is a continuation of the experimental and theoretical evaluation of blended wing-body combinations. The basic diamond, delta, and arrow plan forms which had an aspect ratio of 2 with leading-edge sweeps of 45.00 deg., 59.04 deg., and 70.82 deg. and trailing edge of -45.00 deg., -18.43 deg., and 41.19 deg., respectively, are used herein as standards for evaluating the effects of camber and warp. The wing thickness distributions were computed by varying the section shape along with the body radii (blending process) to match the prescribed area distribution and wing plan form. The wing camber and warp were computed to try to obtain nearly elliptical spanwise and chordwise load distributions for each plan form and thus to obtain low drag due to lift for a range of Mach numbers for which the velocities normal to the wing leading edge are subsonic. Elliptical chordwise load distributions were not possible for the plan forms and design conditions selected, so these distributions were somewhat different for each plan form. The models were tested with transition fixed at Mach numbers from 0.60 to 3.50 and at Reynolds numbers, based on the mean aerodynamic chord of the wing, of roughly 4,000,000 to 9,000,000. At speeds where the velocities normal to the wing leading edges were supersonic, an increase in the experimental wave-drag coefficients due to camber and twist was evident, but this penalty decreased with increased sweep. Thus the minimum wave-drag coefficients for the cambered arrow model were almost identical with the zero-lift wave- drag coefficients for the uncambered arrow model at all test Mach numbers.

Key concepts: Camber (aerodynamics), Wing, Mach number, Lift-to-drag ratio, Delta wing, Chord (peer-to-peer), Airfoil, Drag

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Investigation at Mach Numbers of 0.60 to 3.50 of Blended Wing-Body Combinations with Cambered and Twisted Wings with Diamond, Delta and Arrow Plan Forms — Research Paper | ScholarLens