Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
AIAA-2000-2392
Review
of Skin Friction
Measurements
Fluids 2000
19-22 June 2000 / Denver, CO
For permission
to copy or republish,
1801 Alexander
contact
the American
VA 20191
Institute
of Aeronautics
and Astronautics
M. Hall*
Aerodynamics
Branch
John B. Anders"
Flow Physics
and Control
Branch
ABSTRACT
This
from
paper
early
reviews
correlations
to measurements
The
NASA
(NTF)
flat
skin
Langley
with
friction
of drag on plates
in the cryogenic
National
in late 1996.
gradient
plate
Transonic
(zero
surface
in
assessing
measurements,
and
aerodynamics
of
correlation
of zero
as
large
scale
pressure
Reynolds
due to its
accuracy
skin
in complex
by Schoenherr
flows.
for a range
A
friction
numbers,
contained
large
surprisingly
Subsequent
accurate
in
measurements
carefully
R e, from
scatter,
controlled
data compiled
of momentum
Reynolds
more
Early
860
but
thickness
to
370,000
has
proved
its correlated
in wind tunnels
conditions
form.
under
have provided
in the
Facility
extends
NASA
the
Langley
upper
limit
National
The
data
NTF
Preston
accuracy
about
tube
is estimated
and
Clauser
to be within
600,000.
1. INTRODUCTION
the
data minimizing
extraneous
effects between
tests
is often used as the first step in the calculation
of
skin friction
detail.
of
to
vehicles.
gradient
in
- 2 percent
of a power-law
curve fit, and falls
above the Spalding
theory
by 1 percent
at R e of
pressure
important
Re to 619,800
using the van Driest transformation.
Previous
data, test techniques,
and error sources
are discussed,
and the NTF data will be discussed
inferred
curvature)
the
being
of
Facility
incompressible
skin friction
at high
numbers
is emphasized
in this paper,
importance
in water
environment
negligible
data
The design
of transport
aircraft
accurate
estimates
of skin friction
length
numbers
around
109 and
Mach
numbers
of approximately
0.8, corresponding
cruise conditions 1. This estimate
is often made
first calculating
the flat plate incompressible
friction and then correcting
for various effects
as pressure
gradient,
three-dimensionality
flow,
compressibility,
etc.
Several
theories/correlations
are available,
most
differ
in the
Reynolds
of data.
Transonic
in incompressible
Reynolds
requires
that
be made at
As
will
correlations
skin
friction
level
predicted
numbers
where
there
has been
be
shown,
of skin
the
friction
most
do
commonly
not
agree
to
by
skin
such
of the
baseline
of which
at
high
a dearth
used
to the
American
1
Institute of Aeronautics
and Astronautics,
Inc.
desired
accuracy
athighReynolds
numbers,
is the
and
most accurate.
critical reviews
of the
been
made,
available
recently
Reynolds
recent
data
has
skin
numbers
data
exception
have
friction
become
is usually
of the
tunnel
present
a large axisymmetric
An experiment
data
at
available.
Reynolds
National
purpose
of the
but
very
The
data,
distance
temperature
velocity,
only
high
most
with
was taken
shear
u_
u*
to provide
fps
velocity,
axial distance
on
coordinate
y"
y u_/v
cc
angle of attack
of model
(._,/p)1/2
U/U_
along surface
the
model,
to measure
at flight
Langley
wall
data which
and it
Clauser
(6"/_)
skin friction
along
normal
model
to surface
of model
pressure
gradient
boundary
layer thickness
Gu
thickness
at u/ue =0.99
effects
G"
displacement
early.
6+
value
momentum
dynamic
and instrumentation
kinematic
obtained,
and
density
skin friction
data
skin friction
numbers to compare
The
difficulties
in
free of extraneous
accuracy
was recognized
and complicated
description
of the test,
comparison
with other
the results
available
the test.
shear
will be discussed.
A factor
Reynolds
to be considered
in testing at high unit
numbers
is the difference
in scales
may be an important
factor
be very carefully
machined
roughness-induced
engineering
adequate
effects.
purposes
wall smoothness
high Reynolds
problems
is
be
thickness,
viscosity
stress
see Figure
adiabatic
--i.e.,
the
to avoid
e
i
at edge of boundary
for
stagnation
at wall
based on x coordinate
most
considered
at
spaced
closely
region.
layer
inches
viscosity
aw
numbers 2. Another
of the many
the
difficulty
of manufacturing
boundary
layer rakes with tubes
enough to capture the law-of-the-wall
thickness
of y* at edge of boundary
subscripts
At the wall,
that
wall
What
would
parameter,
(dp/dx)
wall condition
layer
incompressible
condition
based on 0
freestream
oo
condition
superscript
2.
Cf
friction
Driest
NOMENCLATURE
integral
coefficient
pressure
coefficient
constant
in equation
outside
diameter
of Preston
model
diameter,
12.75
constant
shape
van Driest
Mach
tube
inches
Reynolds
_*/0
constant,
radial
unit Reynolds
or by Sommer
5) for
and
Short
temperature-dependent
3. NTF EXPERIMENT
The
measure
equation
numbers
to
number
quantities,
form by Van
velocities
and
in equation
factor,
to incompressible
(equation
6) for
method
(equation
quantities
Cp
reduced
method
as high
corresponding
extend
the
as possible
to flight
existing
skin
conditions
and
Mach
in order
friction-Reynolds
number database.
The highest Reynolds
numbers
obtainable
in Langley
Research
Center
tunnels
coordinate
number,
pulp_
American
are produced
Institute
2
of Aeronautics
in the
and Astronautics,
cryogenic
Inc.
transonic
tunnels,
NTFand0.3MTransonic
Tunnel.Forthistest,
unitReynolds numbers as high as 94 x 106/ft were
run, and length
the downstream
model
were
measuring
made
Reynolds
numbers
measurement
measured.
The
skin friction
even
difficult
difficult
instrumentation
problems
low
of the flow.
related
of
tunnels
by
model
to the
presented
planning
the
the model
in
this
NTF test,
on which
major
were
in the early
dimensional
planning
difference
stage
too
mounting
and maintaining
surface in the high dynamic
many
in
being
It was
that
a two-
problems
in
the accuracy
of the
pressure
environment.
4.1
Theories
the data
surprisingly,
the
plotted
at
Mach
numbers
as high
as 0.8 in order
to
transform
the data to an equivalent
incompressible
state.
techniques
test, since
consuming
development
was considered
for an experiment
in NTF.
required
to measure
as possible,
make,
at
standard
that
be developed
a notoriously
even
different
rationale
would
skin
ambient
difficult
with the
provide
consistency
among
inadequacies
in the
experiment.
balance
was
used
since
measure
Preston
skin
tubes
friction
directly.
Also used
and boundary
layer surveys,
which
skin friction
was
Clauser
method.
There
or
point
only
out
inferred
by a modified
has been
a renewed
law
of the
wall
is used
extensively
here
and
when
When
of von Karman,
carefully-controlled
later,
the
in 1953,
published
the
6, describing
boundary
layers
the
of Spalding
method
the
was
derived
7 was
from
boundary
constants
answer
is
layer.
This
of
wall
the
not
the
S palding-Chi
method to produce
does
Schoenherr
not
usual
portion
law of the
accounted
for correctly.
adjusted
for use as the
R,
published.
his sublayer-buffer-log
for the outer
If the
The constants
were
incompressible
theory
in
compressible
skin
a more reasonable
cf vs
to
scatter
number.
of turbulent
way
were
from
large
years
was
By adjusting
the constants
can be changed,
but, more
interest
in the validity of the law of the wall lately4,
as evidenced
in the report of George and Castilto.
The
exhibits
friction
A skin
it is the
to
Three
data
published
profile,
measurement
techniques
were used
they
would
either
characteristics
for this
temperature.
AND
and deriving
the method
method
as accurately
themselves
in
of Reynolds
Twenty
by Landweber
friction
of his own
an equation
with
most
experiments.
the
data
as a function
for compressibility
effects
DATA
to 18725 was
was obtained
sizes
towed
to account
it was
dating
Skin friction
of various
necessary
measuring
is shown
almost
70 years
ago, but is still used
in its
correlated
form, except at low Reynolds
numbers.
paper
In addition,
new
in NTF
FRICTION
s correlation
layer.
no
SKIN
of others
boundary
that
profile
necessary
and Correlations
predicted
decided
also
of the model
Schoenherr
correlated
with
results
agree
was
velocity
were
1.
It
cf from
THEORY
used
cf was to be measured.
determined
A photograph
Figure
high Reynolds
report
the
to infer
The surveys
extreme
ideas
and
to determine
the boundary
such
as
the
momentum
thicknesses.
is
and
data
measurements.
4. FLAT PLATE
task
in the cryogenic
more
temperature
of 940 x 106 at
station
on the
present
match
correlation
friction
c,f level.
of course,
the level
important,
the slope of
that
over
of
the
the
Karmancomplete
Reynolds
number
have
been
used
range.
Other methods
are Ludwieg-Tillmann
recently,
Fernholz
which
9, and
is based
on
is compared
to
The Karman-Schoenherr
equations
are:
.og,0(2.0)
(I)
American
Institute
3
of Aeronautics
and Astronautics,
Inc.
whereCFistheaverage
skinfriction
The local skin friction
coefficient,
R/elI 1ekU
u
_
12
coefficient.
by differentiating
equations
are
I,u;/'/,u;/
1'
I0
/kUe
6_,u+/,u;/'
121 (_u;
e
12
20
60
252
(2)
Re
ku+
e
where
c. =-t
iu:/_
The Ludwieg-Tillmann
equation
is
The Fernholz
and Finley
equations
+cN+/;
where
= In(Rx)
_-In
In (-_--_-)
(u_
l-Y
z_ = I_
Ju
and
u)
= 0.3
In/Y]
\L-l}
k=0.4,
(4)
dy
_=-2.7
for
Re > 2000
tn(Re)+O.37
C=5.1,
for4252<R
M=4.70,
Spalding,
of
Karman-Schoenherr,
Ludwieg-Tillmann,
and
and
other
over
numbers.
complete
methods
and
Spalding
the
The
show
range
of Reynolds
of Karman-Schoenherr
opposite
trends
American
at low
Institute
Reynolds
occurring
Fernholz
and
e <2000
andN=6.74
high
methods
+In(Re)
U_
_---0.404
The
are
c{,
--_--
(3)
at
numbers,
Re between
Karman-Schoenherr
data to Re of about
The
Spalding
at high
Reynolds
are shown
4
of Aeronautics
relies
and thus
numbers
to be the
and Astronautics,
crossover
and
point
7000.
The
correlation
includes
Kempf s
370,000
(Rx of 450 x 106.)
method
the law-of-the-wall,
the
6000
same
Inc.
on the
might
unless
constants
be in question
these
constants
as for lower
Reynolds
of
numbers. Ludwieg-Tillmann
deviatesfrom
5. NTF EXPERIMENT
- RESULTS
AND
KarmanSchoenherr
belowReabout3000and
DISCUSSION
aboveReabout20000. Fernholz
andFinleyis
lowerthantheothertheories.
5.1 Tunnel, Model, Instrumentation,
and Test
Conditions
4.2 Data
5.1.1
Tunnel
The
range
of operating
Overthepast30 yearsexcellent
reviewsof
conditions
for
the
National
Transonic
Facility
availableincompressibleand compressible
(NTF)
at
Langley
Research
Center
23
is
as
follows:
boundary
layerdatahavebeencompiled.These
include
thecompilation
forincompressible
flowsby Mach numbers from 0.2 to 1.2, total pressure from
total
temperature
from
ColesandHirstfromtheStanford
Conference
in one to 9 atmospheres,
--320
to
150deg.
F,
and
Re/ft
from
3.7
to
146
x
196811
, thecompilations
ofcompressible
flowdata
byFernholz
andFinleyin197712,
and198113,
and 106 at Mach 1. For cryogenic operation, liquid
theexamination
ofIncompressible
datato1996by nitrogen is injected into the flow downstream of the
Fernholz
andFinley
1.Sincethattime,otherdata test section, and vaporized to maintain low tunnel
Intermediate
temperatures
can be
hasbeenpublished,
mosthighReynolds
number temperatures.
data havingbeentakenon the wall of wind attained by regulating the amount of liquid nitrogen
tunnels.Thesedataappearto bedifferent
from injected. The tunnel can also be run using air if no
cooling
is required.
For the present
tests, both
flatplateboundary
layerdataTM, i.e., the boundary
layer has developed
and strong
adverse
gradients,
and
equilibrium
flat
sufficiently
long
has
is usually
plate
not
not
been
been
ambient temperatures
were used to obtain
curvature
pressure
characteristic
boundary
run has
apparently
entering
in regions
of wall
and favorable
layers
made.
of
until
completed
before
Reference
15
from
1996,
listed
range.
The
Relaxation
data
in
test
section
square
24, making
models
in the
tunnel
model
skin friction
was
data are
tabulated
and
not measured
in all cases
not used
for comparison
data of Fernholz,
Krause,
Schober
19 is compared
however,
and the
here.
The
Nockemann,
in Figure
3 with
high
Reynolds
number
data of Gaudet,
low Reynolds
number
data of Coles 2 and Purtel121, and the
methods
of
Karman-Schoenherr
(K-S)
and
Spalding.
For this figure the compressible
profiles
of Gaudet,
were re-reduced
and transformed
by
the van Driest transformation
22, which was also
used for the
the figure
on
an
data
transformation.
is the R e range
axisymmetric
following
The
Spalding
data,
NTF
Noted
model,
and
in
in NTF
reported
methods
of
will be used
since
they
best experimental
a large range
to compare
agree
data
Karman-Schoenherr
reasonably
available
at this
with
time
of F_.
Standard
Institute
worked
length
described
uniform,
ft
long
here
is slotted
were
area
to
3.3%
ratio.
that the
validating
that
as expected.
data
25 were
reduction
used;
and
tunnel
however,
local
values
of flow
parameters
on the model
were
recalculated
from
measured
model
conditions
using
the
Fortran
routines
Bridgemann
equation
calculate the properties
5.1.2
Model
of NTF.
large length
was required
The Beattie-
of state
was
used
to
of both nitrogen and air 26.
The design
compromise
among
several
desirable
to have a long model
of the
model
factors.
in order
was
It was
to produce
Reynolds
numbers.
The diameter
to be large enough so that the model
to
and
transverse
curvature
affect skin friction.
the
8.2
very
demonstrated
was
tunnel
instrumentation
model
it
loads
be
needed
and
mounted
to
be
internally.
large
enough
In
that
effects
would
be
excessive.
over
A sketch
steel
American
design
addition,
the slotted
pressures
model
in a
section.
model
blockage
effects,
which
on an inviscid
geometric
over
and
large
feet long.
17.28
the
flow;
produce
was
flow
in compressible
to
long,
to mount
The
Measured
to 106,000
feet
numbers.
26,000
is 25
it possible
Reynolds
minimize
based
17.
Other
data
was
published
in 1994
by
Motallebi TM on the wall of a wind tunnel for Re from
and cryogenic
temperatures
the desired
Reynolds
number
5
of Aeronautics
model
of
the
is shown
and Astronautics,
axisymmetric
in Figure
Inc.
347
4.
stainless
It was
an
axisymmetric
cylinder12.75inchesin diameter
havinga nosedescribed
bya superellipse,
and7
cylindrical
sections
downstream
ofthenose.Ports
wereinstalled
inthemodelatStations
1and2, at
x=73.95and121.95inches,respectively.Skin
frictionwas measured
by a balanceand by
Prestontubesat Station2, andby rakesat
Stations
1 and2. Thewholemodel,including
the
nose,waspolished
to a surfacefinishof4 I_ in.
taken
would
No
ensure
transition
trips
were
used
on the
nose.
model
was sting-mounted
boundary
layer interference
in order
effects,
be caused
by model
to set the
attack.
of attack
model
Initially,
around
nonuniformity
attack.
model
that could
and
zero
adjust
the
of
the
predicted
determined
from
layer
calculations
nose
using
and
CFD
methods.
in measuring
of
the
It was
flat plate
skin
friction.
Similarly,
the ratio of the boundary
layer
to the model radius was estimated 27 to be 0.25 at
the second
curvature
than
measurement
effects
station,
on cf were
and
transverse
estimated
to be less
Instrumentation
determining
skin
friction
on the model
on
5.
Preston
were tested
methods
were
of
used:
Photographs
the model
of
are
the three
shown
in
tubes
and the skin friction
at Station 2 at both hot and
The
problems
measurement
known 28.
operating
a
environment
experiment
associated
of skin friction
Additional
done
greatly
were
device
that
a
influenced
Preston
calculations.
tubes
than
the design
were
They were
from
tunnel
--
the
Tunnel.
reduction
anticipated
and
sized from
designed
region
are well
in a cryogenic
risk
reduction
in a smaller
larger
direct
resulting
Langley
0.3 Meter Transonic
Cryogenic
The problems
encountered
in the risk
experiment
the
by balance
problems
mechanical
required
be
with
boundary
American
layer
of the boundary
Institute
polished,
diameter
that no mounting
The
and
nose
did
was
apparatus
(see Figure
would
protrude
5 b).
set of Preston
from Laval
set
layer
of
calibration
Superpipe
tube
data
know
to the
University
3. Rather
data,
high
than
Reynolds
rely on a
number
was
cast
calibration
in the
methods
parameters
of four
different
method
gave superior
results in determining
skin friction
from known inputs.
It was found that all methods
gave the same results.
number
calibration
was
Princeton
data at
was used to reduce
high Reynolds
the NTF data.
numbers,
and
Inference
of skin friction from velocity
surveys
is most accurate
if tubes on the boundary
layer
rake
Three
in diameter,
portion.
in mounting
the probes
so that the tubes
be firmly attached
to the surface
and to
single
these calculations
and boundary
27 that the pressure
gradient
not be a factor
inches
the outer
that
the
over
0.058
of
angle
flow
into
unchamfered
and
internal
to external
test
design
were
not extend
be
mounted
to measure
authors
covering
the range of Reynolds
numbers
for which
measurements
were to be made was
angle
were
the model
of the flow
were
would
capability
tubes
the tubes
The
mount
It has been
to minimize
which would
at nominally
Preston
circumferentially
The
struts.
are
of the
edge
positioned
turbulent
within
of the boundary
the
boundary
layer
previously
on each
a
pressures
were
scanned
provided
were
measured
system,
pressure
as
by
and
an
model
(Type
T)
K. One port
was dedicated
reference
the
polished,
by copper-constantan
accurate
to 1 degree
ESP module
known
so
temperatures
thermocouples
the
be defined
quantities
(_ and (_ are accurately
the profiles.
The boundary
layer
discussed
Model
portion
In addition,
should
electronically
logarithmic
layer.
to measuring
that
was
also
measured
by a secondary
standard.
Whenever
the reference
pressure
difference
deviated
by
- 0.19% of full scale the modules
were re-zeroed
online.
5.1.4
Test Conditions
Mach numbers
numbers
from
The model
was tested
at
6.
at
Mach
at
6
of Aeronautics
0.6.
The
highest
and Astronautics,
Inc.
unit
Reynolds
number
which
data could
be obtained
x 106, a consequence
at Mach
of the
load
0.85 was 65
constraints
for
this
method
such
as p and
temperature-dependent
quantities
in parameters
the model.
Noted in the figure are the conditions
at which data was obtained
on Preston tubes, the
equations
intermediate
balance,
and the
tunnel conditions,
layer rake.
At most
devices
were tested,
values -- the
Sommer
and
and Johnson
equation
with constants
for Mach 3.82 in air 35. The Sommer
boundary
all three
to the
tunnel,
finite
it was
blockage
of the
necessary
to
model
calculate
in the
the
local
Mach
number,
which
could be slightly
different
from the freestream
Mach number.
This was done
by averaging
pressures
of Station 1 and using
static
pressure
number.
To
vicinity
around
the nominal
the
model
local
These
averaged
pressure
pressures
in
in calculating
Twl
were
used
data positions
the
model
were averaged
and Tw2.
Representative
over
pressures
are
and
shown
in
temperatures
Figure
7.
It is
evident
that the pressure
gradient
is sufficiently
close to zero and that its effect on the local shear
stress
can be considered
accurately
evident
quantified
that
there
is little
variation
at ambient
temperature,
This
change
is small,
in this
The
report
for
equation
M_e+ 0.45(-_--
In order to present
is more
transform
velocity
all
defining
1. /
profiles
velocity
profiles
in the
(5)
and
outer
adiabatic
wall boundary
layers
at
helium 36. Velocities
are transformed
to the density
variation
the boundary
layer by this
coordinate,
region
of
Mach
11 in
in proportion
of
y, is not transformed.
Called
generalized
McDonald 37, the van
defined as
velocities
by Maise
Driest
transformation
u': i0
more
uniform
and
is
be expected.
used
factors
associated
du
velocity
density evaluated
at the wall, new
and ue result.
These transformed
to calculate
was coupled
seven
determined
and Short T-
It is also
used
integral quantities
in an equivalent
incompressible
form, velocity
profiles were transformed
using the
Van
Driest
method 21, which
was
shown
to
not as uniform
the
model
being
as would
was
in the pressure
number.
While
distribution,
temperature
There
negligible.
in later discussion.
gradient
with Mach
as
the
pressure
method
the
T-prime
condition.
Short method,
which
Mach
of the measurement
stations,
11 orifices
Station
1 and 11 around
Station 2 were
averaged.
and
their
values
at a temperature
between
the wall and freestream
Preston
tube reductions.
the T condition is
to calculate
define
prime
by
IJ are replaced
shear
stress
R e and
with the
c f. The
Clauser
from velocity
values of e, (5"
properties
are
transformation
method
profiles
to infer
the
by an interactive
graphical
method.
plotted
along with
factors
wall, and the data was fit to the law of the wall by
iteration.
It is estimated
that the data could be fit
to the law of the wall with a resolution
of about
are compressibility,
transfer,
surface
pressure
curvature,
gradient,
surface
lateral
divergence
(three-dimensionality)
flow, and the freestream
disturbance
scale.
All
effects,
disturbance
level, were
test
was
begun
controlled/minimized
skin friction could
5.2.1
conducted
Above
effects
to
heat
roughness,
of the
level and
except
the
freestream
examined
before the NTF
insure
that
to the extent
be measured.
they
Tests
0.2 to
the wall,
defined
were
0.85.
approach,
and the one used by Allen in Preston
tube reductions 2931, is the use of the T method.
In
Institute
as
be
0.3, compressibility
in the flow.
One
American
profile was
law of the
--=-In
u_
k
Compressibility
Effects
at Mach numbers
from
approximately
Mach
must
be considered
could
The incompressible
the incompressible
where
k=0.41
yu_
_w
+C
(7)
and C=5.5
The profile
data
were
originally
reduced
with
C=5.0,
however
it was found that C=5.5 gave a
better fit to the Preston tube data and skin friction
theory.
7
of Aeronautics
and Astronautics,
Inc.
5.2.2
Pressure
Preliminary
Gradient-Relaxation
tests
Meter
Transonic
effects
of both
were
run
Cryogenic
and
on
measured
skin
0.6
and
numbers,
by using
at
to produce
were
the
pressure
Figure
measured
gradient
two
the
pressure
by moving
different
and Reynolds
not
removed
completely
correlation
should
pressure
conditions
gradient
using
be adequate
effects
are
I_ however,
the
for estimating
effects.
For
local
these
test
= 1. - 0.7
I_,
(8)
(Cf)_=0
on
As shown
in Figure
the
is strongly
nose
strongly
adverse
about
favorable
x=13
gradient
switching
inches,
to
and relaxing
to very small
x=30
inches.
adverse
pressure
gradient
about
The pressure
gradient
is zero at
x=50
The question
inches.
the outer
arises
as to whether
to
the equilibrium
zero pressure
gradient state by. the
first measurement
station.
Station
1 was located
at x=73.95 inches, 44 inches from
small adverse gradient.
Measured
e were
and
1.3-1.5
630
and
e from
.065-.075
the
the beginning
of
values of (5 and
inches
beginning
here,
of small
31 (5
adverse
gradient
and
pressure
relaxation
gradient.
for flows
The distance
required
for
with adverse pressure
gradient
by zero
17 (5 and
or
pressure
followed
pressure
340 e from
gradient
is about
zero
5-10
(339"
5.2.3
foot
Heat
nonadiabatic
friction
were
Transfer
wall
also
Effects
temperature
measured
The
layer
long
be
effect
of
effects
on skin
in the 0.3 Meter
0.25
at the
5.2.5
determine
Figure
most
results
2-
pressure
to measure
are shown
data
theory,
radii of 3
acquisition
station,
or equal
to
In order
to
Effects
normal
y in inches
to the surface.
plotted
case,
that
smooth,
used
to
against
at
When
friction
constructed,
balance
y* for
highest
Reynolds
number.
Based on this figure,
wall roughness
should
be smaller
than
unit
the rms
30 pin.
the complete
model and skin
element
had
a measured
roughness
of 4 p inches and a value of y* of about
one.
Based
on the
y'=5
criterion,
surface
roughness
should not have
the skin friction measurements
significantly
of this test.
affected
5.2.6
Lateral
Diverqence
Effects
Three
dimensionality
of the flow is evident
even in flat
plate
experiments
taken
to insure
flow.
From
flow,
plots
where
velocity
keeping
with skin
same
locations
component.
in the
This
transition
near-wall
inducing
great
care
the two-dimensionality
profiles
of e are always
may
measured
across
ragged,
be due
process,
In
dimensionality
the
was
been
somewhat
to the
and/or
the
in
raggedness
the
presence
in the
boundary
pattern
in the flow.
there
is finite three
dimensionality
effects
are added
to the usual two
raggedness.
has
of the outer
friction
measurements
at the
and variations
in the wake
structures
a standing
in
The
model
Rouqhness
severe
could
of T,fraw.
radius.
using
Newtonian
impact
locations,
and model
the y* = 5 height
approximately
a range
The
effect
made
9 shows
c_
over
were
noses,
second
Surface
insure that
boundary
down
it possible
of $ to model
resulting
in an increase
in cf less than
1.5%, based on the calculations.
cylinder,
weight
100 K, making
ratio
calculations
the
Effects
is a geometric
elliptical
Tunnel.
The total temperature
of this tunnel can
be rapidly varied from above ambient temperature
to
to outside
effect
by the
Boundary
then
Curvature
curvature
characterized
the
Cf
Transverse
transverse
and
and 6 inches
to estimate
the magnitude
of this
effect. The measured
ratios of (_r were found to
Reynolds
number
5.2.4
the wall,
used
Compressibility
behind
distributions
from
estimated
transition
equilibrium
numbers
of
unit
chamber
tunnel.
8 (a)
cf in
parameter
to generate
self-similar
Data are shown
at Mach
0.8
where
friction
gradients
of different
magnitude.
shows the effects on Preston tube
by Clauser
profiles 38.
0.3
adverse
examined.
terms
Langley
Tunnel,
favorable
gradients
upper
Effects
in the
order
of
to
the
in the flow,
dimensional
minimize
flow
on
of
layer,
When
the
three
longitudinal
expected
droop due to the model
calculated
and
found
to
be
0.25
be adjusted
degree.
within
0.1
Since
the
degree,
model
it was
felt
Figure
8 (b) for
Mach
0.6
and
Mach
0.8.
Repeatability
is shown by the agreement
between
that the
alignment
effect
could
be minimized
by careful
of the model.
Initial runs were devoted
two
different
to
alignment.
the
wall
transfer
was
runs.
For most
slightly
through
the
runs
nonadiabatic
tunnel
wall
American
in this
due
to
tunnel,
to
heat
plenum
model
and
made
8
Institute of Aeronautics
Preston
tube
in the
same
and Astronautics,
In addition,
measurements
azimuthal
Inc.
plane,
rake,
balance,
were
always
which
will
be
shownto bean
important
issue
in a later
Transformed
section
11 along
of this report.
5.2.7
Freestream
dependence
layer
of turbulent
parameters
intensity
and
nonlinear.
4
level
Disturbance
on
Levels
cf and
rms
other
The
boundary
freestream
turbulence
is not
known,
so this
parameter
remains
potentially
important
parameter
of skin friction measurements
in the assessment
made in this tunnel.
The
in NTF
main
sources
identified
41
fluctuations
is noted
wind
by
measuring
the
fluctuating
5.3 Profile
NTF
have
surface
places
within
in comparison
tunnels,
Clauser
noise
at several
that,
section
of
with
has
low
It
levels
of
test
Measurements
--
Skin Friction
from
coefficients
by
were
first
incompressible
inferred
from
transforming
form
transformation
of fitting
factors
the velocity
the
by applying
and then
using
profile
velocity
the
data
van
Driest
the Clauser
to the
to
method
Pitot pressures
were
assuming
isentropic,
reduced
to Mach
ideal gas flow,
gamma,
and constant
Ps throughout
layer 42.
Since
numbers
constant
Inferred
0.41
in the
literature
present
locate
rake
tubes
very
near
the
profile
model
to
wall,
the
the
logarithmic
layer of the boundary
layer, as shown
in the velocity
profile data of Figure 10 (a) plotted
in law-of-the-wall
coordinates.
In order
to
accurately
calculate
boundary
layer
integral
quantities
such as ,5* and e, the theoretical
of East, also used by Gaudet 16, was used
the profile
from
The
since,
profile
to fill in
point.
constants
was
of
used
taken
used
value
as pointed
by the
function
of
skin
friction
for
in
to be
reducing
C chosen
by
out by Coles,
the outer
since
this
value
reduction
gave
of the profile
data
agreement
with
better
To decrease
Schoenherr,
the
an even
necessary.
and
5.0 gave
numbers
cf level
higher
5.5
is shown
values
between
to that
value
Reduction
data.
first
and
data.
temperature
from
the
efforts
a
of
of k is usually
data exists,
of
12 shows
profiles
on the
used
Despite
Figure
velocity
plotted
as
The value
The value
was
Tw.
Friction
from
is dependent
other
of Tt and
Skin
7.
C=5.0
data
number
a zero
of transformed
equation
temperature
in the boundary
layer was estimated
by the
Rotta relation 43.
By this means,
both
measurement
the values
obtained
been
the boundary
in Figure
number
significantly.
of c f inferred
surprising
5.3.1
Transformed
Velocity
Profiles
The pitot
rake was mounted at both Stations
1 and 2.
Skin
profiles
shape
various
authors
to describe
varies between
5.0 and 5.5.
Method
friction
of C used
the
static pressure.
are shown
Reynolds
the higher
Reynolds
and the results
from
Clauser
method
transformed
R0.
transonic
factors
low
pressure gradient
boundary
layer calculation.
For
the calculation
of shape factors for data, the value
5.3.2
pressure
other
the
and Purtell,
of Gaudet,
values
been
the tunnel.
Coles
data
shape
with
of Karman-
of C would
of the
in Figure
data
12. A value
for the
final
a value
reduction
of the
behavior,
conversely,
o_=0 at _ increments
i.e.,
as 0
decreases,
are replotted
of 5.5
present
of 15 degrees
13 (a).
Measured
values
of Re show
as e increases,
The cf data
The
of
To check
were taken
have
using
of c_ too high
at Reynolds
30,000
and 100,000
where
5.3.2 Circumferential
Measurements
for non-uniform
flow effects, rake data
at nominal
and the
than did
by
rake were
and are
skin friction
a consistent
cf increases;
c_ decreases.
as a function
of R e in
have been
and C=5.5
used.
were
Figure13
(b). From this figure,
it was concluded
that when the skin friction is plotted as a function
used.
The strength
of the wake component
2.2 for the present
data, in agreement
with
was
other
of
high
Reynolds
number
Reference
44.
traditional
defect
in the coordinates
data
Transformed
profiles
coordinates
of Reference
as
shown
are plotted
in Figure
in
10 (b) and
4 in Figure
American
in
Institute
10 (c).
Re,
removed,
variations
and
in
also
circumferential
that
measuring
devices
should
circumferential
location
data
from
flow
are
different
be taken at the
on a model.
same
Two
dimensional
standing
patterns on tunnel walls and
models
have been found, and the variation
is not
9
of Aeronautics
and Astronautics,
Inc.
always
insignificant.
was always
There
is
circumferential
vicinity
were
significant
skin
friction
of q)=0, where
made.
The
measurements
measurements,
having
subtended
gradient
coefficient
element
an angle
provide
inches
for
methods,
5.4.1
model
Tube
27 degrees.
compared
Spalding
Aliqnment
with the
incoming
flow,
to
Preston
align
tubes
skin
friction
function
zeroed
values
geometry.
and
plotting
of the local
to be more
could
the
adjustment
sting-mounting
the model
were
results
as a
No yaw
the tunnel
the
flow
angularity
than
surface
By reducing
Preston
tube data to
of angle
in relation
was
possible
arrangement;
be adjusted
with
however,
in angle of attack.
Several
runs were devoted
initially
to aligning
the model,
with
results
at Station
2 shown
in
Figure
14.
It was
zero
angle
independent
with the
installed
increments
Skin
tubes
were
taken
in both
nitrogen
which
Superpipe
the
Friction
mounted
ambient
0.07deg,
calibration
at Station
temperature
be
data
Figure
air
valid
and
cold
comparison
form, the
transformed
method,
at
the
high
of
the same
Institute
to
also
transformed
as
Re in Figure
with
theory.
compressible
cf
incompressible
location.
Reynolds
and
by
the
from velocity
In most
cases
In
was
T-prime
profiles
the data
at
appear
to be significantly
higher
than incompressible
theory,
even at Reynolds
numbers
of 40,000
50,000.
The reasons
for this
could
not
determined,
problems
however,
in
encountered
view
of
in running
the
the
to
be
severe
balance
at
cryogenic
temperature
same problems
might
the
footprint
balance
than that
susceptible
flow.
Data
element
of
was
much
larger
from
of Three
Preston
Methods
tubes,
velocity
profiles,
and
Balance
well
data
tube
and Clauser-inferred
with
each
other
the following
Cf = 0.0097
and
Spalding
10
of Aeronautics
with
value
and
Inc.
of
fit to a
Re (-144)
3% above
value at R e =600,000.
value at Re=30,000.
and Astronautics,
values
were
equation:
agrees
Reynolds
numbers,
in the balance data
to 200,000.
law, having
Schoenherr
the Spalding
American
at Station
unit
(a),
was used,
Princeton
this test.
Compressibility
for by the T method
tested
tunnel
16
16
(b)
for
incompressible
are in good
were
was
cf against
Preston
2 and
balance
cf against
in
at Re of 40,000
Measurements
to
in
essentially
the same
tubes 1 and 25 as the
flow.
The calibration
of Patel
was
determined
from
the
Reynolds
numbers
of
effects
were accounted
Sommer and Short 35.
rolled
and
15 (b)o
Measurements
5.6 Comparison
confirmed
Karman-Schoenherr
incompressible
nominal
degrees,
Later runs
at _= --
these
results
by giving
pressure
patterns
on rake
model was rolled.
5.4.2
that
of attack
was
--0.07
of tunnel Mach number.
pitot rake
15 degree
determined
the
in Figure
as compressible
positions
stations.
tube pressures,
a measure
shear,
have
been shown
to
18.
are
number
In order
The spread
were
Data
mounted
on plugs at six circumferential
at the two skin friction
measurement
sensitive
pressures
with
theories
5.5 Balance
with
runs
Re/ft.
effects.
In order to plot the data
Re, values
of e at each
test
of
of attack.
of tunnel
condition
were calculated
from the boundary
layer
survey data. The data in incompressible
form are
Data
Model
Preston
surface
of compressibility
as a function
additional
the resulting
calculated
numbers
of 0.4, 0.6, 0.7
diameter,
comparison
the
the
point
balance,
in
of approximately
data
computational
Figure
15 (a) shows
compressible
cf at Mach
The skin
friction
was
higher
on
clockwise
side than at _=0, and
clockwise
side.
To
in
in
were
essentially
however
the skin friction
an
data
c(=0.
(9)
is within - 2%,
9 is 1% above
the
Karman-
It is equal
to
3.
of High-Reynolds-Number
Flat-Plate
in the NTF,"
Paper AIAA-84-0588,
Experiments
AIAA 13th
application
Aerodynamics
San
to
compressible
prime equation
could
flow,
suitable
T-
CA,
be used 35.
4.
6.
have
friction
data
been
shown
incompressible
Reynolds
data
to
theories
R0 of 619,800
agree
within
with
existing
3% at the
At R0=30,000,
the
highest
data
are in
obtained
good
at transformed
number.
agreement
above the
by two
agreement;
different
however,
methods
these
were
data
did
in
not
problems
factor
in
this data.
c_ by
roughness
as
should
affecting
turbulence
the
of
turbulence
much
not
data
the
level
indications
however
W. S. and
Peterson,
Testing
March
J. B., Jr.,
Conference,
George,
W. K. and Castillo,
as
be
an
1.5%.
Surface
issue.
factor
may
be the
freestream
NTF
tunnel,
both
in rms
and
in
scale.
There
level
data
are
is not large,
cannot
be
quantified.
December,
1997,
5.
Schoenherr,
Surfaces
SNAME,
6.
L.,
Plates
L.,
"The
in Zero
Spalding,
MA
D. B.,
"A New
Spalding,
Architects
May
and
of
Spring
and
Marine
7 & 8, 1953,
Analytical
Plate Valid
Regimes,"
Mass
Flat
Resistance
Gradient,"
of Naval
Boston,
of
Transactions
Frictional
Pressure
of Society
Engineers,
32.
7.
"Zero-pressure-
layer,"
Applied
no
12, part
1,
Moving Through
a Fluid,"
40, 1932, pp 279-313.
Meeting
Deigo,
pp 689-729.
K. E.,
"Resistance
Landweber,
Flat
"Design
5-7, 1984.
gradient
turbulent
boundary
Mechanics
Reviews,
vol 50,
CONCLUSIONS
Skin
Saric,
pp 5-
Expression
for Both the
International
Transfer,
5,
1962,
pp
"The drag of a
compressible
turbulent
boundary
smooth flat plate with and without
layer
on a
heat transfer,"
Journal
1964,
9.
of Fluid
Mechanics,
vol 18, pt 1,
January,
pp 117-143.
Ludwieg,
H. and
of the Wall-Shearing
Layers,"
Tillmann,
Stress
NACA
W.,
"Investigations
in Turbulent
-TM-1285,
Boundary
National
Advisory
Committee
for Aeronautics,
May, 1950.
10.
Fernholz,
H. H. and Finley,
P.
J.,
incompressible
flow at M=0.2 to compressible
flow
at M=0.85.
The van Driest transformation
and T-
Incompressible
Turbulent
prime
Proqress
The
data
were
method
obtained
appear
the compressibility
many
helpful
presentation
nominally
to be adequate
to remove
effects.
Acknowledqements
Dr. Richard
Campbell
the NTF model.
Also
for
from
Boundary
Layer:
Smits,
The authors
wish to thank
for designing
the nose for
thanks to Dr. Arild Bertelrud
suggestions
concerning
A. J. and Marusic,
Flows:
Simulation,"
A Challenge
Paper
Fluid Dynamics
the
of this paper.
M.
Turbulent
Flow,
Pipe
and Aerospace
June 1996.
I.,
"High
Turbulent
Boundary
V.,
30th
Norfolk,
VA,
Mean-Flow
Ph.D.
Engineering,
and
AIAA
June 28
Scaling
Thesis,
Mechanical
Princeton
University,
of
Institute
the
Data,
Sciences
32,
E.A.,
"Computation
Layers
University,
CA 1968.
12. Fernholz,
H. H. and
- 1968,
13.
AGARDograph
Fernholz,
H. H., Finley,
"A Further
Layer
Compilation
Data
AGARDograph
1981.
14.
Bushnell,
B.,
"Mixing
Compressible
11
of Aeronautics
Finley,
of Compressible
Data,"
Journal,
American
of
The
No.
4,
of
AFOSR-IFP-
Stanford
Conference,
Volume
II Compiled
Data,"
1968 AFOSR-IFP-Stanford
Conference
Stanford
Layer
1977.
Reynolds
for Experiment
AIAA-99-3530,
Conference,
- July 1, 1999.
2.
Zagarola,
Assessment
REFERENCES
Number
An
in Aerospace
Compilation
1.
Zero-Pressure-Gradient
with
P. J.,
"A Critical
Turbulent
No.
Boundary
223,
P. J. and
AGARD,
Mikulla,
of Compressible
a Survey
of Turbulence
No.
AGARD,
263,
Data.,"
November,
in
Turbulent
Low
and As[ronautics,
Inc.
Reynolds
Boundary
1975,
V.,
Boundary
Layers,"
B.
Number
AIAA
pp 1119-1121.
15.
Dussauge,
Smith,
R.
"Turbulent
Supersonic
1996.
16.
J.-P.,
Flow,"
Gaudet,
Turbulent
Numbers
Fernholz,
W., Smits,
Boundary
L.,
"Experimental
Establishment,
17.
K. G.
Numbers
Ministry
18.
and
Motaltebi,
F.,
Layers,"
AIAA
2153-2161.
Journal,
Fernholz,
Schober,
at
High
of the
32,
7190,
Ozarapoglu,
H. H., Krause,
Reynolds
Laval
1973.
University,
Measurements
Flows,
in
Ph.D.
Thesis,
Council,
of
Two-
Boundary
1994,
and
pp
E., Nockemann,
"Comparative
V.,
Turbulent
November,
Compressible
1-5, 1976.
May, 1973.
30.
Incompressible
Study
of the techniques
of skin friction
in
boundary
layers,"
Boundary
Layers
March
limitations
Journal
of
measurements
on
its use
Fluid
September,
M,
1982.
29.
Allen, J. M.,
"Evaluation
of CompressibleFlow Preston
Tube Calibrations,"
NASA
TN D-
Turbulent
February,
"Turbulent
Research
Flow
Langley,
turbulent
Turbulent
1970.
"Mean
Subsonic
19.
July,
1984.
L.,
between
December,
Dimensional
and
Gaudet,
Aeronautical
of Defence,
335,
September,
Numbers
No.
Investigation
Studies
at Mach
NASA,
28. Winter,
K. G.,
"An outline
available
for the measurement
Layer
at High
Reynolds
Number of 0.8," TR 84094,
Royal Aircraft
Boundary-Layer
P. J.,
and Spina,
E. F.,
in Subsonic
and
AGARDpgraph
Boundary
and a Mach
Winter,
H., Finley,
A. J.
Layers
1965,
of the Preston
in pressure
Mechanics,
tube
gradients,"
23,
pt
1,
pp 185-208.
33.
Bertelrud,
A.,
"Pipe
Flow Calibration
of
Preston Tubes of Different
Diameters
and Relative
in
the canonical
boundary
layer at Re,theta
< 6 x
10"'4 on the wall of the German-Dutch
windtunnel
Lengths
of
Aeronautical
Research
Institute of Sweden,
1974.
34. Bradshaw,
P. and Unsworth,
K., "A Note on
in
Preston
Tube
IC Aero
Report
20.
Coles,
D.,
"The
Turbulent
a Compressible
Fluid,"
September,
1962.
Physics
Boundary
R-403-PR,
Layer
Rand
Corp.,
35.
School,
Friction
Heating
Maryland,
Engineering,
University
1978.
E. R., "Turbulent
Boundary
Layer
Fluids,"
Journal
of the
Sciences,
pp 145-160, 216.
23.
Bruce,
W.
E.,
18,
no.
Jr.,
3,
March,
"The
U.S.
1951,
National
Transonic
Facility,
Parts I and II. Papers No. 14
and 15," AGARD-R-722,
AGARD, April, 1985.
24. Fuller, D. E., "Guide for Users of the National
Transonic
Facility,"
NASA Technical
National
System,"
NASA
Memorandum
"User's
Guide
Research
Data
Transonic
Facility
Technical
Memorandum
Nitrogen,"
76.
NASA
TN
Compressible
for Two-Dimensional
NASA
Technical
73-07,
110242,
D-8274,
NASA,
D. K., "Computer
Transitional,
or
Boundary-Layer
and Axisymmetric
Memorandum
American
Institute
83207,
College
Flow,"
B. J.,
"Free-Flight
of Turbulent-Boundary-Layer
Region
Skin
of Severe
Aerodynamic
from 2.8 to 7.0," NACA-
of
Hypersonic
Layers,"
AIAA Journal,
1979, pp 919-921.
37.
Maise,
and
Kinematic
boundary
January,
G. and
17, Number
H.,
Viscosity
Layer,"
AIAA
1968, pp 73-80.
F.
H.,
Advances
pp 1-51.
39. White,
40.
Turbulent
McDonald,
Eddy
Clauser,
Layer,
F. M.,
Hancock,
The
Viscous
in the
Boundary
8,
August,
"Mixing
Length
in a Compressible
Journal,
6,
Turbulent
in Applied
Company,
Fluid
No.
1,
Boundary
Mechanics
IV,
Flow,
1956,
McGraw-
1974,
P. E. and Bradshaw,
of Free-Stream
Layers,"
September,
125,
of Science
TN-3391,
NASA, Ames, March, 1955.
36. Watson, R. D., "Generalized
Velocities
Outer
Data
Report
1973.
S. C. and Short,
in the Presence
at Mach Numbers
Hill Book
Associated
Flow
of
on
FFA
in Compressible
Imperial
September,
Sommer,
38.
J. B.,
April 1996.
26. Adcock,
J. B., "Real-Gas
Effects
With
One-Dimensional
Transonic
Cryogenic
December,
Calibrations
Measurements
of
Recommendations
and Technology,
Including
Presentation
Turbulence
Journal
1983,
P.,
"The Effect
on Turbulent
of Fluids
pp 284-289.
Boundary
Engineering,
105,
41.
Igoe, W. B., "Analysis
of Fluctuating
Static
Pressure
Measurements
in the National Transonic
Facility,"
NASA
March, 1996.
42.
12
of Aeronautics
Staff,
Technical
A. Ro,
and Astronautics,
"Equations,
Inc.
Paper
Tables,
3475,
and
NASA,
Charts
1967.
for Compressible
Flow,"NACAReport1135, 10,905,
44. Gad-eI-Hak,
M. andBandyopadhyay,
P.,
NASA,
1953.
43. Rotta,
J. C., "Critical
Review
ofExperimental"Reynoldsnumbereffects in wall-bounded
flows,"Applied Mechanics Reviews, Vol.
Heat TransferCoefficientsand Temperature turbulent
distributions
in TurbulentBoundaryLayersat 45, No. 8, August, 1994, pp 307-365.
Supersonic
and,Hypersonic
Flow,"NASATTF
American
13
Institute of Aeronautics
and Astronautics,
Inc.
Figure
1. Photograph
ofModelinNTF.
0.007
0 004
_ ,_
Kam_n-Schoenherr
,_
Crossover
Spalding
0.006
Point
_'
0005
m
e
Fefnho_z,
etal
Gaudet
Coles Te,bu_atlon
SpaldingTabulatmoll
Purt_
0004
0 003
C
0002
NTF
0 001
0001
1000
10"
10 _
I0_
......
t 000
100
Figure
2.
10 _
Range
10 _
10 n
Theories
Figure
3.
Comparison
with Theory.
14
American
Data
Institute of Aeronautics
and Astronautics,
Inc.
of Flat Plate
Data
STATION
STATION
STUB
49.200
12.75
--,
48.000
48.000
dis
STING
#3
-"-
"
FAIRING
/
/>A*
24.000
--,,
..125.951
30.000
-"
(4
sects)
27.425
28,_
_'_
,,.-
convention
TOP VIEW
"=
looking
into
flow
207.376
17.28
ft
_'fff[fffUfff_ffffffu_rffffff_"fffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff(f[fff
dimensions
in
Figure
(a)
inches
4.
fffffffffffffffffffl
unless
noted
Sketch
of Model.
Figure
Rake.
5. Continued.
(b)
Preston
Tube.
09
08
07
06
M
0.5
04
03
Balance, Station 2
r sto
TUbe. Station
.-
_r% g,......
02
_"_
Balance.
Rake.
Stalion
01
0
20
40
60
80
100
Re,if1
Figure
5.
NTF Model
Figure
Instrumentation.
American
Institute
15
of Aeronautics
6.
Mach-Reynolds
and Astronautics,
Number
Inc.
Test
Conditions.
ill
02
1 05
01
o
^-'
M=06
M=0 7
M=04
M=085
M--04,
M=04,
M=0.4,
M---04,
M=04.
M--07
M=O 7.
M=0.7,
M=O 7.
M=O 7,
,>
^
v
Point
2243
T =1202
TIT
Longludlnal
Span 1
n 2
_k)n
1
Statbon 2
Longnu6ir_l
Span1
S,p,an 2
S_t_n
1
Slat_
2
-01
_,
Station
Station
T
Point
-02
73.95
_,
Nose-cylinder
2595
576
121,95
T =-2503
junction
095
-0 3
0
50
1O0
150
50
x, inches
(a) Pressures.
(b) Temperatures.
Figure 7. Representative
1 08
170
M=0.6,
106
_
"_'
100
x, inches
R=15x
10 e
M=0 8, R=34 7 x 10 e
1 04
On Model.
10 _
16510
J
R/ft=64
x 10 _
c
1 02
cfllc_)
1 60 104
Tasl
365,
0.3M-TCT
1
st 358,
0.3M-TCT
0 98
096
c/(cr)
o-1 - 07
_e_
d(c )/d(T./T
0 94
-0 15
150
-0 I
-005
0 05
0 1
015
10 _
0 98
)= 1 15 10 3
..............
1
1.02
1 04
1 06
1 0B
T IT
w
Effects.
16
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc.
4O
35
A(u/u)=22
3O
k=0
M=09
Layer
Calculation
U'/U
RJff=SO 48 x 10 _
C=55
._/
25
Boundary
41,
20
15
10
E_I Pro_le
_4=_85R =32 68O
M=O_ R =3975O
M_040 R =26G300
M:O_0 R =465400
_4=O60 R -619a00
a_r_
or Wake
.................
0 10 o
10 106
20 108
30 104
40
10 _
50 106
10
60 10 e
100
1000
y, inches
Figure
9.
Calculated
104
10 _
y*
Turbulent
Figure
Wall Scaling.
(a) Law-of-Wall.
Transformed
Velocity
10.
Profiles.
0_4
|
v.^?
0.3
A
-4
_:_0
0.2
t_
M=O 40 R '=123,400
M=O 40 R '=266300
M=O20 R '=313,000
(u,'-u')tu'
0.1
Solid
symbols denote
Open
symbols,
data 8t Station
data al Stabon
"'_
55
M=060
R '=551 900
M=060
R '=a_a aoo
-10
" :::::::::::::
: :::::::::::::I
=- Law of wat_e
-12
M=040
_ ......
0
R '=123350
M=060
-01
02
04
06
0.01
08
0.1
y16
Y/6 u
(b)
Law-of-Wake.
Figure
American
(c)
10.
Institute
Transformed
17
of Aeronautics
Velocity
Outer
Region
Profiles.
and Astronautics,
Inc.
R '=619820
10 _
16
li
30
.............
1 :
15
S,lahen
Gaudel
_',,
ZPG
Boundary
Layer
103
Calculation
26
103
C=55.
Equation
C=50.
Equalion
X,
Ct
20
101
-
11
100
1000
10 +
10 _
15
10
10
103
10 +
104
10 _
R e '
Figure
200
11.
Transformed
.El
10 '_
R'
Shape
Factors
Figure
10 _
1 90
10"
12.
Effect of C on cf Obtained
Clauser Method.
22
10 _
21
10
by
+
Karman-Sd_oenherr
1 8510
18010'
Spalding
v-n
2010
1 80
103
19103
60
I0 _
"
C I'
140
10 s
Ct,
"_
17
! 20
10 _
M=0.4,
Rtlt=15
Station
x
170
10 J
1 65
10 _
M=0.4,
F-q
1 5
16010
t20
2
10 _'
10010"
180
10
-60
60
120
10 _
Station
R/ft=15
10 _
14103
t80
1105
12105
(a)
Figure
Variation
13.
14105
1610
_-
R'
e
of cf with _.
Variation
American
of Boundary
(b) Variation
Layer
Properties
18
Institute of Aeronautics
of c4 with R_.
and Astronautics,
Inc.
18
10 _'
2510
2.10102
M=
Nominal
20010
Zero
_.07
deg
Top
Tube.
M=O 4
Bollom
M=085
Top
Tube,Tui0e M---OB54_
_lld
Cold
BOltom
M=7
Cold
Cold
Tube
M=O
2010
85
mP-f
CT
190103
185
HOI
Hot
M85_
M= 4,
M=6.
19510
M=7
o
205107
103
1.510
III I
1 80
10 -_
1 7510
O_
10
170103
-03
-02
-01
01
02
10 _
107
10 _
03
10 B
10 +
Rift
O
Figure
3010
14.
(a)Compressible
Figure 15. Preston
Determination
of Nominal
Zero Angle of Attack.
2510
M=
4.
Hot
M= 7.
M85,
Hot
Hot
M=4
M=6.
M=7.
Cold
Cold
Cold
MBS,
Cold
Data.
Tube Data.
M=0+20
o
M=060
M=0
BalaFce
Karrna_-Scbeenbe_
NTF
Spalding
20
40
Data
Test
83
103
Stabon
CI
15
1510
103
o
o
1010
....
1 0
104
10 _
10 _
10
+
10 _
107
Rer
(b)
Data in Transformed
Figure
10 u
109
Rift
15.
Parameters.
(a) Compressible
Figure 16. Balance
Concluded
American
Institute
19
of Aeronautics
and Astronautics,
Inc.
Data.
Data.
30
103
30
103
........
I
2510
:
o
^
M=040
M=O 60
M=0185
, C=55
I
25
109
20
10 _
Preston
Tube
Spalding
el'
2OLO,
_
Ela_ance
1510
from
1t
Data
NTF Tes_3 ta
Station 2
R
survey data.
7o
c.
15 lo_
Stal_)n 2
from T method
1 0 10
1 0 10 _
10 _
10"
10 _
10 _
10 _
(b)
Figure
17
Comparison
Techniques.
of Three
0 0024
"",
"
Cla ....
C=55
0 0022
o 002
ct
00018
o oo16
Frt to Data
0 0014
c t = 0 0097
_'_
6;.._,,
R e * o _44_
-, -_
0 0012
104
lO 5
10 _
R'
Figure
18.
fit to Preston
10 t
R u'
Re
Tube
and
Crofile
cf Data.
2O
American
Institute of Aeronautics
and Astronautics,
Inc.
Measurement