Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 36

I

I

I i!IIAL

/D-t.~-v:,p;!:; 5_~ ~ ·f-"L'-' :3

~ . ~S~-4!N>#~7Y

·

\Joepartment

of the

Navy

Bureau of Ordnance Contract No, NOrd 961:2

DRAG STUDIES IN WATER ENTRY

\

OF

THE

MK 13~6 TORPEDO

Report

July

No.

1951

E 12 .I

Hydrodynamics

California

Institute

CG:c: :Sill
CG:c: :Sill

-

Laboratory

of

Tech nology

DRAG

Department of the Navy Bureau of Ordnanc e Contract NOrd-9612

STUDIES

IN

WATER

ENTRY

 

0

F

THE

MK

13-6

TORPEDO

by

Genevieve M.

Wilcox

Research Engineer

a arb arb

Hydrodynamics

Laboratory

California Institute of Technology

Report No.

Copy No.

E

9-9'

12 . 1

Pasadena,

California

Joseph Levy Project Supervisor '@! Gi 4 'IP-
Joseph Levy
Project Supervisor
'@! Gi 4
'IP-

C snftd@ntial

C snftd@ntial Abstract Introduction TABLE OF CONTENTS General Discussion of Water Entry Purpose Experimental Program

Abstract

Introduction

TABLE

OF CONTENTS

General Discussion of Water Entry

Purpose

Experimental Program Models Test Conditions 0 Determination of Drag.

Page

1

2

2

2

4

4

4

4

Experimental Results .

5

Model and Prototype Drag Comparisons

5

Drag of the Standard Mk 13-6 Torpedo Model

5

Variation of Drag along the Trajectory

5

Effect of Initial Pitch o

5

Effect of Atmospheric Pr e ssure

13

Effect of a Finer Nose Shap e on the Mk 13-6 Torpedo Model

13

Sensitivity to Atmospheric

Pressure

1

3

Sensitivity to Initial Pitch

18

Remarks

18

Conclusions

18

Appendix I

23

Apparatus

 

23

The

Controlled Atmosphere Launching Tank

23

The

Trajectory Analyzer

23

Models

 

23

Appendix II

27

   

27

Analysis of the Data Reduction of the

27

The

Distanc e vs.

Photographic Data Time Curves

27

The Velocity-Time Curves

 

28

The

Coeffici e nt of Drag

28

Appendix III

Factors in Mod e l Studies of W a ter Entry

Bibliography

@Rl!liidenhar

3 1

3 l

33

ifjJ

Iilide nh!f

ifjJ Iilide nh!f The mode l of the stand a rd M k 13 -6 a

The mode l of the

stand a rd M k

13 -6

a ir c r aft

t o rp e d o

d u ring

t h e

cavity p ha s e of t he un der wa t er t raj ecto ry

A BST R A CT

An experimental investigation was made of t he drag characte risti c s of a 2-in. diameter model of the standard (He ad F) Mk 13-6 torpedo during the cavity phase of the underwater tra- je c tory. The data used in this analysis were available from a previously coompleted trajec- tory study. These data were sufficient to de- termine the instantaneous velocity of the model along its traject o ry 0 Hence, the deceleration and the instantaneous drag coefficient could be determined.

The model was dynamically and geometri- cally similar to the prototype; its entry velocity of 120 fps was scaled from the prototype veloc- ity of 406 fps in accordance with the Froude law. Results from model runs made at nominal at- mospheric pressures of 1, 1/ 2, 1/ 11, and l/22 atmospheres with initial pitches between±. 6°

of 19°

was used in all tests.

Naval Ordnance Test Station, Morris Dam, taken at a nominal trajectory angle of 19° with initial

are presented.

A fixed trajectory

angle

Prototype data from the

pitches between±. 1° were available for parison.

com-

Results from three tests of the Mk 13-6 tor- pedo model with the finer Dunn nose (Head I) made at air pressures of 1, 1/ 11, and l/22 atm. are also presented. These runs were made with a nominal trajectory angle of 20° and entry ve- locity of 120 fps with initial pitches between

+

0

0

o 5 . There were no prototype data from

-

this shape suitable for drag analysis .

summa-

rized in the conclusions at the end of the report.

The results of the investigation are

sol -5
sol
-5

2

1i&entia4;

----

INTRODUCTION

An investigation of the water entry of small- scale projectiles was undertaken at the Hydro-

where:

dynamics Laboratory of the California Institute

absolute

static pressure

in the

of Technology in an effort to develop a satis- factory modeling technique and to study the be- havior of air-launched projectiles under a wide

undisturbed liquid absolute pressure within the cavity

range of entry conditions. This study was joint-

v

velocity of the torpedo

 

ly sponsored by the Bureau of Ordnance and the Office of Naval Research under Contract NOrd

p

density of water

9612.

General Discussion of Water Entry

When an air-launched torpeao

strikes the

water it creates a cavity which persists into the underwater trajectory. The analysis of the drag during the cavity stage is facilitated by observing the orientation of the model as it moves along the trajectory . During the cavity phase the torpedo may do one of three things

only its nose in

contact with the water, (2) it may travel with its nose in contact with the water and its after- body oscillating between the top and bottom of the cavity, (3) or it may travel with both its nose and afterbody in contact with the cavity wall. If the first or second condition exists, the mean trajectory is the straight line exten- sion of the air path , The third condition, which most often occurs, produces a trajectory con- vex toward the side of the cavity in contact with the tail. The drag will be lower when only the nose of the torpedo is in contact with the water. When other portions of the torpedo in addition to the nose contact the cavity wall, the cavity bulges at the point of contact causing the cross section of the cavity and, hence, the drag to in-

(Fig. 1): ( 1) it may travel with

crease.

In

general,

the

drag on the torpedo

will be

greater during the

cavity phase than it

is when the torpedo is completely in contact

with the water.

Froude scaling has been used in the modeling of water entry because the forces of gravity and inertia are of major importance during the cavi- ty phase of the trajectory. This modeling sys- tem is not valid beyond the cavity phase because the viscous forces become significant after the cavity has been dissipated. Theoretical con- siderations further indicate that valid modeling also requires equal cavitation numbers in the model and prototype systems. The cavitation nu1nber is defined as:

k

=

In order to fulfill the requirement of equal cavi- tation numbers, the atmospheric pressures in the model and prototype systems must be in the same ratio as the linear dimensions of the model and prototype . ::1::

Much of the early work in the modeling of water entry was done with models of the stand- ard Mk 13-6 aircraft torpedo launched in open tanks. These tests indicated that simple Froude scaling was sufficient to reproduce the trajec- tory of that projectile. However, when the finer Dunn nose was substituted for the stan.dard head of the torpedo, the model followed a steeply div- ing trajectory in contrast to the level path of the prototype. It was necessary to reduce the air pressure in the model system before the proto- type trajectory could be satisfactorily repro- duced. 1, 2, 3'** Several nominal air pressures were investigated with the fine nosed model. At l/11 atm., where the cavitation number was equal in both model and prototype systems, the model trajectories fell within 5 calibers of the prototype trajectory for the first 70 calibers of horizontal travel. At air pressures of 3/4. l/2, 1/4, and l/22 atm., the model trajectories devi- ated more widely from those of the prototype. Therefore, these results support the theoretical e vidence that equal cavitation numbers should be a criterion for valid mode ling.

Purpose

Modeling of trajectory implies but does not prove that drag has been modeled as well. The purpose of the investigation was to determine whether drag was satisfactorily modeled by Froude scaling and to ascertain the effect of atmospheric pressure upon the drag character- istics of the model. Since the only prototype data available were from the standard Mk 13-6 torpedo, a shape relatively insensitive to at- mospheric pressure at model size, the results

*Appendix III includes a discussion of the im- portant factors in modeling.

**Numbers in superscript refer to bibliogra-

phy at the

end of this

report.

WATER
WATER

SURFACE

A. ONLY

NOSE

CONTACTING

WATER

LiLT& A

~

fMEAN

TRAJECTORY

~--,, _

WATER

SURFACE

:_:_:_:_----=-=-:

:.:

_

----- ------~
----- ------~

----:_-~ }~>

-~-=-~~ ~'
-~-=-~~
~'

--------':~~~~

8

OSCILLATING

IN

---==:~-~~,' ~

CAVITY

-----~~',

8 OSCILLATING IN ---==:~-~~,' ~ CAVITY -----~~', - -,~, C. CONTACTING BOTTOM Fig. OF 1 CAVITY

- -,~,

IN ---==:~-~~,' ~ CAVITY -----~~', - -,~, C. CONTACTING BOTTOM Fig. OF 1 CAVITY - Orientation

C. CONTACTING

BOTTOM

Fig.

OF

1

CAVITY

-

Orientation of the

""-~

WATER

SURFACE

~ TRAJECTOR~Y----~~~~~~~~-------

,

,

~ WATER SURFACE ~ TRAJECTOR~Y----~~~~~~~~------- , , ~ D . C O N T A C

~

D. CONTACTING

TOP

OF

CAVITY

torpedo in the cavity.

c

3

4

4 .08MHtential ~ of this study could only establish the validity of Froude modeling and give

.08MHtential

~

of this study could only establish the validity of Froude modeling and give some indication of the region in which the most satisfactory air pres - sure might lie.

The model data taken at nominal air pres-

sures of 1, 1/2. 1/11, and 1/22 atm. were avail - able from the previously completed trajectory

two typical runs

from each pressure condition were analyzed to determine the drag on the model. Both these and the prototype tests were made with initial pitches between±. 1°. Since it was hoped that this drag study could establish some trends in model behavior that would be of use in later work with more sensitive projectiles, the in - itial pitch range investigated at air pressures of 1 atm. and 1/11 atm. was extended from±. 1° where comparison with the prototype was pos - sible to±. 6°. Data from the pressure sensi- tive Dunn nose torpedo launched with essentially constant entry pitch and velocity, but with air

pressures of 1,

included even though prototype comparison was impossible.

study.

The test results from

1/11,

and 1/22 atm.,

were also

Experimental Program

Models

of

the Mk 13-6 torpedo. One was of the standard Head F torpedo with the spherical-tip-and-cone- nose, and the other was of the Head I torpedo, a

finer shape also known as the Dunn nose (Fig. 2).

Both models were 2-in.

ally and dynamically scaled from the 22. 42-in. diameter "floater" torpedo used in the prototype work . 4 The details of model construction and tolerances for the physical constants are gi ven

in Appendix I.

The two models used in these tests were

in diameter,

geometric-

Test Conditions

The models were launched at nominal a i r pressures of 1, 1/ 2, 1/11, and 1/22 atm. An air pressure of 1/ 11 atm. will produce equal cav i - tation numbers in both model and prototype sy s - tems. The entry velocities of the models varied between 116 and 122 fps; (120 fps corresponds to a Froude scaled prototype velocity of 406 fps). The tests were made with initial pitches ranging from 6. 4°S (S denotes steep or nose down with

/ respect to the trajectory) to 5. 3°F (F deno t es flat or nose up with respect to the trajectory), at nominal trajectory angles of 19° for the stand- ard torpedo and 20° for the Head I. The launch- ing condit.ions of the individual runs are tabu- lated in Table I.

Determination of Drag

Drag was determined from

the model along its

trajectory.

Drag was determined from the model along its trajectory. deceleration of The methods Fig. 2 -The

deceleration of The methods

the model along its trajectory. deceleration of The methods Fig. 2 -The Mk 13-6 torpedo model

Fig.

2

-The

Mk 13-6 torpedo model

(a)

The model with the

standard hemisphere-

and-cone nose (Head F)

(b) The model with the finer

Dunn nose (Head I)

TABLE

I.

LAUNCHING CONDITIONS

Mk 13-6 TORPEDO MODELS

 

Standard Mk 13-6 Torpedo (Head F)

 
 

Tank

Entry

Entry

Angles

Run

Air Pres.

Velocity

Pitch

Traj.

 

No .

Std. Atms.

fps

 

0

 

0

9-1

0.

984

120.6

0.

1 F

18.9

9

- 2

0.515

122.

1

o.

3 s

18.

3

9-3

0.046

119.

9

0.

2F

18.

6

9-4

0.035

120 .

1

0.

6 s

19.

2

9-5

0.514

119.

2

1. 0 s

18.

5

9

- 6

0.979

117.

9

1. l s

18.6

9-28

0.

977

120.9

2.

6 s

18.

pt

9

- 30

0.978

119.2

6.

0 s

18.4

9

- 32

0.089

115.

9

6. 4 s

19

. 0*

9-39

0.500

117.

2

2.

5 s

19

. 5

9-40

0.045

119.

9

1.

7 s

19.

1

9

- 41

0.089

119.

5

2.

0 s

18.

8

9

- 42

0.089

120.2

0.

8 s

18.

8

9-43

0.089

117.

8

0.

1 s

18.

8

9-51

0.967

121.

3

3

. OF

18.

3

9-52

0.089

121.

3

3.

6F

18.

8

9-53

0.975

121.

9

5.

2F

18.

6

9-54

0 . 089

121.

2

5.

3 F

18.

7

 

Mk 13-6 Torpedo with Dunn Nose (He a d I)

 

Tank

Entry

Entry

Angles

Run

Air

Pres.

Velocity

Pitch

Traj.

 

No.

Std. Atms .

fps

 

0

 

0

11 -14

o. 089

121.

6

0

. 2 s

20

 

1

.

11-16

0.045

121.

5

0.

5 F

20

. 5

11-2 3

0.978

120.4

o.

3 s

20

.

3*

*Possible error .±.0. 5°; all other trajectory angles correct to ±.0. 2°.

cnc l '

tlllr

 

5

of calculation and the

assumptions

used in re-

mine the instantaneous drag coefficients.

vVhen

ducing the basic

Appendix II.

from photographic records of the launchings

Launching

Tank.-*

made

are

trajectory data are

The data used in this analysis

given in

in the

Controlled Atmosphere

EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS

Model and Prototype Drag Comparisons

report

Test Station

at Morris Dam. The tests were made with the "floater" version of the 22 , 42-in , Mk 13-6 air-

craft torpedo. 4 This projectile is a full-scale buoyant model of the standard Mk 13-6 torpedo without engine or steering mechanism.

were taken at the Naval Ordnance

T:1e

prototype

data presented in this

Instantaneous drag coefficients could not be determined from the prototype data. There- fore, comparison was made between the curves which resulted when the logarithm of the instan- taneous velocity was plotted against the distance from entry. The slope of these curves at any point is proportional to the instantaneous drag coefficient (see Appendix II). Figures 3 and 4 show the logarithm of the ratio of the instan- taneous velocity to the entry velocity plotted against the distance from entry in calibers. Model data taken at air pressures of 1, 1/2, 1/11, and 1/22 atm are compared with the prototype results,5, 6 These tests were made within an initial pitch range of±. 1°. The a- greement between model and prototype is good to a distance of about 50 calibers from entry. Beyond 50 calibers the model was retarded mC!re rapidly than the prototy,e. The model data taken at 1/2 atm . and 1 11 atm. are in closest agreement with the prototype results, indicating the best pressure for modeling to be in this region. The results from the 1/22 atm. tests deviated most widely from those of the prototype,

The curves whic1> resulted when the distance traveled from entry was plotted against time . were also compared, as a greater distance trav- eled in a given time represents a lesser drag. Figures 5 and 6 show the distance from entry in calibers plotted against prototype time. These curves substantiate the trends in model behavior which were evident in the cur ves of Figs. 3 and

4.

Drag of the Standard Mk 13-6 Torpedo Model

Variation of Drag Along the Trajectory

The model test data were

sufficient to deter-

*see Appendix I for description of Launching Tank and Data Analyzer.

projectile was contacting

the cavity wall, 85o/o of the instantaneous drag coefficients were between 0.18 and 0. 30. The maximum and minimum values were 0. 36 and 0, 15, respectively. This coefficient should be comparable to that of the hemisphere at zero cavitation number (Cd)O because the flow sepa- rates on the hemispnerical portion of the nose and the cavitation number is essentially zero. (The depth of submergence is small and t.he ve- locity high during this portion of the trajectory.) The value of (Cd)O is approximately 0. 22~ and, hence, in reasonable agreement with the meas- ured values.

only the

nose

of the

The first contact of the torpedo tail with the cavity wall (tail slap) was always followed by an increase in drag coefficient, and after tail slap the value of the drag coefficient fluctuated. Be- tween tail slap and a distance of 50 calibers from entry, 80o/o of the instantaneous drag coef- ficients were between 0. 28 and 0. 40. The maxi- mum and minimum coefficients measured during this portion of the trajectories were 0. 48 and 0, 23, respectively. The steady state drag coef- ficients measured within a range of cavitation numbers producing somewhat comparable cavi- ties varied from 0. 30 to 0. 498 and, hence, are in fair agreement with the transient values ob- tained. Beyond a distance of 50 calibers from entry the measured drag coefficients varied from 0. 14 to 0. 35. Unfortunately, it was not possible to establish the end of the cavity phase. However, the data do show that the cavity was still present after the first 50 calibers of under- water traveL

Figures 7 and 8 show the variation in drag coefficient with time from entry during' six typi- cal tests. Tail slap and the approximate orien- tation of the projectile in the cavity are indicated on the curves,

Effect of Initial Pitch

The path of the torpedo could be varied from

initial pitch .

The values of the critical pitch which separate

the upturning from diving trajectories are lated in Table II.

tabu-

broach to steep dive by changing the

vVhen the

torpedo was

launched with large

initial pitch,

either flat or steep,

tail slap oc-

curred as the afterbody crossed the surface of

*Extrapolation of pressure distribution data 7 ' 8 gives 0. 26 for the (Cd)O based upon the diameter of the hemisphere. This reduces to 0. 22 for the torpedo because the diameter of the hemispheri- cal nose is less than the maximum diameter of the torpedo upon which the drag coefficient of

the

torpedo was based .

.c

]

4

;

6

>-

0

0>-

~t:

>o

(/)0

1.0

9

.

0.8

0

0.7

0.6

6 >- 0 0>- ~t: >o (/)0 1.0 9 . 0.8 0 0.7 0.6 "" t-L~".--:::-::r:c--t---
"" t-L~".--:::-::r:c--t--- PITCH O.I°F 0 .30S '-''Q., " ,---t_ --- TRAJ 18.9° 18
""
t-L~".--:::-::r:c--t--- PITCH O.I°F
0 .30S
'-''Q.,
"
,---t_
---
TRAJ
18.9°
18 .3°
1---'~~
""' 6
+
VEL
120 .6 FPS
117.9 FPS
I
~~
I
f---- +-- ~~_""'k,*f::t.-+-,------11-+~--+------+------+----+-----l-------'
+T I ~',
1/
~',, ~',
r----4-----r------ 4-----+•~v~~~-----1--------1--------1--------4-------~
',
'+
+
R--,
u"'-
:
+
""
+,+
~'--tt~',,
+
+
AIR
PRESSURE
IN
MODEL
SYSTEM
~~
I
ATM
--------+--------+
------~

0.5~------~------~~~+"'~~,.~~~- ------~------~-------+-------+-------4------~

0.41------+----~--~~ 0 ~~~'~----4----4---- - ~----~----+---­

:::>

J

oLLI

LLI>

z

<t>-

1-0::

ZI-

etZ

1-LLI

(/)

z

0.3

0.2 t------+----+-----t------4--- +

0.1 t------+----4----

0.091--------4-------~~------4-------~~------4--------+

>-

0

0

J

LLI

>

(/)

:::>

0

I.U

z

<t

z

<t

(/)

z

>-

0

0

J

LLI

>

>-

0::

z

LLI

0.080

1.0

0.9

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 DISTANCE FROM ENTRY MEASURED ALONG TRAJECTORY-CALIBRES
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
DISTANCE
FROM
ENTRY
MEASURED
ALONG
TRAJECTORY-CALIBRES
',
PITCH
0 .3°5
1.0°5
PROTOTYPE
DATA
~i"
TRAJ
18 .9°
18.5 °
RUN
PITCH
TRAJECTORY
VELOCITY
-
lo
+
VEL
122.1
FPS
119.2
FPS
NO.
FPS
""'
-
0
824
0.7F
20.4
397
~'X,
I
I
X
AVERAGE
VALUES
FROM
5
RUNS
-
'"'+~ "·
624
0.6F
19.7
393
--~:-,
I
635
0 .6F
19.8
387
-
639
0 .9F
20.4
394
~+~
824
0.7F
20.4
397
',
1195
OBS
20.3
418
+
AVERAGE
5
RUNS
AVERAGE
VALUES FROM
VELOCITY : 402
F PS
',
+
~
'
+
+
~
X
--+
~
',
+
+
'
+
+
~
1'-,
AIR
PRESSURE
IN
MODEL
SYSTEM
""'--------,
X
1/2
ATM
'
'" ',
'
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
DISTANCE
FROM
ENTRY
MEASURED ALONG
TRAJECTORY-CALIBRES
Fig.
3
-
Velocity as
a
function
of distance
fr.om entry measured along

0.2

0.1

0.09

0.080

the trajectory for the

standard Mk 13-6 torpedo model and prototype

C«<flff&L!Lb . t

1.0 ' PITCH 0 .8°S ' 1 0 .1°S 0.9 ~+ TRAJ 18 .8° 18
1.0
'
PITCH
0 .8°S
'
1 0 .1°S
0.9
~+
TRAJ
18 .8°
18 .8°
0.8
VEL
+
120} FPS
~~
1)7.3 FPS
0.7
~X
L
j_
0.6
~
L
r:::,~
0.5
>-
1-
~~
< :>
0
0.4
>-
J
1-
w
>
:> <
~
en
0
0.3
J
+
:::::>
w
'
0
>
w
K+x +
z
>-
<{
a::
1-
z
1-
0.2
z
+
~,
~
w
++
en
z
f+-
~
"'
+
~--
AIR
PRESSURE
IN
MODEL
SYSTEM
1/11 ,ATM
X
0 .1
0 .09
0.08 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
DISTANCE
FROM
ENTRY MEASURED
ALONG
TRAJECTORY-CALIBRES
1.0
,,
,,
PITCH
0 .2°F
o.6°S
PROTOTYPE
DATA
0.9
\'~+
TRAJ
18.6°
19.2°
0.8
RUN
PITCH TRAJECTORY
VELOCITY
+
VEL
119.9 FPS
120. 1 FPS
0
NO.
0
6
FP S
0
.7
J
I
824
0.7F
20.4
397
~X
L
v
0
0
.6
X
AVERAGE VALUES
FROM
5
RUN S
'~
I
6
2 4
0
.6F
19 .7
393
)(
635
0
.6F
19. 8
387
>-
·
0 .5
639
0.9F
20.4
394
!::
~:-~
824
0 .7F
20.4
397
< :>
'
X.
0
1195
o.as
20 .3
418
>-
0 .4
J
'~
l+
w
1-
+
AVERAGE
VALUES FROM 5 RUN S
>
:> <
~
+
AVERAGE
VELOCITY : 402
FP S
en
0
~X
J
0 .3
:::::>
w
+~
0
+
w
>
z
<{
>-
~
+
+
1-
a::
)(.
z
z
1- 0.2
--+
-
+
<{
u
w
1-
"'
++
(/)
z
~
+
+
'
'
+
'
'
,
AIR
PRESSURE IN
1/22
MODEL SYSTEM
ATM
,
X
0 .1
'
- -
'
0
.09
'
0
.080
'
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
DISTANCE
FROM
ENTRY
MEASURED
ALONG
TRAJECTORY-CALIBRES

Fig.

4

-

Velocity as

a

function

of distance

from

entry measured along

7

the trajectory for the standard Mk 13-6 torpedo model and prototype

'·"'"" 1

8

&eiiHdLhddi

(f) w 100 0::: AIR PRESSURE I I I ro ~~MMODEL SYSTEM I I ::J
(f)
w
100
0:::
AIR
PRESSURE
I
I
I
ro
~~MMODEL SYSTEM I
I
::J
PITCH
O. I°F
I . I 0 S
o
+
<!
~
90
(.)
TRAJ .
189°
18.5°
----
I
~
0:::
VEL--f;'~~
0
80
-
f-
(.)
w
J
I
<!
~
70
·-f---
-
0:::
r- --
f-
/.~~--
(9
z
60
-I-
---
r--
-
0
_j
<!
/~
0
--
50
w
-~
0:::
&0
::::>
(f)
#
<!
40
--
w
1/
~
~
0:::
30
----
- 1----
f-
z
w
20
,-
-
f-·
-
~
0
0:::
l.L
w
10
--
- 1-----
(.)
z
~
~
02
0.4
0 .6
08
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2 .0
2 .2
2.4
0
(f)
w
100
0:::
1
I
I
ro
PRESSU~E
AIR
IN
MODEL
SYSTEM
::J
1/2
ATM
D
+
v
<!
I
I
(.)
90
I
~
~
I
I
.,
/
0:::
0/
0
PITCH
0 .3°S
1.0°S
/
f-
80
TRAJ .
18.3°
18.5°
v
(.)
w
VEL.
122.1\ 1192_):1;~~
J
<!
0:::
70
f-
~
(9
/
z
0
60
PROTOTYPE
DATA
_j
<!
/
RUN
PITCH
TRAJECTORY
VELOCITY
NO.
0
0
FPS
0
~
w
50
0
624
0.5F
20 .3
406
0:::
::::>
~
0
626
0.5F
20 .3
406
(f)
X
634
1. 1F
20 .3
413
<!
A
w
40
0
635
0 .5F
20.3
407
~
/
6
636
2.4F
20.4
399
+
637
0 .8F
~
20.3
402
0:::
30
ISl
824
0 .7F
20.4
397
f-
v
z
0
AVERAGE
VALUES
FROM
w
5
RUNS:
I
RUN
PITCH
TRAJECTORY
VELOCITY
~
20
NO.
0
0
FPS
0
0:::
I
624
0
.6F
19 . 7
393
l.L
635
0
.6F
19 .8
387
w
10
637
0.9F
20.4
394
(.)
z
v
824
0.7F
20.4
397
<!
1195
0 .8S
20.3
418
f-
(f)
0
0 .2
0.4
OS
OS
10
12
1.4
IS
IS
2.0
2.2
2.4
TIME
FROM
ENTRY-PROTOTYPE
SECONDS
Fig.
5
-
as a function of time for the standard Mk 13-6
torpedo model and prototype
Distance
from
entry measured along the trajectory

G@iih&C . tbial

.-.n ?J aau (/) w 100 a:: I I I I ro AIR PRESSURE IN
.-.n
?J aau
(/)
w 100
a::
I
I
I
I
ro
AIR
PRESSURE
IN
MODEL SYSTEM
::J
11 11
ATM
D
+
JTCH
J 8°S
Jos
<1
90
TRAJ.
18.8°
188°
0 I
X
VEL
120.2FPS 117.3 FPS
>-
a::
\
~
'\
0
1-
80
0
J?--v~
w
J
<1
a::
70
v
1-
<.D
/
z
60
-
0
f--
-
_j
<1
'/
0
+
50
1----
-
w
a::
v
::::>
(/)
<1
40
w
::2'
6L
>-
a::
30
1-
I
z
w
I
::2'
-
20
-
c-
-
0
a::
f_
LL
w
-
10
-
0
z
l
;:!
(/)
00
0 .2
0.4
0 .6
0.8
1.0
1.2
14
1.6
1.8
20
2.2
24
0
(/)
w 100
a::
ro
~ODEL
1
AIR 1 PREssJRE
IN
sYsTEJ
::J
1/22 ATM
D
+
<1
90
f--
0
I
X
t-----
>-
a::
0
"'
vv---
1=2
80
-
-
c-
0
v
w
6
J
<1
a::
r---
-
70
t--
-
v
~
t-
1-
PITCH
0.2°F
0.6°S
TRAJ .
18.6°
0
19.2°
<.D
z
VEL .
+
0 /
1199 FPS 120.1FPS
60
v
PROTOTYPE
DATA
0 _j
\
<1
"'?
RUN
PITCH
TRAJECTORY
VELOCITY
0
NO.
0
FPS
0
w
50
-
+
a::
v
0
624
0.5 F
20.3
406
::::>
0
626
0 .5
F
20.3
406
(/)
X
634
1.1
F
20. 3
413
<1
w
40
0
635
0.5 F
20.3
407
::2'
6/
D.
636
2.4F
20.4
399
>-
+
637
0 .8F
20.3
402
a::
30
I--
lSI
824
0 .7F
20.4
397
1-
z
If
0
AVERAGE
VALUES
FROM
5
RUNS
w
I
RUN
PITCH
TRAJECTORY
VELOCITY
::2'
20
f--------
NO.
0
0
FPS
0
a::
f
624
0.6F
19.7
393
LL
635
0 .6F
19. 8
387
w
10
-
f--
1--
637
0 .9F
20.4
394
0
z
11
824
0.7F
20.4
397
<1
1195
0 .8S
20.3
418
1-
(/)
00
0 .2
0.4
0 .6
0 .8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
0
2.0
2.2
2.4
TIME
FROM
ENTRY- PROTOTYPE SECONDS
Fig.
6
-
as a function of time for the standard Mk 13-6
torpedo model and prototype
Distance
from
entry measured along the trajectory

73ont±&EIIE±&r-

9

10

10 AIR PRESSURE I ATM 0.4 APPROXIMATELY 1/2 OF RING < Q > I SHROUD ON
10 AIR PRESSURE I ATM 0.4 APPROXIMATELY 1/2 OF RING < Q > I SHROUD ON

AIR

PRESSURE

I

ATM

0.4

APPROXIMATELY

1/2

OF

RING

<

Q

>

I

SHROUD

ON T A IL CONTACTING CAVIT Y WALL n. < IL CONTACTIN G PORTI ON
ON
T A IL
CONTACTING
CAVIT Y
WALL
n.
< IL
CONTACTIN G PORTI ON OF
_J
0

(/)

SHROUD RING VARYING BETWEEN 1/2 AND 5 /8

~

z

w

> <

IL

IL

w

0 0.2

> <

0.3

LAUNCHING

VELOCITY

CONDITIONS

121.9

FPS

(!)

<

a::

0

TRAJECTORY 1e .s•

PITCH 5.2• F :::E _J 1 0 <( ~ I- PITCH FROM I- 0 CRITICAL
PITCH
5.2• F
:::E
_J
1
0
<(
~
I-
PITCH
FROM
I-
0
CRITICAL
6 .9•F
ID
SHROUD
RING
ON
TAIL
ENTIRELY
CONTACTING
CAVITY
WALL
oOO
LAUNCHING
CONDITIONS
0
0
VELOCITY
117. 9
FPS
TRAJECTORY 1e.s•
PITCH
I.
I
S
PITCH
FROM
CRITICAL
0.6 • F

0 .

0.0

0.4

Q

> <

I

~ z

w

> <

IL

IL

w

0

> <

(!)

ct

a::

0

0. 3

0.2

0. 1

0 .0

0.01

TIME

FROM

0 . 1 ENTRY-SECONDS

1.0

Fig.

7

-

from entry for the sta ndard Mk 13-6 torpedo model

Instantaneous

coefficient of drag as

a function

of t ime

CMHi Ide h e+e.t

0.5 0.4 0 .3 AIR PRESSURE >- 1/11 ATM t- ~ 0 ctO Ju., 1/)0

0.5

0.4

0 .3

AIR PRESSURE >- 1/11 ATM t- ~ 0 ctO Ju., 1/)0 J::E -o ~t- t-
AIR
PRESSURE
>-
1/11 ATM
t-
~
0 ctO
Ju.,
1/)0
J::E
-o
~t-
t-
0
m
LAUNCHING
CONDITIONS
0 0
VELOCITY
121.2
FPS
TRAJECTORY
18.7"
APPROXIMATELY
1/2
OF SHROUD
RING
PITCH
5 . 3"
F
ON
TAIL
CONTACTING
CA V ITY
WALL
0
0
0
PITCH
FROM
CRITICAL
8.0" F
APPROXIMATELY
1/6
OF SHROUD
RING
r(ON
TAIL
CONTACTING
CAVITY
WALL
0
LAUNCHING
CONDITIONS
o
oo o
0
>-
VELOCITY
119.5
FPS
t-
~
TRAJECTORY 18 . 8"
~0

PITCH

2.0° s

PITCH

FROM

CRITICAL

0.7"F

J

1/)u 0

J

-:::e

'"'o

t-t-

b

m

0.7"F J 1/)u 0 J -:::e ' " ' o t-t- b m >- t- a.-

>-

t-

a.-

3/4

~APPROXIMATELY

ON

TAIL CONTACT I NG

OF

SHROUD

RING

CAVITY

WALL

c

0

I

t-

z

w

0

u

u

w

0

0 0.2

(!)

'"'

a::

a

c

0

I

t-

z

w

0

it

w

0

0

(!)

'"'

a::

a

c

0

I

t-

z

w

0

u::

u

w

0

0

(!)

a::

a

'"'

0 .1

0 .0

0.4

0.1

0.0

'"'~ 1/) 0 Jo 0.4 :::!~-- t-a. '"' 0 t- 0 0 .3 0 0
'"'~ 1/)
0
Jo
0.4
:::!~--
t-a.
'"'
0
t-
0
0 .3
0
0
LAUNCHING
CONDITIONS
VELOCITY
0.2
115.9
FPS
0
TRAJECTORY
19.0"
s
6 .4°
0 . 1
PITCH
FROM
CRITICAL
3 .7"5
0.01
0.1

TIME

FROM

ENTRY-SECONDS

Fig.

8

-

Instantaneous

coefficient of drag as a function of time

from

entry for the

standard Mk 13-6 torpedo model

Fig. 8 - Instantaneous coefficient of drag as a function of time from entry for the

11

12

0 .10 0 .10 ::r: ::r: (.) (/) (/) (.) 1- 0 0 1::: z
0
.10
0 .10
::r:
::r:
(.)
(/)
(/)
(.)
1-
0
0
1:::
z
a:
z
u.
0
0
J
(.)
(.)
J
<(
LJJ
LJJ
<(
(/)
0
.08
(.)
(/)
0.08
< :>
I
-
I
1-
-
a.
a.
t:
0:::
<(
<(
0:::
(.)
(.)
_J
_J
(J')
(/)
_J
_J
<(
0.06
0.06
~
1-
0
0
z
z
<(
<(
0
>-
>-
a:::
a:::
0.04
1-
0.04
1-
z
z
LJJ
LJJ
z
z
0
LJJ
LJJ
LJJ
LJJ
3C
3C
0
1- 0.02
1-
0
.02
LJJ
LJJ
ID
ID
LJJ
LJJ
0
0
:::!!
AIR
PRESSURE
:::!!
AIR
PRESSURE
1-
I ATM
1-
112 ATM
0 .0 8
6
4
2
0
2
4
6
6
4
2
0
2
4
6
STEEP
FLAT
STEEP
FLAT
INITIAL
PITCH- DEGREES
INITIAL
PITCH-DEGREES
0.10
0
. 10
(/)
::r:
0
(/)
::r:
z
(.)
0
(.)
1-
z
0
1-
a::
(.)
0
a::
LJJ
0
J
(/)
LJJ
J
<(
I
(/)
<(
0.08
(.)
0 .08
a.
(.)
I
<(
-
1-
a.
1-
_J
0:::
<(
0:::
(/)
(.)
_J
(.)
(/)
_J
_J
<(
<i
1- 0.06
0.06
1-
0
z
0
z
<(
<(
>-
>-
a:::
0
a:::
!-
0 .04
z
1-
0
.04
z
LJJ
LJJ
z
z
--
---
LJJ
0
LJJ
0
LJJ
LJJ
p
3C
3C
1-
0.02
1-
0
.02
LJJ
LJJ
ID
ID
LJJ
0
LJJ
:::!!
:::!!
AIR
PRESSURE
AIR
PRESSURE
i=
0
1-
1111
ATM
1122
ATM
0.0 8
0.0 8
6
4
2
0
2
4
6
6
4
2
0
2
4
6
STEEP
FLAT
STEEP
FLAT

INITIAL PITCH-DEGREES

INITIAL

PITCH-DEGREES

Fig .

9

-

Time from

entry to tail slap as a function of initial pitch

 

for the

standard Mk 13-6 torpedo model

j$ I

Hd@UU&'ir

the water.

As the initial pitch approached criti-

cal pitch,

tail slap became progressively later

(Fig. 9). If tail slap did not occur at entry, the portion of the projectile in contact with the cavi- ty wall after tail slap varied, causing the bubble configuration to fluctuate. At an initial pitch of

about

water at the cavity wall and then returned com- pletely into the cavity. When tail slp.p occurred at entry, the orientation of the projectile in the cavity was relatively constant if the initial pitch

was flat. If the initial pitch was steep, the ori- entation of the projectile was less stable. Since the torpedo contacts the top of the cavity when the initial pitch is steeper than critical, the lesser stability may be caused by the force of gravity pulling the projectile away from the cavity wall. Figures 10 and 11 include sets of drag coefficient vs. time curves from runs with air pressures of 1 atm. and 1/11 atm. arranged

Both

t he absolute

trajectory} and the initial pitches w ith res pect

to critical pitch are noted on these curves. The

pitch with respect to critical should be used in comparing results from the two air pressures. These data show that the drag on the torpedo is similarly affected by change in initial pitch at both air pressures. Further, these data also show that the fluctuation of the instantaneous drag coefficient reflected the changing orienta- tion of the projectile in the ca v ity. (Also see Figs. 7 and 8.} The drag coefficient was rela-

tively constant after tail

pitch .was extremely flat. When the initial pitch was steeper than critical, the drag coefficient increased at tail slap and then diminished, sug- gesting that the projectile was falling away from the top of the cavity. At the intermediate initial pitc he s the drag coefficient fluctuated after tail slap, reflecting the bouncing motion of the pro- jectile in the cavity.

0° t h e entire shroud ring contacted the

in order of increasingly steep initial pitch.

initial pitches (pitch with respect to

slap w hen the initial

The average drag on the projectile was per-

pro-

ceptibly lower ne ar critical pitch where the

jectile traveled longest with only its nose in con-

tact with the cavity wall. This is evident in Fig. 12, which shows the distance vs. time data taken with an air pressure of 1/ ll atm . The curve from the run with an initial pitch close to criti- cal is perceptibly higher than the others, indi- cating the lesser drag. The same effect was apparent at the other pressure conditions in- vestigate d .

Effect of Atmospheric

Pr essure

The standard Mk 13-6 torpedo is r e lativ e ly insensitive to change in atmospheric pressure. However, some slight but consistent differences

were noted . Nithin an

the average drag on the projectile during the first 75 calibers of travel increased slightly

initial pitch range of.±. 1°,

of travel increased slightly initial pitch range of.±. 1°, TABLE II. CRITICAL PITCH% STANDARD Mk 13-6

TABLE

II.

CRITICAL PITCH%

STANDARD Mk

13-6

TORPEDO MODEL

13

Tank

Critical

Air

Press.

Pitch

Std.

Atm.

 

0

1

l.

7 s

1/2

2.

0 s

1/ 11

2.

7 s

l/22

2.

3 s

%These values are from

a

pitch

sensitivity study currently in progress in the launching tank.

with decrease in atmospheric pressure.%% This is evident from Fig. 13 which shows the dis- tance vs. time curves from runs made at air pressures of l, l /2, 1/11, and 1/ 22 atm. The curves become progressively lower as the at- mospheric pressure diminishes, indicating the increase in drag.

The trajectories at 1/22 atm. differed some- what in shape from those at the other pressures (Fig. 14). Further, the variation of me an drag as a function of time (or distance from entry) at l/22 atm. differed from that at other pressures . At l/22 atm. the mean drag coefficient increased with time (Fig. 15). while at the other pressures the mean coefficient remained essentially con- stant from tail slap to the end of the cavity phase.

Effect of a Finer Nose Shape on the Mk 13-6 Torpedo Mode 1

Sensitivity to Atmospheric

Pressure

The drag on the Head I model was

lower than

that of the standard Head F model. This is evi-

dent in Fig. 16, which shows the distance vs. time data from both the Head F and Head I tor- pedoes.

The instantaneous drag coefficients measured on the Head I model ranged from 0. 10 to 0. 38, (Fig. 17). The variation of instantaneous drag coefficient with time was similar for both tor- pedoes. Further, the mean drag coefficient of the Head I model increased with time only at l /22 atm. (An increase in drag with decrease in pressure was also evident in the data taken with the Head F model.) However, the drag on the Head I model was extremely sensitive to change in atmospheric pressure, for the drag

*±At the time of this analysis complete p re s - sure-sensiti vity data were not available for the extreme initial pitch conditions.

~

§o

Lial

"""

stand a rd Mk 13 -6 tor pedo m od e 1

t he

f o r

J> l- J J J JU. J J J 1 0 5 I I AIR
J>
l-
J
J
J
JU.
J
J
J
1
0
5
I
I
AIR
PRESSUREAIR
I PRESSURE
ATM
I ATM
(.) 0
(.)
I
0.5
0.4
i
1-
·.!-
0
z
z LLJ 0 0.4
LLJ
~
J
b
~
v« n 1\
;:; 03
LAUNCHING CONDITIONS
00.3
LAUNCHING
CONDITIONS
0191
0
;y ~!9
u. u.
u
"~
~~
u
(9C
VEL
121.9
FPS
117.9 FPSVEL
LLJ
LLJ
Q_ loP'
18 .6°TRAJ
go2
TRAJ
18.6°
go.2
I
~
PITCH
5.2"F
Li
I . I • SPITCH
Cl.
(l.
Li 0
<.!)
<l: c;l :.i:
<.!)
<
<(
<(
C/)
~
0.1
PITCH
FROM 6 .9 • F
o- 0 ~--~
:50.1
PITCH
FROM 0 .6 • F
o- =-~
CRITICAL
CRITICAL
t;o
<i
~
t)o ~--~
1-
l-ID
(I)
0
0
0.01
0.011.(0
0.0•01
0.1
0.0 101
0.1
1.( 0
(.)0
(.) I 0 0.4
I 0.4
1-
1-
z
z
~~~
LLJ
~
\1 ~ :2Srtl
~03
LAUNCHING
CONDITIONS
LAUNCHING CONDITIONS
(.) ~0.3
'""'-"'t1" ~
E
l:LJ
7
N:
~
(l. <>- tt~
u u 8o.2 LLJ
p
VEL
121.3
FPS
VEL
120.9
FPS
(
ih
00.2
TRAJ
18 .3"
TRAJ
18 . 1°
"!
0 .5
10"
(.)
Cl.Li
-<t
<l:O
2. 6" SPITCH
3.o· FPITCH
<.!)
<.!)
:.>-
(/")
<t
<t
0~
~
1--- 1- :::! < t->
01
PITCH
FROM
:5 0 .1
PITCH
FROM 0 .9° S
r-
t-el:
CRITICAL
CRITICAL
4 .7" F
oo
g:g,
(I)
Q 0 <o xo Li
<t
0
0
0.0•01
0 .010
.0 )01
0.1
0.01
0.1
1.( 0
I .I0
I
i
(.)00.4
0
)0 .4
w
1-
1-
z I
~~~
z
jo
9% I ro<
p
n
~
0.3
1----
LAUNCH lNG
CONDITIONS
LAUNCHING
CONDITIONS
(.)
(.) ~0.3
ib
~~
~
f-a
u. u.
u::
p
2VEL FPS119.
VEL
120.6
FPS
u.
LLJ
Q
>-
0
0.2
TRAJ
18 .4°
TRAJ
18 .9°
ot."P" ,.(j
1-
(.)
8 LLJ 0.2
Li 0
PITCH
6 .0• S
PITCH
O. I"F
<
(l.
~
<.!)
<l:
<t
0
(/")
:Ot-
(/")
~
0.1
PITCH
FROM 1.8" F
o-
0::0.1
PITCH
FROM
r---
0 ~
t-> >-
-0
4 .3 • SCRITICAL
CRITICAL
1-<
;:!o 0 1-
oo
~
(I)
0
0 0 .001
0 .1
1.0
0.001
0 .01
TIME
FROM
0.1
ENTRY-SECONDS
0.01
TIME
FROM
ENTRY-SECONDS
Fig.
10
- Instantaneous
1.0
drag coefficient as
a functi o n of time
from
entry
0.01 TIME FROM ENTRY-SECONDS Fig. 10 - Instantaneous 1.0 drag coefficient as a functi o n

U1

entry

from

of time

standa rd Mk 13 -h torpedo model

a function

Instantaneous drag coefficient as

the

ENTRY-SECONDS

for

-

ll

FROM

Fig.

TIME

~

coefficient as the ENTRY-SECONDS for - ll FROM Fig. TIME ~ o 0.5 I I AIR
o 0.5 I I AIR PRESSURE I 1111 ATM u 0 0.4 ~ w ~
o
0.5
I
I
AIR
PRESSURE
I
1111 ATM
u 0 0.4
~
w ~ z
cfa.b~I
_0
n
0
0.3
LAUNCHING
CONDITIONS c ,0~I.Y"
ltt
~'1
Ll
p
Ll
VEL
120.2
FPS
UJ
0
0.2
TRAJ
18.8"
(.)
I
I\J 9
ll.
u.
PITCH
0 .8" S
<>:
(!)
I
0
0
_J
<X
~,
r-
CJ)
gs 0 . 1
d:::
PITCH
FROM
_J oo
t->
CRITICAL
1.9" F
t-<l
<>:
1-
m
0
0 ).001 '
0 .01
0 .1
1.( 0
I
--
(.) 0 0.4
1-
z I
~;50
~
0.3
LAUNCHING CONDITIONS
0
(.)
u: Ll
~
jQS
VEL
119.5
FPS
R
~
0.2
TRAJ
18 . 8°
(.)
I~
u.
PITCH
2 .0° s
(!)
<>:
,
<X
:::;t-
gs 0
<Jlo-
PITCH
FROM
t->
CRITICAL
0.7° F
- ll.o _J _J
1-
<>:
<>:
ou
1-m
0
1.001
0 .01
.I
I( 0
f
o0.4
(.)
b~~
1-
z I
0
~
0.3 I
LAUNCHING CONDITIONS 0
(.)
!?
~
~
Ll Ll ~ 0.2
VEL
115.9
FPS
,
TRAJ
19 . 0"
p' ~-
(.)
Cl.l:::
PITCH
6.4" s
(!)
<>:>
_j<l
<(
CJ)U
~0
PITCH
FROM
_,u.
_o
CRITICAL
3.7• s
<lll.
1-0
1-
0
0 .001
0 .01
0
I
1.0
TIME
FROM
ENTRY-SECONDS
, 0.5,-----------.---,---,--,-,-,,,,---,--,-,-,~~ AIR PRESSURE 1!11 ATM u: Ll r1\ 1 1111111 VEL 121.2 FPS!l. u.
,
0.5,-----------.---,---,--,-,-,,,,---,--,-,-,~~
AIR
PRESSURE
1!11 ATM
u:
Ll
r1\ 1 1111111
VEL
121.2
FPS!l.
u. ,
<>:0
0 UJ
0.2
TRAJ
18.7"
(.)
~
PITCH
5.3" F
--' ~;
(!)
<X
-
1-<>:
~gt)
~
0.1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
PITCH
FROM
CRITICAL
8.0 ° F
0 0.001
I '
I II
I
I
II II 0 . 1
I
I
I
II
0.01 I
1 II' 10
c j
(.)0 0.4
1-
z I
UJ
0 . 3
00 ""'"'
(.)
""""'"
tt
VEL
121.3
0
1111111
0 UJ
0.2
TRAJ
18.8"
(.)
lb
PITCH
3.6 ° F
(!)
<X
~~ o-
~
z ~
0 .1
~:::;i:
-~.---r-
PITCH
FROM
1
I I Ill
1
1
I
II
II
1
CRITICAL
6.3° F
<>:1-u
t-g ::'t-~
r1-rrrH-----r--r-+-r+++r
o~---------------+----,
0001
0.01
o<
0.4
(.) 0
0.3
'~""'"00""'"' ~~
2
Ll Ll
VEL
11 7 . 8
FPS
~
0.2
TRAJ
18.8"
(.)
O. I"SPITCH . 2.6" F
~
~
<>:0
_J t->
,
0.1
PITCH
FROM
-+- -
~~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--+ Cl.u.
CJ)
CRITICAL
_J
~
t-<l
t-oo
0
0 .001
I
m
I
0 .01
0 .1
1. 0

16

16 90 I I AIR PRESSURE 1111 ATM / I 80 f-- I !?' ~ c~
90 I I AIR PRESSURE 1111 ATM / I 80 f-- I !?' ~ c~
90
I
I
AIR
PRESSURE
1111
ATM
/
I
80
f--
I
!?'
~
c~
70
(f)
w
0:
(IJ
_J
<(
!J ~
0
I
>-
60
0:
0
f-
0
A~
w
r
J
<(
0:
f-
~
(.!)
z
50
0
_J
<(
0
w
0:
:::>
(f)
,
<(
w
40
r-
:::?!
>-
0:
f-
z
I
w
:::?!
0
30
0:
LL.
w
@
0
z
<(
f-
(f)
Ci
J
20
LAUNCHING
CONDITIONS
ABSOLUTE
PITCH
WITH
RESPECT
CURVES
VELOCITY
TRAJECTORY
PITCH
TO
CRITICAL
PITCH
FPS
0
0
A
119.5
18.8°
2.o 0 s
0.7"F
10
-
B
115.9
19.0 °
6.4°S
2 .7°S
c
117 . 3
18 .8°
0.1 os
2 .6°F
D
121 .2
18 .7"
5.3°F
8 .0°F
:/
E
12 1.3
18
.8°
3 .6° F
6 . 3°F
I
I
I
I
I
0 .10
0 .20
0 .30
0.40
0 .50
0 .60
0 .70
0.80
TIME
FROM
ENTRY -SECONDS
Fig.
12
-
Distance from entry m eas ured along trajectory as a function

c c

of time for the c :ttill1al
of time for the
c :ttill1al

standard Mk 13 -6 torpedo model

(f)

lJJ

0:::

f:Q

J

<X

(.)

I

>-

0:::

0

1-

(.)

lJJ

J

<X

0:::

1-

(!)

z

0

<X

Cl

lJJ

0:::

::::>

(f)

<X

lJJ

::E

>-

0:::

1-

z

lJJ

::E

0

0:::

LL.

J

lJJ

(.)

z

<X

1-

(f)

0

CS!&i&CIIEidl 90 v 2 1 2 ATMOS \ +ATMO/} L 80 / I ATMOS\ #
CS!&i&CIIEidl
90
v
2 1 2 ATMOS \
+ATMO/}
L
80
/
I
ATMOS\
#
v
-fr ATMOS ""\
70
v
d
60
A r
50
40
j V/1
30
#
NOTE:
EACH
CURVE
IS
AN
AVERAGE
OF
THE DATA FROM TWO RUNS-THE
CURVES FROM THE INDIVIDUAL RUNS
APPEAR
IN
FIGURES
5
AND
6
h
20
LAUNCHING
CONDITIONS
AIR
PRESSURE
Pf"!;CH
TRAJE CTORY
VELOCITY
0
ATM
FPS
0
. 1°
F
18 .9°
120 .6
I
10 /
I
. 1°
S
18 . 6°
II
7 .9
0.3°S
1/2
1.0°S
18 . 3°
18 . 5°
122 . I
119 .2
08°S
1/11
18 . 8
18.8 °
°
120 .2
0.1 °S
117 .3
0
.2°F
19 .2
°
1/22
0.6°S
18
.5 °
120 . I
119 . 2
0 0
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0 .60
0.70
0.80
TIME
FROM
ENTRY-SECONDS
Fig.
13
-
Distance from
entry measured along the trajectory as a function
of time for
the
standard Mk 13-6 torpedo model

ddHilcitmt 1

17

18

Confidential

coefficient increased about 80o/o when the air pressure was reduced from 1 atm . to 1/22 atm. This extreme sensitivity to pressure is not sur- prising because, as previously reported, 1 the trajectory of this mode 1 varied from a steep dive at an air pressure of 1 atm. to a broach at a pressure of 1/22 atm. The photographs in Fig. 18 were reproduced from actual test data recorded during the launching of the Head I model. at an air pressure of 1 atm. The photo- graphs show the instantaneous orientations of the projectile and the cavity at successive points along the trajectory.

Sensitivity to Initial Pitch

No pitch sensitivity data were available when this analysis was made. However, later visual observation indicated that the mo<lel with Head I behaved similarly to that with Head F. Its tra- jectory could be varied from broach to dive with change in initial pitch and the drag was slightly less near critical pitch .

Remarks

Further study of pressure-sensitive models is ne c essary to fully understand the markedly low drag on the Head I model at 1 atm. It is probably caused by the same phenomena which produce the steeply diving trajectory.3 Un- fortunately, the present data do not show enough of the cavity c onfiguration to make measurement of the bubble diameter or determination of the separation point possible.

An extensive

investigation of a

shape that is

pressure sensitive at model size is currently in progress. A wide range of carefully con- trolled conditions will be investigated with both model and prototype. From these data it is

typ e drag characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

The following conclusions were drawn from

the

results

of this analysis:

1. Within an initial pitch range of± 1°, the

drag on the standard (Head F) Mk 13-6 torpedo during the first 50 calibers of underwater travel

is modeled by Froude scaling to the accuracy of the prototype data. However, the results from

atm. are in

runs made at 1/2 atm. and 1/ ll

closest c o rrespondence prototype data.

with the

bulk of the

2. Within an initial pitch range of±. l 0 , the

average drag on the Head F model during the

first 75 calibers of underwater travel increases

with decrease

in atmospheric

pressure.

3.

perceptibly lower near critical pitch.

The

average

drag on the Head F

model is

4. The or i entation of the Head F model in the

cavity influences the ficient.

instantaneous drag coef-

5. At a constant trajectory angle and entry ve-

model

in the cavity is primarily determined by initial pitch.

locity the initial orientation of the Head F

6. The drag on the model decre a ses when the

finer Dunn nose (Head I) is substituted for the standard Head F.

7. The Head I model is extremely sensitive to

atmospheric pressure. The drag increase s about 80o/o when t he pres sure is reduced from

hoped to gain an insight of the physical condi-

1

to

1/ 22

atm.

tions which produce the markedly low drag on the Head I model at 1 atm., and to determine

8.

The markedly low drag on the Head I model

conclusively whether a Froude-scaled,

equal-

at

l

atm.

and the

phenomena causing it should

cavitation number system will reproduce

proto-

be

subjected to further

study.

~ 0 AIR PRESSURE I ATM 1/22 ATM a:: VELOCITY 120.6 FPS 120. 1 FPS
~
0
AIR
PRESSURE
I
ATM
1/22
ATM
a::
VELOCITY
120.6
FPS
120.
1
FPS
CD
TRAJECTORY 18 .9°
19.2
°
_J
PITCH
0.1°
F
0.6° s
<l:
/
--
(.)
I
10
I
1--
c
1/2 ATM
w
122.1
FPS
Cl
18. 3°
0 .3° s
20

Fig.

0

10

14

-Effect of au

20

30

40

HORIZONTAL

50

6 0

TRAVEL- CALl BRES

70

80

pressure UIJOn the traject o ry of the standard Mk 13-6 t o rped o model

Confidential

90

19 0.5 0.4 Q oo (,) I 0 z ILl 0.3 00 0 ii: LAUNCHING

19

0.5 0.4 Q oo (,) I 0 z ILl 0.3 00 0 ii: LAUNCHING CONDITIONS
0.5
0.4
Q
oo
(,)
I
0
z
ILl
0.3
00
0
ii:
LAUNCHING
CONDITIONS
1
LA-
CONTACTING AREA OF SHROUO
RING INCREASING FROM 1/2 TO 7/8
PROJECTILE PITCHED ABOUT IO"F
>-
~ c
>
1/4
1-
APPROXIMATELY
OF SHROUg
RING
VELOCITY
119 .9
FPS
0.2
--- ON TAIL CONTACTING CAVITY WALL
~
<!)
a_
c >
~
TRAJECTORY
18. 6°
a:
<l
J
0
PITCH
0 . 2"
F
en
0.
1
J
PITCH
FROM
<l
1-
CRITICAL
2.5"F
0.0
APPROXIMATELY 5/ 8
OF SHROUD RING ON
1--------------+------- t- TAlL CONTACTING
0.
4
CAVITY WALY
Q
00 1':)0/
c >
I
1-
z
0.
3
ILl
0
(,)
LAUNCHING
CONDITIONS
APPROXIMATELY~
ii:
LA-
>-
OF
SHROUD
RING
ON
ILl
6~~~T$ 0 ~ltPI N
0
VELOCITY
120. 1 FPS
1-
G_
--\:---- =-=---1
0.2
(,)
a_
~
00
<lc
>
0
TRAJECTORY 19 . 2°
<!)
J
0
~
a:
(/)~
PITCH
0.6• s
0
0.
1
=~
<lO
PITCH
FROM
l-I-
CRITICAL
1.7"F
t-
0
CD
0.0
0.4
Q
(,)
I
1-
z
0.3
0
ILl
(.)
LAUNCHING
CONDITIONS
LA-
AREA
OF
CONTACT
BETWEEN
LA-
ILl
PROJECTILE
AND
CAVITY
WALL
0
VELOCITY
119.9
1> ---r-
0.2
FPS ---+-
o>,u--
~f.J
-----
INCREASING
(,)
a
<l
TRAJECTORY
19.1"
<lu
<!)
0
J
~
a:
PITCH
I . 7• S
(/)~
0
0 . 1
PITCH
FROM
CRITICAL 0 .6"F
0.0

0.00 1

Fig.

15

-

Instantaneous

for the

0~

1

TIME

FROM

ENTRY -

drag coe ffic ient as

a

~I

SECONDS

function of time

from

entry

sta n dard Mk 13-6 torpedo model

1.0

20

6 A

s

·

7

ntj.,r.

65 v i--1/11 ATM 1\ 60 v ~ Cll w 55 v a: "\ 1/22
65
v
i--1/11
ATM
1\
60
v
~
Cll
w 55
v
a:
"\
1/22
ATM
Ill
~\II ATM
J
~
\I
ATM
/
~
/
(.) 50
~
I
>-
a:
~
d
~
0
~
I
ATM
/
/
1-
45
\_1/22
ATM
(.)
§
~
w
-,
IY
~
~
a:
/
1-
40
v ~/
///'
(.!)
z
HEAD
I
HEAD
F
0
I
/L
/hv
;;t
35
0
!J ~
fY
LAUNCHING
CONDITIONS
w
a:
~
AIR
::>
30
.
PRESSURE
VELOCITY
TRAJECTORY
PITCH
-
Cll
ATM
FPS
~
w
V~
~
:I!;
I
HEAD
F
25
I
115.9
19.0
6.4S-
>-
a:
II r/
1-
1/11
117.3
18.8
O.IS
z
w
1122
120. 1
19 . 2
0.6S
_
:::!:
20
E7
0
lfJ
'
a:
HEAD
I
u
I
120.4
20 .3
0 .3S
w
v
-
15
(.)
1/11
121.6
20.1
0.2S
z
/;
1122
121.5
20 .5
0 .5F
~
1-
C/l
I
I
I
I
0
10
II
I
I
I
I
NOTE:
THE
RUNS
USED
FOR
COMPARISON
AT
EACH
5
PRESSURE
CONDITION
WERE
CHOSEN
-
ON
THE
1/
BASIS
OF
SIMILAR
TRAJECTORIES
I
I
I
I
l
0
0 0.02
0 .04
0.06
0 .08
0 . 10
0.12
0.14
0.16
0 . 18
0.20
TIME
FROM
ENTRY- SECONDS
Fig.
16
-
Distance from
of time for
the
entry measured along the trajectory as a function
standard (Head F) and Dunn (Head I)

models of the Mk 13-6 torpedo

eolfifd@liL¢'

<\cirf

<\cirf 0 u I z w u LL. LL. w 0 Q (.') ct 0::: 0

0

u

I

z

w

u

LL.

LL.

w

0

Q

(.')

ct

0:::

0

<\cirf 0 u I z w u LL. LL. w 0 Q (.') ct 0::: 0

AIR

PRESSURE

I

ATM

>-

0.4

--------------------------4------ ~~ -----------------+---------------------- -----1

~

~u

JLL.

_o

;':a. APPROXIMATELY 3/4 OF SHROUD RING ON TAIL CONTACTING CAVITY WALL 0 .3 0 I-
;':a.
APPROXIMATELY
3/4
OF
SHROUD
RING
ON
TAIL
CONTACTING
CAVITY
WALL
0 .3
0
I-
LAUNCHING
CONDITIONS
APPROXIMATELY 1/2 OF SHROUD RING
ON TAIL CONTACTING CAVITY WALL
0 :2
VELOCITY
120.4
FPS
TRAJECTORY
20.3"
PITCH
0.3° s
0.1
>-
I-

0.4

0

u