Attachment Line Data 12, 16, 24 degrees
First the disclaimer: there are not enough
pressure ports or films on the slat to give a great deal of confidence in the analysis.
The attachment line locations as predicted from the experimental
pressure ports are estimated to be located at:
12 degrees Angle of Attack (uncorrected)
eta
|
S, attachment
|
Xn, attachment
|
Zn, attachment
|
Effective Sweep, degrees
|
Rbar
|
0.17
|
0.029
|
9.71 |
-0.354
|
44.5
|
265
|
0.41
|
-0.52
|
23.72
|
-0.713 |
38.4
|
239
|
0.65
|
-0.67
|
37.60
|
-0.685
|
33.7
|
222
|
0.85
|
-0.67
|
49.05 |
-0.593
|
34.4
|
224
|
0.95
|
-0.19
|
54.38
|
-0.372
|
40.2
|
145
|
The above is FINAL DATA
The rough estimation of the uncertainty in the attachment line location
is discussed
here. If we assume that the best estimate is that made when
using a CFD solution that closely matches the pressure ports, then the
uncertainty in the location is approximately 5% of the slat chord (cs
= 5 inches). As shown in the discussion though, poorly place
ports can result in a difference of 10%cs. The effect of
the location of the attachment line and the number and placement of the pressure
ports is discussed here. As indicated there can be a large uncertainty
in the calculation of Rbar.
16 degrees Angle of Attack (uncorrected)
eta
|
S, attachment
|
Xn, attachment
|
Zn, attachment
|
Effective Sweep, degrees
|
Rbar
|
0.17
|
-0.496962
|
9.91808
|
-0.819718
|
31.4906
|
172.53
|
0.41
|
-0.76416
|
23.9255
|
-0.820747
|
29.7009
|
155.906
|
0.65
|
-0.962405
|
37.866
|
-0.774199
|
24.8682
|
150.421
|
0.85
|
-0.868811
|
49.2417
|
-0.647013
|
10.891
|
59.0676
|
0.95
|
-0.324655
|
54.4622
|
-0.421458
|
36.2957
|
113.912 |
24 degrees Angle of Attack (uncorrected)
eta
|
S, attachment
|
Xn, attachment
|
Zn, attachment
|
Effective Sweep, degrees
|
Rbar
|
| 0.17 |
-1.26426
|
10.5944 |
-1.17221
|
29.81
|
210.613
|
0.41
|
-1.28626
|
24.4209
|
-0.984413
|
38.9089
|
196.605
|
0.65
|
-0.605869
|
54.7229
|
-0.524954
|
60.8442 |
197.824 |