REPORT No.

563

CALCULATED AND MEASURED PRESSURE DISTRIBUTIONS OVER THE MIDSPAN

SECTION OF THE N. A. C. A. 4412 AIRFOIL

_By ROBERT _. I}INKERTON

SUMMARY local velocities over the surface; the pressures arc cal-
culated by means of Bernoulli's equation. Although
Pressures were si_mltaneously measured i_ the variable-
this method provides an inexpensive means of obtain-
density tunnel at 54 orifices distributed over the mid._pan
ing the distribution of pressure, the results may not be
section of a 5- by 30-b_ch rectangular model of the :\*. A.
in satisfactory agreement with measured results. Such
C. A. 4412 airfoil at 17 a_gles of atlact" ranging from
disagreement, however, is not surprising since the
--20 ° to 30 ° at a Reynolds Number of approximately
theory does not account for the effects of the viscous
3,000,000. Accurate data were thus obtained for study-
theory boundary layer.
ing the deviations of the results q[ potential-flow
A reasonably accurate method of calculating the
from measured results. The results of the analy._is and
pressure distribution over an airfoil section is desirable
a discussion of the experimental tech_dque are presented.
made either at and might be obtained by two procedures. First, such
It is shown that theoretical calculations
a method might be found by the development of a com-
the effective a_gle of attack or at a given actual l_t do not plete theory. Such a theory, however, must take into
accurately describe the observed pressure distr_butlon over account all the factors or phenomen,_ involved and
an aiTfoil section. There is therefore developed a modified must give satisfactory agreement with actual measure-
theoretical calculation that agrees reasonably well with ment. A second procedure, the most feasible one at
the measured results of the te_'ts of the N. ,t. C. A. _12 present, is the development of a rationai method of
correcting the application of the potential-flow theory
section a_d that consists of making the eaIculatlons and
to minimize the discrepancies between the theoretical
evaluating the circulation by means of the experimentally and measured results.
obtained lift at the effective angle of attaelc; i. e., the angle It was realized, however, that unusually reliable ex-
that the chord of the model ramies with the direction of the perimental pressure-distribution data for comparison
gow in the region, of the section u_der considerations. In with calculations were not available. The experi-
ments to obtain such data consisted of pressure
the course oJ the computations the shape parameter ¢ is
measurements at a large number of points around one
modified, thus leading to a modified or an effective profile
section of an airfoil. :Because the investigation was
shape that differs slightly from the spec_ed shape. primarily intended to study deviations of the actual
INTRODUCTION from the ideal, or potential, flow, the tests were made in
the variable-density tunnel over a range of values of the
Pressure-distribution measurements over an airfoil Reynohls Number, representing varying effects of
section provide, directly, the knowledge of the air-force viscosity. In addition, tests were made in the 24-inch
distribution along the chord that is required for some high-speed tunnel at certain corresponding values of
purposes. In addition, such data, when compared with theReynolds Number obtained by means of high speeds,
the results of potential-flow (nonviseous fluid) theory, thereby bringing out the effects of compressibility.
provide a means of studying the effects of viscous forces Parts of this experimental investigation outside the
on the flow about the airfoil section. scope of this report are still incomplete.
The results of experimental pressure measurements The present report, which presents the most impor-
for a few miscellaneous airfoils may be found in various tant of the experimental results (those corresponding to
publications. The general applie'ttion of this method the highest value of the Reynolds Number), is divided
of obtaining design data, however, is limited because of into two parts. The first part comprises the descrip-
the expense of making such measurements. tion and discussion of the experimental _eehnique:
A method of calculating the pressure distribution is Materials that are essential to establish the fact that the
developed in references 1 and 2. This method, based measured results are suffMently accurate and reliable to
on the "ideal fluid" or potential-flow theory, gives the meet the demands of the subsequent analysis. The
365
366" REPORT NO. 563 NATIONAL ADVI_ORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS

second part i)resents a comparison of theoretically cal- near tlle test section. Tim remaining 54 tubes, used
culated results with measured results and an analysis of to measure the pressure at the orifices on the airfoil,
the differences and probable causes. A method is were connected to the tubes leading to the airfoil model.
developed to modify tlle application of potential-flow A lighttight box mounted on the fiat side of the
theory in order to minimize discrepancies from the semicircle contained drums for holding photostat paper
measured pressure distributions. and tile necessary operating mechanism. The ma-
nometer was arranged so that it could be operated
EXPERIMENTAL PRESSURE DISTRIBUTION from outside the tank that houses the tunnel.
APPARATUS AND TESTS The manometer eharacteristics determined by trial
included the time required for the meniscuses to be-
Tile experimental investigation described herein was
come steady and the proper exposure of the photostat
made in the variable-density wind tunnel (reference 3).
The model used was a standard duralumin airfoil having paper.
A record of the heights of the manometer fluid in the
glass tubt's was taken at each of 17 angles of attack
/4,_,,r : 45 i _Y 2 ; L_.J t' i t' z , : :_" _"¢ 53

FmURE 1.-- Distribution of presgure orifices about the N. A. C. A. 4412 airfoil.

the N. A. C. A. 4412 section and a rectangular I)hm

form with a span of 30 inches and a chord of 5 inches.
It was modified by replacing a midspan section l inch
in length with a brass section in which the pressure
orifices were located. The 54 orifices, each 0.008 inch
in diameter, were drilled perpendicularly into the air-
foil surface and placed in 2 rows about the airfoil. The
method and accuracy of construction of the model are
described in reference 3. In order to evaluate the
pressure force parallel to the chord, a relatively large
number of orifices were located at the nose of the airfoil
(fig. 1); well-defined distributions of pressure along a
normal to the chord were thus assured. The locations
of the pressure orifices are inchlded in table I. Brass
tubes were connected to the orifices and carried in
grooves in the lower surface of the airfoil to the phmes
of the supporting struts where they were brought out
of the model. After the model was assembled, the
grooves were covered with a plate carefully faired into
the surface. The tubing extended through the tunnel
wail into the dead-air space and the part exposed to the
air stream together with the support struts was faired
into a slngle refit (fig. 2). Tile tubes were connected by
rubber tubing to a photorecording multiple-tube manom-
eter mounted in the dead-air space.
Figure 3 shows the 60-tube manometer, composed of FmvaE 2.--Pressure-distribution model mounted in the tunnel.
30-inch glass tubes arranged in a semicircle and con-
nected at the lower ends to a common reservoir. The from -20 ° to 30 ° at a Reynolds Number of approxi-
total-head pressure of the air stream was chosen as the mately 3,000,000.
reference pressure and was measured by a pitot head, In order to keel) the results as accurate as possible,
mounted as shown in figure 2, to which four equally it was necessary to obtain large deflections of the ma-
spaced manometer tubes were connected. The dynamic nometer liquids, which was accomplished by using two
pressure of the air stream was determined by two liquids of widely different specific gravities.
tubes connected to the calibrated static-pressure orifices Liquid: Spec_c gravity
used in the normal operation of the tunnel. One tube Mercury ...................................... 13. 6
Tetrabromoethane .............................. 3. 0
was connected to a set of four orifices spaced around
the inner wall of the return passage and the other tube The proper choice of the angle-of-attack groups and of
to a set of four orifices spaced around the entrance cone the liquid enabled the use of large and comparable
 "t4 ] 2 AIRFOIL 367
PRESSURE DISTRIBUTIONS OVER THE MIDSPAN SECTION OF THE N. A. C. A.

deflections throughout the angle-of-attack range. ]Re- and the pitching-moment coefficients, which are defined
peat tests, using the same and different manometer by the following expressions:
liquids, provided data on the precision of the tests.
c,=lfPdx
RESULTS

A copy of a sample photostat record is shown in

fig_lre 4. Tile pressures in inches of manometer fluid
were measured to 0.01 inch. All measurements were
made from a reference line obtained by drawing a line
connecting the meniscuses of the four reference tubes.
The quantities thus obtained from the photostat records
were:
ap=H--p

where H is the total-head pressure of the stream and

p, the pressure at the airfoil orifice; and

q= factor>(Ap,

where q is the dynamic pressure and -_p, is the difference

in pressure between the static-pressure orifices in the
entrance cone and those in the return passage. The
factor was previously determined by comparing values
of .5p, with simultaneous values of the dynamic pres-
sure obtained with a calibrated pitot-static tube
mounted in the air stream in the absence of a model.
Finally, the pressures on the airfoil were computed as
ratios to the dynamic pressure, thereby making the
results independent of manometer liquid.
Bernoulli's equation for the undisturbed stream
becomes

pc_ _- 12p 172 = H

where p_ is the pressure and V the velocity. The

pressure of the fluid at the wing orifice is given by

p=H-- Ap

Substitute for H from the previous equation and

remember that _pV2=q, the dynamic pressure, then

p=po_+q--hp

Consider p_o as tile datum pressure. The pressure

coefficient then becomes

p=p--po_l Ap
q q

u, here Ap and q are quantities obtained from the

photostat records as previous]y described. Values of
P at. each orifice on the airfoil and for all angles of
attack ate tabulated in table I.
Figure 5 (a, b, c) presents plots of P against orifice FI(_URE 3. Photoreeording multiple-tube manometer.
position along the chord and against position perpendic-
ular to the chord for each angle of a.ttaek. Large-scale where c is the chord, x is the orifice station along the
plots similar to those presented here were mechanically chord, and y is the orifice ordinate measured from the
integrated to obtain the normal-force, the chord-force, chord. The lower-case symbols c=, c_, c,,_j 4 designate
368 REPORT NO. 563 NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS

section characteristics and refer respectively to the where w is tile induced normal velocity produced t)y ttle
normal-force, chord-force, and pitching-moment co- vortex system of tile airfoil, including the tunnel-wall
efficients for the midspan section of the airfoil. interference, and V is the velocity of the l:ndisturbed
Plots of these coefficients (sen table II) against geo- flow. In order to calculate tile induced velocity w,
metric angle of attack are given in figure 6. The geo- the distx'ibution of the lift (or circulation) along the
metric angle of attack a is measured from the mean span of the airfoil must be determined. A theoretical
direction of the flow in the tunnel. This direction is method of obtaining this distribution is given in refer-
defined as the zero-lift direction of a symmetrical airfoil ence 4 and, when applied to this problem, gives for
in the tunnel and was found to be equivalent to 20' of the induced angle of attack of the midspan section
upflow. In order to have true section characteristics
a.,_ 1.584 cz
(2-dimensional) for comparison with theoretical cal-
culations, a determination must be made of the effec- where c_ is the lift coefficient for the midspan section.
five angle of attack, i. e., the angle that the chord of This lift eoeft]cient is obtained from the pressure

FtC, URE 4. - Copy of sample record. _N', leading-edge orifice tube; S, static-pressure tubes; T, trailing-edge orifice tube; and Z, reference-pressure tubes.

the model makes with the direction of flow in the region "measurements by,means of the equation
of the midspan section of the model. I c_----c_ cos o_--cc sin
The effective angle of attack, corresponding to the'
Values of c_, a_, and a0 are given in table II.
angle for 2-dimensional flow, is given by
PRECISION

The reliability of the results of the pressure measure-

where o_ is the angle that the flow in the region of the ments reported herein may be determined by considera-
airfoil section makes with the direction of the undis- tion of the technique of obtaining and measuring the
turbed flow. The amount of this devi_ltion is small pressure records, of the deviations of the pressure
and can be calculated from diagrams obtained from several tests at the same angle
of attack, and of the method of calculating the effective
• angle of attack.
 :PRESSURE DISTRIBUTIONS OVER TIlE MIDSPAN SECTION OF THE N. A. C. A. 4412 AIRFOIL 369

The method of obtaining the pressure records is a to become steady and by delaying the taking of the
direct, simultaneous, ptloto_aphic recording of the record at each angle of attack until sufficient time had
height of the liquid in tile manometer tubes. Since elapsed. As a further check, a zero record was taken
the pressure coefficients used in the analysis are ratios at the end of each test run under the same conditions.

-3

Yormo/ force *IChord force -4 Norme/ force _ _Chord force

x Exper/menf
-2
_ -20 ° -3 .... Modif/ed ', _ "

-/
x_x )_ x ×x x x x wx w x x _

x_ L _ _ _

-2

-/

-2
-/

-/

/0 50 I00 0 10 0 50 I00 0 I0
Percent chord (a)

FIGUP.E 5a.--E:_perlmental and theoretical pressure-distribution diagrams for the N. A. C. A. 4412 airfoil at several angles of attack.

of quantities taken from the same record, the primary In addition, the tubes were checked for leaks before
source of error therefore lies in the uneqlml damping in and after each run. In order to minimize any possible
the tubes connecting the airfoil orifices to the manom- error in reading the photostatic records (fig. 4) measure-
eter. This source of error was minimized by deter- ments of the recorded pressures were made independ-
mining the time required for the liquid in alI the tubes ently by two persons. The readings were then corn-
370 REPORT NO. 563 _ATIONAL ADVISORY CO_IMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS

q NOcmol force force

k'ofmo/ force Chord force
--.#

-3
x Expen'rnen i
Usuo/ theory
Modif/ed" I_ II h°rd

-2

-/

-/

d =16 °

/
0

5O I00 0 I0
0 Co)
F]C._:RE 5b --Experimental and theoretical pressure-distribution diagrams for the N, A. C. A. 4412 airfoil at several angles of attack.
 PRESSURE DISTRIBUTIONS OVER THE MIDSPAN SECTION OF THE N. ,4. C. A. 4412 AIRFOIL 371

pared and a compromis0 was made where differences from several tests at the same angle of attack. Figure 7
occurred. The differences between any two such presents sueh diagrams at two angles of attack,--4 °
ndent readings rarely exceeded 0.01 inch except Tand 8 °. Tetrabromoethane, because of the larger
indep 7
in t.hc case of obvious errors. Possible errors due to ' deflections, gave more accurate results, which a_reed

Normal force Chord force Normal force

-/7 I Chord force

x [xpenmenl
-/6 Usual theory
Mo_fied

-6

-/4
-5
x

-13

,<

-2
×
o" "24 ° ×

-/

x
x

I T _ _ -I

c×x x L

-6

-5

-4

-2

-/
x

---t
o l_'XXx_×_fx×)¢ x _¢ x
,-
_¢ x x
_- r<- :-_<=-:_--- X
x x x x × i,: x_'×

I o_'_ 50 IO0 O I0
chord (c)
FtC,URE 5c.--Experimental ant] theoretical pressure-distribution diagr:_ms for the N, :L C. :L 4t12 airfoil at several angles (ff
attack.

shrinkage of the records were avoided by the use of the very eh)sely with the mean values obtained from
ratio of two pressures obtained front the same record; repeated mercury tests, of which the greatest devia-
na:nely, the ratio of the pr0ssure at a wing orifice to tion from the mean values was approximately 4-3 per-
the dynamic pressure. cent of the dynamic pressure. This deviation is not a
The precision of the measured results is indicated random scattering of points from any given test hut is
by the variations of the pressure diagrams obtained a consistent, difference between repeat tests and may
372 REPORT NO. 563 NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS

be partly accounted for by a possible small difference because of the fact that the tips of a rectangular wing
in angle of attack. Figure 7 (b) also includes the results carry a larger proportion of the load than is indicated
of tests made before and after earcfttlly polishing the by the theoretical calculations on which the method is
midspan section of the modeh The change in surface based. To make an aeeur,_te experiment..d determine:
smoothness and a slight change in fairness had no dis- tion of the lift distribution on which to base the in(luted-
cernible effect on the distribution/ the differences were angle calculations wouhl require pressure measure-
ments at several sections along the span, especially
near tihe tips. An estimate can be made, however, of
the possible error in the induced angles of attack given
herein by comparison of the deduced slopes of the lift
curve for infinite aspect ratio obtained from these tests
and from the best force-test d_lta available. Such a
comparison indicates that the induced angle of attack
may bc approximately two-thirds of the calculated
values given herein, which would mean a possible error
of approximately }_° for a lift eoefflcient of 1.
It is evident, therefore, that the effective angles of
attack are subject to a eonsiderable error of uncertain
magnitude. Approximate possible errors have been
!

Ii4! t L
-/6 _ -8 0 8 /6 24
Angle of o/?ock, or, degrees

FIGI:tIE 6.--.-N,-orIna|- and chord-force coefficients, and pitching-moment coefficients

about the quarterchord point. The numerical value of c_ shouM be prefixed by
a minus sign.

less than those obtained by repeat tests of the same

surface.

The determination of the effective angle of attack

of the midspan section entails certain assumptions that.
are subject to considerable uncertainty. First, the
angle of attack of this section may be in error because
of the assumption that the deviation of the air-stream
axis from the tunnel axis is uniform along the span of
the model; i. e., that the geometric angle of attack
is the same for all sections along the span. Actually
there is some variation of the air-stream direction
across the tunnel. Because of the interference of the
support struts, the deflection of the stream in this
region niight reasonably bc expected to exceed the
0 50 I00
deflection ati the midspan section; hence, the deflection Percenf chord
,it the midspan section is prob'tbly less than the effective Fm_RE 7.--Pressure-distribution diagrams from several tests at two angles of attack.
mean value. Furthermore, a zero deflection of the
stream at the midspan section would bring the angle estimated and summarized as follows: Thc v'flues of
of zero lift obtained from the pressure tests into agree- the angles as given may be too large by a constant
ment with force-test results. error of approximately h/° because of a possible error
A second and r,_ther large source of error lies in the in the assumed tlirection of the stream. On tlie other
determination of the induced angle of attack. The i hand, the angles may be too small by approximately
method used probably produces erroneous results cz/2 °, owing to thc error in the induced-angle calculations.
 PRESSURE DISTRIBUTIONS OVER THE MIDSPAN SECTION OF THE N. A. C. A. 4412 AIRFOIL 373

THEORETICAL PRESSURE DISTRIBUTION mined by means of the same transformations. Refer-

POTENTIAL-FLOW THEORY enees 1 and 2 present detMled discussions of the under-
A theoretical determination of the distribution of lying theory and the deriv,_tion of the neeessa_- equa-
pressure about an airfoil section has been developed tions for the calculation of the chara.cteristies of the
for potential flow and assumes an i(tmd fluid that is potenti'd field about the airfoil.

ffi _4 e

a'o z2

_o =_G.4 °

"x

\ i

" \ _, =/6' o

FIGURE &--Pressure-vector diagrams for the N. A. C. A. 4412 airfoil at several angles of altaek.

nonviseous and incompressible. Briefly, the inethod The gener.1 equation for the local velocity abmlt an
consists of the eonformal transformation of the airfoil airfoil section in a pot entiM flow as given in reference t
section into a circle. Then, inasmuch as the flow is
about the circle can readily be e, leulated, the flow
characteristics about the airfoil section can be deter- _= Vk[sin (0+ _+ _) + 4_@] (1)
374 REPORT NO. 563 NAT[ON'AL ADVISORY CO_[_rIT'I_'EE FOR AEROXAUTICS

where where p is the pres,_ure .it the airfoil surface and p oo

the pressure of the free stream.
+ d
COMP_]_ISON DF THEORY AND EXPERIMENT

(sinh:++ sin_O) l t-(_ The theoretical distribution,_ of pressure have been

-3' -.
calculated for the 2-dimensional angles of attack corre-
17"is the velocity of t.lCe undisturbed
sponding to the measured distributions on the N. A.
streanl.
C. A. 4412 airfoil. Comparisons of the calculated and
a, tile angle of attack (2-dimensional). measured distributions are presented in figure 5 (ex-
F, tile circulation. cluding the diagrams after the airfoil has stalled) and
O, g,, _, parameters that are fl, nctions of tlle in figure 8. Figure 5 presents the usual normal- and
airf(fil coordinates.
chord-component pressure diagrams and provides a
¢0, the mean value of ¢. means for a general study of the differences between
R=ae%, the radius of the conf()rmal circle
the theory and experiment as a function of angle of
about which the flow is calculable.
attack. Figure 8 provides a more detailed study at a
In order to calculate the velocity field from equation few angles of att.aek and l)resents vector diagrams f,}r
(I) the circulation must 1)e evaluated. This evalua- the angles of --S °, --4 °, 2 °, 8% and 16 °. These dia-
grams were ob t ained by plot ring the pressure coefficients
normal to the airfoil profile; the perpendicular distance
from the profile line represents the magnitude of the
coefficient. The experimental pressures are represented
by the drachm vectors and the theoretical pressures by
the solid contour line. The other contour lines repre-
sent certain modified calculations to be discussed later.
It is immediately evident that the theoretical result,, -
do not satisfactorily agree with the actual measure-
ments except for angles of attack near --8 °, correspond-
g ing approximately t.o the angle at which the experi-
2¢ .8 mental and theoretical lifts are the same (fig. 9). The
comparisons in figure 5 show, moreover, that with in-
8
creasing angle of attack the differences between theory
and experiment become larger as predicted by the
higher slope of the theoretical lift. curve. A detailed
study of the vector diagrams (fig. 8) shows how these
o ] 2 /_-2M-+@@__ _
.co. differences vary around the profile of the airfoil. The
largest differences occur in the regions of low pressures,
.4 e_. g or the high-velocity areas, and as previously stated they
increase with increasing angle of attack. Furthermore,
the percentage difference in pressure is larger near the
trailing edge than in the region of the nose, indicating a
_ _ i ......

-16 -8 0 # /6 _4 progressive influence on the flow as it moves over the

Effectlve ongle of olfocl% _,degt'ees airfoil surface.
]7IGURE'9. Lift and pitching-moment section characteristics for the N. A. C. A. The effect of these differences in the pressure distri- =
4H2 airfoil.
bution on the pitching-nmn_cnt characteristics is shown
tion is done by the use of the Kutta condition, which in figure 9. The theoretical pitching moment about
requires that the-yelocity at, the trailing edge (0 - 7r) be the quarter-chord point was obtained by integrating
zero so that equation (l) becomes theoretical pressure diagrams. The results show an in-
creasing diving moment with increasing angle of attack,
v= I_2-[sin(0+ _ + _) +sin (c_+ eT)] (la)
whereas the diving moment actually decreases.
where _r is the value of _ at 0=rr (trailing edge). The comparisons have thus far been made at the
The angle of zero lift. is equal to --_r. same relative angle of attack, that is, for the angle of
The necessaW equations and a step-by-step description attack in 2-dimensional flow. Another condition of
of the calculation of the velocity field are given later. comparison that has been used more or less regularly
The pressure eoeftlcients are computed by means of in previous studies is suggested; it allows a comparison
Bernoulli's equation, at the same lift and consists in comparing the theo-
retical distribution calculated at an angle of attack
P---P--P-_=q 1 -- (,U)'
v 2 (3) that gives a theoretical lift equal to the experimental
 PRESSURE DISTRIBUTIONS OVER THE MIDSPAN SECTION OF THE N. A. C. A. 4412 AIRFOIL 375

value. This method has been used for the diagrams potential one; probably the pressures may also be
in figure 8 and the tlistributions thus calculated are considered as being transmitted undiminished through
represented thereon by the long-and-short-dash con- the thin boundary layer. The actual flow might there-
tour lines. Again the differences are too large to be fore be replaced by a potential flow about a shape
neglected, especially at angles of attack where a large slightly different from that defined by the airfoil
lift is obtained. At --8 ° the curve coincides with the coordinates, which wouht require the determination of
previously described contour, since the angle and the the boundary-layer thickness to define the effective
lift are the same, while at --4 ° the distribution cal- profile shape. The pressure about the new shape could
culated on the basis of the same lift is approximately then be computed by the potential theory. Boundary-
the same as the dashed contour representing a third layer calculations, however, are at present subject to
calculation presented herein. At the higher angles of un_ertainties that would cast doubt on the validity
attack the calculated distributions depart progres- of the results and, in addition, the computations are
sively in shape from the measured distributions. It difficult and tedious.
may therefore be concluded that, on the basis of these MODIFIED THEORETICAL CALCULATIONS
comparisons, the usual calculations from the potential
theory do not give an accurate determination of the A simpler antl more practical method of calculating
distribution of pressure about an airfoil. the pressure over an airfoil section has been developed
The inaccurate prediction of the forces on an airfoil
by the usual potential-flow theory is not surprising
',3---- I ]
since the theory neglects the frictional force of the
viscuous fluid acting on the airfoil. The direct effect x Exper/rnenf
of this force, which acts tangential to the direction of Reduced c/rculot/on
the local flow, is important only on the drag and .2 .... Mod/f/'ed theory
-- Usuol iheory
contributes what is known as the "skin-friction" drag.
Because of the small magnitude and the direction of
this force, the component in the direction of the lift is
probably negligible, the lift being determined en-
tirely by the pressure forces. The indirect effect, how-
ever, of this friction force is the deceleration of the air
in a thin layer near the surface of the airfoil and the
0
production of the so-called "boundary-layer" phe-
nomena, which are important in the development of
lift by an airfoil. In the boundary layer the velocity
changes rapidly from zero at the surface of the airfoil
to the value of the local stream velocity at the outer
:limit of the layer. The loss of energy involved in over- 0 50 I00
Percen_ chord
coming the friction forces results in a cumulation of
FlouRz I0.- Effect of an arbitrary re2uction of the circulation on the calcuiatod
:siowly moving air as the flow moves back along the
pressure distribution.
airfoil; hence the boundary-layer thickness increases
toward the trailing edge. This cumulative effect is as a result of the foregoing analysis. The analysis
indicated by the progressive increase in the differences shows that theoretical distributions calculated at the
between the theoretical and measured pressures. true angle of attack are similar in shape to the true
From this discussion it is not to be presumed that distributions but give too high a lift. Conversely,
agreement between the measured and calculated results when the theoretical distributions are calculated at an
should occur at zero lift, except approximately for a angle of attack that gives the same lift as the experi-
symmetrical airfoil section. The velocity distributions mental distribution, the two distributions are dissimilar
over the upper and lower surfaces of an asymmetrical in shape.
section are not the same, even at zero lift. The viscous The modified calculation is made at the effective
effects on the flow over the two surfaces at the calcu- angle of attack but the circulation is determined from
lated angle of zero lift are therefore different and a lift the experimentally measured lift instead of by the
is measured, which is negative for most sections. l(utta-Joukowsky method. The preliminary calcula-
Actually, then, the experimental and theoretical angles tions made on this basis resulted in an excessive velocity
of zero lift are not the same and for normal sections and a consequent high suction pressure at tim trailing
the two lift curves intersect at a negative value of the edge, as shown in figure 10. This unsatisfactory result
lift coefficient. (shown by the dot-dash line in fig. 10) was finally
Outside the boundary layer the viscous forces can avoided by means of a further modification subsequently
probably be considered negligible and the flow a described.
1.2C,692 37-- 25
376 REPORT NO. 563 NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS

Since a change ill the effective profile shape has been ! tions obtained by means of the modified calculations
by boundary-layer considerations, an arbi- 1 are given by the dashed lines. The relative merit of
predicted
trary modification of the shape parameter _ is made so i]the unaltered potential theory and the modified method

that the veh)city becomes zero at 0=_-. (See equation t for the calculation of the pressure distribution about an
(1).) The shape is thus altered to satisfy again the i airfoil section is shown in figures 5, 8, and 9.
Kutta-Joukowsky condition. In order to maintain the I The following step-by-step description of the compu-
continuity of the e curve, a study has been made of the tations required to obtain the calculated pressure dis-
manner in which _ should be modified. The indicated tribution is given in sufficient detail to enable the calcu-
cunmlative effects of the viscous forces toward the lations for any airfoil to be made. The local velocity
trailing edge show that most of the change in, should about the airfoil is computed by means of equation (1)

FIGURE ll.--Theoretieal Darameters required to comlnlte lhe lheoretica] pressures on the N. A. C. A, 4412 airfoil.

probably be made in tlmt region. Inasmuch as the modified as indicated by the preceding discussion. Tim
effect of ctmnging e is not critical for different, dis- detailed forms of the modifications are_ introduced as
tributions of the change, provided ttmt most of the they appear in the course of routine computations.
In order that the transformation from the airfoil to
chanffe is made near the trailing edge of the airfoil, a
purely arbitrary distribution is chosen that permits its conformal circle may be of a convenient form, the
ready application, namely, a sinusoidal variation with 0. coordinate axes are selected so that the profile is as
The ¢ curve and subsequently the other parameters nearly as possible symmetrical about t.lwm. (See refer-
must be modified for each angle of attack. This modi- ence 1.) The z axis is chosen as the line joining the
fication Ires been made and the corresponding pressure centers of the leading- and trailing-edge radii. The
distributions determined for several angles of attack. origin is located midway between a point bisecting
(See figs. 5 and 8.) At --8 ° the distribution is the the distance from the leading edge to the center for
swne as that shown by the solid line representing the the lea<ling-edge radius and the corresponding point
unaltered theory. In the other diagrams the distribu- at the trailing edge; the coordinates of these points are
 PRESSURE DISTRIBUTIONS OVER THE MIDSPAN SECTION OF THE N. A. C. A. 4412 AIRFOIL 377
/?Tr
respectively (2a, 0) and (--2a, 0). In the following
The value of _ at 0.=10 is given by the following
discussion the coordinate scale has been chosen so that
equation.
a is unity. (For practical purposes it is probably suffi-
cient to choose the chord joining the extrelnities of the
_'_=-_-LlO\_/,- 1.001 (¢,+t-_, ,)
mean line as the x axis.)
+0.494 (_b,+2--_b, 2)
The following equations express the relationship
+0.313
between the airfoil coordinates previously described
+0.217
and the parameters 0 and _b.
+0.158 (s)
+0.115
x=2 cosh ¢ cos 0 (4)
y---2 sinh ¢ sin 0 + 0.0804
+0.0511
In order to compute values of 0 corresponding to any
+0.0251 (¢.+9-- _'.-.q)]
given point on the airfoil profile, equations (4) are
solved for sin20.
where the subscripts designate the particular 0 at which
2 1 the named quantity is taken. A plot of _ as a funetior_
sin 0 = 2 (h + -(_) (5) of 0 for the N. A. C. A. 4412 airfoil is given in figure
where 11. Thus far the calculations are identical with those
x 2
(0 712 made for the potential theo .ry.
As stated in the discussion of the modified theoretical
caleuhgions, the circulation i_ evaluated by the experi-
A similar solution for sinh2¢ can be obtained but
ment.ally known lift of the airfoil section. The well-
experience has shown that a more usable solution is
known equation relating the lift and tlle circulation is
given by the equation below
L = pVr
Also by definition
Y (6) 1
sinh ¢:2 sin 0
L:-_ p V2cc z

A plot of ¢ as a function of 0 for tim N. A. C. A. 4412 Expressing the circulation in terms of the lift, coefl3cicnt,
airfoil is given in figure 11. The functi(m ¢o is given by
F = e,2Vc t

and finally
F c
4_RT-- _,_ c, (g)
and can be determined graphically from the ¢ curve or
Substituting the mlmerical values for the N. A. C. A.
by a numerical evaluation. The value of ¢o for the
N. A. C. A. 4412 airfoil is 4412,
F 1
4 rR V-- 6.915 e _ (ga)
g'o= 0.1044
Tile prediction of unreasonable vch)eities around the
The parameter E as a function of 0 is given by the trailing edge is avoided by altering the _ function so
definite integral, that the velocity is zero at 0=r.. The altered function
is designated ¢0 and is arbitrarily assumed to be given
_"=-2--_Jo1 C2_ _ cotO_O, dO (7) by

_°=_+_T(1-cos 0) (lO)
where the subscril)t n refers to the particular value of
0 for which the corresponding value of _ is to be deter- where :X_T is the increment of E required to give zero
mined. A 20-point numerical evalu'_tion of this inte- velocity at 0--r and is a function of the angle of attack.
gral is derived in reference 1 and is included here for The quantity :X_r is given by
convenience. The integral is cvahmte(t at 20 equal
*._62,=_aT--E T
interval wducs of 0, namely,
where E, T is determined t)y equating equation (I) to
00:0 0-20
zero and substituting from equation (9).
91"

01=]_=0 19
sin (_r+a+_,r) +_Re_=0
0_,=2_'=0 ,s
10 - Solving for _-r gives,

_.r=sin-IS;llCS _-- a
020-----27r 0o
378 REPORT NO. 563 NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS

The parameters e and ¢ are conjugate functions of 0, Differentiating equation (10)

and @ is given by
_-_ =d_-t---_sln 0
1 ['2_ cotO2O, do+
& k'
Plots of _ and as functions of 0 for the N. A. C. A.
where the definite integral can be evaluated in tile
4412 airfoil are given in figure 11. Equation (1) for
same manner as equation (7). The coordinates of the
the velocity at any point on the airfoil profile is now
profile corresponding to the modified e function can be written
obtained from the new ¢ function by equations (4).
Figure 12 gives the modified shape obtained by this v= Vk.[sin (O-f-_,+a)+8_c_ ] (Ib)
method for the N. A. C. A. 4412 airfoil at c_=8 ° and 16 °.
The profiles given in figure 12 are, of course, only The generality of the preceding method of cal-
effective profiles corresponding to the calculations. cu]ating the pressure distribution about an airfoil
The actual profile about which a potential flow might section is supported by the following evidence. First,
be considered as being estat)llshed would be bhmt at no restricting assumptions have been made in the
the trailing edge and wouht have the thickness of the development of the method. Second, the circulation
wake at that point. The thickness of the boundary is determined by a known quantity, the experimentally
layer on the upper surface, however, is greater than measured lift. Third, the change in the effective air-
ttmt on the lower surface; therefore, if the trailing edge foil shape is in the direction indicated by boundary-
were taken as the midpoint of the wake and the after layer considerations. Finally, the computed and meas-
p0rtion_of the profile were faired to that point, the ured pressures agree satisfactorily.

/
LANGLEY _[EMORIAL AERONAUTICAL LABORATORY,
N.A.C.A. 4412-"
_N_ATIONAL ADVISORY COSII_IITTEE FOR 2_kERONA'UTICS r
FIGI_:Ri_12.--Change in profile shape associated with the modified theoretical calcu-
lation of pressure. LANGLEY FIELD, YA., ][arch 25, 1936.

REFERENCES
resulting shape would be similar to the effective
profiles in figure 12. 1. Thcodorsen, T., and Garrick, I. E.: General Potential Theory
The influence of the changes in ¢/ on the value of k of Arbitrary Wing Sections. T.R. No. 452, N. A. C. A.
1933.
are found to be negligible so that k. may be written
2. Theodorsen, Timodore: Theory of Wing Sections of Arbi-
trary Shape. T.R. No. 411, N. A. C. A., 1931.

3. Jacobs, Eastman N., and Abbott, Ira H.: The N. A. C. A.

where Variable-Density Wind Tunnel. T. R. No. 416, N. A.
C. A., 1932.
e_o
k p __ 4. Millikan, Clark B.: On the Lift Distribution for a Wing of
Arbitrary Plan Form in a Circular Wind Tunnel. Pub-
4isinh2@+sin20)E1 +(-_) ] lication No. 22, C. I. T., 1932.
 PRESSURE DISTRIBUTIONS OVER THE MIDSPAN SECTION OF THE N. A, C. A. 4412 AIRFOIL
379

TABLE I.--EXPERIMENTAL DATA--N. A. C. A. 4412 AIRFOIL

[Average pressure (standard atmospheres): 21; average Reynolds Number: 3,100,000]

Orifices Values of pressure coefficient, P=P-P_, for different angles of attack

q

Sta-
tion Ordi-
(per- hate
_16ol --12ot _8o t _6 ° $ --4 ° --2 ° _ 0° 2 2° t 4° t 8o, 12 ° i 16 ° x 18 ° 1 20 ° t 24 ° t 30 ° t
i_n_ cant
from c (per- e : _20 o 1
cent
L.E.
of
above
chord) •
I
i
chord)

28 100.00 0 --0.421 --0.199 0.114 0.198 0.217 ' 0.204 O. 207 0.200 0.181 i 0.158 O. 134 i O. I01 0.010 --0,062 --0.173 --0.466 --0,513
1 97.92 --.16 --.454 --.251 .159 • 224 .181 i .178 • 180 .183 .164 • 157 • 167 i .140 • 121 .094 .049 --,291 --.304
29 94.86 --.16 --.406 --.291 .107 .185 1.52 .151 .158 ' . 166 .154
.074 .153 .122 .128 .152 i •.156
160 ..180
203 ..166
199 .23l
.179 ..166
237 •.i27
224 --.
--.160030 --.
--.167036
2 89.90 --.22 --.505 --. 330 • 140 i . 150 • 042
.035 .107 .072 .082 .098 i •118 .118 .158 • 211 . 212 • 257 . 270 .288 , 040
30 84.94 --.28 --.538 --.382 i .231 .179
--.043 .055 •049 .068 .095 ,126 .136 .158 .251 .322 ,348 .374 , ,179
31 74.92 --. 52 --. 558 _ --. 454 .289
32 64.94 --.84 --. 564 --. 539 --.101 •002 .000 .023 .062 .104 • 120 . 154 . 244 . 283 . 374 I .407 . 453 .270
--.199 --.082 --.063 --.024 .021 .072 • 100 . 157 . 250 . 309 . 414 . 452 . 492 . 348 • 368
3 54.48 --1.24 --.571 --.6_3 • 407
49.98 --1.44 --.571 --.695 --.252 --. 115 --.099 --.053 --.005 . 050 .091 .134 .252 .316 .426 ,472 .531 ,381
33 • 446
44.90 --1•64 --.571 --.721 --.304 --.160 --. 128 --.075 --.017 .048 .088 . 140 . 268 .342 . 459 .505 . 570 . 413
4 • 498
39.98 --1.86 --.558 --.754 --.368 --.206 -.169 -.105 --.041 .03l .071 .136 . 265 . 362 .485 . 544 .609 . 466
34 • 544
34.90 --2. 10 --.551 --.773 [ 447 --.258 -.217 -.146 --.073 .010 • 066 . 133 .290 .387 • 516 . 576 . 642 ,504
5 • 596
29.96 --2.30 --.545 --.786 I --.545 --.330 -. 274 --.t90 --.105 --.011 • 048 . 116 .293 . 414 .551 .609 . 687 • 557
35 .648
--.427 -.367 --. 266 165 --.054 • 025 .115 • 313 .433 .589 .661 .726 .609
6 24.90 --2. 54 --.545 --.806 i 688 .700
19.98 --2.76 --.551 --.819 896 --.591 --. 490 --.365 --. 244 --. lll --.011 .093 .321 . 472 .627 .687 .752 . 642
36 .778
14.94 --2.9(} --.558 --.825 --1.178 --.799 --.663 --.502 --.348 180 --. 053 . 070 . 345 . 518 . 713 . 785 . 857 . 733
7 •876
9. 96 --2. 86 --.551 --.832 --1.660 --1.143 --.946 --.716 -- 501 --.279 --. 111 • 059 . 402 . 616 •818 .883 .948 . 824
--1.407 --1.153 --.867 506 --.333 --.131 .071 .462 .713 .890 .901 1.019 .902 .941
7•38 --2.72 --.577 --.916 --2.070
--1.861 --1.490 --1.106 777 --.428 --.150 .109 .568 .818 .980 1.013 1.046 .948 •980
4.94 --2.46 --.571 --.897 --2.807
--2.468 --1.93t --1.380 -- 932 --.467 --. 098 .23I .748 .948 .993 .948 .909 .883 • 941
2.92 --2.06 --.702 _--1 242 --3.745 .713
1.66 --1.60 --1.053 --1.947 --4.940 --3.198 --2.478 --1.709 -1 059 --.436 .028 .409 .916 .974 .791 .596 .433 .602
39 .244
10 .92 --l. 20 --2.082 --3. 212 --6. 177 --3.770 --2.765 --1.812 995 --.266 .254 ] .643 1.013 .831 .264 --.173 --.518 .003
--1.059
40 --4.052 --2.732 --1.559 631 .156 • 039 .924 .905 .094 --I. 379 --2.285 --3. 012 --1.67l
0" 36 --." 70 --3.204 '--4.300 --7. 337 --2.397 --1.232 --. 296 356 .834 .989 _ .952 .157 --1. 555 --3.648 --5. 060 --6.073 --3. 695 --2,382
11 --3. 730
0.68 --2.623 --3. 433 --5.480 --.535 .184 .681 945 1.010 .854 .473 --1.000 --3. 250 [--6.230 --7.775 --8.941 '--5. 660
41 --2.552
0.4 4 1.56 --1.178
.322 --l. .231
549 --2.625
--.043 .765 .955 .994 948 .720 • 336 --.202 --1.740 --3. 738 --5.961 --7.125 --7.954 --4.698
12 --2.006
.974 1.009 .939 770 .468 .055 --.456 --1.793 --3. 399 --5.210 --6.110 --6.681 --3. 881
42 .94 2. 16 .739 720" .596 --1. 249
1.70 2.78 •928 1935 •883 1.090 .939 .782 569 .246 --.148 --.611 --1.743 --3.053 --4.478 --5.190 --5.620 --3.010
13 --. 786
2.94 3.64 .987 1 000 .974 .890 .76I .550 332 .018 --.336 --.728 --1.647 --2.637 --3.765 --4.285 --4.562 --2.200
43 --. 695
14 4.90 4.68 .922 •935 .896 • 713 .542 .333 110 --. 179 --.485 --.813 --t. 547 --2.343 --3.190 --3.570 --3.731 --I.529
.498 .344 .139 --.060 --. 312 --.588 --.831 --1.432 --2 057 --2.709 --2.98I '--3.060 --1.235 --. 644
44 7•50 5.74 .804 .798 •752
• 374 .208 .017 --. 168 --. 388 --.623 --.872 --1.391 --1 912 !--2. 440 --2.002 '--2.681 --I.059 --. 630
15 9.96 6.56 .687 .687 .622
.263 .089 --.091 --.271 --.468 --.676 --.899 i--1.350 --1.802 '--2. 240 --2.415 --2.382 --1.007 --,611
45 12.,_, 7.34 .583 .576 .498
.178 .014 --. 152 --.309 --.500 --. 604
16 14.92 7.88 .498 .485 .407 --.700 --.912 I--1.308 t--t. 769 --2. 149 --2.285 1--2. 180 --.955
• I00 --.052 --. 210 --.360 --.537 --.721 --.910 --1. 272 --1.620 --L952 --2. 062 --1.984 --.910 --. 604
46 17.44 8.40 .414 .407 .329
.036 --.111 --.262 --.402 --.568 --.740 --.914 --1 239 --1.548 --1.841 --1.927 i--1.815 --.870 --. 598
17 19.96 8.80 .335 .335 .257
--.024 --. 176 --. 322 --.452 --.609 --.769 !--.930 --1 224 --1.502 --1.758 --1. 822--1.685 --.85I -. 591
47 22. 44 9. 16 .263 ' .257 [ .172
--.063 --.196 --.332 --.4,54 --.599 --.746 _--.895 --1.163 --1.418 --1.640 I--1.692 --1.592 --.825 --. 591
18 24.92 9.52 .212 .211 t .I40 --.742 !--.881 --1 122 --1.347 --1.535 --1.573 --1.391 --.812 --. 591
48 27. 44 9. 62 . 166 . 165 . 100 --.096 --.223 --.355 --.471 --.606
--.722 q--.851 --1.07l --1.280'--1.438 --1.403 --1.254 --.786 --. 591
19 29. 88 9.76 .114 ' .133 ] .068 --.114 --.241 --.364 --.469 --.594
--. 154 --. 275 --.381 --.473 --.596 --. 693 --.804 --.982 --1. 144 --1.269 --L 255--1.005 --.760 --. 591
49 34.98 9.90 .036 .055 ] .009 --. 584
--. 173 --.272 --.370 --.447 --.542 --.635 -- 732 --.880 --1.007 --1.099 --1.059 --.798 --.727
20 39. 90 9.84 --.017 .009 _ --.030 -. 591
9.64 --.005 I --.044 --.069 ! --.194 --.29I --.371 --.439 --.519 --.639 --.691 --.809 --.902 --.901 --.910 --.655 --.720
50 44. 80 -. 591
--.173 ". 256 --.329 --.389 --.455 --.525 --. 595 --.690 --.759 --.786 --.734 --.538 --.715
' 21 49. 92 9.22 --.121 i --.056 --.075 -. 591
--.161 --.238 --.303 --.351 --.406 _--.471 --.527 --.601 --.649 --.649 --.584 --.473 --.700
51 54. 92 8.76 --.147 --.069 --.075 --.591
22 59. 94 8.16 --.199 I --.101 --.095 --. 16[ --.244 --.298 --.342 --.391 Ii_.438 --.487 --.541 i --.576 --.551 --.460 --.414 --.695
--.123 --. 214 --.204 --.296 --.334 --.378 --,421 --.456 ' --.460 --.414 --.343 --.369 --.688 --.591
64.90 7.54 --.225 _ 108 --.082
--. 115 r-. 181 --. 225 --. 250 --.232 --.319 --.351 --.371 --.375 --,310 --.264 --.337 --.682 --, 584
69. 86 6. 76 --. 252 I --. 121 --.082
--.082 --. 148 -. 183 200 222 --.252 --.279 --.285 --.264 --.212 --.212 --.310 --.655 --.584
24 74.90 5.88 --. 277 I; --.128 --.056
--.076 --.115 ( --.144 --.155 169 --.19l --.210 --,199 --,180 --.147 --. 173 --.291 --.642 --. 578
53 79. 92 4. 92 --.297 I --.147 --.069 --. 565
3.88 --. 330 --.154 --.024 --.113 --.106 --.082 --.082 --. 140 --.271 _ --.604
84.88 --.552
89. 88 2.74 --.356 --.161 .022 •028 --.006 --.010 --.016 017 --.026
.10O .073 .069 .078 082 .076 .070 .079 t .062 --.010 i --.095 --.226 --.519 --.519
94.90
98. O0 • -388
--.434 075 .127 .165 .141 .139 .147 150 .143 --. 500

28 0 I --.024 --.068 i --.091 --.094 I01 --.116 --.032

• 127
--.009
.120
--.004
.088
--.043
--.004
--,114
1 --.075
--.240 I --.565
--._00 --.479
I j 100.00

I Test, variable-density tunnel 1098; manometer liquid, mercury. _ Test, variable-density tunnel 1099-4; manometer liquid, tetrabromoethane.

TABLE II.--INTEGRATED AND DERIVED CtIARAC-

TERISTICS--N. A. C. A. 4412 AIRFOIL

¢m¢ :4 Cl [ al
__ --]
De]lees
-- -- C. --De_ees
Ce
Degrees
--20 --0.592 O. 0318 0. 030 --0.545 i --0,9 -i91 l
--16 ' --.767 --.0170 • 035 --.742 i --1.2 --14 8 I
--12 ! --.722 --.12fd --. 092 --. 732 --1,2 -1o, 8 I
--8 --.372 --.0445 --. 096 --. 374 --.6 --7.4
--G --. 210 --.0151 --.096 --.211 --.3 --57
--. 095 --. 0255 --.0 --4.0
--4 ] -.0256 .0P43
--2 . 146 .0107 --.092 .146 l .2 --2.2
5 -.5
0 ] ,338 .1_
2 ,,_1 -, 5)34
=o_ ._o1"_38 .8 12
--:087 .677 I.l 29
4 ] ,677 -.025_
--. 084 1. 024 1.6 8.4
8 I 1.020 --.1003
--. 074 L 289 20 10.0
12 1.275 --.2043
--. 068 1. 579 2.5 135
16 1.548 --.3357
18 1.626 --, 4040 2,6 154
20 1.640 --.4374 -'_o 1.671
1. 696 2.7 173
24 1,212 --.1838 --: 141 1. 182 1.9 22 1
30 1.009 --.0776 --, 146 .913 1.4 28. 6
380 REPORT NO. 563 NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS

TABLE III.--THEORETICAL PARAMETERS---N. A. C. A. 4412 AIRFOIL

Statie o Ordinate
(perce: V 7:
o+, (percent 0H-E
¢) I c)

Uplrer surface Lower sttr f_ce

de#. rain. deq. mi'n.

2. 032 0 0 0.1,'8 -4 10 2.032 0 0 0.178 -4 10
0. 62 2.03l • 0121 I •.034
007 ...... ) 2,031 --.0129 --. 012 ...... --6 20
0 25 1.25 2. 021 •0375 -_ 41 --.60 2. 021 --.0371 --. 034 ...... --10 49
.5 1.64 2.011 •0532 •046 l --, 88 2•011 --•04_A --. 043 ...... --12 52
1.25 2. 44 1.98[ •0855 .073 [ --?i_ _ 35
48 -1.43 1.980 --.0706 -. 069 • 162 --18 1
2.5 3.39 1. 931 .1239 • 103 I .104 15 29 -1.95 l, 930 --.0916 --. 098 • 151 --23 48 )
5 4..73 1. 830 .1784 48 --2. 49 1. 829 --.1130 --. 140 • 133 --31 47
7.5 5.76 1. 730 .2203 .146
.179 /] ._ --2. 74 1.729 --.1227 --, 172 • 119 -37 39
10 6. 59 1. 629 • 2542 35 --2.86 1.628 --.1271 --,900 • 108 --42 36
15 7, 89 1. 427 • 3075 Pgl .213 45 25 --2.88 1. 426 --.1271 --. 249 .090 --51 11
20 8. 80 I. 225 ,3446
:N I .213 53 56 --2. 74 I. 224 --.1210 --. 292 076 --58 32

m
25 9.41 1. 024 .3696 61 26 --2.50 1. 023 --.1II0 --. 330 • 064 [ --65
2369 / "_ .o55 I --71

m
3O 9. 76 • 824 •3845 68 32 -2•26 • 820 --.1005 --. 366
4O 9.80 .418 .38_ • 435 / : I97 81 42 -1.80 ._17 --.0807 -. 435 .041 ,, --82 47
5O 9.19 • 0149 •3640 • 500 ] .181 94 32 --1.40 • 0137 --.0633 --. 500 • 030 --93 45
60 8. 14 --. 389 .3229 106 11 --I. O9 --. 390 --.04O9 -. 560 .023 1 --103 50
7O 6.69 --. 792 ,2655 •• 628
560 ] .163
.143 119 0 --.65 --. 793 --.0307 -. 629 .o17 { -11.5 _2
8O 4.89 -- 1,196 • 702 ] .121 132 48 --. 39 -I, 197 --.0190 -.704 ,012 ] --127 32
.1940 --. 0149 --. 746
85 3.83 -- 1. 398 1518 140 32 --. 30 --1.398 .010 ] --134 28
90 2.71 --1•600 .1074 .745 ] .10_ I49 23 --. 22 -t.600 --.0109 --. 795 .O99 --142 25
• 793 [
95 1.47 -1. 802 .0577 • 855 : 065 159 56 --. 16 --1. 802 --.0081 --.856 .009 --152 31
--.0069 --.912 .012 --161 34
98 .68 --1.924 .0262 • 910 .647 169 18 --. 14 -- I. 924
100 .13 -2.003 0 li14 3 --. 13 --2. 003 --.0013 --1.O90
I. O90 I •025 • 025 - 175 57

TABLE IV.--THEORETICAL PARAMETERS--N. A. C. i.

4412 AIRFOIL

--
•1 ] :1924I .0611 6_01
3.041 -0.0727
--.0548 I •0755 /
.2 t ,20a2 [ .0395 1.777 --.0258 I .1135 }
.3 .2128 -.0116 1•326 •01'20 ] .1220 [
-_ l .2035 --.0527 1.139 •0492 I ,1O95 |
.5 I ,1806 [ --.0866 1.088 •0797 ] .0800
.6 [ .t519 [ --.0942 1.147 .1002 [ .0515 I
.7 I ,1214 [ --.1028 1.350 .1087 1 .0239 1
.8 I .0863 [ -.1166 1.856 .I109 [ -.0130 ]
.9 _ .0501 -.1016 3.528 .O975 [ -.0720 [
[. O .0250 -_ 0590 ......... 0706 , --. 0960 [
t.l .0118 --•0249 3•589 .0403 [ --.0970 [
[,2 .0088 .0020 1.887 .0115 [ --.0925 [
t. 3 .01.'20 i .0169 1.372 --.0153 I -.OsrrO /
[.4 .0192 t ,0284 1.167 --.0385 / --.0785 I
[.5 ,0302 .0434 1.109 --.0612 / --.0720 ]
[.6 .0470 ] .0661 1.163 --.0837 [ --.0640 (
[, 7 .0736 . O976 1.3,_1 -. 10.'29 [ -. 0505 [
[.8 .1080 ,1211 1.845 --,I126 I --.0210
t.9 •14_ .1._61 3.2o5I -.1o7o I .o_4o
.0600
.,0 •17800 6.201
I -0727I 1