TECHNICAL NOTES

:JATIONAL ADVI SORY COMIvHTTEt: FOR AEFLONAUTICS

No. 269

THE DISTRIBUTION OF LOADS BETr':EE.~- THE WL!GS OF

A BIPLANE HAVING

DECAL~GE

By Richard M. Eock

~-:ashin[ton

Novembe r, 1927
REPRODUCED BY

NA TI,ONAL TECHNICAL
INFORMATION SERVICE
u.s. DEPARTMENT Of

COMM ERCE
SPRINGFIELD, VA. 2216 1

NAT IONAL ADVIS0RY

COlv.i~;1ITTEE

FOR AERONAUTtCS.

TECHNICAL NOTE NO. 269 .

THe:: DI STRIBUT ION OF LOADS BET Y',:i.; EN THE

~i-;r NGS

OF

A BIPLAlil E fi..AVI NG DECALAGE.

By Richard M. Mock .

Introduction
It is known that in a bipl ane the load is not distributed
equally b etween t h e wi ngs .

The presence of one wing wi ll af-

fect the lift cha r acter i stics of the othe r wing .

A des i gner

must Y-now the total load each wing carries in orde r that

~::...::

may desi gn an adequate struc ture .

The purp o s e of this th es is is to determine t he distr i bution of loads bet een the wings of a b i plan e at vari ou s angles
of d ecalage, when the gap/chord ratio i s one, a nd there i s no
sta gger .
Since the dist ributi on of loads between wi n gs i s the ratio
of the lif t of one wing to the lift of th e othe r, the ef f ective
li ft of each wing will hav e to b e determi ned .

This can be cal-

cu la ted if the effect of the presence of one wi ng on the lif t

of the othe r wi ng is known .

Th e effective lift of each wi ng

was first inv est i gated, usin g th e vortex theory and later by
experiment s in the wi nd t unnel . I n order to obliterate a poss i*A Thesis submitted t o the faculty of the Col lege of Eng ineering , New York Uni vel'S i ty, i~ part ial fu l fi llment of the requ irement s fo r the de gr e e in Bachelor of Sc ien c e i n Mechanical Engi nee ring, May, 1927.

N. A. O. A. Technical : ot e No . 269

.2

b lc sou r co of o rror , t wo atrfoils

an d the Gott i n g en 387 .

WC TC

used., namely; t h e U. S .A. 27

Ext en s i ve tests were made , us i ng the

U . S . A. 2 7 ai r foil , and whe n the results s:lOwed a po s s:l.ble error

th e y we r e checked wi th the G~ttingen 38~ ai rfoil.

The authoT i s indebted to Profe s sor Alexander Xlemin and Mr.
F r ode rie k Y..nCl.e k f or their many h elp fu l su gg est ions on the theoretical calculations, on t he relative values of the vort ex theor y .
calculations, and on t he wind tUnnel r esults .
The Terms ' Def i ned
The d e ca la ge, gp.p, stagger , and a ngle of attack are mea sured

~.
..

'

acc ordin g to the def i n i ti ons gi v en by the Nat ional Adv isory Oommittee for Ae ronaut i cs in thei r r ep ort No . 240 (Refer enc e 1)
The d.ecalag e shal l be ca lled po s i t i ve wh en the lower wing
has a smal ler angle of attack than t h e u ppe r wing .

Th e decal age

shall be cal l ed negat i ve wh en the lower wi ng has a l a r ger angle

of attack than the upper wing .

The a ngle of decala ge i s the

a cute angle between the chords of the wings of a b iplane .

The gap is the di s tanc e b etwe en the pl a ncs of the chords
of any t wo a d jacGnt wiDgS, mea sured a long a line pe r p endicular
to the ohord of the u pper wing at any desi gnated point of its
1 eadin g edge .
The stagger is tho a mount of advano e of the l ead ing edge
of t he upper wing of a biplane, t r ip18,r:o ,

aT

IJiul tip l ane, over

N. A . O. A. T ec hn i ca 1 Not e r 0

269

that of a lowe r wing , expr essed. as a pe rcen t age of gap or in

d e g r e e of the angle who se tangent i s the pe r centage just re'f erred to .

I t i s c on sid.er ed pos i tiv e when the uppe r wi ng is

forward and is mea sured f rom t h e leadi n g edg e of the upper

wing along it s chord to th e point of i n ter s ec tion of the chord
with a line drawn perp endicu larly to the chord of the u ppe r
wing at the lead ing ed g e of the lower win g , all lin es b ein g
drawn i n a

p l ~ne

parallel to the p l an e o f

s~nm e t ry.

All cal culati ons will be made in ab s olut e un its employing

feet, p ounds , and seconds .

For a b i p l ane, the f ol lowing terms

shall be used !
0L

= lift c oeff i c ie n t (ab s olute)

ga p

spa n of up p er wing

= span of 1 0Yl o r wi ng
= a rea of upp er wi ng
= area of l ower wing
= anE;le of stag ge r
L

= t otal lift on a wi ng

= tota l d ra g on a win g

0 Lo

= effect ive li f t c oef fici ent of upp er w'i ng

01u

= eff ective lift co efficient of lower wi ng

If the lo we r win g of a bip lane '{{ere removed the upper wing

would have a 1 i f t co eff i ci ent of

01'

When the lowe r wi ng is

replaced the lift of the upper i s af fected .

The lift co eff i c i -

N. A.

.A. T e c hn i ca 1 rot c No.

269

e nt of the upper wi n g will then be called

0Lo

or the effective

lift coefficient of the upp er wing of a bip l ane .

Sim ilarly,

the effective lift coef ficient of the lower wing viill b e called
Lu'
The effect of t h e lower wing on the lift coef ficient of
the upper wi11 be called
I:::.

I:::. 011,1 0'

0Luo = 0Lo - 0L

(upper wi ng alone)

The effect of the uppe r wi ng on the lift coeffic ient of

the lower will be callod

I:::.

0Lou
OL

(lower wing alone) .

As the lift c oef ficient is Q function of the lift, all

calculations wil l be made, using coef ficients in order that
the results may be a pp li cabl e to ot her cases .
The Vortex Theory Applied to the Biplane
For purposes of calculation) the airfoil is replaced by a
li n e at one- third of the wing chord.

The c irculation about the

airfoil and the c irculation about this imaginary line are equal.
The circulation about one win g is d i stur bed by the presence of
the other i n two ways.

Every wing, about which there is a cir-

culation) has two factors affecting t he air around it, th e

transverse vortex and the tip vortices coming from the ends of
the wing .

I n a bipl ane these vortices cause a d is turba nc e in

the Qir fl ow about each wing.

The change in the air f low can b e

N. A.C . A. Tcchnicul f ote No. 269

att ribut ed to a velo c i t y hav ing a horizontal and a vertical c omponent .

The hor i zo ntal v el oc ity a ffects the c ir culation, while

the vertical velocity tends to change the an gl e of atta ck.

The velo city at t h e lower wing , due to the upper transverse vo rtex, at a point
wi ng is

distance from the center of the

(Reference 2a) :
b'o +' . . , . . . . . .

ro cos

"2 x
[ -r=~=====~====;:;::=- +
b
:2
(-.!1.
+ x ~2 + ~-

1G

4 'Ii G

\2

COS2~

jb(2

]
0.

\.

The vel o c ity at the sam e p oint, due to the t ip vortice s is !

V2

ro

-----,=~==~=====7

11

(b O

+ \2

G s in

+ j---:;:::~=2=+=(::;::b=0=_:::::::x=2=c=o=s=2=~
\2

The derivations for th e above are not necessary in th i s

paper.
I t is accepted that the c irculation about any wing is:

Therefore, t he ci r cul ation about the upper wing i s :

and that about the lower wing is:

whe re

Vv

t erfe ren ce .

~s

the velocity of the ai r wi thout a ny exte rnal in-

N. A. O.A . Tec hn ical No te No . 269

The chang e in the ho rizontal velo c ity of the lower wi ng due

to the upper win g is
.':, Vou

/:, Vou

- -

(Referenc e 2b ):

0Lo 8 0
4 n b o bu

( Reference 2b)

and similarly,
/:, Vuo =
V'J
~

The va l ue of

( Ref erenc e 2b )

in terms of the angl e of sta gger [3

g iven in .l! i gure 1 .

The value of

and

A is

A is g iven below .

The chang e in the vertical vel o c i ty a t the lo'wer wing due

to the presenc e of the upper vr i ng is
6- o.ou

= -

!;,.

o.ou

(Re fer en c e 2c)

Lo 8 0
4iT b o b u

(v + x)

(Refe rence 2 0)

0Lu 8u
4 n b o bu

(v - x)

(Reference 2 c )

and s imilarly,

The va l ue of v
l y.

t;, o.uo

and

are g i ven in F i gures 2 a n d 3, re s p e ct i ve-

The i nt e g r at ion of the above equation s i n order to obtain

the valu es

~; ive n

i n F i gu res 1, 2, and 3, was ma d e g raphically by

Fuchs and riop f ( Re fe r ences 2d a nd 2e),

~

~(A 1 ) - ~( 11.2 ) ;

~( A)

c os~

2
( / 1 - 11. cos :2 B
,'

-v

v ~ (-'1 ) - 1)( A2 ) ; ,

1)(A)

sinf3

(J

+ lo g e

'"

- 1)

- --2- - 2-- 1 + A cos f3 - ' l ) +

( 1 + sin~) ( J 1 + 1\)
sin f3 +J 1 + 'A2 cos 2 f3

( Ref erence 2)

N. A . 0 . A . Te c hnical r ot e No. 269

where

/1. 1

+ bu

= 2O G

a nd

Since an increaso in horizontal wind velocity or in the

angle of a tta c k will increase the lift of a n airf oil, the increase in lift will b e a pp roximately :
!J.

L = a1

av

!J.

V + a1

an.

!J.

a + D 6 a
(Reference 2g)
ne gl i g ible

As the lift of a wing is:

the increa s e in lift on the lower wing, due to the presence of

the upper wing is:

6.V+

where

: , (P Lu Su
C'

a.

V,,v 2 )

6.a

is the slope of the lift curve of the airfoil used .

The chan ge in 1 i f t of t he lower wing, due to the presenc e

of the upper is:

6. 010u = 2 01

!J.

Vou
Vv

6. V

o. . C1u
,
6. a
0 a

N. A. C. A. Tec hn i ca l Kot e No. 269

Subst i tuting , we

obt~in :

CLo So

= 2 0Lu [- 4

TT

.a

~]

Lu [ 57 .

3 So (v
4 TT b o bu

a.

( Due to c~an ge in
'110rl' zonta l l ' ,l.".,....._L, "J " '';_ ~-J.Y>.)

(Due to change
i n vertical
veloc i ty)

~~

\I

+ x) ]

( 57 . 3 clmnge s r a d i ans to de 2:re es )

By c han g ing th e s i gn s , the e ffect on the uuper 'fling can be
found.

2 CLu [ 4

OL 0 3u
TT b
b
I-L J +
o u

a
a

OLu
Su (v - x ) ]
a
[57 . 3 4 IT b b
o u

App l ication of the Th eory

The wi ng s used f or t h e i nvesti go. tion wer e two metal wi nd
tunne l model 1 8-inch by 3-inch U. S . A. 27 airfoils and t wo wooden
II

wind tunne l model 1 8- inch by 3-inch Go tt i n g en 387 a irfo il s .

It

has been stated in the introduction t hat the biplane was i n-

v e st i gated at va r iou s decala g e s , when the Gap

on e, and there was no sta gg e r .
were i nvest i ga t ed were :

_ 20 ,

c~ ord

rat io was

The angle s of decala g e that

_

10 ,

o ,

+2 o ,

The characteristics of each airfo il we re de termi n ed by t e s ti ng the airfo il in the wind tunnel .
ar e g iven in Figu r e 4 .

The re su lt s of th e s e tests

Sinc e in each b i pla.ne comb i nat i on th e

upper and .~owe r wing have the same span, the same area , and
the same lift

cha raot eIi~tics .

N. A . C. A. Technical NotE) No. 269

b
:=

(3

C1 0

(3

a.

b
:=

slope .

:=

The ab ove can be reQuccd to the f ol lowing

2"

(
~ S
\ 2 n b /

form(~c ferenc e

(C1 0 C1 u) + (57 . 3 ( v - 2 x H ( C1 u )
\. 4 n ) \
b
/

I n orde r 'to know the val ues of

1, 2 , and 3, we must determ i ne

~,

and

A.1

A.1

b
bu
= 2o +
G

A.2

b - b
= 2o G u =

:=

and

from F i gures

A.2

F rom these values

~

~ ( A.1)

5. 1

= v ( A.1.)

x = x ( A.1 )

:=

1. 8 .

2h) :

= 0 as the re is no stagge r

.iI . A. C. A. Techn i ca l No te No . 269

10

TAB LE I.

Theoret i ca l
Angl e
of
att a ck*

-2
decalage

6. CLu o '
- 1
decal age

eff ect on uppe r wing due to l owe r.

No
deca la g e

+1
decalage

+2
decalage

+3
decal ago

+4
decal age

- . 02 281

- . 01 801

-. 0 1 31 2

--

- . 02 1 47

- . 01 838

- . 01 586

- . 01251

- . 01785

- . 0155

- . 01 37

1- 011 7

: - . 0 101 1 - . 0 0798 - . 00579

+ 2

- . 0070

- . 0064

- . 0058

I 0050
1-.

- . 00445 ..... . 0037-5 - . 00325

+ 4

+ . 0077

+ . 007 1

+. 0058

+ . 0058

-oo::J

--

--

--

--

+ . 0053

+ . 0045

+ . 00417

+ 6",

+ . 0274

+ . 0257

+ . 0240

+ . 0220

I + . 0202
I

+ . 0 183

+ . 01 66

+ 8

+ . 0522

+ . 0499

+ . 0464

+. 0435

+ . 0402

+ . 037 1

+. 0342

+1 0

+ . 08 10

+ . 01 68

+ . 0728

+ . 0695

I + . 0645

+ . 060 3

+. 0560

+1 2

+ . 1 1 25

I + . 1080

+ . 1035

+ . 0982

I + . 0930

+ . 0889

+ . 0828

+1 4

+ . 0872

+ . 1 345

+ . 1332

+ . 1280

+ .1 225

+ . 1162

+ . 1100

I
I
1

+1 5

--

I + . 0920

+1 6

--

--

+ . 1 446

+ . 1 404

+. 1350

+ . 1 298

+ . 1 230

+ . 0279

+ . 0435

+ . 0425

+ . 0408

+ . 0393

*Ang1e of attack is measu r ed on upp er wing.

N.A. O.A. Technica l Note No . 269

11

TABLE II.
U.S. A. 27
Theoretical ef f ectivG 0Lo) abs . lift coefficient of upper win g .
+40
decala g e

Angle
of
a ttack*

- 2
decala ge

-1
decala ge

No
decala g e

+1
decal age

- 4

.17719

.181 99

.18688

--

--

--

--

- 2

.31653

. 32962

. 33214

. 33549

. 33889

--

--

. 4521 5

.4545

. 4567

. 4583

.. 45989

.46202

. 46421

+ 2

. 6024

. 6086

. 6092

. 610

. 610 55

. 61122:.ri .6117 5

+ 4

.7 557

.7 5 51

.7 538

.7 538

. 7533

.7 525

.7 5217

+ 6 -.

.9104

. 9087

. 907

. 905

. 9032

. 901 3

.8996

+ 8

1. 0722

1.0699

1. 0664

1.0635

1. 0602

1.0 571

1.0 542

+10

1. 231

1. 2268

1. 2228

1. 2195

1. 2145

1 . 2103

1. 206

+12

1. 3955

1.391

1. 3865

1. 3812

1. 3760

1.3719

1.36 58

+14

1. 477 2

1. 5245

1. 5232

1. 518

1. 5125

1. 5062

1. 500

+ 1 5

--

1 . 523

1. 5256

1. 57 1 4

1. 5660

1. 5608

1.5 540

+16

--

-,

. 9379

. 9535

. 9525

. 9508

.9493

+2
decalag e

*Ang le of attack i s measured on upper wi ng.

+3
decala g e

N.A . O.A . Techn i cal Note No . 269

12

TABLE III.
U.S.A . 27

IJ. CLou , eff ect

_1
No I
An g le
_ 2
of
r ~ e ca- I decacL eca- i
at tacl<:*J
l age I
.La g e ! l age
- 4 ! - . 027981- . 02601 -. 02 396
I
I
- 2 1- . 054381- . 051 2 7 - . 04864 Theoreti ca l

-. 082 7 51 -.077 3

--

. 04 522 - . OLH68

--

I
I

+4
deca1a ge

--

--

--

-. 06574 -. 0611

- . 05635
- . 0860

-.138 1

- .1 31 6

- . 1 230

- .117 0

- .18 75

- . 1 794

- .171 3

- .1631

-.1 554

1-. 2460

- . 235 6

- . 2263

<")1 ,-,,-,

- . 2073

3065

1-.2961

-.2858

-. 2775

1-. 26 56 - . 2550

, -. 2443

) - . 3603

- . 3 51 0

- . 341 5

-.3 30

- . 31 87

-.3094

- . 296 4

- . 3003

- . 3961

-. 3908

-. 3808 1- . 3702

-. 3 578

-. '34 53

/-. 3090

-. 4 1 00

-.4020

3917

-. 381 5

- . 3685

-.19 65

- . 2606

255 .6

- . 2 49 1

- . 2426

- . 2038

+ 8

-. 2533

1-.
I

+1~

--

+16

--

1-, .1957

I
I

--

I -~'

.:"-, _ 00

1-.
1-.

*Angl e of attack is measured on upper wi ng.

+3
deca.l age

- .1012 ' -.09 61 5 - . 0906 5

+ 6

+14

--

+ 4

+12

+2
decala g e

- . 0 735 1- . 069 3

-.1193 1- 1136 ,- . 1082

1
- .1 588 1- . 1 520 - .1 450

+ 2

+10

+1
deca1ag e

on lowe r wing due to upper

1-.

198 1

N .A. C.A. Techn i cal Note No . 269

13

TAB LE IV.
U. S . A. 27
The o r et i ca l
Angle
of
a t tack*

- 2

0
+ 2

effect i ve

CLuJ abs . l ift coef ficient of l owe r wing

_ 2
decal age

_1
d e cal age

No
decalage

+1
d ecal ag e

+2
decal age

+30.
d e cala ge

~ 320 0 2

. 24899

.l 7 604

--

--

--

--

. 41 562

. 35173

. 29936

. 239 7 8

.1 5832

--

--

. 53225

. 452 7

. 3965

. 3337

. 28226

. 2 1 39

. 5664

. 5068

. 4288

. 37385

. 3 1 235

. 2620

. 6282

+4
de cal ag e

1 .4365

+ 4

.7242

. 6640

. 6030

. 5419

. 4834

. 4070

.3 53 0

+ 6

. 81 62

.7 563

. 6955

.63 60

. 5767

. 51 69

.4596

+ 8

. 8967

. 8490

. 7844

.7257

. 6664

. '6082

. 5499

+1 0

. 9765

. 9209

. 8642

. 817 5

. 7544

. 6970

. 6387

+1 2 0

1. 029 7

. 9860

.941 5

. 88 7

. 831 7

.7 856

.7 236

+1 4

. 609 7

1. 034 9

. 9992

. 9562

. 9127

. 8592

. 8 047

+1 5

--

. 601 0

. 9880

. 9453

. 901 5

. 848 5

+1 6

--

--

1.17 0 4

1.1344

1. 0879

1. 040 4

1. 020
. 7 1 35

*A ng1e of attack i s mea su r ed on upp e r wi ng.

N. A. C. A. Technical Note

~o .

269

14

From Figure 4:

a CL =

a..

CL

a a..

. 067 7

for the U. S. A a7 airfoil ,

. 0747

f or the G~t ting en 38 7 airfoil .

As the a irfoils are I S- inch by 3-inch, and the gap chord

ratio one
So=Su = . 37 5 sq . ft .
bo

=b =
G

1 . 5 ft.

= a5 ft .

The ab ove equations can b e simplif i ed st ill furthe r to f it

this sp ecial case.

U. s . A. a7 airfoi l s :

Gottingen 387 airfo ils:

/j

C:. LOU

=-

(5 .1 )( . 37 5 ) C
C - 57 . 3 (1. 8)~ . 3 7 5)C ( . 0747)
1u 4 TT ( 1. 5)
2 TT ( 1. 5 ) 2
10
10
. 1023 C10
.1 023 C1u

The effect of the presence of the l ower wi ng on the lift of

the u pp er, and the effect of the p resen c e of the Lepper wing on the

N. A. C. A. Te chnical Note No . 269

15

lift of the lower were calculated for d e cala ge of

+2 0

+3 0

for t h e U. S.A .27 a irfoi l and +2 0 fo r the G~ttin ge n

+4

387 a irfoil .

Each b i pl ane comb i nation was cal cul ated f or 1 6 an-

g les of attack .

Th e s e

calcu~ati ons

were mad e by su bs tituting the

valu e s obta ined from Fi gure 4 in th e a b ove equations .

The angle

of a ttack was measu r ed on t h e u pper wi ng, thu s an increase in

decala ge causes a d e cr eas e in the a ngle of t h e lower wing .

The
/

numerical results f or t h e cal,c ulat.ions for t he U. S.. A . 2_7_A.-irf oil

are g iven in Table s I and III.
airfoi l are given b elow .

Th e r esults 'f~r tho G~ttinge n 387

Figures 5 and 6 show the same val ues

p lotted aga i nst the lift of the u pper wing a l one .

That is, if

the upper wi ng had the same angle of a ttack a nd its lift was not
disturbed by the pr e s ence of the lower wi ng.
From the values g i ven i n Fi gu r e 4, the effect ive li ft of .
t he upp er and lower wi ngs were cal culat ed by means of th e above
resu lts.

The numerical re sults of thes e calculations fo r the

U . S . A. 2 7 a irfo i l are g i ven i n Tables II a nd IV, wh il e the _Ie---

suIts for the G~tt in gen 387 airfoil are given b elow:
Angl e of At t a ck

0Lo (eff ecti ve)

_ 40

-.01115

. 3858 5

-.011 55

. 5119

-. 00 50

. 68 30

- ,010 5

. 8 785

-.0 330

1. 0610

. A. C.A . Technical Note No . 269

An gle of Attack

16
CLuo

CLo ( effect ive)

_ 80

- .058

1.2290

-100

-.0856

1~3836

-120

-.1180

1 . 5430

-140

- . 1413

1. 6293

-150

-.1490

1 . 6590

-160

- . 1 538

1. 6758

The dist ribution of loads between wings is the ratio of the

effective lift of the upper wing to the effect ive lift of the
lower wing .

The distribution of the load between the wings was

calculated f rom the above results.

The ratios are plotted in

Figur e 7 .
The Resu lts of t he Theoretical Investigat ion
I n discussing the re sults of the investi gation f rom the
view of the vortex theory at this point the wind tunn el test resul ts or any con clusions drawn f rom them will be omitted .
The var ia t ion of

11 CLuo

i"1i th

the

CL

of the upper wing

alone, as g iven in Figure 5, show that at angles of attack below 3

for the U. S.A . 27 airfoil and below 3.25

II

fo r the Gottingen

387 airfoil, the eIfect of the ve rtical velocity at the upper

win g, due to the lower win g,. is g reat er than the eff ect due to
the hori z ontal velocity.

Above these values the eff ect due to

the horizontal velocity compon ent is greater .

The vertical ve-

lo c ity tends to decrea se the lift of the upper wing, wh ile the

N. A.C . A. Technical Note No . 269

17

horizontal velocity tends to increase the lift.

CLuo

Th erefore,

vlill b e negat i ve below the s e values and p os itive above.

As the horizontal velo c ity component is a function of the square

of the lift on the upper wing, and the vertical velo c ity component is directly proportiona l to the lift on the upper win g,
there is a point at which the two components are equal .

This is

the po int when the U. S.A.27 airfoil is at 3 0 and the G~ttingen 387
i$ at 3. 25

At angles above 3 0 for the U.S.A.27, and above

II

3 . 25 0 for t h e Go t tingen 387, the effect of the horizontal component is predominant, therefor e
increase i n decalage.
versed.

CLuo

will increase with an

Below these an gles the eff ect will b e re-

Th ereforo, at smal l angles of attack an increase in

decalage increases

CLuo .

As both the ho ri zontal and vertical velocity at the lower

wing, due to the uppe r wing, tend to decrease the lift of t he
lower wing,

CLuo

will be negative.

As an increase in deca-

l age causes a decrease in lift on the lower wing

have le ss eff ec t with increased decala ge .

CLuo

will

This phenomenon is

shown graphically in Figure 6 .

With positive decalage the lift on the upper wing wil l b e
g reater than that on the lower wing, at all angles of attack
of the biplane.

This is caused by the upper wing having a

lar ge r angle of a ttack.

Ne glecting the effe ct of one win g on

the lift of the other, the ratio of the lift of the upper to
the lift of the lower will be g reater than one.

Sim ilarly this

ratio will b e le s s than one when there is a negative decalage.

' . A. C.A . Tech..'l ical Note

i~o .

269

18

F rom Figures 5 and 6 it can b e seen that at lar g e angl es

of attack the lift on the upp er wing i s increased and the lift
on the lower wing decreased.

Th erefo r e, the ratio of the ef-

fect ive lift on the upper TI ing to that on the lower wing will be
g reater th.s.n it would b e i f this effec t were neglected .

At

sma ll angles the d ecrease in the lift on tl1e lowe r wing is so

much more than the decrease in the lift on the u pp er vling that
the same result is produced , thereby i ncreas ing the ratio at
all p Oint s .

At som e angles the ratio is not in creased as much

as at high an gle s of attack; therefore, the cu rves in Figu re 7

have a gene r a l upward slope .
The Experime ntal Inve st i ga tion
The Apparatus
]n tests in the wind tunnel the most p robable sour c e of

error is in set ti ng the model to be te st ed.

I n this experiment

every po ss ible precaution was t a ken to eliminate any error from

this source .
One wi ng was set i n the chuck of the wind tunnel in the
usual manner .

This chuck rests on the balanc es .

Anothe r chuck

was sc rewed to roof of the wind tunnel directly above the chuck
used for the wing just menti oned.
accurately by means of a p lumb b ob .

The upper chuck was centered

In this upper chuck was

set a spindle, offset by a link at 7 inches ab ove the wing.

The interf ering or dummy wing was mounted on this spindle .

The

N. A. C. A. Techniclll r ote

~Jo .

269

19

link hOvd Ov slot in one end to permit e. certain amount of freedom

in putting

t~e

wing in place.

It i s this interfering or dummy

wing that :'.ff ec ts t he lift on t h e wi ng in the lower chuck.

By

rotating the u pper spindlc in the chuck the interf erin g or dummy
wing was used either as t h e upper or lower wing of the biplane.
Of course in one position the wing ID. S turned to keep the leading edge into the wind .

Figure 8a is a photo graph of the appa-

ratus in t h e wind tunnel.

In t h e photo graph the win gs are in p os ition to give readings for t h e e ff ective lift on the lower win g .
the dimensions for t h e a pparatus.

re 8 gives

In the tests a rod was

screwed into the lower part of the interfering

below the s pindle.

Fi

win ~J

directly

As t h e rod was long enough to reach the

floor of the tunn el, it prevented any po ss ible vibration of the

interfering wing.

This rod is not shown in the photo graph.

Procedure

The investi gation was made in 4-foot wind tunn el at New York
University .

All tests were made with a wind veloc ity of 40

miles per hour.

The d ecalag e was mea sured with a pair of drawin g dividers
having very .sharp points.
the end of eac h wing .

Two fine crosses were scratched on

For each decala ge to be investigated a

full- scale dra wing, s howing these crosses, was made of the win gs.
The wings were placed in the tunnel at approximately the desired

N. A.C.A . Tec hnica l i ote No. 269

decalage .

20

Tne drawin g dividers were then set by p lacing them on

the full scale cirav.,ring .

scratched on the

~ings,

With the divid.ers h eld over the crosses,

the wings were moved deli cately until

the crosscs, and therefore the wings, were in the des ired posit i on .
It has been stated that the lift vras investigated at varioue:
angles of decala gc> when the gap/chord ratio ~as one, and t her e
was no stagger .

The gap/ chord ratio vvas always equa l to one

since the ful l drawing , used to place the viings, was mad e with
that gap/chord ratio.
I t may

appe~r

that t h ere was a possible source of error in

measuring thc sta gger .

Ac c ording to thc National Advisory Com-

mi ttee for Aeronautics definition, there is no sta gger vrhen the

leading edge of the lower wing lies in a perpend i cular to the

chord of the upper 'sinG dru.vID at the lead i ng edge, of the u pper
wing .
I n order to prevent the vlinESs from having any stagger, a
small j i g
num .

VTL,s

used .

I t consisted of a small

Great pa ins were taken in mak i ng the

1fT"
"Til

A spring clarr.p \yas screwed to the stem of tl:te

made of alw{lipe rfectly square .

"Til .

This c l amp

he ld the st em a 6ainst the lower s ide of the upper wing so that

on e edge of the st em coinc ided with the chord of the upp er wing.
One side of the head of the

"Til

waS p ressed a gainst the leading

ed g e of the upper vYing so that 'when the leading edge of the lower
YJ i ng was brought up flush with the other sicie of the h ead of the

N. A.C . A. Techn ical l'T ote

1:0 .

269

21

ItT," there was n o pos s ibility of any stagger.

One ai r fo il was set up in the lower chuck (connected to the
balance) .

I t was then tested fo r li ft at the ordi na ry angle s of

attac k .
To measure the effective lift of the upp er win g, the wing i n
the chuck, just described , was used as the upper wing.
wing was t h en put in pl ace .

After the

II

The lower

Til shaped j i g was c l amped

to the upper wing, the lower wing was careful ly set at t he c orrect decala g e by means of the dividers.
lo cked in pl ace and the decala ge checked:

The lower wing was then

After the

II

Til

was removed, the tunnel was started and a rea din g taken.

clamp
With

the decalage se t, the wings we r e both rotated abou t the same axis,
so that rea dings could be taken at all a ngles of atta ck, without
further adjustment .

To prev ent any error, the decalage was

checked befo re and a f ter th e reading at each angle of attack .

Great care was ta.ken to keep the wings pa r a llel f or ea.ch test .
I n a similar way the effective li ft of the lower wi ng was
measured .

The i nte r fe ri ng wing was then removed Qnd monopl ane

readings wore a gain taken on the wing in the lO...-ie r chuck .

The

tests wer e run wit hout remov i ng the 'wi ng in the lower chuck between runs.
removed .

I n thi s way, anot her p oss i ble sour ce of error was

N.A. C.A. Te chn i ca l Not e No . 2 69

22

TABLE V.

u . S . A. 27
Wind. t unn el re sul t s fo r
An gle
of
a tta ck*

_2
d eca1age

,6C Lu o, ef f e c t on upp e r wi n g due t o lower

_1 1 No
d e ca- I dec al a gs
l a ge

..,..

Ii

-. 089

I
044
-. 061 1-.

-. 0 8 4 1-. 0 7 7

-. 1 28

-.113

- . 09 8

I
-. 068

-. 09 1

+10
+12
+1 4

-. 1 58

-.1 47

- .1 2 4

I
+3
decal a ge 1

+. 01 3 5

-. 031 51 - . 01 7

+ 6
+ 8

+2
decal a ge I
!
+ . 0123

+4
deca1 a ge

-. 0 8 6

I -. 0 43

+ 2
+ 4

+1
d e ca1a ge

I
I
I
I

-.11 3

-. 031

-. 0 51

I -.030

-. 073

-.10 7

I
I

+1 5
+1 6
,

*Ang1e of attack i s mea sured on uppe r wi n g .

-. 0 78

-. 07 3

- . 098

-. 083

-.10 5

-. 02 2

-. 085
-. 09 9

+ . 059

-~

..-- -------....----~-----

N. A. 0 . A. Te c l1n i ca 1. Not e No . 2 69

23

TAB LE VI.

U. S . A. 2 7
Wi n d tunnel r esu lts fo r e ff ect i ve
An gle
of
attack*

_ 2
decalage

- 1
decfl.la ge

I
I

No
de calage

0L 01 ab s . l i f t

+1
decala ge

+2
deca l a ge

- 4

. l7 53

- 2

. 305

. 334

. 362

. 379

. 391 5

+ 2
+ 4

. 662

. 664

. 67 1

. 688

+1 4

+4
decal age

. 4365

. 472

. 69 7

. 718

. 726

. 942

. 947

. 8 10
. 892

. 9 07

. 922

. 929

. 935
1 . 051

+1 0
+12

+3
decal a ge

. 58 7

+ 6
+ 8

. 406

coef . of upp e r

1 . 125

1.136

1 . 159

1.17

1.178
1 . 883

+1 5
+16
*Angl e of at t ack i s measu r ed on uppe r wi n g .

1 . 185

1 . 20

24

A. O. A. Technical Note No . 269

TABLE VII.
U.S.A . 27

Wind tunnel re sults for

An gl e
of
attack*

_2
decalag e

6C LoUJ effect on lower wing due to upper

_1
decal a ge

No
decala g e

+1
decal age

- 2
- . 043

- . 036

-.0335

- . 051 5

- . 1 04

- . 108

- . 105

+1 4

- .11 57

-~1 308

-.168

-. 120

-.1 455

- . 099

-. 107

- . 2045

- . 180

- . 252

- . 248

-. 21 5

- . 237

- . 118
- . 1 77

- . 197

- . 209

+10
+1 2

-.1145
-. 099

+ 6
+ 8

+4
decal age

- . 0426

+ 2
+ 4

+3
decala g e

+ . 0055

+2
decala ge

- . 21 1

-. 197

- . 230

- . 243

- . 21 4

- . 246
- . 250

-. 222

- . 262
- . 232

+1 5

+1 6

- . 218

*Angl e of attack is measured on uppe r wing.

N. A. C.A. Technicu. l i:Jote No . .::, 69

25

TAB LE VIII.
LS . P-.2 7

Wind tunn el r-esul ts for e f: ect ive CLu, abs . lift c oe r . of lower wing
I _ 9O
An g le
I
d~caof
attack* la c e

-1
d ecala ge

- 4

i~o

+1
decalage

de c a l a ge

+3
d ecala g e

+4
d ecala g e

1.0322

. 1138 5

- 2
0

+2
d e calag c

.1 204
. 57 2

. 494

. 4065

. 3345

. 2~,>35

.1403

. 779

. 711

. 643

. 563

. 4725

. 422

.180

+ 2

+ 4

+ 6
+ 8

. 973

. 8 76

. 8 73

.741

. 669

. 6115

. 3 16

.11 6

1.094

1.037

. 995

. 888

.833

. 568

1. 068

1.046

+10
+12
+14

1.14

+15
+16
*A n g1e of attack i s ~ easured on upper wing .

N.A.C .A. Technical Not e No . 269

26

Th e Resu lts of the 'Wind Tu nnel Experiments

The result s of t h e tests with the wing a lone are given in
Figure 4 .

I t was upon these results that the theoretical cal-

cu l ations were based.

From rea dings of the lift on the wing, alone in the tunnel,
and the 1 i ft when the other wing is pres en t, the eff ect of the
pr ese nce of one wing upon the lift of the other was calculated.
The experimen tal results for the effective lift of both upper
and lower wings are g iv en in Tables VI and VIII, respectively.
The effect of the presence of one wing upon the lif t of the
other, as obtained in the wind tunnel, i s g iven in Tables V and
VII.

The same results are shown graphically in Fi gures 9 and 10.

F i gure 11 g ives the r a tio of the effective lift of the up-

per wing to that of t he lower as obtained from t h ese tests (See

Fi g . 1 3 fo r comparison wit h Fi g . 7) .
Discussion of t he Experimental Results
It can readily be seen that there is a diff erence between
the results obtained by the experimental and by t h e t heoretioal
investi gations.

After t h e nature of t h e wind tunnel results have

been discussed, the reasons for this difference will b e e xplained.

The resu l t s obta i ned in the wind tunnel for

6 CLuo ,

as

shown in Fi gu re 9, are hardly similar to the theoretical results

s hown in Fi gu re 5.

Th e wi nd tunnel results for th e U.S.A.27 air-

N. A. G. A. Tecl1n ica l :;;0 . 2G9

27

foil were calculated, pl ot ted, a nd found to :?;i ve SOL e very consistent results .

I t was th ought t l18,t

t~1ere

mi ght have been a

possible error, s incc t he curv e s obtained fror:', the vlind tunnel

invest i go.tion d id not confo rm with those ob tained by the app1ication of the vortex theo r y.
made in

t~le

0..

new s et-up was

II

wind tunn el, us ing two Gottingen 387 airfoil s as 'n

ch ec k on the re sult s
G~ttin gen

For t h is rea s on

obt~ ined

by the U. S. A.27 airf oils.

airfoils were t es ted at a deca1a ge of +20.

The

The re-

su1ts of this tes t gives a curve very s i milar to that obtained

at +2 0 deca1ag e with the U. 3. A. 27 airfoil. Of course thes e curves
do not coincide since

t~e

t wo airfoils have diffe rent lift char-

act erist ics .

Fi gu re 9 shows that the lower wing reduces the lift of the
upper ,,-:l1en the angle of D.ttack of the b iplane is i nc reased .

The

lift on the uppe r wing i s increased with a n increase in decalage.

The p lotting of the wind tunn el re sults for

6 0Luo '

the

effect of the upper wing up on the lift chara cte ri stics of the
lower, g ive a cu rve wit h a sl ope very s i milar to that ob ta ined
by the theoretical investigation-

Though t he e f f e ct increases

wi th the angle of a ttaclc, the lift on the 10'\7e1' win g de creas es

wi th an i nc rea se i n decala ge, contrary to the results given by

the application of the vortex theory.

Since the lift on t h e upp er wing is decreased at a large
an g le of attack, the ratio of the lift on t he upper wing to that
on the lower wing will be less than that obtained the oretically .

N.A. C. A. Technical Note No. 269

28

As the reduction in lift on the lower wing increases fast er than

that on the upper wing, the cu r ves wil l still have the same upward slape as i n the theoret ical results.
A Comparison of the Results Obtained by the Theoretical
and Experimental I nvesti gations
It has b een shown that there is a difference between the
!'l ind tunnel test results and the calculated results bas ed on
the vortex theo r y .
The fact that the wind tunnel tests were accurate can b e
pr oven in two ways.

The re sul ts obtained from t he readings i n

the wind tunnel , when plotted, gave smooth consistent curves.

Sec ondl y, the res u lt s were checked by using a dif ferent s et pf
airfoils and a new set-up stil l obtaining the sa-me results.
I t may be s tated he re that the possibility of an error in setting up the a pparatus is ne glig ible as the wing on which the
readings '[Jere made was not moved in the chuck between any of the
tests, i ncludi ng the tests with the wing alonc in t h e tunnel.
The reason f or the di f fer enc e in the results is in the
me thod of appl ying the vo rt e x t h eory.

The airfoils of the bi-

p l ane we re replaced by lines at one-th ird the wing chord.

All

the calculations were based on the circulation ab ou t these line s.

'When the decala\..J e is varied fr om _ 2 0 to +4 0 ,

and the gap kept

b-o.n,stnnt, these l i nes come approximately 3/32 of an inch closer

~

t ..qget.hex., wh il e the trailing edges of the wing are moved app rox-

N. A. C. A. Tec hn icall;ote 1. 0. 269

imatcly 7/16 of an inch.

remain const2.nt.)

29

(The distances b etween t he leading edg es

The vort3x theory as developed by Dr. Fuchs

and Dr . Hcpf (RefereDc e 2 i) do es not re cogn ize the movement of

these lines or the fa ct tr. .3..t the di stance betvleen t he trailing
ed g es is not the same as the gap .

Th e theory has been developed

onl y including the interf erence between the c irculations and the
v o rtices .

The Venturi eff e ct produced by having t h e trailing

ed g es of t h e wings closer to gether wh en there is positive decal a ge and by having the trailing edges f arther apart wh en there
is ne ga tive decala ge has b een neglected .

Wit h positive, this

Venturi eff ect tends to increase the velocity of the air b etween the wings, reducing the circulation about the upper wing
and increasing the circulation about the lower wing .

I t has

been shown that the lift of a wing is a f unction of the circulation .

Figures 5 a nd 6 show an increased lift on the upper wing

and a decreased li ft on the lower wing , due to the cir culation

about a line rep l acing the ai r foi l and ne glecting t he Ve nturi
effect .

Th e increased lift is small compared to the decreased

li ft of the lower wing .

that of Figure 5 . )

(The scal e of Fi gure 6 i s f ive times

Wh en the Venturi eff e ct i s taken i nto ac-

count, the lift on the u pp er wing i s decreased unti l it is b elow

the val ue for the wing alone, making
Figure 9.

6,

CLuo

negative, as in

The increa sed li f t of the lower wing will decrease

the slope in Fi gure 6.

As the scale of Figure 6 i s lar ger,

the ef f ect i s not noticeable at first.

This i s shown in F igure

N.A . C. A. Techn i cal Note No. 269

10 .

30

Thus it can be shown that the Venturi effect does affect

the lift of the win gs .

It is. well to keep in ['l i nd that the ef-

fect of the interfe ring circulations is greater than t he Venturi

effect .
When the deca l a ge i s il1creased t l1e

Ve ~1tu ri

e ff ect

increases~

increasing the lift of the lower wing , or reducing the effect of

the upper wing on the lower wing.

Thi s explains the reversed

order of the l i nes in Figure 10 when compared with Figur e 6 (See

F i gure 12) .
Th e reduced value of the ratio of the effect ive lift Of the
upper wing to that of the lower wing has already been discussed .
The experimental results bring out
vortex theo r y as applied to biplanes.

m~ny

ot he r p oints i n the

Wh en the wind tunnel re-

suI ts are applied to the equations developed from the vort e x

theo r y for

6. CLuo,

they show that actually the vertical veloc-

ity i ncreases faster than the horizontal velocity .

The hor i-

zontal velocity tends to increase the lift of the uppe r wi ng ,

whil e vertical velocity tends to reduce the lift.

Ac cording to

th e c onstants d etermined by the g r aphic inte gration of Dr. Fuchs

and Dr . Hopf (Reference 2j), the vertical velocity does not increase as fast as the horizontal velocity.

It may be that these

constants are not applicable.

In app l yin g the vortex theory, Dr. Fuchs and Dr . Hopf have
ne glected the fact that when a biplane with no s tagger is at a
h i gh angle of attack, the same effect is produced as if ther e

N.A . C.A . Technical Rote No. 269

31

were stagger, since one wing meets the wind b efore the other.
This may caus e the lowe r wi ng to b e le ss a ff ected b y the tip
v o rt i ces of t he u pper wi ng , t h e transverse v ortices remain i ng
the same .

It may b e re called that t h e tip vortices t end t o

reduce the lift of eithe r win g .

As the wing approaches an elliptical loading the vortices
ar e leavin g the wing in an increasing amount from t he center to
the tip of the wing .

Dr . Fuchs and Dr. Hopf (Reference 2j)

shoul d have made their inte gration using an ellipti ca l loading

when they obtained the cons tants for FiguI'es 1, 2 and 3.
Conclusions
In a bipl an e t he lift of the upper wing wi l l b e greater
than that of t h e lower wing , due to the circulation of the lower
wi ng, increasin g t he wind vel ooi ty at the upper win g and the
circulation of t h e upper wing , decreasing t he wind veloc ity of
the lower wing .

The increased velocity between the wings due to

the Venturi eff ect tends to decrease the circulation of the upper wing and i n crea s e the circulation of t h e lower wing .

The

Venturi ef fect is not as great as that produced by the interference of the c irculations.
The tip vortic e s of each w:i.ng tend to decrease the lift of
the other.

It ha s boen sDown that t h e lift of each wing is de-

creased, due to the p resence of the other, t h e lift of the lower

wing bein g de c reased more than that of the other.

Therefo re,

N. A. C. A. T e c 1m i ca 1 K0 t c !Ii 0

269

32

the total lift of a b i ul ane is less t han t hat of tvvo similar monoplane wings .
Since t h e lift of each wing is decr eas ed a nd t hat of the
lower wi ng i s decrea sed m0 Te than t hat of t h e upper, the ratio
of t he effec tive lift of th e upper wing to that of t he lower
wing will b e g reater than one except at small angl e s of attack
and when there i s no or n egative decala ge.

Wh en t h e decalage is

ne gative, the lower wing has a g reater angle of attac k and a

g reater lift, c ons equ ently the ratio i s less t han on e .
The equation for the app lication of the vort e x theory to a
biplane should be corrected for t he Venturi ef f ec t ( b y rep lacing
the airfoil by more than one line), t he eff ec t of t h e vortices
"leaving the win g before they reach the end (u s in g el l iptical
loadin g), and t he eff ect of t h e sta bg er at h i gh angle s of attack.

N. A.O . A. Techn ical Note No . 269

33

Ref e r e n e e s
1. National Adv isory
oomm itt (: 8 f or
Aeronau tics

Nomenclatur e fo r Aeronautics. N. A. O. A.
Technical Report No . 240, Washington,
D. 0., 1926 .

2 . Fuchs, Dr . Richard
[;,nd
Hop f, Dr . Ludwi g

f a) Aerodynam i k, Sect ion 5, Ohapter IV,

Kapitel, Der Mehrdecke r. Richard Carl

Scrupidt & 00 ., Be rli n , 1922 .
Fuchs and Hopi in turn refe r to:
Betz, A. - Die gegensect i ge Be einflusuung zwe i s~r Tra gflachen,
IIZeitschrift f-0. r Flugtechnik
und F otorluft schiffahrt, II
R. Oldenbou r g, \lunchen and
Be rli n , 1914, S. 253, and
IITechnische Be ri chte ,der
Flugzeugmeisterei, II R. O.
Schm idt & 00 - , Berlin, 14,
8.103 .
Fuchs, R. - "Technische Bericht e der
Flu gzeugme iste r ei, II loco cit.,
II 2, S.177 .
(b) Aerodynam ik, l oc o ci t . , p.137 (37) &
~ 37a) .
II
II
II
( c)
p .137 38) &
( 38a)
II
II
II
(d)
p . 143
(Figs . 1 & 2)
II
II
II
(e)
p .144 (Fig . 3)

(f )

II

II

II

( g)

"

II

II

(h)

II

II

II

( i)

II

II

II

(j )

II

II

!I

p . 137 (39),
( 40) & (41 )
p. 1 44
p. 1 4 5 (42)

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

N. A.O .A. Techni cal Note No . 269

Fi g . l

Ar Glc; c f s te ggG r
-_.

o~ 10
15

!II
If

A/

--

- --- - - -- - -

-.---~

..

.- - -.-

II

If;~

::W u
25
-'- --

[7
V
I
V/

1$

V
I
/
V 11

'J;

-- -

30

35

,10

/!;V/I V V /'

_ .-

.~

----

j'/

. -1-- -

- -

-'-

(!;
///

/ /

II Ij

. '

/1; 1/~

If/;VI1/
/;V;J
1/ V
/
V
V

c- );;

~
/

~~J

~:r
~/

IFi g .,

..

j/

.-

._.

Va riati on of !J. fc r a t i plar e frc ill

"A erody narr,ik II by Fuc h E anj Hopf .

.. . .

_ b +1: u

1----'

1--.

//;;VI /

--

.-

"- - 2G

1! I f, .

10

12

Fig.2 ~.s

N.A.O.A. Technical No te ho . 269

Oil-I

LD

~~

atD

r-~,+ %\

(\j

f- - -

f-l

\-t
~\

C)

/..J

to
---t

+'

(f.J

(; )

r1

bD
~

I\~ ~

co

\
\~\ '\ '\
\
1\\1\ \ \ \
\ ~\ ~\
1\
L ~\
'\I~ 1\\ \ \
~~ 1\ \ \
\ ~\ 1\\
\~ \\ \\
1
'\
\ ~\\
\ 1\ .

<t-i

1-'

f- -

[0\i

U)

,1

'\

.-

;::s
II-.

--

.r!

CD

~ .

:...;,
Co

s::

?>

'd

LDf-l

f-.I0
pl).}-

~(!)

---

cd

rl
.. -

p..

.r!

P
cd
ti)f-l

1\\-\1\
\~
i--~4\
\~ ~
I\\~\
--

1\'\\

--- c--

<

II

1\ \ \

--~.--+

--

(J)

~l

1\ \

?>
P

<t-i

:::>
<t-i

s::

C\JO

\\

.r!

+'

cd

--

.r!

f-l

cU

P.

5~
,
~~~~~ii~~!I!!Tl1

41

I I I I I I I I I

I I

I I .I I I I
\
I ----+--v--v-rI

1 I..

Ll+-I
I

_____

ol//V -----

L---,

1""
CJ

-~-

~.
3

--1--I---H

Fig . 3

I
i

~;:::::--

II

31

:1

I I I~-"

Variation of x for a biplane fro m 1I .l\erodynamikll by Fuchs ai'1d Hopf .

9
~

<S'

N. A. C. A. T e c b~ i c B l Jot e NO . 269
1 . 6 1"---" 1 '- --- - ":
:

Fi ~ . 4

---~ ------ _J,--- I~--~-i--~---~~

I _L__
I
!

1. 4

r-------+---- - -1'-

Got t :1ge n 138 \.

t---I-- -t-- -t 7

/"

i' /~

l. 2

r-l

,- -~
1 .0
1------ (1)

;::1
(f)

II

'- -y

0 .8

'--"

H
0

I
L.
0 , 6 I-------+----+--T-

I'

~/

O. 2

t-

!
I

'

_-I
L
r----t--j IV I
~ ;;~ - i-

;/

,~_L

__

I
.
I

V
/

0. 4

V~
I L

-----r--i1;1I i/ L
'- r

.p

r-I
0

.-

!
- j --

- - t-

.-

I,
---

r ---t

.--t--, '
I

iii
I

t---

---t----- t - -

~--i---+----+--'

~-T

-f-l----tI

1--

-.- - t -

Angl e of ~t tac~
I_
,--_L, ._ __ ___L_-L-_....L..-_~_..L-.-_L

'_____'__

_l

_1
0
40
80
1 20
160
Fi g . 4 Gott i ne;en 38 7 and U,S. A, 27 a i r f 011s . Lift c l1arac t e r is t i cs . 18 l1 x3 11 40 M.P.H. N . Y . U . (-rind. t unne l .

+ . 14 N. A. 0 . A . T 8 C hni cal

TI ~ ~--T

1----+--+----+1 -+---

t -,N_O_._2 6_9.-_r--_.--_.--_.,....F_i..,::::g_.5.,....-r---.

}.T, 0___
8

-l~

f---'--!-=-+--+-- - + -

l~---+!

~~~

i - I
,---"'l"Ang e of d~ catabe

Thee

ret i C~iLuo, l

effE at or upp r

wTn~

mil

+. O8

: 6 ~tfijLI/-IJi((~1
I
:~~=I
II I
9

I:
l

lin coe fici qnt

i
-L!
- +7;1~m'~/
+3 ...."
0

I.
U.S .A .27~
, -~Olid [lineE
'

Que

- - - f - - 4-

I,

...J-II-I-J.~I----t-----j

l ve_T--+
'1_1 n_l...g.L:.
' - \ - _ - \ -_ _1-_

+--~

)1jj/i~1

=o~~o--NIILV

+.10

IIIV I
//;;11//

-----1

I I

+.12

ill

V~~~l

I
lines .

-----

f;7tj)~-~-I----+--1

Ij/;

+.06

'-

/~!/V/

(r i / ;'/j I

/ /(;' 1// ,I

T - ~W

+.04

Fig . 5 .
. 2

.4

.6

.8

l.0
1.2
1.4
0 1 of upper wing alone U.S .A .27 and Gotti ngen 387

- 0035

Fig . 6

40
Fi g .7

N.A.C. A. Te chni c al Note No.269

3.6

r---~---r--~----~---~--~----~--~--~--~----r-~

' ,2r---4--- ~~\~4----~--+---~--~----+---~---+----r-~

'l'heo] ; tic31 .\
rat i c of JJift
ll Y P " > 1"
Vlfi
to I i ft of

InT

1 0'l!3 ]

2 8 1m ;: i

'n c

,,~"

~'

r~ in[ ,
11 C' ;1

~?

wi ng ch'3.rccteri st i cs as a

Ih ! H:l

f\
\

2 .4 ~--+---~--~----~~
--~----+---~---+----~--~---r--~

I ~ 4 0 Dccalage

l------V-

10

1.2
1.0
0. 8

------=?::.---

_L----l-----_l---- ~r=---l-:----L------~L______L------t---~
L______ 0 0
....J-----l,...----n e u t al 1 ne
~
I . .......--V'
~ ....-of e ~ual ift
/ ki"0 ______
I --'

I /"
1/

_2

0.4 L-~__~___L
1__~__~__~__~__~__~__ ~__~__~
.2
..1,
.6
.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
01 of upper wing Rlone
Fi g .7

U(
N. A. C.A . TGchnical Note No . 2B9
~

-- 2 II

- ---

Fi g .8

---71

-- - - - - 1

.~- -

I I

-$- --.~-- --~ - I~- Ba s e plat

I

5 11 ,

~lBI~

_th

I
I

_.__I .-

~
::t
rllC\l

__I
I

I
l-L
\

T
I

LinK
_

t-

- (0 - - - ----l<JI~1

.......1'-

- ---

I
I

~I~ Q--f)- -

IT'

~-----------~--------~-4-

i~j/-/--- 2}~1l ----~, _~II

- 7

r-

111

Bol t --.......~';~~-I
"vV'a she r
-- - - .-.:-~ " -~

-- - - - ' - _ _ _ _

1
---1
-~I ~lIl- "
_I

.. .'

, _ __ -.

Spindl e---f~

~--~-L_
_____

Air fo il
[

- - - -.- - . -- ...----------.

Fi g .8

-l

--

Mount for i nt-3rfering wi ng i n biplane test. Full scal e .

. 1 .A. C.A. Technical

.,..,. . 8
..I..1g

incs in

osition to give readings

I
I

-.

N.A.C.A. Technic al Note

0.2

0.4

Fig.9

No . ~ 69

O. G

0. 8

1.0

l/J

1. 2

- 0 .10

. U~
N.A.O. A. Technical Note No.269
0L of upper wing alone
0.2
0.4
0. 6
0.8
1.0
-

Fig.10

1.4

1.2

I
o
00'

+1 0~~ ~ 2
""- ~

-0.05

~~~,

~0.10

0 LOU
I

-0.15

~:.;

l"-.

u ef

e et Dn
low~r wipg
lif It eoet fi ci ~ nt
due t o u p er)

6 0L

-0.20

..

~~~
1-
+3
~~~
!
~ ~~
~
wiJ~
~
~el
~
reStltS or ~ .~~~
.........

t:,

dec fl-lage

~ ~. '"

~"" ~~

r- '",t - . _-

u s i r g U. p . A.2 7
a ir foils .

~~~

... r - - - "

-0.25

__.

-_.

-0 . 30
I

ii
Fi g. 10

'~~
~
-

~-~----------~-~-- ---------~-----------~-------~,~----- -

4-(
Fi g .ll

N. A.C . A. Technic al ..To te Uo . 269

I

I
3.6

I \ i
+
\ I

- =1'--1-- \\
-

-~-+-- !Rat 'i c

3 .2

I
2.8

- --+-- - - r

'H

uppor '.' in" to lift

of l C7J~3T -,. inc f r OLl
-;ri nd tunndl rCEults j

--- +---~----+--

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

1\

''~-~-I

\\11 \ \

\JI1

i\ "Odc ca l at;o

\ __

' ---i~~T

-+--~~

"':-

t - - - t - ------t--""""
,,+.

'"

~----+------ -~~~o I ____;:~

_ _ _+__ - + - _ - +___

1.0

+---~---I

usinc U.S.A.27 airfcil s.

1\
\1 \

o
~
.3--~~\

1. 2

of li ft cf

\
+---~-+-----+-----1\ --~ ----'r+\~
~ -+----l-----+
rl

1. 6

f i g,lR

2.4

2.0

+-.

1--

.---1---

__._ .. _ _ ____ _
~r---f-0

I
-I- 1
---+-_L_,, + -_,
~--~~-~
' --~l'l ~=h~~===t==~==:
t===~==-~~
---+--0
--=:1=-==+====1==
-' t-..j
I
0 l---~
~-

- .- n cut r-~--;-:~::r
~
~c_ ' ___ ~~J..._ -_-_+_-_--+
__-_-_-t-_-_--_+_-_-_-I-

of ~ qua l ll f;.r

0.8

0.2

0.4

~~

-1 0
I

___

I------

0.6
0.8
1.0
?L of upper wing alone

1. 2

1.4

N.A.C.A. Techni cal Not e No,269

.2

,4

~"
"-,

, --.;

-. 05

~
\~~
~-"

.6

F i g .12 .

CL of uppe r wi ng a l on e
.8

-- - - --

~, ~,
:,-~, '
~ ~"
r~

'\

I
i

" """ ~
~
'-"" "'~ ~

r--

-- -

-'<'~ ~
' '\

1.4

~ -

' ''~'

1.2

1.0

,'-'

-. 10
"-

""

~
" '\" ,"- ~'"
~\ ~ ,"~~ ~ ~ I
<'\'

" " ~~
f'

-. 1 5

"

'~ "- f',.\,

~~,

~ ,"~\ ~ ~
\~
'\ '\
, '~
\'\ ~~u ~
~~
~

Lotu , ef f ect
on l owe r winp;
~-f t coe f f i c i e nt
due to u /pper
wi
nIg , u s i ng
-. 20
U . t . A. 27
a i r f oil s .
6C

\ !'.. ' '\ '\'

\ 1'\ " '-~

\\,\ ~ ~
~
\\f \\\'
\ \ \ <' ~ ~
10 )
1\ \ \ \
\ \

'\

\ \

-. 2 5

Soli ~ l i n e s
WIna "tunr: e .l

8 )1

4- -

Bro en I i ne sIi e sult s by

t neo r e tIc a1 c aj1cU1a It l ons . tFi g . b ) .

\\

iI

log
r.:or:::t

\ .' \

\ ' ,,\' \

40~
~o

of

\\ \ \
\ \ \'

20
0

+1

\\

\ ,, \

\\
I

W2.

\\ \ \ \

\ \

!\ \ \ \

~ [\ \ \\ \
\\ \ \
~
\ \ \\ \
\ \\

-*'

10

_ 20

- f--- -

cd

\\ \ \
\-".. ~Y\
\ _"'-

De ca a.ge

-- -- - ---

Q)

Of)

\ .

-. 30

-. 35

aUcd

\\

,I

\\

\\

td

10

Re suIt s b y
er1n
ent . ~ II I g . 1
rP

'\. -

\ \\
\\
\

-. 40

Fi g . 12 .

 Y7
N. A . C.A . Technical ho t e

Fig.l3 .

~0 .a69

r----r--.--+_--_+~ -----+---~----+----+----~--~----~---4

3 . 6 r----+- - -

8~lid , lines - : ~e5ults by

wlr,d 'Gunne l eX:;J8TlIi1'..A nt8 .

. r- --+-----+,r'---'--

--.--+-.-

I,Fig.ll)

!
i

Rat io of - . - - - .-. . ---1 - ' - ' _-t____~~~~..,L2.!.J!.s<:":="':::"":::+=~ll:U:P~!.LO...~;/---j

Broken lin!e - - - Re siul ts !hv
lift of -theo retical calculat ions .
upper wing
\:
(Fig.7)
3 . 2~1 Q..].iit . ~f -~. .--r----+----+-----t-----t-- ower wL, g
~
+40 d ecalage
us i ng U . S .A. ~
i
27 air~~-~\i\~\--~~\~--~-~---~--~----~-~-~

J---~;740

2. 8

r+
~
t\"I

2 . 4c--

t - - - _t-_

--

\ I

a. Oll----+--.-\...\

JC<

\\

\~\ ,
"

-~

--

r-- - - +r-....:J.,.
'~
~._-+---+--+----t--------j-.1'--.

'-

1'-"-.

I------+~_>r_" ;~
.

~~

I'- ........

...............

+1 0

t----+-~~ _

_ _
r --- -

I,

00

--

r-

..........

1-

--

- - - - _

--,0

~~ -

ua

//~I

- -/'p - -0"-

O. 8

/ // "":20"
.2

.4

-"'vi
.6

1>-'_ --

- -.

~r-..c:::::::r---- _.
.8

.-

I .---- __

r---_

_-' -- . . .

:~

-<::.. - -

-'~

ou

- ----i.- r

-- - --

-t--

1.0

0L of upper wing a.lone

_ -: - --

~r-----l

-~,~---i

==--+---r-

,-

===

I- -_---1_---::~
I-- -:;:::"'-

.~";-5--<"'::---

-- --

- 2 de ca ago

- - - - r--

- -

--.
----~

1. al-----+--- -t--_=_. ~7-'-~~--o - I-- -.::-:::.--=- - --__ - ---- .- -_ -- --'

;.:1-- 1-- ~~r0
rwe~ ;al 1 n~, -- --' ~/~t::--1
1.0 0 f e 1 J-. -- lft ..... ~ -- -;.;:-1 ---

/~/

'
-------

-r--=-::-:

I---r--.

'"

- - -.. - :--'-" ~- - - - - _..-:

1.6

----J~--+_-_j_--_+-__j

------

~ '-" '-\1\h.\

"

+ae,

:::.~==-~
-'I

IFigf3
l.2

1. 4