Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-r5zm4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-29T01:24:37.423Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

27th Lanchester Memorial Lecture scale effect in transonic flow

Part of: RAeS Lanchester Lecture Papers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 July 2016

A. B. Haines
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

I must start by thanking the Royal Aeronautical Society for the invitation to present this 27th Lanchester Memorial Lecture. It is an honour and a privilege to follow in the footsteps of the distinguished scientists and engineers who have given the first 26 lectures in this series. These lectures have included many outstanding reviews of a wide range of different topics and I am very conscious that they have set a standard that I, for my part, will find difficult to match. I hope, however, that by choosing a topic that has only been mentioned in passing in just a few of the previous lectures, I will be able to make my own distinct, individual contribution to this tribute to the memory of a man who was not only a great scientist and engineer and talented musician but who, by his writings as long ago as 1907, still carries a message for us today in 1987.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 91 , Issue 907 , September 1987 , pp. 291 - 313
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 1987 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Kingsford, P. W. A life of an engineer. Edward Arnold Ltd, 1960.Google Scholar
2. Hancock, G. J. Aerodynamics — the role of the computer. The Aeronautical Journal, RAeS, August/September 1985, 89, 887.Google Scholar
3. Lanchester, F. W. Aerodynamics. Constable, 1907.Google Scholar
4. Lanchester, F. W. The flying machine from an engineering standpoint. James Forrest Lecture, 1914, Constable, 1917.Google Scholar
5. Lanchester, F. W. The part played by skin friction in aeronautics. Lecture to RAeS, 1937, The Journal of the RAeS, 1941, 314–316.Google Scholar
6. Rogers, E. W. E. Aerodynamics: retrospect and prospect. The Aeronautical Journal, RAeS, February 1982, 86, 852.Google Scholar
7. Haines, A. B., Holder, D. W. and Pearcey, H. H. Scale effects at high subsonic and transonic speeds, and methods for fixing boundary layer transition in model experiments. R&M 3012, 1957.Google Scholar
8. Gamble, H. E. Some effects of Reynolds number on a cambered wing at high subsonic Mach numbers. ARC CP 105, 1952.Google Scholar
9. Holder, D. W., Pearcey, H. H., Gadd, G. E. and Seddon, J. The interaction between shock waves and boundary layers, with a note on the effects of the interaction on the performance of supersonic intakes. ARC CP 180, 1954.Google Scholar
10. Gadd, G. E., Holder, D. W. and Regan, J. D. An experimental investigation of the interaction between shock waves and boundary layers. Proc Roy Soc A, 1954, 226, 227.Google Scholar
11. Pearcey, H. H. and Holder, D. W. Examples of the effects of shock-induced boundary layer separation in transonic flight. ARC 16446, 1954.Google Scholar
12. Pearcey, H. H. Shock-induced separation and its prevention by design and boundary layer control. Ed Lachmann, G. V., Vol 2 Pergamon Press, 1961.Google Scholar
13. Collingbourne, J. E. and Pindar, A. C. S. Balance and pressure measurements at high subsonic speeds on a model of a swept-wing aircraft and some comparisons with flight data. RAE Tech Note Aero 2221. ARC 16052, 1953.Google Scholar
14. Haines, A. B. Possibilities for scale effect on swept wings at high subsonic speeds. Recent evidence from pressure plotting tests. ARA Report 18, AGARD CP 83, 1971.Google Scholar
15. MissBrowne, G. C, Bateman, T. E. B., Pavitt, M. and Haines, A. B. A comparison of wing pressure distributions measured in flight and on a wind tunnel model of the Super VC10. ARC R&M 3707, 1972.Google Scholar
16. Garner, H. A. and Payne, M. M. Tabulated pressure coefficients and aerodynamic characteristics measured on the wing of the Bell X-l airplane in level flight at Mach numbers from 0-79 to 100 and in a pull-up at a Mach number of 0-96 NACA RM L51H25, 1950.Google Scholar
17. Loving, D. L. Wind-tunnel-flight correlation of shock-induced separated flow. NASA TN D-3580, 1966.Google Scholar
18. Blackwell, J. A. JR. Effect of Reynolds number and boundary layer transition location on shock-induced separation. AGARD CP 35, 1968.Google Scholar
19. Pearcey, H. H., Osborne, J. and Haines, A. B. The interaction between local effects at the shock and rear separation — a source of significant scale effects in wind-tunnel tests on aerofoils and wings. AGARD CP 35, 1968.Google Scholar
20. Little, B. H. JR. Effects of intial turbulent boundary layer separation in transonic flow. VK1 Technical Note 39, 1967.Google Scholar
21. Haines, A. B. Further thoughts on scale effect at high subsonic speeds. ARC Report 356576, AC 1944, ARA Memo 156, 1974, AGARD CP 174, 1976.Google Scholar
22. Delery, J. Analysis of the separation due to shock wave- turbulent boundary layer interaction in transonic flow. La Recherche Aerospatiale, 1978-6, 305-320. English translation ESA-TT 560, 1979.Google Scholar
23. Sireix, M., Delery, J., and Stanewsky, E. High Reynolds number boundary layer shock wave interaction in transonic flow. Advances in Fluid Mechanics, Conference in Aachen, 1980, ed E. Krause. Lecture Notes in Physics, 1981, 149–214, Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
24. Delery, J. L'Interaction oude de choc-couche limite turbu-lente et son controle. AGARD CP 365, Paper No 21, 1984.Google Scholar
25. Delery, J., and Marvin, J. G. Turbulent shock wave boundary layer interaction. AGARDograph 280, 1985.Google Scholar
26. Pearcey, H. H. Some effects of shock-induced separation of turbulent boundary layers in transonic flows past aerofoils. ARC R&M 3108, 1955.Google Scholar
27. Stanewsky, E. Interaction between the outer inviscid flow and the boundary layer on transonic airfoils. Dissertation, TU Berlin (D83), 1981, Z. Flugwiss Weltraumforsch, 7, Heft 4, 1983. 242-252.Google Scholar
28. Rodde, A-M. Determination des conditions d'apparation du decollement au pied du choc sur le profil LC 100-D a bord defuite modifiee, ONERA RSF-45/1685AY, 1980.Google Scholar
29. Gobert, J. L., Seradie, A. and Mignosi, A. Etude de l'interaction oude de choc-couche limite sur profile LC-100-Dde 400 mm de corde dans la soufflerie T2. ONERA RT-38/ 7078 AYD, 1980.Google Scholar
30. Seddon, J. The flow produced by interaction of a turbulent boundary layer with a normal shock wave of strength sufficient to cause a separation. ARC R&M 3502, 1967.Google Scholar
31. Fulker, J. L. and Ashill, P. R. A study of the factors influencing shock-induced separation on swept wings. RAE TR 83088, 1983, and also Turbulent Shear-Layer/Shock-Wave Interactions. IUTAM Symposium, Palaiseau, France 1985.Google Scholar
32. Green, J. E. A discussion of viscous-inviscid interactions at transonic speeds. RAE TR 72050, 1972.Google Scholar
33. Coles, D. E. The turbulent boundary layer in a compressible fluid. USAF Project Panel Report R-403-PPR, 1962.Google Scholar
34. Hall, M. G. Scale effects in flows over swept wings. AGARD CP 83-71, 1971.Google Scholar
35. Haines, A. B. Review of post-1974 evidence on scale effects at high subsonic speeds. ARA Memo 218, 1979.Google Scholar
Bocci, A. J. Aerofoil design for full scale Reynolds number, ARA Memo 211, 1979.Google Scholar
36. Collyer, M. R. and Lock, R. C. Prediction of viscous effects in steady transonic flow past an aerofoil. Aeronautical Quarterly, 30, 1979.Google Scholar
37. Elsenaar, A. Private communication, 1987.Google Scholar
38. Lynch, F. Transonic Aerodynamics. Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics, 81, Ed Nickson, J., 1982.Google Scholar
39. Pozniak, O. M. A review of the effects of Reynolds number on afterbody drag. ARA Report 56, 1980.Google Scholar
40. Ferri, A. (Ed). Improved nozzle testing techniques in transonic flow. AGARD-AG-208, 1975.Google Scholar
Zonars, D., Laughrey, J. A., and Bowers, D. L. Effect of varying Reynolds number and boundary layer displacement thickness on the external flow over nozzle boat-tails. AGARD-AG-208 Paper I-F, 1975.Google Scholar
Chamberlain, R. Flight Reynolds number effects on a contoured boat-tail nozzle at subsonic speeds. NASA TM X-3053, 1974.Google Scholar
41. Elsenaar, A. AGARDograph on Reynolds number effects. To be published.Google Scholar
42. Stanewsky, E., Demurie, F., Ray, E. J. and Johnson, G. B. High Reynolds number tests of the CAST 10-2/DOA2 airfoil at ambient and cryogenic temperature conditions. AGARD CP 348, Paper no 10, 1983.Google Scholar
43. Dress, D. A., Johnson, C. B., Mcguire, Peggy D., Stanewsky, E. and Ray, E. J. High Reynolds number tests of the CAST 10-A/DOA2 airfoil in the Langley 0-3 meter transonic cryogenic tunnel — phase 1. NASA TM 84620, 1983.Google Scholar
44. Dress, D.A., Stanewsky, E. McGuire, Peggy D. and Ray, E. J. High Reynolds number tests of the CAST 10-A/ DOA2 airfoil in the Langley 0-3 meter transonic cryogenic tunnel — phase 2. NASA TM 86273, 1984.Google Scholar
45. Cahill, J. F. and Connor, P. C. Correlation of data related to shock-induced trailing edge separation and extrapolation to flight Reynolds number. NASA Contractor Report 3178, 1979.Google Scholar
46. Khan, M. M. S. and Cahill, J. F. New considerations on scale extrapolation of wing pressure distributions affected by trans onic shock-induced separation.NASA Contractor Report 166426, 1983.Google Scholar
47. Haines, A. B. Viscous simulation scenario for military aircraft and components. Unpublished paper, 1984.Google Scholar
48. Harris, A. and Hutton, P. G. The results of tests on a research wing for an advanced combat aircraft — the effect of transition fixing. ARA Model Test Note M86/4, 1985.Google Scholar
49. Hartzuiker, J. P. The European transonic wind tunnel: a cryogenic solution. The Aeronautical Journal RAeS, November 1984, 88, 879.Google Scholar