REPORT No.

715

LATERAL CONTROL REQUIRED FOR SATISFACTORY FLYING QUALITIES BASED ON

FLIGHT TESTS OF NUMEROUS AIRPLANES
By R. R. GILRUTH and W’. N. TURNIIR

SUMMARY report deals particularly with characteristics of con-

ventional aiIerons, some data on spoiler and floating-
An anal@s has been made of the aileron control char-
tip ailerons were used to aid in formulating the criterion
acteristics of numerous airplanes tested in jlighi by the
3f minimum satisfactory aileron effectiveness. In-
Natwnal Advisory Committee for Aeronautics. In the
cluding alterations to the wings and the ailerons of two
correlation of satisfactory and unsaii..sfadory characteris-
of the airplanes tested, a total of 28 different wing-
tics with measured values, it was found that the helix angle
aileron combinations was investigated. The data “
pb/l?V, which expre8ses the lateral displacement of the wing
Emalyzedcover the range of span, aspect ratio, and taper
tip in a gisen forward travel of the airplane, was the meas-
ratio in current use.
ure of the aileron e~ecthenew appreciated by the pilots.
It wus also found that regardless of sise or category of the SYMBOLS
airplanes tested, which included pursuit, transport, train-
ing, and bomber types, a value of pb]iW oj 0.07 represimted The symbols used in this report are as follows:
a criterion of minimum sattijactoy aileron e$e&ene8s. P rolling velocity, radians per second
By the use of previously developed theory, the observed v air speed, feet per second
valua oj pb/!l?Vfor the ~ariims wing-aileron. arrangements b wing span, feet
were examined to determine the e#ective section churacter- .3= aver~ge chord of aileron back of hinge line
i9tics oj the wwi0u9 aileron type8. z& average chord of aileron balance

INTRODUCTION Wa average total chord of that section of the wig

covered by an aileron
A few years ago the National Advisory Committee Atia an=tiar dtierence between up and down ailerons,
for Aeronautics instituted a program for the study of degrees
airplane flying qualities. The primary purpose of the k aileron effectiveness factor, effective change in
research program was to determine quantitatively what angle of attack of wing-aileron section per unit
constitutes satisfactory flying qualities and the stability aileron deflection, AcY[A6
and the control requirements that an airplane can be Cla rate of change of rolling-moment coefficient CI
expected to fulflll. Accordingly, the investigation has w-M aileron angle 8 ——
consisted mainly in determining these characteristics in C,nrate of change of rolling-moment coefficient .CI
flight tests of various airplanes. These airplanes were with helix angle pb/2V
made available largely by the &my and more recently c. liftcoefficient
by private companies through the cooperation of the a angle of attack
Civil Aeronautics Authority.
Stability and control characteristics have now been FLIGHT TESTS
determined for a large ntiber of airplanes of varied
types. The data obtained not only show what consti- The ilightAwt procedure for measuring aileron effec-
tutes satisfactory flying qualities but also, through tiveness consisted in trimrning the particular airplane
ana.lyais,show how various design features influence the for straight flight at a given air speed and then abruptly ..—
observed flying qualities. applying aileron control, holding the rudder locked.
In the analysis of these data and in the preparation Records were taken of rolhg velocity, yawing velocity,
of reports, it has been convenient to consider separately air speed, and control position. Aileron control forces
the various phases of control and stability. Thus, the were also recorded whenever feasible. This procedure
present report is conihed to the rem.dtsof the anaIysis was repeated for various aileron dellectionsj at varioui
of aileron control. In addition to the data obtained in speeds, and for clifferent combinations of flap and power.
tests performed specitlca.llyto determine flying qualities, Standard NACA flight-test instruments were used, .——
data obtained in previous lateral-control investigations the data.. being recorded photographically and syn-
have been included in the analysis. Although this cbronized by merms of a timer.
201
202 REPORT NO. 715.—NATION.& ADVISORY C&?iiifiEE ‘FOR AERONAUTICS

General results for conventional ailerons m~y be sum- indicated in the table, the maximum values of pb/2 V
marized as follows: given were substantially constant over the speed range
(1) The rate of roll for a given a.irpkme at a given tested. Deviation from constant values- in the very
control deflection was very nearly a linear function of large airplane (airplane K) resulted from control-cable
air speed except for cases where control-cable stretch stretckthat also limited aileron power even at low
appreciably limited the available aileron deflections. speeds, An average value of pb/2V is given for this
At a given air speed the rate of rolI progressively in- airplane. For the airplane U with retractable ailerons,
creased with aileron deflection, the type of variation the value given of pb/2V is for low-speed flight,
being dependent on the type of aileron balance. In
some instances, with balanced ailerons, a point was CRITERION FOR AILERON EFFECTIVENESS
reached where further deflection produced no additional
roiling moment. Comparison of the measured values of pb/2V with
(2) None of the aileron combinations tested ex- pilots’ _opinions of the lateral-control e.fl’activeness
hibited objectionable lag characteristics. Rolling ac- suggests a lower limit for tbe amount of lateral control
ce~erationswere great enough in aJIcases that the rolling that is considered satisfactory by pilote. Although the
velocity furnished the important measure of aileron values of pb/2 V varied considerably among the various
control from the pilot’s viewpoint, airplanes tested, no case was recorded where control was
(3) Rates of roll that would have been unsatisfactory considered adequate for values of pb/2V less than 0.07
for small airplanes were considered entirely adequate or where inadequate control was reported for air-
for large airplanes. planes asceeding this limit. The same Hm.ibappems to
(4) Rates of roll that were considered inadequate at apply to large airplanes as welI as smal airplanes
high speeds were satisfactory at low speeds, regardless of wing loading or purpose for whjch the ___
(5) The effec.tiverms of the aileron control in nornd airplane was intended.
flight had no correlation with the aileron control at the Values of pb/2V much greater than the suggested ._
stall. In no case could the completely stalled airplane lower limit of 0.07 were experienced in several cases.
be controlled by means of the ailerons. These airplanes -werenot considered by the pilots to be
(6) Power or flap position had only very slight particularly outstanding or to be superior in essential
effects on the rolling velocities obtained. qualities of control to airplanes developing much lower
(7) Some of the large nirplanes tested suflered values. On the other hand, none of the ailerons tested
severely from the effects of contr&cable stretch in were considered as being too effective.
limiting the available. aileron deflections, particuhuly The requirement for satisfactory lateral control
at high speeds. It WOUIC1 also appear that the large indicated by the present nnalysis is at considerable ._.._ _
airplanes and some of the small airplanes with fabric- variance with the criterion previously used by tbe
covered wings lost a considerable amount of potential NACA, Requiring that the maximum value of
rolling ability through wing w~ing due to the torsional pb/2V shouId never be less than 0.07 is the same as
loads applied by the deflected ailerons. specifying that the maximum rolling-moment coeffi-
In the summary of the flight data obtained from the cient should not be less than 0.07C19, a value that is
various airplanes tested, it was desirable to use the const.mt for any given airplane. On the other hand, the
nondimensional expressicmpb/2V. Intei@-eted” physi- ding criterion of references 1 and 2 specified that the __
cally, ~b/2V represents the lateral displacement of the ratio of rolling-moment coefficient to lift coefficient be a
wing tip in a given forward travel of the airplane or, in constant. The value of CJ/CLthat was suggested was
other words, the helix angle generated by the wing tip. 0.075 Qtbougb, as stated in reference 2, a value possibly
The characteristics of conventional ailerons are such half as great might be used for airp]anes not intended
that., for geometrically similar airplanes regardless of to be acrobatic.
size or air speed, substantially constant values of -pb/2V The Cl/CL criterion was designed primarily for appli-
are obtained for a given aileron.deflection. Thus, the cation to the low-speed conditions for airplanes of the
rolling performanc~ of an airplane may be defined in private-owner type. In the light of the present investi-
terms of the numerical value of pb/2V obtained with full gation it is considered ultraconservative for all typee at
control deflection for the case of conventional ailerons low speeds. Comparison of the test results on airplanes
tlIatreach fti deflection at,allspeedsunder consideration. of different wing loadings indicatea that tb~ rolling-
This method of presentation bas been used in table I moment coefficient required for satisfactory control is
where the characteristics of the various airplanes tested independent of lift coefficient. As the minimum speed
have been tabulated. In addition to the values of and not the lift coefficient is apparent to the pilot, a
pb/2V obta.i.nedwith full ~vailgble aileron control, the heavily. loaded aigiane with a high-lift device should
wing span, the wing loading, the pilot’s opinion of the require.no greater rolling-moment coefficient, and cor-
control effectiveness, and a sketch of the wing-aileron responding helix angle, than is required by a lightly
combination tireincluded for each airplane. Except as loaded.airplane of equivalent minimum speed.
 LATERAL CONTROL R13QUIRJ3DFOR SATISFACTORY FLYING QUALITIE S BASED ON FLIGHT TESTS 203

As regards the variation of rolling-moment coeflkismt maneuvering speeds for pursuit airplanes of the types
tith ~t coei%cient implied by the C1/CL criterion tested because of the short span used and the rela-
throughout the speed range, the present analysis indi- tively high maneuvering speeds. -The use of greater
catm that no such marked drop in aileron effectiveness wing spans in airplanes of this type would, of course,
can be tolerated with increased speed. Rather, it require proportionately larger vrduw of pb/217 unlws a
appears that a rolling-moment coefficient large enough reduction of maneuverability in roll could be accepted.
to give the speciiied value of pb/2V is desired and is For ailerons of the conventional trailing-edge type,
used by pilots up to reasonably high speeds, For large the criterion as expressed in terms of pb/2T7 is sufficient
airplanes this amount of control i.. required chiefly to to insure satisfactory aileron effectiveness. For lateral
.8 - controIs that depend on spoiler action, however, unsa~
isfactory characteristics may result from lag or from
an incorrect initial response even though the specified
value of pb/2V is obtained. Some of the diflimlties
.6 :
experienced with spoilers are discussed in reference 2.

.4 .6 -
~ ‘
/ ‘
/ ‘ /-
~“
/
-----
.2 ----
.5=~ / ---- --
/- -----
-----
.-
/
/
/-
0 .4
G# Taper / Toper
rotio — ro tio
—. // — 1:1
— -—4:.; /# /
Clp
.8 - —.-—2:1
———4:1 .3- ———4:1
,& “ —--—- Ellipiicul

.6 _ /
py .2_

, /
A-IO
.4 _ )
.1_

.2’- o ‘1’1 rtti tltl lILI 1111Illi ltll (Ill 11$1111(

/ ‘ 6 7 8 9 10 I
/ Aspect rdio, A
/. np. FMUEE 2.—Varlntion of Cr with a..peot ratio and taper ratio (from referenra 3).
Illr 11111111 11!1 1111 11!1 [Ill 1111 n
0 .2 .4 .6 .8 1.0
Wingsemispan PREDICTION OF AILERON EFFECTIVENESS
FMUEE I.—Variation of CIJ/k
with aIIeron span, ospeot ratio, snd taper rntfo (from
In the analysis of tight results, an attempt was made
refsrence 8).
to develop a simple e-xpressiortthat -would correlate
provide sticient corrective control for rolling due to Lheobserved data and allow prediction of aileron effec-
atmospheric disturbances. For airplanes of the pursuit tiveness for future designs. By the adaptation of the
category, this amount of control appears to be required theory of reference 3 to the pre9ent investigation, the
in maneuvering at high speeds. In this connection, effectiveness of a given aileron installation was ax- .
airplanes with high stick forces may have insufficient pressed as follows:
aileron control at high sp~eds because the controls
camot be deflected a sfficient amount.
(1)
The rolling requirements of pursuit types, in addition,
call for consideration of the actual rolling velocitim
available, because the maneuverability in roll is de- Curves for determining the value of C,8/k and of C,v
pendent on the time required to bank the airplane at Fora given airplane were taken directly from reference
maneuvering speeds, As indicated, a value of pb/2V 3 and are reproduced as figures 1 and 2. Direct inter-
of O.O7 appears to give adequate rolling velocities at polation, although not strictly correct, may be used to
204 REIPORT NO. 715.—NATIONAL ADVISORY COjJMIm’EE FOR AERONAUTICS

determine CzJk with sticieuk &cwracy in practiwd figure & should give sufficiently conservative resulte.
work for airplanes of aepect ratios other than those In g~eral, the aileron effectiveness factor k for plain -
given in figure 1. In use,”the value of CJk is read at a ailerom did not vary with aileron deflection for angles
poinhm the semispan corresponding to the position of up to approximately +20”. With the balanced ailer-
the outer end of the aileron, and from this v~ue is ons, however, the effectiveness factor was a maximum
deducted the value read at a point corresponding to at small deflections and usually decreased progressively
the inner end of the aikron. The quantity thus as the deflection increased. ao that tbe values given in
obtained is the value of C,$/k used in the formula. The figure’~ -—should be somewhat reduced if a deflection ‘- ““.
range ~eatar than 30° is contemplated.
coefhient Clfl, of course, does not vary with aileron
Spin. CONCLUDING REMARKS
The values of the aileron effectiveness factor k, when
A&=30°, were determined from the observed p5/2V The helix angle pb/2V generated by the wing tip of
values of the various airplanestested in flight and are an airplane in an abrupt aileron roll appears to repre- - -
presented in figure 3 as a function of the ratio of mean sent th aiIeroq.. control effectiveness appreciated by
aileron chord Z=to mean wing chord Z;ti, The values pilots.. The lower bit for satisfactory aileron eflec-

.8 . I
— — Seufed unbulonced oiler~ns
— Unsealed - .Y “1 “. 1.. I
:------LTheoretical. fir-1 T;~e’ DitXer- T@ “’ ‘ -“ D;ffer-
i’hin uirfoi!s ,,..-” ~ * e“c~~
e- uf
aileron C. A6e=30” oileran Ah =30°—
.6:
,,.“ 0 Mod. Frise ‘ 0.20 /6’-/4 < Plainunsealed il. Oti 18-9”
,/‘ 6 Sfofted .30 2@70 . . .00 /7-9”
/‘ v Plainunseoled .00 1?-!3 ; “ seoled ..00 17-9”

— ---..-
,.~ ,. _ v “ aeofed 00 17~3 A = unsealed .00 17-8”
!- ,. Q ~~ -O Frise sealed .00 20-/0 -;
k .4_ .i-r.?? 4 ●

,/’ (I Mod. Fr;s. ., ----- A Frise 2? ?7-1.3

““”--
/’ Cbb 0“” .49 /a=i2 v Mod.Frise .20 17-[3
, Y ~ Frise .48 lti:14 . . .52 15‘/5
/ - Plo;nsea! ~led .00 23:7 + ~ Ploinsealed “ .00 22-8 H
A Frise .25 1~1 o- Slot fed .54 t6-14
.2 ;: ❑ * .07 15-i5 Q-Fri.se .20 f5-Is
I b. .15 15-/5-t w Slotted .30 /9-9” 1--- -i
< Plainunsealed ,00-l?-ga~ Q Mod.Frise .[7 15-J51 ..
‘Mox)mum deflecfian
.. ---.- —
o .! .2 .3
.3=
p%~ —

??IGUBE9.-Mkron MTectkonces factor k, as measured in Sfght fOI various wirwaikron arrnngemon[s (M.-W”).

of k determined in flight are considerably tiveness expressed in this form, that is, pb/2V= 0.07,
lower than
those predicted by theory and, in most cases, they are independent of the size or category of the ~plane
was
lower than values obtained for comparable aerody- testecL,.
namic arrangements in the wind tunnel At least part Study of the obswed valuea of pb/2V for the various
of this eflect may be accounted for on the bask of the fig-&ron arraggemegts tested indicated that the
deflection of the wing in torsion and the deflection of the aileron effectiveness developed in flight may be con- ‘“” ‘
aileron control system. For timple, 1° of wing twist siderably less than that theoretically predicted on the
varying uniformly from the wing tip would reduce the basis of aikron characteristics measured in the wind .
apparent aileron tiectiveness by about 20 percent: tunnel, presumably because of wing twisting and deflec-
The wing deflections experienced by the various air- tions in the aileron-control system. In aileron design,
planes, however, are unknown. The deflections that. therefore, the ri@ty of the wing in torsion and the
occurred between the ailerons pnd the cockpit control rigidity of the controI system must .be considered as
are Iikewise unknown. Inasniuch as aileron deflections well as the aerodynamic properties of the wing-aileron
were determined on the basis of the position of the cock- combination. In addition, secondary rolling moments
pit control, this fact would further tend to reduce the due to aiIeron yaw may have an important influence _
apparent aileron tiectiveness. For these reasons, it on aileron control, particularly at low speeds. Ailerons
would seem unwise tQdraw any il.nalconclusions r&ard- otherwise sfitisfactmy may appear defective when the .._ .
ing the relative merits of the aiIeron types employed. directional stability of the airplane is ho low to restrict. .. .
If the rigidity of the wing and the control system is the aileron yaw to reasonably small values or when
known, accurate prediction of aileron effectiveness the dihedral effect of the wing is such that the efkcts
should be possible on the basis of wind-tunnel data for of yaw on the rolling moments are accentuated. -.
the aileron type employed. If this information is lack- Although this report is not primarily concerned with
ing, however, the curves for pIain ailerons given in aileron-.. control forces, several of tho airplanes tested
 LATEMJJ CONTROL BEQuTHED FOR SATISFACTORY FLYING QUALITIES BASED ON FLIGHT TESTS 205

were unsatisfactory in this respect, In some cases, LANGLEY hlEMORIAL AERONAUTIC LABORATORY,
however, material reduction in stick force has been NATIONAL ADVISORY COW~EE FOR AERONAUTICS,
poasible simply by a restriction of the deflection range LANGLEY l?CELD, VA., Aw”l 18, 19~1.
of the ailerons to that required. The maximum stick
force varies as the square of the deflection range, be-
cause mechanical advantage of the control system as REFERENCES
well as the hinge moments of the ailerons is involved.
The point previously made regarding aileron control 1. W’eick, Fred E., and Wenzinger, Carl J.: W’ind-Tunne]

at the stall may well be emphasized again. Aileron Research Comparing Lateral Control Devices, Particu-
larly at High Angles of Attack. I—Ordinary Ailerons on
control here depended upon the symmetry of flow and Rectangular Wings. Rep. No. 419, NACA, 1932.
the rate at which the flo-iv broke dovm on the wing 2. Weick, Fred E., and Jones, Robert .T.: R&um6 and Analysis
and had no correlation with the control available in of N. A. C. A. Lateral Control Research. Rep. No. 605, ““
normal flight. In no case -m.s aileron control retained NACA,1937.
8. pearson, Henry A., and Jones, Robert T.: Theoretical
when the wing was completely stalled; roll against the
Stability and Control Characteristics of Wings with
ailerons usually occurred as a result of the adverse yaw Various Amounts of Taper and Twist. Rep. No. t3M,
developed. NACA, 1938.
 TABLE 1.--CHAIL4CTEIHSTICS OF AIRPLANES TESTED

.-
wing hmysg.
Air- Wlngngroontac-
Afr-
plane
Wing_4ngnt8r- Pype of control
‘(%’ plmle
rype 01 control
‘/%’ &#’ pilot’s
Ipinfon?

I Modified
A Pncsuit
ID R&d 85.0 27.2 0.105 Yw N 4nr&i-nla.m Frise
balanoed 4L8 14.7 Ye9

— —

t==’
M&l&d
0 8-pMe 84.2 9.4 Ye9
B Pnr6nit slotted 86.0 29.0 ($? Yea
Oonlmerold
pm.) MBnced

c1 Pnr9nit
lb slotted 87.8

—
28.9

—
.100 Yea 1? s-place
COmmecdal
b=
1:
FrisO
b81uJlced 34.0 9.7 .089 Ye9

!.
D Pnrsult lp-y Slott%d 87.8 27.0 .C@l Y(II Q
1=
1,
Frim
bdmwd 86.0 6.8 .147 Yea

I I
E-1

i b
Plain
nnbalamed
rmaealti
80.0 19.3 .075 Yea It
ib Fliae
balanced 26.0 6.1

.
.1011 Yee

— —

Pm Fdae
E-2 nnlxdamed 80,0 19.8 .088 Ye3 balanced 85.2 6.5 .OQ! ‘Yes
SQslad
— —

! Friw
Plubl
. (m YEa
IF’ 420 19.7 .0a9 Yea unbekmoed 328 10.1
bfdanmd

! Plabl

lb
Mod4ded
G Smutbomber 42.0 !M8 .022 Y6a T-2 nnbcdanced 828 8.8 .C& Yea
i!%%ad unsealed

P18fn
H
McdlEed
balanmd
70.5 m.o .r2fl Yea T-8
1= UnlBlfmced
tmseakd
88.8 1o.1

—
.077 Ye’s

I
‘P
I
?&dUled
bland
80.6 224 .lml Yea T-4
P m 1 .ca YES

1. ,..
1
I I
I
1,
,.
,,
 I
[ ‘

‘P
Mndifiad I Plain
J Romber 101,0 27.1 .016 N() T-3 Erpertmental , unbfdanrad 39”8 10.1 .0!9 No
I “
balanctul
—— .— I
II ? unsmlod
— — — .

K Bomber
I Frl.?a 149.0 17.6
, f139
(aver- No 1 T-6 Exporlmental ,
Plain
rmbalanwd 328 10.1 .071 Km
iP balanced
*) ?
Sc31ul

. — ——

Plain
L Transport unbalanwd 40,n 34. i .071 Yes T-7 J3~rlmental 171cating 86.8 &6 .055 No
sealed W7ngtip
ID= D=’
— —

~“ Plain .047
M lhnsport nnbdmmed Oh6 n. 6 .Oefj YrLs I? Exporbnanta,l Ratraotable 34,0 M. I (low No
,P tied b f~ se)
~ I

1“
. i’