Chapter 4 – EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION OF THE

FLOW ABOUT A 65° DELTA WING IN THE NASA

LANGLEY NATIONAL TRANSONIC FACILITY

James M. Luckring
NASA Langley Research Center
Hampton, Virginia 23681
USA
james.m.luckring@nasa.gov

ABSTRACT
An experimental investigation for the flow about a 65o delta wing has been conducted in the NASA Langley
National Transonic Facility (NTF). The tests were conducted at Reynolds numbers, based on the mean
aerodynamic chord, ranging from 6 million to 120 million and at Mach numbers ranging from 0.4 to 0.9. The
model incorporated four different leading-edge bluntness values. The data include detailed static surface-
pressure distributions as well as normal-force and pitching-moment coefficients. The test program was
designed to quantify the effects of Mach number, Reynolds number, and leading-edge bluntness on the onset
and progression of leading-edge vortex separation.

4.1 NOMENCLATURE
AR wing aspect ratio, 1.8652

ble leading-edge bluntness, rle/cbar

b/2 wing semispan, 1.0 ft.

Cm pitching moment coefficient about 0.25cbar

CN normal force coefficient

Cp pressure coefficient

c wing chord

cbar wing mean aerodynamic chord, 1.4297 ft.

cr wing root chord, 2.1445 ft.

ct wing tip chord, 0 ft.

d sting diameter, 0.275 ft.

d/b nondimensional sting diameter, 0.1375

RTO-TR-AVT-080 4-1
EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION OF THE FLOW ABOUT A 65°
DELTA WING IN THE NASA LANGLEY NATIONAL TRANSONIC FACILITY

E Young’s modulus of elasticity

M Mach number

q free-stream dynamic pressure

Rn Reynolds number, based on cbar

rle streamwise leading-edge radius

S wing reference-area, 2.1445 ft2

t wing thickness, 0.875 in.

t/cbar nondimensional wing thickness, 0.051

wts NTF test section width, 8.2 ft.

x,y,z Body-axis Cartesian coordinates

xv Longitudinal distance to vortex origin

α angle of attack

η percent semispan location, 2y/b

Λle wing leading-edge sweep, 65o.

λ wing taper ratio, ct/cr, 0.

4.2 INTRODUCTION
Separation-induced vortex flows have been a topic of sustained aerodynamic research and application for
many decades. Slender and highly swept wings are conducive to the formation of these vortex flows, and as
such much of the vortex flow research has been directed at highly maneuverable military aircraft applications.
The manifestation of the vortex flow effects on full aircraft configurations is, however, quite complex.

The delta wing has proven to be very useful for the study and understanding of the basic features of
separation-induced vortex flows since many aspects of these vortex flows relevant to aircraft applications can
be generated with this simple shape. Much of this work was initially performed on delta wings with sharp
leading edges in order to fix the location of primary vortex separation and thus be able to study the basic
structure of the leading-edge vortex itself as well as its interaction with the wing. Two notable examples of
this work are presented in Figure 1. In Figure 1a, taken from Hummel1, the basic structure of the primary and
secondary vortices is illustrated along with their relation to static surface pressure distributions. In Figure 1b,
taken from Polhamus2, the ability to predict vortex lift is demonstrated from his leading-edge suction analogy.
The fundamental experimental and theoretical research, such as Hummel’s and Polhamus’, has contributed
greatly to the practical realization of this flow on complex aircraft configurations. AGARD, and now the
RTO, have played a key role in this practical realization through sponsoring periodic symposia5-8 to assess the

4-2 RTO-TR-AVT-080
 EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION OF THE FLOW ABOUT A 65°
DELTA WING IN THE NASA LANGLEY NATIONAL TRANSONIC FACILITY

state of the art of vortex flows as they pertain to military aircraft.

The characteristics of these vortex flows are greatly complicated by a blunt leading edge, as illustrated in
Figure 2 (taken from Luckring9). With a blunt leading edge the origin of the leading-edge vortex is no longer
affixed at the apex of the wing. In addition, primary separation itself is no longer affixed circumferentially at
the leading edge, and the onset of leading-edge vortex separation will now be a function of flow conditions
and wing geometry. For example, at low to moderate angles of attack the wing could develop fully attached
flow. Due to the upwash distribution at the delta wing leading edge the leading edge separation will first
occur near the wing tip and then progress up the leading edge with further increase in angle of attack. For an
angle-of-attack range the wing will exhibit partial span leading-edge vortex separation with attached flow on
the upstream portion of the wing and leading edge vortex separation on the downstream portion. Because the
leading-edge separation is now occurring from a smooth surface, the physics of this flow could be quite
different from the sharp-edged case. Strength, position, and the very existence of the vortex will be affected
by leading-edge radius and will change with Mach number, Reynolds number, and angle of attack. This
added complexity could have considerable impact on the performance and maneuver aerodynamics of slender
wings

The experimental program discussed in this paper was designed to create a fundamental database addressing
blunt leading edge effects for separation-induced leading-edge vortex flows. A brief description of this
program is presented, followed by selected examples form the experimental database. All materials in this
report have been previously published, and much of the information in this document is drawn from the
author’s recent publications9-12.

4.3 EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM

This experimental program was designed to quantify the effects of Reynolds number and Mach number on
separation-induced leading-edge vortex flows for a 65-degree swept delta wing with blunt leading edges. A
brief description of the facility, the model, and the experimental test program is provided in the following
sections. Additional details can be found in the Appendix.

4.3.1 Facility
The National Transonic Facility (NTF) was developed as a unique wind tunnel to obtain high Reynolds
number flows as well as Reynolds number effects at transonic conditions for a broad class of configurations.
Pilot work was performed during the 1970’s, facility construction began in 1979, and preliminary operations
began in 1982.

An aerial view of the NTF is shown in Figure 3, and the basic circuit is shown in Figure 4. The NTF is a
closed-circuit, fan-driven, continuous-flow pressure tunnel that can test in either dry air or nitrogen. The
facility can be operated at Mach numbers from 0.1 to 1.2, at total pressures from 1.1 to 8.8 atmospheres, and
at total temperatures from approximately 120 degrees Fahrenheit down to –250 degrees Fahrenheit. The
cryogenic test conditions are achieved through the evaporation of injected liquid nitrogen. Through
combination of pressure and cryogenic temperature the NTF can achieve a maximum unit Reynolds number
of 146 million per foot at Mach 1. The test section is 8.2 feet by 8.2 feet and approximately 25 feet long. The
floor and ceiling of the test section are slotted (approximately six percent open) and the sidewalls are solid.
Additional facility characteristics can be found in References 13-15.

RTO-TR-AVT-080 4-3
EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION OF THE FLOW ABOUT A 65°
DELTA WING IN THE NASA LANGLEY NATIONAL TRANSONIC FACILITY

Because facility operations have three degrees of freedom (speed, pressure, and temperature), experimental
campaigns can be constructed to isolate the effects of an aerodynamic parameter while holding two other such
parameters constant. Thus, for example, Reynolds number can be varied while holding both the Mach number
and the ratio of dynamic pressure to Young’s modulus (q/E) constant. Such testing allows Reynolds number
effects to be isolated for those due to compressibility or aeroelasticity. Other variations (such as isolating
compressibility effects) can be achieved within tunnel envelope and model load constraints. Because
Reynolds number effects can be highly coupled with those due to aeroelasticity and compressibility, this
capability to experimentally isolate each of these effects can be of comparable importance to the capability of
simulating high Reynolds flows. Overviews of facility usage have been given by Wahls16 and Luckring17.

4.3.2 Model
The model is a full-span sting-mounted delta wing with interchangeable leading-edge components. The
model and the near-field sting geometries are fully analytical with continuity through second derivative and,
hence, curvature. It was anticipated that such analytical definitions could help facilitate Computational Fluid
Dynamics (CFD) analysis.

A schematic of the model is shown in Figure 5. The wing is an uncambered flat plate with special
consideration given to the leading and trailing edges. The wing was designed for a series of interchangeable
leading-edge components and the leading edge contours are shown in Figure 6. They were defined with a
NACA-like airfoil polynomial19 for four values of leading-edge bluntness, rle/cbar, that were 0 (sharp), 0.0005,
0.0015, and 0.0030 in the streamwise direction. These bluntness values were chosen to be relevant to several
aircraft that incorporate thin highly swept wings.9

The leading-edge contours matched the flat-plate wing over a distance of 15 percent root chord and were
constant spanwise to match the flat-plate central portion of the wing. This leading-edge contour region is also
indicated in Figure 5. The central flat plate portion of the wing was 5.1 percent thick (referenced to the mean
aerodynamic chord) and this thickness was closed out over the last 10-percent of the root chord to a sharp
trailing edge. The model was polished to an 8-microinch surface finish.

The support mechanism was a ten degree offset sting designed to position the model at the center of the test
section over the angle of attack range investigated. The offset allowed for testing at angles of attack of
nominally –2 to 28 degrees. The near-field sting was an uncambered body of revolution that emerged
symmetrically from the wing slightly aft of the 60% root chord station. It was also a fully analytical surface
based upon the same functions used to represent the leading-edge shapes. The sting diameter was designed to
be the minimum allowable to accommodate the design load of 6500 pounds normal force and to also house
necessary instrumentation leads.

The model was instrumented with 183 static surface orifices that had an internal diameter of 0.010 inches.
(See Figure 5.) The orifice arrangement allowed for fairly good spanwise resolution at five chordwise
stations. Pressure orifices were also located directly on the blunt leading edges to help track the onset and
progression of leading-edge vortex separation. In order to avoid fuselage effects and to minimize sting
interference effects, most instrumentation was situated remotely to the model. Pressure tubing was routed
through the sting to electronically scanned pressure (ESP) modules. Because of the number of pressure tubes,
there was no room for a conventional force balance. However, normal force and pitching moment quantities
were measured through a novel gauging arrangement with the near-field sting. Balance accuracy gauging on
the sting itself allowed for the measurement of these quantities. Unfortunately, there was no similar means to
obtain axial-force measurements. Angle of attack was determined from the combination of arc-sector setting

4-4 RTO-TR-AVT-080
 EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION OF THE FLOW ABOUT A 65°
DELTA WING IN THE NASA LANGLEY NATIONAL TRANSONIC FACILITY

and calibrated sting-bending effects using the sting gauges just mentioned. On-board inclinometers were too
large to include in this thin-wing model. A photograph of the model installed in the NTF test section is shown
in Figure 7.

4.3.3 Test Program

The NTF operating envelope, scaled to the delta wing of the present investigation, is shown in Figure 8a.
Here the facility Reynolds numbers are based upon the delta wing mean aerodynamic chord and represent
maximum operating capability. The Mach and Reynolds number extent for the delta wing experimental
program is also shown and is well within the maximum facility capability. In addition, a variety of slender
vehicle operating conditions are shown along with those for a typical High-Wing Military Transport (C-17).
Although the delta wing is a very fundamental shape, the test program was designed to include conditions
relevant to aircraft operations.

The tests were conducted in 1991, and a representative matrix of test conditions is shown in Figure 8b. Not
all of these conditions were achieved for every configuration due to resource limitations. The data were
obtained at Mach numbers ranging from 0.4 to 0.9. Reynolds number was varied from 6 million to 120
million in such a way to facilitate analysis at Reynolds numbers based upon either the wing mean
aerodynamic chord or the wing leading-edge radius. Data were obtained at only two total temperatures,
nominally 120o F and –250o F. Total pressure was varied nominally between 1.1 and 5.3 atmospheres to
obtain the desired free-stream test conditions.

It was anticipated that the flow would naturally be turbulent over the Reynolds numbers tested, so artificial
transition strips were not used. Moreover, there were no clear transition-strip test techniques for these vortex
flows.

A number of potential pseudo-Reynolds-number effects were considered and minimized in the design of the
experiment. Calculations indicated that aeroelastic deformation would be small due to the low aspect ratio of
the wing, the thickness of the wing, and the stiffness of the material. The 8-microinch surface finish was
sufficient for the model to be hydraulically smooth over the range of conditions tested. Wind tunnel wall
interference was believed to be negligible due to the slotted test section and the relative size of the delta wing
to the test section (b/wts = 0.244). In addition, test section walls, model support walls, and reentry flaps were
all set to minimize wall effects based upon facility guidelines. The model support mechanism was designed to
keep the model centered in the test section. This essentially eliminated pseudo-angle-of-attack effects
associated with the model traversing the test section flow and/or getting too close to the ceiling at high angles
of attack.

4.4 SAMPLE RESULTS

In this section representative examples of the data are presented. The full data set has been published18-21, and
these papers include both tabulated and plotted results for all measurements taken. In addition, several papers
have been recently been published9-12 with focused analysis of subsets of the data from this experimental
program.

4.4.1 Contrast of Sharp-Leading-Edge and Blunt-Leading-Edge Flows

A comparison of static surface pressure coefficients is presented in Figure 9 for the sharp-edged and one of

RTO-TR-AVT-080 4-5
EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION OF THE FLOW ABOUT A 65°
DELTA WING IN THE NASA LANGLEY NATIONAL TRANSONIC FACILITY

the blunt-edged wing geometries. The data density of this figure is representative of the entire data set.
The surface pressures for the sharp-edged delta wing show typical separation-induced leading-edge vortex
properties. The primary vortex suction peak is situated conically on the wing and diminishes in magnitude as
the trailing edge is approached. Outboard of this suction peak turbulent secondary separation is indicated.
The surface pressures for the blunt-edged delta wing clearly demonstrate part span leading-edge vortex
separation. Attached flow pressures are evident at 20% root chord while leading-edge vortex-like pressures
are evident from 60% root chord aft. The origin of the blunt leading-edge vortex for this case is in the vicinity
of 30% root chord. The direct comparison of the pressures in Figure 9 at 60% root chord demonstrates the
outboard shift of the vortex footprint due to leading-edge bluntness.

4.4.2 Reynolds Number Effect

A representative effect of Reynolds number on the blunt leading edge vortex flow is summarized in Figure 10.
Results on the left portion of this figure are the same ones used in Figure 9 to compare with sharp-edged flow.
Comparison of these results at Rn = 6 million (typical of wind-tunnel conditions) to those at 60 million
(representative of flight conditions) show significant recovery of attached flow at the higher Reynolds
number. The origin of the leading-edge vortex separation has shifted downstream in association with the
higher Reynolds number.

4.4.3 Compressibility Effect

A representative effect of compressibility on leading-edge vortex separation is presented in Figure 11. Results
on the left portion exhibit extensive attached flow at Mach number of 0.4. However, the increase of Mach
number to 0.6 has a profound effect on this separation. The 60% root chord station shows well-developed
vortex separation and the 40% root chord station also appears to have separated. The origin of leading-edge
vortex separation has moved significantly upstream in association with the increase in free stream Mach
number from 0.4 to 0.6.

4.4.4 Separation Onset and Progression Analysis

Leading-edge pressures provide a useful means to identify the passage of separation onset, and these data
were taken in sufficient density to facilitate this analysis. An example is presented in Figure 12. At low
angles of attack the leading-edge pressure will follow a trend that can be deduced from attached-flow slender
wing theory, Cp,le = C0 - C2 sin2α, and departure from this trend can correlate with separation onset. An
application of this analysis is presented in Figure 13 to quantify the effect of Reynolds number on the onset
and progression of leading-edge separation. Here Reynolds number is shown to delay separation at three root
chord stations, and the Reynolds number effects occur over a significant angle of attack range at values typical
of maneuver conditions.

The leading-edge pressure analysis can be to estimate the onset and progression of the leading-edge
separation. An example of such analysis is shown in Figure 14 and includes both Reynolds number and Mach
number effects. The data show, for the onset and progression of leading-edge vortex separation, how
Reynolds number delays this phenomena and Mach number promotes it. These effects are comparable in
magnitude but opposite in sign. Such results demonstrate the importance of isolating these effects for the
purposes of prediction to other conditions of interest.

4-6 RTO-TR-AVT-080
 EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION OF THE FLOW ABOUT A 65°
DELTA WING IN THE NASA LANGLEY NATIONAL TRANSONIC FACILITY

4.5 CONCLUDING REMARKS

A brief summary has been presented for an experimental investigation of the flow about a 65o delta wing with
blunt leading edges. The tests were conducted in the NASA Langley National Transonic Facility (NTF) and
the data have been published in the public domain. The data demonstrate significant effects of Reynolds
number, Mach number, and leading-edge bluntness on the onset and progression of leading-edge vortex
separation. The data indicate there is much to be learned regarding blunt leading-edge vortex flows, and the
fully analytical nature of this particular delta wing could be useful for future experimental and computational
studies.

4.6 REFERENCES
[1] Hummel, D., “On the Vortex Formation Over a Slender Wing at Large Incidence,” AGARD CP-247,
Paper No. 15, January 1979.

[2] Polhamus, E. C., “A Concept of the Vortex Lift of Sharp-Edged Delta Wings Based on a Leading-Edge
Suction Analogy,” NASA TN D-3767, 1966.

[3] Peckham, D. H., “Low-Speed Wind-Tunnel Tests on a Series of Uncambered Slender Pointed Wings
with Sharp Edges,” ARC R&M 3186, 1961.

[4] Tosti, L. P., “Low-Speed Static Stability and Damping in Roll Characteristics of Some Swept and
Unswept Low-Aspect-Ratio Wings,” NACA TN 1468, 1947.

[5] “High Angle of Attack Aerodynamics,” AGARD CP-247, January 1979.

[6] “Aerodynamics of Vortical Type Flows in Three Dimensions,” AGARD CP-342, July 1983.

[7] “Vortex Flow Aerodynamics,” AGARD CP-494, July 1991.

[8] “Advanced Flow Management: Part A - Vortex Flow and High Angle of Attack,” RTO MP-069, May
2001.

[9] Luckring, J. M., “Reynolds Number, Compressibility, and Leading-Edge Bluntness Effects on Delta
Wing Aerodynamics,” ICAS paper 2004-4.1.4, September 2004

[10] Luckring, J. M., “Reynolds Number and Leading-Edge Bluntness Effects on a 65o Delta Wing,” AIAA
Paper 2002-0419, January 2002.

[11] Luckring, J. M., “Transonic Reynolds Number and Leading-Edge Bluntness Effects on a 65o Delta
Wing,” AIAA Paper 2003-0753, January 2003.

[12] Luckring, J. M., “Compressibility and Leading-Edge Bluntness Effects for a 65o Delta Wing,” AIAA
Paper 2004-0765, January 2004.

[13] Fuller, D. E., “Guide for Users of the National Transonic Facility,” NASA TM-83124, 1981.

[14] Igoe, W. B., “Analysis of Fluctuating Static Pressure Measurements in the National Transonic Facility,”

RTO-TR-AVT-080 4-7
EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION OF THE FLOW ABOUT A 65°
DELTA WING IN THE NASA LANGLEY NATIONAL TRANSONIC FACILITY

NASA TP-3475, March 1996.

[15] Bobbitt, C. W., and Everhart, J. L., “NTF Characterization Status,” AIAA Paper 01-755, January 2001.

[16] Wahls, R. A., “The National Transonic Facility – A Research Retrospective,” AIAA Paper 01-0754,
January 2001.

[17] Luckring, J. M., “An Overview of National Transonic Facility Investigations for High Performance
Military Aerodynamics” AIAA Paper 01-0906, January 2001.

[18] Chu, J., and Luckring, J. M., “Experimental Surface Pressure Data Obtained on 65o Delta Wing Across
Reynolds Number and Mach Number Ranges. Volume 1 – Sharp Leading Edge,” NASA TM-4645,
February 1996.

[19] Chu, J., and Luckring, J. M., “Experimental Surface Pressure Data Obtained on 65o Delta Wing Across
Reynolds Number and Mach Number Ranges. Volume 2 – Small Leading Edge,” NASA TM-4645,
February 1996.

[20] Chu, J., and Luckring, J. M., “Experimental Surface Pressure Data Obtained on 65o Delta Wing Across
Reynolds Number and Mach Number Ranges. Volume 3 – Medium Leading Edge,” NASA TM-4645,
February 1996.

[21] Chu, J., and Luckring, J. M., “Experimental Surface Pressure Data Obtained on 65o Delta Wing Across
Reynolds Number and Mach Number Ranges. Volume 4 – Large Leading Edge,” NASA TM-4645,
February 1996.

4-8 RTO-TR-AVT-080
 EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION OF THE FLOW ABOUT A 65°
DELTA WING IN THE NASA LANGLEY NATIONAL TRANSONIC FACILITY

APPENDIX – AVT-080 DATA SET

1.0 General Description of Model

1.1 Designation NTF 65o Delta Wing
1.2 Type Full-span, sting mount
1.3 Additional remarks Mach number, Reynolds number, leading-edge bluntness effects
1.4 References References 18, 19, 20, 21

2.0 Model Geometry

2.1 Planform Delta wing
2.2 Aspect ratio 1.865
2.3 Leading edge sweep 65 degrees (reference dimension)
2.4 Trailing edge sweep 0 degrees
2.5 Twist 0 degrees
2.6 Leading edge bevel (leeward) 0 degrees
2.7 Leading-edge bevel (windward) 0 degrees
2.8 Trailing edge bevel (leeward) 0 degrees
2.9 Trailing edge bevel (windward) 0 degrees
2.10 Leading-edge radius (streamwise) r/cbar = 0 (sharp), 0.0005, 0.0015, 0.0030
2.11 Tolerance of leading-edge radius ∆r/cbar = +/- 0.000025
2.12 Trailing edge radius 0 (sharp)
2.13 Tolerance of trailing edge radius n/a
2.14 Model thickness (flat area) 0.072917 feet
2.15 Root chord 2.144507 feet
2.16 Model span 2 feet (reference dimension)
2.17 Area of planform 2.144507 feet2
2.18 Mean aerodynamic chord 1.429671 feet
2.19 Balance reference center none
2.20 Shape/radius of balance housing or center- References 18, 19, 20, 21
body
2.21 Form of wing-body junction sharp
2.22 Form of wing tip none
2.23 Model weight Not available
2.24 Model material Vascomax C-200 steel
2.25 Additional remarks 8 micro-inch surface finish
2.26 Drawings and references References 18, 19, 20, 21

RTO-TR-AVT-080 4-9
EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION OF THE FLOW ABOUT A 65°
DELTA WING IN THE NASA LANGLEY NATIONAL TRANSONIC FACILITY

3.0 Wind/Water Tunnel

3.1 Designation National Transonic Facility (NTF)
3.2 Type of tunnel Closed circuit, pressure, cryogenic
3.3 Test section dimensions 8.202 feet square with filleted corners, 25 feet long
3.4 Test section cross sectional area 66. 8 feet2
3.5 Contraction ratio 14.95:1
3.6 Maximum speed M = 1.2
3.7 Sources and levels of noise or turbulence in References 14, 15
empty tunnel
3.8 Flow angularity Reference 15
3.9 Uniformity of velocity over test section Uncertain
3.10 Tunnel resonance References 14, 15
3.11 Type of roof and floor slotted
3.12 Type of side walls solid
3.13 Thickness of side wall boundary layer Approximately 1 inch
3.14 Thickness of boundary layers at roof and Approximately 1 inch
floor
3.15 Additional remarks none
3.16 References on tunnel References 13, 14, 15

4.0 Model Motion

4.1 General description Arc-sector support
4.2 Method of applying motion Arc-sector rotation
4.3 Accuracy of the model orientation Uncertain, but equal to or less than ∆α = +/- 0.1o
4.4 Waveform of the model motion none
4.5 Maximum angular rate n/a
4.6 Maximum amplitude n/a
4.7 Maximum of angular acceleration n/a
4.8 Tare friction n/a

5.0 Test Conditions

5.1 Model planform area/tunnel cross sectional 0.0321
area
5.2 Model span/tunnel height 0.244
5.3 Blockage From 0.0027 at α = 0o to 0.0161 at α = 30o
5.4 Flow angularity ∆α = 0.13o
5.5 Model sting/support Sting and arc-sector

4 - 10 RTO-TR-AVT-080
 EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION OF THE FLOW ABOUT A 65°
DELTA WING IN THE NASA LANGLEY NATIONAL TRANSONIC FACILITY

5.6 Detail of sting/ support Figures 5, 7

5.7 Support deformation under aerodynamic Included in angle-of-attack calibration
loads
5.8 Support/model resonance under Not recorded
aerodynamic loads
5.9 Position of model in tunnel Test section centerline
5.10 Range of tunnel velocities 0.4 < M < 0.9
5.11 Range of tunnel total pressure 1.05 < Pt , atm< 5.34
5.12 Range of tunnel total temperature -251 < Tt , oF< 127
5.13 Range of model steady or mean incidence -1o < α < 27o
5.14 Position of transition, if free Not measured.
5.15 Position and type of trip, if transition fixed none
5.16 Flow instabilities during tests n/a
5.17 Additional remarks Free transition is anticipated to be close to wing apex at the
Reynolds numbers of this investigation.
5.18 Drawings for set-up in tunnel and related References 18, 19, 20, 21
references

6.0 Measurements and Observations

6.1 Visualisation method of surface flow none
6.2 Visualisation method of off-surface flow none
6.3 Visualisation of vortex behavior none
6.4 Criteria of vortex breakdown none
6.5 Measurement of velocity vector none
6.6 Measurement of flow turbulence none
6.7 Steady pressure for static conditions Pressure transducers
6.8 Unsteady pressures for static conditions none
6.9 Unsteady pressure for dynamic conditions n/a
6.10 Steady forces by integration of pressures Not performed
6.11 Unsteady forces by integration of pressure n/a
6.12 Steady forces measured directly from Normal force and pitching moment
balance
6.13 Unsteady forces measured directly from n/a
balance
6.14 Motion history in dynamic conditions n/a
6.15 Observation or measurement of boundary none
layer properties
6.16 Additional remarks none

7.0 Instrumentation
7.1 Oil flow method none

RTO-TR-AVT-080 4 - 11
EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION OF THE FLOW ABOUT A 65°
DELTA WING IN THE NASA LANGLEY NATIONAL TRANSONIC FACILITY

7.2 Laser light set-up in static situation none

7.3 Laser light set-up in dynamic situation none
7.4 PIV set-up none
7.5 Steady pressure
7.8.1 Position of orifices spanwise and Figure 5, References 18, 19, 20, 21
chordwise
7.8.2 Diameter of orifices 0.010 inches
7.8.3 Type of transducers Piezio Electric
7.8.4 Type of measuring system Electronically Scanning Pressure (ESP) system
7.8.5 Signal acquisition Digital
7.8.6 Principle and accuracy of calibration In-situ periodic within-system calibration, 0.5 percent of full scale
7.6 Unsteady pressure none
7.8.1 Position of orifices spanwise and n/a
chordwise
7.8.2 Diameter of orifices n/a
7.8.3 Type of transducers n/a
7.8.4 Type of measuring system n/a
7.8.5 Signal acquisition n/a
7.8.6 Principle and accuracy of calibration n/a
7.7 Steady loads
7.8.1 Type of transducers Strain Gauge
7.8.2 Signal acquisition Digital
7.8.3 Accuracy of calibration Nominally 0.5% of full scale
7.8 Unsteady loads none
7.8.1 Type of transducers n/a
7.8.2 Signal acquisition n/a
7.8.3 Principle and accuracy of calibration n/a
7.9 Motion measurement none
7.9.1 Type of transducers n/a
7.9.2 Signal acquisition n/a
7.9.3 Accuracy n/a
7.9.4 Sting acceleration none

8.0 Data Presentation

8.1 Test cases for which data could be made Full data setr
available
8.2 Test cases for which data are included in Only sample highlights
this document
8.3 Surface flow topology none
8.4 Vortex behavior and breakdown location none
8.5 Velocity vector none
8.6 Tubulence none

4 - 12 RTO-TR-AVT-080
 EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION OF THE FLOW ABOUT A 65°
DELTA WING IN THE NASA LANGLEY NATIONAL TRANSONIC FACILITY

8.7 Steady pressures Spanwise distributions every 20% root chord

8.8 Unsteady pressures none
8.9 Steady forces or moments Normal-force and pitching-moment coefficients
8.10 Unsteady forces and moments none
8.11 Other forms in which data could be made Reports, data files
available
8.12 Reference giving other representations of References 18, 19, 20, 21
data

9.0 Comments on Data

9.1 Accuracy
9.1.1 Mach number +/- 0.0005
9.1.2 Model orientation Uncertain, but equal to or less than ∆α = +/- 0.1 degrees
9.1.3 Reduced frequency n/a
9.1.4 Vortex breakdown location n/a
9.1.5 Velocity vector n/a
9.1.6 Steady pressure coefficients References 18, 19, 20, 21
9.1.7 Unsteady pressure coefficients n/a
9.1.8 Static loads References 18, 19, 20, 21
9.1.9 Dynamic loads n/a
9.2 Influence of tunnel total pressure Static aeroelastic effects are felt to be negligible
9.3 Wall interference corrections none
9.4 Other relevant tests on same model none
9.5 Relevant tests on other models of nominally None published
the same shapes
9.6 Any remarks relevant to comparison none
between experiment and theory
9.7 Available CFD solutions for test case none
9.8 Additional remarks none
9.9 References on discussion of data References 9, 10, 11, 12

RTO-TR-AVT-080 4 - 13
EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION OF THE FLOW ABOUT A 65°
DELTA WING IN THE NASA LANGLEY NATIONAL TRANSONIC FACILITY

2
a) Flow structure – Hummel1 b) Vortex lift – Polhamus

Figure 1: Some leading-edge vortex properties, sharp-edged delta wings.

Sharp leading edge Blunt leading edge

Vortex origin
fixed at apex

xv
Displaced vortex origin varies with:
- Angle of attack
- Mach number
- Reynolds number
- Leading-edge radius

Vortex properties vary with: - etc.

- Angle of attack
- Mach number
Vortex properties still vary with:
- Reynolds number
- Angle of attack
- etc.
- Mach number
- Reynolds number
- Leading-edge radius
- etc.
Primary vortex separation
at leading edge Primary vortex separation
near leading edge

Figure 2: Bluntness effects on leading-edge vortex structure – Luckring9.

4 - 14 RTO-TR-AVT-080
 EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION OF THE FLOW ABOUT A 65°
DELTA WING IN THE NASA LANGLEY NATIONAL TRANSONIC FACILITY

Figure 3: National Transonic Facility (NTF).

Figure 4: National Transonic Facility circuit. Dimensions in feet.

RTO-TR-AVT-080 4 - 15
EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION OF THE FLOW ABOUT A 65°
DELTA WING IN THE NASA LANGLEY NATIONAL TRANSONIC FACILITY

cr = 25.734 in. ƒ Leading-edge

surface pressure
. .. stations:

. . x/cr = 0.10, 0.20,

. .
b/2 = 12 in. (ref) 0.30, 0.40, 0.50,
0.60, 0.70, 0.80,
Λ = 65 . o

. .
0.90, 0.95

t = 0.875 in. Spanwise surface

pressure stations:
x/cr = 0.20, 0.40, 0.60, 0.80, 0.95

d = 3.30 in.

t/cbar 0.0510
b/2cr 0.4663 Streamwise leading-edge radii:
d/b 0.1375 rle/cbar = 0., 0.0005, 0.0015, 0.0030

Figure 5: Schematic of NTF delta wing.

Sharp
Small
Medium Contours not to scale
Large

z/zm = a sqrt(ξ) + b ξ + c ξ2 + d ξ3 ; ξ = x/xm

rle/cbar = 0, 0.0005, 0.0015, 0.0030

match

Figure 6: Streamwise leading-edge contours for NTF delta wing.

4 - 16 RTO-TR-AVT-080
 EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION OF THE FLOW ABOUT A 65°
DELTA WING IN THE NASA LANGLEY NATIONAL TRANSONIC FACILITY

Figure 7: Delta wing mounted in the NTF.

240 120

108
200 NTF, Cryo
Delta wing 96
Reynolds Number, million

84
160
Rn, million

72
HSCT
120 Shuttle 60

48
X37
80 F18E/F
Test 36
Program Shuttle
24
40
F18E/F C17 NTF, Air
12
Delta Wing
0 0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Mach
Mach Number

a) NTF envelopes and aircraft operating b) Representative delta-wing test matrix

conditions.

Figure 8: Test conditions

RTO-TR-AVT-080 4 - 17
EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION OF THE FLOW ABOUT A 65°
DELTA WING IN THE NASA LANGLEY NATIONAL TRANSONIC FACILITY

rle = sharp M = 0.4, α = 13o, Rn = 6 million rle = medium

Spanwise distribution, x/cr = 0.6

-2.0

-1.5

-1.0
Cp

-0.5

0.0

0.5
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
η

The blunt-edged wing develops a

part-span leading edge vortex

Figure 9: Comparison of sharp and blunt leading-edge vortex flow.

M = 0.4, α = 13o, rle = medium

Rn = 6 million Rn = 60 million
Spanwise distribution, x/cr = 0.6

-5.0

-4.0

-3.0
Cp
-2.0

-1.0

0.0

1.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
η

The high Rn delays leading-edge

vortex separation

Figure 10: Reynolds number effect on blunt leading-edge separation.

4 - 18 RTO-TR-AVT-080
 EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION OF THE FLOW ABOUT A 65°
DELTA WING IN THE NASA LANGLEY NATIONAL TRANSONIC FACILITY

Rn = 60 million, α = 13o, rle = medium

M = 0.4 M = 0.6
Spanwise distribution, x/cr = 0.6

-2.0
Cp* = - 3.7 Cp* = - 1.3
-1.5

Cp -1.0

-0.5

0.0

0.5
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
η

An increase in Mach number

promotes leading-edge vortex
separation

Figure 11: Mach number effect on blunt leading-edge separation

Separation onset
nominally at
measurement

Attached flow theory:

Cp = C0 – C2 sin2 α

-4

Separation onset Separation onset

downstream of upstream of
-3 measurement
measurement

-2

Cp,le
-1

M = 0.4, Rn = 6 million

0 rle = medium, x/cr = 0.5

1
-5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
α

Figure 12: Correlation of separation onset with blunt leading-edge pressure.

RTO-TR-AVT-080 4 - 19
EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION OF THE FLOW ABOUT A 65°
DELTA WING IN THE NASA LANGLEY NATIONAL TRANSONIC FACILITY

Figure 13: Reynolds number effect on leading-edge separation onset and progression.

0.0
rle = medium M = 0.4, Rn = 6 million

xv
0.2
M = 0.6, M = 0.4,
Rn = 6 million Rn = 60 million

0.4
Mach promotes
xv/cr separation
Rn delays
separation
0.6

0.8

1.0
0 10 20 30
α
Mach and Reynolds number effects are opposite in sign and can be comparable
in magnitude for the onset of leading-edge vortex separation

Figure 14: Mach and Reynolds number effects for the progression of leading-edge separation.

4 - 20 RTO-TR-AVT-080