2016 national wing design competition rules

Download 71.26 Kb.
Size71.26 Kb.

These competition rules are modeled after the rules for the international AIAA Design/Build/Fly competition, which can be found at www.aiaadbf.org.
The competition rules may be changed or supplemented at any time.
Notification of any rule changes or clarifications will be disseminated via email to teachers or team liaisons and posted at:



Summary of Changes 2

Competition Summary 3

Judging 3

Competition Site 4

Team Requirements 4

Schedule 4

Communications 5

Aircraft Requirements 6

General 6

Safety 8

Scoring 10

Design Challenge 11

General 13

Payloads 14

Flight Line Order 14

Mission 15

General Mission Specifications 15

Flight Course 16

Contingencies 16

Report Guidelines 17

 Design Report: 17

Design Report Electronic Copy: 19

Appendix B: Eppler 422 Airfoil Characteristics 23

Appendix D: Martin Hepperle 114 Airfoil Characteristics 28

Appendix E: NACA 62(1)-212 Airfoil Characteristics 30

Appendix F: Selig/Donovan 7043 Airfoil Characteristics 32

Appendix G: USA-35B Airfoil Characteristics 34

Summary of Changes

The format of this year’s competition has changed. Please read the rules carefully and be aware of all changes. The following document changes from the previous year’s competition:

  • Competition Summary: Design report due date

  • Competition Site: Competition date

  • Schedule: Design report due date

  • Communications: New website where information will be posted

  • Aircraft Requirements: All payloads must be mounted on wing; Mounting hardware that counts towards wing weight limited to non-removable components; website location for self-inspection checklist changed

  • Scoring: Two separate Flight Scores may be recorded for each of two unique payloads; Report Score will be scaled from 100 to 20 points max; Student pilot bonus increased to 10%

  • Design Challenge: Mission changed drastically to a multi-role payload mission; 2 out of a predetermined set of 4 unique payloads will be flown during the competition

  • Payloads: Four unique payloads are detailed and must be supplied by the team; At their discretion, teams may also supply their own additional “counterweight” payloads

  • Mission: Each team must supply student or non-student volunteers to serve 30-minute rotations as Flight Course spotters

  • Contingencies: Teams may only use one competition wing to record valid Flight Scores even if a second wing is identical to the first

  • Report Guidelines: Design report due date

Competition Summary

The National Wing Design Competition (NWDC) is sponsored by the National Air & Space Education Institute (NASEI) and is intended to provide an introduction to aircraft design. The University of Kentucky College of Engineering and NASA have provided support for this year’s NWDC. Engineering firms such as Stantec, Lockheed Martin and Belcan will also support the NWDC. Student teams will design, fabricate, and demonstrate the flight capabilities of a wing to replace the stock Hobbico® NexSTAR™ wing.

The goal of the competition is to design and build a high-performance wing, while demonstrating a balance between practical-and-affordable manufacturing techniques and good flight characteristics. The design objective is to produce a multi-role wing that, when mounted on the NexSTAR™ fuselage is light weight, and can carry a diverse array of non-uniform payloads at a distance from the center of gravity of the aircraft. The wing must be capable of carrying different specified payloads non-concurrently. Scoring for each sortie is a function of the position of the particular external payload with respect to a fixed point on the NexSTAR™ fuselage and the overall weight of the wing.

It is the responsibility of each team to know and follow all rules, updates, and competition day briefings. In the aircraft industry, deadlines are common and meeting these deadlines is extremely important. Thus, all competition deadlines will be enforced with a graduated score reduction penalty outlined here in the “Schedule” and “Report Guidelines” sections. Also, teams are required to submit a Design Report that describes the design process. The Intent of the report is to represent a wing “proposal” explaining the team’s design choices including cost-benefit analyses, tradeoffs, optimizations, etc. The reports are not explanations of test results and can be comprehensively written before flight testing even begins. However, if flight tests are accomplished before the due date, observations of results may be included in the report. Reports are due Friday, April 29, 2016.


Each team must design, document, build, and fly a competition wing. Flight Scores will be based on the demonstrated mission performance obtained during the competition.

Each team must submit a Design Report describing their design and outlining their proposed construction process. A maximum of 20 points will be awarded for the Design Report. Reports will be scored by a panel of aerospace industry professional engineers and professors.

The overall team score is the product of the Report Score and Flight Score.

Competition Site

The exact competition date and location is to be determined, although it is tentatively scheduled for Saturday May 14 2016 at Lake Cumberland Regional Airport in Somerset, KY. The competition location and schedule will be posted on the NASEI website, and all teams will be notified of changes via e-mail. To obtain atmospheric data for flight planning and design purposes, you can check historical weather conditions at www.weatherbase.com or www.weatherunderground.com.

Team Requirements

All team members (except for a non-student pilot) must be NASEI students. Teams may use a non-student pilot if desired. All pilots (student or non-student) must be AMA members and must perform the technical inspection of their team’s aircraft and complete a signed proof of flight form prior to the competition.

Each school may enter only one team. Each team must have its own airframe. This consists of a fuselage, tail, landing gear, propulsion system, and receiver. Each wing has a total spending limit of $700 dollars. Each team is eligible to be reimbursed for up to $350 of these expenses by NASEI. Valid expenses may be invoiced to NASEI by submitting itemized receipts along with a written explanation of items purchased to the following address by May 14, 2016.

National Air & Space Education Institute

2720 Cannons Lane, Hangar 7

Louisville, KY 40205


Design Reports must be submitted to NASEI.Wing.Design.Competition@gmail.com by 5pm eastern daylight time on April 29, 2016. No corrections, additions, or changes can be made after submission. Teams must submit one electronic copy of their Design Report in PDF format.

A 5% reduction in score will be applied every 24 hours to reports submitted after the 5pm April 29 deadline. For example, the maximum possible score for a report submitted at 6pm on April 30 will be 90%.

The competition is tentatively scheduled for May 14, 2015.  The competition is anticipated to run from 9am to 3pm. A final competition schedule will be e-mailed to the teams prior to the competition date and posted on the NASEI web page.  If the competition is postponed due to weather, then the competition will be rescheduled and the same competition schedule will be followed.


The competition administrators will maintain a website as a resource for downloading the latest information regarding the competition. This website can be found at:


Questions regarding the competition may be sent to the competition administrators by e-mail at:


All correspondence with the competition administrators should include a team name and school name. All questions and answers will be entered periodically into FAQs and posted on the competition website.

Aircraft Requirements


  • The wing design may be of any form except a flapping wing configuration.

  • The wing must be separable from the aircraft.

  • All payloads must be mounted to the wing; not to the aircraft fuselage. Any payload mounting hardware that is not removable will count as wing weight. For example, if payloads are mounted on a threaded bolt that is integral to the wing frame and secured with a wing nut, then the bolt counts as wing weight, but the wing nut does not.

  • Any lifting body added to the original NexSTAR™ airframe counts as a wing and must be removable. For example, if a bi-plane design is used, both wings must be removable.

  • All parts used to attach the wing to the airframe count toward the weight of the wing. For example, if a main spar is used to secure the wing to the airframe, then it counts toward the weight of the wing (even if part of it lies inside the fuselage).

  • Wing struts count as part of the wing and must be removable.

  • No structure or components may be dropped from the aircraft during flight.

  • No form of externally assisted take-off is allowed.  All energy for take-off must come from the unmodified O.S. Engine included in the kit.

  • Engine fuel must be 10% Nitro-methane.

  • Each aircraft must use a commercially made propeller provided in the kits (replacement propellers may be purchased if necessary). Teams may modify the propeller by clipping the tips or painting the blades for balance.  Other modifications are not allowed.

  • Aircraft and pilot must be Academy of Model Aeronautics (AMA) legal. This means:

    • The aircraft take-off gross weight with payload must be less than 55-lbs.

    • The pilot must be a member of the AMA.

    • Complete AMA Aircraft Safety Code can be found at: http://www.modelaircraft.org/files/105.pdf



Proof of flight of the NexSTAR™ platform with the competition wing MUST be verified by the competition organizers prior to being able to fly. This requirement is to ensure competition safety. Aircraft without the signed proof of flight form will not be allowed to fly at the competition. All decisions made by judges are final.

All aircraft will be self-inspected prior to each test flight and competition flight by the team’s AMA certified pilot. The purpose of this inspection is to ensure the safety of all people and the aircraft. Aircraft deemed unsafe will not fly.

The quick pre-flight self-inspection checklist is posted on the WDC website at http://airandspace-ed.org/program/competitions/nasei-wing-design-competition/pre-flight-self-inspection-checklist. In detail, the inspection will consist of the following:

  • Brief review of key structural points of aircraft

  • Wing tip test: Aircraft with full flight payload will be lifted from a lift point at each wing tips (to roughly simulate a 2.5g load case) to verify adequate strength and to check for vehicle center of gravity (cg) location. Teams should mark the expected empty and loaded cg locations on the exterior of the aircraft. Special provisions should be made for aircraft whose cg does not fall within the wing tip chord so the aircraft can be secured while performing the wing tip test.

  • Radio range check (motor on and motor off) and fail safe check. All aircraft radio transmitters must have a fail safe mode, which is automatically selected if the receiver loses signal from the radio transmitter. The fail safe should be demonstrated on the ground by switching off the transmit radio. During failsafe the aircraft receiver must select Throttle Closed.

  • Physical Inspection:

    • Verify all components are adequately secured to vehicle. Verify all fasteners are tight and have either safety wire, locktite (fluid) or nylock nuts. Clevises on flight controls must have an appropriate safety device to prevent disengaging in flight.

    • Verify the structural integrity of the propeller and ensure proper propeller attachment.

    • Visual inspection of electronic wiring to assure adequate wire gauges and connectors.

    • Verify all control surfaces move correctly.

    • Check the integrity of the payload and payload attachment system.

Any minor damage sustained during a flight attempt may be repaired. However, an aircraft must be re-inspected by the team’s AMA certified pilot after repairs before being cleared to fly.


Each team's score will be computed from the Report Score and Flight Score using the formula:

Score = Report Score * [(Flight Score A) + (Flight Score B)] * 1.1 (Student Pilot Bonus)

There are 4 unique predetermined payloads that each team may be asked to fly in the 2016 competition. These payloads are detailed in the following section. At the beginning of the competition, 2 of the 4 payloads will be randomly selected. Each team will have a maximum of two attempts to complete a successful flight carrying both of the 2 selected payloads non-concurrently (two attempts for payload 1 and two attempts for payload 2). Flight Scores A is awarded for a successful flight carrying payload 1. Flight Score B is awarded for a successful flight carrying payload 2. If a team is unable to complete a successful flight carrying either payload, a Flight Score of zero will be recorded for that payload. If a team is unable to complete a successful flight of either of the two selected payloads on the day of the competition, their overall score will also be zero per the equation above.

The Flight Score equation is described in the following section. The number of payloads is not considered in the Flight Score equation. Each team is only required to fly one instance of each of the two selected payloads. Additional points will not be awarded for carrying multiple instances of the same payload concurrently. However, additional payloads of any design may be mounted to the wing for any flight attempt in order to maintain aircraft weight and balance. Any such “counterweight” payloads must be mounted to the wing and not the fuselage. All such “counterweight” payloads that are removable from the wing will not count as additional wing weight. The Student Pilot Bonus will only be awarded to teams that complete a successful flight at the competition piloted by an AMA-certified student member of the team for either Flight Score A OR B. The student pilot is not required to complete two successful flights in order for the bonus to be awarded.

The Report Score rubric that judges will use (outlined in the “Report Guidelines”) is based on a 100 point system. These scores will be scaled down to a maximum of 20 points when factored into the overall score equation above. This is intended to account for minor disparities in report grades recorded by a variety of industry professional judges. As such, report scores of 96 thru 100 will be scaled to 20; scores of 91 thru 95 will be scaled to 19; and so on.

Design Challenge

Multi-Role Adaptive, Light-Weight Wing

  • This is a strategic weight and balance mission. Just as commercial and military aircraft must be trimmed and balanced for a multitude of potential cargo or armament configurations, your wing must be capable of carrying a variety of payloads in challenging locations.

  • The 4 unique payloads that may potentially be flown at the competition are detailed here. Two of these 4 payloads will be randomly selected at the beginning of the competition. Each team is required to manufacture and provide their own payloads for the competition.

  1. Payload 1: As many schools already have an abundance of them, the first payload is the same as in last year’s competition. A single payload of 1½” diameter Schedule 40 PVC pipe cut to 24” in length. The pipe must have a ¼” diameter hole drilled perpendicular to the axial length that extends through both walls. The ¼” hole must be drilled at the midpoint of the pipe’s length. The ends of the pipe must be covered. The weight and size of the covering is at the discretion of the team.

  2. Payload 2: The second payload consists of two 1 ½” diameter Schedule 40 PVC pipes. One pipe is cut to 24” in length, and the other pipe is cut to 36” in length. The pipes must have a ¼” diameter hole drilled perpendicular to the axial length that extends through both walls. The ¼” hole must be drilled at the midpoint of the pipe’s length. The ends of the pipes must be covered. The weight and size of the covering is at the discretion of the team.

  3. Payload 3: The third payload is 30 US pennies. Additional structures may be used to carry the payload. These additional structures must be removable, or these structures are included in the wing weight.

  4. Payload 4: The fourth payload is 16 ounces of water. Additional structures may be used to carry the payload. These additional structures must be removable, or these structures are included in the wing weight.

  • All payloads (including “counterweight” payloads) must be externally mounted to the wing and must be removable. The mounting locations of all payloads are left to the discretion of each team, but the locations of the primary payloads DO impact the Flight Score. The number and location of any “counterweight” payloads DO NOT impact the Flight Score

  • All mounting mechanisms not specified in the payload descriptions above are at the discretion of the teams, but the mounting must be deemed safe by an AMA member. Any mounting structure that is not removable will be included in the wing weight.

  • Flight Scores are recorded after successful flights as follows:

is the wing weight in pounds. is the distance in inches from the nearest surface of the primary payload to a fixed y-z plane along the length of the stock Hobbico® NexSTAR™ fuselage as shown in Figure . is the distance from the nearest surface of the primary payload to the aircraft thrust line in inches. Note that if the total payload consists of multiple payload objects (e.g., Payload 2), then and are the minimum distances to either payload object. A successful flight must be completed in order to obtain the above Flight Score.

  • If multiple instances of the primary payload are flown concurrently, the Flight Score will be recorded with respect to the location of the single instance of the payload that results in the lowest Flight Score per the equation above.

  • Teams are responsible for knowing their wing weight, payload location measurements and keeping their own score. Two hypothetical primary payload locations and their respective measurements are shown in Figure .

Figure : Origin of Dx Measurements

Figure : Example Primary Payload Location Measurements


  • Teams may use any airfoil to design their wing. A list of airfoil coordinates is available at http://aerospace.illinois.edu/m-selig/ads/coord_database.html. Note that this website gives airfoil coordinates only, it does not provide aerodynamic data.

  • Aerodynamic data is provided in Appendices A thru G for the following airfoils:

Eppler 422 (E422)

Eppler 423 (E423)

Martin Hepperle 114 (MH 114)

NACA 62(1)-212

Selig/Donovan 7043 (SD 7043)


Teams are responsible for gathering the aerodynamic data for airfoils other than those provided in the appendices of this document.

  • Teams may not use the wing provided in the NexSTAR™ kit.

  • If teams use airfoils other than those provided by the WDC rules the aerodynamic data and detailed discussion of the choice must be provided in the design report.

  • All design decisions made must be discussed in the Design Report.

  • The Design Report must describe the expected fabrication procedures.

  • Each team is required to use the standard fuel and propulsion system.


  • Each team is responsible for providing all payloads.

  • The payloads must be secured to ensure safe flight without possible variation of aircraft center of gravity during flight.

  • Payloads must be carried externally and mounted to the wing.

  • All payload mounting locations must be inspected by an AMA member for safety as part of the pre-competition technical inspection.

Flight Line Order

  • Each team’s position in the flight order is determined from their Report Score; the highest Report Score goes first. The order of teams with the same report score will be determined by coin toss. The flight order is repeated after all teams have had an opportunity to fly.

  • There will be a staging area position near the flight line. If you are not ready to enter a staging area when it is your turn, then you forfeit that opportunity to fly.

    • Electing to enter one of the staging area positions on your turn in the rotation order will constitute using a flight attempt.

    • If you go to the flight line and are not able to begin your flight when instructed, then you forfeit that flight attempt.

  • The NexSTAR™ with the designed wing assembled, fueled, and ready to fly must be brought to the staging area prior to the flight.

  • Only the pilot and one observer are allowed to enter the staging area.

  • The observer is allowed to leave the staging area to retrieve forgotten equipment, but must return to the staging area prior to the flight attempt. If both the pilot and the observer are not in the staging area when the flight attempt is called to start, then the flight attempt is forfeited.


  • Each team will be allowed a maximum of 4 flight attempts (two attempts for each of the two primary payloads selected the day of the competition). Teams may not use more than 2 attempts for any one payload.

  • Aircraft must perform a conventional takeoff.

  • Teams are allowed 2 takeoff attempts per flight attempt. If the team has not completed a successful takeoff after the 2nd attempt then the flight attempt is forfeited. No repairs may be made between takeoff attempts.

  • The aircraft must complete two laps of the flight course shown in Figure before landing.

  • After completing the required number of laps of the flight course for a given mission, go-arounds are permitted if necessary for safe landings.

  • The aircraft must complete a successful landing at the end of a mission to receive a Flight Score. A successful landing is outlined in the general mission specifications below.

General Mission Specifications

  • The engine may run only when the aircraft is on the runway, in flight, or in the designated engine run-up area and under certified AMA member supervision.

  • Maximum flight crew is the pilot and one observer. 

  • The observer must be a student.  The pilot may be a non-student.

  • The aircraft must be loaded, fueled, and ready when called to fly.

  • Each team must provide two volunteers to serve 30-minute rotations as flight course spotters. Volunteers may be students or non-students.

  • The upwind turn will be made after the upwind spotter signals the observer by raising his or her hand. The downwind turn will be made after the downwind spotter signals the observer. Upwind and downwind spotters will be positioned 500 ft from the starting line. Aircraft must be straight and level when passing the turn marker before initiating a turn.

  • Aircraft must pass the start/finish line in the air. Then they may land immediately or go around at the pilot’s discretion.

  • Aircraft must land on the runway. Aircraft may "run-off" the runway during roll-out.  Aircraft may not “bounce” off the runway.

  • Aircraft obtaining “significant” damage during landing will not receive a score for that flight.  Damage that is “significant” would prevent the aircraft from taking off again without repairs. Final determination of “significant” damage is at the discretion of the Flight Line Judge.

  • Flight altitude must be sufficient for safe terrain clearance and low enough to maintain good visual contact with the aircraft. Decisions on safe flight altitude will be at the discretion of the Flight Line Judge.

Flight Course

  • The orientation (direction) of the flight course will be adjusted based on the prevailing winds as determined by the Flight Line Judge.  The flight course will be positioned to maintain the greatest possible safety.  The nominal flight course is shown in Figure .


Figure : Flight course for the competition. Not drawn to scale.


  • In the event that, due to time or facility limitations, it is not possible to allow all teams to have the maximum number of flight attempts, the competition committee reserves the right to ration flight attempts (as determined by the competition committee). 

  • In the event of a tie in the final score, the team with the higher Report Score will place in front of the other team.

  • Teams may perform repairs on their wings between flight attempts and continue to compete provided the repaired wing passes inspection by a certified AMA pilot. Each team may only enter one competition wing. Flight Scores will not be recorded for flights using a second wing even should that wing be identical to the first.

Report Guidelines

In engineering practice, construction does not begin until the design has been finalized, a thorough analysis has been conducted to verify that the final product will function as intended and the construction and testing processes and procedures have been thoroughly planned. The purpose of these design reports is to document design decisions as well as the analysis of tradeoffs behind those decisions. This report is not intended to be a summary of construction progress. The judges evaluating the reports will base their scores on how well you document your design and analysis, on the suitability of the analysis for ensuring that you achieve the best possible flight score, on how well you have planned out the construction procedures and how well you’ve thought out what flight tests need to be conducted to ensure that your aircraft can safely fly with each of the 4 design payloads.

Reports should adhere to the following requirements.  Failure to meet requirements may result in score reduction.

  • Due 5pm EST Friday April 29, 2016 (a 5% score reduction will be applied every 24 hours to late reports)

  • Reports should be 5 to 10 pages.

  • Reports should have a cover page (which includes school and team name), table of contents, and list of references, none of which count toward the 5-10 page count.

  • Reports should include CAD drawings, which do not count toward the 5-10 page count. However, these pages must contain drawings only.

  • Reports should be typed single sided.

  • Reports will receive a 10 point penalty for each page under 5 or over 10.

  • All reports should be at least 1.5 spacing and no more than double spaced, 10-pt Arial font. Tables and figures should also be at least 10-pt Arial font. Margins should be 1 inch on all sides. All figures and tables should be clear and readable for the judges.  Format and readability will be considered in the scoring of the reports.

 Design Report:

  1. Executive Summary (10 points):

    • (4pts) Provide a summary description of your design, and explain why it is the best solution for the mission requirements.

    • (2pts) Describe the mission requirements that impact your design.

    • (2pts) Document the predicted performance of your wing and discuss the wing characteristics you sought to optimize

    • (2pts) Detail the tradeoffs you anticipate (consider weight reduction, ease of production, etc.)

  1. Wing Parameter Design (45 points):

    • (6pts) Describe mission requirements and resulting design requirements.

    • (8pts) Provide a detailed review of the solutions that were considered (i.e. airfoil selection, planform selection, wing sizing) and show a comparative analysis of 3 or more wings considered and why you selected the one you did.

    • (8pts) Tabulate final wing dimensions and characteristics (i.e. airfoil choice, span, surface area, taper, aileron sizes, dihedral and any key characteristics describing your final wing design – see Aerodynamics Module on NASEI/IAE website).

    • (5pts) Provide estimates of predicted performance characteristics for final design (i.e. lift, drag, stall, etc. – see equations in Aerodynamics Module on NASEI/IAE website)

    • (8pts) Document the weight and balance for final design.  Must include a weight & balance table for the empty aircraft and with payload. (see NASEI aeronautical course on Moodle)

    • (6pts) Provide engineering drawings of final wing design and components.

  1. Manufacturing Plan and Processes (35 points):

    • (10pts) Document the process selected for manufacture of major components and assemblies of the final design.

    • (10pts) Detail the manufacturing processes investigated and the selection process/results including cost-benefit analyses to consider such factors as time, money, strength and weight.

    • (15pts) Include a manufacturing milestone chart, preferably a Gantt chart, showing scheduled and actual event timings. It is ok if not all milestones are completed by the report submission deadline but a full schedule through testing must be planned.

  1. Testing Plan (10 points):

    • Detail testing objectives, schedules, and check-lists for flight tests. If any testing has been completed document the results of those tests. Although it is not necessary to complete testing prior to the report submission deadline, a full testing plan must be submitted.

Design Report Electronic Copy:

Each team must provide an electronic copy of their final design used for the report judging as outlined below.

  • Electronic copy must be RECEIVED by the deadline mentioned above.

  • Electronic report files must be named: “2016_NWDC_[school]_[team name].PDF”

  • Electronic report must be a single file with all figures/drawings included in the proper report sequence in PDF format. (Free PDF file conversion programs are available on the Internet, such as www.pdf995.com.)

  • Electronic reports should have all figures compressed to print resolution to minimize file size.

  • Electronic reports must be less than 20 MB in size (including encoding for e-mail transmission) and e-mailed to:


The tables below list the ordinates from which the airfoils can be manufactured. Each value is given as a percentage of the chord length. To get the actual dimension just multiply each number by the desired chord length.
Appendix A: Airfoil Ordinates

Table : E422 Airfoil Ordinates

Table : E423 Airfoil Ordinates

Table : MH114 Airfoil Ordinates

Table : NACA 62(1)-212 Airfoil Ordinates

Table : SD 7043 Airfoil Ordinates

Appendices B through G give the aerodynamic performance for each airfoil as well as an outline of the shape of the airfoil. All aerodynamic characteristics were calculated using computer software designed for low Reynolds number calculations.

Table : USA-35B Airfoil Ordinates

Appendix B: Eppler 422 Airfoil Characteristics


Figure : E422 Airfoil


Figure : E422 Drag Polar


Figure : E422 Lift Curve


Figure : E422 Moment Coefficient


Figure : E422 Lift/Drag Ratio

Appendix C: Eppler 423 Airfoil Characteristics


Figure : E423 Airfoil


Figure : E423 Drag Polar


Figure : E423 Lift Curve


Figure : E423 Moment Coefficient


Figure : E423 Lift/Drag Ratio

Appendix D: Martin Hepperle 114 Airfoil Characteristics


Figure : MH 114 Airfoil


Figure : MH 114 Drag Polar


Figure : MH 114 Lift Curve


Figure : MH 114 Moment Coefficient


Figure : MH 114 Lift/Drag Ratio

Appendix E: NACA 62(1)-212 Airfoil Characteristics


Figure : NACA 62(1)-212 Airfoil


Figure : NACA 62(1)-212 Drag Polar


Figure : NACA 62(1)-212 Lift Curve


Figure : NACA 62(1)-212 Moment Coefficient


Figure : NACA 62(1)-212 Lift/Drag Ratio

Appendix F: Selig/Donovan 7043 Airfoil Characteristics


Figure : SD 7043 Airfoil


Figure : SD 7043 Drag Polar


Figure : SD 7043 Lift Curve


Figure : SD 7043 Moment Coefficient


Figure : SD 7043Lift/Drag Ratio

Appendix G: USA-35B Airfoil Characteristics


Figure : USA-35BAirfoil


Figure : USA-35BDrag Polar


Figure : USA-35BLift Curve


Figure : USA-35BMoment Coefficient


Figure : USA-35BLift/Drag Ratio


Download 71.26 Kb.

Share with your friends:

The database is protected by copyright ©es.originaldll.com 2023
send message

    Main page