ni I 111

'
11 ,I1
C-1) liltil

Cm : MEMORANDUM REPORT NO. 1582

JUNE 1964

THE AERODYNAMIC PROPERTIES OF

THE 155-MM SHELL M101 FROM FREE FLI GHT RANGE TESTS OF
FULL SCALE AND 1/12 SCALE MODELS

>1 B. G. Karpov
L.E. Schmidt
S.4
14r Revised by
0 r4 K. Krial
'u L. C. MacAllister ,

0V

RDT &: Project Nfo. DM010501A005

BALLISTIC RESEARCH LABORATORIES

ABERDEEN PROVING ,-ROUND, MARYLAND

 I

NOTICE: When government or other dravings, speci-

fications or other data are used for any purpose
other than in connection with a d.-finitely related
government procurement operation, the U. S.
Government thereby incurs no responsibility, nor any
obligation whatsoever; and the fact that the Govern-
ment may have formlated, f\rnithed, or in any way
supplied the said drawings, specifications, or other
data is not to be regarded by implication or other-
wise as in any manner licensing the holder or any
other person or corporation, or conveying any rights
or permission to manufacture, use or seUl any
patented invention that may in any way bc relatcd
thereto.

iR
 Destroy this report when it is no longer needed.
Do not return it to the originator.

DDC AVAILAB3ILITY NOTICE

Qualified requesters may obtain copies of this report frc• DDC.

ReIeEse or announcement to the public is not authorized

The findinga in this report are not to be ccnstrued aý.

an official t-nartnt. of the rzition, 'U~s
pos
so desiEgnated by other -uthorized doc'=entz.
B A LL IS TIC R E3E A R CH LA B OrRATO0?RI ES

MEM¶OR~IDUMM. REPORT NO. 1582

JUIRIE 19054

F'iIIE'r1F UVU
AG KUFt '11LE
''.7 OFVD 5 X 'r:l.0D
I./L

Fr.-7- FM~k
?jVGF 0- FLT SAEaML/.L.~,

.j. t.7
 B ALL I ST IC RE SE A RC 1 L A BOR ATOR I E S

MEMtORANDUM REPORT NO. 1ý5ý02

BGKrizpov/LEScrIdT/

Abcrdecen Proving Grouni, .

Jr:1964

THE AERODYNZAMIC PiHOPEIRTIF3 OF "L,:E 5~. SHELL MLOI. FriCtI

FREE FLIGHT RANIGE TES'ro OF FULL SCALE AMfl 1112 SCALE ',SODEL-j

The -tcroaIyni~.-vc p~roperticn of thjý ','V 1-- LOI IlZ-1-trr-ilrwd'( frC7-.

*,h:1.
Frce FL lw Of~;~0'th~ ' .i' pr.11ct Lc~d':ia'L
u;cIc~ 7-4cI

1fcu.nd ta.a .trmcvLot th':, .'i-rc Iy-;.'.1c :t c;arc: zi'-il.,r

fo ct on Ii, h u. Lc n: i:: tc atd.~ I

tr.~t' n~t d r.n

acc r. t ~
lyt .. "L 1:-I .0 'or&J. 7:.Lr .L!.:o 10'..L 1 III: h ry!I.t
 TABLE OF CO1TETS

Page

;A 37PRACT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

TABLE OF SYMEOLS AND COEFFICIENTS ...................... 7

FOREWORD. . i.

IJTRODUCTION. . . . . . ..
. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . 12

AERODYNIAMIC CDIUMACTERISTICS ......................... 14

i. *rngForce Coefficicnt ... . ....... ............. 14

2. Nor-al Force and Overturning Moment Cocfficicnt. ........ . ... . I.
" Th,
1. .inui
i Force ond Moment CaoeCficient. .............. 17
T,", DwLiping_
D. Force and Co,cnt
Coefficients ..... .............. .. 19
5.,Dýn::ic Sto:.bilit... ........................................ 20

COTNCLUSION.S ...... ............... ................................. 25

S-,:-
7F,.C. S .................. . ...... .............. . 24

APX
ý,MI ~ -I R
.....k;*-.0*";"I" ,CF . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
,IPPF,,'DIX 11 - DMIIC,,SIO.N0• TAP;LE1 AN
d,-:3 ... ... ... .2

. . . . . . . . . . ...................................
F.......S .I;TL: . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

t'L:-'r:; ........................... .. .

D S .I'-7 -•..
 TABLE OF SYM4BOLS AND CO =FICIE:TTS*

CD Drag force coefficient

CD Zero-yaw drag coefficient

0

CD 2 Yaw-drag coefficient

C- Spin deceleration moment coefficient

p

•M Overturning moment coefficient

Mognus moment coefficient

C + C,) Da-ping moment coefficient

CN N;or:"al force coefficient

C, force coefficient

C( CK) Dn'rpirti force cocfficient

Cr:.",nu:: force center of prf!.,ur.,.

Ci\P fo.•ani'orce center of preu.z,zre

D:-, ': o ., .-' .-

* ,. "- . -. *: t i *,fr .a

T f

-----.-.--- -.- '- " ". -

-- - - -
IKI Magnitutch of' yq rii

14 .riach nia-hcr

N,. NT thbl-b* 011 Y.1 nvl1h1i ~Vt'i

R 1Rcynol-'I'i nri-ter

VLr

1; DiaL I

.2
22-ni ~)
2
 TABLE OF SYMBOLS ArD COEFFICIEITS (Cont 'd)

Damping rates of yaw arms (x > 0, stable)

2 Mean squared yaw

2 K, 2, K'
K2 + 1 K2
-
(Reference !)

., 2,, - A2i- -_ K2 (Reference 14)

Standard error

Comiplex yaw + ia)

(q Ir) Complex cross angulir velocity

P Air denzity

T'irning ratez of yaw arms

I" L • -~'~77 -7
 FOWARD

One of the earliest drag and stability programs fired In the Free Flight
Aerodynamics Range of the Ballistic Research Laboratories was the firing of
12.7-7-m models of the 155-m shell M10 in 1944. These firings were carried o ut
when the range had approximately one-fourth its current instrimcntation. When the
larger range facility, the Transonic Range, was built in 1951, cne of the early
programs of the facility -was a checkout stability and drag test of the full scale
155-.= M1O1 shell. One objective of this 1951 Program was to investigate the- dif-
ferences, if any, that would appear between the scaled model data and the parent
shell. The resultant data were compared and a prelimidnary draft of the report
was written by B. G. Karpov and L. E. Schmidt.

-The aerodynamic coefficients for the scaled model and the full scale proto-
type showed good agreement at supersonic velocities but substantinl dizatgrcement
at subsonic velocities. It was realized that first, the modeýls were not exactly
scaled, and sec.ond, they also differed in Reynold's number frc-1 the parent shell.
It was not at all clear which of these di(ferences were predc-mnant in prcd'cing
,, dizap-rec-rnt bet'ween the model data and the full scale data. Hence, the
authors withheld t.;c report and both hayI since left the Frce Flight Acrcdyna-.ics
Branch.

Over the cnzu-n.-; years, a number of ad.ditionnl events ha-'C occurrel which
sh(.ed considcrablf! l1oht on the results obtained in th(! first two -.
mjor prot-rams.
Firo.a
eric":: cffirt de to prod'uce and launch a ncarloy exact-scaled -odel
in calilbr .,.0 .e. The model wan produce-d with ,ocaled
a pr, r~rav, band, fi::c
wrench fr- root::,
ttin7 1holes and bourrelets (F1ue.s i aul 5). The rcsulting,
m.cdCL had to be .'aboted (..,.ire 6) anl launcht:d from a 20-7%-.m
gn ao a z,.,bcaolbfr
'o.,Žctl I.. •,:eonI, a "etl a:-ount of idit Lcn.aL data were .f an... for MLOl anI

r-'- ln:fLrr-atn [on en tlh M"

" "h'LL wort. rcctiro-.L a;'de

::az ' :7... • "',we ., . -,I r

an ore refinv- data ara.yzz }e'.'e_, •, ,5

T- *fxe- l -,;-0 Lta31:to of

7; T- n - "n "a,- la..,. a

a:;Otae:~nso~co r:umcir aea

2-.

<-t - . ..- -- _ r--- - -

 These factors shed considerable light on the discrepancies in the earlier
data~ und it seemed advisable to issue the original report with added clarifica-
tions.

The report is given essentially as it was originally written with the excep-
tion of those parts in which the newer data have clarified the discussion. Thces
sections are denoted by [ .The notation has also been changed to the modern
aerodynamic form.

IlYMODUCTI0N
It Is- frequeintly, convenient or- even necessary to study theý arrodynamic prop-
-ertiecc of shell by means of model. firings. Therefore, the effect of scaling on these
properties 13 a problem of considerable importonce. Firinggs of the 155-7mm Hc' shell
M101 In the D~a.lintic Research Laboratories' Large Spark Photopgrnphy Ran6ge and of
it5 cal moel o th S-nll rmre6hove affordcd an excellent op~portuinity
to :study *scale effect. Thc Reynold's numbers based on oveýraLl leng~th, were
R l".8 x 10 6 Mfrthe
or full scaleý and R 1. 3 x M for the 7c+el where M is,
t-c Xnch num.ber.

The1 55-c 1.110 proýrom, consisted of firings in a tMach nr-ýher range of 0.6 to
2.4.. Stan-lnrd l5--..rtille'ry pl-.-crs with a twis~t or one tu,,rn In calibe.rs
we~re uzed. For this; program, the Lari:e rangec ha~d a complement of 25 s-tatlon.;
0,."7I
v'r 633 feet or 13560) calibers. Conriderablo diffictilty was experienc-d In
m~':~wngth7,nilar orientation of the mnissile's, shnadow In tthe searLy firings,
Ibr:s:ause t out-of-foculs direct i~Aeof the missile nnd the, nhadcuovrane
(SePlatei; 1 thrcugj:h 10). The inzertion of a pin In the rnlidle o:. tho basze of
.h rojectile recm~odled thIn nit:Laticn (Plate 11). The mc"Ie] o-1r."'v A!:-o (:on-
1 tAof f!rinr-s in a Mach number rangec of 0.' to 2.4. Tlhe mcdtels wt.re firedr
wIthn two i:frn trC-azrocition::(c.m. ) Ln order t,) cl;tain rm:c

awzzof on,- t-srn in -10 calibers wa sr. Sih ly d cr,ýn - immartcl

_
*.'iS a ec~na7L_ cnT~~
th

=7
a-_ *a a:; 7na

Iazalyo

---- v~~~~~~~r' .~ ~ .---...- the

 *Was insensitive to changes in Mach number. This is probably due to the fact
that at transonic velocities the aerodynamic coefficients change rapidly (see
graphs) and the velocity of the model over the range changes by about 0.06 Mach
numbers, while the full scale shell undergoes a deceleration of only 0.01 Mach
numbers. The yaw equation which is fitted to the observed data assumes constancy
cf the coefficients. Hence, less satisfactory average values of the coefficients
are obtained for the model over the above range of Mach numbers than for the full
scale shell, where averaging is done only over one-sixth as large an interval of
velocities.

It is to be noted that the 155-m-m MlOI and the model are not geometrically
similar in all respects (see Figures 1, 2, and 3). The thlckncss of the rotating
band which is usually difficult to scale (the rifling grooves of Outns do not scale)
has been scaled accurately. The diameter of the rotating band is 1.02 calibers
in both cases. To compensate for such relatively shallow band on the model, it
was -mde about twice as long. Moreover, the fuze details were omitted on the
model, thus raking a continuous ogive rather than a distinct break in tie curva-
t'ire at the Junction with the fuze on the flull octaLe oh,.-L. Therefore, to approx-
[--ate the complete hend with the fuze of thc prrototlyp,. th- radius of ogive of the
m,-lel had to be slig;htly increased. Moreover, the front bour...L.t was omittdc, on
the model.

1:n rctronp,:ct, the most seriouis discrrFincy betwfecn the fulL.Scalt: shelL an:
it:; model wz in the number and the nature co th,: groov;s which w-re cit in the
"rotating hw.d by the rezpective riflIn,•;::-. e fulL scle gr:,rove,: we'r- relatively
zhulic- but eight timoo more nu-.erous,. T',,e 're rece:nt -ue!,, flmns, conriuctr.d
in 195- with calbh.r .'.,0 molhts, w.:r,eo".aý tlI sc:l. .oý,.,,-, tht:Že rw:zir'N1
zabot.nE& technriquve fcr lauunchin- from a 2 ?-in tu,'b. T .s intr'ctt, l:t'inh iu-b
......... yie e1 ya'w teV.,[l 2 to 5 tt .: Lnu'-,-r thl!n th ,t:'[tl•. .... i'u f- Li1

(-on-u::*-', '" the ,"ich n'vu ber'rom

" "rin'z
.
were a
rCe! ion
e nr,•u-A: nately Iii ' "
. tC 0.9 onlyV.

-
Ad-, i "i... ",. : Q.i

I
7 77".

A
 AERODY11 IC CHARACTERISTICS

1. Drag Force Coefficient

The drag force coefficient, %, is defined by the relationship

CD 8D
D "pd 2 V2

where
D = drag force
o = air density
V = missile velocity
d - diameter.
It is obtaincd from the coefficients of a cubic equation fitted by least squares
to the ti-c-diotance data 8

are nttnrcnd by different rounds,

Since different y,'niw: it is necess.ary to
zcr-arate the yaw and the Xach nw;ber effects in order to study the variation of
CD with '.! This is aeco-,pilihc'I for the supcrrcnlc projectiles by asszumnng that
CD ca:n b,-- ,,xp- , a linar f'". .ticn of yaw zq:,ared a;,1 by i:.;c of th -
tl6.

"2

CD =CD 1CD 7,

te.-.can q arnd h ar,-C:~'--'

,- •..
",• ..t•. :o Q by th,
. -ast oaqt ar- x.•.hc, t .. ar rli ionzh;a

Y-1'7
.C ; "".• : '• " • •,, ,- " ,! - .e _.n:t n. i h. 2z r
',.j. .b-
.¾,. - &n
ýo a h n a

S '." • • : - , " ] :• 6 . 9 .. - . -

-' _,":',"
z '''. .. .. . . ",' _:-
": ý.77 t . ~. " : . .' •. . . . .i ¢ _ ', - . .+ ;. " . r 'n -: •:, o " . •. .: .
 l55---n MOI 12.7-:7m Model
a = .9-415 b = .1327 a .9407 b = .1324

M CD2 C(sq-rad) CD 2

1.2 9.9 ± 0.9 8.8 t 0.5

1.6 11.6 i 1.8 10.6 1 1.9
2.1 7.8 i 0.8

(To determine the approxi~nte shape of the CD versus Xnich number curve in
thc transonic and subsonic regions of velocity, a value of 5.,9G-rad) was used
for CD 2 for all data. I The rrsulting curve nhowed that in the Mach number intervals
of 0.58 - o.85, CD u-is a constant function of Mpermitting the linear function in
yaw squared to be fitted to it directly. Althou&gh in the Interval of 0.95 - l.CO
CD varied so rapidly with M that the snall error in M, about 0.5 per cent, com-
plctcly clouded this relationship and madc the determination of a different CD52
impossible. When the subtonic value of CD 82 was applied to the transonic data,
it fade them fall into a s-coth curve, thercfore, the sa=e value of CD6 2 was used
to co-pure CDo for nll. rb:'onic and transonic data.

The rcsuiltin zero yaw Values of CD arc plotted as a function of M in

0
F re7. .... ncn of the plot. shos tthat CDo is almost Identical for the
m.odel and the MIOL 'or a l2ach n:'::r of" 0.90
fhcll :. 2.O. (At lowmr Much .

numbern, the dra. c..efficiecnt of the model, which was not pFrfcctly scaled, is
about 11 per cent hiiher than that of the full ncale.

.. :o exact z:alc,: model! atrt can be faired csentially to the za:-.t zero drag,
Valu',, az th.; p. ro:: I. .owev"r, due to the long ext'rapolatio'ri, caused by
oee" gr.-
A: c.-.. us
the I ine yaw level, t~he
in actual....CDo int,:rcept of the exact scale
tile' actual
-.cdel could lie ,Ohc rc. trom CDthof the pr-rent vehicle to 5 p.r cent to
")e" cnt abc."
- t. ',,iýtavr. the-,.t'f.rcv,
th't tilt bee t. '
.ata fr.m the :e. s ,::d thoez
an'iKnaL frem the irotot-pe o
due 1c ,c..-.et-
--... .- .han aynold'" r'umsr e:fects .
C . '•-.a-2.F'-•'e' "•'p ..... .... :.'
'O"nt uu'-"
• sr-a-""C-i.'nt and the over-t'
" < "
n-In--o, - cc:,t
'n"-c '

.. -,.e ,. .. - ". -2 ' :a1

1... ... - t ,, t

Cf-:: r vc , =
where
p = air density
V = missile velocity
=complex yaw
d =diameter
N =normal force
M =overturning moment.

CNis determinedl from the swerving motion and (for thc ccmis-calcd models
aX1
only) fron the Cývcrsus center-of-mass relationship .An analysis of' these
data indicated that for the small yaws Involved, C6appeared Independent of yaw.
CNis plotted as a function of Mach number In F'igure 8. The curve is d-rawn through
cra
Uhc C data dectrmined from the model C.t versustr center-of-mass data. The standard
statistical error in thc swerve values of C~ i5 about 0.15, and the data show no
sit-nificant diffeýrence In the values of CN for the various miss:iles tested.

Thic centcr ofl prczssu.rc of the norma..l f1orcc is plotted in Fikgure 9. Little
dlifference bctwcen the varlous modlels =dc full scale projectiles is irndicated
except, rpcsntbly, at sutb:'onic ee.

Thecct--~s CZltions of both types- of zsemiscated modelLs differed from

thait of the fril nc-tlr' pro,'lectil1c. This- ciff'cronce necessitated Intci-polating
ths -. dldata orf1 to pro-vidt! a rcfcreýncc curve for comr~iraron with the full.
sledatn. A-11 thei dlata anA the- lntc.rpolatod ur' fro-i the rseMLicalcd mo(Ielo for
the ftiLl zeaLvz- :at-r of nu-%; .' caLlbers; fro". no;() or,! giveni In F1ý,ire 10. Yaiw
liI':
t'czappoar n,,!1, cte
thin theod5)dsic fdt difference
iv''r bcýt-.;:!,n ~ Lani f-ill sleprojcetiesz. kny actuatl d .foren~cc duo to
Sor -:--al Lt -c"-etr~cal d~ffcrcnýces are apparentL rLL
7

t:) a~-ca-Q
* Lid olf abouft 0.1 in
1e' Cý,

01,~f!In", !Iffvron-
'~ i~and i'u-l1 cle Im-~tad ý.-2y intro-

a~ n--j u 'reo -- ,re trstihat. o" ;rii2*.,io* ,,:

2 r th: -`:12 Lsale ý!a:a :,1

'~-l~y

Ly -
 These can be considered only as suggestive since in most cases corrections
(for yaw level, center of mass, or Mach number differences) several times the
size of the "observed" differences have been applied to permit comparison.]

3. The Magnus Force and Mo-nent Coefficients

The Magnus force coefficient is defined by

L6F
2
N Iod Vx

and the 14agnus moment coefficient by

C 8T
In lpd qgp

where
- ,,,•,, r e

T = rnomc'n
mcus
p Orin.

"The Xag-nus forcets contrib-,ftion to the projectile's crvinF -oticn w's not
larrgc cno-2•ih to furnis-h reliable ridata
. for th,, ro.':m-l
As a under consideration
rcnult, C., and its cent(r of prseorc were d...t..r...cl only for the csi.-cc~aed
-odels via thec ccnte.-of--.azz relattons. h1e-cre rcsults are:
1 %iP (cat. aft of no.e)

.- 0. 5 -0.. :.
t.co -o. ".1. 5.1.5
L.&0 -0. 55 5.59
2.co -0.55 5.59
_•.dJ -0. 55 5.59

T n. ; a - ouC.'-I
C'2... 7 n.
4.n-ic i-b-i'.
"••!:- • r,.or--~.! Xorsce "c"c'
'-: -- n .o-.c caes w-as

ito
t-s obta'i C- f ro a I r.t" --a
1 ro'-nd the h.... b e -
h~
.... ~;,,,'
~ ~~ .... ~7
n-'o
•,••v.,. ezC.('c
t- r•p.) & • :-2ln
r . :- n' :.% F .. . - f r -'
VIC!:c ' - = -'- .j
S.. . .... . . .. -y . I. o t . ..- ,_ : n n ? 4 r - 2 " : -_ . .. . . .

n:T!
 of this plot shows that in the supersonic region, for the accuracies involved, the
I401 and model values are not significantly different. The determination of C.
(and also of (N + -'))for the M1O1 were not as good as are generally obtained
from spark range tests because the periodicity of the yawvhg motion was practically
synchronous with the upark stations group spacing. This gave the fitting process
less "leverage" in determining the damping.

[The difference between the cmlscalced model data and the full scale M1Ol
data at subsonic speeds w-s one or the maJor problems in the original analysis.
The scaled model, data and, inadvertently, the data collected on the M107 shell
appear to clarify the matter.

The Magnus moment data for all projectiles tested below M f 0.82 have been
replotted in Fignre 13 as a function of Mach number, and in Filure ll1as a function
of effective yaw Level. The first plot shown that the data fall Into two distinct
grotipinga; the second shows that this sceparation is not apt to be a yaw effect
(unles3 of a very co.plicatcel nattre). The data for the semiscalcd modeL and the
f;il:l scale MI07 group at a value of (; of about -0.5, while the ncaled MOl
-.odcl data and M.40 data yild values of C, from a little below zero to 0.2.
.t" lLt-r firings of the 'A,101, 1•107, and Peal.:d M101 model aliso yi-Ld.A a fev
•'W'es of Ci that were marginally acceptable. The M107's ha-d vaLue,-, of .ahout
-0.7, the MLOL's :and the scaled models gave values of about 0.6. The ni•'$ of uIl
for the .RO'(7 ,gretes with thnt for the -cmlocalhld model. There rathrr :tran~e
correlatlonr suggcst that, in-so-far aus Mignts properties are rosiorn-., the cmi-
.:,ai.odIs orig'inally fired were "scal.Ld." MI0"7 model, rather than ":,cLrt," M101
:.1hs. 3ince the ag:nus torque coefflc£int is known experim•,,ntally to be- o:,i-

tlvv to rotating, band pozition'12'13 at le:ast, the various paramI.nter.- oV the full
-:c:AL, and mrodel bands were compared. In only one respect wa- the MLO'•' :ore
~o::elzyasociated with the sem.[ealod model than with the M.Ol. This ,-s In the
.3L.! lat'.2raL of t'-- rifling: semnic(aled rozdel - C.",4 :4va•.. '.-allbhzr; C7
0.ZC sqiuare call!ber; ?4-0 - 0.12 zpiare calibers. While these variouz =c.parativ'
t. and .- L"re
. . are hardly ' wav
ith ouch l!•.'tv ata, th,týy

;iel idata are

rle igniL.cantly ,"ove that of the '" 0i. dim
.iO", of the -...., i-fe'eniee in yvaw ,veL and the :•-eneral
. In tiie
': it -ould
-. be -iifiou"t to clearLy az:i;- ie,rith.c observd variation to
or to ya1W rcffctz •1ione.j

|11 -- .. . ..- • .~- - - i -

 '111,,"'i ~ Fw" ui oti Coefficients
Tli- itiv.%vinit Vr-Orv cunrrc~irnta are defi'ned by::

83

ql ipd v(q +irjý,

8s~

C- a
III 2
pd2V (8 +

qa

((1 .4 ltd52(

whrr, l vA.- k-Lv it*, thr2 dar~pntrforces due

pitio ngu6C vlciy qLOI.it o

*~I
41 1(.C~L

0 q

ttlw ln':-.A.'mm71 (aMie':cntzviata cctr- lciofinnea rcn Lon. Sp.-qgt.t

2 '

-%r? -lw orth ent r-ofmas postio oa t'hicio MOI.Mc r'-

 In the ease of the damping coefficients, one can any that the data f.al. in
either two or three grouips. It is clear that the senmicaled model data lio at

a level of about + 4 (destabtiiLzng) while the f'ull ncaloe 101 and

= 4•)

,4107 have a value of about "9 (-tabilLzing). The actual data from the acLled

models have a value of about -4.5 and would require large yaw effect corrections

to agree with the full scale data. Thus, the most probable nittation it thin:

the band diffcerncea between the full scale M101 and M107 do not afrect the damping
coefficienta; the 1/12-ocale model data probably thow a Reynold't nimber effect in

comparison with the full scale data, but the decrease in stability indicated could
be anywhere between about 10 per cent to 50 per cent depending on the magnitude
of the yaw corrections one is willing to assume; the particular combination of
geometric differences and scale change assoclatcd with the 1/12-ai..e semlocaled
models produced a very large change in the damping derivatives, the extent of

which in about l;0 per cent in a destabilizing direction.

There in one further point of aimilarity between the exaict sc.le model and
the bigger rhell, and the dlffercnce between the two types of -midcl that may, or
.aV not, be relevant. At low speeds the smooth-noned semiscalc d models had laminar

boundary layer flow to the lending .dge of the b.nd; then the bounfl.ry layer became
tuite thick. The full scnale pro3cctilcs ¶uzntoubtcfAly had turbulent flo' aft of
the fuze, while the co-mbination of high yaw anmi the oca.iic func razo pro--mtcld
early transition for the. exnct nca1.,-, models. St-imlar frlow conditiona prcvaitcoI

on the scmiscaled =odcln at 'iupcrsonic specls; but band .and flow transttion effecto

on the aerodyna-tic forces on th,! boa•ttall could be lecs c-rioii3 unirr the lattcr
conditions.

Flow szhdou;,raphs of the full ::c:•le and model projectiles at varioous Mach
.:..mber" nre given in PLates I - 10. o1 the ,-;tneral
In vitw1 r,:ent oris the
oL

-.o-.ent data of thme z.misccl,:d -.odetz with thf, other c:ni-,irationn, the force data
fro- the -z7 a-•..
. mode!h..;. not appL- to t,.. Ciil z'ale at Y.nch rL'e -:r:a
Less

than about 1.2-1

Dynnam c i. c:tab f't-,

A OtIZZii is lyrn::.ica•lly alŽi:
:;'%t.- the yX.J' cnazc-d by t:'e i:n'tit" co1tLm

z'ez:not inerea•e, in ia
£T•tW::- y to he •"d- ftll ?or a ' tare:
i: ze tra•-'el.-1" I-n, a -"!at •.i'r ....
_.-: ... to be . •. -. ,__' nb , a :
 (b) a>0 2 <1

,)
x

w tranntvýrse mnerint of lnr-rtla

p niir Icnni~ty

" a - D 1 (HCl

I1

1~.1

~'-¶tflZ that h > 0 o' the

a.' stab
t.youtnicI. i~~.~ ~: ota

:=deL can bto radci b-i-cauze th-y xio not ~i~-rut

:y~'~w~Lor aund~~r

Liu3 3,z: 1 -,: r a ro ,-,, -D l c1 n

h and as for a model which in homologous with the MIO rrom a consideration of
d
the model data. This involves obtaining model valtten or (N~Cq + C.)and Cm,
at the shell center of mass by means of a shifted center of mass relation-
ohip l15 and then using these ohifted values oi (CM + a% along with
C% and C., which are independent of center of mxanm, with t e ki of the homolo-
0ous model to compute h and ad

In the subsonic region (from M - 0.85 to the lowest Mach number of the program,
0.6) h of the model in negative and since this violates Condition (a) that h
1r positive, the model cannot be stabilized by increaning spin. In this region Id
is a large positive number. With an increase in Mach number, h becomes positive
but Pd is less than zero up to about M - 0.95 (see Figure 19). This means that
Condition (b), 0 < sd < 2, is violated so that the model again cannot be stabilLzed
by increasing spin. The u rcmafinS within the Interval between zero and two above
M - 0.93, but between a Mash gvi-ber of 0.9ý5 on,! 1.0, nd is close to two, 3o to
S•'bL e the molel by increirxin. spin within thin range would be very difficutt or
t:mpozsible (:;cc Condition (b)) . At supersonic np'reda, the model is co-7pletely
c:thtble if s > i.

The 155-5•.I .t=0I shell i. eiao dynamically iitut.'bL- In the sub.onic and trnn-
:'ontc reron at the m'.'lr spin of 1/25. flowevcr, thn rate of divergence is
"all
'n•d ad io bctwee(n zcro inti two; co an the erffctive rtpin increases along the trn-
J.:,:tory, it should rnpidly br:ecre dynauie:Llly :aitibl. The change in sign of CMIn
for the RL07 shell dc-Cv:ti:,:-o. Its dynnmic stability relAtive to the MIOL, and It
',,iLd r'umre mor, tl:c alons! the trajectory to stabiliz,. Thc A101 nnd undouibtodly
th,: MLO' arre dynnnc•icly ::tnbrif the-y arc rrotseoplcal.y stable at above traun:onLc

(Althoxbh th,. pr,•,.nt datu do not, in th:!nt.[lven, etstabloh a particular tr,.rid

"dyr r.ic z atbility 2 . "ith yaw' levl.( ; -1 :'imLL!,r proj:ctIL , the!
-,s YO"-:-
.,
,,tz dlyra"-7icuLLy'un:tble bon.:ally for z:;aLL yaws and bec•-am, :,tibLt. at hlhcr
W"'• ,',':. L 2 . ' cau::', •"ho ,:r.-:•l zhIilari7ty in -hape and nizc, one -ight ect
h....- 01 and

_ _ _ _ _.. .. . . . . _ --

777 07- '1

 CONCLUSIONS

The w".all gcomertric dif rcrr'n'!r-~htwtt the sm I rcalrIl 12.(-rm. model nnd the
full acale KIL ppearvi to
14101~ 1..t, little differenceŽ at wiperronle vclociticet;
that 13, aerodynamic data der1ivd f rom tho aminenlned tr~oetni nnil the 0111. OCalO
projectileti were cont'ntial~ly the itsimm. At rmbnonic volocitica, hownv'-ýrp dritri from
the nemicaled model dirrt-red iilonificintty from the dritri or the Cull dettle pro-
jectile texcr'pt In the cie" of nor'vinl force and ccntr'r or 11rcrmure. Th'ý drngj force
and the MKignud and dom~ping -moment were nignificaintly dlf~rcr'nt 'itthe lower spc,74
ranv~cr. CAMdditonal. data obtaitnr"d rom limitc~i frrines or cxact secalr-d caliber .50ý
rnodelii and firingn or the mio-t.
MIT hell, uhich diiffr-t fron the M10I only In
the rotating band, sueg~esta thit In the carje of the drag, force the crfectg or
impc.rfect nealing are probably the predo1n'Innt factor altholii-'h one Woutld expect
also a difr~rcnce due to Heynold'n numbcr e~ffctz;. With rci:,rird to the Magma~
"-r~onnt It v"1uid app'cir th-it the orlnIit
viilc -Aolin, vwre mnore n'marly cctiled
zmndetz of the KLtIO rhel-l thin th,? M1.01 zhe 1. ranc
that the 1-ind, 0m~ra*eC~tr1stc5
txffcct the 'eimir,men airly -oror,!,y !it the slibhrtc, r pe-1. In the cawse of
the da-in om'-nt, the? lacir of mirr'-.-nt umzll aqpc-ir to liq llr1tart -y !,i- to the
raiiL'r"v to ocnlc. llrnrce, It wolitd icmthat r.-orbt promir,?n In sacalng
Q!Ln be acete at i h titA1)
aie~ncvlcie~ .if(t
ru1 trwin-onic v-4oe-
tticz:, 1'irtieixrsry wh'-' the- danplnif, or : ýw-7m-
e:to-~ !%r,. rd ~ntIii.u.r- to

Whl3
101111C thfe dat~a -L thf: IXACt. :C!LU t they dto riot jrc
,),n~rC~:ih
the * .nt f! nl:n Ifi loan. Ro'vnoI:!. r'ff,7ct.. in th., ,te'hv
hi
isv th2 di)in~pro;'-t.I .::,~.h~'npW,%r to 811 (MýItfe th~tt at. utte':ec
::Ovv, LIcrtinLo + ic to the o 'z. I nc nth r 'ad3(e o' thve

=AL :1. C.
 REFERENCES

1. McShane-•,E. J., Kelioy, J. L., and Reno, F. V. Exterior Bln-lintics. Univor-

oity of Denver Pren, 19)3.
2. Roocker, E. T. The Aerodynamic Properties of the 105mm liE Sh.ell, MI, in
Ouboohic and Trannonic Flight. Ballistic Research Laboratories Memorandum
Report No. 9219, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, September 1955.
aoyer, E. D. Aerodynnmic Propertles of the 90mm HE M-71 Shell. Bailiatlc
B.
Research Laboratorira Memornndum Report No. 1I475p Aberdee.n Proving Ground,
Maryland, April 196%.
4. Murphy, C. It. The MWaourement of Non-Linear Forces and Moments by Means of
Free Flight Tests. Balliotic Research Laboratories Report No. 974,
February 1956.
5. Rogera, W. K., Jr. The Transonic Free Flight Range. Ballistic Research
Laboratories Report No. 1.04p, Aberdeen Proving Grounul, Maryland,
June 1958.
6. Braun, W. F. The Free Flight Aerodyntinics Range. Ballistic Research Labord-
toriea Report 36. 1048), Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, July 1958.
7. Schmidt, L. E. and "'v.trphy," C. It. Effect of Spin on Aerodynatc Properties of
bodies of Revolution aln.litic Research Laboratories Memorandhm Report No. 715,
Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, August 1953.
8. Mluphy, C. It. Dnta11tduction for the Free Flight Spark Ratngc.. Balllitic
Reoearch Laboratorice Rrport No. 900, February t954i.
9. Stein, It. Compnxpuin ol' 55tr.. Mhell. Designs by Meawna or Model Firings -
Part I - Drag. altiztLc S(.;-eatrch Laboratories Rport No. 567, Agu-st 1L945.
10. Witt, W. I. Reynoldh Number Effects on the Drag of Spinning Proj,:ctilsn in
Free Flijght. NAVORD R,-port 2555, 1952.
1L. M'Ltrphy, C. It. end Schmidt, L. E. The Effect of Length on th,; Aerodynamic
Characterizticz0of Bodi.:s of Reývolution in Supernonlc Flighta. rallistic
Rccearch Laboratories Report No. 876, August 1-955.
12. Stein, 1. E'fect or" Variouz Driving Bands on the Acrodynwmic Performnance of
Projectiles at lligh Vclocities. Ballistic Research Laboratories Report No. 605,
Aberdccn Proving Grournd, X'XryLanc, hruary 1946.
15. Scott, W. E. The Effect of a otatalng Band Upon Some Aerodynamic CovC'tcient3
of the Scvcn-Olttiber Arry-Navy Spinner Rocket at Mach 1.8. Ball istic Hesearch
nborntortes Me.-.or.dumn Repourt No. 120, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Mnrylad,
September 1960.
;,. M.urphy, C. H. On the Stability Criteria of the Kelley-.eSh.n Linearized Theory
of Yw-ini Motion. Ballistic Research Laboratories Report No. 855, Aberdeen
I rovIng 'Ground, :.-yland, April 1955.
12,. ThreRzky, !.. A. -'tfec of Reynolds Nwrnber on the Dynw.ic Stability of S-poi-
nin.; Proj ½s Firýd at SIubrsonic Velocities. 7AVORD Resorrt -.!',6, !-J.
 APPKIDDX I
LINLAR AERODOflA14C FORCES

The basic aerodynamic force ;iystem ma~kes tine of an Xi'coordliaate systcrn for'
which the X axis is along the missile's axia of nyiinetryp the 2 axia pointa down
and the Y axis is determined by the right-hand ruln. The atnge or attack, a, in
the angle batwepn the missile's axis and the projection of' thn velocity vector on
the, XZ plane while the angle of sidenlip, ~,in the nngle betvrren the minatte's
axis and the velocity vector's projection on the )(7 plaii':. P'ositive angle ol'
attack occurn ror nmic.ilc's nose-iip; positive aideiilip for minlet nonc-1.et as
viewed from behind.

For a lincar d;:.pcndcnce of the tranavcrac force azit --oment on tanrles, and
angu~lar velocity, the rncasiuretible terms are definL-d by the expannions:

~ (1/ )PVZA--
W 1 r
Y'~tun, zi h~ ry'' Ic (ri'XIt
+~tn 1at
ICt; f h xir no

fo(wngd rettisfrl' th- tI1'roynrirld :u--npat.ofrh vyaino:o

floigdr(2) A oXj. for~ ytrliand nmca-;nt: t'or-in* )t ot.? ft!1 fzc,

ircnitiv-Wh of-ti-
A 'c:Iit,. Cr a iotcio t,, .t.

A ~..Iv
o-) C.. ylLI.;2 1'C' rn a.~t'1U)0:t
t t2:, :fu.:,ý
-Lo
-:Or22t illu

()A I:~~ i A yld; 7,'±r~.' Wc

I .

L~..J-F,

4.-Tr
 APPE7%"DIX II
DISCIJSSION OF TA3LE~3 AND -GWPH3

The average physical. propertiesi of the projectile types ore given In Tnbi.. I.
Taible1 II ncludes the acrodyrnnmic coefricicntoa nd other neroidynanic propo'rtiop of~
the) 155-rm M-101 prototype, and Ttibte. III g~ives thte datn, on the, 15rM.1107, III*
arodlynamic coef'ficients or the cc inviltedmod1 nrc givr-n in Table IV) tnod tri4
exact ncated models In Tabl~e V.

The niimbering syatcem is devir.r'd to that the projcetiles or the 'IV6q typed
are numbered In order of increasing Mich number with the f Iring rolind hirmber pre.
ceding.

In Table I, the k*are the aixial aind transverge ravtll of arrntion ini enlibera.
The m-an aquared yaw in square degrees is 52 Ile da-.pin; raites, X,#ar In unita
Or per calibe-r while the titrning ratec t are In ralim-rn pr c-AlIb.r. the lyunnmia
antbi2.ity factor is sd' and a is the Eyro:;copie satbility factor. N~ 11 thq nuimber
or ynv stations n-nd NT,the rofti-Anir,
ouh stutionz.. On.ly nvcrage titdd
crrora for the vnrloiin rolindr, are giv.-n b -cvu-e linficr ;;i7J-Ar condlltioný- the irrors
tir- tilr*ot the samve.

Ce7rtain critcrlia were c-ployE-d to h'ýth'7r the7 vnriollr,

v''rin c '
of th, diffc-rent ro-andn wer.-r of ac-7table CD %mza con,-:,rlerdptin
C~iy
Ir Nh u- at Icast five. If N wtan at Ilcazt 11s, thcen Cý, n-i3 rst,!-ptcd if IK11 Wonrr
Lanrger thnin O.Co,93, and C,, # C ri nd Cn, were incccptA' if I K1) w .. r,, lnrgr'r thin
0.012. %r w-,3 ncceptnble. if N wn- t leazt:t 14' and If (",) wn att lr~n-t 0.C(, Izioh
for thre -w3etn aind 0.04~ foot for thr' proi-ty1e. Init.itO~ the: Co Ir~ti4-1int h
to CAC11I. the rcur~~t. 't. Ltvlr rror:; b,:lr~ th!in twic': thr,
e.~~iu
'&v--rag. error.

A cpaionof the ftow 1ýatt~crný; of thec M101 1n]. the %C~ds-L IL .ivu
1 by na:
at* the -~pirk pho~toz.-arp!1: in Plat..e±i I to 10. Ani tx-.-inat~cn, c" !h~~pao~:hcwl
~d5 ~t ~~nezin tho fi'; pttý-rnz r2~ i to te:o~:~c:
unq It upp -'rs thnat IC the ::ujnŽ) wee >iar the :.:'w rt" 1t i:o
?A1AtU I

2 M2
 TADX Ir
I1
A;MODYMANI( COMl0rrI't•rI O TIMn M.M9-14 lOI.pnRO

lid +

1795 ,:Y10 55 .139) 1.01, . 8,9

1686 A5L 1131-
1193 .6g2 . ,28

1793 ,6A)6 4I,2 1362 306 . -,t0

1194• 646 0, . I =-"99
1684 .649 1314
Wý 03 1337
1121 .6ý4 24 1372 3. 41. a 9-9.0
18 65.9 .1355 3.51 .0.5
1603 8681 .1111
1116 ,709 .12914

61115 .7 19 ,
1660
1679 -7m
,'lf
.729.150.14 , 137

1.618 .761~ 7.9 .11151 .7 9.2

1.679 .1671. 1J14 511
tL.h ,'iy8, •1

Ia,1O ,8il 6.6 .1542 3.60 1.65 - ...

3A2 .. IV)L 11,1 . l.567 - 9 ) .51.

It . 8•' '(.0 .1.5w) 5.,6.u6 - ').6 0

.P6",( 6.(),h . ,]6 5-76 1.78 - 7.9 .01

1,191.
L792 .269 5,38 .1585 5.84 -1.5.2 0
1,822 .879 LL. 11 .-l)71. 381 L. Iti) - 7.6 *14,
iu.6 .89 .1570
.8~ L0
1.oo .~-- 2
L1.11.
111.0 .92.3 L.6 1698 h,55

,075 •95! 2.9 3816 .4 -U.. 5

17197 -947 5,7 .9W_6 Lo .21.9
2,

-----------------------
 TAMNIf.it (CO1104)

listYMi co atmori TO 1j-44Is RM

10'17
9
Mo) 6,'t

VU1 1913 1
40g 3.9? -10.9 sl
to1 966.0

1.,056

10151 ,~B~

I.116 r. .

I Lon

1 ,1)96 9.0 5.0 2.2 - .

U0

5.55 2.67 - 7.6 .28

L,305 1.6o6 J. .JO
5.51 2. - 9.9 .'i

T)L .605 ~ . 54~05

5..
3j5 .2 . Q .~
LL2" L*770 11.7
..9 5!h . q?6

LL02 2. LOT .2748

I LOL 2.185
23' 2.~ - 03
12h 2.190 2L.0 5522)
.00 2.8 .0
2.19K 10. L .o050 -

5 2.~tL 2.2 3 1 .')L 5.CGoh.

,---9-L--. jI-*----
c - ---.
 TABIA. 11 (Contd)

M 10

1603 .ho20

1.116
1601

1115

16719 1.9)

.07 1.86

., 5' L.9,(l1.
LLI.-05 U .75
115.1'

L'(92 51P '7

172. 17 4. L 27 1.75

Lill 47 .06 L.~

1075 .71 .0L1

.1797 ML3 .2 .1io

1109

1072- 0 .. )1

:1-iw w - 4, .r
 TABr.I II (Cwil d)
A2t1ODYNM@tIO PROPfI0 OF TIIf 5'))-M4 M1O1.PROMr

066 t,02
670

1070 .7 ."03 ,92 1,69

1079 . )h .16 ,79 1,72
992 .166 o067 .69 1.93
8614

1799 , 1., h .80 1.71

663

1562 ,1t)1 .052 .6oO.00

L~1S.090 .72 9.00
1560 1.91
1106
ko
861
IO .1,65 .1014 1.011 1.99

8'18 609 .

., 6 .L.0 .81. 2.06

990 5.'0
2.09
L1,03) Itt"(') .0 ;, 5

99L .220 L.0J 2.0

1 2"7 1,"2 .5 0--. .

L1OQ9
LION
L1LO
.Z
-•,''-I" L2
...-L'
ILI1o8 L ( ,([
* L8• . o'39)116' 2.22
.105 .77 -- j
 TAX-9d 11 (~OOu 1d)
AmXiOTmtN4 rnopK~rxim or vmtu1m.19 m4o0t (U=

*(rml/oat) *'(n/0mI)
.6) .0014

0211 .006

9.0 u! .004,

_______ Sv~u 01

TAIU~ III
An10DYIAMIC COM7ICWIMM OF TIM I''.-t.Q M10-1 MMI
Rd c __ N1.. Ž
4816 5-814 1.6L ,5

4818 6 6.11 47 3.)L 1.6;. - 9.7 .5

'+81.9 .79 L 2.3 .013i. 5.71, 1.57 - 9.9

Av.,rngo OttiutiaLcnJ Errorr3

.12 .002 .0010 .0'082..8

.~~if1'1 rr~23in bLnU1.3t i ~fVIi.n or L...naL nrr1irt--i 'I~tk,.

3j3
 TBLI IV
AMlODYMMtC cOWCzMrMI 0l TH•D64ALID
H MODK1
0sititr Of Mass at MA Calbersi-rrom Nose

13•95 ,71. 7, 0 ,1t')83

110,0
1tf99 ,99t .1.
1.0 .1t07
,tgo.8 4,.8t

.01
83a 12.0 .39*
140 33..) -. 64.0
1.097 t,3O 9.7 .19%6 3.8
3.Q2 -8.6 .moo
01 .06 9L.t .1106a 3.1' 2.ha -8.9 .29)

139 1.0o
8. ' ,o .,. .3.14 ., Io
L.356 1t.0 .153 2.598
t:t L,558 •t.8l ,St8s 2.07 .8, .. ,
SA0. .81 9 .57., .89 -6.9 ,.
"U18 1.'1h 1.7 .1t91 2.77 -5.5 ,O0
7.5 780 ..2.2 .,096 2.69 -7.6 .76
L.965 2.0 .3020 2.65 2.80 -7.9 .25
LL6
o.f6 1.968 .076 2.67 2.80 -8.1- ,23
L1UR7 1.97h 7.5 .592 2.6.-5-- 2. 42 -7.. .25
- 512 1.999 2.5 .2961" 2.61. -7.L.9
132 2.51
1ý01
1. 141ý3.95-1 .2"h85 2..18
; fit).6. .. 06 -6.1 ,10
1,.500 .
2L .262
V51 . .L08 -7...8
7.0 2.L.05
5 1.8 .t6L) 2.876 2,-.
""18- . , l 1. v.5 9 . . ... .•3
 TAItLI IV (omnt'd)
AXNtODYAtMIC COWrICI32MTf Or TIMl amISCALED MD0
O.ntor of Ma.s at5. Calibers from Nose

•6
UD:o ) . ,5
Nt66 ,

.8214 10,) .1%6 1,012 ,7 0,38

2166k

4. •19
A hU
2161 .869 6.3
7,3 .1,U80 4. 23 1.0 .,61
9119 ellt
140
11])). 2.2 &1-,48
2164 -0516 I•.18
7.1,

1.59 .909 16.0 gW

9162 ,905 6.6 .202 IUo4.t
6, .2768-,-t
,65 -.1
2159 L.9109

2150 1.004 D.8 .5%t8 h, ,9 -h,0 .,0

1W9 1.06,O 2. It .5.%216

%77 ,.th 2.6-i .2.4 .

t59I 1.O07 7.1-

t.0711 It.Ilit4,

.525 2.6
05 .1 .927(;0 5i 10
1 to2 0.7 ý,v It.
1' . O 09. It 002, 0
5.1-86 0
2r6 1.1,69 9.5t 301.

L525 1.690 2.55 -7.,5 .f

15:1, I.,C616 I.7
1 18
2.) . 5,[9
5.,0
m 4..90 -7-,5 ,0

5.91. 2.85 .6.6 .0,)

15L9 i. 6-(o O.7 ,:69
2.6r -7. .8
1.68o P21. ,1" 9 5.85 -8.6 .02
IA22 1. 6819 9, 5 ,5)•61 5.91
L5,0
7
• ' ,72, t111 1.0o 65
L52 8 2, 5Is2 it.. L L17')8 .6-,
.
t 529 2.11'16 5.1k 2/O69
8 , i
2.5"55 :, 7 .2709 5. 6(
L5z6 b.-'7
;2.7 _;694•56 7 5.
L.52:7' 2. 57ts

7¢:,. 2. l,295.L.2 5

i•-t

.:4i
•
 TotLs IV (Oont'a
C0(v~
A~~~0WTW410r nomm U4UaLI MODWM

.2k 04
.011 .
'004 18
023 .007
.011
9 ,~ .000
1016 .00)

.003 15 06.0
1. 50 '019
.003 9.00 m5~ .003
9.0 011

.Ot8 IN ~ .1 1.0 .1'.

o 1.1 .0055 10~

cf ,ffLiciellA Or itZ'~IPft.
starvuiart irrorr-,r bLn i3t 2
 AMDN0DTAMI4I CO 101Y0If 553-1 NBi). D)EL C OTDM.
W M101

115 706 104,2 90 2,98 16911 2. 8 .00

415.769 %1,I42139 3.13 31)1 110
11186 $790 30.6 .100 1.7ii,6 4.8i,
111.111923 1.74.13 1.110 .10.9 .61

Avera~ge Otatistlea1 Irrora

eDyIav do

37
 PROJICTILS I5-mm

2,403

6Ol5 • •1,00 D.

155.mm MIOI

4,502
---- 2452 -

-8il-
,.ooo2
-- , -.-- 448

10 D.2D

-- " .916
12.7-mm MODEL

NOTE' ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN CALIBERS

FIG. I
 , I

FIOURE 2. SEMISCALED MODEL

• .;
 1

U-

S. S

S - S.

6 S

S
S. S

* a

-I

I,
/

FIGURE 3. 155-MM MIOl AND SEMISCALED MODEL

 4.
.55-MCALDMDE
M01ANDEXAT
FIGRE toSomeSize
(Scald

REMI
I

FIGURE 5. EXACT SCALED MODEL

1?,

fit

4e

FIGURE 6. EXACT SCALED MODEL AND SABOT

a -j
AIM~
:hiJ
 I fII
it I I;I : I tI;! l i 1
'I it
II Ii; j till It~l

lp 1:' it I

*il,.si .i 1i11 it 1 1k'i t:li s s, i ;

A It!! .1 1 i : :
lit! i!! I ..

311- i i I It li t I .1,1.
si i I-Fi
li-
ell fi l
I7 7
... ...................

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

. '.
.........

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

... .

II ......
........

.. . .. . . 1

itt ~C\4
 It I

It ~~ ~ ~
*,tLL, r 0.* 1 *.*
111 1tt il .I t.44 l

I
it
II L:

...
.,. ..

IIt.

i, I . II ii . I

_ __ _ _ _

- toXJ
 14I ,I I Ii
llt l !!! 1IWtl

.I i I+444
-11444 4444 i4.44
i,.lll l'l i'.
i
Hl i,

lillU 4l i•_-4

!1• I~ liil lt i*

''' ,,,, t,, 't ~ t..stat sa"

tll 1i !i :li iio

- - ..-.--.- ! ll4•:l
i a,
. *. . ........
........ ..... .. .. !1 .

. io i+ i~ Ii~

LoL
..........._.,•
... , : ,.,, . .. o...

Ix,

I.3 I1-+ '1-,+l,

4 ;. C
IR

co'
¼'*:' itl I
t.11
'F 7•':."•,,
.: it
l: 3 4,..4 , ... ,,.iI I I la44 ill s it Il it tit. II * 4 $ II
!',1

4" L lit_" -4 &

L:l I II .

! . . ... ....

4 4 ... 444ii~I.
. •.. .lla I I,£: iII.
st.~ 4441 * ~S 54 45I~~

i .i
i ,... .........

J5 s ..
U .. .. .... .L..... . 4 .5. .. .. .. J... ~...44

I 11

i".
..- - - - ...... ...

S. . .. .. .. . "-
. "~I,.-
*'''I
"; /
"''
'
"
, "- -a- --.
 1:1
j''' B ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,L:~ ~ L~~f
ith.
~ *Q1 ~ ~ tl 1

,
i 44.LI.i lt 1i
*! , . III;' ; 1 1 1 : :
!Ili,
'IlLi
i+4 all .141L I~ It
.116 4-14 i

a.~ .... .... j . !!!I lit!

"l..4 al; ,t.1 *.aa x1 i. k ii

. . . . . . ... ... It 44 ~ L 4 .4......

1

I.4... ....
* 4... &

.. .. .... j 444 .
... .
.... .... 4
.*4 4 4 ....
.4..... ...

S -, *~ - tel .. , M 7

........... j. 4 4
........ 4 4 4 fl ~~ ....... 1 I4 ~t 444
w44 .4

03
 ti ll ~ 4i 11 I ~ ~
~
A_ 1 441i .,
j H I
Hf 4

1
5.
III $1i4
.4
i "4 I .1444
411 1. .. 4£I .. . I. .. 444." . iI44

'4iltil IlI .1il

lJ
Z"4 i .. . ... 44

i i .....
. .

'tl it
...... 5...
. 4...4± 4

.... ..... . .
iJ
l
d
i

]. "

, .

""........ . ...... .... ..... .1.

...........

....
... ... "

' ':I I I. • ' I

'

'I ...
IS~:......... ....
i • ,I... ... ........
.':
.. ;;i i~ l..i
......... " II I ..i..............

..
. •o . 1

. ....... •: I :
.... ..
...
:'
. ... :
: ...:...
. ... .. . ....
..
. . .L . .

, .. .. . .. •..
2.:.i..~......i.,_... ?i.. ... . ...
. 2.i .1.. !... 2 . . . . .• . .... .
 4 , , .44
4!4
4i l l

I. * I i hr i, F
il Uit Its

"4
'S. , . .445

I• i 4 I
!!I ,l
ii ,II

I',,I
4i, .ii
i4fi

4: i! .
.____.___,.
it II....
.

.I

4.44 .. 41..4:1
.44 £44 515 14.5.~Lt k&4....I L .a. .......

. :I. .:,.:. I(:.-" I~ ; I

. ....
... i i . ... ...-
. S.

........ ...... .............. ...... A.

... - 44 ~ 4 4

* i
It ~ **

t 4

.11 .11 *iii$!j

to. I t~ . . .i

fl.. .... .... ....

...... ...
... :.., 54 .

... 4-4,LL~...
t4. .- .
JL* -- -----

~*j~ :.tviI t..~4.h. s: ......

ai........iR

Pill1
 1*•
StI~ .44. WL., 4 • l I Ji ll
.4442

'it
14 *"&"AI t .9

l!!ii :Ii;i!
It; 11-i 11iz 11 i 1- l . ils -4 i lJl

ii: :..;:4.•O If ***44ii*,1

4... .... Sr" ,1i 4ý A

.:! ',!' 'uP!!

.4iitý . 4 J at ii 1"

4
A wI 4J
4 ± ... .. 4' " "
..... . ,. . , .. t
4..4: ii.. .. i .. .s:! : I. . L

: I .. If •.
.... i
4• i - ' ; i i h, S:
si i: l t - t i i

- . ....
.. ... .. " . .....-..... I .
....... ,,',--•......
-, '-..

0 0 , ;Hi
....
.....
.. 7-.-.
--
7

......
.. ...

-q .. 1 '**4• 1-•,•',

T7 I'_
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -jA

03M
 ;;Ti i:H

a ii9 a9 .9,9. i i i

j, 1

-.-ka L-
tu

.1:1~.. 5, 9 .... ....

.. .. . . . ..... .. .. . .. . . .. - - ----i ....

R~~ ,
I

....... I......
qI

'It
 .44- Ui
4,4ih~ A

44 444k. 4l4" 1' 1L

*~~~. H'~ '''' .... ..

s.44~441J
pii

9; till

Il, 'I.,gs
fla~~~41 e #~.~.~{f

...
... .
...

Pm

. .... ...

. . .. . . ... .. .. .. .
.. ... .. -- - - - -* - - - - ' -- - - -- -- -

4j7'
___~t V9
 464

I II
7
/O

it)
r,~
 v iý

WIT T
ILI

LUJ
W.- -C

.~ ~ Ot
 a I
, ,

a,

1K 1
"B)

w
I-
4
-I
0.

I,

-I
w
C
C

I') I
 S 4

Is . I
IhI. I I,
Is S
r 5 u a
*e ,I I
,,. V I
I

I S a
II *' IS St
I
V S
,1 ' U,
ISIS
S IJ.J. I e a.,

* a

S 4 I 8.1

* I
a,

a
I

I
I
is
--5
I
S to
5% -. *1

m.s
4
a.,
a.

IS

4
LAJ

0
 I
I
pm.

w
4
- a..,
'S
C.

I0

Be

-J
w
a
U
 a S

S iS
Al - 1, ,
I. S

a to
5I S* 5 5 CtJ
S I *5,

5*115 5. 5
* I
.- '. ii S
B, I,
5-..'. 3
*-Y.. h'
S 5,
Sn
* a. S ' 5 5.

&! [a d5 S I
-, p . , a
a *55

Ar A..
Si -,S.. S..
. SI

S >5 *, * ma
S V a 5 .51

* * . U.
a S

w
'-U
4
-h
a.

to
N
0
'I

p
-J
0
0

- :.

,1
 .. it

44L

""41& ,I, CD
 UII!

at
4,)
In

IA,

2
w
I-
4
- -a
0.

in
N
ED
'S

-J
La
C
0
V

CT
ý-to-
IPIrdIila l~il"ltA~l
1 01-11o us 11, Avi
i'I n onval Offl uoiu(DJia-'hmn)

o1141iltdhi Oowm'A'l, I. 11 r kneavell & D.V4 pel

oii#i
U1 0,Akntn
L. M&topi1.'L ii~~4ALt Diefitok'/tpeutit Wel~oiti
AWN WMWdtbi m1adtie & apoi Dvidldu

A~iitt t oll)t~&. 1),

0 tII~,'C O
'1 ) h-u ellioilhy ( h&1) n

Wnikngut D, 0, P-. 1

ATM(uid L:1 1,eiz Pti.~lmloh 0,A W Msto Army~ti (14) C*

P L'itlt~ihdAtntriý 46 L ChVI
L ,Ili'temiu
C uL, Voo

W~t.Iiointoll, D. C. 2O, A

AWN
kvi Mv.1L
Hr.F1 Avt lil -W . 1 'v.

14v )111 j I.Ill fbIIJ14 141~j 1 0144ii , p1irt ~a H, tk

ora Waft0w iOr
W\[iM1: 812 Av~ijvA)
1:, t tkvi i-,0 T31 1

A'U12v: 14~-W u Od
i 01buaor 1),T40-11rr'. or i t ltIu U P;-:
I AlmI -(wIO I'.L) toT10 ThafultfliIrla t~ilrolt'rAbiol1

1041
I Lit~
AFiII

I AFt,(OW'I i3100
insawfitdi ietiiAI!' utN.W
t
h-bimida A ()00 WIMd Ingoii 1), (1.
, 20000

Atoh~d ki iW
'V0111jedea
V YAu WI~dll~Oll V.t r,. P0008

I, HA8A IVaol1tLy Mm-iiue Corp~i LUtiLton )fliue

A t:rt Me,
t)II I I.20X)e.?
,-f~dl
 oill
II !It~ uI~
I .r

411

*, 4 L'L ~i.

'~ a ,o I,,
J ,j

.1 *~.0 r4 M.S

u SOý
ii~i .1 'I4
~ I ~3A4
ii' H
ti

.:~4 3 V

0
4'4H
-4