42 G,-:i -r. .- .-., . “AC&--”’--’ 2/67531/metadc... · 2 NACARML9JU...
Transcript of 42 G,-:i -r. .- .-., . “AC&--”’--’ 2/67531/metadc... · 2 NACARML9JU...
i
42z
.
i.-
k---- . =~. 2 :Z..:__..,-_-----G,-:i -r. .- .-., _______ ___
“AC&--”’--’“-”-.-=++”:- - ----
%:---
1
RESEARCHMEMORANDUM”
PREIitMINARYINVESTIGATIONOFA VARIABLE
MASS-FLOWSUPERSONICNKXEINLET ~
ByClydeHayes
LangleyAeronauticalLaboratoryLangleyAir Force Base,Va.
ONAL ADVISORY CommitteeFOR AERONAUTICS
WASHINGTONDecember13, 1949
-.—.
..=:...- . . . --. ..— -
—
.—.-
.-,
----
. i
.
..
.-
.,.=
-.
. .
—...
-.
., ..,.- . .:.. ...,
!ii==+.~-...-~-----,.++.-... ..~ .,...,._~-.,
.-.—-. ,:
., .. —.._-
, ... -+
...-.--- —-.n - ..=
-.. :.. . -_
--. —..
. . . ..
—.
,.~ “-~=-_
,.—
—
r_~.-=.+—. ,..
—-
+..
,...._._.—-:...—-=, m-
~-=.--
. +—.-—=. <—- .:. ... —
,.. .....—----- .-. . —. ..
.-
-...+. —-.+_.F,?. ,.. ,, ..V ----. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . sac
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...-,
K>“yl i.—..a.,
:—..~J,*. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~t.,,..a”,‘Uc*MA ij :=.—.
.r___q. .- ;...
——............... ........... ..... ., ,.GRADEOFOFFICERMARL- w.,
...*..... .....JM S“”... . .,.DA% , ... .. .. . . ,
=- — . .-L ... ..——...- .. , =
.~- > . .
,.—. . .
-.. ..-. —-..-.A..w- .—..-
&.., .T .*._ -- .-— _ -. ..-u — .. _,- ..,-. s
...... ~.-,=---- —..:-- :<. —. . ..- .-. ”
*-.. _-*.:
------ ------- - .--’”
~-— —---- ...
..-.-. ...+
-.—.. ..
.
.—.
—>%
.— -—.=.=
r- ,
“....i.:-—. . . . . . ..-- .-—
.._
.—....-_.-
.- ,:—,.. :
... .: :..”=,.”. :=..
-a _:.... .. . ..- . ..-— .,=
.r. -= --.. .- ..-.,-- :- -.. ... . - —-
-.
-.=.. ..“-4”~
-,.-—.-..-s= __
.
. . . ..... - ...
..-.-. ..-.
TECHLIBRARYKAFB.NM
Illllulllllllllllllllllll‘-:
“w
NACARM L9JIU-
NATIONALADVZSORYCOMMITTEEI?)R
RESEARCHMEMORANDUM
lJl143BoB :-
AERONAUTICS
PRELIMINARYINVESTIGATIONOFA VARIABLE
MASS+!LOWEX%PERSONICNOSEINLZ?l
By ClydeHayes
●
SUMMARY
A methodhas%eenanalyzedforvaryingthemassflowof supersonicinletshavinga circulsrcrosssectionanda centrslbody. Themethodconsistsofchangingthesizeoftheenteringstreamtubeby meansofan inflatablebootonthesurfaceofthecentrelbody. Testsweremadeat a Machnumberof2.70to determinetheeffectof suchnosesha~s on .theenteringflow,massflow,endpressurerecovery.Comparisonwasmadebetweentheoreticalsndexperimentslmassflows.Thetestresultsshowthatthemassflowcouldbe reducedto 76percentofdesignmassflowtithouta lsrgelossofpressurerecoveryandwithouttheunstableflowconditionsordiscontinuitiesoftheflowthatexistinthefixed–geometrydiffuserswhenshilarreductionsinmassflowsremadebyincreasingthebackpressure.Althoughdragtiasuementswerenotmadeinthisinvestigation,considerationof shockwaveconfigurationsindicatesthattheaccompanyingIncreaseindragissmallerthanthatcausedby thestrongshockwavesaheadoftheinletwhichusuallyaccompanyreductionsinmassflowmadeby increasingthebackpressure.
INTRODUCTION
Fromtheperformancecharacteristicsofrsmjetsoperatingatsupersonicvelocities.itcenbe shownthatforeffectiveoperationovera rsngeofflightconditions,regulationofthemass.flowisdesirable.Fora fixqd+eonmtrysu~rsonicnoseinletofthetypehavinga circularcrosssectionanda centralbodysndhavingpartinternalandpartexternalsupersoniccompression,themass”flowcannotbe reducedwithsupersonicenteringair. Theoreticallyit ispossibleto reducethemassflowby increasingthelackpressureuntiltheintern.slsuprsoniccompressioniseliminatedanda newflowconditionisestablished.This* newflowconditionisestablishedsuddenlysndis accompaniedby enabruptdecreaseofmassflowsndan increaseindrag. Figure1 shows
* thetwoflowconditionsfora fixed~eomtryinletandillustratesthe
2 NACARML9JU
.
asymmetrical.flowconditionwhichmayexistdueto unevenseparationonthecentrslbody. Theresultis asymmetricalloadingoftheinlet.Sincethisflowconditionisunstdle,themassflowcannotbe reduced
.&sufficientlywithouttheflowoscillationsandvibrationsbecomingofsuchmagnitudethatthisnwthodcennotcmlinqrilybe used. Themassflowmayalsobe regulatedbymovingthecentrslbodyforwardalongthetis oftheinlet.Sincethecentralbodyusuallyhousesfuel,instrments,smdaccessories,thissystemissorestimesnotdesirable.
Tnthepresentdiscussiona methodis introduced%y whichthemassflowisregulatedby changingthenosean@e ofthecentralbody. Inorderto reducethemassflowenteringtheinlet,theflowmustledeflectedsothatsomeoftheflowdoesnot‘entertheinlqt.Iftheshockwaveproducedby thecentralbodyis eithermadestrongerormovedforwsxd,scmeoftheairwhichwoukdotherwiseentertheinletisdeflected aroundit. By increasingthenosesngleofthecentralbodytheshockwaveismadestrongerand,atthesametime,movesoutward“awayframthelipofthecowling.Thisnaypossiblybe accomplishedbyattachingto thecentralbodya flexiblebootwhichmaybe inflatedtoincreasethenoseangle.Thepurpseofthispreliminaryinvestigationisto determinetheeffectof sucha methodontheenteringflow,massflow,andpressurerecovery,andto comparethee~rimsntalmassflow
.—.
withthetheoretital.. :
ThetestsweremadeattheLa@ey Laboratoryin& intermittent *jetusedforprevioustestsof similarsupersonicinlets.TheMachnwiberwas2.70andtheReynoldsnumber2.~ x 106,basedonthecowl-lipdiameter. —
SYMBOIS —
eb equivalentconeangle;snglebetweenaxisofcliffusersmdline$oiningapexofconeandtangeutto surfaceof inflatedboot
ec semitoneangleofcentrslbody—
ee effectivecme angle;semicomsngleofa centralbodytithaconicshapewhichwouldproducea shockwavetangenttothat
‘z
of a given (?b
cowlingpositionpsmmeter;anglebetween~is of diffuserandlinejoiningapexofconeto lipofcowling ,.
..+
---
NACARM L9Jll
P. initialstagnationpcesimre
Pf stagnationWessuretier decelerationintoinlet
R radiusofenteringstreamtube
3
DESCRIPTIONOF‘ZEl!!METHOD
Themethodofmass-flowregulationconsideredinthispreliminaryinvestigationconcernsthemriationoftheeffectivenoseangleofthecentralbody. Thiswriationcanbe effectedby theuseofa flexiblebootincorporatedinthesurfaceofthecentrslbody. By inflatingthe ‘boottheeffectivenoseanQe csnbe increased.Thegeneralshapeofsuchaninflatedbootis shownto enexaggeratedscsleinfigure2.Theinflatedportionisnotextendedallthewaytotheapexofthecentrslbodyontheassumptionthatinactualpraoticeitwouldbenecessaryto fastentheflexiblematerislsomedistancebackfromthetip.
Theeffectofthechsngeinnoseangleontheflowis showninfigure3. Withthebootuninflated,theenteringstresmtubeisrepresentedby streamlineBC’.Theradiuso-ftheenteringstreamtubeisshownasR. Asthebootis inflatedtheconeangleis,ineffect,increased,endtheshockwaveOAmovesto a newpositionOAt. Nowthestreamlineunderconsideration,BC,is deflectedatC‘ anddoesnot
. entertheinlet,andno longerrepresentstheenteringstresmtube.StreamlineB~C?’nowrepresentstheenteringstreamtube,slthoughit isalsodeflectedby shockwaveOA?,butata differentpointC“,andenterstheinlet.TheradiusoftheenteringstreamtubeisnowshownasR!,whichis smsllerthanR. Thus,ithasbeenshownthatan increaseofthecentral+odynoseanglewillresultina decreaseinmassflow.
h orderto givesomebasisforcomparingthedataobtainedfromthetests,a pammueterwhichism indicationofthemount of inflationofthebootis introduced.Thisparameter,theequivalentcone-e ‘b,istheanglefommdby theaxisoftheinletanda linedrawnfromthetipofthecentrslbodyandtangenttothes~faceoftheinflatedboot.
Forcomparisonwiththeexperimmtsl datathemassflawenteringtheinletforreducedmas~fbw conditionswascalculatedby assumingthatthecentralbodywasa trueconewiththesemi+pexangleequslto theequivale?rbangle (3b.Theshapesofthestreamlinesinthe
conicelfieldweredraxnfromdatatakenfromreference1, ad the
—
4 NACARM L9J11
comparativesizesoftheenteringstr.eantube.were.de~eminedgraphically.Thismethodgivesonlyenapproximdion~ofthemassflow.Fora moreprecisesolution,notincludedinthispreliminaryinvesti-gation,theflowfieldcanbe calculatedby“applyingthemethodofcharacteristics(reference2) to theexactcentrd-~odynosesha~s.
—-
APPARATUSANDMODEL
Theapp!mtiususedfortestingandthepethodof acqtiringdataarefullydescribedinreference3. Themassflowwasmeasuredwithacalibratedthinplateorificecontainedina tubeattachedto theremofthemodel. ..
Theentrancedianeterofthecowlingwasl.~0inches,with4° internaland7° externallipangles. .
In orderto simulatetheinflatedbodies,thenoseofthecentralbodywasbuiltupwithsoftsolderandeha~d asfoll.ows:The@dedsolderwasfirstcuttothe~mmn diameter”ofthec=ntrelbodyendthencutto forma conicshapewiththesemi~~x angleequsltotheequivalentconea@e withtheapexofthecpnecoincidentwiththeoriginal“’nose.Thesolderwasthenremovedfromthenosefora dfstanceof1./4Inchhackfromthetip,endtheremainingmaterialwascuttoformafairedcurvealongthesurface.Theresultis-thesham ofthesimulatedbootofthedesiredequivalentengle.TheexactshapewithinthedimensionalMmits givenwasnotconsideredcriticel.Thecentrsl-bodylocationwaskeptconstantatthe~esitionwhichplacedtheshockwavefromthenoseofthecentralbodyatthecowlinglipwitha220centrslbodyata Machnuniberof2.70.
DISCUSSIONANDRESULTS
An analysisoftheflowenteringtheinletwasmadeassumingthattheamx angleofthecentralbodyincreasedbutthatthenoseofthecentrelbodywasstilla truecone. Sincetheinflatedbootwas Istartedsomedistancebackfromthetipofthecentrslbody,theactualshapeisnota cone;therefore,ifthisenalysisistobe usedforthecomparisonofexper~ntaldata,theagreementoftheequivalentcone____me eb withtheeffectiveconeangle ee mustbe determined.TheCOmparhOII Of eb 19nd ee is presentedinfigure4.,andshowsreasonablyclose~eement. Tn figure~,thecalculatedandmeasuredved.qesofmass flowarecomparedintermsofrelativegrossfl~, definedastheratiooftheactualmassflowtothemassflowforthedesigncondition,
.-,
r
—
.—.
.-.
——
..-
./-.
--
-.
—.
.
. –-“*
.—
NACARM L9JIJ 5*
“w
.
.’
&clu@g thevelueat ‘b = 27.2>,theexper-ntalresultsshowreasonableagreementwiththetheoryassuminga trueconeforthevsluesof ~%. At 27.25°themarkeddeviationfromthetheorymaypossibly%ecausedbytheeffectsoftheappreciabledifferencebetweenthecontourofthecentralbodywiththesimulatedlootandthetrueconicalshawassmnedinthetheory.Onlyatthisvslueof %b dotheeffectsfromexpansionoftheflowoverthe&mlated boot,asobsemedinfigure6,causenoticeablecurvatureoftheshocksheadoftheinlet.
Theeffectofreductionofmassfluwby thismethodonthepressurerecoveryis showninfigure7. Forrelativemassflowof 90 ‘pmcent,thelossofpressurerecoveryfromthevalueof67.7fordesignmassflowisoftheorderof7 ~rcent,whilethatfor80-percentrelativemassflowisoftheorderof9 percent.Forrelativemassflowof76percentthepressurerecoverywasreducedto 56.9. Thesevaluesoflossofpressurerecoveryaresmallenoughto ellowthissystemto bepracticsl.
Shadowgraphsoftheflowconditionpresentedinfigure6 showthattheexternal.flowdoesnotundergosnylargeor abruptchsngeswithchangeof eqtivslentconesingleeb. Thereis sn increaseinthestrengthoftheshockwavewhichindicatesenincreaseindrag,butthisincreaseisgradusl.Thestrengthoftheshockwaveislessthanthatoftheinletwitha normalshockacrosstheentrancesnd,therefore,thedragislessthanifthemassflowisreducedby increasingthebackpressureuntila normslshockwaveisforme~.Thereisno indicationofanyunstableflowconditionswhichmightcauseflowoscillations.
CONCLUSIONS
AmethoQforvaryingthemassflowof supersonicinletshavingacircularcrosssectionanda centrslbodyhas%eenconsidered,andtestsandcalculationshavebeenmadein orderto determinetheeffectsat aMachnumberof2.70of a simulatedinflatablebootonthecentrsl+odysurfaceupontheenteringflow,massflow,and~essurerecovery.Acomparisonwasmadebetweenexperimentalandtheoreticalmassflows.
Thefollowingconclusionsweremade:
1.Themassflowwasdecreasedgraduellyto 76massflowwithan aocompsmyingdecreaseofpressure67.7 percentfordesignmassflowto 56.9 pmcent.
percentof designrecoveryfrom
.
6
—
NACARM L9Jll
.. -
2. Themam+flowreductionwasachievedwithoutthenecessityofhavinga movl.ngcentreLbodyandwithouttheunstableflowconditions,~theaccompsz@ngvibrations,andabruptchangeindragproducedby #decreasingthemassflowwith.afixed.~ecmmtryinlet.
3. Formass-fluwreductionsto 76 percentofthedesignmassflowitwasfoundthatthemassflow”andshockanglescouldbe predicted.by
-.
theoryassumingthecentralbodyto%e representedby a conetangenttotheinflatedboot. .- .
LengleyAeronauticalLaboratoryNationalAdvisoryCommitteeforAeronautics
LangleyAirForceBase,Va.
—.
-.
—
2mFEEwNcs-.
1.SteffofComputingSection,,CenterofAm&sis (UhderDirectionof-.
ZdenekKopal):TablesofSupersomlc XlowaroundCones.Tech.Rep. dNo.1,M.I.T.,1947.
2. Ferri,Antonio:ApplicationoftheMethodofCharacteristicstoSupersonicRotationalFlow. NMA Fep.841,1946.
3. Ferri,Antonio,andNucci,LouisM.: TheoreticalandExprimentelAnalysisofLowDragSupersonicInletsHavinga CircularCrossSectionanda CentrslBodyatMachlhuibersof3.30,2.75,and2.45.NACARM*3, 1948.
——
,..._—..-
NACARM L9%U
.
(a)DesignmasE f low.
.
\
(b)Reduoedmassflow.
7
. .
Figure 1.-Twoflowconditionsforfixed-geometryMets.(Notto scale.)
.—
03
.-
</“
%
\
-4I
Figure 2.- Ty_picd ehapeof the Simlaatedboot. (Not to scele.)
—
I
1
*.”,.
11!1’ II ,l!:!’=:’:!l I’l,’:kl. ’t’‘1 I ,,1,1
● ✎ ✌
.
StreamtubeforshockwaveOA
——. —- Streemtubefor shck ~ve at
-.
$
At/ A
!2
0
Figure 3.- Flow pb?mlenainto Met for two poaiticm of the shcck wave. (Not to scale.)
10 NACARM L9Jll-
28
27
22
.
+
23 24
Eij?wvwkxv’
Fl~ k.-Effective
\
1
/
—
25
cu/77~e,.
coneangleasa ?unctionoftheconeangle.
27 2/3
..L_
.
—
. v
.
4.—
,. . ..- ..___—
equivalent .+.-
.
-—
,
oCc?lculc?f cd ddti
I 000ITesf dufa
o
I +o75
22 23 2-4 215Equivu/en ~ conr tmqle, @b, L7cy.
Figure 5.- Relative IIMSEIflow as a functkm of
26 27 a
equlvalmt cone angle.
!2
.
.—
..
.
.
.-.. --. . -
—.—
.-
.
—
.-..
,.. T—
.—_—
. . .
L-.-. ...-—
. ?=.*
. ...-.. .
NACARML9Jll 13
.&.”3’-:”-;.. :.-.
Relativemassflow= 1.00.
Relativemassflow= 0.76.
‘-’
Figure6.- Shadowgraph
RelativeDIRSBflow= 0.93.
Relativemassflow= O.~.
=s=L-62158
picturesof theinletforfourdifferentvalues
‘faaiiw”
r
. .
t
?0
65
60
35
50
Y. r
\
90 80Re/Qf/ve nwss 5/0 w, perceh+
Figure 7.-Pre13flurerecove~ a~ a functian of relatim mass flow.