Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-03T11:13:38.003Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Proximal bodies in hypersonic flow

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 October 2007

STUART J. LAURENCE ,
R. DEITERDING  and
G. HORNUNG
STUART J. LAURENCE
Affiliation:
Graduate Aeronautical Laboratories, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91125, USA
R. DEITERDING
Affiliation:
Oak Ridge National Laboratory, PO Box 2008 MS6367, Oak Ridge, TN 37831, USA
G. HORNUNG
Affiliation:
Graduate Aeronautical Laboratories, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91125, USA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Hypersonic flows involving two or more bodies travelling in close proximity to one another are encountered in several important situations. The present work seeks to explore one aspect of the resulting flow problem by investigating the forces experienced by a secondary body when it is within the domain of influence of a primary body travelling at hypersonic speeds.

An analytical methodology based on the blast wave analogy is developed and used to predict the secondary force coefficients for simple geometries in both two and three dimensions. When the secondary body is entirely inside the primary shocked region, the nature of the lateral force coefficient is found to depend strongly on the relative size of the two bodies. For two spheres, the methodology predicts that the secondary body will experience an exclusively attractive lateral force if the secondary diameter is larger than one-sixth of the primary diameter. The analytical results are compared with those from numerical simulations and reasonable agreement is observed if an appropriate normalization for the relative lateral displacement of the two bodies is used.

Results from a series of experiments in the T5 hypervelocity shock tunnel are also presented and compared with perfect-gas numerical simulations, with good agreement. A new force-measurement technique for short-duration hypersonic facilities, enabling the experimental simulation of the proximal bodies problem, is described. This technique provides two independent means of measurement, and the agreement observed between the two gives a further degree of confidence in the results obtained.

Type
Papers
Information
Journal of Fluid Mechanics , Volume 590 , 10 November 2007 , pp. 209 - 237
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Ambrosio, A. & Wortman, A. 1962 Stagnation point shock detachment distance for flow around spheres and cylinders. ARS J. 32, 281.Google Scholar
Artem'eva, N. A. & Shuvalov, V. V. 1996 Interaction of shock waves during the passage of a disrupted meteoroid through the atmosphere. Shock Waves 5, 359–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Artemieva, N. A. & Shuvalov, V. V. 2001 Motion of a fragmented meteoroid through the planetary atmosphere. J. Geophys. Res. 106 (E2), 3297–3309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berger, M. & Colella, P. 1988 Local adaptive mesh refinement for shock hydrodynamics. J. Comput. Phys. 82, 64–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Billig, F. S. 1967 Shock-wave shapes around spherical- and cylindrical-nosed bodies. J. Spacecraft Rockets 4, 822–823.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carman, J. B. Jr 1980 Store separation testing techniques at the Arnold Engineering Development Center–Volume I: An Overview. Tech. Rep. AEDC-TR-79-1. Arnold Engineering Development Center.Google Scholar
Deiterding, R. 2003 Construction and application of an AMR algorithm for distributed memory computers. In Adaptive Mesh Refinement–Theory and Applications. Lecture Notes in Computational Science and Engineering vol. 1, pp. 361–372.Google Scholar
Deiterding, R. 2005 Detonation structure simulation with AMROC. In High Performance Computing and Communications 2005. Lecture Notes in Computer Science vol. 3726, pp. 916–927.Google Scholar
Deiterding, R., Radovitzky, R., Mauch, S. P., Noels, L., Cummings, J. C. & Meiron, D. I. 2005 A virtual test facility for the efficient simulation of solid materials under high energy shock-wave loading. Engng Comput. 22 (3–4), 325–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayes, D. H. & Probstein, R. R 1966 Hypersonic Flow Theory. Academic.Google Scholar
Hornung, H., Sturtevant, B., Bélanger, J., Sanderson, S. & Brouillette, M. 1991 Performance of the new free-piston shock tunnel T5 at GALCIT. In Proc. 18th Int. Symp. on Shock Waves, Sendai, Japan. Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joarder, R. & Jagadeesh, J. 2004 A new free floating accelerometer balance system for force measurement in shock tunnels. Shock Waves 13, 409–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lees, L. 1955 Hypersonic flow. In Proc. 5th Intl Conf. Los Angeles, pp. 241–276. Inst. Aero. Soc., New York.Google Scholar
Lordi, J. A., Mates, R. E. & Moselle, J. R. 1966 Computer program for the numerical solution of nonequilibrium expansions of reacting gas mixtures. NASA CR-472.Google Scholar
Lukasiewicz, J. 1962 Blast-hypersonic flow analogy – theory and application. ARS J. 32, 1341–1346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McIntosh, M. K. 1969 A computer program for the numerical calculation of equilibrium and perfect gas conditions in shock tunnels. Tech. Rep. CPD 169. Australian Defense Scientific Service.Google Scholar
Mee, D. J. 2003 Dynamic calibration of force balances for impulse hypersonic facilities. Shock Waves 12, 443–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mee, D. J., Daniel, W. J. T. & Simmons, J. M. 1996 Three-component force balance for flows of millisecond duration. AIAA J. 34 (3), 590–595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, S. L. 1975 Data Analysis for Scientists and Engineers. John Wiley.Google Scholar
Naumann, K. W., Ende, H., Mathieu, G. & George, A. 1993 Millisecond aerodynamic force measurement with side-jet model in the ISL shock tunnel. AIAA J. 31 (6), 590–595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Passey, Q. R. & Melosh, H. J. 1980 Effects of atmospheric breakup on crater field formation. Icarus 42, 211–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, M. J., Mee, D. J., Tsai, C. Y. & Bakos, R. J. 2004 Three-component force measurements on a large scramjet in a shock tunnel. J. Spacecraft Rockets 41, 416–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sahoo, N., Mahapatra, D. R., Jagadesh, G., Gopalakrishnan, S. & Reddy, K. P. G. 2003 An accelerometer balance system for measurement of aerodynamic force coefficients over blunt bodies in a hypersonic shock tunnel. Meas. Sci. Technol. 14, 260–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanderson, S. R. & Simmons, J. M. 1991 Drag balance for hypervelocity impulse facilities. AIAA J. 12, 2185–2191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schultz, P. H. & Sugita, S. 1994 Penetrating and escaping the atmospheres of Venus and Earth. In Lunar and Planetary Science Conf. XXV, pp. 1215–1216.Google Scholar
Sedov, L. I. 1959 Similarity and Dimensional Methods in Mechanics. Trans. ed. Maurice Holt. Trans. Morris Friedman from the 4th Russian edn. Academic.Google Scholar
Storkmann, V., Olivier, H. & Gronig, H. 1998 Force measurement in hypersonic impulse facilities. AIAA J. 36, 342–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tanno, H., Itoh, K., Saito, K., Abe, A. & Takayama, K. 2004 Shock wave interaction with a sphere in a shock tube. In Intl Symp. on Interdisciplinary Shock Wave Research, pp. 483–497. Interdisciplinary Shock Wave Research Center.Google Scholar
Taylor, G. I. 1950 The formation of a blast wave by a very intense explosion. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A 201, 159–174.Google Scholar
Toro, E. F. 1999 Riemann Solvers and Numerical Methods for Fluid Dynamics. Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warren, W. R., Kaegi, E. M. & Geiger, R. E. 1961 Shock tunnel experimental techniques for force and moment and surface flow direction measurements. ARS J. 31 (1), 82–83.Google Scholar
Woods, W. C., Holland, S. D. & DiFulvio, M. 2001 Hyper-X stage separation wind-tunnel test program. J. Spacecraft Rockets 38, 811–819.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, M. J., Candler, G. V. & Bose, D. 1998 Data-parallel line relaxation method for the Navier–Stokes equations. AIAA J. 36, 1603–1609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar