淡江大學覺生紀念圖書館 (TKU Library)
進階搜尋


系統識別號 U0002-1208201311334600
中文論文名稱 伴隨噴流之超音速飛行體阻力分析
英文論文名稱 THE DRAG REDUCTION ANALYSIS FOR SUPERSONIC PROJECTILE ASSISTED WITH COUNTER-FLOW AND REAR END JETS
校院名稱 淡江大學
系所名稱(中) 航空太空工程學系碩士班
系所名稱(英) Department of Aerospace Engineering
學年度 101
學期 2
出版年 102
研究生中文姓名 張皓淳
研究生英文姓名 Haw-Chun Chang
學號 698430351
學位類別 碩士
語文別 英文
口試日期 2013-07-11
論文頁數 94頁
口試委員 指導教授-宛同
委員-潘大知
委員-劉登
中文關鍵字 超音速  鈍體  逆向噴流  順向噴流  減阻  LES模組  κ-ε模組  空氣動力學 
英文關鍵字 Supersonic  Blunt body  Counter-flow jet  Rear end jet  Drag reduction  LES model  κ-ε model  Aerodynamics 
學科別分類 學科別應用科學航空太空
中文摘要   在21世紀的今天飛行器減阻的課題越來越重要,在軍事用途上,它可以使戰鬥機或飛彈變得更省油,飛的更快;民用方面則可發展出更省油更環保的飛行器。在此我們試圖使用噴流方法達到減阻效果,我們於超音速彈體的前後方,分別加上逆向噴流及順向噴流,並分析其物理現象,利用逆向噴流衝擊相對氣流來改變外部流場並達到減阻效果;利用順向噴流補足彈體後方因分離流或膨脹波所形成的低壓區塊,以減少壓差阻力。
  我們利用Gambit產生網格,並使用CFD求解軟體Fluent中內建的LES及κ-ε 模組求解驗證案例及新案例,新的案例中包含半球形及喇叭狀的機鼻外型之局部逆向噴流、數個局部順向噴流、以及細長比為14.5的全彈體於飛行速度2.5馬赫時兩種噴流的搭配結果。另外我們還嘗試計算噴流所需的耗能量及其效率的基本推算:逆向噴流因為動量損失而使減阻效果變差,順向噴流則可製造出一個淨推力的效果,且似乎不需花費太多能量,所以整體效果優於逆向噴流。就結果而言,噴流概念將來也許可以實際應用於真實的超音速飛行器或彈體設計上。
英文摘要 Drag reduction is an important objective for aircraft operation, and become even more vital in the twenty-first century. In military usage, fighters or missiles can therefore save fuel consumption and attain higher flying speed; and in civil practice, the goal of more efficient and environmental concerned flights can be achieved. Here we try some approaches to accomplish the purpose of drag reduction. The physical phenomenon of supersonic projectile aerodynamics with counter-flow and rear end jets are analyzed in current effort. Using counter-flow jet to impinge upon the opposite free stream flow in order to change the flow field and thus in the hope of reducing drag force. On the other hand, we could also employ rear end jets to fill the domain which is after the projectile rear end so as to decrease the base drag and the drag from supersonic expansion waves.
In addition to the grid construction and flow solver routine, LES model and k-epsilon model of CFD Fluent code are also employed in our studies for verification and case studies. Investigated problems include local counter-flow jet situations with hemispherical nose and trumpet-like nose configurations, several local rear end jet cases, and the combination of both nose counter-flow and rear end jets for a real missile-like projectile with a fineness ratio of 14.5 and Mach number of 2.5. With the newly defined drag reduction efficiency parameter; the drag reduction of counter-flow jet is not so good because of loss momentum of the reverse thrust. The rear end jet flow can be considered a big thrust there, and comparisons are also made. After the simulations of the energy consumption of the jets and efficiency of all different cases, it appears that we do not need to spend too much energy to transform the total drag to become net thrust, and it is believed that the jet conception considered in this work can found their practical application in future supersonic projectile operation.
論文目次 Abstract II
Contents IV
List of Tables V
List of Fighures VI
Nomenclatures XII
Chapter 1 Introduction 1
Chapter 2 Research Background 4
Chapter 3 Numerical Modeling 12
3.1 The Cases of Verification 12
3.2 Geometry Configuration and Mesh Generation for Verification 14
3.3 Governing Equations 18
3.4 Solver 19
3.5 The Cases in Real Atmosphere 21
Chapter 4 Result and Discussion 28
4.1 Verification 28
4.2 Local Counter-flow Jet Cases 39
4.3 Local Rear End Jet Cases 48
4.4 Projectile Drag Reduction 58
Chapter 5 Conclusions 70
References 72
Appendix A 76
Appendix B 79
Table 2-1. Counterflowing nozzle jet flow conditions.. 5
Table 4-1.The comparison of the nose cases for verification 31
Table 4-2. The comparison of hemispherical nose of counter-flow jet cases 40
Table 4-3. The comparison of trumpet-like nose of counter-flow jet cases 43
Table 4-4. The comparison of 3-D rear end jet cases of static pressure ratio equals 3 50
Table 4-5. (a) The comparison of 3-D rear end jet cases of static pressure ratio equals 10 51
Table 4-5. (b) The comparison of 3-D rear end jet cases of static pressure ratio equals 10 51
Table 4-6. (a) The comparison of 3-D rear end jet cases of total pressure ratio equals 1 52
Table 4-6. (b) The comparison of 3-D rear end jet cases of total pressure ratio equals 1 53
Table 4-7. The comparison of a projectile with only counter-flow jet 60
Table 4-8. The comparison of a projectile with only rear end jet 65
Table 4-9. The comparison of a projectile with both two jets 69


Figure 2-1. Percentage of drag reduction measured for different values of the ratio of jet pressure to the pitot pressure of the Mach 8 test flow. 5
Figure 2-2. Effects of angle of attack and flow rate on the interaction of the counter-flowing jet with Mach 4 6
Figure 2-3.(a-e) Pressure counter of two flow mode with the variation of P, (a) P=4.5, (b) P=8.9, (c) P=22.3, (d) P=31.2, and (e) P=44.6 7
Figure 2-4. The variation of drag coefficient to jet total pressure ratio P 7
Figure 2-5. Numerical schlieren-like visualizations by contours of the norm of the gradient of mean density in the meridian plane for P=0.816 at two instants in (a) and (b) and the corresponding enlarged jet structure in (c) and (d) 8
Figure 2-6. Numerical schilweren-like visualizations by contours the norm of the gradient of mean density in the meridian plane for P=1.633 at two instants in (a) and (b) and the corresponding enlarged jet structures in (c) and (d) 9
Figure 2-7. Distributions of the mean local Mach number M for (a) P=0.816 and (b) P=1.633. Here, solid lines denote M>1 and dashed lines M<1 with a contour increment 0.1 9
Figure 2-8. The results of different jet diameter by Meyer cases 11
Figure 3-1. The geometry configuration of counter-flow jet cases drew by Pro-E 15
Figure 3-2.(a) Side view of sturcture type meshes with no jet case drew by Gambit 15
Figure 3-2.(b) Slanting view of sturcture type meshes with no jet case drew by Gambit 16
Figure 3-3.(a) Side view of the case for verification with counter-flow jet 16
Figure 3-3.(b) Slanting view of the case for verification with counter-flow jet 17
Figure 3-4.(a) 2-D rear end case with 32160 cells mesh 17
Figure 3-4.(b) 2-D rear end case with 86160 cells mesh 18
Figure 3-5.(a) Overall side view of trumpet-like nose with 2274432 cells mesh 23
Figure 3-5.(b) Overall slanting view of trumpet-like nose with 2274432 cells mesh 23
Figure 3-5.(c) Local side view of trumpet-like nose with 2274432 cells mesh 23
Figure 3-5.(d) Local slanting view of trumpet-like nose with 2274432 cells mesh 24
Figure 3-6.(a) Side view of rear end case with 451040 cells mesh 24
Figure 3-6.(b) Slanting view of rear end case with 451040 cells mesh 25
Figure 3-7.(a) Side view of hemispherical nose projectile with 3360624 cells mesh 25
Figure 3-7.(b) Slanting view of hemispherical nose projectile with 3360624 cells mesh 26
Figure 3-7.(c) Side view of hemisphical nose projectile with 466624 cells mesh 26
Figure 3-7.(d) Slanting view of hemispherical nose projectile with 466624 cells mesh 26
Figure 3-7.(e) Side view of trumpet-like nose projectile with 4101204 cells mesh 27
Figure 3-7.(f) Slanting view of trumpet-like nose projectile with 4101201 cells mesh 27
Figure 4-1. The pressure data of the cases for verification of head with and without jet 28
Figure 4-2.(a) Y-plus of the case for verification of head case with no jet 29
Figure 4-2.(b) Counters of Mach number of the head case with no jet 29
Figure 4-2.(c) Contours of static pressure of the head case with no jet 30
Figure 4-3.(a) Y-plus of the case for verification of head with counter-flow jet 31
Figure 4-3.(b) Contours of Mach number of the head case with counter-flow jet 32
Figure 4-3.(c) Contours of static pressure of the head case with counter-flow jet 32
Figure 4-4. 2-D rear end cases by steady and unsteady state 33
Figure 4-5. There is a wall or a symmetry line behide the step 34
Figure 4-6.(a) Test different meshes for 2-D cases for verification 35
Figure 4-6.(b) Y-plus of 32160 cells mesh of 2-D rear end case 36
Figure 4-6.(c) Y-plus of 86160 cells mesh of 2-D rear end case 36
Figure 4-6.(d) Contours of Mach number of 32160 cells mesh of 2-D rear end case 37
Figure 4-6.(e) Contours of Mach number of 86160 cells mesh of 2-D rear end case 37
Figure 4-6.(f) Counters of static pressure of 32160 cells mesh of 2-D rear end case 38
Figure 4-6.(g) Contours of static pressure of 86160 cells mesh of 2-D rear end case 38
Figure 4-6.(h) The 2-D rear end case whichhas 154560 cells mesh 39
Figure 4-7.The pressure data of hemispherical nose of counter-flow jet cases 41
Figure 4-8.(a) Mach contour of Case 7 of local counter-flow jet case 44
Figure 4-8.(b) Mach contour of Case 8 of local counter-flow jet case 44
Figure 4-8.(c) Mach contour of Case 9 of local counter-flow jet case 45
Figure 4-8.(d) Pressure contour of Case 7 of local counter-flow jet case 45
Figure 4-8.(e) Pressure contour of Case 8 of local counter-flow jet case 46
Figure 4-8.(f) Pressure contour of Case 9 of local counter-flow jet case 46
Figure 4-8.(g) The pessure data of trumpet-like nose cases 47
Figure 4-8.(h) Y-plus of outer surface of trumpet-like nose case 47
Figure 4-8.(i) Y-plus of inner surface of trumpet-like nose case 48
Figure 4-9.(a) Contours of Mach number of rear end case with no jet 48
Figure 4-9.(b) Contours of static pressure of rear end case with no jet 49
Figure 4-9.(c) The pressure data pressure of rear end case with no jet 49
Figure 4-10. The pressure data of rear end jet cases with total pressure ratio equals to 1 54
Figure 4-11.(a) Contours of Mach number when M=0.65 of local rear end jet case 55
Figure 4-11.(b) Contours of Mach number when M=1 of local rear end jet case 55
Figure 4-11.(c) Contours of Mach number when M=1.8 of local rear end jet case 56
Figure 4-11.(d) Contours of static pressure when M=0.65 of local rear end jet case 56
Figure 4-11.(e) Contours of static pressure when M=1 of local rear end jet case 57
Figure 4-11.(f) Contours of static pressure when M=1.8 of local rear end jet case 57
Figure 4-12.(a) Contours of static pressure without jet of a projectile case 58
Figure 4-12.(b) Contours of Mach number without jet of a projectile case 58
Figure 4-12.(c) The pressure data of without jet case of a projectile 59
Figure 4-13.(a) Mach contour of Case 1 of the projectile case 61
Figure 4-13.(b) Mach contour of Case 2 of the projectile case 61
Figure 4-13.(c) Mach contour of Case 3 of the projectile case 61
Figure 4-13.(d) Mach contour of Case 4 of the projecile case 62
Figure 4-13.(e) Pressure contour of Case 1 of the projectile case 62
Figure 4-13.(f) Pressure contour of Case 2 of the projectile case 62
Figure 4-13.(g) Pressure contour of Case 3 of the projectile case 63
Figure 4-13.(h) Pressure contour of Case 4 of the projecile case 63
Figure 4-13.(i) Density contour of Case 1 of the projectile case 63
Figure 4-13.(j) Density contour of Case 2 of the projectile case 64
Figure 4-13.(k) Density contour of Case 3 of the projectile case 64
Figure 4-13.(l) Density contour of Case 4 of the projecile case 64
Figure 4-14.(a) Mach contour of only rear end jet case of a projectile 66
Figure 4-14.(b) Pressure contour of only rear end jet case of a projectile 66
Figure 4-14.(c) Density contour of only rear end jet case of a projectile 66
Figure 4-15.(a) Mach contour for Case 1 of both jets case of a projectile 67
Figure 4-15.(b) Mach contour for Case 2 of both jets case of a projectile 67
Figure 4-15.(c) Pressure contour for Case 1 of both jets case of a projectile 67
Figure 4-15.(d) Pressure contour for Case 2 of both jets case of a projectile 68
Figure 4-15.(e) Density contour for Case 1 of both jets case of a projectile 68
Figure 4-15.(f) Density contour for Case 2 of both jets case of a projectile 68
參考文獻 [1] Love, E.S., “The Effects of a Small Jet of Air Exhausting from the Nose of a Body of Revolution in Supersonic Flow,” National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, November 1952.
[2] Finley, P.J., “The Flow of a Jet from a Body Opposing a Supersonic Free Stream,” Journal of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 26, 1966, pp. 337-368.
[3] Shang, J.S., “Plasma Injection for Hypersonic Blunt-Body Drag Reduction,” AIAA Journal, Vol. 40, No. 6, June 2002, pp. 1178-1186.
[4] Shang, J.S., “Plasma Injection for Hypersonic Blunt-Body Drag Reduction,” AIAA Journal, Vol. 40, No. 6, June 2002, pp. 1178-1186.
[5] Gauer, M. and A. Paull, “Numerical Investigation of a Spiked Blunt Nose Cone at Hypersonic Speeds,” Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, Vol. 45, No. 3, May-June 2008.
[6] Ahmed, M.Y.M. and N. Qin, “Drag Reduction Using Aerodisks for Hypersonic Hemispherical Bodies,” Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, Vol. 47, No. 1, January-February 2010, pp. 62-80.
[7] Kalimuthu, R., R.C. Mehta, and E. Rathakrishnan, “Drag Reduction for Spike Attached to Blunt-Nosed Body at Mach 6,” Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, Vol. 47, No. 1, January-February 2010, pp. 219-222.
[8] Zhou, C.Y., W.Y. Ji, and P. Xie, “Numerical Investigation on the Drag and Heat Flux Reduction of a Supersonic Reentry Capsule with a Counter-flow Jet,” Information Technology Journal, Vol. 11, 2012, pp. 1705-1713.
[9] Forrester, A.I.J., A. Sobester, and A.J. Keane, Engineering Design via Surrogate Modelling: A Practical Guide, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2008.
[10] Josyula, E., M. Pinney, and W.B. Blake, “Applications of a Counterflow Drag Reduction Technique in High-Speed Systems,” Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, Vol. 39, No. 4, July-August 2002.
[11] Venukumar, B., G. Jagadeesh, and K.P.J. Reddy, “Counterflow Drag Reduction by Supersonic Jet for a Blunt Body in Hypersonic Flow,” Physics of Fluids, Vol. 18, 2006.
[12] Daso, E.O., V.E. Pritchett, T.S. Wang, D.K. Ota, I.M. Blankson, and A.H. Auslender, “Dynamics of Shock Dispersion and Interactions in Supersonic Freestreams with Counterflowing Jets,” AIAA Journal, Vol. 47, No. 6, 2009, pp. 1313-1326.
[13] Venukumar, B. and K.P.J. Reddy, “Experiments Investigation of Drag Reduction by Forward Facing High Speed Gas Jet for a Large Angle Blunt Cone at Mach 8,” Sadhana, Vol. 32, Parts 1 & 2, February-April 2007, pp. 123-131.
[14] Meyer, B., H.F. Nelson, and D.W. Riggins, “Hypersonic Drag and Heat-Transfer Reduction Using a Forward-Facing Jet,” Journal of Aircraft, Vol. 38, No. 4, July-August 2011, pp. 680-686.
[15] Khamooshi, A., T. Taylor, and D.W. Riggins, “Drag and Heat Transfer Reductions in High-Speed Flows,” AIAA Journal, Vol. 45, No. 10, October 2007, pp. 2401-2413.
[16] Daso, E.O., W. Beaulieu, and J.O. Hager, “Prediction of Drag Reduction in Supersonic and Hypersonic Flows with Counterflow Jets,” AIAA 2002-5115, October 2002.
[17] Chen, L.W., C.T. Xu, and X.Y. Lu, “Large-Eddy Simulation of Opposing-Jet-Perturbed Supersonic Flows Past a Hemispherical Nose,” Modern Physics Letters B, Vol. 24, No. 13, 2010, pp. 1287-1290.
[18] Chen, L.W., G.L. Wang, and X.Y. Lu, “Numerical Investigation of a Jet from a Blunt Body Opposing a Supersonic Flow,” Journal of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 684, October 2011, pp. 85-110.
[19] Khan, O.U. and K.A. Hoffmann, “Flow Control over a Backward-Facing Step with Application of a Magnetic Field,” Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, Vol. 45, No. 2, March-April 2008, pp. 255-263.
[20] Fujita, M., “Axisymmetric Oscillations of an Opposing Jet from a Hemispherical Nose,” AIAA Journal, Vol. 33, 1995, pp. 1850-1856.
[21] Fluent User’s Guide.
[22] Venkatachari, B.S., Y. Ito, and G. Cheng, “Numerical Investigation of the Interaction of Counterflowing Jets and Supersonic Capsule Flows,” AIAA Journal, June 2011.
[23] Shah, S.B.H., S. Zahir, and I. Ahmed, “Numerical Investigation on the Effect of Shock Standoff Distance due to Counterflow Jets Injection from a Hemispherical Cylinder,” Proceedings of International Bhurban Conference on Applied Sciences & Technology, January 2011.
[24] Finley, P.J., “The Flow of a Jet from a Body Opposing a Supersonic Free Stream,” Journal of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 26, part 2, December 1965, pp. 337-368.
[25] Emami-Naeini, A., S.A. McCabe, D. de Roover, J. L. Ebert, and R. Le Kosut, “Active Control of Flow over a Backward-Facing Step,” Proceedings of the 44th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, and the European Control Conference 2005, December 2005.
[26] Mehrez, Z., M. Bouterra, A.E. Cafsi, A. Belghith, and P.L. Quere, “Active Control of Flow Behind a Backward Facing Step by Using a Periodic Perturbation,” ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, Vol. 5, No. 2, February 2010.
[27] Behrens, A.A., J.M. Lutz, and P.J. Strykowski, “Instantaneous Flame Anchor Measurements Behind a Rearward-Facing Step,” AIAA Journal, Vol. 47, No. 6, June 2009, pp. 1350-1357
[28] Mehrez, Z., M. Bouterra, A.E. Cafsi, A. Belgith, and P.L. Quere, “Mass Transfer Control of a Backward-Facing Step Flow by Local Forcing-Effect of Reynolds Number,” Thermal Science, Vol. 15, No. 2, 2011, pp. 367-378.
[29] Henning, L. and R. King, “Robust Multivariable Closed-Loop Control of a Turbulent Backward-Facing Step Flow,” Journal of Aircraft, Vol. 44, No. 1, January-February 2007, pp. 201-208.
論文使用權限
  • 同意紙本無償授權給館內讀者為學術之目的重製使用,於2018-08-13公開。
  • 同意授權瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2018-08-13起公開。


  • 若您有任何疑問,請與我們聯絡!
    圖書館: 請來電 (02)2621-5656 轉 2281 或 來信