系統識別號 | U0002-1307202000323600 |
---|---|
DOI | 10.6846/TKU.2020.00331 |
論文名稱(中文) | 蚌式進氣道在全機外形上之初步設計研究 |
論文名稱(英文) | Preliminary Investigation and Design on Full Configuration Fighter Diverterless Supersonic Inlet (DSI) |
第三語言論文名稱 | |
校院名稱 | 淡江大學 |
系所名稱(中文) | 航空太空工程學系碩士班 |
系所名稱(英文) | Department of Aerospace Engineering |
外國學位學校名稱 | |
外國學位學院名稱 | |
外國學位研究所名稱 | |
學年度 | 108 |
學期 | 2 |
出版年 | 109 |
研究生(中文) | 鄭詔安 |
研究生(英文) | Chao-An Cheng |
學號 | 605430015 |
學位類別 | 碩士 |
語言別 | 繁體中文 |
第二語言別 | 英文 |
口試日期 | 2019-06-19 |
論文頁數 | 149頁 |
口試委員 |
指導教授
-
宛同
委員 - 劉登 委員 - 潘大知 |
關鍵字(中) |
第五代戰鬥機 F-35戰鬥機 蚌式進氣道 計算流體力學 |
關鍵字(英) |
Fifth generation fighter jets F-35 joint strike fighter Diverterless supersonic inlet CFD |
第三語言關鍵字 | |
學科別分類 | |
中文摘要 |
現今戰鬥機的發展為各先進國家國防科技研發重點,而對於第五代戰鬥機特性追求著眼於提升戰鬥機於戰場中存活率及其聯合作戰效益;尤其對於戰鬥機整體性能要求,有別於以往追求其超、高音速巡弋能力亦或是武器彈藥量攜掛能力,對於第五代戰鬥機更注重於在有限的結構重量下,提升其外形結構強度、操縱靈敏性、氣動力特性及暱蹤性。 為追求戰鬥機在戰場上有更高的存活性,其外形、氣動力特性、靈敏性、暱蹤性等關係環環相扣,特別在於進氣道的設計已逐漸由傳統型具邊界層隔道超音速進氣道演變為無邊界層隔道蚌式超音速進氣道設計,大幅度確保戰鬥機在各式嚴苛的操作條件,仍能獲得充足的發動機推力及氣動力特性並提升其匿蹤性。 本研究旨於探討蚌式進氣道流場特性,藉由電腦輔助軟體進行計算流體分析,觀察氣流流經其凸包後於進氣道內部流場變化,含壓力變化、壓力恢復等現象,並比較於不同馬赫數、攻角及凸包外形間差異,期許本研究對日後我國第五代戰鬥機研發具有參考性。 |
英文摘要 |
The research on fighter jet development has always been one of an important investment on modern countries’ nation defense, the development on fifth generation fighter jet majorly focus on pursuing higher performance and upgrading its joint strike capabilities, different from conventional design on high Mach number cruising or weapon payload capacities, it especially focuses more on improving its agility, maneuverability, optimization on aerodynamics and stealthiness under structural limitations, also take in reducing its cost of operation and maintenance into considerations. To pursue higher chance of survival during missions, military aircraft designs are based on several aspects according to its requirements and specifications. In most conventional military fighter jet, the application of boundary layer diverter is commonly used in its inlet design. However, this type of design is gradually replaced by an evolutionary concept, the diverterless supersonic inlet, which is featured with a bump located on its fuselage surface, and in front of its inlet opening. The diverterless supersonic inlet highly ensures the engine gains sufficient air flow needed and provides required thrust under the operation of critical flight attitudes, and also shields the engine in some certain degree, minimizing the aircraft’s Radar Cross Section, results in better stealth performance. In this research, we aim to understand the flow characteristics over a diverteless supersonic inlet (DSI), and observe the phenomena while air passing through the generic bump. Furthermore, we simply modified the bump into various geometries we designed to see how the changes shapes of the bump will influence on the flow characteristics, under different cruise speed and flight attitude. |
第三語言摘要 | |
論文目次 |
Contents Abstract III Contents V List of Figures VII List of Tables XIV Nomenclature XV Chapter 1 Introduction 1 Chapter 2 Research Background 6 2-1 Boundary Layer 6 2-2 Development of Supersonic Inlet 7 2-3 Boundary Diverter Supersonic Inlet 9 2-4 Diverterless Supersonic Inlet 10 2-2 Wedge and Conical Flow 14 2-3 Bump Design Concept 15 Chapter 3 Numerical Method 18 3-1 Geometry Model Construction 18 3-2 Grid Generation 24 3-2-1 Grid Generation Settings 24 3-2-2 Grid Convergence 25 3-3 Flow Solver and Governing Equations 29 3-4 Turbulence Modeling 32 3-4-1 Spalart-Allmaras 33 3-4-2 Shear-Stress Transport k-ω 34 3-5 Numerical Setups 38 Chapter 4 Validation 42 Validation on 3D M6 Wing 42 Chapter 5 Numerical Results and Discussion 47 5-1 Validation on Full Scale Fighter Jet 47 5-2 Numerical Simulation on Three Bump Configurations 61 5-3 Original Bump (OB) Configuration Performance 62 5-4 Widened Bump (WB) Configuration Performance 70 5-5 Narrowed Bump (NB) Configurations Performance 78 5-6 Overall Comparison between Three Configurations 86 Chapter 6 Conclusion 87 References 89 Appendix 93 List of Figures Figure 1 Generation of Fighter Jets 4 Figure 2 Fifth generation fighter [1] 5 Figure 3 Illustration of Boundary Layer 6 Figure 4 Intake designs for designated Mach numbers [4] 7 Figure 5 Engine supported by pylon under wing 8 Figure 6 Illustration of airflow entering commercial jet engines [7] 8 Figure 7 Illustration of airflow entering military jet engines [7] 9 Figure 8 Intake of F-15 fighter jet 10 Figure 9 F-15 fighter jet with boundary layer diverter inlet [2] 10 Figure 10 Diverterless supersonic inlet bump diverting boundary layers [5] 11 Figure 11 F-16 block 30 with diverterless supersonic inlet [6] 12 Figure 12 Derive of diverter supersonic inlet from F-16 to F-35 [3] 13 Figure 13 Mach number distribution on a horizontal plane (parallel to x-y plane) near design mass flow ratio (left) and low mass flow ratio (right) at Ma=1.7 [7] 13 Figure 14 Total pressure recovery for various intake mass flow ratios at M=0.8 (left) and M=1.7 (right) [7] 14 Figure 15 Flow over a wedge and a cone [8] 15 Figure 16 Shape of the bump [9] 16 Figure 17 Widened bump configuration 17 Figure 18 Narrowed bump configuration 17 Figure 19 The ONERA M6 wing [10] 18 Figure 20 Geometric layout of the ONERA M6 wing [10] 19 Figure 21 ONERA M6 wing with calculation domain 20 Figure 22 Full scale fighter jet used in current study 20 Figure 23 Geometric layout of full scale fighter jet used in current study 21 Figure 24 Original Bump 22 Figure 25 Projections of the bump cross section 23 Figure 26 Intake geometry 23 Figure 27 ONERA M6 wing surface meshing 27 Figure 28 ONERA M6 wing and calculation domain meshing 27 Figure 29 Full scale fighter jet surface meshing 28 Figure 30 Full scale fighter jet and calculation domain meshing 28 Figure 31 Boundary settings for 3D ONERA M6 wing 39 Figure 32 Boundary settings for full scale fighter jet 40 Figure 33 Boundary settings for full scale fighter jet with three configurations 41 Figure 34 Pressure coefficient on ONERA M6 wing at y/b=0.2 43 Figure 35 Pressure coefficient on ONERA M6 wing at y/b=0.44 43 Figure 36 Pressure coefficient on ONERA M6 wing at y/b=0.65 44 Figure 37 Pressure coefficient on ONERA M6 wing at y/b=0.80 44 Figure 38 Pressure coefficient on ONERA M6 wing at y/b=0.90 45 Figure 39 Pressure coefficient on ONERA M6 wing at y/b=0.95 45 Figure 40 Pressure coefficient on ONERA M6 wing at y/b=0.99 46 Figure 41 CL over AOA of original bump full scale fighter jet at Mach 0.8 47 Figure 42 CD over AOA of original bump full scale fighter jet at Mach 0.8 48 Figure 43 Lift to drag ratio over AOA of original bump full scale fighter jet at Mach 0.8 48 Figure 44 Cm over AOA of original bump full scale fighter jet at Mach 0.8 49 Figure 45 Contour of Total pressure, at nose, under 0.8 Mach and 5 degrees AOA 50 Figure 46 Contour of Mach number, at nose, under 0.8 Mach and 5 degrees AOA 50 Figure 47 Contour of Total pressure, at inlet, under 0.8 Mach and 5 degrees AOA 51 Figure 48 Contour of Mach number, at inlet, under 0.8 Mach and 5 degrees AOA 51 Figure 49 Contour of Total pressure, at mid-fuselage, under 0.8 Mach and 5 degrees AOA 52 Figure 50 Contour of Mach number, at mid-fuselage, under 0.8 Mach and 5 degrees AOA 52 Figure 51 Contour of Total pressure, at leading edge, under 0.8 Mach and 5 degrees AOA 53 Figure 52 Contour of Mach number, at leading edge, under 0.8 Mach and 5 degrees AOA 53 Figure 53 Contour of Total pressure, at trailing edge, under 0.8 Mach and 5 degrees AOA 54 Figure 54 Contour of Mach number, at trailing edge, under 0.8 Mach and 5 degrees AOA 54 Figure 55 Contour of Total pressure, at mid-fuselage, under 0.8 Mach and 5 degrees AOA 55 Figure 56 Contour of Mach number, at mid-fuselage, under 0.8 Mach and 5 degrees AOA 55 Figure 57 Contour of Total pressure, at inlet, under 0.8 Mach and 5 degrees AOA 56 Figure 58 Contour of Mach number, at inlet, under 0.8 Mach and 5 degrees AOA 56 Figure 59 Contour of Total pressure, at wing root, under 0.8 Mach and 5 degrees AOA 57 Figure 60 Contour of Mach number, at wing root, under 0.8 Mach and 5 degrees AOA 57 Figure 61 Contour of Total pressure, at mid wing, under 0.8 Mach and 5 degrees AOA 58 Figure 62 Contour of Mach number, at mid wing, under 0.8 Mach and 5 degrees AOA 58 Figure 63 Contour of Total pressure, at wingtip, under 0.8 Mach and 5 degrees AOA 59 Figure 64 Contour of Mach number, at wingtip, under 0.8 Mach and 5 degrees AOA 59 Figure 65 Q-Criterion of the original bump fighter, under 0.8 Mach and 5 degrees AOA 60 Figure 66 Streamline of the original bump fighter, under 0.8 Mach and 5 degrees AOA 60 Figure 67 TPD contour of OB, at 0.8 Mach and 5 degrees AOA 64 Figure 68 PRR contour of OB, at 0.8 Mach and 5 degrees AOA 64 Figure 69 Velocity contour of OB, at 0.8 Mach and 5 degrees AOA 65 Figure 70 Vorticity contour of OB, at 0.8 Mach and 5 degrees AOA 65 Figure 71 TKE contour of OB, at 0.8 Mach and 5 degrees AOA 66 Figure 72 Turbulence intensity contour of OB, at 0.8 Mach and 5 degrees AOA 66 Figure 73 TPD contour of OB, at 1.3 Mach and 5 degrees AOA 67 Figure 74 PRR contour of OB, at 1.3 Mach and 5 degrees AOA 67 Figure 75 Velocity contour of OB, at 0.8 Mach and 5 degrees AOA 68 Figure 76 Vorticity contour of OB, at 0.8 Mach and 5 degrees AOA 68 Figure 77 TKE contour of OB, at 1.3 Mach and 5 degrees AOA 69 Figure 78 Turbulence intensity contour of OB, at 1.3 Mach and 5 degrees AOA 69 Figure 79 TPD contour of WB, at 0.8 Mach and 5 degrees AOA 72 Figure 80 PRR contour of WB, at 0.8 Mach and 5 degrees AOA 72 Figure 81 Velocity contour of WB, at 0.8 Mach and 5 degrees AOA 73 Figure 82 Vorticity contour of WB, at 0.8 Mach and 5 degrees AOA 73 Figure 83 TKE contour of WB, at 0.8 Mach and 5 degrees AOA 74 Figure 84 Turbulence intensity contour of WB, at 0.8 Mach and 5 degrees AOA 74 Figure 85 TPD contour of WB, at 1.3 Mach and 5 degrees AOA 75 Figure 86 PRR contour of WB, at 1.3 Mach and 5 degrees AOA 75 Figure 87 Velocity contour of WB, at 1.3 Mach and 5 degrees AOA 76 Figure 88 Vorticity contour of WB, at 1.3 Mach and 5 degrees AOA 76 Figure 89 TKE contour of WB, at 1.3 Mach and 5 degrees AOA 77 Figure 90 Turbulence intensity contour of WB, at 1.3 Mach and 5 degrees AOA 77 Figure 91 TPD contour of NB, at 0.8 Mach and 10 degrees AOA 80 Figure 92 PRR contour of NB, at 0.8 Mach and 10 degrees AOA 80 Figure 93 Velocity contour of NB, at 0.8 Mach and 10 degrees AOA 81 Figure 94 Vorticity contour of NB, at 0.8 Mach and 10 degrees AOA 81 Figure 95 TKE contour of NB, at 0.8 Mach and 10 degrees AOA 82 Figure 96 Turbulence intensity contour of NB, at 0.8 Mach and 10 degrees AOA 82 Figure 97 TPD contour of NB, at 1.3 Mach and 15 degrees AOA 83 Figure 98 PRR contour of NB, at 1.3 Mach and 15 degrees AOA 83 Figure 99 Velocity contour of NB, t 1.3 Mach and 15 degrees AOA 84 Figure 100 Vorticity contour of NB, at 1.3 Mach and 15 degrees AOA 84 Figure 101 TKE contour of NB, at 1.3 Mach and 15 degrees AOA 85 Figure 102 Turbulence intensity contour of NB, at 1.3 Mach and 15 degrees AOA 85 Figure 103 Pressure recovery ratio contour of original bump, at Mach 0.8 and 5 degrees angle of attack 93 Figure 104 Total pressure distribution contour of original bump, at Mach 0.8 and 5 degrees angle of attack 93 Figure 105 Turbulence kinetic energy contour of original bump, at Mach 0.8 and 5 degrees angle of attack 94 Figure 106 Pressure recovery ratio contour of original bump at Mach 0.8 10 degrees angle of attack 94 Figure 107 Total pressure distribution contour of original bump, at Mach 0.8 and 10 degrees angle of attack 95 Figure 108 Turbulence kinetic energy contour of original bump at Mach 0.8 10 degrees angle of attack 95 Figure 109 Pressure recovery ratio contour of original bump, at Mach 0.8 and 15 degrees angle of attack 96 Figure 110 Total pressure distribution contour of original bump, at Mach 0.8 and 15 degrees angle of attack 96 Figure 111 Turbulence kinetic energy contour of original bump, at Mach 0.8 and 15 degrees angle of attack 97 Figure 112 Pressure recovery ratio contour of original bump, at Mach 1.3 and 5 degrees angle of attack 97 Figure 113 Total pressure distribution contour of original bump, at Mach 1.3 and 5 degrees angle of attack 98 Figure 114 Turbulence kinetic energy contour of original bump, at Mach 1.3 and 5 degrees angle of attack 98 Figure 115 Pressure recovery ratio contour of original bump, at Mach 1.3 and 10 degrees angle of attack 99 Figure 116 Total pressure distribution contour of original bump, at Mach 1.3 and 10 degrees angle of attack 99 Figure 117 Turbulence kinetic energy contour of original bump, at Mach 1.3 and 10 degrees angle of attack 100 Figure 118 Pressure recovery ratio contour of original bump, at Mach 1.3 and 15 degrees angle of attack 100 Figure 119 Total pressure distribution contour of original bump, at Mach 1.3 and 15 degrees angle of attack 101 Figure 120 Turbulence kinetic energy contour of original bump, at Mach 1.3 and 15 degrees angle of attack 101 Figure 121 Pressure recovery ratio contour of widened bump, at Mach 0.8 and 5 degrees angle of attack 102 Figure 122 Total pressure distribution contour of widened bump, at Mach 0.8 and 5 degrees angle of attack 102 Figure 123 Turbulence kinetic energy contour of widened bump, at Mach 0.8 and 5 degrees angle of attack 103 Figure 124 Pressure recovery ratio contour of widened bump, at Mach 0.8 and 10 degrees angle of attack 103 Figure 125 Total pressure distribution contour of widened bump, at Mach 0.8 and 10 degrees angle of attack 104 Figure 126 Turbulence kinetic energy contour of widened bump, at Mach 0.8 and 10 degrees angle of attack 104 Figure 127 Pressure recovery ratio contour of widened bump, at Mach 0.8 and 15 degrees angle of attack 105 Figure 128 Total pressure distribution contour of widened bump, at Mach 0.8 and 15 degrees angle of attack 105 Figure 129 Turbulence kinetic energy contour of widened bump, at Mach 0.8 and 15 degrees angle of attack 106 Figure 130 Pressure recovery ratio contour of widened bump, at Mach 1.3 and 5 degrees angle of attack 106 Figure 131 Total pressure distribution contour of widened bump, at Mach 1.3 and 5 degrees angle of attack 107 Figure 132 Turbulence kinetic energy contour of widened bump, at Mach 1.3 and 5 degrees angle of attack 107 Figure 133 Pressure recovery ratio contour of widened bump, at Mach 1.3 and 10 degrees angle of attack 108 Figure 134 Total pressure distribution contour of widened bump, at Mach 1.3 and 10 degrees angle of attack 108 Figure 135 Turbulence kinetic energy contour of widened bump, at Mach 1.3 and 10 degrees angle of attack 109 Figure 136 Pressure recovery ratio contour of widened bump, at Mach 1.3 and 15 degrees angle of attack 109 Figure 137 Total pressure distribution contour of widened bump, at Mach 1.3 and 15 degrees angle of attack 110 Figure 138 Turbulence kinetic energy contour of widened bump, at Mach 1.3 and 15 degrees angle of attack 110 Figure 139 Pressure recovery ratio contour of narrowed bump, at Mach 0.8 and 5 degrees angle of attack 111 Figure 140 Total pressure distribution contour of narrowed bump, at Mach 0.8 and 5 degrees angle of attack 111 Figure 141 Turbulence kinetic energy contour of narrowed bump at Mach 0.8 and 5 degrees angle of attack 112 Figure 142 Pressure recovery ratio contour of narrowed bump, at Mach 0.8 and 10 degrees angle of attack 112 Figure 143 Total pressure distribution contour of narrowed bump, at Mach 0.8 and 10 degrees angle of attack 113 Figure 144 Turbulence kinetic energy contour of narrowed bump, at Mach 0.8 and 10 degrees angle of attack 113 Figure 145Pressure recovery ratio contour of narrowed bump, at Mach 0.8 and 15 degrees angle of attack 114 Figure 146 Total pressure distribution contour of narrowed bump, at Mach 0.8 and 15 degrees angle of attack 114 Figure 147 Turbulence kinetic energy contour of narrowed bump, at Mach 0.8 and 15 degrees angle of attack 115 Figure 148 Pressure recovery ratio contour of narrowed bump, at Mach 1.3 and 5 degrees angle of attack 115 Figure 149 Total pressure distribution contour of narrowed bump, at Mach 1.3 and 5 degrees angle of attack 116 Figure 150 Turbulence kinetic energy contour of narrowed bump, at Mach 1.3 and 5 degrees angle of attack 116 Figure 151 Pressure recovery ratio contour of narrowed bump, at Mach 1.3 and 10 degrees angle of attack 117 Figure 152 Total pressure distribution contour of narrowed bump, at Mach 1.3 and 10 degrees angle of attack 117 Figure 153 Turbulence kinetic energy contour of narrowed bump, at Mach 1.3 and 10 degrees angle of attack 118 Figure 154 Pressure recovery ratio contour of narrowed bump, at Mach 1.3 and 15 degrees angle of attack 118 Figure 155 Total pressure distribution contour of narrowed bump, at Mach 1.3 and 15 degrees angle of attack 119 Figure 156 Turbulence kinetic energy contour of narrowed bump, at Mach 1.3 and 15 degrees angle of attack 119 List of Tables Table 1 ONERA M6 wing geometry [9] 19 Table 2 Full scale fighter jet geometry 21 Table 3 Specification of three bump configurations 22 Table 4 Mesh properties of ONERA M6 wing 24 Table 5 Mesh properties of full scale fighter jet 24 Table 6 Result comparison between different mesh case 26 Table 7 Initial setups for 3D ONERA M6 wing 39 Table 8 Initial setups for full scale fighter jet 39 Table 9 Initial setups for full scale fighter jet 41 Table 10 Performance of Original Configuration at Mach 0.8 63 Table 11 Performance of Original Configuration at Mach 1.3 63 Table 12 Performance of Widened Bump Configuration at Mach 0.8 71 Table 13 Performance of Widened Bump Configuration at Mach 1.3 71 Table 14 Performance of Narrowed Bump Configuration at Mach 0.8 79 Table 15 Performance of Narrowed Bump Configuration at Mach 1.3 79 Table 16 Comparison of PRR on Three Configurations at Mach 0.8 86 Table 17 Comparison of PRR on Three Configurations at Mach 1.3 86 |
參考文獻 |
[1] “F-35 Lightning II, Joint Strike Fighter,” Lockheed Martin Corporation, 2006, URL: https://www.lockheedmartin.com/en-us/products/f-35.html [2] “Boundary Layer,” National Aeronautics and Space Administration, URL: https://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/airplane/boundlay.html [3] Richard K. Scharnhorst, “An Overview of Military Aircraft Supersonic Inlet Aerodynamics,” AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Aerospace Exposition, January 2012. [4] Andras Sobester, “Trade Off in Jet Inlet Design: A Historical Perspective,” Journal of Aircraft, Vol. 44, No. 3, May-June 2007. [5] Chris Wiegand, Bruce A. Bullick, Jeffrey A. Catt, Jeffrey W. Hamstra, Greg P. Walker, and Steve Wurth, “F-35 Air Vehicle Technology Overview,” AIAA Aviation Forum, Aviation Technology, Integration, and Operations Conference, 2018. [6] Eric Hehs, “JSF Diverterless Supersonic Inlet,” 15 July 2000, URL:http://www.codeonemagazine.com/article.html?item_id=58. [7] Jehanzeb Masud, Farooq Akram, “Flow Field and Performance Analysis of an Integrated Diverterless Supersonic Inlet,” AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition, January 2010. [8] Marlene Svensson, “A CFD Investigation of a Generic Bump and its Application to a Diverterless Supersonic Inlet,” (Master Degree Thesis), Linkopings University, 2008. [9] Shang-Cheng Xu, Yi Wang, Zhen-Guo Wang, Xiao-Qiang Fan, “The Design and Analysis of Bump in High Speed Supersonic Flow,” 21st AIAA International Space Planes and Hypersonic and Technologies Conference, 2017. [10] V. Schmitt, F. Charpin, “Pressure Distributions on the ONERA-M6-Wing at Transonic Mach Numbers,” Experimental Data Base for Computer Program Assessment. Report of the Fluid Dynamics Panel Working Group 04, AGARD AR-138, May 1979. [11] Perry A. Wooden, Jeff J. Azevedo, “Use of CFD in Developing the JSF F-35 Outer Mold Lines,” AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference, June 2006. [12] Omer Khan, Jehanzeb Masud, “Evaluating an Experimental Streamlined Fairing for a Diverterless Supersonic Inlet (DSI) Equipped Aircraft,” AIAA SciTech Forum, January 2016. [13] Steve L. Karman Jr., Perry A. Wooden, “CFD Modeling of F-35 Using Hybrid Unstructured Meshes,” AIAA Computational Fluid Dynamics Conference, June 2009. [14] ANSYS CFX Theory Guide, ANSYS Inc., 2013. [15] P. R, Spalart, S. R. Allmaras, “A One Equation Turbulence Model for Aerodynamics Flows,” La Recherche Aerospataiale, Vol. 1, p.5, 1994. [16] David C. Wilcox, “Multi-scale Model for Turbulent Flows,” AIAA Journal, Vol. 26, No. 11, p. 1311-1320, 1980. [17] Florian R. Menter, “Two-equation Eddy-viscosity Turbulence Model for Engineering Applications,” AIAA Journal, Vol. 32, No. 8, p. 1598-1605, 1994. [18] Hsien-Hao Teng, “Design and Numerical Study on Aerodynamics Performance for F-16 Leading Edge Extension,” (Master Degree Thesis), National Cheng Kung University, 2018. [19] Sheng-An Yu, Tung Wan, “Investigation of the F-16 Ventral Fin Effects,” 3rd International Conference in Aerospace for Young Scientists, September, 2018. [20] Hao Jiang, “Three Dimensional Reconstruction of F-35 and the Analysis of Aerodynamic and Stealth Characteristic,” (Master Thesis), Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2010. [21] Irsalan Arif, Shuaib Salamat, Mudassir Ahmed, Faiz Qureshi, and Syed Irtiza Ali Shah, “Comparative Flow Field Analysis of Boundary Layer Diverter Intake and Diverterless Supersonic Intake Configuration,” Journal of Applied Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 11, No. 4, p. 1125-1131, 2018. [22] Jeyatharsan Selvanayagam, Cristhian Aliaga, and John Stokes “CFD Simulation of S-Duct Test Case Using ANSYS FLUENT,” AIAA Propulsion and Energy Forum, 2019. [23] Mohammad Reza Soltania, Rasoul Askarib, “On the Performance of a Body Integrated Diverterless Supersonic Inlet,” Aerospace Science and Technology, Vol. 91, p. 525–538, 2019. [24] T., Triantafyllou, “Total Pressure Distortion Levels at the Aerodynamic Interface Plane of a Military Aircraft,” The Aeronautical Journal, Vol. 119, No. 1219, p. 1147-1166, September, 2015. [25] Pedro David Bravo-Mosquera, Alvaro Martins Abdalla, Hernán Darío Cerón-Muñoz, and Fernando Martini Catalano, “Design and Performance Assessment of an Inverted Rectangular Dorsal Intake for Military Aviation,” 31st Congress of International Council of the Aeronautical Sciences, September, 2018. |
論文全文使用權限 |
如有問題,歡迎洽詢!
圖書館數位資訊組 (02)2621-5656 轉 2487 或 來信