Validation of Truncation Philosophy for 3-D Scramjet Inlets
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Air Force Research Laboratory Robust Scramjet Program: Validation of Truncation Philosophy for 3-D Scramjet Inlets Trent M. Taylor, Thomas D. Wolf, Ronald R. Springer, and Stephen M. D’Alessio round testing of a medium-scale scramjet engine in semifree- jet mode will require development of a technique for truncat- ing 3-D inlets to provide confidence that the performance and operability of a full-length inlet is accurately represented. Trun- cation is necessary because of the test section size limitations of current hypersonic test facilities. A method was developed by APL, under the Air Force Research Laboratory Robust Scramjet program, to truncate a streamtraced 3-D inlet. Correlations were also developed to relate flow parameters between the full-length and truncated inlets that yield similar perfor- mance and operability. A pair of subscale inlets (baseline and truncated) have been designed and fabricated to be tested at the NASA Glenn Research Center 1- by 1-Foot Supersonic Wind Tunnel to verify this truncation methodology and correlation. This TRuncated INlet Test (TRINT) was concluded in the fourth quarter of 2011; the test covered a range of Mach numbers at various angles of attack and included evaluation of inlet performance during backpressured runs (i.e., an attached operating combustor was simulated). Analysis of the results is still pending, and if acceptable performance and operability similarity were demonstrated in the test, this truncation approach can be used for future Robust Scramjet engine demonstration tests. MOTIVATION Freejet testing of an integrated engine system (i.e., increases. The length of the system can become too engine system is immersed in the supersonic flow) large to fit in the test section, and the blockage area becomes increasingly difficult as the size of the engine of the inlet can prevent the facility from maintaining JOHNS HOPKINS APL TECHNICAL DIGEST, VOLUME 32, NUMBER 1 (2013) 395 T. M. TAYLOR ET AL. the desired operating condition. If the inlet can be truncated, M 0 Full-scale inlet (2-D) the total length of the test arti- M1 A0A = 0° cle can be reduced, which, in M2 turn, reduces blockage in the M wind tunnel. However, if the 3 flow properties (pressure, tem- perature, velocity, etc.) and inlet performance are significantly impacted by this truncation, A0A = ow-turning angle then the test data for the engine Truncated inlet (2-D) M1 are no longer valid. A carefully M2 designed truncation methodol- M3 ogy can minimize the differences so that integrated engine perfor- mance can be measured. Trun- cating an inlet can be a relatively straightforward process for a 2-D Figure 1. Truncating a 2-D inlet. inlet, as seen in Fig. 1. The flow properties downstream of the first ramp on the 2-D inlet within the propulsion system. On a 3-D inlet, flow is can be easily found with computational fluid dynamics being compressed in all directions and there is no mean- (CFD) or experimentation. The first ramp can then be ingful plane to remove as there is in a 2-D inlet. No removed, and its flow turning can be replicated by low- known program to date has examined methods for trun- ering the inlet angle of attack (AOA). The wind tunnel cating a 3-D inlet and conducted tests to determine the must be set to the appropriate flow conditions, i.e., sta- validity of the approach. tion M1 versus M0. The isolator is the constant area sec- tion downstream of the compression ramps. This is the portion of the inlet where the pressure rise required for DEVELOPMENT OF 3-D INLET TRUNCATION combustion is contained and one of the places where METHODOLOGY flow properties will be examined. The current designs For the 3-D streamtraced inlets considered in this being considered for use in the Robust Scramjet program truncation investigation, the Busemann flow field (see all use inward-turning 3-D inlets. Inward-turning inlets Fig. 2) was selected as the parent flow. The baseline inlet are designed to compress the flow in a 3-D manner as was derived by tracing streamlines through the top por- opposed to planar compression of pure ramp inlets. The tion of this flow where inlet surfaces are defined as the advantage of the inward-turning engine concepts is a streamlines first turn from their original axial direction. lower wetted surface area per unit mass flow processed The truncated inlet is made by removing portions of the by the engine. This feature inherently leads to lighter baseline inlet at a higher flow-turning angle. This Buse- structures, lower heat loads, and fewer frictional losses mann flow field is characterized by internally contracting, Mach contours Conical shock Isentropic compression Flow angle contours Figure 2. Busemann inlet. (Reproduced from Ref. 4 with permission of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.) 396 JOHNS HOPKINS APL TECHNICAL DIGEST, VOLUME 32, NUMBER 1 (2013) AFRL ROBUST SCRAMJET PROGRAM: SCRAMJET INLET TRUNCATION conically symmetric flow that uses isentropic compres- With the streamtubes defined, the 3-D streamlines sion and terminates in a conical shock that realigns the were read into a grid-generation program as databases. flow to the axial direction, as shown in Fig. 2. The Buse- These were used to create a surface mesh and then a mann inlet has naturally high on-design performance 3-D mesh. This method was tested and verified by solv- because the forward compression occurs isentropically. ing the 3-D mesh in a CFD code with a calorically per- The principal disadvantage of the Busemann inlet from fect and inviscid gas, which are the assumptions of the a practical point of view is that its internal contraction Taylor–Maccoll equations. Both an inlet with a circular significantly exceeds the Kantrowitz1 starting constraint inflow and circular outflow profile and an inlet with a for inlets of interest. In supersonic inlets, a normal shock square inflow and square outflow profile were solved in (or series of high-strength shocks) can set up in the for- the CFD code. The total pressure losses and inlet exit ward part of the inlet and will deflect much of the mass Mach numbers closely matched the values predicted flow from flowing down the inlet. An inlet with these by the Taylor–Maccoll equations and conical shock high-strength shocks and low mass flow rates is labeled equations. Total pressure is defined as the pressure that as unstarted. The Kantrowitz starting constraint defines results from slowing the flow to zero velocity in an isen- an area ratio of the inlet that is necessary to have the tropic (adiabatic and reversible) manner. Shock waves shock system pass through the inlet and allow the mass and viscous losses will reduce the total pressure of the to flow down the inlet, i.e., to start the inlet. Streamline flow. A series of cross-flow slices was visualized from tracing within the Busemann inlet provides the oppor- inflow to exit of the inlet, and a conical shock shape tunity to leverage the high performance of Busemann was observed in both the inlet with a circular profile and design while avoiding the high internal contraction. the inset with a square profile. The parent Busemann inlet flow is generated from a It was also of interest to the Robust Scramjet pro- solution of the Taylor–Maccoll2 equations. In the pres - gram to examine inlets that undergo shape transition ent work, a method similar to that shown by VanWie from the inflow to exit of the inlet—namely, those inlets and Molder3 was used to solve the equations and derive whose cross-section transitions from a square shape to a the Busemann flow field. The process starts by assum- circular shape. Various methods were examined for this ing a Mach number and total pressure loss at the exit of shape transition and its impact on inlet performance. the inlet. The conical shock strength can then be deter- The main focus of this current work is to examine trun- mined, and the flow field is then integrated backward cation methods, so further details on the shape transi- through the inlet using the Taylor–Maccoll equations tion study can be found in Ref. 4. The optimal method until the flow becomes aligned with the freestream. A found is in this study was used to generate the baseline Fortran program was written for this work to numeri- inlet geometry used in this truncation study. cally integrate the equations using a Runge–Kutta As the flow is compressed in the forward section of method to find the inlet inflow conditions. The inlet the inlet, the amount of flow-turning (deflection from exit conditions were then iterated using a bracketing the axial direction) increases. The truncation method method to find the parent flow field that had the desired developed for the Robust Scramjet program uses the inflow Mach number and contraction ratio (ratio of the streamlines of the baseline inlet and truncates these entrance area to exit area). lines at an increased turning angle such that the inlet Having defined the axisymmetric parent flow field, profile is changed but the geometry downstream of the a locus of points defining the cross-sectional perimeter truncation remains the same. The method starts with of the desired inflow shape was placed in the freestream the streamlines of the baseline inlet and then removes of a 3-D representation of the axisymmetric flow field. the leading portions of the inlet up to a surface that is Then, streamlines were traced through these points at a larger flow-turning angle. Thus, the truncated inlet using a Fortran program. The resulting streamlines surfaces are kept as a subset of the baseline surfaces.