Numerical Analysis of Effect of Slot Geometry on Supersonic Air Inlet Performance

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Malek Ashtar University of Technology, Iran

2 Malek-Ashtar University shainshar

3 Faculty of Aerospace Engineering, Malek Ashtar University of Technology, Iran.

Abstract

Various methods are used to control and attenuate the adverse effects of shock wave/boundary layer interactions (SWBLIs) and improve the performance of supersonic aircraft inlet. In this study, passive slot control is presented as a new, practical method for this purpose and its effect on supersonic inlet performance is investigated. To do so, a rectangular supersonic air inlet is first modeled and meshed at design Mach number of 2.2 and mesh independency is examined using three-dimensional (3D) computational fluid dynamics (CFD) method to achieve an ideal mesh; the most suitable mesh is selected to continue the work. The results of numerical simulations are compared with those of other studies and validated to ensure the correctness of the solution. In this paper, the inlet performance is first discussed without slots at design Mach number of 2.2 and, then, its performance is evaluated by creating slots and considering various parameters. The results indicated that using slots increased the pressure recovery and, consequently, enhanced the inlet performance in off-design conditions. It was also found that creating slots caused the vertical waves to reach the inlet with a delay and effectively controlled the flow. Then, after selecting the best slot, the inlet performance was presented and compared in off-design conditions at Mach numbers of 2 and 2.4, both with and without slots; finally, the best geometry was determined

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

[1] E. L. Goldsmith, J. Seddon, Practical intake aerodynamic design, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 1993.
[2] J. D. Mattingly, W. H. Heiser, D. T. Pratt, Aircraft engine design, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2002.
[3] M. Soltani, M. Farahani, Experimental investigation of effects of Mach number on the flow instability in a supersonic inlet, Experimental Techniques, vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 46-54, 2013.
[4] M. R. Soltani, M. Farahani, J. Sepahi, Numerical and Experimental Simulation of an Axisymmetric Supersonic Inlet, AeroTech III 2009 Conference, 18-19 Nov, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 2009, 2009.
[5] J. R. Blackaby, E. Lyman, J. A. Altermann III, Inlet Performance Characteristics from Wind-Tunnel Tests of a 0.10-Scale Air-Induction System Model of the YF-108A Airplane at Mach Numbers of 2.50, 2.76, and 3.00, NASA Report, 1959.
[6] J. Hawkins, F. Kirkland, R. L. Turner, Inlet spillage drag tests and numerical flow-field analysis at subsonic and transonic speeds of a 1/8-scale, two-dimensional, external-compression, variable-geometry, supersonic inlet configuration, Ames Research Center, 1976.
[7] J. D. Anderson Fundamentals of aerodynamics, New York  Ma Grow-Hill, 1991.
[8] C. Smith, G. Smith, Two stage supersonic inlet (TSSI): 10-inch model calculations, NASA, CR-2005-213287, 2005.
[9] A. Beke, J. Allen, Force and pressure-recovery characteristics of a conical-type nose inlet operating at Mach numbers of 1.6 to 2.0 and at angles of attack to 9 degrees,  NACA RM E52I30, National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, 1952.
[10]  W. Moeckel, J. Connors, A. Schroeder, Investigation of Shock Diffusers at Mach Number 1.85. 1-Projecting Single Shock Cones, National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics Cleveland OH Lewis Flight Propulsion Lab, 1947.
[11]  M. Neale, P. Lamb, More tests with a variable ramp intake having a design mach number of 2.2, 1967.
[12]  S. Pandian, J. Jose, M. Patil, P. Srinivasa, Hypersonic air intake performance improvement through different bleed systems, ISOABE, ISABE- International Symposium on Air Breathing Engines, 15 th, Bangalore, India, 2001.
[13]  C. Herrmann, W. Koschel, Experimental investigation of the internal compression inside a hypersonic intake, 38th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference & Exhibit, 2002.
[14]  B. U. Reinartz, C. D. Herrmann, J. Ballmann, W. W. Koschel, Aerodynamic performance analysis of a hypersonic inlet isolator using computation and experiment, Journal of Propulsion and Power, vol. 19, no. 5, pp. 868-875, 2003.
[15]  M. Mizukami, J. Saunders, Parametrics on 2D navier-stokes analysis of a Mach 2.68 bifurcated rectangular mixed-compression inlet, 31st Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit, pp. 2755, 1995.
[16]  P. Vivek, S. Mittal, Buzz instability in a mixed-compression air intake, Journal of Propulsion and Power, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 819-822, 2009.
[17]  D. Gefroh, E. Loth, C. Dutton, S. McIlwain, Control of an oblique shock/boundary-layer interaction with aeroelastic mesoflaps, AIAA journal, vol. 40, no. 12, pp. 2456-2466, 2002.
[18]  E. S. Hafenrichter, Y. Lee, J. C. Dutton, E. Loth, Normal shock/boundary-layer interaction control using aeroelastic mesoflaps, Journal of propulsion and power, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 464-472, 2003.
[19]  R. K. Jaiman, E. Loth, J. Dutton, Simulations of normal shock-wave/boundary-layer interaction control using mesoflaps, Journal of Propulsion and Power, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 344-352, 2004.
[20]  H. Holden, H. Babinsky, Separated shock-boundary-layer interaction control using streamwise slots, Journal of Aircraft, vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 166-171, 2005.
[21]  A. Gaiddon, D. Knight, C. Poloni, Multicriteria design optimization of a supersonic inlet based upon global missile performance, Journal of Propulsion and Power, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 542-558, 2004.
[22]  T. Mitani, N. Sakuranaka, S. Tomioka, K. Kobayashi, Boundary-layer control in Mach 4 and Mach 6 scramjet engines, Journal of Propulsion and Power, vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 636-641, 2005.
[23]  S. Trapier, P. Duveau, S. Deck, Experimental study of supersonic inlet buzz, AIAA journal, vol. 44, no. 10, pp. 2354-2365, 2006.
[24]  H. Babinsky, Understanding micro-ramp control of supersonic shock wave boundary layer interactions, CAMBRIDGE UNIV (UNITED KINGDOM), 2007.
[25]  B. J. Tillotson, E. Loth, J. C. Dutton, J. Mace, B. Haeffele, Experimental study of a Mach 3 bump-compression flowfield, Journal of Propulsion and Power, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 545-554, 2009.
[26]  S. D. Kim, Aerodynamic design of a supersonic inlet with a parametric bump, Journal of Aircraft, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 198-202, 2009.
[27]  S. Das, J. Prasad, Cowl Deflection Angle in a Supersonic Air Intake, Defence Science Journal, vol. 59, no. 2, 2009.
[28]  A. Weiss, H. Olivier, Shock boundary layer interaction under the influence of a normal suction slot, Shock Waves, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 11-19, 2014.
[29]  M. Karbasizadeh, A. Babaei, M. Bazazzadeh, M. Menshadi, Optimization of slot geometry in shock wave boundary layer interaction phenomenon by using CFD–ANN–GA cycle, Aerospace Science and Technology, vol. 71, pp. 163-171, 2017. (in Persian)
[30]  M. H. Mohammadi, M. Bazazzadeh, M. Mirzabozorg, Design and simulation of ultrasonic inlet operation with combustion chamber based on Ramjet engine requirements, National Conference on Knowledge and Technology of Electrical Engineering, Computer and Mechanics of Iran, june 2019, 2019. (in Persian)
[31]  M. A. Maljaee, J. Sepahi-Younsi, Experimental Study of Effects of Bleed Geometric Parameters on the Performance of a Supersonic Axisymmetric Intake, 2018. (in Persian)
[32]  A. Ghanbari Motlagh, S. Abdolahipour, A. Shams Taleghani, Flow control by magnetohydrodynamic field method at the supersonic air intake, Aerospace Knowledge and Technology Journal, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 157-170, 2020. (in Persian)

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics