0
Technical Brief

Experimental and Numerical Investigations of a Bypass Dual Throat Nozzle

[+] Author and Article Information
Rui Gu

Department of Power Engineering,
Nanjing University of Aeronautics and
Astronautics (NUAA),
Jiangsu, China
e-mail: sz24zxdzb3@126.com

Jinglei Xu

Professor
Department of Power Engineering,
Nanjing University of Aeronautics and
Astronautics (NUAA),
Jiangsu, China
e-mail: xujl@nuaa.edu.cn

Shuai Guo

Department of Power Engineering,
Nanjing University of Aeronautics and
Astronautics (NUAA),
Jiangsu, China
e-mail: gs916@126.com

Contributed by the Turbomachinery Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING FOR GAS TURBINES AND POWER. Manuscript received February 1, 2014; final manuscript received February 21, 2014; published online March 17, 2014. Editor: David Wisler.

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 136(8), 084501 (Mar 17, 2014) (7 pages) Paper No: GTP-14-1062; doi: 10.1115/1.4026943 History: Received February 01, 2014; Revised February 21, 2014

The bypass dual throat nozzle (BDTN) is a new kind of fluidic vectoring nozzle. A bypass is set between the upstream convergent section and upstream minimum area based on the conventional dual throat nozzle (DTN). The BDTN shows a minimum or even no penalty on the nozzle's thrust performance, while it would be able to produce steady and efficient vectoring deflection similar to the conventional DTN. A BDTN model has been designed and subjected to experimental and computational study. The main results show that: (1) BDTN does not consume any secondary injection from the other part of the engine, while it can produce steady and efficient vectoring deflection. (2) Under the same condition, it can provide the maximum thrust vectoring efficiency of all the known fluidic thrust vectoring concepts reported in the literature. (3) The thrust vector angle is also greater than that of the conventional DTN that has been reported up to now. Especially, under NPR = 10, the thrust vector angle of BDTN can reach 21.3 deg. (4) For a wide NPR range from 2 to 10, the BDTN generates the best thrust vectoring performance under NPR = 4. Above all, the BDTN is well suited to produce vectored thrust for nozzles.

Copyright © 2014 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Gal-Or, B., 1990, Vectored Propulsion Supermaneuverability and Robot Aircraft, Springer-Verlag, New York.
Deere, K. A., 2003, “Summary of Fluidic Thrust Vectoring Research Conducted at NASA Langley Research Center,” AIAA Paper No. 2003-3800. [CrossRef]
Walker, S. H., 1997, “Lessons Learned in the Development of a National Cooperative Program,” AIAA Paper No. 97-3348. [CrossRef]
Deere, K. A., 2000, “Computational Investigation of the Aerodynamic Effects on Fluidic Thrust Vectoring,” AIAA Paper No. 2000-3598. [CrossRef]
Heo, J.-Y., and Sung, H.-G., 2012, “Fluid Thrust-Vector Control of Supersonic Jet Using Coflow Injection,” J. Propul. Power, 28(4), pp. 858–861. [CrossRef]
Miller, D. N., Yagle, P. J., and Hamstra, J. W., 1999, “Fluidic Throat Skewing for Thrust Vectoring in Fixed-Geometry Nozzles,” AIAA Paper No. 99-0365. [CrossRef]
Williams, R. G., and Vittal, B. R., 2002, “Fluidic Thrust Vectoring and Throat Control Exhaust Nozzle,” AIAA Paper No. 2002-4060. [CrossRef]
Shin, C.-S., and Kim, H.-D., 2010, “A Computational Study of Thrust Vectoring Control Using Dual Throat Nozzle,” J. Therm. Sci., 19(6), pp. 486–490. [CrossRef]
Abeyounis, W. K., and Bennett, B. D., Jr., 1997, “Static Internal Performance of an Overexpanded Fixed-Geometry, Nonaxisymmetric Nozzle With Fluidic Pitch-Thrust-Vectoring Capability,” NASA Paper No. TP-3645.
Strykowski, P. J., and Krothapalli, A., 1993, “The Countercurrent Mixing Layer: Strategies for Shear-Layer Control,” AIAA Paper No. 93-3260. [CrossRef]
Flamm, J. D., 1998, “Experimental Study of a Nozzle Using Fluidic Counterflow for Thrust Vectoring,” AIAA Paper No. 98-3255. [CrossRef]
Deere, K. A., 1998, “PAB3D Simulation of a Nozzle With Fluidic Injection for Yaw Thrust-Vector Control,” AIAA Paper No. 98-3254. [CrossRef]
Deere, K. A., Berrier, B. L., Flamm, J. D., and Johnson, S. K., 2005, “A Computational Study of a Dual Throat Fluidic Thrust Vectoring Nozzle Concept,” AIAA Paper No. 2005-3502. [CrossRef]
Flamm, J. D., Deere, K. A., Berrier, B. L., and Johnson, S. K., 2005, “An Experimental Study of a Dual Throat Fluidic Thrust Vectoring Nozzle Concept,” AIAA Paper No. 2005-3503. [CrossRef]
Deere, K. A., Flamm, J. D., Berrier, B. L., and Johnson, S. K., 2007, “Computational Study of an Axisymmetric Dual Throat Fluidic Thrust Vectoring Nozzle for a Supersonic Aircraft Application,” AIAA Paper No. 2007-5085. [CrossRef]
Deere, K. A., Flamm, J. D., Berrier, B. L., and Johnson, S. K., 2007, “Experimental Study of an Axisymmetric Dual Throat Fluidic Thrust Vectoring Nozzle Concept for Supersonic Aircraft Application,” AIAA Paper No. 2007-5084. [CrossRef]
Flamm, J. D., Deere, K. A., Mason, M. L., Berrier, B. L., and Johnson, S. K., 2006, “Design Enhancements of the Two-Dimensional, Dual Throat Fluidic Thrust Vectoring Nozzle Concept,” AIAA Paper No. 2006-3701. [CrossRef]
Arne, V. L., and Nachtigall, A. J., 1993, “Calculated Effects of Turbine Rotor-Blade Cooling-Air Flow, Altitude, and Compressor Bleed Point on Performance of a Turbojet Engine,” Paper No. NACA-RM-E51E24.
Gu, R., and Xu, J., 2014, “Effects of Cavity on the Performance of Dual Throat Nozzle During the Thrust-Vectoring Starting Transient Process,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 136(1), p. 014502. [CrossRef]
Patankar, S. V., 1980, Numerical Heat Transfer and Fluid Flow, McGraw-Hill, New York, pp. 89–109.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Configuration of the experimental model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Blowdown wind tunnel facility

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Three-dimensional experimental model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Photograph of the experimental model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Photograph of the experimental model installed in the wind tunnel

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Numerical simulation and experiment results comparison

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Comparison of experimental and computational up-wall pressure

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Computational 3D mesh

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Computational 2D mesh

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Pressure distributions of different grids on the down-wall

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Experimental Schlieren images (NPR = 3)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Comparison of Schlieren image with computational density contours (NPR = 3)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Comparison of experimental static pressure data with CFD prediction at upper-wall and lower-wall of the cavity under different NPR

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Experimental Schlieren images (NPR = 10)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Comparison of Schlieren image with computational density contours (NPR=10)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Contours of the BDTN (NPR = 3)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Contours of the BDTN (NPR = 10)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Comparison of thrust vector angle between 2D and 3D simulation results

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

Comparison of thrust coefficient between 2D and 3D simulation results

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In