0
Research Papers: Gas Turbines: Turbomachinery

Two-Dimensional Supersonic Thrust Vectoring Using Staggered Ramps

[+] Author and Article Information
Carlos F. Montes

Department of Mechanical and
Aerospace Engineering,
UC Davis,
1095 Candlewood Ave.,
Sunnyvale, CA 94089
e-mail: cfmontes@ucdavis.edu

Roger L. Davis

Professor
Department of Mechanical and
Aerospace Engineering,
UC Davis,
One Shields Avenue,
2132 Bainer Hall,
Davis, CA 95616
e-mail: rogerdavis@ucdavis.edu

Contributed by the Turbomachinery Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING FOR GAS TURBINES AND POWER. Manuscript received October 7, 2016; final manuscript received December 29, 2016; published online March 28, 2017. Editor: David Wisler.

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 139(8), 082605 (Mar 28, 2017) (11 pages) Paper No: GTP-16-1489; doi: 10.1115/1.4035848 History: Received October 07, 2016; Revised December 29, 2016

The thrust vectoring performance of a novel nozzle mechanism was numerically investigated. The nozzle was designed for supersonic, air-breathing engines using published engine data, isentropic relationships, and piecewise quartic splines. The mechanism utilizes two staggered, adjustable ramps. A baseline inviscid numerical simulation without ramps verified the nozzle design by comparing the results to the analytical data. Nine ramp configurations were analyzed under steady-state turbulent viscous conditions, using two sets of inlet parameters corresponding to inlet conditions with and without an afterburner (AB). The realizable kε model was used to model the turbulence field. Area-weighted integrals of the exit flow showed superior flow deflection with the nonafterburning inlet flow parameters. Calculations of the mean flow deflection angles showed that the flow can be deflected as much as 30 deg in a given direction with the largest ramp length and angle values. The smallest ramp length (less than 5% of the nozzle length) demonstrated as much as 21 deg in flow deflection.

Copyright © 2017 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Ali, A. , Rodriguez, C. , Neely, A. , and Young, J. , 2012, “ Combination of Fluidic Thrust Modulation and Vectoring in a 2D Nozzle,” AIAA Paper No. 2012-3780.
Blake, B. A. , 2009, “ Numerical Investigation of Fluidic Injection as a Means of Thrust Modulation,” Thesis, University of New South Wales at the Australian Defence Force Academy, Canberra, Australia.
Waithe, K. , and Deere, K. , 2003, “ An Experimental and Computational Investigation of Multiple Injection Ports in a Convergent-Divergent Nozzle for Fluidic Thrust Vectoring,” AIAA Paper No. 2003-3802.
Flamm, J. , 1998, “ Experimental Study of a Nozzle Using Fluidic Counterflow for Thrust Vectoring,” AIAA Paper No. 98-3255.
Sung, H.-G. , and Heo, J.-Y. , 2012, “ Fluidic Thrust Vector Control of Supersonic Jet Using Coflow Injection,” J. Propul. Power, 28(4), pp. 858–861. [CrossRef]
Anderson, C. , Giuliano, V. , Wing, D. , Anderson, C. , Giuliano, V. , and Wing, D. , 1997, “ Investigation of Hybrid Fluidic/Mechanical Thrust Vectoring for Fixed-Exit Exhaust Nozzles,” AIAA Paper No. 97-3148.
Tian, C. , and Lu, Y. , 2013, “ Turbulence Models of Separated Flow in Shockwave Thrust Vector Nozzle,” Eng. Appl. Comput. Fluid Mech., 7(2), pp. 182–192.
Deere, K. , Berrier, B. , Flamm, J. , and Johnson, S. , 2003, “ Computational Study of Fluidic Thrust Vectoring Using Separation Control in a Nozzle,” AIAA Paper No. 2003-3803.
Koshoffer, J. M. , 2001, “ Fluidic Nozzle Control System,” U.S. Patent No. 1,158,156A2.
Miller, D. N. , Yagle, P. J. , Ginn, K. B. , and Hamstra, J. W. , 2000, “ Method and Apparatus of Asymmetric Injection Into Subsonic Flow of a High Aspect Ratio/Complex Geometry Nozzle,” U.S. Patent No. 6,962,044B1.
Rolls-Royce, 1986, “ The Jet Engine,” Rolls-Royce, Derby, UK, p. 12.
Hawkins, W. M., Jr. , 1953, “ Jet Deflector and Orifice Control,” U.S. Patent No. 2,928,238.
Wooten, W. H., Jr. , and Speir, D. W. , 1979, “ Vectorable Nozzle,” U.S. Patent No. 4,280,660.
Konarski, M. , and Nash, D. O. , 1975, “ Thrust Vectorable Exhaust Nozzle,” U.S. Patent No. 4,000,854.
Zha, G. , Carroll, B. F. , Paxton, C. D. , Conley, C. A. , and Wells, A. , 2005, “ High Performance Airfoil Using Co-Flow Jet Flow Control,” AIAA Paper No. 2005-1260.
Mattingly, J. D. , 2006, Elements of Gas Turbine Propulsion, McGraw-Hill, New York, p. 864.
Olson, B. J. , 2007, “ 2D Nozzle Design,” MathWorks, Natick, MA.
Yu, K. , Yang, X. , and Mo, Z. , 2014, “ Profile Design and Multifidelity Optimization of Solid Rocket Motor Nozzle,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 136(3), p. 031104.
White, F. M. , 2011, Fluid Mechanics, McGraw-Hill, New York, pp. 21–30.
ANSYS, 2009, “ ANSYS Fluent 12.0 User's Guide,” Canonsburg, PA, pp. 8–76;7–100.
Shih, T.-H. , Liou, W. W. , Shabbir, A. , Yang, Z. , and Zhu, J. , 1994, “ A New k-Epsilon Eddy Viscosity Model for High Reynolds Number Turbulent Flows—Model Development and Validation,” Report No. NASA-TM-106721.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Sample streamlines (blue) through the nozzle with deployed ramps (red)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

A schematic showing several geometric parameters used to determine the angleα

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

(a) The simplified 3D nozzle with exit plane parameters and (b) ymax and ymin for a sample configuration

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Domain size for each subcase

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

(a) Sample grid topology with subdomain structures and (b) sample grid with low cell count for visual clarity

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

The variation of Iδ with increasing grid density was used as the metric for grid independence

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Nozzle geometry verification by means of comparing inviscid, numerical data, and analytical data

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Mach number contours for all Lr values, positioned at 10 deg, for both inlet boundary parameter sets

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Static pressure contours for all Lr values, positioned at 10 deg, for both inlet boundary parameter sets

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Mach number contours for all Lr values, positioned at 25 deg, for both inlet boundary parameter sets

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Static pressure contours for all Lr values, positioned at 25 deg, for both inlet boundary parameter sets

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Mach number contours for all Lr values, positioned at 40 deg, for both inlet boundary parameter sets

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Static pressure contours for all Lr values, positioned at 40 deg, for both inlet boundary parameter sets

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Static pressure numerical averages, evaluated across the nozzle inlet boundary for case 1 (a) and case 2(b)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Mean flow deflection angles (δavg) are compared to the analytical averages of θ and α

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Area-weighted integrals plotted against θ (a) and Lr (b). Bold lines represent case 1 data.

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