Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-8r8nv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-09T17:01:11.930Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Modern developments in hypersonic wind tunnels

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 February 2016

R. J. Stalker
R. J. Stalker*
Affiliation:
Centre for Hypersonics, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Autralia
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.

The development of new methods of producing hypersonic wind-tunnel flows at increasing velocities during the last few decades is reviewed with attention to airbreathing propulsion, hypervelocity aerodynamics and superorbital aerodynamics. The role of chemical reactions in these flows leads to use of a binary scaling simulation parameter, which can be related to the Reynolds number, and which demands that smaller wind tunnels require higher reservoir pressure levels for simulation of flight phenomena. The use of combustion heated vitiated wind tunnels for propulsive research is discussed, as well as the use of reflected shock tunnels for the same purpose. A flight experiment validating shock-tunnel results is described, and relevant developments in shock tunnel instrumentation are outlined. The use of shock tunnels for hypervelocity testing is reviewed, noting the role of driver gas contamination in determining test time, and presenting examples of air dissociation effects on model flows. Extending the hypervelocity testing range into the superorbital regime with useful test times is seen to be possible by use of expansion tube/tunnels with a free piston driver.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 110 , Issue 1103 , January 2006 , pp. 21 - 39
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2006 

References

1. Baals, D.D. and Corliss, W.R., Wind tunnels of NASA, NASA SP-440, 1981, pp 81–87.Google Scholar
2. Hertzberg, A., The application of the shock tube to the study of the problems of hypersonic flight, Jet Propulsion, 1956, 6, (7), pp 549–554.Google Scholar
3. Wittliff, C.E., Wilson, M.R. and Hertzberg, A., The tailored-interface hypersonic shock tunnel, J Aerospace Sci, 1959, 26, (4), pp 219–228.Google Scholar
4. Nagamatsu, H.T., Geiger, R.E. and Sheer, R.E. (Jr), Hypersonic shock tunnel, ARS Journal, 1959, 29, (5), pp 332–340.Google Scholar
5. Lacey, J., Inoue, Y., Higashida, A., Inoue, M., Ishizaka, K. and Korte, J.J., Mach 10 Hypersonic nozzle: improved flow quality, J Spacecraft and Rockets, 2003, 40, (1), pp 126–131.Google Scholar
6. Merski, N.R., Global aeroheating wind-tunnel measurements using improved two-color phosphor thermography method, J Spacecraft and Rockets, 1999, 36, (2), pp 160–170.Google Scholar
7. Stalker, R.J. and Morgan, R.G., Supersonic hydrogen combustion with a short thrust nozzle, Comb and Flame, 1984, 57, pp 55–70.Google Scholar
8. Paull, A., Hypersonic ignition and thrust production in a scramjet, AIAA Paper No. 93-2444. Presented at AIAA/SAE/ASME/ASEE 29th Joint propulsion conference, Monterey, CA, USA, 28-30 June 1993.Google Scholar
9. Stalker, R.J. and Pulsonetti, M.V., Experiments on scaling of supersonic combustion, Univ. of Queensland, Mechanical Engineering Research Report No 2004/3, 2004.Google Scholar
10. Wittliff, G.E., Sundaram, T.R., Rae, W.J. and Lordi, J.A., Study of high density hypervelocity flows and similitudes, AEDC Rep, TR-67-72. Arnold Eng Dev Center, Tullahoma, Tenn, USA, 1967.Google Scholar
11. Stalker, R.J., Approximations for nonequilibrium hypervelocity aerodynamics, AIAA J, 1989, 27, (12), pp 1761–1769.Google Scholar
12. Hayes, W.D. and Probstein, R.F., Hypersonic Flow Theory, 1st Ed., New York, Academic Press, 1959, pp 24–26.Google Scholar
13. Harris, C.J., Comment on nonequilibrium effects on high-enthalpy expansion Of air, AIAA J, 1966, (4). 6, p 1148.Google Scholar
14. Stalker, R.J., Hypervelocity aerodynamics with chemical nonequi-librium, Ann. Rev. Fluid Mech, 1989, 21, pp 37–60.Google Scholar
15. Chase, R.L. and Tang, M.H., A History of the NASP Program from the formation of the joint program office to the termination of the HySTP Scramjet Performance Demonstration Program, AIAA Paper No.95-6031, Presented at AIAA 6th Int Aerosp Planes and Hypersonics Technologies Conference, Chattanooga, TN, 3–7 April, 1995.Google Scholar
16. Roffe, G., Bakos, R., Erdos, J. and SWartwout, W., The propulsion test complex at GASL, AIAA Paper No. 97-7096, 13th Int Symp On Air Breathing Engines, Chattanooga, TN, 7-12 September 1997.Google Scholar
17. Guy, R.W., Rogers, R.C., Puster, R.L., Rock, K.E. and Diskin, G.S., The NASA Langley Scramjet Test Complex, AIAA Paper No. 96-3243, Presented at 32nd AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference, Lake Buena Vista, Fl, USA, 1–3 July, 1996.Google Scholar
18. Garrard, D. and Rigney, S., Building for the Future – AEDCs investment in hypersonic aeropropulsion T & E, AIAA Paper No. 2000-2644, Presented at 21st AIAA Aerodynamic Measurement and Ground Testing Conference, Denver, CO, USA, June 2000.Google Scholar
19. Miles, R.B., Brown, G.L., Lempert, W.R., Yetter, R., Williams, G.J. JR, Bogdonoff, S.M., Natelson, D. and Guest, J.R., Radiatively driven hypersonic wind tunnel, AIAA J, 1995, 33, (8), pp 1463–1470.Google Scholar
20. Brown, G.L., Girgis, I.G., Jiang, F. and Lockner, T.R., A review of the RDHWT/MARIAH II Fluid mechanics modeling and experiments, AIAA Paper No 2004-2481, 24th AIAA Aerodynamics measurement technology and ground testing conferences, Portland, OR, USA, 28 June – 1 July 2004.Google Scholar
21. Costantino, M. and Darnell, I., Ultra-high pressure modelling and experiments review, AIAA Paper No 12004-2482, 24th AIAA Aerodynamic Measurement Technology and Ground Testing Conference, Portland, OR, USA, 28 June – 1 July 2004.Google Scholar
22. Tamagno, J. and Lindeman, O., Experimental results on supersonic combustion general applied science laboratories, Ronkonkoma, New York, USA, December 1962.Google Scholar
23. Osgerby, I.T., Smithson, H.K. and Wagner, D.A., Supersonic combustion tests with a double-oblique-shock SCRAMjet in a shock tunnel, AIAA J, 1970, 8, (9), pp 1703–1705.Google Scholar
24. Stalker, R.J., Development of a hypervelocity wind tunnel, Aeronaut J, 1972, 76, pp 374–384.Google Scholar
25. Stalker, R.J., An Investigation of free piston compression of shock tube drive gas, Nat Res Council, Canada, Div of Mech Eng Report MT-44, May 1961.Google Scholar
26. Gardner, A.D., Hannemann, K., Steelant, J. and Paull, A., Ground testing of the hyshot supersonic combustion flight experiment in HEG and Comparisonwith Flight Data, AIAA Paper No 2004-3345, 40th AIAA Joint Propulsion Conference, Ft. Lauderdale, Fl, USA, 11-14 July 2004.Google Scholar
27. Itoh, K., Uedo, S., Tanno, H., Komura, T. and Sato, K., Hypersonic aerothermo-dynamic and scramjet research using high enthalpy shock tunnel, Shock Waves, 2002, 12, pp 93–98.Google Scholar
28. Odam, J., Scramjet experiments using radical farming, PhD Thesis, The University of Queensland, Australia, November 2004.Google Scholar
29. Sanderson, S.R. and Simmons, J.M., Drag Balances for Hypervelocity Impulse Facilities, AIAA J, 1991, 29, (1), 2, pp 2185–2191.Google Scholar
30. Robinson, M.J., Simultaneous Lift, Moment and Thrust Measurements on a Scramjet in hypervelocity flow, PhD Thesis, University of Queensland, Austrlia, Dec 2003.Google Scholar
31. Smith, A.L. and Mee, D.J., Drag measurements in a hypervelocity expansion tube, shock waves, 1996, 6, pp 161–166.Google Scholar
32. Störkmann, V., Olivier, H. and Grönig, H., Force measurements in hypersonic impulse facilities, AIAA J, 1998, 36, (3), pp 342–348.Google Scholar
33. Holden, M.S., An experimental investigation of turbulent boundary layers at high mach number and Reynolds numbers, Cornell Aero. Lab Report No AB-5072-A-1. NASA CR-112147, November 1972.Google Scholar
34. Goyne, C.P., Stalker, R.J. and Paull, A., transducer for direct measurement of skin friction in hypervelocity impulse facilities, AIAA J, 2002, 40, pp 42–49.Google Scholar
35. Goyne, C.P., Stalker, R.J., Paull, A. and Brescianini, C.P., Hypervelocity skin-friction reduction by boundary-layer combustion of hydrogen, J Spacecraft and Rockets, 2000, 37, (6), pp 740–746.Google Scholar
36. Paull, A., Alesi, H. and Anderson, S., HyShot flight program and how it was developed, AIAA Paper No 2002-5248, 11th AIAA/AAAF International Space Planes and Hypersonic Sys & Tech Conference, Orleans, France, 29 September – 4 Oct 2002.Google Scholar
37. Frost, M.A., HyShot Scramjet Experiments in the T4 Shock Tunnel, M Eng Sc Thesis, University of Queensland, 2002.Google Scholar
38. Holden, M.S., An Experimental Investigation of Turbulent Boundary Layers at High Mach Number and Reynolds Numbers, NASA CR-112147, November 1972.Google Scholar
39. Boyce, R.R. and Hillier, R., Shock-induced three-dimensional separation of an axisymmetric hypersonic turbulent boundary layer, AIAA Paper No. 2000-2226, Presented at 21st AIAA Aerodynamic Measurement and ground testing conference, Denver, CO, USA, June 2000.Google Scholar
40. Störkmann, V., Olivier, H., Grönig, H. and Paris, S., Force measurement on ELAC Ia and on a Re-entry capsule in short duration hypersonic facilities, Proc 21st Int Symp on Shock Waves, Great Keppel Island, Australia, 20-25 July 1997, pp 563–568. Houwing, A.F.P. (Ed), Panther Publishing, ACT 2609, Australia.Google Scholar
41. Grönig, H., Description of the Aachen shock tunnel TH2, Shock Wave Laboratory, Technical University Aachen, Templergraben 55, 5100 Aachen, January 1991.Google Scholar
42. Holden, M.A., Wadhams, T.P. and Candler, G.V., Experimental studies in the LENS shock tunnel and expansion tunnel to examine realgas effects in hypervelocity flows, AIAA Paper No 2004-0916, 42nd AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, Reno, NV, USA, 5–8 January 2004.Google Scholar
43. Bakos, R.J. and Erdos, J.I., Optimizing pressure recovery in a detonation driven reflected shock tunnel, Proc 21st Int Symp on Shock Waves, Great Keppel Island, Australia, 20-25 July 1997, pp 1359–1365. Houwing, A.F.P. (Ed), Panther Publishing, ACT 2609 Australia.Google Scholar
44. Glößner, C. and Olivier, H., Force and Moment Measurement on the HOPPER Configuration for High Enthalpy Conditions, Proc. 24th In. Symp. on Shock Waves, Beijing, China, 11-16 July 2004, pp 203–208. (Ed) Ziang, Z., Springer, Berlin.Google Scholar
45. East, R.A., Stalker, R.J. and Baird, J.P., Laminar flat plate heat transfer measurements from a dissociated high enthalpy hypersonic air flow, J Fl. Mech, 1980, 94, pp 673–699.Google Scholar
46. Slade, J.C., Crane, K.C. and Stalker, R.J., Driver gas detection by quadrupole mass spectrometry in shock tunnels, Proc. 19th Int. Symp. on Shock Waves, Marseille, France, 26-30 July 1993, pp 293–298. Brun, R. and Dimitrescu, L.Z. (Ed), Springer, Berlin.Google Scholar
47. Skinner, K.A., Mass spectrometry in Shock Tunnel Experiments of Hypersonic Combustion, PhD Thesis, University of Queensland, December 1994.Google Scholar
48. Suelani, N. and Hornung, H.G., Detection and reduction of driver gas contamination in a high-enthalpy shock tunnel, Proc. 21st Int. Symp. on Shock Waves, Great Keppel Island, Australia, July 20-25, 1997, pp 543–548. Ed. Houwing, A.F.P., Panther Publishing, ACT 2609, Australia.Google Scholar
49. Cornell Aeronautical Laboratory Hypersonic shock tunnel – Description and Capabilities, May 1969. Cornell Aero. Lab. Of Cornell Univ, Buffalo, NY, 14221, USA.Google Scholar
50. Hannemann, K., Inst. of Aerodyn. And Flow Technology, Göttingen, Germany. Private Communication.Google Scholar
51. Itoh, K., National Aerospace Lab, Kakuda, Japan. Private Communication.Google Scholar
52. Paull, A., A simple shock tunnel driver gas detector, 1996, Shock Waves, 6, (5), pp 309–312.Google Scholar
53. Hornung, H.G. and Sandeman, R.J., Interferometric measurements of radiating ionizing argon flow over blunt bodies, J Phys. D: Appl, Phys, 1974, 7, pp 920–934.Google Scholar
54. Logan, P.F., Stalker, R.J. and McIntosh, M.K., A shock tube study of radiative energy loss from an argon plasma, J Phys D: Appl Phys, 1977, 10, pp 323–337.Google Scholar
55. Oertel, H., Non-reflected shock tunnel test times, Prof. 7th Int. Shock Tube Symp, Toronto, Canada, June 23-25 1969, pp 80–1081. (Ed) Glass, I.I., Univ. of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
56. Mudford, N.R. and Stalker, R.J., The production of pulsed nozzle flow in a shock tube, AIAA Paper No 76-357. Presented at AIAA 9th Fl and Plasma Dyn Conference, San Diego, CA, July 1976.Google Scholar
57. Stalker, R.J. and Mudford, N.R., Unsteady shock propagation in a steady flow nozzle expansion, J Fluid Mech, 1992, 241, pp 525–548.Google Scholar
58. Stalker, R.J. and Edwards, B.P., Hypersonic blunt-body flows in hydrogen-neon mixtures, J Spacecraft and Rockets, 1998, 35, (6), pp 729–735.Google Scholar
59. Miller, C.G., Operational experience in the langley expansion tube with various test gases, AIAA J, 1978, 16, (3), pp 195–196.Google Scholar
60. Paull, A. and Stalker, R.J., Test flow disturbances in an expansion tube, J Fluid Mech, 1992, 245, pp 493–521.Google Scholar
61. Neely, A.J., Stalker, R.J. and Paull, A., High enthalpy, hypervelocity flows of air and argon in an expansion tube, Aeronaut. J, 1991, 95, (946), pp 176–186.Google Scholar
62. Ben-Yakar, A. and Hanson, R.K., Characterization of expansion tube flows for hypervelocity combustion studies, J Prop and Power, 2002, 18, pp 943–952.Google Scholar
63. Neely, A.J. and Morgan, R.G., The Superorbital expansion tube concept, experiment and analysis, Aeronaut J, March 1994, 98, (973), pp 97–105.Google Scholar
64. McIntyre, T.J., Lourel, I., Eichmann, T.N., Morgan, R.G., Jacobs, P.A. and Bishop, A.I., Experimental expansion tube study of the flow over a toroidal ballute, J Spacecraft & Rockets, 2004, 41, (5), pp 716–725.Google Scholar
65. Morgan, R.G., Development of X3, a superorbital expansion tube, AIAA Paper No 2000-0558. Presented at 38th Aerospace Sciences Meeting, Reno, NV, January 2000.Google Scholar
66. Silvester, T.B., Morgan, R.G. and Jacobs, P.A., Skin friction measurements in a duct in the X3 Superorbital Expansion Tube, AIAA Paper No 2004-3551. Presented at 40th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference, Ft. Lauderdale, FL, USA, July, 2004.Google Scholar