Advertisement

Comparative Heat Flux Measurement of a Sharp Cone Between Three Hypersonic Test Facilities at LHD

  • Q. WangEmail author
  • P. Lu
  • J. W. Li
  • S. Wu
  • J. P. Li
  • W. Zhao
  • Z. L. Jiang
Conference paper

Abstract

Comparative heat flux measurements for a sharp cone model were conducted by utilizing a high Reynolds number shock tunnel JF8A, a high-enthalpy shock tunnel JF10, and a large-scale shock tunnel JF12 at the Key Laboratory of High Temperature Gas Dynamics (LHD), Institute of Mechanics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, which were responsible for providing the nonequilibrium or perfect gas flows. Through the assessment of data accuracy and consistency between each facility, we aim to compare the heat transfer data of a sharp cone taken in them under a totally different kind of freestream conditions. A parameter, defined as the product of the Stanton number and the square root of the Reynolds number, was found to be more characteristic for the aerodynamic heating phenomena encountered in hypersonic flight under laminar flows. This parameter can almost eliminate the variability caused by the different flow conditions, and it should be a more preferable parameter for the reduction of the ground experimental data and the extrapolation to flight.

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 11402275 and 11472280).

References

  1. 1.
    S.L. Gai et al., Stagnation point heat flux in hypersonic high enthalpy flows. Shock Waves 2, 1 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    T. Kishimoto et al., High Enthalpy Flow Computation and Experiment Around the Simple Bodies (Special Publication of National Aerospace Laboratory SP-29, Tokyo, 1996)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    W.Z. Dong et al., Numerical analysis for correlation of standard model testing in high enthalpy shock facility and flight test. Exp. Meas. Fluid. Mech. 16, 2 (2002)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Z. L. Jiang et al., Experiments and development of the long-test-duration hypervelocity detonation-driven shock tunnel (LHDst), AIAA 2014-1012Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    F.K. Lu et al., Advanced hypersonic test facilities, in Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics, 2002Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    D.L. Schultz et al., Heat transfer measurements in short duration facilities, AGARD-AG-165, 1973Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Q. Wang, Experimental Study on Characteristics of Heat Transfer and Electron Density in High Enthalpy Flow (Institute of Mechanics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 2013)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    K.H. Kim et al., Methods for the accurate computations of hypersonic flows: I. AUSMPW+ scheme. J. Comput. Phys. 174, 1 (2001)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    A. Jameson et al., Lower-upper implicit schemes with multiple grids for the Euler equations. AIAA J. 25(7) (1987)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Q. Wang et al., Comparative study on aerodynamic heating under perfect and nonequilibrium hypersonic flows. Sci. China Phys. Mech. 59(2) (2016)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    F.M. White, Viscous Fluid Flow, 2nd edn. (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1991)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    P. Germain, et al., Transition on a sharp cone at high enthalpy: new measurements in the shock tunnel T5, AIAA 93-0343Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Q. Wang
    • 1
    Email author
  • P. Lu
    • 1
    • 2
  • J. W. Li
    • 1
  • S. Wu
    • 1
  • J. P. Li
    • 1
  • W. Zhao
    • 1
    • 2
  • Z. L. Jiang
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.State Key Laboratory of High Temperature Gas DynamicsInstitute of Mechanics, Chinese Academy of SciencesBeijingChina
  2. 2.School of Engineering ScienceUniversity of Chinese Academy of SciencesBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations