Experiments in Fluids

, Volume 12, Issue 1–2, pp 113–118 | Cite as

Base pressure measurements on a cone at Mach numbers from M∞ = 5 to 7

  • M. Tanner
Originals
Received:
  • 65 Downloads

Abstract

Base pressure measurements were performed on a blunt cone in the Ludwieg-Tube facility at the DLR in Göttingen at Mach numbers from M∞ = 4.99 to 6.83. The angle of incidence was varied between α = 0° and 15°. The results show the influence of Mach number and angle of incidence on the base pressure.

Keywords

Mach Number Pressure Measurement Base Pressure Blunt Cone Base Pressure Measurement 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

List of symbols

D

base diameter

R

base half diameter; D = 2R

rn

nose radius

α

angle of incidence

ϕ

cone apex angle

p∞

free stream static pressure

pB

base pressure (one pressure tap only)

pref

reference pressure

U∞

free stream velocity

M∞

free stream Mach number

ReL

free stream Reynolds number based on cone length

ρ∞

free stream density

v∞

free stream kinematic viscosity

γ

ratio of specific heats

q∞

free stream dynamic pressure \( = ({\text{1/2}})\rho _\infty {\text{ }}U_\infty ^2 \equiv \frac{1}{2}\gamma {\text{ }}p_\infty {\text{ }}M_\infty ^2\)

cpB

base pressure coefficient \( = (p_B - p_\infty )/q_\infty \equiv \frac{2}{{\gamma M_\infty ^2 }}\left( {\frac{{p_B }}{{p_\infty }} - 1} \right)\)

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bulmer, B. M., 1976: Flight-test base pressure measurements in turbulent flow. AIAA J. 14, 1783–1785Google Scholar
  2. Cassanto, J. M., 1968: Base pressure results at M = 4 using free-flight and sting-supported models. AIAA J. 6, 1411–1414Google Scholar
  3. Cassanto, J. M., 1972: Flight test base pressure results at hypersonic Mach numbers in turbulent flow. AIAA J. 10, 329–331Google Scholar
  4. Cassanto, J. M., 1973: A base pressure experiment for determining the atmospheric pressure profile of planets. J. Spacecraft and Rockets 4, 253–261Google Scholar
  5. Chapman, D. R., 1951: An analysis of base pressure at supersonic velocities and comparison with experiment. NACA TR 1051Google Scholar
  6. Chapman, D. R.; Kuehn, D. M.; Larson, H. K., 1958: Investigation of separated flows in supersonic and subsonic streams with emphasis on the effect of transition. NACA TR 1356Google Scholar
  7. Compton III, W. B., 1968: Effect on base drag of recessing the bases of conical afterbodies at subsonic and transonic speeds. NASA TN D-4821Google Scholar
  8. Deléry, J.; Wagner, B., 1990: Results of Garteur action group on “flow past missile afterbodies”. AGARD Preprint, FriedrichshafenGoogle Scholar
  9. Esch, H., 1977: Mesung des Widerstandes kegeliger Hecks im Überschall. DFVLR-IB 351-77/6Google Scholar
  10. Krogmann, P., 1977: An experimental study of boundary layer transition on a slender cone at Mach 5. AGARD-CP 224, pp. 26-1 to 26-12Google Scholar
  11. Love, E. S., 1957: Base pressure at supersonic speeds on two-dimensional airfoils and on bodies of revolution with and without fins having turbulent boundary layers. NACA TN 3819Google Scholar
  12. Ludwieg, H.; Hottner, Th.; Grauer-Carstensen, H., 1970: Der Rohr-windkanal der Aerodynamischen Versuchsanstalt Göttingen. Jb. 1969 der DGLR, pp. 52–58Google Scholar
  13. Morel, T., 1979: Effect of base cavities on the aerodynamic drag of an axisymmetric cylinder. Aeron. Quart 30, 400–412Google Scholar
  14. Nagamatsu, H. T.; Sheerjr., R. E.; Graber, B. C., 1967: Hypersonic laminar boundary-layer transition on 8-foot-long 10° cone, M 1 = 9.1–16. AIAA J. 5, 1245–1252Google Scholar
  15. Pick, G. S., 1972: Base pressure distribution of a cone at hypersonic speeds. AIAA J. 10, 1683–1686Google Scholar
  16. Reller jr., J. O.; Hamaker, F. M., 1955: An experimental investigation of the base pressure characteristics of nonlifting bodies of revolution at Mach numbers from 2.73 to 4.98. NACA TN 3393Google Scholar
  17. Roache, P. J., 1973: Base drag calculations in supersonic turbulent axisymmetric flows. J. Spacecraft and Rockets 10, 285–287Google Scholar
  18. Schmidt, W. R.; Herpfer, E., 1973: Zusammenstellung experimenteller Unterlagen zum Heckwiderstand von Flugkörpern im Transschall- und im Überschallbereich und Vergleich mit theoretischen Berechnungsmethoden. BMVg-FBWT 73-27Google Scholar
  19. Staylor, W. F.; Goldberg, T. J., 1965: Afterbody pressures on boattailed bodies of revolution having turbulent boundary layers at Mach 6. NASA TN D-2761Google Scholar
  20. Stivers jr., L. S., 1971: Calculated pressure distributions and components of total-drag coefficients for 18 constant-volume, slender bodies of revolution at zero incidence for Mach numbers from 2.0 to 12.0, with experimental aerodynamic characteristics for three of the bodies. NASA TN D-6536Google Scholar
  21. Tanner, M., 1973: Theoretical prediction of base pressure for steady base flow. Prog. Aerospace Sci. 14, 177–225Google Scholar
  22. Tanner, M., 1980: Theoretische Bestimmung des Basisdruckes von Flugkörperrümpfen mit turbulenten Totwasser bei Überschallgeschwindigkeiten. DFVLR-FB 80-29Google Scholar
  23. Tanner, M., 1984: Steady base flows. Prog. Aerospace Sci. 21, 81–157Google Scholar
  24. Tanner, M., 1988: Base cavity at angles of incidence. AIAA J. 26, 376–377Google Scholar
  25. Tanner, M., 1991: Basisdruckmessungen an einem Kegel-Zylinder bei Machzahlen von M ∞ = 3.15 bis 6.83. Z. Flugwiss. Weltraumforsch. 15, 192–196Google Scholar
  26. Zarin, N. A., 1966: Base pressure measurements on sharp and blunt 9° cones at Mach numbers from 3.50 to 9.20. AIAA J. 4, 743–745Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Tanner
    • 1
  1. 1.DLR, Institute for Theoretical Fluid MechanicsGöttingenFRG

Personalised recommendations