Shock Waves pp 619-624 | Cite as

Extrapolation of a generic scramjet model to flight scale by experiments, flight data and CFD

  • A. Mack
  • J. Steelant
  • K. Hannemann
Conference paper

Summary

Based on ground and flight testing, a generic full scale scramjet combustion chamber was investigated to extrapolate the results obtained at small scale experiments. Numerical CFD validation was done for the experimental data for a duct size of 9.8mm height and wall porthole injection. Taking previous results of mixing and combustion performance enhancement into account, the configuration was extrapolated to a real full scale vehicle with a duct size of 300mm height. The combustion process in the full scale combustion chamber showed comparable flow topology changes and pressure rise due to variation in equivalence ratio. The different working modes of the scramjet such as the pure supersonic mode at lower equivalence ratio, a mixed subsonic/supersonic mode with a locked reverse flow area behind the injector at moderate equivalence ratio and choked flow at high equivalence ratio could be reproduced for both small and large scale ducts.

Keywords

Combustion Chamber Equivalence Ratio Total Pressure Loss Shock Tunnel Flow Topology 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Paull, A.: Scramjet measurements in a shock tunnel. AIAA 99-2450, 1999Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gardner, A.D., Hannemann, K., Steelant, S., Paull, A.: Ground Testing of the HyShot Supersonic Combustion Flight Experiment in HEG and Comparison withFlight Data. AIAA 2004-3345, 2004Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mack, A., Steelant, J., Schramm, J.M., Hannemann, K.: Sensitivity Analysis for the HyShot Generic Supersonic Combustion Configuration using CFD, ISABE-2007-1310, 2007Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mack, A., Steelant, J., Hannemann, K., Gardner, A.D.: Comparison of Supersonic Combustion Tests with Shock Tunnels, Flight and CFD, AIAA 2006-4684, 2006Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mack, A., Steelant, J.: Mixing Enhancement by Shock Impingement in a Generic Scramjet Combustion Chamber. European Conference on Computational Fluid Dynamics ECCOMAS CFD 2006, September 5-8 2006, Egmond aan Zee, The Netherlands, 2006Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mack, A., Steelant, J., Hannemann, K., Karl, S., Odam, J.: Mixing and Combustion Enhancement in a Generic Scramjet Combustion Chamber, AIAA 2006-8134, 2006Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mack, A., Steelant, J., Togiti, V., Longo, J.M.A.: Impact of boundary layer Turbulence on the Combustion Behaviour in a Scramjet. proceedings of EUCASS 2007, Paper 295, 2007Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mack, A., Hannemann, V., Validation of the Unstructured DLR-TAU-Code for Hypersonic Flows, AIAA 2002-3111Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Karl, S., Hannemann, K., Application of the DLR Tau-code to the RCM-1 testcase: Penn State Preburner Combustor. Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Rocket Combustion Modelling, 2006Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Evans, J.S., Schexnayder Jr., C.J., Influence of Chemical Kinetics and Unmixedness on Burning in Supersonic Hydrogen Flames AIAA Journal, Vol. 18, No. 2, February 1980Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Karl, S., Hannemann, K., Steelant, J., Mack, A.: CFD Analysis of the HyShot Supersonic Combustion Flight Experiment Configuration, AIAA 2006-8041, 2006Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sippel, M., Klevanski, J.: Preliminary Definition of the Supersonic and Hypersonic Airliner Configurations in LAPCAT. AIAA 2006-7984, 2006Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. Mack
    • 1
  • J. Steelant
    • 1
  • K. Hannemann
    • 2
  1. 1.European Space Agency (ESA-ESTEC)Netherlands
  2. 2.German Aerospace Center DLRGermany

Personalised recommendations