Computation of three-dimensional, inviscid supersonic flows

  • Paul Kutler
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Physics book series (LNP, volume 41)


Supersonic Flow Slip Surface Delta Wing Courant Number Shock Shape 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Rakich, J. V., “Calculation of Hypersonic Flow over Bodies of Revolution at Small Angles of Attack,” AIAA J., Vol. 3, pp. 458–464, March 1965.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lomax, H., and Inouye, M., “Numerical Analysis of Flow Properties About Blunt Bodies Moving at Supersonic Speeds in an Equilibrium Gas,” NASA TR R-204, 1964.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kutler, P., Reinhardt, W. A., and Warming, R. F., “Multishocked, Three-Dimensional Supersonic Flowfields with Real Gas Effects,” AIAA J., Vol. 11, No. 5, pp. 657–664, May 1973.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dekker, T. J., “Constructive Aspects of the Fundamental Theorem of Algebra,” B. Dejon and P. Henrici, eds., John Wiley & Sons, Inc., p. 37, 1969.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lax, P. D., “Weak Solutions of Nonlinear Hyperbolic Equations and Their Numerical Computation,” Commun. Pure Appl. Math., Vol. 7, pp. 159–193, 1954.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gary, J., “On Certain Finite Difference Schemes for Hyperbolic Systems,” Math. Computation, pp. 1–18, 1964.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Abbett, M. J., “Boundary Condition Computational Procedures for Inviscid Supersonic Steady Flow Field Calculations,” Aerotherm Corp., Mt. View, Calif., Final Rept. 71-41, 1971.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Longley, H. J., “Methods of Differencing in Eulerian Hydrodynamics,” Los Alamos Scientific Lab., Los Alamos, New Mexico, LASL Rept. LAMS-2379, 1960.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Godunov, S. K., “Finite Difference Method for Numerical Computation of Discontinuous Solutions of the Equations of Fluid Dynamics,” Math. Skornik, Vol. 47(89), No. 3, p. 271, 1959.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rizzi, A. W., and Inouye, M., “A Time Split Finite Volume Technique for Three-Dimensional Blunt Body Flow,” AIAA J., Vol. 11, Nov. 1972.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rizzi, A. W., Klavins, A., and MacCormack, R. W., “A Generalized Numerical Method for Three-Dimensional Supersonic Flow,” to be published.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Moretti, G., and Abbett, M., “A Time-Dependent Computational Method for Blunt Body Flows,” AIAA J., Vol. 4, pp. 2136–2141, 1966.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bohachevsky, I. O., and Mates, R. E., “A Direct Method for Calculation of the Flow about an Axisymmetric Blunt Body at Angle of Attack,” AIAA J., Vol. 4, pp. 776–782, 1966.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Burstein, S. Z., “Numerical Methods in Multidimensional Shocked Flows,” AIAA J., Vol. 2, pp. 2111–2117, 1964.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Morretti, G., Grossman, B., and Marconi, F., Jr., “A Complete Numerical Technique for the Calculation of Three-Dimensional Inviscid Supersonic Flows,” AIAA Paper 72–192, 1972.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Marconi, F., and Salas, M., “Computation of Three-Dimensional Flows about Aircraft Configurations,” Computers & Fluids, Vol. 1, No. 2, June 1973.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kutler, P., Lomax, H., and Warming, R. F., “Computation of Space Shuttle Flow Fields Using Noncentered Finite-Difference Schemes,” AIAA J., Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 196–204, Feb. 1973.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Blottner, F. G., and Roache, P. J., “Nonuniform Mesh Systems,” J. Computational Phys., Vol. 8, pp. 498–499, 1971.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kalnay de Rivas, E., “On the Use of Nonuniform Grids in Finite-Difference Equations,” J. Computational Phys., Vol. 10, pp. 202–210, 1972.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Chu, C. W., and Powers, S. A., “Determination of Space Shuttle Flow Field by the Three-Dimensional Method of Characteristics,” NASA TM X-2508, 1972.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Thomas, P. D., Vinokur, M., Bastianon, R., and Conti, R. J., “Numerical Solution for the Three-Dimensional Hypersonic Flow Field of a Blunt Delta Body,” AIAA J., Vol. 10, No. 7, July 1972.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    MacCormack, R. W., “The Effect of Viscosity in Hypervelocity Impact Cratering,” AIAA Paper 69–354, pp. 1–7, 1969.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Warming, R. F., Kutler, P., and Lomax, H., “Second-and Third-Order Noncentered Difference Schemes for Nonlinear Hyperbolic Equations,” AIAA J., Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 189–196, Feb. 1973.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Rusanov, V. V., “On Difference Schemes of Third Order Accuracy for Nonlinear Hyperbolic Systems,” J. Computational Phys., Vol. 5, pp. 507–516, 1970.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Burstein, S. Z., and Mirin, A. A., “Third Order Difference Methods for Hyperbolic Equations,” J. Computational Phys., Vol. 5, pp. 547–571, 1970.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Richtmyer, R. D., and Morton, K. W., Difference Methods for Initial-Value Problems, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 1967.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Warming, R. F., and Hyett, B. J., “The Modified Equation Approach to the Stability and Accuracy Analysis of Finite-Difference Methods,” J. of Comp. Phys., Vol. 14, No. 2, Feb. 1974.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hopf, E., “The Partial Differential Equation ut + uux = μuxx'” Commun. Pure Appl. Math., Vol. 3, pp. 201–230, 1950.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Lax, P. D., and Wendroff, B., “Difference Schemes for Hyperbolic Equations with High Order Accuracy,” Commun. Pure Appl. Math., Vol. 17, pp. 381–398, 1964.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hirt, C. W., “Heuristic Stability Theory for Finite-Difference Equations,” J. Computational Phys., Vol. 2, No. 4, pp. 339–355, June 1968.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kutler, P., “Application of Selected Finite Difference Techniques to the Solution of Conical Flow Problems,” Ph.D. Thesis, Dept. of Aerospace Engineering, Iowa State Univ., 1969.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Abbett, M. J., “Boundary Condition Computational Procedures for Inviscid Supersonic Steady Flow Field Calculations,” Aerotherm Corp., Mt. View, Calif., Final Rept. 71-41, 1971.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Abbett, M. J., “Boundary Condition Computational Procedures for Inviscid Supersonic Flow Fields,” Proceedings, AIAA Computational Fluid Dynamics Conference, 1973.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Moretti, G., “Importance of Boundary Conditions in the Numerical Treatment of Hyperbolic Equations,” High-Speed Computing in Fluid Dynamics, The Physics of Fluids Supplement II, 1969.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Roache, P. J., Computational Fluid Dynamics, Hermosa Publishers, Albuquerque, New Mexico, 1972.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Bohachevsky, I. O., and Rubin, E. L., “A Direct Method for Computation of Nonequilibrium Flows with Detached Shock Waves,” AIAA J., Vol. 4, pp. 600–607, 1966.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Kutler, P., and Lomax, H., “The Computation of Supersonic Flow Fields about Wing-Body Combinations by 'shock-Capturing’ Finite Difference Techniques,” Second International Conference on Numerical Methods in Fluid Dynamics, Sept. 1970; also Lecture Notes in Physics, Vol. 8, pp. 24–29, 1971.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Hayes, W. D., and Probstein, R. F., Hypersonic Flow Theory, 2nd ed., Academic Press, New York, p. 485, 1966.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Abbett, M. J., “Sharp Shock Computational Procedures for Inviscid, Supersonic, Steady Flow Field Calculations,” Aerotherm Corp., Mt. View, Calif., Final Rept. 72-50, 1972.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Thomas, P. D., “On the Computation of Boundary Conditions in Finite Difference Solutions for Multi-Dimensional Inviscid Flow Fields,” Lockheed Palo Alto Research Lab., Palo Alto, Calif., LMSC 6-82-71-3, March 1971.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Vincenti, W. G., and Kruger, C. H., Jr., Introduction to Physical Gas Dynamics, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1965.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Kutler, P., and Lomax, H., “Shock-Capturing, Finite-Difference Approach to Supersonic Flows,” J. Spacecraft Rockets, Vol. 8, No. 12, pp. 1175–1182, Dec. 1971.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Fowell, L. R., “Exact and Approximate Solutions for the Supersonic Delta Wing,” J. Aeronaut. Sci., Vol. 23, 1956.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    South, J. C., and Klunker, E. B., “Methods for Calculating Nonlinear Conical Flows,” NASA SP-228, pp. 131–158, 1969.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Babaev, D. A., “Numerical Solution of the Problem of Supersonic Flow Past the Lower Surface of a Delta Wing,” AIAA J., Vol. 1, No. 9, pp. 2224–2231, Sept. 1963.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Beeman, E. R., and Powers, S. A., “A Method for Determining the Complete Flow Field Around Conical Wings at Supersonic/Hypersonic Speeds,” AIAA Paper 69-646, 1969.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Voskresenskii, G. P., “Numerical Solution of the Problem of a Supersonic Gas Flow Past an Arbitrary Surface of a Delta Wing in the Compression Region,” Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR, Mekh, Zhidk. Gaza, No. 4, pp. 134–142, 1968.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Babaev, D. A., “Numerical Solution of the Problem of Flow Round the Upper Surface of a Triangular Wing by a Supersonic Stream,” Zh. vychislitel'noi matematiki i matelmaticheskoi fizika, Vol. 2, pp. 278–289, 1962.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Oswatitsch, K., and Sun, Y. C., “The Wave Formation and Sonic Boom Due to a Delta Wing,” Aeronaut. Quart., Vol. XXIII, May 1972.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Roe, P. L., “Wind Tunnel Measurements of Sonic Boom Due to a Plane Lifting Delta Wing,” Preliminary results presented to the Euromech 31 Meeting, Aachen, West Germany, May 1972.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Bannink, W. J., and Nebbeling, C., “Investigation of the Expansion Side of a Delta Wing at Supersonic Speed,” AIAA J., Vol. 11, No. 8, Aug. 1973.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Kutler, P., “Numerical Solution for the Inviscid Supersonic Flow in the Corner Formed by Two Intersecting Wedges,” AIAA Paper 73-675, 1973.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Kutler, P., “Supersonic Flow in the Corner Formed by Two Intersecting Wedges,” AIAA J., Vol. 12, No. 5, pp 577–578, May 1974.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    West, Major J. E., and Korkegi, R. H., “Interaction in the Corner of Intersecting Wedges at a Mach Number of 3 and High Reynolds Numbers,” ARL 71-0241, 1971.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Charwat, A. F., and Redekeopp, L. G., “Supersonic Interference Flow Along the Corner of Intersecting Wedges,” AIAA J., Vol. 5, No. 3, pp. 480–488, March 1967.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    MacCormack, R. W., and Warming, R. F., “Survey of Computational Methods for Three-Dimensional Supersonic Inviscid Flow with Shocks,” AGARD Lecture Series No. 64 on Advances in Numerical Fluid Dynamics, AGARD-LS-64, 1973.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Kutler, P., Sakell, L., and Aiello, G., “On the Shock-on Shock Interaction Problem,” AIAA Paper No. 74-524, 1974.Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Merritt, D. L., and Aronson, P. M., “Wind Tunnel Simulation of Head-On Bow Wave-Blast Wave Interactions,” NOLTR 67-123, Aug. 1967.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Babenko, K. I., Voskrensenskiy, G. P., Lyubimov, A. N., and Rusanov, V. V., “Three-Dimensional Flow of Ideal Gas Past Smooth Bodies,” NASA TT F-380, 1966.Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Bazzhin, A. P., “Some Results of Calculations of Flows Around Conical Bodies at Large Incidence Angles,” Lecture Notes in Physics, Vol. 8, 1971.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Cleary, J. W., “Hypersonic Shock-Wave Phenomena of a Delta-Wing Space-Shuttle Orbiter,” NASA TM X-62,076, 1971.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Rakich, J. V., and Kutler, P., “Comparison of Characteristics and Shock Capturing Methods with Application to the Space Shuttle Vehicle,” AIAA Paper 72-191, 1972.Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Cleary, J. W., “Subsonic, Transonic, and Supersonic Stability and Control Characteristics of a Delta Wing Orbiter,” NASA TM X-62,066, 1970.Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Kutler, P., Rakich, J. V., and Mateer, G. G., “Application of Shock Capturing and Characteristics Methods to Shuttle Flow Fields,” NASA TM X-2506, Vol. 1, p. 65, 1972.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1975

Authors and Affiliations

  • Paul Kutler
    • 1
  1. 1.Computational Fluid Dynamics BranchAmes Research Center, NASAMoffett Field

Personalised recommendations