Hypersonic flight experience

The flight test results from the X-15, Asset, Prime, Reentry F and Shuttle Orbiter flight research programmes are reviewed and compared with theory and ground- based experiments. Primary emphasis is placed on our present capability to predict aerodynamic coefficients and stability derivatives, and distributions of surface pressure and aerodynamic heating rate for typical orbital and sub-orbital hypersonic vehicles. Overall, this comparison demonstrates the feasibility of designing hypersonic vehicles based on tests in conventional perfect-gas wind tunnels supplemented by state-of-the-art CFD analysis. At Mach numbers up to approximately 8, real-gas effects are small and Mach number/Reynolds number simulation is sufficient to insure accurate prediction of aerodynamic characteristics. At higher mach numbers, real-gas effects become important but appear to affect primarily pitching moment and to have little influence on other aerodynamic characteristics. Viscous interaction effects appear to be well correlated by the viscous interaction parameter V̄'∞, and to affect primarily axial force. With the exception of RCS jet interactions, stability and control derivatives are well predicted throughout the hypersonic flight régime. State-of-the-art aerodynamic heating techniques appear to give accurate predictions for laminar and fully turbulent attached flows so long as there are no strong shock interactions or non-equilibrium chemistry effects. For such flows, heating rate distributions depend only weakly on Mach number for M∞ ≥ 8 and hence M∞ ≈ 8-10 wind tunnel results can be used throughout the hypersonic speed range. For high- speed, high-altitude flight, surface catalycity effects can have a major influence on heating rates but modern, finite-rate boundary layer analyses are capable of predicting major trends. The major remaining challenges are the accurate prediction of: (1) real-gas effects on longitudinal trim, (2) the effectiveness of blended high altitude control systems, (3) shock interaction heating, (4) heating rates for separated vortex-dominated leeside flows, and (5) boundary layer transition and relaminarzation. Finally, it is pointed out that there are no flight data on the propulsion-airframe integration effects that are so important for airbreathing launch vehicles.

[1]  J. M. Underwood,et al.  Development of aerodynamic uncertainties for the Space Shuttle Orbiter , 1983 .

[2]  A. L. Crosbie,et al.  Catalytic Recombination of Nitrogen and Oxygen on High-Temperature Reusable Surface Insulation , 1981 .

[3]  A. Martellucci,et al.  Boundary layer transition flight test observations , 1977 .

[4]  P. O. Romere,et al.  Space Shuttle entry aerodynamic comparisons of flight 1 with preflight predictions , 1983 .

[5]  K. J. Weilmuenster,et al.  A comparison of computed Space Shuttle Orbiter surface pressures with flight measurements , 1982 .

[6]  E. R. Hillje,et al.  Space Shuttle wind tunnel testing program , 1982 .

[7]  Fred R. Dejarnette,et al.  Application of axisymmetric analog for calculating heating in three-dimensional flows , 1987 .

[8]  P. O. Romere,et al.  Space Shuttle entry longitudinal aerodynamic comparisons of flight 2 with preflight predictions , 1983 .

[9]  D. A. Throckmorton,et al.  Orbiter entry leeside heat-transfer data analysis , 1983 .

[10]  G. M. Buck,et al.  Rarefied-flow aerodynamics and thermosphere structure from Shuttle flight measurements , 1986 .

[11]  R. E. Maine,et al.  Programmer's manual for MMLE3, a general FORTRAN program for maximum likelihood parameter estimation , 1980 .

[12]  M. J. Lanfranco,et al.  Catalytic surface effects on space thermal protection system during Earth entry of flights STS-2 through STS-5 , 1983 .

[13]  J. W. Haney.  Orbiter Entry Heating Lessons Learned from Development Flight Test Program , 1983 .

[14]  C. D. Scott.  Catalytic recombination of nitrogen and oxygen on high-temperature reusable surface insulation , 1980 .

[15]  I. E. Beckwith,et al.  A survey of NASA Langley studies on high-speed transition and the quiet tunnel , 1972 .

[16]  J. A. Cunningham,et al.  Space shuttle wing leading edge heating environment prediction derived from development flight data , 1983 .

[17]  D. I. A. Poll.  A New Hypothesis for Transition on the Windward Face of the Space Shuttle , 1986 .

[18]  B. Griffith,et al.  Hypersonic Mach number and real gas effects on Space Shuttle Orbiteraerodynamics , 1983 .

[19]  D. C. Schlosser,et al.  Approach to establishing the effect of aeroelasticity on aerodynamic characteristics of the space shuttle orbiter , 1983 .

[20]  B. Griffith,et al.  Hypersonic Mach number and real gas effects on Space Shuttle Orbiteraerodynamics , 1984 .

[21]  R. L. Wright,et al.  Flight boundary layer transition measurements on a slender cone at Mach 20 , 1977 .

[22]  Kenneth Sutton,et al.  Overview of CFD methods and comparison with flight aerothermal data , 1988 .

[23]  K. J. Weilmuenster,et al.  Calculation of inviscid flow over shuttle-like vehicles at high angles of attack and comparisons with experimental data , 1983 .

[24]  James P. Arrington,et al.  Shuttle Performance: Lessons Learned , 1983 .

[25]  E. R. Keener,et al.  Aerodynamic Forces on Components of the X-15 Airplane , 1961 .

[26]  R. C. Blanchard,et al.  Shuttle high resolution accelerometer package experiment results - Atmospheric density measurements between 60 and 160 km , 1989 .

[27]  Kenneth F. Stetson,et al.  Hypersonic Boundary-Layer Transition , 1992 .

[28]  H. F. Nelson.  Temperature-Dependent Reaction Rate Expressions for Oxygen Recombination , 1985 .

[29]  D. B. Kanipe.  Plume/flowfield jet interaction effects on the Space Shuttle Orbiter during entry , 1983 .