Test Section Design for Measuring the Drag Coefficient of a Suborbital Rocket Model at Ma 2.45

Wasilczuk, Filip; Kurowski, Marcin; Flaszyński, Paweł

doi:10.2478/tar-2024-0018

Abstract

This study investigates the drag coefficient of three models of suborbital rockets with different nosecones. A test section allowing for force measurement of a 1:50 scale rocket model was designed with the aid of numerical simulations. The velocity obtained in the wind tunnel corresponds with a Mach number of 2.45. RANS simulations were used in verifying operating parameters, as well as testing the support configurations for connecting the model with the bottom wall of the tunnel section. Pressure distribution measurements on the top and bottom walls of the wind tunnel matched simulation results well. The shock structure in the test section was visualized using the schlieren technique, revealing that the measured angle of the main shock generated at the tip of the rocket matched the simulation data. Finally, the measured forces were compared with simulations for one of the nosecone configurations. Despite very good agreement for pressure distribution on the wind tunnel walls and shock structure, a significant mismatch in the forces measured was nevertheless observed: the simulated CD (0.57) being four times larger than that obtained in measurements (0.138). Further analysis of the test section is required to pinpoint the source of discrepancies and redesign the force measurement system to achieve improved force results.

References

Magiera R, et al, A combustion stabilisation method in a nitrous oxide based hybrid rocket engine. 24th ESA Symposium on European Rocket & Balloon Programmes and related research, 2019 Jun 1–5; Essen, Germany.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Zhang WD, Wang YB, Liu Y, Aerodynamic study of theater ballistic missile target, Aerospace Science and Technology, 2013;24(1):221–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ast.2011.11.010.
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Shivananda T, McKeel S, Salita M, & Zabrensky E. Space launch vehicle aerodynamics – Comparison of engineering and CFD predictions with wind tunnel data. 39th Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit.; 2001 Jan 8–11; Reno, NV. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2001-258.
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Vitale R, Abate G, Winchenbach G, & Riner W. Aerodynamic test and analysis of a missile configuration with curvedfins. AIAA 1992-4495 Astrodynamics Conference; 1992 Aug 10–12; Hiton Head, SC. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-4495.
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Kim BK, Al-Obaidi ASM. Investigation of the effect of nose shape and geometry at supersonic speeds for missile performance optimization, J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 2023; 2523: 012010, https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/2523/1/012010.
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Ukirde K, Rathod S. Aerodynamic analysis of various nose cone geometries for rocket launch vehicle at different Mach regimes. AIP Conf. Proc. 11 December 2023; 2855(1):020004.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Shah S, Tanwani N, Singh SK, Makwana MM. Drag Analysis for Sounding Rocket Nose Cone. International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology. 2020;7(7).
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Seiff A, Sandahl CA. Aerodynamic Characteristics of Bodies at Supersonic Speeds: A Collection of Three Papers, NACA Conference on Aerodynamic Design Problems of Supersonic Guided Missiles (1951). Review of Aerospace Engineering. 2023;16(5).
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Goucem M, Khiri R. Optimizing Supersonic Rocket Efficiency: A Numerical Analysis of Aerodynamic Characteristics and Angle of Canard Deflection. International Review of Aerospace Engineering. 2023;16(5), https://doi.org/10.1108/IRA-2023-0050.
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Sahbon N, Murpani S, Michałów M, Miedziński D, Sochacki M. A CFD Study of the Aerodynamic Characteristics of Twardowsky and FOK Rockets. Transactions on Aerospace Research. 2022(1):35–58. https://doi.org/10.2478/tar-2022-0003
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Marciniak BA, Cieśliński D, Matyszewski J. Verifying the ILR-33 AMBER Rocket Recovery System by Means of a Drop Test Campaign. International Review of Aerospace Engineering. 2023;16(1)
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Czyż Z., Karpiński P., Skiba K., Wendeker M. Measurements of Aerodynamic Performance of the Fuselage of a Hybrid Multi-Rotor Aircraft with Autorotation Capability. International Review of Aerospace Engineering. 2022;15(1).
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Ruchała P, Placek R, Stryczniewicz W, Matyszewski J, Cieśliński D, Bartkowiak B. Wind tunnel tests of influence of boosters and fins on aerodynamic characteristics of the experimental rocket platform. Transactions on Aerospace Research. 2017(4):82–102. https://doi.org/10.2478/tar-2017-0030.
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Angelino G. Approximate method for plug nozzle design. AIAA Journal. 1964, 2(10):1834–1835. https://doi.org/10.2514/3.2682.
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Spalart P, Allmaras S. A one-equation turbulence model for aerodynamic flows, AIAA 1992-439. 30th Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit. 1992 Jan 6–9; Reno, NV. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-439.
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Szulc O, Doerffer P, Flaszynski P, Braza M., Moving wall effect on normal shock wave–turbulent boundary layer interaction on an airfoil. International Journal of Numerical Methods for Heat & Fluid Flow. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1108/HFF-06-2023-0338.
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Sutherland, W. LII. The viscosity of gases and molecular force. The London, Edinburgh, and Dublin Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science. 1893; 36(223),507–531. https://doi.org/10.1080/14786449308620508.
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Chin SS. Missile Configuration Design, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1961.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article

Test Section Design for Measuring the Drag Coefficient of a Suborbital Rocket Model at Ma 2.45

Abstract

Paradigm

My account