Jump to content

Propul­sion System Intake Duct for High Mach Number Regimes

hypersonic-passenger-plane

Since the Wright Brothers first took to the skies over 100 years ago, the world has been com­pletely trans­formed and made to feel a whole lot smaller, where we are able to fly to all corners of the world effi­ciently and afford­ably. In recent years com­mer­cial flights have topped over a billion pas­sen­ger flights per year. Now we are on the cusp of another major rev­o­lu­tion with massive increases in flight speed and altitude. With high super­sonic speeds or even hyper­sonic speeds exceed­ing Mach 5 at alti­tudes of 90,000 ft or more, it would be possible to fly from the UK to Aus­tralia in 4 hours, and this amazing feat may be com­mer­cially viable within 20 years. 

Even more impres­sive is the devel­op­ment of space­planes that will bridge the realms of air and space. These vehicles would make use of air-breath­ing reusable propul­sion systems, which would be capable of con­ven­tional runway take-off and landing, while during flight they would accel­er­ate to hyper­sonic speeds to climb to low-earth orbit much more afford­ably than current single-use rocket systems. Appli­ca­tions ranging from payload delivery, sur­veil­lance and recon­nais­sance, or even space tourism are the driving forces behind these remark­able developments.

Hyper­sonic is like super­sonic on steroids. Whereas super­sonic speeds are defined as those exceed­ing the speed of sound (Mach 1), hyper­sonic speeds are in the regime at which intense aero­dy­namic heating causes mol­e­c­u­lar dis­so­ci­a­tion and ion­iza­tion, typ­i­cally above Mach 5.

The propul­sion systems required for these extreme con­di­tions not only must operate in very chal­leng­ing envi­ron­ments but the tech­nolo­gies used for rel­a­tively low speed flight (as during take-off and climb) are dras­ti­cally dif­fer­ent and often incom­pat­i­ble with those at high super­sonic and hyper­sonic cruising speeds. Various combined cycle concepts that include con­ven­tional jet engine con­fig­u­ra­tions with ramjets or scram­jets or even with rocket stages have been on the drawing board and are now under devel­op­ment. One such propul­sion system is the turbine based combined cycle (TBCC) which combines a con­ven­tional turbojet with ramjet or scramjet modes at high Mach numbers.

Turbine-based combined cycle propulsion system

Turbine-based combined cycle propulsion system

Intake Duct Design with CAESES

The present case study inves­ti­gates a hypo­thet­i­cal intake duct geometry for a TBCC propul­sion system, which channels high-speed air from the freestream into the engine and converts the dynamic energy into high pressure by making use of a series of com­pres­sion shocks. The flight speed is set to Mach 3.4 in this study.

The duct design has a rec­tan­gu­lar inlet with 3‑stage com­pres­sion ramp upstream of the inlet cowl which gives rise to a series of oblique shocks that decel­er­ate and compress the flow. Down­stream of the inlet cowl is a dif­fus­ing S‑duct with an area expan­sion ratio of 2.18 which further decel­er­ates and com­presses the flow through a terminal shock and addi­tional dif­fu­sion in the expan­sion zone. The duct tran­si­tions from a rec­tan­gu­lar cross section to circular one at the engine inlet.

Intake duct geometry in CAESES

The model was created in CAESES with its spe­cial­ized geometry engine for accurate, flexible, and robust geometry creation specif­i­cally geared towards auto­mated design studies. In this case, the design vari­ables were related to the lengths and angles of the 3‑stage com­pres­sion ramp. The total deflec­tion angle of the 3 stages was fixed and the 2nd and 3rd stage angles could be adjusted. Fur­ther­more, the angle of the cowl lip could also be varied.

Intake duct variation

Workflow with CAESES and ANSYS

CAESES is also an automa­tion and inte­gra­tion platform that can coupled to 3rd party tools to drive them in an auto­mated workflow. In this study, CAESES was coupled to ANSYS/ICEM and ANSYS/​Fluent for 3D meshing and CFD sim­u­la­tion respec­tively. To facil­i­tate a stream­lined workflow, CAESES also provided aux­il­iary geome­tries rep­re­sent­ing the flow domain upstream of the duct, as well as control points and surfaces that facil­i­tated easy struc­tured mesh creation by ICEM.

Results

In this study, a design explo­ration (DoE) on 20 designs was per­formed using the CAESES built-in SOBOL algo­rithm. It was found that the angle at the cowl lip (βlip) and the result­ing shock strength at that location had the strongest influ­ence on the pressure recovery of the duct. Out of the 20 designs, the best case was found to have a reduced lip angle relative to the baseline of 6.68°. For this case relative to the baseline, the pressure recover coef­fi­cient at the throat increased by 6.3% (0.844 vs 0.794) and at the outlet it was increased by 3.9% (0.504 vs 0.485).

This example study has illus­trated how CAESES coupled to ANSYS tools is very effec­tive at estab­lish­ing an auto­mated workflow to explore and improve the design of a high Mach number intake duct for a hypo­thet­i­cal TBCC propul­sion system. Most impor­tantly, CAESES is ideal for auto­mat­i­cally gen­er­at­ing design can­di­dates very pre­cisely and robustly for complex duct shapes. 

We would like to thank Nanjing Tianfu, the CAESES dis­trib­u­tor in China, for pro­vid­ing the data and results that form the basis of this case study.

Contact Us

CAESES is used by several leading aero­space com­pa­nies for various aero­dy­namic design and opti­miza­tion projects. To learn more about how CAESES can benefit your orga­ni­za­tion for aero­space and aero­dy­namic appli­ca­tions, please contact as at info@caeses.com.

More articles

Latest from the blog

All articles

Stay up to date

Receive latest news to your inbox.

Subscribe to newsletter