Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Supersonic Inlets / Number Of Shockwaves  
User currently offlineBlackbird From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (6 years 3 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 3782 times:

What's the typical and maximum mach number you can get with an inlet...

-That uses 1 shockwave to slow the flow to subsonic-speed?
-That uses 2 shockwaves to slow the flow to subsonic-speed?
-That uses 4 shockwaves to slow the airflow to subsonic-speed?
-That uses 8 shockwaves to slow the airflow to subsonic-speed?


Blackbird

9 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineTdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 1, posted (6 years 3 months 1 week 4 days ago) and read 3746 times:



Quoting Blackbird (Thread starter):
What's the typical and maximum mach number you can get with an inlet...

-That uses 1 shockwave to slow the flow to subsonic-speed?
-That uses 2 shockwaves to slow the flow to subsonic-speed?
-That uses 4 shockwaves to slow the airflow to subsonic-speed?
-That uses 8 shockwaves to slow the airflow to subsonic-speed?

There's no maximum...they'll all work. You'll just have really horrible pressure losses (which can be overcome with excess thrust). For really high Mach numbers you'll have a heating problem with a really inefficient inlet, but I suppose you could build a carbon-carbon inlet if you really wanted to.

Typical is a whole 'nother matter. I would expect nobody uses 1 shock wave on current designs anymore...old MIG's probably did, with the round flat inlets, so that's probably good up into the Mach 1.5 region. Things like the F-14 and Foxbat could go Mach 2-2.5 with multi-shock inlets (I think they were 4). Offhand I can't think of any that use 8, although the SR-71 might have.

At some point the pressure losses get too bad, even with a nice inlet, which is why you switch over to scramjets and skip the whole issue (and pick up a bunch of others).

Tom.


User currently offlineBlackbird From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (6 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 3669 times:

Tom,

Quote:
There's no maximum...they'll all work.

I thought the inlet would become so inefficient that it would be useless after awhile (in terms of thrust being so low and drag becoming so high)

Quote:
You'll just have really horrible pressure losses (which can be overcome with excess thrust). For really high Mach numbers you'll have a heating problem with a really inefficient inlet, but I suppose you could build a carbon-carbon inlet if you really wanted to.

The pressure losses are a result of the shock-wave formation I would assume? Wouldn't the airflow become more turbulent the more powerful the shockwaves as well?

[quote]Typical is a whole 'nother matter. I would expect nobody uses 1 shock wave on current designs anymore...old MIG's probably did, with the round flat inlets, so that's probably good up into the Mach 1.5 region.

I would have figured you could have made it to 2... didn't the F-16 use a pitot-type inlet?

Quote:
Things like the F-14 and Foxbat could go Mach 2-2.5 with multi-shock inlets (I think they were 4).

I don't know what the number of shockwaves in the MiG-25's inlets are, but 4-shocks sounds about correct for the F-14.

Regarding high-performance inlets, many high-performance inlet-designs often use porous ramps and surfaces and such to remove turbulent airflow. That I assume would improve performance over the typical figures for a multi-shock inlet (ie. the theoretical maximum efficiency for a 4-shock duct with porous ramps would be more efficient than the theoretical maximum for a 4-shock duct without porous ramps)

Quote:
Offhand I can't think of any that use 8, although the SR-71 might have.

Okay, could you give me a guess as to what mach number you could get to with a 90-percent efficiency assuming the inlet uses substantial amount of porous-surface?


BTW: I don't know how many shocks the A-12/YF-12/SR-71/M-21 use either -- the aircraft I'm asking questions about is not the Blackbird.


User currently offlineTdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 3, posted (6 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 3659 times:



Quoting Blackbird (Reply 2):

Quote:
There's no maximum...they'll all work.

I thought the inlet would become so inefficient that it would be useless after awhile (in terms of thrust being so low and drag becoming so high)

There's certainly a climbing inefficiency, but you're never going to shock down to below ambient pressure (with any normally shaped inlet) so you can still make positive thrust. It's just a question of how large an engine are you willing to pack around.

Quoting Blackbird (Reply 2):
I would have figured you could have made it to 2... didn't the F-16 use a pitot-type inlet?

I'm not sure on the F-16...that's a weird one that could go either way. I found an AIAA paper that discusses an improved F-16 inlet for the J79 engine and that one is definitely a multi-shock, but it's not clear if the original one was or not. The drag improvement with the multi-shock is dramatic, so I would hazard a guess that the original wasn't, but was on the bad edge of the performance curve when it got up to Mach 2.

Quoting Blackbird (Reply 2):
Okay, could you give me a guess as to what mach number you could get to with a 90-percent efficiency assuming the inlet uses substantial amount of porous-surface?

I really haven't the foggiest, since it really depends what the engine is. Can you tolerate augmetors (afterburner) during cruise or do you need to supercruise? Etc.

Tom.


User currently offlineBlackbird From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (6 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 3599 times:



Quote:
I really haven't the foggiest, since it really depends what the engine is. Can you tolerate augmetors (afterburner) during cruise or do you need to supercruise? Etc.

Okay, the engine is a single-spool turbojet with a relatively low pressure-ratio (~9:1), subsonic intake-velocity, with a modulating afterburner, with low AB settings used for cruise.


Blackbird


User currently offlineTdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 5, posted (6 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 3593 times:



Quoting Blackbird (Reply 4):
Okay, the engine is a single-spool turbojet with a relatively low pressure-ratio (~9:1), subsonic intake-velocity, with a modulating afterburner, with low AB settings used for cruise.

Unfortunately, I can't help you. I was trying to suggest the types of questions that would need to be answered to provide the Mach number you're looking for. However, even with the answers to those questions, I don't know how to do the detailed calculations. I have a pretty good conceptual grasp of supersonic aerodynamics but I don't have the detailed skills to do much beyond very simple numeric estimates. If we're lucky, somebody on the forum does.

What you're describing sounds like some known applications that span the whole range from about Mach 1.2 to about 3.5, so I imagine the theoretical limit is even higher than that.

Tom.


User currently offlineBlackbird From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (6 years 3 months 1 week 14 hours ago) and read 3563 times:

Oh well, I gave it a shot...

By the way, do reflected shocks count as individual shockwaves?

(I would assume so right? Either way, I made a mistake -- the diagram I saw was overly simplistic, and didn't show the reflected waves. Either way I checked a book I have, and I count a total of 13 to 14 shockwaves minimum if you count the reflections. There could be 15 or 16, but the drawing also shows the airflow pattern in terms of the flow directions into the duct, and it's hard to tell which are which, however those 2-3 extra lines that I counted seem to match the flow-directions into the duct, not the shockwave -- so, a count of either 13 or 14 seems more accurate)


Blackbird


User currently offlineVikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 10259 posts, RR: 26
Reply 7, posted (6 years 3 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 3545 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Blackbird (Reply 6):

By the way, do reflected shocks count as individual shockwaves?

There's no particular reason I can see why they wouldn't. They act as their own oblique shock waves.



How can I be an admiral without my cap??!
User currently offlineTdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 8, posted (6 years 3 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 3542 times:



Quoting Blackbird (Reply 6):
By the way, do reflected shocks count as individual shockwaves?

As far as I know, yes. The shock relationships hold whether it's a reflected or non-reflected shock, so from the point of view of air passing through them they're the same thing (albeit at different angles).

Tom.


User currently offlineBlackbird From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (6 years 3 months 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 3530 times:

That's a lot of shocks then


Blackbird


Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Supersonic Inlets / Number Of Shockwaves
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Least Number Of Engines Can A B777/B767 Fly On? posted Fri Feb 8 2008 17:06:57 by B773A346
Number Of Airlines On A Route posted Mon Dec 24 2007 04:10:26 by PAHS200
Number Of Cans On A Long Haul Flt posted Tue Aug 15 2006 00:58:48 by XXXX10
737-200 Number Of Fuel Tanks posted Wed Sep 7 2005 20:16:12 by ArniePie
Determination Of Number Of Flight Deck Crews posted Fri Jan 31 2003 14:30:59 by Macmac76
Determining The Number Of Pilots posted Fri Dec 14 2001 20:44:46 by Arnand
ATC Staff, What Choice Of Air Space To Work. posted Sat Aug 9 2008 08:00:58 by Readytotaxi
Isn't This A Really Bad Place For A Cup Of Coffee? posted Thu Aug 7 2008 11:22:04 by KELPkid
Takeoff Performance Of 757-300 posted Wed Jul 30 2008 08:54:01 by EA772LR
Tail Number Vs. Ship Number posted Thu Jul 17 2008 10:40:01 by Fbgdavidson

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format