Improved Power On Base Drag Methodology For The Aeroprediction Code
Download Improved Power On Base Drag Methodology For The Aeroprediction Code PDF/ePub or read online books in Mobi eBooks. Click Download or Read Online button to get Improved Power On Base Drag Methodology For The Aeroprediction Code book now. This website allows unlimited access to, at the time of writing, more than 1.5 million titles, including hundreds of thousands of titles in various foreign languages.
Improved Power-on, Base Drag Methodology for the Aeroprediction Code
Improved methods for base pressure prediction under base bleed and rocket motor-on conditions have been developed. The base bleed method makes several refinements to the method developed by Danberg at the Army Research Laboratory in Aberdeen, Maryland. The improved rocket motor-on, base pressure prediction improves upon the method developed at the Army Missile Command in Huntsville, Alabama by Brazzel and some of his colleagues. The major refinement to the base bleed method of Danberg was to estimate the power-off value of base pressure empirically based on an extensive data base, as opposed to using computational fluid dynamics codes to predict this term. The major modifications to the power-on base pressure prediction method of Brazzel was to extend its range of applicability to high values of thrust coefficient, to Mach numbers less than 1.5, and to different afterbody shapes. In comparing the improved methods for power-on base drag prediction to experiment, it was seen that both methods gave reasonable agreement to most experimental data bases. However, more validation is needed, particularly for the combined effects of angle of attack, fins, and power-on conditions.
The 2002 Version of the Aeroprediction Code
A new version of the aeroprediction code (APC), the AP02, has been developed to address the requirements arising from advanced weapon concepts. The AP02 was formed by adding significant new technology and several productivity improvements to the previous version of the APC, the AP98. New technology added included 6 and 8 fin aerodynamics, improved nonlinear aerodynamics, improved pitch damping predictions, improved power-on base drag estimates, base-bleed effect on base drag estimation, improved axial force of nonaxisymmetric bodies and trailing-edge flap capability. Other improvements and productivity enhancements include an aerodynamic smoother, ballistic and three degree-of-freedom simulation modules as well as refinements for the pre- and post-processor for inputs and outputs of the AP02. Comparison of the predicted aerodynamics of the AP02 to AP98 and experimental data showed the AP02 to be slightly better than the AP98 in most cases that both codes would handle. However, due to the additional new technology incorporated into the AP02, many new options are available in the AP02 that are not available in the AP98. Therefore, the AP02 is more robust and, on average, is slightly more accurate than the AP98 in predicting aerodynamics of weapons.
Improved Power-on, Base Drag Methodology for the Aeroprediction Code
Improved methods for base pressure prediction under base bleed and rocket motor-on conditions have been developed. The base bleed method makes several refinements to the method developed by Danberg at the Army Research Laboratory in Aberdeen, Maryland. The improved rocket motor-on, base pressure prediction improves upon the method developed at the Army Missile Command in Huntsville, Alabama by Brazzel and some of his colleagues. The major refinement to the base bleed method of Danberg was to estimate the power-off value of base pressure empirically based on an extensive data base, as opposed to using computational fluid dynamics codes to predict this term. The major modifications to the power-on base pressure prediction method of Brazzel was to extend its range of applicability to high values of thrust coefficient, to Mach numbers less than 1.5, and to different afterbody shapes. In comparing the improved methods for power-on base drag prediction to experiment, it was seen that both methods gave reasonable agreement to most experimental data bases. However, more validation is needed, particularly for the combined effects of angle of attack, fins, and power-on conditions.