Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T16:15:08.741Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Development of mechanical guidance actuators for a supersonic projectile

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 February 2016

K. C. Massey ,
J. McMichael ,
T. Warnock  and
F. Hay
K. C. Massey
Affiliation:
Georgia Tech Research Institute, Atlanta, USA
J. McMichael
Affiliation:
Georgia Tech Research Institute, Atlanta, USA
T. Warnock
Affiliation:
Georgia Tech Research Institute, Atlanta, USA
F. Hay
Affiliation:
Georgia Tech Research Institute, Atlanta, USA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this paper, the results of a series of experiments funded by DARPA to determine the feasibility of using small actuators to provide directional control for a supersonic projectile are presented. Controlling the flight of the projectile was accomplished by taking advantage of complex shock-boundary-layer interactions produced by mechanical devices. Experimental tests were conducted at GTRI to screen several control concepts and actuator locations. Further experiments were conducted on a scale projectile in a supersonic stream to investigate the rise time of the forces. Several different mechanical actuators were tested which served to provide guidance for future actuator designs. CFD results were also used to predict the results in flight as well as gain insights into the fluid mechanics involved. Flight tests of a Mach 4 round proved the viability of the guidance actuator.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 112 , Issue 1130 , April 2008 , pp. 181 - 195
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2008 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Kandebo, S.W., New powerplant key to missile demonstrator, Aviation Week, 2 September 2002.Google Scholar
2. Marx, W.J., Wessling, F.C. III, Peters, B.R., Thies, A., Strickland, B.R. and Lianos, D., Miniature smart munitions/guided projectiles for the objective force, 23rd Army Science Conference, December 2002.Google Scholar
3. Warnash, A. and Killen, A., Low cost, high G, Micro Electro-Mechanical (MEMS), Inertial Measurements Unit (IMU) Program, 23rd Army Science Conference, December 2002.Google Scholar
4. Margason, R.J., Fifty years of jet in cross flow research, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA, USA, April 1993.Google Scholar
5. Spaid, F.W. and Cassel, L.A., Aerodynamic interference induced by reaction controls, AD-775-209. Advisory Group for Aerospace Research and Development, Paris, France, December 1973.Google Scholar
6. Hemsch, M.J. (ED), Tactical missile aerodynamics: General Topics, Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1992, 141.Google Scholar
7. Hsia, H., Tao-Sze, Equivalence of secondary injection to a blunt body in supersonic flow. United Technology Center, Sunnyvale, California, USA, AIAA J, October 1966, 4, (10).Google Scholar
8. Champigny, P., Lateral jet control for tactical missiles, Office National d’Etodes et de Recherches Google Scholar
9. Schetz, J. et al. Effects of pressure mismatch on slot injection in supersonic flow, AIAA-90-0092, Applied Physics Lab, John Hopkins University, January 1990.Google Scholar
10. Fujimori, T. et al Numerical prediction of two and three dimensional sonic gas transverse injections into supersonic flow, AIAA-91-0415, National Aerospace Laboratory, January 1991, Tokyo, Japan.Google Scholar
11. Takahashi, M. and Hayashi, A.K., Numerical study on mixing and combustion of injecting hydrogen jet in a supersonic air flow, AIAA-91-0574, Nagoya University, January 1991, Nagoya, Japan.Google Scholar
12. Edwards, J.A., Concepts behind the UK HOTLiP manoeuvring projectile program, Dstl Fort Halstead, Sevenoaks, Kent, August 2001.Google Scholar
13. Graham, M.J. and Weinacht, P., Numerical simulation of lateral control jets, AIAA 99-0510, 37th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, January 1999.Google Scholar
14. Graham, M.J., Weinacht, P. and Brandeis, J., A Numerical investigation of supersonic jet interaction for finned bodies, AIAA 2000-0768, 38th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, January 2000.Google Scholar
15. Hay, F. and Massey, K.C., Parametric investigation into the location and geometry of deployable pins used for guiding supersonic projectiles, AIAA 05-2-20B.Google Scholar
16. Metacomp Technologies, 2000: CFD++ User’s Manual, Westlake Village, CA, USA.Google Scholar
17. Goldberg, U.C., Peromian, O. and Chakravarthy, S., A wall-distance-free K-ε model with enhanced near-wall treatment, J Fluids Engineering, 1998, 120, (3), pp 457–462.Google Scholar
18. Silton, S., Comparison of predicted actuator performance for guidance of supersonic projectiles to measured range data, AIAA-2004-5195, August 2004.Google Scholar
19. Massey, K.C., Guthrie, K.B., and Silton, S.I., Optimised Guidance of a Supersonic Projectile using Pin Based Actuators, 23rd Applied Aerodynamics Conference, AIAA 05-4966.Google Scholar