Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T00:15:14.868Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Numerical investigation of optimal pin location on a supersonic projectile

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 January 2016

M. Bell ,
T. D. Robinson  and
D. Robinson
M. Bell*
Affiliation:
Queen’s University, Belfast, UK
T. D. Robinson
Affiliation:
Queen’s University, Belfast, UK
D. Robinson
Affiliation:
Queen’s University, Belfast, UK
*
[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The flowfield around a supersonic projectile using a pin actuator control method has been predicted using computational fluid dynamics. It has been predicted using both viscous and inviscid methods for a number of positions. Both methods showed that an optimal longitudinal position exists. However, the inviscid model over-predicted the lateral acceleration due to the difference in shock formation around the pin between the two approaches. The optimal location was predicted independent of solver, however the higher-fidelity solver predicted lower achievable lateral accelerations. This is due to the viscous interactions caused by the pin. The effect of projectile orientation has shown that shielding the pin leads to reduced effectiveness due to the wake of the fin enveloping the pin. When the pin is exposed to onset flow, the forces achieved are increased. There is also an increase in the achievable forces and moments with increasing Mach number.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 116 , Issue 1177 , March 2012 , pp. 271 - 286
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2012 

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. Massey, K.C. and Silton, S.I. Testing the maneuvering performance of a Mach 4 projectile, 2006, 24th Applied Aerodynamics Conference, 2006-3649.Google Scholar
2. Massey, K.C. and Silton, S.I. Combining experimental data, cfd and 6dof simulation to develop a guidance actuator for a supersonic projectile, 2007, Third International Symposium on Integrating CFD and Experiments in Aerodynamics.Google Scholar
3. Hemsch, M.J. Tactical Missile Aerodynamics: General Topics, AIAA, 141.Google Scholar
4. Fleeman, E.L. Tactical Missile Design, AIAA, 2001.Google Scholar
5. Schindel, L.H. and Lam, L. Improved missile control effectiveness payoffs, J Spacecraft and Rockets, 2006, 33, (5), pp 641–650.Google Scholar
6. Private correspondence with Thales Air Defence, 2006-2009.Google Scholar
7. Bell, M., Watterson, J. and Lisk, D. A numerical study into a local protuberance interaction with a fin on a supersonic projectile, 2009, 47th Aerospace Sciences Meeting, AIAA, 2009-1092.Google Scholar
8. Lisk, D. Guidance of supersonic projectiles using pin based actuators, 2007, QUB Internal Report.Google Scholar
9. Lesieutre, D., Love, J., Dillenius, M. and Blair, A.B. Recent applications and improvements to the engineering level aerodynamic prediction software misl3, 2002, AIAA, 2002-0275.Google Scholar
10. Lesieutre, D.J., Mendenhall, M.R., Nazario, S.M. and Hemsch, M.J. Aerodynamic characteristics of cruciform missiles at high angles of attack, 1987, AIAA, 87-0212.Google Scholar
11. Lesieutre, D.J., Mendenhall, M.R. and Dillenius, M.F. Prediction of induced roll on conventional missiles with cruciform fin sections, 1988, AIAA, 99-0529.Google Scholar
12. Lesieutre, D.J., Love, J.F. and Dillenius, M.F. Prediction of the non-linear aerodynamic characteristics of tandem-control and rolling-tail missiles, 2002, AIAA, 2002-4511.Google Scholar
13. Kadar, B. Temperature and concentration profiles in fully turbulent boundary layers, Int J Heat Mass Transfer, 1981, 24, (9), pp 1541–1544.Google Scholar
14. Fluent. Fluent 6.3.26 Manual.Google Scholar
15. Barberis, D. and Molton, P. Shock wave-turbulent boundary layer interaction in a three dimensional flow, 1995, AIAA, 33rd Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibition, 95-0227.Google Scholar
16. Leschziner, M.A. Turbulence modelling for separated flows with anisotropy-resolving surfaces, 2000, The Royal Society, 358, pp 3247–3277.Google Scholar
17. Lisk, D. and Todd, N. Experimental investigation of the effect of a pin actuator on the pressure distribution of a fin, 2007, QUB Internal Report.Google Scholar