Comparison between novel waverider generated from flow past a pointed von Karman ogive and conventional cone-derived waverider

Abstract

This study conducts a comparison between a novel waverider generated from axisymmetric supersonic flow past a pointed von Karman ogive and a conventional cone-derived waverider generated from the axisymmetric supersonic flow past a cone. First, a pointed von Karman ogive is obtained by sharpening the blunt nose of the original von Karman ogive to a point. Then, a cone with the same shock wave radius at the base plane as that of the pointed von Karman ogive when it travels at a designated supersonic speed is designed. Both axisymmetric supersonic flows past the pointed von Karman ogive and the cone are calculated using the method of characteristics, and the two calculated flow fields are employed as the new and conventional basic flow fields of the waveriders, respectively. Second, a novel waverider is generated from the new basic flow field past the pointed von Karman ogive, using the streamline tracing technique, and a conventional cone-derived waverider is generated from the conventional basic flow field past the cone, using the streamline tracing technique. Finally, numerical methods are employed to verify the design procedures of the novel and conventional cone-derived waveriders, and to analyze the differences between both types of waverider. The obtained results show that the novel waverider possesses lower drag and higher lift-to-drag ratios, while the conventional cone-derived waverider has a higher internal volume and volumetric efficiency.

An airframe/inlet integrated full-waverider vehicle design using as upgraded aerodynamic method

“…A quadratic curve is selected as the projection curve of the leading-edge curve of forebody (curve 2-4-7), and it is expressed by Eq. (11). When the coordinate values (z, y) at point 4 and point 2 are given in Eq.…”

“…As done previously for the numerical simulation of a waverider (4,9,11) , two cases-case 1 and case 2-are considered to complete the code validation in order to investigate the accuracy of the numerical methods employed in this study.…”

“…Boundary condition 1-2, 2-3, 3-4, 4-5 Pressure far-field 5-6, 6-7, 7-8, 8-9, 1-10, [10][11][11][12] No-slip 9-12…”

“…The waverider first proposed by Nonweiler (7) in 1959 is any hypersonic lifting body with an attached shock wave along its leading edge (8)(9)(10)(11)(12)(13)(14) . Since then, because of the excellent aerodynamic configuration of the waverider, it has become one of the most ideal aerodynamic configurations for hypersonic vehicles.…”

Waverider Configuration Design With Variable Shock Angle

“…For instance, He et al [10] proposed a waverider using the general curved cone as the osculating flow field, named osculating general curved cone (OCC) waverider, the results proved that the OCC waverider had good volumetric characteristics and good flow compression abilities to satisfy the inlet requirements for hypersonic air-breathing vehicles. Ding et al [11], [12] designed a waverider generated from axisymmetric supersonic flow past a pointed von Karman ogive, named ''von Karman waveriders'', he also compared the aerodynamic performance between the new waverider and conventional cone-derived waverider using CFD method, the results showed that the ''von Karman waveriders'' possessed higher lift-to-drag ratio but lower volumetric efficiency than conventional cone-derived waverider. Liu et al [13] investigated a wide-ranged multistage morphing waverider design method based on conical flowfield.…”