HIFiRE-1 Ascent-Phase Boundary-Layer Transition

Kimmel, Roger L.; Adamczak, David; Paull, A.; Paull, Ross; Shannon, Jeremy; Pietsch, Robert; Frost, M.; Alesi, Hans

doi:10.2514/1.a32851

Cited by 33 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, Li et al [50] found an excellent correlation between the measured transition location in the HIFiRE-1 7°half-angle circular cone model flight experiment [51] and a PSE-based logarithmic amplitude ratio for second-mode disturbances of N 13.3. A possible cause for an earlier onset of transition will correspond to nonmodal growth [21,22].…”

Section: B Effect Of Weak Leading-edge Shock On Transient Growthmentioning

confidence: 98%

Optimal Growth in Hypersonic Boundary Layers

Paredes

Choudhari

et al. 2016

AIAA Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The linear form of the parabolized linear stability equations is used in a variational approach to extend the previous body of results for the optimal, nonmodal disturbance growth in boundary-layer flows. This paper investigates the optimal growth characteristics in the hypersonic Mach number regime without any high-enthalpy effects. The influence of wall cooling is studied, with particular emphasis on the role of the initial disturbance location and the value of the spanwise wave number that leads to the maximum energy growth up to a specified location. Unlike previous predictions that used a basic state obtained from a self-similar solution to the boundary-layer equations, mean flow solutions based on the full Navier-Stokes equations are used in select cases to help account for the viscousinviscid interaction near the leading edge of the plate and for the weak shock wave emanating from that region. Using the full Navier-Stokes mean flow is shown to result in further reduction with Mach number in the magnitude of optimal growth relative to the predictions based on the self-similar approximation to the base flow. Nomenclature A, B, C, D = linear matrix operators c = normalization coefficient E = total energy norm G = energy gain h 1 = streamwise metric factor h 3 = spanwise metric factor J = objective function K = kinetic energy norm K = bilinear concomitant L = flat-plate characteristic length L = Lagrangian function M = Mach number M E = energy weight matrix N = logarithmic amplitude ratio relative to neutral stability location of modal instability N η = number of discretization points along the wall-normal direction q = vector of base flow variables q = vector of perturbation variableŝ q = vector of amplitude variables R = local Reynolds number Re = Reynolds number T = temperature T ad = adiabatic wall temperature T w = wall temperature u; v; w = streamwise, wall-normal, and spanwise velocity components ν = kinematic viscosity x; y; z = Cartesian coordinates α = streamwise wave number β = spanwise wave number γ = heat capacity ratio δ = local similarity length scale of boundary layer δ 0.995 = 0.995 boundary-layer thickness ξ; η; ζ = streamwise, wall-normal, and spanwise coordinates in body-fitted coordinate system ρ = density Ω = domain of integration ω = angular frequency Subscripts ad = adiabatic wall condition r = reference value w = wall condition 0 = initial disturbance location 1 = final optimization location Superscripts H = conjugate transpose T = transpose = dimensional value † = adjoint

show abstract

Section: B Effect Of Weak Leading-edge Shock On Transient Growthmentioning

confidence: 98%

Optimal Growth in Hypersonic Boundary Layers

Paredes

Choudhari

et al. 2016

AIAA Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The HIFiRE-1 and -5 configurations were described in prior papers [16,41]. Both configurations consisted of an instrumented test article mounted atop a two-stage ground-launched sounding rocket.…”

Section: Flight Experiments Descriptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Two HIFiRE flights focused on boundary-layer transition. HIFiRE flight one (HIFiRE-1) created an extensive knowledge base regarding transition on axisymmetric bodies that was summarized in numerous prior publications [3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17]. HIFiRE flight five (HIFiRE-5) was devoted to measuring transition on a three-dimensional body.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

First and Fifth Hypersonic International Flight Research Experimentation’s Flight and Ground Tests

Kimmel

Adamczak

Borg

et al. 2019

Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Hypersonic International Flight Research Experimentation (HIFiRE) program is a hypersonic flight-test program executed by the U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory and the Australian Defence Science and Technology Group, including flight, ground test, and computation. HIFiRE flights one and five (HIFiRE-1 and HIFiRE-5, respectively) were devoted to boundary-layer transition. The body of knowledge from the research campaigns showed a complex transition behavior. Axisymmetric flows and crossflow transition were strongly affected by wind-tunnel noise, with transition occurring at lower Reynolds numbers in the wind tunnel. Similarly, three-dimensional flows with inflected velocity profiles, such as the leeward side of HIFiRE-1 or the HIFiRE-5 centerline, exhibited much lower transition Reynolds numbers in ground tests as compared to flight. The disparity between flight and wind-tunnel transition Reynolds numbers was less pronounced for attachment-line transition. The supposition was that this transition mechanism was either less affected by wind-tunnel noise or was more susceptible to disparities in wall cooling between the wind tunnel and flight.

show abstract

“…Existing high-enthalpy hypersonic ground test facilities are unable to sustain sufficiently long test times in order to reach the chemical activity encountered in real flights (Hornung 1992;Itoh et al 1999;Hannemann, Schramm & Karl 2008). Flight tests thus remain the only source of experimental data; examples can be found in Johnson et al (1972), Walker et al (2008), Kimmel et al (2015) or Wheaton et al (2018). However, these experiments feature a major uncertainty in the free-stream conditions, offer very limited data owing to engineering challenges and are scarce because of their cost.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%