Navier-Stokes Predictions of Pitch Damping for Axisymmetric Projectiles

Weinacht, Paul; Sturek, Walter B.; Schiff, Lewis B.

doi:10.2514/2.3306

Cited by 42 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The application of CFD to prediction of the characteristics of army projectiles was initiated at Aberdeen Proving Ground for calculations of pitch damping force and moment coefficients [50,51]. As a method of computing flow fields in deceleration for comparison with ballistic range data, Saito et al [52] used an inertial frame CFD system for models of shock stand-off distance.…”

Section: Earlier Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Theoretical treatment of fluid flow for accelerating bodies

Gledhill¹,

Roohani

Forsberg

et al. 2016

Theor. Comput. Fluid Dyn.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most computational fluid dynamics simulations are, at present, performed in a body-fixed frame, for aeronautical purposes. With the advent of sharp manoeuvre, which may lead to transient effects originating in the acceleration of the centre of mass, there is a need to have a consistent formulation of the Navier–Stokes equations in an arbitrarily moving frame. These expressions should be in a form that allows terms to be transformed between non-inertial and inertial frames and includes gravity, viscous terms, and linear and angular acceleration. Since no effects of body acceleration appear in the inertial frame Navier–Stokes equations themselves, but only in their boundary conditions, it is useful to investigate acceleration source terms in the non-inertial frame. In this paper, a derivation of the energy equation is provided in addition to the continuity and momentum equations previously published. Relevant dimensionless constants are derived which can be used to obtain an indication of the relative significance of acceleration effects. The necessity for using computational fluid dynamics to capture nonlinear effects remains, and various implementation schemes for accelerating bodies are discussed. This theoretical treatment is intended to provide a foundation for interpretation of aerodynamic effects observed in manoeuvre, particularly for accelerating missiles.

Funding agencies: DRDB [KT466921, KT528944, KT470887]

show abstract

Section: Earlier Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Theoretical treatment of fluid flow for accelerating bodies

Gledhill¹,

Roohani

Forsberg

et al. 2016

Theor. Comput. Fluid Dyn.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Funding agencies: DRDB [KT466921, KT528944, KT470887]

show abstract

“…locations. The pitch-damping calculations were performed separate from the other calculations using a steady lunar coning motion described by Weinacht et al (18). These are still steady-state computations but entail using a rotating reference frame to put the projectile body in a coning motion.…”

Section: The 7-cal Ansr Model Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

CFD Prediction of Magnus Effect in Subsonic to Supersonic Flight

DeSpirito

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.ii REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved OMB No. 0704-0188Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS. REPORT DATE (DD-MM-YYYY)September 2009 ARL-TR-4929 SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSOR/MONITOR'S ACRONYM(S) SPONSOR/MONITOR'S REPORT NUMBER(S) DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENTApproved for public release; distribution is unlimited. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES ABSTRACTThe aerodynamic coefficients of the 7-cal. U.S. Army-Navy Spinner Rocket were characterized using computational fluid dynamic (CFD) calculations and validated using archival experimental data. The static aerodynamic coefficients, roll-damping, and pitch-damping moments were accurately predicted by steady-state Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) as well as unsteady hybrid RANS/large-eddy simulation (LES) CFD. The Magnus moment was overpredicted in the subsonic and transonic regime. Unsteady RANS/LES computations did not improve the prediction of Magnus moment at the lower Mach numbers. Both steady-state RANS and unsteady RANS/LES simulations resulted in similar predictions of all aerodynamic coefficients. Distributions of Magnus moment along the projectile body showed that the largest difference in Magnus moment between configurations and Mach numbers was in the last caliber of the projectile body. iii

show abstract

“…The prediction of dynamic coefficients such as pitch-damping, roll-damping, and Magnus moments has not achieved widespread use, even though some methods for efficient prediction via steady-state methods (e.g., for pitch damping) were demonstrated over 10 years ago (1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6). To determine the full set of static and dynamic aerodynamic data needed to predict projectile in-flight motion, projectile designers still turn to flight tests (both aeroballistic range and telemetry free-flight) as their primary source for dynamic aerodynamic coefficients.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Navier-Stokes Predictions of Dynamic Stability Derivatives: Evaluation of Steady-State Methods

DeSpirito

Silton

Weinacht

2009

Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.ii REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved OMB No. 0704-0188Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS. REPORT DATE (DD-MM-YYYY)September 2008 ARL-TR-4605 SPONSOR/MONITOR'S ACRONYM(S) 9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) SPONSOR/MONITOR'S REPORT NUMBER(S) DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENTApproved for public release; distribution is unlimited. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES ABSTRACTThe prediction of the dynamic stability derivatives-roll-damping, Magnus, and pitch-damping moments-were evaluated for three spin-stabilized projectiles using steady-state computational fluid dynamic (CFD) calculations. Roll-damping CFD predictions were found to be very good across the Mach number range investigated. Magnus moment predictions were very good in the supersonic flight regime; however, the accuracy varied in the subsonic and transonic flight regime. The best Magnus moment prediction in the subsonic flight regime was for the square-base projectile that did not exhibit highly nonlinear Magnus moments. A primary contribution of this report is the demonstration that the pitch-damping moment can be adequately predicted via steady-state methods rather than resorting to unsteady techniques. The predicted pitch-damping moment compared very well to experimental data for the three projectiles investigated. For one configuration, the pitch-damping moment was predicted by several CFD codes, two different steady-state methods, and a time-accurate planar pitching motion method. All methods compared very well to each other and to the experimental data. iii

show abstract

Navier-Stokes Predictions of Pitch Damping for Axisymmetric Projectiles

Cited by 42 publications

References 13 publications

Theoretical treatment of fluid flow for accelerating bodies

Theoretical treatment of fluid flow for accelerating bodies

CFD Prediction of Magnus Effect in Subsonic to Supersonic Flight

Navier-Stokes Predictions of Dynamic Stability Derivatives: Evaluation of Steady-State Methods

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About