Q., “ Research on Thermal Protection Mechanism of Forward-Facing Cavity and Opposing Jet Combinatorial Thermal Protection System,” Heat and Mass Transfer, Vol. 50, No. 4, 2014, pp. 449–456. G., “ Drag and Heat Reduction Mechanism in the Combinational Opposing Jet and Acoustic Cavity Concept for Hypersonic Vehicles,” Aerospace Science and Technology, Vol. 42, 2015, pp. 407–414. doi: AASTCF 0094-5765 Crossref Google Scholar and Liu J., “ Heat Flux Reduction Mechanism Induced by a Combinational Opposing Jet and Cavity Concept in Supersonic Flows,” Acta Astronautica, Vol. 121, 2016, pp. 164–171. doi: SHWAEN 0938-1287 Crossref Google Scholar B., “ Numerical Analysis on Cooling Performance of Counterflowing Jet over Aerodisked Blunt Body,” Shock Waves, Vol. 24, No. 5, 2014, pp. 537–543. doi: AIAJAH 0001-1452 Link Google Scholar L., “ Concept of Non-Ablative Thermal Protection System for Hypersonic Vehicles,” AIAA Journal, Vol. 51, No. 3, 2013, pp. 584–590. doi: LHHPAE 0567-7718 Crossref Google Scholar and Zhao W., “ Experimental Demonstration of a New Concept of Drag Reduction and Thermal Protection for Hypersonic Vehicles,” Acta Mechanica Sinica, Vol. 25, No. 3, 2009, pp. 417–419. L., “ Conceptual Study on Non-Ablative TPS for Hypersonic Vehicles,” 17th AIAA International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference, AIAA Paper 2011-2372, 2011.
-l.jpg "quicken 2017 beta")
X., “ Drag Reduction Mechanism Induced by a Combinational Opposing Jet and Spike Concept in Supersonic Flows,” Acta Astronautica, Vol. 115, 2015, pp. 24–31. doi: JSCRAG 0022-4650 Link Google Scholar S., “ Ablation and Thermal Response Program for Spacecraft Heatshield Analysis,” Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, Vol. 36, No. 3, 1999, pp. 475–483.
and Yan L., “ Experimental Investigation on Drag and Heat Flux Reduction in Supersonic/Hypersonic Flows: A Survey,” Acta Astronautica, Vol. 129, 2016, pp. 95–110. Huang W., “ A Survey of Drag and Heat Reduction in Supersonic Flows by a Counterflowing Jet and Its Combinations,” Journal of Zhejiang University-Science A (Applied Physics and Engineering), Vol. 16, No. 7, 2015, pp. 551–561. The operating conditions located on the front are proved accurate by a computational fluid dynamics method, and higher drag and heat reduction efficiency can be realized than the conventional configuration at a relatively lower jet total pressure. The multi-island genetic algorithm coupled with the kriging surrogate model integrated in Isight 5.5 has been employed to establish the approximate model and solve the Pareto-optimal front. The jet total pressure ratio and geometric dimensions are selected as design variables, and the sampling points are obtained numerically by using an optimal Latin hypercube design method.
#Quicken 2017 beta verification#
Therefore, based on the verification of a numerical method, multiobjective design optimization of the combinational novel cavity and opposing jet concept is conducted to minimize both the drag force coefficient and heat load in the current study.
However, the novel concept would not necessarily generate higher drag and heat reduction efficiency than the conventional one. The combinational forward-facing cavity and opposing jet configuration is an effective concept, and its performance could be partially improved when a maximum thrust nozzle contour is employed to substitute the conventional cavity configuration. It attaches profound importance to conduct a survey on drag reduction and a thermal protection mechanism applied to the nose tip of hypersonic reentry vehicle due to severe aerodynamic drag and heating.
0 kommentar(er)
