Book contents
- Theories and Technologies of Hypervelocity Shock Tunnels
- Theories and Technologies of Hypervelocity Shock Tunnels
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Preface
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Shock-Wave Relations and Aerothermodynamic States
- 3 Heated Light-Gas High-Enthalpy Shock Tunnels
- 4 Free-Piston-Driven High-Enthalpy Shock Tunnels
- 5 Detonation-Driven High-Enthalpy Shock Tunnels
- 6 Theory and Methods for Long-Test-Duration Shock Tunnels
- 7 Methods for Designing High-Enthalpy Flow Nozzles
- 8 Aerothermodynamic Testing and Hypersonic Physics
- Index
- References
This chapter is part of a book that is no longer available to purchase from Cambridge Core
4 - Free-Piston-Driven High-Enthalpy Shock Tunnels
Book contents
- Theories and Technologies of Hypervelocity Shock Tunnels
- Theories and Technologies of Hypervelocity Shock Tunnels
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Preface
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Shock-Wave Relations and Aerothermodynamic States
- 3 Heated Light-Gas High-Enthalpy Shock Tunnels
- 4 Free-Piston-Driven High-Enthalpy Shock Tunnels
- 5 Detonation-Driven High-Enthalpy Shock Tunnels
- 6 Theory and Methods for Long-Test-Duration Shock Tunnels
- 7 Methods for Designing High-Enthalpy Flow Nozzles
- 8 Aerothermodynamic Testing and Hypersonic Physics
- Index
- References
Summary
The free-piston driver is a powerful technique to increase both the driver gas sound speed and pressure. Therefore, it is capable of generating high-enthalpy flows and offering high performance among various gasdynamic shock drivers. So far, it has been implemented in a number of major reflected-shock as well as shock-expansion wind tunnels around the world. The free-piston driver has the advantage that a high driver gas pressure is automatically generated in the same process. On the other hand, the driver is far more complex mechanically and requires operation-tuning in order to operate effectively. Moreover, its test time is short and the test flow is not steady because the piston motion is difficult to control. In this chapter, the basic concepts of the free-piston driver are discussed. The analytical theory that describes the piston dynamics and the method for tuned piston operation are presented. Examples of major free-piston-driven test facilities as well as their applications in hypersonic testing are also summarized.
Keywords
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Theories and Technologies of Hypervelocity Shock Tunnels , pp. 73 - 118Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2023
References
Abdel-Jawad, M. M., Mee, D. J., Morgan, R. G., Jacobs, P. A., and Philpot, J. A. (2001). Transient Force Measurements at Superorbital Speeds. Paper 5358, 23rd International Symposium on Shock Waves, Fort Worth, Texas.Google Scholar
Adam, P. (1997). Enthalpy Effects on Hypervelocity Boundary Layers. Ph.D. Thesis. California Institute of Technology. (Unpublished).Google Scholar
Atkins, W. W. and Halperson, S. M. (1960). Hypervelocity Projection Techniques and Impact Studies, January 1959–June 1960. NRL Memorandum Report No. 1116.Google Scholar
Bélanger, J., Kaneshige, M., and Shepherd, J. E. (1996). Detonation Initiation by Hypervelocity Projectiles. In Proceedings of the 20th International Symposium on Shock Waves, Vol. II, ed. Sturtevant, B., Shepherd, J. E., and Hornung, H. G.. Pasadena, CA: World Scientific, pp. 1119–1124.Google Scholar
Bernstein, L. (1975). Force Measurements in Short-Duration Hypersonic Facilities. AGARDograph No. 214, ed. R. C. Pankhurst. London: AGARD.Google Scholar
Bi, Z., Zhang, B., Zhu, H., et al. (2018). Experiments and Computations on the Compression Process in the Free Piston Shock Tunnel FD21. Presented at the 5th International Conference on Experimental Fluid Mechanics, Munich, Germany.Google Scholar
Bird, K. D. (1962). 48-Inch Hypersonic Shock Tunnel, Description and Capabilities. Cornell Aeronautical Laboratory, May.Google Scholar
Bray, K. N. C., Pennelegion, L., and East, R. A. (1959). A Progress Report on the University of Southampton Hypersonic Gun Tunnel. Aeronautical Research Council Technical Report. C.P. No. 457.Google Scholar
Charters, A. C., Denardo, B. P., and Rossow, V. J. (1957). Development of a Piston-Compressor Type Light-Gas Gun for the Launching of Free-Flight Models at High Velocity. NACA TN 4143.Google Scholar
Chinitz, W., Erdos, J. I., Rizkalla, O., Anderson, G. Y., and Bushnell, D. M. (1994). Facility Opportunities and Associated Stream Chemistry Considerations for Hypersonic Air-Breathing Propulsion. Journal of Propulsion and Power, 10(1), 6–11.Google Scholar
Dann, A. G., Morgan, R. G., Gildfind, D. E., et al. (2012). Upgrade of the X3 Super-orbital Expansion Tube. Presented at the 18th Australasian Fluid Mechanics Conference, Launceston, Australia, December 3–7.Google Scholar
Duryea, G. R. and Sheeran, W. J. (1969). Accelerometer Force Balance Techniques. Presented at the 3rd IEEE International Congress on Instrumentation in Aerospace Simulation Facilities, Brooklyn, USA.Google Scholar
Eggers, A. J. Jr. (1955). A Method for Simulating the Atmospheric Entry of Long-Range Ballistic Missiles. NACA Report 1378.Google Scholar
Glass, I. I. and Hall, J. G. (1959). Handbook of Supersonic Aerodynamics, Section 18, Shock Tubes. NAVORD Report 1488 (Vol. 6), December.Google Scholar
Glössner, C. and Olivier, H. (2005). Force and Moment Measurements on the Hopper-Configuration for High Enthalpy Conditions. In Proceedings of the 24th International Symposium on Shock Waves, ed. Jiang, Z. L.. Beijing: Springer, pp. 203–208.Google Scholar
Hannemann, K., Brück, S., and Brenner, G. (1995). Numerical Simulation of Reacting Flows Related to the HEG. In Shock Waves @ Marseille II, ed. Brun, R. and Dumitrescu, L. Z.. Berlin: Springer, pp. 251–256.Google Scholar
Hannemann, K., Schramm, J. M., Wagner, A., and Camillo, G. P. (2018). The High Enthalpy Shock Tunnel Göttingen of the German Aerospace Center (DLR). Journal of Large-Scale Research Facilities, 4, A133.Google Scholar
Hertzberg, A., Wittliff, C. E., and Hall, J. G. (1961). Summary of Shock Tunnel Development and Application to Hypersonic Research. Cornell Aeronautical Laboratory. Report No. AD-1052-A-12, AFOSR TR 60-139.Google Scholar
Hornung, H. G. (1972). Non-equilibrium Dissociating Nitrogen Flow Over Spheres and Circular Cylinders: Part 1. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 2(53), 149–176.Google Scholar
Hornung, H. G. (1988). The Piston Motion in a Free-Piston Driver for Shock Tubes and Tunnels. GALCIT Report FM 88-1, California Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Hornung, H. G. (2010). Ground Testing for Hypervelocity Flow, Capabilities and Limitations. In Aerothermodynamic Design, Review on Ground Testing and CFD, ed. Chazot, O. and Bensassi, K., RTO-EN-AVT-186. RTO/NATO, paper 1.Google Scholar
Hornung, H. G. and Wen, C.-Y. (1995). Nonequilibrium Dissociating Flow Over Spheres. AIAA Paper 95-0091.Google Scholar
Itoh, K. (1996). Tuned Operation of a Free-Piston Shock Tunnel. In Proceedings of the 20th International Symposium on Shock Waves, ed. Sturtevant, B., Shepherd, J. E., and Hornung, H. G.. Vol. I. Pasadena, CA: World Scientific, pp. 43–51.Google Scholar
Itoh, K. (2002). Characteristics of the HIEST and Its Applicability for Hypersonic Aerothermodynamic and Scramjet Research. In Advanced Hypersonic Test Facilities, ed. Lu, F. K. and Marren, D. E.. Vol. 198 of AIAA Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics. Reston, VA: AIAA, pp. 239–253.Google Scholar
Itoh, K., Komuro, T., Sato, K., et al. (2002a). Characteristics of Free-Piston Shock Tunnel HIEST (1st Report, Tuned Operation of Free-Piston Driver). (In Japanese). 日本機械学会論文集 B編, J-STAGE, 68 巻 (2002) 675 号.Google Scholar
Itoh, K., Tanno, H., Komuro, T., Sato, K., and Ueda, S. (1994). Tuned Operation Theory for Free-Piston Driver of High-enthalpy Shock Tunnel. In Symposium on Shock Waves Japan’94, pp. 29–32.Google Scholar
Itoh, K., Ueda, S., Komuro, T., et al. (1998). Improvement of a Free Piston Driver for a High-enthalpy Shock Tunnel. Shock Waves, 8, 215–233.Google Scholar
Itoh, K., Ueda, S., Tanno, H., Komuro, T., and Sato, K. (2002b). Hypersonic Aerothermodynamic and Scramjet Research Using High Enthalpy Shock Tunnel. Shock Waves, 12, 93–98.Google Scholar
Jenkins, R. C. (1974). Shock Tube Operation Using a Compression-Heated Driver Gas. Grumman Research Department Report RE-481, Grumman Aerospace Corporation, Bethpage, New York, August.Google Scholar
Jessen, C. and Grönig, H. (1989). A New Principle for a Short-duration Six Component Balance. Experiments in Fluids, 8, 231–233.Google Scholar
Kaneshige, M. J. (1999). Gaseous Detonation Initiation and Stabilization by Hypervelocity Projectiles. Ph.D. Thesis. California Institute of Technology. (Unpublished).Google Scholar
Kaneshige, M. J. and Shepherd, J. E. (1996). Oblique Detonation Stabilized on a Hypervelocity Projectile. Symposium (International) on Combustion, 26(2), 3015–3022.Google Scholar
Kortz, S., McIntyre, T. J., and Eitelberg, G. (1995). Experimental Investigation of Shock-on-Shock Interactions in the High-Enthalpy Shock Tunnel Göttingen (HEG). In Shock Waves @ Marseille I, ed. Brun, R. and Dumitrescu, L. Z.. Berlin: Springer, pp. 75–80.Google Scholar
Laurence, S. J., Butler, C. S., Martinez Schramm, J., and Hannemann, K. (2018). Force and Moment Measurements on a Free-Flying Capsule Model in a Shock Tunnel. Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, 55(2), 403–414.Google Scholar
Morgan, R. G. (1997). Superorbital Expansion Tubes. 21st International Symposium on Shock Waves, Australia, Paper 9000.Google Scholar
Morgan, R. G. (2000). Development of X3: A Superorbital Expansion Tube. AIAA Paper 2000-0558.Google Scholar
Morrison, W. R. B., Stalker, R. J., and Duffin, J. (1989). New Generation of Free-Piston Shock Tunnels. In Current Topics in Shock Waves/17th International Symposium on Shock Waves and Shock Tubes, Bethlehem, PA 1989; ed. Kim, Y. W.. New York: American Institute of Physics, pp. 582–587.Google Scholar
Nagamatsu, H. T., Geiger, R. E., and Sheer, R. E. (1959). Hypersonic Shock Tunnel. Journal of the Aerospace Sciences, 29(5), 332–340.Google Scholar
Nagamatsu, H. T., Sheer, R. E. Jr., Osburg, , L. A., and Cary, K. H. (1961). Design Features of the General Electric Research Laboratory Hypersonic Shock Tunnel. GE Research Lab. Report No. 61-RL-2711C, May.Google Scholar
Paull, A., Stalker, R. J., and Mee, D. J. (1995). Supersonic Combustion Ramjet Propulsion Experiments. In Shock Tunnel Studies of Scramjet Phenomena 1994. NASA Contractor Report NASA-CR-199445.Google Scholar
Porat, H., Morgan, R. G., and McIntyre, T. J. (2012). Study of Radiative Heat Transfer in Titan Atmospheric Entry. 28th International Congress of the Aeronautical Sciences, Brisbane, Australia, September, Paper ICAS 2012-3.8.3.Google Scholar
Rasheed, A. (2001). Passive Hypervelocity Boundary Layer Control Using an Ultrasonically Absorptive Surface. Ph.D. Thesis. California Institute of Technology. (Unpublished).Google Scholar
Roffe, G. A. (1963). The Free Piston Shock Tube Driver: A Preliminary Theoretical Study. Technical Report No. 32-560. Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, CA, December 15.Google Scholar
Sanderson, S. R., Hornung, H. G., and Sturtevant, B. (2004). The Influence of Non-equilibrium Dissociation on the Flow Produced by Shock Impingement on a Blunt Body. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 516, 1–37.Google Scholar
Sanderson, S. R. and Sturtevant, B. (1995). Shock Wave Interactions in Hypervelocity Flow. In Shock Waves @ Marseille I, ed. Brun, R. and Dumitrescu, L. Z.. Berlin: Springer, pp. 69–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, M. P. (2006). Development and Modelling of Expansion Tubes. Ph.D. thesis. University of Queensland. (Unpublished).Google Scholar
Smart, M., Stalker, R., Morgan, R., and Paull, A. (2008). Hypersonics Research in Australia. In Advances on Propulsion Technology for High-Speed Aircraft. Educational Notes RTO-EN-AVT-150. Neuilly-sur-Seine, France: RTO/NATO, Paper 11.Google Scholar
Stalker, R. J. (1961). An Investigation of Free Piston Compression of Shock Tube Driver Gas. National Research Council of Canada (NRC), Division of Mechanical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering Report MT-44, Ottawa, Canada.Google Scholar
Stalker, R. J. (1967). A Study of the Free-Piston Shock Tunnel. AIAA Journal, 5(12), 2160–2165.Google Scholar
Stalker, R. J. (2006). Modern Developments in Hypersonic Wind Tunnels. The Aeronautical Journal, 110(1003), 21–39.Google Scholar
Stalker, R. J., Paull, A., Mee, D. J., Morgan, R. G., and Jacobs, P. A. (2005). Scramjets and Shock Tunnels: The Queensland Experience. Progress in Aerospace Sciences, 41(6), 471–513.Google Scholar
Steward, B. (2004). Predicted Scramjet Testing Capabilities of the Proposed RHYFL-X Expansion Tube. Ph.D. Thesis. University of Queensland. (Unpublished).Google Scholar
Takahashi, M., Komuro, T., Sato, K., et al. (2009). Scramjet Combustor Characteristics at Hypervelocity Condition over Mach 10 Flight. In Proceedings of the 6th European Symposium on Aerothermodynamics for Space Vehicles, ESA SP-659, ed. Lacoste, H. and Ouwehand, L.. Noordwijk, Netherlands: European Space Agency, ID.45.Google Scholar
Tanno, H. (2013). Current Research Activities on Hypersonic Aerothermodynamics in JAXA-HIEST. Invited Seminar at Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, March 19.Google Scholar
Tanno, H., Komuro, T., Sato, K., and Itoh, K. (2005). Improvements of the Accelerometer Force Measurement Technique. Presented at the 21st International Congress on Instrumentation in Aerospace Simulation Facilities, Sendai, Japan, August 29–September 1.Google Scholar
Tanno, H., Komuro, T., Sato, K. et al. (2012). Free-flight Force Measurement Technique in Shock Tunnel. AIAA Paper 2012–1241.Google Scholar
Tanno, H., Komuro, T., Sato, K., et al. (2014). Aeroheating Measurement of Apollo Shaped Capsule with Boundary Layer Trip in the Free-piston Shock Tunnel HIEST. AIAA Paper 2014–0434.Google Scholar
Toniato, P. (2019). Free-Jet Testing of a Mach 12 Scramjet in an Expansion Tube. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Queensland. (Unpublished).Google Scholar
Toniato, P., Gildfind, D. E., Jacobs, P. A., and Morgan, R. G. (2015). Development of a New Mach 12 Scramjet Operating Capability in the X3 Expansion Tube. Presented at the 7th Asia-Pacific International Symposium on Aerospace Technology, Cairns, Australia, 25–27 November.Google Scholar
UQ X3. (n.d.). X3 Expansion Tube. https://mechmining.uq.edu.au/research/hypersonics/x3-expansion-tube (Accessed: May 9, 2023).Google Scholar
Wagner, A., Laurence, S., Martinez Schramm, J., et al. (2011). Experimental Investigation of Hypersonic Boundary-Layer Transition on a Cone Model in the High Enthalpy Shock Tunnel (HEG) at Mach 7.5. AIAA Paper 2011–2374.Google Scholar
Wen, C.-Y. (1994). Hypervelocity Flow over Spheres. Ph.D. Thesis. Graduate Aeronautical Laboratories, California Institute of Technology. (Unpublished).Google Scholar
Wise, D. (2014). Experimental Investigation of a Three Dimensional Scramjet Engine at Hypervelocity Conditions. Ph.D. Thesis. University of Queensland. (Unpublished).Google Scholar
Wittliff, C. E., Wilson, M. R., and Hertzberg, A. (1959). The Tailored Interface Hypersonic Shock Tunnel. Journal of the Aerospace Sciences, 26(4), 219–228.Google Scholar