Designing an inlet based on the fuselage geometry and its constraints is an important part of flight vehicle design. Among the different possible configurations, design integration of a supersonic inlet with a cylindrical fuselage is a major challenge. On one hand, propulsive efficiency requirements force the designers to consider the simplest compression surfaces for the inlet entrance geometries and on the other hand, the considerable drag of inlet/diverter integrations needs to be minimized, which can affect the inlet. In this paper, two new concepts as a replacement for a top mounted pitot inlet are presented: a three-dimensional wave-derived inlet and a trigonometric bump inlet. They are designed based on computational fluid dynamics simulations and their performance has been measured and compared with the initial single normal shock inlet as a baseline.
Seddon J and Goldsmith EL. Intake aerodynamics. 2nd ed. AIAA Education Series. New York: AIAA, 1999.
2.
Scharnhorst RK. An overview of military aircraft supersonic inlet aerodynamics. In: 50th AIAA aerospace sciences meeting, 9–12 January 2012, Nashville, TN, USA.
3.
Goldsmith EL and Seddon J. Practical intake aerodynamic design. 2nd ed. AIAA Education Series. New York: AIAA, 1993.
4.
Wikipedia, en.wikipedia.org (accessed 6 May 2018).
Murakami A. Silent supersonic technology demonstration program. In: 25th international congress of the aeronautical science, Hamburg, Germany, 3–8 September 2006.
7.
Gridley MC and Walker SH. Inlet and nozzle technology for 21st century fighter aircraft. ASME paper no. 96-GT-244, New York: ASME, 1996.
8.
SahebyEBHuangGPQiaoWYet al.Highly integrated inlet design based on the ridge concept. J Propul Power2016; 32: 1505–1515.
9.
Gridley MC and Cahill MJ. ACIS air induction system trade study. In: ASME/SAE/ASEE joint propulsion conference and exhibit, Lake Buena Vista, FL, USA, 1996, AIAA paper no. 1996-2646.
10.
Watanabe Y, Ueno A and Murakami A. Design of top mounted supersonic inlet for silent supersonic technology demonstrator S3TD. In: 27th international congress of the aeronautical sciences, Nice, France, 19–24 September 2010.
11.
Miki H, Watanabe Y and Kameda M. Performance evaluation of a boundary layer diverter for supersonic propulsion system. In: 28th international congress of the aeronautical sciences, Brisbane, Australia, 23–28 Septembers 2012.
12.
Slater JW. Methodology for the design of streamline-traced external-compression supersonic inlets. In: 50th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE joint propulsion conference, Cleveland, OH, USA, 28–30 July 2014.
13.
Townend LH. Rectangular and caret sails in supersonic flow. Aeronautical Research Council (UK), R. & M. No. 3624, 1970.
14.
Hall GR, Huwitz WM and Norby WP. Development of the F/A-18 E/F air induction system. In: AIAA/SAE/ASME/ASEE conference and exhibit, Monterey, CA, USA, 28–30 June 1993.
15.
Saheby EB, Huang GP and Hays A. Design of wave derived inlet for high curvature fuselage. In: 52nd AIAA/SAE/ASEE joint propulsion conference, Salt Lake City, UT, 25–27 July 2016.
16.
Simon PC, Brown DW and Huff RG. Performance of external-compression bump inlet at Mach numbers of 1.5 and 2.0. NACA-RM-E56L19, 1957.
17.
Hamstra JW, McCallum BN, Sylvester TG, et al. System and method for diverting boundary layer air. U.S. Patent 5,779,189, 1998.
18.
Masud J and Akram F. Flow field and performance analysis of an integrated diverterless supersonic inlet. In: 48th AIAA aerospace sciences meeting, Orlando, FL, USA, 4–7 January 2010.
19.
Yang YK. Design of bump inlet of thunder /JF-17 aircraft. J Nanjing Univ Aeronaut Astronaut 2007; 39: 449–452. Article number: 1005-2615 (2007) 04-0449-04.
20.
Titchener N, Babinsky H and Loth E. “Can fundamental shock-wave/boundary-layer interaction research be relevant to inlet aerodynamics?” In: 50th AIAA aerospace sciences meeting, 2012. Reston, VA: AIAA.
21.
Chauffour M-L. Corrected shock-based design for waverider geometries. In: 12th AIAA international space planes and hypersonic systems and technologies, Norfolk, Virginia, 15–19 December 2003.
22.
Magee T, Shaw S and Fugal S. Experimental validations of a low boom aircraft design. In: 51st AIAA aerospace sciences meeting, Texas, USA, 2013.
23.
Hehs E. JSF diverterless supersonic inlet. Code One Magazine, 15 July 2000.
24.
Kim SD. Aerodynamic Design of a Supersonic Inlet with a Parametric Bump. AIAA Journal of Aircraft 2009; 46: 198–202. Article number: 10.2514/1.37416.
25.
TillotsonBJLothECraig DuttonJ. Experimental study of a Mach 3 bump-compression flowfield. J Propul Power2009; 25: 545–554.
26.
LiuHYLiLZhangDM. Study on a class of TC-Bézier curve with shape parameters. J Inform Comput Sci2011; 8: 1217–1223.
27.
HanXL. Quadratic trigonometric polynomial curves with a shape parameter. J Comput Aid Geom Des2002; 19: 503–512.
Scharnhorst RK and Delot A-L. Computational and experimental results for flow in a diffusing S-duct without and with flow control devices. In: 51st AIAA/SAE/ASEE joint propulsion conference, Orlando, FL, USA, 27–29 July 2015.
30.
Barth TJ and Jespersen D. The design and application of upwind schemes on unstructured meshes. In: AIAA 27th aerospace sciences meeting, Reno, NV. USA, 1989, AIAA-89-0366.
31.
Weiss JM, Maruszewski JP and Smith WA. Implicit solution of the Navier-Stokes equations on unstructured meshes. In: 13th AIAA CFD conference, Snowmass, CO, USA, July 1997, AIAA-97-2103.
32.
Masud J and Akram F. Effect of passive bleed system on an integrated diverterless supersonic inlet. In: 49th AIAA aerospace sciences meeting, Orlando, FL, USA, 4–7 January 2011.
33.
Titchener N, Bruce P and Babinsky H. An experimental investigation of corner bleed applied to a normal shock-wave/boundary-layer interaction and diffuser. In: 49th AIAA aerospace sciences meeting, 2011. Reston, VA: AIAA.
34.
TitchenerNBabinskyH. Microvortex generators applied to a flowfield containing a normal shock wave and diffuser. AIAA J2011; 49: 1046–1056.
35.
SchlichtingH. Boundary-layer theory, 7th ed. New York: McGraw Hill, 1979.
36.
SahebyEBOlyaeiGKebriaeeA. Design of supersonic inlet based on shock wave. Modares Mech Eng2017; 16: 303–310.
