NACA Conical Boatail Pressure Affects | Drag (Physics) | Aerodynamics

TECHNICAL NOTE 2972

THEORETICAL

PRESSURE FOR

DISTRIBUTIONS BOATTAILS

AND

WAVE

DMGS

CONICAL

By John R. Jack Lewis Flight Propulsion Laboratory Cleveland, Ohio

Washington July 1953

.. . . .

.. . .. .

.

..

.

,- . . ..-

.- ..-.

.

... ....

.. .

.. . .. .-

--

and secantparabolic boatta~ showed the conical boattail to have the smallest wave drag. There are.5. little data available to serve either as a guide in the design of boattails for supersonic bodies or as a basis for esthating the aerodynamic loads and wave drags associated with boattails. INIROIXXTION One of the major components of a missile configurate is the ion afterbody section known as the boattail. However. ptilication of the present report was considered warranted. 1) — . which are quite valuable for structural desiw and for esttit ing base pressues.5 to 4. tangent-parabolic. however. For a specific l&ch number. ‘After completion of the work presented h this report. and boattail angle . increases with increasing boattail angle. avafible qyzrimental data indicate that potential theory does predict the boattail chsxacteristics adequately for most design purposes. since reference 1 does not present say pressure dlstributions. NM lM16MlMlllollllln 13 IL5952 C 1s maw fmmom COMMITIEEMROIWUZ!ICS F~ TKXKKML NOTE 2972 TEIEOREIIICAL PRESSURE DISZKIBUIT ONS AND MNll IWWS FoR CONICAL BomTAm3 By John R. area ratio.800.— --- . for a constant srea ratio. 1). and boattail angles from 3° to II”. However. area ratio. It has generally been assumed that boundary @er effects render the potential flow computations toward the rear of the missile meaningless. .TECH UBRARY tC/WB. the wave drag decreases with increasing Mach nuriber~d area ratio. boattaila with Mach number. Jack Afterbody pressure distributions and wave drags were calculated using a second-order theory for a variety of conical boattails at zero sugle of attack. area ratios from 0. a comparison of the wave-drag coefficients for conical.200 to 0. a report of simibr content came to the attention of the author (ref. Results are presented for Mch numbers from 1. and fineness ratio. The wave drag. An investigation was therefore undertaken at the IIMR Lewis Laboratory to study systematically the variations of pressure distributions and wave drags of ~ conical. The results indicate that for a given boattail angle.

MEI!HODOF COMWIMTION Pressure distributions for each boattafi were calculated using the second-ofier theory developed in reference 2.. !l?he procedure presented in reference 3 proves to be an expedient means of obtatiing both a first. Wave-tig coefficients for each boattail were obtained by graphically integrating the pressure distributio~ over the boattail surfaces. As indicated in reference 2. the area ratios of practical interest correspond to boattai. section of sufficient length to give uniform flow at the free-stresm lhch number at the beginning of each boattail. in general. The calculating procedure followed was that presented ti reference 3. The average time for calculating the combined first.and second-order solutions was apprccdmat ely 11 cmput er hours. r is the local boattail radius. are within this Mmitat ion. .200 to 0. respectively.800. and ~ and R are the maxhum and minimum boattail radii. and the exact isentropic pressure relation is used for evaluating the pressure coefficient at each point on the bdy. Cp I?XSQECS AND DEXUSSION Pressure distributions and wave drags.The variations of pressure coefficient in the axial direction for the conical boattaiM me presented in figure 1 for selected values of boattail angle and free-stresm — . and boattail angles from 3° to U_”. area ratios from 0. in which the approximate boundary condition at the surface of the body is used to obtain the perturbation velocities. The wave-drag coefficient was based on the maximum area of the boattail and is deftied by where is the exact isentropic pressure coefficient.1.5 to 4.and a second-order solution. the second-order solution could be carried beyond this petit by extending the tables used in the computations. however. lengths which.5. It was assumed that the boattails are preceded by a cylindrical. 2 NACA TN 2972 b Rressure distributions and wave-drag coefficients are-presented for &h numbers fran 1. ti each case the solution was carried downstream to the petit at whSch the radius of the I&ch cone from the beginnhg of the boattail has grown to ten times the local radius of the bcattail. .

. the pressuxe coefficient has a~roxhmt el. 3. . .. The results of the present calculations were extrapcilded to 1~~ = O by using the concepts of Newtonian flow theory which predict a zero drag coefficient for all boattail angles as (ref. .. the coefficient of wave drag increases with ticreasing boattail angle and decreases with increasing area ratio. To extend the I&ch number ~nge investigated. .. .decreases as the boattail angle increases.- —. . The dashed lines presented in figme 3 represent the limit@g area ratio to which the theory of reference 3 can be applied without extending the tables used in the computations. . . .To obtain the effect of body contour on pressure distributions and wave drags. 3 and 4.5 . .. .~~””””””o”o-2oo Secant-parabolic boattail leading-edge angle.and a secant-parabolic boattail contour each having the same len@h and area ratio have been investi~ted and the results compared with those obtatied from the correspon~g inscribed conical boattail. with each having a cliffrent expane sion sz@. . . . . L/~.deg .y the Prandtl-Meyer value at the beginning of the boattail because of the ~ans ive turning through the boattail mgl. ... . .. . . Design parameters for these boattails were arbitrarily chosen and are: l%chnmber.. . deg . .”2”255 . .5 Conical boattail angle. The pressure coefficient level increases with increasing Mach nuniberfor a given boattail angle and. Defining equations for these boattail contours axe as follows: c _. . .e.O .— . a tangent. In each case. . . the wave-drag coefficient has been plotted as a function of the reciprocal of the I&ch nuiber (fig. . . .08. Graphical integration of the pressure distributions presented in figure 1 over the boattail surfaces yields the variation of wave-drag coefficient with area ratio and with boattail. .. . 5).. . . Ftieness ratio. Body contour effect. .— . The variation of fineness ratio and area ratio with boattail angle is given in figure 2.2.NACA TN 2972 3 . . . which is fold. &ch nmiber. . Arearatio. 4). .e at the leading edge of the boattail. respectively). The wave dxag coefficients presented in figure 4 were obtained by extrapolating some of the data of figures 3(a) and 3(b). . . the coefficient of % +wave drag decreases as the Mach nuniberis ticreased... . .. for a given I&h nuniber. . For a specific boattail angle. . .. . .7 The contours considered for the comparison are slike inasmuch as they me members of the psrabolic fsmily. .angle (figs. . . . . e. .owed by a co~tinuous compression along the boattail surf~. . . For a given lkch number. ~... . ... . .ce. A/~ . .. The dependence of the pressure distributions upon fineness ratio and area ratio msy be found by correlating boattafl angle with fineness ratio and area ratio.

0.0.angle.1228 ~ % Pressure distributions for the tangent.and secant-parabolic boattails are ccmpared with the pressure distribution for the conical boattail h figure 6. boatt-ail.4 NACA TN 2972 Tangent-parabolic: ii=l Secant-parabolic: ~=1 conical: .02719 + % () 2 2 . a tangentparabolic.5 to 4. April. For a given area ratio and increasing boattail.0.0.5 and for boattail angles from 3° to KLO: 1. 2. For a given boattail angle.27 times the conical boattail drag.5. The wave-drag coefficient for a given boattail angle decreased with ficreasing I&h number and area ratio. and a fineness ratio of 2.06116 = % . while the secant-parabolic boattail &rag is 1. 1953 — — —— . Lewis Flight Propulsion Laboratory National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics Cleveland. the boattail wave-drag coefficient ticreased.28. a comparison of the wave drags for a conical. and a secant-parabolicboattail. an area ratio of 0.01364 ~ ()m t=l . The tangent-parabolic boattail hm a drag 1.atedusing a second-order theory for various conical boattails at zero angle of a%ck. The following conclusions have been rbached after mm the res~ts for a ~ch ntier range from 1. Graphical.shows the conical boattail to have the smallest wave drag. have to the least wave drag (~ = 0.02 times as large. the pressure coefficient level ticreased with increasing Mach number and for a given &h number decreased as the boattail angle increased.0465).25. SUMMAlwaE’ Afterbody pressure distributions and wave drags have been calcul.200.integration of these pressure distributions to obtain the respective wave drags shows the conical. Ohio. For a I&ch nunber of 2. 3.

PP. M. Joux. E. Grinmd. N21CATN 2744.: First. Van Dyke.and Second-Order Theory of Supersonic Flow Past Bodies of Revolution. —— — —- —--—— -- —— –-— . 3. Mar. 4.: Axial and Normal Force Coefficients for Pointed Bodies of Revolution at Super. 5. 17. and Dye. G..WA TN 2972 5 REFERENCES w 1. B. 1952.Boattails. RM-905. Van Dyke..: Practicsl Calculation of Second-Order Supersonic Flow Past Nonlifting Bcxliesof Revolution. 18. no. RAND. Sci. Jour.: Lift on hclined Bdies of Revolution in Hypersonic Flow.nger. Aug. H. S.. VO1.. and Young. G. 1950. 2. H. 1951. J. vol. no.. 675-690. 161-178. Psx’tu . Williams.. M_. P. Milton D. W. 1952.and l&personic Speeds. Nov. pp. 3. Milton D. Aero. Aero. The RAND Corp. U. Sci. Huth. Air Force Proj.

1 0 1 (a) lb - 1. .04 . (d) l% - 4 * 4. -.3.ails. z Axial 5 station. in axial direction — —.5.5. 3 -.06 l% .02 v L “’=”’”* I 1 I I 1 1 1 1- 1 J.re 1.NACA TN 2972 -. 2 -. .5. coefficient 5 6 Fl@.Variation of pressure for conical boatt. 0 (c) -.7 \ -.

deg 3 \ .0 .+ $ . L/~ 8 10 Figure 2. . area ratio. . 7 I e 1.NACA TN 2972 ..8 !iIDJ : / -L A. .Relations between boattail angle.— ——..2 \ 11 \ \ .$=(l. and fineness ratio. \ \ \ G. 0 2 4 6 Fineness ratio.2&my .D 1+----L . .6 \ .

4 Area ratio. A/k (b) Mach number.04.5. . \ \— 0 — — . Figure 3.8 “ . 2.12 .16 .— 3 .8 1.0 . 3.08 .——— .5.Variation of wave-drag coefficient with area ratio.12 .) (Dashed .08 1--~ I \ A .6 .2 . lines represent limiting area ratio for theory of ref. . 0 (a) Mach nuniber. 1.

02 \ 3 \ —_ 0 ._ ..04 . 3. .4 .. .06 .02 0 (c) Mach number. .Concluded. . Variation of wave-drag coefficient with area —— ——--— —___ .06 . .-.0 Area ratio.6 .8 1.5.2 .5. —. ratio. 4. .. Figure 3._ .A/% (d) Mach nuuiber.04 I \ < 1 .

deg (b) Mach nuuiber. 2. Figure 4.. . .Variation of wave-drag coefficient with boattall angle. — . .10 NACA TN 2972 . f3.5. 10 12 .8 0 2 4 6 8 E@attall angle.

. deg 10 12 (d) Mach muiber.06 q g s .5.04 . 3. .04 . Variation of wave-drag coefficient with boattdl —..02 T o # 2 4 Wattail 8 6 angle.5. . 9.Concluded. 4.06 . —-—— — —. 0 0. angle. Figure 4.NACA TN 2972 11 .02 0 (c) Mach number.— — .

.08 .12 9 . . l/~ (b) Area ratio. 0 (a) Area ratio.04 c!? -. Figure 5.4WI.2~.04/ / - 3 I 0 . 0.08 / / / ‘ 7 A /5 .2 Mach number reciprocal.8 _ —.16 . . .Variation of wave-drag coefficient with reciprocal of Mach nuuiber. .16 q U.12 .NAM TN 2972 . O .6 .4 .

0.600.08 / A . .06 11 /9 .02r o .Concluded. Variation of wave-drag coefficfent with reciprocal of Mach number.800. .04 7 { 5 .04 v!? . .6 . 0. deg I-1. .3 u 0 (c) Area ratio. l/~ (d) Area ratio. % . — —— — ..2 Mach number reciprocal.8 Figure 5.4 .12 e.

0.5.4 Mal .kchnumber.10 [ =M (Not to scale) I I I 1 \ ~ -.02 I 0 .04 / -.8 1.. J ‘o + f Tangent parabolic 8ecant parabolic -Conical -. Free-stream I.— — .08 \ / y Tangentparabola \ -. .—— — .200. xiL .6 station.Pressure distributions over three boattail contours. 2.2 . area ratio. — .0 Figure 6.. NACA-h@q -7-6-53- 1004 —z.06 / parabola -.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful