J. SPACECRAFT VOL. 3, NO.

Apollo Command Module Aerothermodynamic Characteristics

at Hyperbolic Earth Entry Velocities
KENNETH D. KORKAN* AND GERALD M.
North American Aviation Inc., Downey, Calif.

Aerothermodynamic problems associated with the potential use of the Apollo command
module for Earth entry velocities up to 55,000 fps are investigated. Ten-g undershoot trajec-
tories are studied, assuming L/D = 0.5 and W' JC^A = 100 psf, to determine aerodynamic heat-
ing and heat protection requirements. The points of maximum radiant heating on under-
shoot boundaries, determined using a nonadiabatic stagnation region analysis, are employed
to conduct detailed analyses of the nonadiabatic flowfield surrounding the Apollo command
module. An adiabatic flowfield is established employing a mass-flow method, yielding a
streamline network in the shock layer pitch plane. To determine the effect of radiant trans-
Downloaded by 2405:8100:8000:5ca1::204:1d71 on December 13, 2019 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/3.28639

port on the flowfields, a one-dimensional streamtube analysis is applied to the computed

adiabatic streamline network using the basic one-dimensional gasdynamic equations with the
effect of radiant energy transport included in the energy equation, assuming an optically thin
gas. These results are employed to determine the total equilibrium radiant and convective
heating and the ablative heat protection requirements for Earth entry up to 55,000 fps.

Nomenclature Introduction
.4
g
h
streamtube area
load factor = [(L2 + D 2 )/^ 2 ] 1 / 2
static enthalpy, f t 2 /sec 2
F UTURE missions to the planets Mars and Venus will re-
sult in Earth entry velocities significantly in excess of the
velocities associated with Earth entry from lunar missions.
/ radiation intensity per unit volume, slug/f t-sec3 Since for most opportunities these velocities are in excess of
.7 mechanical equivalent of heat, 778 ft-lb/Btu
M Mach number 45,000 fps, radiant heating becomes the predominant heating
P static pressure, psf mode for blunt shapes such as the Apollo configuration. As a
PO stagnation pressure, psf result, the total heating may be too high for heat protection
q heat-transfer rate, Btu/ft 2 -sec systems that are designed for entry from Earth orbital or
qo stagnation point heat-transfer rate, Btu/ft 2 -sec lunar missions where the environment is primarily convective.
qi heat-transfer rate with no decay, qi = /;60/2, The ability to guide a low L/D entry vehicle into the narrow
Btu/ft2-sec corridor bounded by the skip-out limiting overshoot trajec-
tory and the ^-limiting undershoot trajectory also poses
Q integrated heat-transfer, Btu/ft 2 significant problems. When this corridor depth becomes less
R gas const (1716 ft2/sec2-°R, air); radius, ft
maximum body radius, ft than about 10 naut miles, difficulty is encountered in provid-
RB
RN body stagnation region radius, ft ing adequate guidance without a large expenditure of propel-
Rs shock radius, ft lants for trajectory corrections prior to entry.
•s distance along streamline Since the Apollo shape is currently in the advanced de-
sf distance along body surface velopment phases for Earth entry from the lunar mission, the
T temperature, °R possibility of using this shape for Earth entry at higher
velocity, fps velocities merits consideration. The feasibility of employing
initial reentry velocity the Apollo command module at entry velocities up to 55,000
y coordinate normal to body surface fps is investigated in the following sections,
Z compressiblity factor
ballistic coefficient (weight/drag coefficient-area), psf
L/D lift-to-drag ratio Flowfield Analysis
a. angle of attack as defined in Fig. 2
5 shock detachment distance, ft Recent studies of hyperbolic entry phenomena1"4 indicate
50 shock detachment distance with no radiation occur- that radiant transport in the flowfield surrounding the entry
ring in the flow, ft vehicle significantly alters the temperature and density pro-
angle defined in Fig. 2 files in the shock layer, which results in a reduction in aerody-
density, slugs/ft 3 namic heating when compared to solutions assuming a com-
Stef an-Boltzmann constant pletely adiabatic flowfield.
Subscripts Early attempts at computing the radiant energy trans-
ported to an entry vehicle were made under the assumption of
33 = frees tream conditions
i — initial conditions behind shock an adiabatic, nonabsorbing media. Under certain conditions,
such assumptions are reasonable and are approximately satis-
Presented as Preprint 65-491 at the AIAA Second Animal fied when the heating rate is small compared to black body
Meeting, San Francisco, Calif., July 26-29, 1965; submitted radiation (q <<C crT*) and when the radiant heating rate is
August 27, 1965; revision received January 11, 1966. small in comparison to the freestream kinetic energy rate
* Senior Resarch Engineer, Research and Technology, Aero-
[q « (l/2/)poo«;oo3]. Both of these conditions place an upper
mechanics, Space and Information Systems Division. Member
AIAA. limit on the energy that can be radiated to an entry vehicle
t Project, Manager, Re-entry and Recovery Systems, Ad- per unit time. When q is of the order of o-T4, significant gas
vanced Systems Department, Space and Information Systems self-absorption of radiation occurs. Conversely, when q is
Division. Member AIAA. of the order of (l/2J)pmvJ, "decay" of the flow energy
 AUGUST 1966 APOLLO COMMAND MODULE ENTRY CHARACTERISTICS 1275

occurs; i.e., a significant portion of the total flow energy is

dissipated as radiant energy.
Results of Yoshikawa and Chapman4, shown in Fig. 1,
illustrate these flow regimes for a gray gas. Also shown are
10-0 constant total load factor lines for W/CDA = 50 psf,
L/D = 0.5, and W/CDA = 300 psf, L/D = 1.0. These values
and the 10-0 constraint are typical of the range expected for
high-velocity manned entry. Attendant with the lower
ballistic and L/D parameters are large vehicles stagnation
region radii, e.g., RN = 0(10 ft), whereas, the higher values of
these parameters characteristically lead to smaller stagnation
region radii, e.g., RN = 0(1 ft). These nose radii dimensions
yield shock standoff distances that differ by more than an
order of magnitude. Figure 1 indicates that the flowfields
for manned Earth entry constrained to less than a 10-0 load
factor lie in the "decay only" flight regime and that the
effects of gaseous self-absorption are not of critical im-
portance.
The flowfield surrounding the Apollo command module at Fig. 2 Study configuration dimensions.
Downloaded by 2405:8100:8000:5ca1::204:1d71 on December 13, 2019 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/3.28639

angle of attack is determined by initially computing an

adiabatic flowfield assuming two-dimensional flow in the
pitch plane. Integration of the mass, momentum, and energy
conservation equations along the established streamline net-
work, including radiant energy transport, is then accomplished
by assuming that the pressure distribution along the stream-
lines is unaffected by radiation transport. Since absorption
of radiation is neglected, the radiation transport term in the
one-dimensional equation represents only local radiant
emission.
Adiabatic FloAvfield Analysis
The study configuration dimensions are shown in Fig.* 2.
At an angle of attack of about 147° where an L/D of 0.5 is
achieved, a large segment of the flowfield is in the subsonic or
transonic flow regime, particularly in the region of the blunt
front face where radiation heat transfer predominates.
Several methods are available in the open literature to solve
the blunt body problem; e.g., the direct method, the inverse
method, and the mass-flow method, all of which have been de-
tailed by Hayes and Probstein.5 The mass-flow method, em-
ployed in this study, has been programed for the IBM 7094
computer6 and determines the flow of perfect or real gases in
thermodynamic equilibrium around two-dimensional or
axially-symmetrical bodies using a method that is similar to
the solution given by Gravalos, Edelfelt, and Emmons.7
NO ABSORPTION
240^
Detailed adiabatic flowfields were obtained for the con-
figuration shown in Fig. 2 at the following flight conditions:
Condition 1 Condition 2
i'co = 52, 000 fps vcc = 48,000fps
P.o - 6. 54- 10 ~7 slugs/ft3 Px = 5.68-10-7 slugs/ft 3
= 49.8 Moo = 45.7
a - 147° a = 147°
The assumed altitude and velocity conditions approximate the
10-gr conditions that occur for initial entry velocities of 55,000
and 50,000 fps, respectively.
Two-dimensional flow was assumed in the vertical plane of
symmetry for each case on the basis of tuft studies conducted
during the Apollo program. The required input for the IBM
7094 mass-flow program consists of body coordinates, surface
pressure distribution, and shock wave profile. Initial pres-
sure distribution estimates were obtained from the results of
Gregorek and Korkan.8 Initial estimates of the shock wave
profile were obtained from Apollo tests at Mm = 15.9, which
were modified by multiplying by the ratio of test to flight
normal shock density ratios. The method then consists of
adjusting the shock wave profile, pressure distribution, and
position of the stagnation streamline after each iteration,
until the boundary conditions of the mass-flow method are
satisfied as outlined in Ref. 6.
The adiabatic flowfield arrived at by this approach ex-
hibited the correct sonic line shape as shown by Hayes and
Probstein,5 compatible relative positions of the normal seg-
ment of the shock wave and body stagnation point as out-
lined by Kaattari,9 and a pressure distribution in the pitch
plane of the Apollo configuration at angle of attack that com-
pares favorably with experimental data as shown in Fig. 3.

_200K 52,000 FT/SEC,

A//C D A = 50 LB/FT , 6.54 X 10"7 SLUGS/FT3

L/D = 0.5

W/C D A = 300 LB/FT 2 ,

L/D = 1 .0

80 h
= 48,000 FT/SEC, THEORETICAL/
, = 5.68 X 10~7 SLUGS/FT3 RESULTS -

-0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4

DISTANCE ALONG BODY SURFACE MEASURED FROM
GEOMETRIC CENTER, S'/Rg
10 20 30 40 50
VELOCITY (1000 FT/SEC)
Fig. 3 Comparisons of calculated and experimental Apollo
Fig. 1 Radiation flight regimes. plane of symmetry pressure distributions, a. = 147°.
 1276 K. D. KORKAN AND G. M. HANLEY J. SPACECRAFT

Nonadiabatic Flowfield Analysis

The adiabatic flowfields discussed previously yield boundary

conditions that are employed in a nonadiabatic streamtube
analysis. These boundary conditions consist of the initial
values of velocity, pressure, and density at the origin of each
streamline immediately behind the shockwave in addition to
the pressure distribution along the streamlines, which is as-
sumed to be unaffected by radiant energy transport. The
validity of the assumption that pressure is unaffected by
radiant transport has been substantiated in the stagnation
region2 where it was found that, even for unrealistically large
magnitudes of radiant decay, the pressure was unaffected and
virtually constant in the stagnation region. Finally, it is as-
sumed that the gas radiates but does not absorb, which is
justifiable for a gray gas on the basis of flight in the decay-
only regime discussed previously.
The basic one-dimensional gasdynamic equations, with
radiation transport included, can be written in the following
form to solve for the temperature, velocity, density, and
Downloaded by 2405:8100:8000:5ca1::204:1d71 on December 13, 2019 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/3.28639

streamtube area distributions along a specific streamline:

NON-ADIABATIC FLOW Energy
FIELD SHOCK WAVE.
LOCATION dh/ds = — (7/p,,) — v(dv/ds) 0)
ADIABATIC FLOW
FIELD SHOCK WAVE Momentum
LOCATION
dv/ds = -(\/pv)(dP/ds) (2)
Equation of State
Fig. 4 Two-dimensional flowfield, va, = 52,000 fps, p,n = p = P/ZRT (3)
6.54 X 10 ~7 slugs/ft 3 .
Continuity
The success of the application of the mass-flow method to a = const/p^ (4)
blunt body at an angle of attack is measured by how well the
boundary conditions are met, i.e., the coinciding of the shock By assuming that the initial values of the flow variables im-
wave profiles and the degree of accuracy in matching the pres- mediately behind the shock wave and the pressure distribu-
sure as given on the streamline immediately behind the shock tion along the streamlines as given by the mass-flow method
and that predicted by the oblique shock relation (e.g., as are not affected by radiation transport, it is possible to simul-
given by Hochstim10). In the two cases investigated, the taneously solve Eqs. (1-4) by numerical integration to obtain
average shock pressure deviation was 4.2% for the v(,, = 48,000 the flow variables along the streamlines with radiation energy
fps case and 6.8% for the v(J} = 52,000 fps case. transport included.
Both the 48,000 and 52,000 fps cases were analyzed em-
ploying the nonadiabatic streamtube IBM 7094 program.
A comparison of the adiabatic and nonadiabatic velocity,
intensity, density, and static temperature variations along
streamline number 3 (see Fig. 4) for vm = 52,000 fps is shown
in Fig. 5, nondimensionalized by initial values immediately
behind the shock. This figure shows that the temperature
decreases considerably faster when radiation decay occurs in
- i.ofte-^
the flowfield. Since the pressure was assumed to be unaf-
fected by radiation transport, the density must accordingly
increase as suggested by the equation of state. Intensity
values were computed employing the results of Kivel and
Bailey11 which were input as a function of temperature and
2 3 4 5 6 7
DISTANCE ALONG STREAMLINE, S ( F T )

-0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4

DISTANCE ALONG BODY SURFACE MEASURED FROM
2 3 4 5 6 7
GEOMETRIC CENTER, S'/R B
DISTANCE ALONG STREAMLINE, S ( F T )

Fig. 5 Comparison of adiabatic and nonadiabatic flow- Fig. 6 Comparison of adiabatic and nonadiabatic shock
field results along streamline 3, vm = 52,000 fps. layer thickness, vm = 52,000 fps; 48,000 fps.
 AUGUST 1966 APOLLO COMMAND MODULE ENTRY CHARACTERISTICS 1277

density into the stream tube computer program. Resulting

adiabatic and nonadiabatic intensity variations, shown in
Fig. 5, indicate a large reduction in the magnitude of intensity
in the flowfield due to radiation transport. Since a direct rela-
tion exists between the intensity present in the shock layer and
the magnitude of radiant energy being transferred to the body,
this result indicates that a significant reduction in radiant
heating occurs due to decay. Finally, Fig. 5 shows that the
flow does not accelerate as quickly under the influence of ra-
diation transport due to the relative increase in density a) Adiabatic
caused by radiation transport effects.
It may be anticipated that the effect of radiation decay
on density and velocity in turn alters the streamtube area.
Since the initial values of the flow variables were assumed to
be unaffected by radiation transport, the continuity equation
can be written as
P^adiabatie/P^nonadiabatic = ^inonadiabaticA'l adiabatic (o) 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
NONDIMENSIONALIZED SHOCK LAYER
and the magnitude of contraction experienced by the stream-
Downloaded by 2405:8100:8000:5ca1::204:1d71 on December 13, 2019 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/3.28639

THICKNESS, y/d
tube can be computed easily. This ratio was calculated for
the two specific cases being investigated and significant
streamtube contraction results, leading to a decrease in shock
detachment distance when radiation transport is included in
the flowfield analysis. This also has an effect on the amount
of radiant energy delivered to the body since the heat-trans-
fer rate is directly proportional to the shock detachment
distance.

b) Nonadiabatic

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

NONDIMENSIONALIZED SHOCK LAYER
THICKNESS, y/d
a) Adiabatic
Fig. 8 Shock layer temperature profiles, v^ = 52,000 fps.

The computed percent of contraction was applied to the

corresponding streamlines to determine the decrease in
streamtube width under the influence of radiation decay.
The difference was then absorbed along each normal by
physically moving each streamline toward the body. As
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 shown in Fig. 4, the shock wave profile translates and ro-
NONDIMENSIONALIZED SHOCK LAYER
THICKNESS, y/g
tates under the influence of radiation transport. For a blunt
body such as the Apollo command module, the change in local
shock angle with respect to the freestream direction, caused by
relocation of the shock wave, should not significantly alter the
boundary conditions along the shock front as compared to the
boundary conditions utilized in the adiabatic analysis. The
resulting difference between these flowfields can be demon-
strated by observing the adiabatic and nonadiabatic shock
detachment distances as shown in Fig. 6 for freestream veloci-
ties of 48,000 and 52,000 fps. Since less radiant energy is
present at the lower velocity, the shock detachment distance
is not affected as much as at 52,000 fps.
b) Nonadiabatic °
The stagnation normal and normals 1, 4, 7, 10, 13, and 16,
were chosen to illustrate the influence of radiation on the
various regions of the flowfield. The shock layer density
, 6 = 1.035 profiles, shown in Fig. 7, are indicative of the effect of radiation
transport on the entire flowfield. As indicated in the discus-
1, (5 = 0.550 7 sion of the one-dimensional streamtube analysis, an increase
4,6 = 0.740/
in density results when radiation transport is included in the
°'*rSTAGNATION NORMAL,5 =0.2
oL_______. J flowfield analysis, which can readily be seen by comparing the
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 vm = 52,000 fps adiabatic and nonadiabatic cases. The major
NONDIMENSIONALIZED SHOCK LAYER
THICKNESS, y/fi
difference exhibited by the temperature profiles shown in Fig.
8 is that the adiabatic profiles increase from the shock wave
Fig. 7 Shock layer density profiles, v^ = 52,000 fps. to the body, whereas the nonadiabatic profiles decrease be-
 1278 K. D. KORKAN AND G. M. HANLEY J. SPACECRAFT

given by

- -^ J 0 (6)

where y is the coordinate normal to the body surface. The

intensity profiles resulting from the flowfield analyses were
numerically integrated to obtain the radiation heat-transfer
a) Adiabatic rate for each normal location. This procedure was followed
for normals 1-17, and the results correlated with the non-
adiabatic stagnation point values obtained by the numerical
technique presented in Ref. 2.
The radiant heat-transfer distributions for both adiabatic
and nonadiabatic flow, nondimensionalized by division by the
corresponding stagnation point values, are shown in Fig. 10.
0 0.2 "6.4 "0.6 0.8
NONDIMENSIONALIZED SHOCK LAYER
1.0
This figure shows that the maximum points on the adiabatic
THICKNESS, y/d and nonadiabatic distributions do not occur at the same loca-
tion on the body surface. Also, when comparing the v^ —
52,000 fps case with the 48,000 fps case, the location of the
Downloaded by 2405:8100:8000:5ca1::204:1d71 on December 13, 2019 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/3.28639

maximum point appears to be a function of the freestream

velocity. Since the radiation heat-transfer rate is dependent
not only on intensity but also on shock layer thickness, the
STAGNATION NORMAL, interplay between these two variables produces the maximum
6 = 0.250 FT
0.550
at some location away from the stagnation region and toward
, 6 = 0.740 the geometric center. As the velocity decreases from 52,000
7,6= 0.870
10, <J = 1.035
fps, the adiabatic and nonadiabatic maxima shift toward
b) Nonadiabatic
13,5 = 1.230 each other at the lower velocities. When significant decay no
16, <5 = 1 .440
longer occurs, the adiabatic and nonadiabatic distributions
would coincide. Prediction of the magnitude and location of
this maximum point is important when attempting to tailor
the heat protection system thickness around the body for a
specific re-entry velocity.
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0
NONDIMENSIONALIZED SHOCK LAYER
THICKNESS, y/d Trajectory Analysis
Fig. 9 Shock layer intensity profiles, vx = 52,000 fps. The first objective during an entry trajectory is to success-
fully enter the atmosphere within a region that allowrs
eventual control of the trajectory, and, for manned entry,
cause of the radiation decay taking place along the stream-
does not lead to load factors greater than man can withstand
lines in the flowfield. Observation of the density and tem-
following an interplanetary mission. Having achieved the
perature profiles provides an indication of the type of be-
first objective, the second objective is to maneuver the entry
havior exhibited by the intensity profiles shown in Fig. 9,
This figure shows a relatively constant intensity for adiabatic vehicle to a recovery area.
The first objective is realized if entry is accomplished with-
flow, whereas the intensity decreases rapidly going from shock
in an entry corridor bounded by an overshoot and undershoot
to body for nonadiabatic flow. Based on this comparison, a
conic, defined by Chapman.12 Since an Apollo configuration
large decrease in radiant heating may be expected when the
employs roll modulation, overshoot boundary entry is accom-
influence of decay is included in the heat-transfer analysis.
plished employing full negative lift or a roll angle of 180°;
whereas, undershoot boundary entry is accomplished employ-
Radiant Heating Distributions
The basic purpose of the detailed flowfield studies was to — 4.0,- 16
arrive at realistic radiation heat-transfer distributions. The
equilibrium radiant energy transferred to a specific normal
location for an assumed infinite plane radiating geometry is

= 52,000 FT/SEC
(ADIABATIC)
= 52,000 FT/SEC
(NON-ADIABATIC)
= 48,000 FT/SEC
(NON-ADIABATIC)
= 48,000 FT/SEC
(ADIABATIC)

g30

48,000 3901 NON-ADIABATIC

48,000 9190 ADIABATIC
52,000 7860 NON-ADIABATIC
52,000 23,150 ADIABATIC

0.6__
-0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3
DISTANCE ALONG BODY SURFACE MEASURED FROM
GEOMETRIC CENTER, S'/R
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
TIME (SEC)
Fig. 10 Comparison of adiabatic and nonadiabatic radiant
heating distribution in the Apollo command module pitch Fig. 11 Undershoot boundary Earth entry trajectory,
plane, a. = 147°. 55,000 fps.
 AUGUST 1966 APOLLO COMMAND MODULE ENTRY CHARACTERISTICS 1279

ing full positive lift or a roll angle of 0°. A recent study of /I

the hyperbolic velocity Apollo entry corridors13 indicated that II W/C D A - 100 LB/FT2
u II L/D = 0.5
entry can be made up to 58,000 fps with an L/D of 0.5 and gf max
-N' 18 - II
= 10. The second objective, i.e., maneuvering of the entry
vehicle to a recovery area, is achieved by modulation of the 1
CO
I
I
entry trajectory following pullout from the initial portion of §15 ^ I
entry. •u~ 1

In this study, a simple maximum range scheme is employed I

I
which consists of a constant altitude deceleration following 0£ ^

LLJ I
pullout from the initial portion of the entry trajectory, em-
Z I /EQUILIBRIUM RADIATION
ploying roll modulation. Finally, full positive lift, attained < I ^/-'"" ( A D I A B A T I C )
>- 9 —
when the roll angle is zero, is maintained to the point of <
V
, /EQUILIBRIUM RADIATION
parachute deployment. A typical 10-gr undershoot trajectory 1C /v ' /^ (NON-ADIABATIC)
resulting from the preceding modulation scheme is shown in Z 6— W* /CONVECTION
Fig. 11 for an initial entry velocity of 55,000 fps. Load factors 0
D_

greater than 4 0's occur for about 90 sec and the velocity is Z
0 ||
\ \ /
\ '• /
reduced to 2000 fps in approximately 750 sec. < 3 „ ij \ y /NONEQUILIBRIUM
J /\\ / RADIATION
o
Gasdynamic Heating ftf^^l
Downloaded by 2405:8100:8000:5ca1::204:1d71 on December 13, 2019 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/3.28639

0
3 50 100 150 200 250 300 35
Gasdynamic heating due to convection and radiation was TIME ( S E C )

computed at the stagnation point of the Apollo command

module along trajectories of the type previously discussed.
These heating rates, along with the radiant heating distribu-
tions presented in Fig. 10, then were employed to determine
the radiant heating rate history at various locations as a
function of time.
Radiation
At high entry velocities, a region of nonequilibrium now
exists immediately behind the shock wave, since the flow
passing through the shock wave requires a finite time to com-
plete the processes of vibration, dissociation and ionization
required to reach chemical equilibrium. Because of the im-
portance of collisions between atoms and molecules in the
time associated with this process, the nonequilibrium region
extends further toward the body at high altitudes. Experi-
mental results14 tend to indicate that stagnation point non-
equilibrium radiation heating rates are dependent only upon
velocity in the region of flight where peak radiative and con-
vective heating occur and that the magnitude of nonequi-
librium radiation falls off rapidly at very high altitudes be-
cause of collision limiting effects. Computations of non-
equilibrium radiation were made utilizing the velocity-de-
pendent experimental correlation of Page and Arnold pre-
sented in Ref. 14. However, these heating rates were limited
to values less than -^ of the freestream kinetic energy rate to
approximate the influence of collision limiting. Although this
assumption is not well supported, the nonequilibrium radia-
tion heating rates are small compared to the equilibrium
radiation heating rates, and any inaccuracies introduced by
this assumption can be neglected.
Stagnation region equilibrium radiant heating rates were
computed employing the theoretical methods presented in
Ref. 2. These computations were made utilizing an IBM 7094
program that simultaneously solves the coupled momentum,
continuity, and nonadiabatic energy equations, assuming the
shock layer to be optically thin. As explained previously, it
was assumed that the stagnation region flowfield is two-di-
mensional. The radius of curvature of the shock wave, re-
quired for the stagnation-point solutions, was obtained in con-
junction with the flowfield studies previously discussed. When
this radius of curvature (3.03 ft) is employed in the non-
adiabatic stagnation region program, the resulting shock
standoff distance and equilibrium radiation heating rate are
found to be consistent with the results illustrated in Figs. 6
and 10.
Convection
Convective heating during entry is influenced by the non-
adiabatic nature of the flowfield because of the large reduction
Fig. 12 Stagnation point heating rales for undershoot
boundary Earth entry trajectory, Vi = 55,000 fps.
in total enthalpy that occurs in the flowfield due to radiant
energy losses. Although these interactions can be computed
by employing a fully coupled viscous solution including radia-
tion energy losses,1 the conservative assumption that no in-
teraction occurs was made in arriving at convective heating-
rate histories. Therefore, a correlation of theoretical results
obtained by Hoshizaki15 was employed in computing the
convective heating.
Gasdynamic Heating Results
Stagnation region heating rate histories obtained along the
entry trajectory shown in Fig. 1.1, are presented in Fig. 12 for
an initial entry velocity of 55,000 fps. This figure indicates
that the large energy losses in the shock layer reduce the peak
equilibrium radiant heating rate by a factor of about 3 from
the adiabatic shock layer rates. Since this figure also indi-
cates that the peak convective and nonequilibrium heating-
rates are about yth and giyth, respectively, of the peak equi-
librium heating rate, the assumptions made in arriving at the
convective and nonequilibrium heating rates discussed pre-
viously do not result in a significant error in the anaysis. A
further reduction in net convective heat transfer to the body
due to blockage by mass injection will occur when an ablative
heat shield is considered in the analysis. With the large peak
equilibrium, radiation heating rates shown in Fig. 12, the
blockage effect should reduce the convective heating rates
to a negligible level during the first 75 sec of the trajectory.
The relative importance of convective heating and equi-
librium and nonequilibrium radiation as a function of entry
velocity is illustrated in Fig 13, where the integrals of the
heating rates along IQ-g undershoot trajectories are shown.
This figure indicates the rapid rise in total equilibrium radia-
tion with velocity and the large reduction in equilibrium
radiation caused by decay. At velocities in excess of about
40,000 fps, equilibrium radiation becomes the predominant
heating mode. For the velocity range shown, total heating-
due to nonequilibrium radiation is negligible.
Because of the importance of equilibrium radiation at high
entry velocities, uncertainties in the radiant intensities can
significantly influence the heat protection system weight.
Currently, few experimental measurements of equilibrium
radiation have been made in the velocity range above 36,000
fps and significant differences in radiation theory exist.11'16-18
Because of these differences, stagnation-point radiative heat-
ing rates, including the effects of decay, were integrated along
the 10-gr undershoot trajectories for specific values of intensity
of 0.1, 0.5, 2.0, and 10.0 times the values predicted by Kivel
 1280 K. D. KORKAN AND G. M. HANLEY J. SPACECRAFT

will either melt or sublime. During the latter phases of the

= CONVECTIVE + NONEQUILIBRIUM
RADIATION + EQUILIBRIUM entry trajectory, surface erosion of charring ablation systems
RADIATION will revert to the usual mode of chemical erosion because of
oxidation. Both models of surface material ablation have
been accounted for in this analysis. However, at the high
entry velocities, the primary mechanism for material ablation
over the entire front face of the Apollo command module is
by sublimation. In order to demonstrate the relative ef-
ficiency of these two types of heat protection systems,
theoretical chemical equilibrium enthalpy data of the gaseous
products of these materials are shown in Fig. 15 as a function
of pressure and temperature. Also, the gas enthalpy and
temperature in which sublimation occurs is indicated as a
function of pressure. Phenolic nylon data 19 indicate that
about 14,000 Btu/lb is absorbed in subliming phenolic nylon
material at 1 atm pressure as compared to about 9200 Btu/lb
for inorganic reinforced plastic. 20
A comparison of the heat protection system weights for the
Apollo command module employing these two types of heat
Downloaded by 2405:8100:8000:5ca1::204:1d71 on December 13, 2019 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/3.28639

35 40 45 50 55 60 65
INITIAL ENTRY VELOCITY (1000 FT/SEC)
Fig. 13 Integrated heating as a function of initial entry
velocity for undershoot boundary trajectory.
and Bailey,11 used in this study, to assess the potential in-
fluence on total heating. These results, which are shown in
Fig. 14, indicate that total radiant heating does not vary
linearly when the effects of decay are included. When in-
tensity values are increased by an order of magnitude, the
total heating is increased by a factor of approximately 2.4 at
a 50,000 fps initial entry velocity.
Heat Shielding Analysis
The convective and radiative stagnation-point heating
rates described previously, in addition to heating distributions
arrived at in this analysis, were employed in a charring abla-
tion computer program to obtain heat protection system
weights for high-speed Earth entry. At these high speeds, the
use of ablation materials developed for orbital or lunar entry
protection systems is shown in Fig. 16 for entry along the
undershoot boundary and a maximum bondline temperature
of 1000°R. Because of the rapid increase in total radiant
heating, the heat protection weight increases rapidly with in-
creasing entry velocity. Because of its higher heat of subli-
mation, phenolic nylon material results in comparatively
lower heat protection system weights. At a velocity of 50,000
fps, for example, the ratio of heat shield weight to vehicle
initial weight is approximately 18% for phenolic nylon and
25% for inorganic reinforced plastic. For entry from orbital
and lunar missions, the weight of the heat protection system is
usually designed by entry along the overshoot boundary,
rather than the undershoot boundary, because of the longer
flight times. However, when radiant heating becomes pre-
dominant, past studies of hyperbolic entry 21 indicate that the
(ATMOS ) T (°R) X l h SUBLIMATION (BTU/LBM )
0.01 5625 15,550
0.10 6110 14,800
1.00
10.00
6725
7500
14,050 /
13,0
O
LL.12

O
environments may not result in an optimum heat protection SUBLIMATION'/

system. Iio P = 0.01 (ATMOS \

Two types of charring ablation heat protection systems 0.10- a) Phenolic nylon
1.0
were investigated during this study; inorganic reinforced 10.0
(1:1 resin-fabric
plastic and phenolic nylon (50% phenolic and 50% nylon by \veigh ratio)
weight). Adequate experimental and theoretical studies of
these types of charring ablators have been accomplished to
conduct consistent analyses of their heat protection capability
at high speeds. O 0
Because of the high-peak heating rates experienced during
the initial entry phases, which persist for approximately the 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000
first 100 sec of the trajectory, currently available materials TEMPERATURE ( ° R )

(ATMOS ) T ( ° R ) 4h SUBLIMATION (BTU/LBM )

0.001 5160 12,300
0.010 5400 11,300
0.100 5620 10,100
1.000 5920 9,250
10.000 6340 8,975/

SUBLIMATION ,
P = 0.001 (ATMOS)/ b) Inorganic rein-
o.oi- forced plastic
0.1-
1.0-
10.0'

~ 30 35 40 45 50 55 60
INITIAL ENTRY VELOCITY (1000 FT/SEC)

0 1000 '2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000

Fig. 14 Effect of radiant intensity uncertainties on un-
TEMPERATURE ( ° R )
dershoot boundary integrated equilibrium radiation
heating. Fig. 15 Comparison of pyroiysis product enthalpies.
 AUGUST 1966 APOLLO COMMAND MODULE ENTRY CHARACTERISTICS
6000——-—————-
36 40 44 48 52 56 60
INITIAL ENTRY VELOCITY (1000 FT/SEC)
Fig. 16 Influence of heat protection system material on
heat shield weight (undershoot boundary).
Downloaded by 2405:8100:8000:5ca1::204:1d71 on December 13, 2019 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/3.28639
design conditions for blunt bodies occur along the undershoot
boundary for velocities in excess of approximately 45,000 fps.
Because of the intensity uncertainties associated with the
magnitude of the total radiant heating variation at high
velocities, the influence of varying intensity by factors of 2
and 0.5 on heat shield weight was estimated for the phenolic
nylon ablation material. The resulting heat protection sys-
tem weight variation is shown in Fig. 17. This figure indi-
cates that, at 50,000 fps, for example, the heat shield weight
increases from 18% of initial vehicle weight to 26% when the
intensity increases by a factor of 2, and decreases to about
13% when the intensity decreases by a factor of 2.
Conclusions
As a result of the detailed analyses presented in this paper,
it is concluded that the potential use of the Apollo command
module for Earth entry at velocities as high as 50,000 fps
appears feasible. Since the nowfields in the pitch plane were
computed at an angle of attack of 147° assuming two-dimen-
sional flow, the shock standoff distances and flowfield in-
tensity variations are considered conservative in the region
toward the lower front face of the vehicle because of the re-
lieving three-dimensional effects. Future use of a recently de-
veloped three-dimensional blunt body program 22 would result
in a relaxation of the current assumption of two-dimensional
flow.
Probably the most critical factor involved in an analysis of
this type is the uncertainty in high-temperature air radiant
intensity. Because of this uncertainty, the heat protection
system weights must be considered tentative until measure-
ments can be made at these high velocities. However, since
the computations indicated that the heat protection system
weight is still reasonable for twice the assumed radiant in-
tensities, only an extremely large increase in intensities would
influence the feasibility of employing the Apollo command
module for hyperbolic Earth entry. Even though the gray
gas assumption leads to a negligible gas selfabsorption, the
atomic line contributions to radiation in the ultraviolet region
may lead to strong spectral absorption in this wave length
region, which future flowfield analyses should take into ac-
count.
References
1 20
Howe, J. T. and Viegas, J. R., ''Solutions of the ionized
radiating shock layer, including reabsorption and foreign species
effects, and stagnation region heat-transfer," NASA TR R-159
(1963).
2 21
Hanley, O. M. and Korkan, K. D., "Inviscid nonadiabatic
flow in the stagnation region of blunt bodies," XVth Interna-
riational Astronautics Congress (September 1964).
3 22
Wilson, K. 11. and Hoshizaki, H., "Inviscid, nonadiabatic
flow about blunt bodies," AIAA Preprint 64-70 (January 1964);
also AIAA J. 3, 67-74 (1965).
4
Yoshikawa, K. K. and Chapman, 1). R., ''Radiative heat-
1281
2.0q.
36 40 44 48 52 56 60
INITIAL ENTRY VELOCITY (1000 FT/SEC)
Fig. 17 Influence of radiation intensity uncertainties on
phenolic nylon heat shield weight (undershoot boundary).
transfer and absorption behind a hypersonic normal shock wave,"
NASA TN D-1424 (September 1962).
5
Hayes, W. D. and Probstein, R. F., Hypersonic Flow Theory
(Academic Press Inc., New York, 1959), 1st ed., Chap. V, p. 167.
6
Waiter, S. A. and Anderson, R. B., "Determination of the
transonic flowfield around a blunt body," North American Avia-
tion Space and Information Systems Div., SID 64-634 (February
1964).
7
Gravalos, F. G., Edelfelt, I. H., and Emmons, H. W., "The
supersonic flow about a blunt body of revolution for gases at
chemical equilibrium," Advances in Astronautical Sciences: Pro-
ceedings of the Fourth Annual Meeting of the American Astronauti-
cal Scoiety (Plenum Press, Inc. New York, 1958).
8
Gregorek, G. M. and Korkan, K. I)., "An experimental
observation of the Mach and Reynolds number dependence of
cylinders in hypersonic flow," AIAA J. 1, 210-211 (1963).
9
Kaattari, G. E., "Shock envelopes of blunt bodies at large
arigles-of-attack," NASA TN D-1980 (December 1963).
10
Hochstim, A. R.7 "Gas properties behind shocks at hyper-
sonic velocities, part I—normal shocks in air," General Dynamics
Convair Kept. ZPH(GP)0()2 (January 1957).
11
Kivel, B. and Bailey, K., "Tables of radiation from high
temperature air," Avco Corp., Research Rept. 21 (December
1957).
12
Chapman, D. R., "An analysis of the corridor and guidance
requirements for supercircular entry into planetary atmospheres,,"
NASA TRR-55 (1960).
13
"Manned Mars and/or Venus flyby vehicle systems study
final report-Vol. 3," North American Aviation Space and In-
formation Systems Div., SID 65-761-3 (June 1965).
14
Page, W. A. and Arnold, J. O., "Shock layer radiation of
blunt bodies at reentry velocities," NASA TR R-193 (April 1964).
15
Hoshizaki, H., "Heat-transfer in planetary atmospheres at
super-satellite speeds," ARS J. 32, 1544-1552 (1962).
16
Meyerott, R. E., Sokoloff, J., and Nicholls, R. W., "Absorp-
tion coefficients of air," Geophysical Research Paper 58, GRD-
TN-60-277 (July I960).
17
Breene, R. G., Nardone, M., Riethof, T. R,, and Zeldin, S.,
"Radiance of species in high temperature air," General Electric
Co. Rept, R 62 SD 52 (July 1962).
18
Armstrong, B., Battrey, D., Sartori, L., Siegert, A. J. F., and
Weisner, J. D., "Radiative properties of high temperature
gases," Air Force Special Weapons Center TR-61-72 (1961).
19
Kratsch, K. M., Hearne, L. F., and McChesney, H. R,,
"Thermal performance of heat shield composites during planetary
entry," Engineering Problems of Manned Interplanetary Explor-
ation (American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, New
York, 1963).
Isaacson, L. K., "Equilibrium chemical composition of the
products of ablation of a typical inorganic—reinforced plastic,"
North American Aviation Space and Information Systems Div.,
SID 64-1284 (July 1964).
"Manned Mars landing and return mission study—final re-
port," North American Aviation Space and Information Systems
Div., SID 64-619-4 (April 1964).
Webb, H. G., Jr., "Final report—study of flowfields about
axisymmetric blunt bodies at large angle-of-attack," North
American Aviation Space and Information Systems Div., SID
65-1353 (October 1965).