# American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

1
A New Force Measurement Method Research on Waverider
Propulsion/fuselage with Airbreathing and Jet
Zhao xuejun
1
and Zeng xianzheng
2

China Academy of Aerospace Aerodynamics, Beijing, China, 100074
Yan baoqin
3

Beijing Institute of Electronic System Engineering, Beijing, 100854, China
and
Jin xin
4

China Academy of Aerospace Aerodynamics, Beijing, China, 100074
In this paper a new experiment method was given to solve the problem met in the force
measurement with engine jet. This method simulated the airbreathing effects on the vehicle
aerodynamics, simulated the jet main parameters, and designed efficiency jet and
airbreathing system. Also we took unique method to solve the effects on aerodynamics of slit
around the jet nozzle. The force measurements of waverider at the condition that the engine
inlet cowl opening and closing with and without engine jet interference were undertaken in
the hypersonic wind tunnel. To decrease the effects of strut on the jet flow-field, we took
sharp belly strut to support the model in the wind tunnel. In the test we simulated the main
jet parameters Mach numbers, pressure ratios and so on. The test condition was at Ma=6,
angle of attack α=-6°-6°, at which we researched the effects on the vehicle aerodynamics of
inlet cowl opening and closing, support system, engine jet, and pressure ratios. From the test
results, it could be drawn that the vehicle nose pressure distribution change caused by inlet
cowl opening or closing had important effects on the aerodynamics. And engine jet had the
obviously effects on the aerodynamic parameters of the vehicle, which increased the normal
force, decreased the axial force, and made the pressure center move back to the bottom.
With the increasing of the pressure ratios, the engine jet had a much stronger effect on the
aerodynamic parameters of the vehicle.
Nomenclature
CN = coefficient of normal force
CA = coefficient of axial force
M

= Mach number of the free-stream
M
j
= Mach number of the jet exit
Mx = roll moment
My = yaw moment
Mz = pitch moment
P

= static pressure of the free-stream
P
j
= static pressure of the jet exit
P
0j
= total pressure of the jet
P
0
= total pressure of the free stream

1
Associate professor, Department of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics, P.O. Box 7201-1, Beijing, China, AIAA
Senior Member.
2
Engineer, Hypersonic Experiment Lab., P.O. Box 7201-1, Beijing, China.
3
Ph.D., Vehicle Design Lab, P. O. Box 142-30 Beijing, 100854, China, and AIAA Lifetiem Member.
4
Professor, Hypersonic ExperimentLab., P.O. Box 7201-1, Beijing, China.
40th Fluid Dynamics Conference and Exhibit
28 June - 1 July 2010, Chicago, Illinois
AIAA 2010-4988

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

2
P

= pressure ratio (P
j
/P

)
P
max1
= first peak value of the static pressure on each angle line
P
max2
= second peak value of the static pressure on each angle line
R = rocket engine gas constant
R
j
= jet gas constant
S
j
= model jet nozzle throat area
S
r
= rocket engine nozzle throat area
T = rocket engine exhaustion temperature
T
j
= jet temperature
X = axial force
X
cp
= pressure center
Y = normal force
Z = lateral force
α = angle of attack
γ
j
= specific heat coefficient of the jet
γ

= specific heat coefficient of the rocket engine exhaustion
Subscripts
F
= flight condition
M
= wind tunnel test condition
I. Introduction
he 2
nd
and 3
rd
flights of the X-43 were successfully completed on March 27, and November 16, 2004. This was
the world’s first scramjet powered aircraft, and is recognized as the worlds fastest “jet powered aircraft.”
1
H.
Julian Allen made an important observation in the 1958 21
st
Wright Brothers Lecture: “Progress in aeronautics has
been brought about more by revolutionary than evolutionary changes in methods of propulsion.”
2
So with the
development of the hypersonic vehicles with airbreathing propulsion system, the hypersonic vehicles like X-43
would meet new problems in the ground test to obtain the aerodynamic parameters. Then how to obtain the
aerodynamics parameters during wind tunnel testing became challenging. The ground testing including: front
body/inlet testing, local width/get rid off tip nose propulsion ventilating testing, engine jet testing and full size
ventilating model testing.
3
Engine jet had been studied for a long time. At present, many experiments had been carried out to study the jet.
In early days, some work in 1964, Zukoski and Spaid did some experiments on supersonic under-expanded jet
injected into supersonic free-stream (M

=1.38-4.45) at different Mach numbers in the 2.5 inches supersonic wind
tunnel in California Institute of Technology.
4
With the development of the fundamental research, the jet
technologies were used on the hypersonic vehicles. But for the complicated configuration vehicles, the ground
testing faced the challenge. For the engine jet simulation testing, mainly focused on the one effect parameter, such as
the effects of the strut, specific heat effects, and momentum ratio effects and so on.
5
Since 60’s last century, the Scramjet had been studied. And the hypersonic vehicles with propulsion/fuselage
frame integration were tested in the ground facilities. The experiment introduced in this paper was to measure the
vehicle aerodynamic parameters with engine jet and inlet ventilating. And in design of the belly strut it must be
considered how to decrease the strut effects to the minimum.
6,7
The purpose of this paper is to develop a totally new
method to resolve the jet, inlet ventilating, and the strut system problems. And an additional objective for the test is
to expand the wind tunnel test capabilities fro fully-integrated hypersonic vehicles with airbreathing propulsion
system. Also the slot effects around the strut and the engine jet nozzle were solved.
8

II. Experiment Facilities and Instruments
A. Hypersonic Wind Tunnel
This test was undertaken in FD-07 hypersonic wind tunnel in CAAA. This wind tunnel is transient, and blow
down free jet one whose nozzle outlet diameter is Φ0.5m. The Mach number ranges from 5 to12 which was divided
into two legs: low leg (5-8) and high (10-12). Every Mach number has a corresponding nozzle that can be changed
to change the Mach numbers. In the test section, there is an insert system that can insert the model into the flow-field
and change the attack angle continuously. Also there are Φ350mm optical glass windows on the test section side
wall to view the schlieren flow field.
T

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

3
B. Experiment Model
In this test, the key technique was the model design which included the airbreathing and engine jet. It was
difficult to design the model system because a lot of aspects had to be considered such as similar parameters, wind
tunnel block ratio including shock block, jet system, airbreathing system, and support system and so on. For the
support system structure abilities, it included the jet tube, airbreathing tube, and the balance position and the wires
pass through hole. Also because of the large mass flow, it was considered every possible aspect to design the support
system to keep the safety and less effect on the vehicle aerodynamic parameters. Fig. 2 showed the model sketch.

Figure 1. FD-07 wind tunnel

C. Instruments and Measurement Precision
The balance used in the test was designed especially for this waverider vehicle whose measurement range and
precision are shown in the following table.
Table 1. Balance measurement range and precision
Mx My Mz X Y Z
Range 10(N·m) 10(N·m) 20(N·m) 200(N) 500(N) 500(N)
Precision 0.0058 0.0047 0.0028 0.0012 0.0004 0.0008
a). belly strut (including jet and airbreathing tube) b). fuselage c). inlet lip
d). balance e). airbreathing tube f). jet tube g). engine jet nozzle
Figure 2. Model structure sketch

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

4
The hypersonic wind tunnel flow total pressure, total temperature and the balance out data were acquired by
SYSTEM8400 electric scan pressure system and NEFF470 data acquisition system whose sampling rate is 10000
points/sec. Before the data were acquired, we used the HBM amplifier to filter and amplify. Filter can get rid of the
wind tunnel fixed frequency and other disturbed wave effects. When the data signals were amplified 10000 times,
we could obtain the high precision data.
III. Similar Parameters
In the hypersonic wind tunnel tests, it was very hard to keep dynamic similarity, kinematic similarity and
thermodynamic similarity. So usually we only simulated the main similar parameters to do this the test.
9
According
to the hypersonic wind tunnel flow-field conditions, we could simulate the following parameters:
1) Jet media. According to the tests done in the hypersonic wind tunnel, “cold jet” and “hot jet” could obtain the
same interference aerodynamic characteristic of the vehicle. So we used the cold air to simulate the engine jet.
2) Free stream flow. Chose the same Mach number with the flight condition M

=6. And the circumstance
pressure was the pressure in the test section that was P

=1388Pa at P
0
=2.0MPa.
3) Pressure ratio P’. In the test we could adjust the jet total pressure to adjust the pressure ratio.
4) et Mach number.
5) Configuration similarity. We made the model according to the scale strictly.
6) Jet momentum similarity
M
r
j j j j
F
r
j j j j
S M P
S M P
S M P
S M P

=

∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞
2
2
2
2
γ
γ
γ
γ

7) Jet thrust coefficient similarity
( ) ( )
M
j j
j
r
j
F
j j
j
r
j
M
P
P
M S
S
M
P
P
M S
S
¦
)
¦
`
¹
¦
¹
¦
´
¦

− + =
¦
)
¦
`
¹
¦
¹
¦
´
¦

− +
∞ ∞ ∞ ∞
∞ ∞
1 1 1 1
2
2
2
2
γ
γ
γ
γ

When (P
j
/P

)
F
= (P
j
/P

)Ｍ, and kept the same size area ratio with the vehicle, then:
( ) ( )
M
j j
F
j j
M M
2 2
γ γ =

That was when the jet momentum was similar; the jet thrust was similar too.
8) Jet mass flow similarity
M
j r
j j j
F
j r
j j
RT S M P
RT S M P
RT S M P
RT S M P
j j
j

=

∞ ∞ ∞

∞ ∞ ∞

) (
) (
) (
) (
2 2 2
2 2 2
2 2 2
2 2 2
γ
γ
γ
γ

When (P
j
/P

)
F
= (P
j
/P

)Ｍ, and kept the same size area ratio with the vehicle,
Then:

M
j j
j j
F
j j
j j
T R
M
T R
M

=

2 2
γ γ

9) Jet expansion boundary similarity.
IV. Experiment Results
Waverider propulsion/fuselage hypersonic wind tunnel test with engine jet was very complicated especially
considering the inlet airbreathing, even a lot of tests were undertaken before. It was still a challenge to the wind
tunnel capabilities and test plan. For this kind of test it was usually obtained the aerodynamics data by separating
inlet and the engine jet effects. We hoped to obtain good results by taking a new method to measure the
aerodynamic parameters disturbed by airbreathing and engine jet. To support the vehicle, we took belly strut that
had less effect on engine jet and the aerodynamic characteristics of the fins.
For the tube flow, the flow would be blocked by shock in the tube if the tube had different cross section at
supersonic conditions. In this test, before simulated the inlet ventilating, all the concern parameters including the
streamline, local Mach number were simulated. And the correction of the boundary layer in the inlet was considered
too. By doing these, the inlet had a very good ventilating flow mass in the hypersonic flow field.
For the force measurements, we had to separate the balance and the model. So it must leave a slot between the
balance and the model. Also it must keep the slot between the inlet and the vehicle, and keep the slot between the
engine nozzle and the vehicle body. Then we could get the aerodynamic payloads on the vehicle body. But the slot
will affect the aerodynamic parameters when the inside flow existed especially with engine jet on. For preventing

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

5
inside flow effects on the vehicle body, in the test we took maze structure to minimize the slit. So to keep the every
part matching each other during the test carried out in the wind tunnel, we design the rigid balance to avoid the
touch of the balance and the vehicle body.
To adjust the engine jet pressure ration, we calibrated the curves of the engine jet nozzle total pressure P
0j
,
according to which we can get the static pressure of the engine jet exit. Then the pressure ratios were obtained.
First we analyzed the flow-flied during the test that would be helpful for us to understand the vehicle flight
conditions and the data results. Because the data would have errors but the flow-field could show the vehicle flight
condition. The complicated flow field occurred around the inlet lip and the engine jet nozzle exit. When the inlet
cowl was closed, a strong shock and a strong separation shock would occur, shown in Fig. 3 and Fig. 4. When the
inlet cowl was open, the bow shock height decrease and the strength became weak because of the inlet ventilating,
and the cross point of the head shock and the bow shock moved forward, which caused a much larger separation
area, see Fig. 5. Figure 6 showed flow field of the engine jet and the free stream flow, from which we could see the
jet boundary shock and separation shock.
Figure 7, Fig.8, and Fig.9 showed the curves when the inlet cowl was closed with jet and without jet. These two
experiments were carried out at the pressure ratio q’=10. From those curves we could draw that when the engine jet
was on, the normal force increased obviously, the axial force decreased and the pressure center moved back to the
vehicle bottom. This was caused by the flow field disturbed by engine jet and free stream. At the angle of attack
α=2º, the engine caused the normal force increased about 15%, and the axial force decreased about 8%. But at the
angle of attack α=-2º, the jet had bad effects on the vehicle pressure center.

Figure 3. Jet and airbreathing off (α=0º) Figure 4. Jet on, airbreathing off (α=0º)

Figure 5. Jet and airbreathing on (α=0º) Figure 6. Jet and airbreathing on (α=4º, P’=30)
Figure 10, Fig. 11 and Fig. 12 showed the aerodynamic characteristics of the vehicle comparing with jet and
without jet at the condition when the inlet cowl was open. These two tests were carried out at the condition pressure
ration p’=30. When the jet was on, the normal force increased obviously, zero normal force angle of attack changed
from 3.5º to -3º, the axial force decreased, and the pressure center moved backward. Comparing to the condition the
inlet cowl was closed, when the inlet was open, the normal force decreased very much. At the angle of attack, the
normal force decreased about 75%, and the zero normal force angles changed from -3.5º to 3º. But when the jet
occurred, the normal force difference between the inlet open and close condition decreased. The same regularity is
happen to the axial force. This was because when the inlet was open, the inlet lip bow shock and the separation

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

6
shock became weak, then the pressure before the inlet lip decreased. Also we could see that with the pressure ratio
became bigger, the effects of the engine jet became dramatically.

Figure 7. Normal force vs. AOA (P’=10) Figure 8. Axial force vs. AOA (P’=10)

Figure 9. Pressure center vs. AOA (P’=10) Figure 10. Normal force vs. AOA (P’=30)

Figure 11. Axial force vs. AOA (P’=30) Figure 12. Pressure center vs. AOA (P’=30)

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

7

Figure 13. Normal force vs. AOA Figure 14. Axial force vs. AOA
To study the jet pressure ratio effects on the vehicle aerodynamic parameters, we chose the inlet cowl open
condition to do the experiments at different pressure
ratios p’=9.8 and p’=30. Figure 13, Fig.14 and
Fig.15 showed the aerodynamic characteristics of
the vehicle. No matter the inlet cowl closing or
opening, the engine jet had similar effect regularity.
It could be drawn that the normal force increased
with the pressure ratio increasing, but the axial
force decreased. This was because when the
pressure ratio increased, the jet expanded widely,
and more and more parts of the vehicle were in the
jet flow field. Comparing to the tests undertaken at
the pressure p’=9.8 and p’=30, it could be drawn
that the jet pressure ratio had obvious effects on the
vehicle aerodynamic parameters. Comparing the
pressure center at negative angle of attack and the
positive angle of attack, it could be drawn that the
jet pressure ratio would affect the actual 0 angle of
attack.
The entire test results talked above was obtained
by blocking the slots around the inlet and the engine jet nozzle. Before the slots were blocked, the data acquired in
the tests were a mess. To solve the problem, we used a kind of soft glue that must be soft enough not to affect the
aerodynamic parameters of the vehicle body.
V. Conclusions
Comparing to the other engine jet experiments, this experiment presented the aerodynamic parameters of the
waverider propulsion/fuselage at the test conditions simulated both the engine jet and the inlet ventilating. And
during the test, the main jet parameters were simulated, and the jet and inlet ventilating tubes were designed, and a
special method was used to solve the slot effects on the vehicle.
The test researched the effects of the inlet cowl closing or opening, support system, jet, and the pressure ratio on
the waverider aerodynamic parameters. From the test results, it could be obtained the following conclusions:
1) Belly strut had less effect on the aerodynamics of the vehicle and the main parts of the vehicle.
2) Engine jet made the normal force increase, axial force decrease, and the pressure center move backward.
3) Increasing with the pressure ratio, the effects on the vehicle aerodynamics became much stronger.
4) The inlet cowl closing or opening had an important effect on the vehicle aerodynamic parameters. When the
inlet was open, the normal force and axial force would decrease obviously.
Figure 15. Pressure center vs. AOA

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

8
Acknowledgments
The authors are grateful to Professor Tian wenbing and Shen qing for discussing the engine jet parameters
simulation and the details of the experiment. The authors also thanked the help of members in the FD-07 wind
tunnel in China Academy of Aerospace Aerodynamic.
References
1
Charles R. McClinton: “X-43-Scramjet Power Breaks the Hypersonic Barrier Dryden Lectureship in Research for 2006,”
AIAA 2006-1, 44
th
AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, 9-12 January 2006, Reno, Nevada.
2
H. Julian Allen: “Hypersonic Flight and the Re-entry Problem,” The Twenty-First Wright Brothers Lecture. Journal of the
Aerospace Sciences, Vol. 25, No. 4, April 1958.
3
David W.Witte, Lawrence D.Huebner, Carl A.Trexler, and Karen F.Cabell, “Propulsion Airframe Integration Test
Techniques for Hypersonic Airbreathing Configurations at NASA Langley Research Center”, AIAA 2003-4406.
4
Zukoski E E, Spaid F W, “Secondary injection of gases into a supersonic flow [J]”. AIAA Journal, VOL. 2, No. 10, Oct.
1964.
5
John D. Anderson, JR., Fundamentals of Aerodynamics, Macgraw Hill, 1981.
6
Zhao chengqing, Jiang yi, Gas Jet Aerodynamics, Beijing Technology University, 1998.6.
7
R.W.Guy, R.C. Rogers, R.L. Puster, K.E. Rock, and G.S. Diskin, “The NASA Langley Scramjet Test Complex”, AIAA-96-
3243.
8
Alan Pope, Kennith L. Goin. High-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing. 1965.
9
Reichenau, D. E. A., “Interference Effects Produced by a Cold Jet Issuing Normal to the Airstream from a Flat Plate at Free
Stream Mach Numbers from 0.6 to 1.4”.AEDC-TR-66-127, Arnold Engineering Development Center, June 1966.

In early days.”2 So with the development of the hypersonic vehicles with airbreathing propulsion system. and momentum ratio effects and so on. And the hypersonic vehicles with propulsion/fuselage frame integration were tested in the ground facilities.= P’ = Pmax1 = Pmax2 R = = Rj = Sj Sr = T = = Tj X = = Xcp Y = Z = α = = γj = γ∞ Subscripts = F = M pressure ratio (Pj/P∞) first peak value of the static pressure on each angle line second peak value of the static pressure on each angle line rocket engine gas constant jet gas constant model jet nozzle throat area rocket engine nozzle throat area rocket engine exhaustion temperature jet temperature axial force pressure center normal force lateral force angle of attack specific heat coefficient of the jet specific heat coefficient of the rocket engine exhaustion flight condition wind tunnel test condition he 2nd and 3rd flights of the X-43 were successfully completed on March 27. the jet technologies were used on the hypersonic vehicles. local width/get rid off tip nose propulsion ventilating testing. This was the world’s first scramjet powered aircraft. For the engine jet simulation testing. there is an insert system that can insert the model into the flow-field and change the attack angle continuously.4 With the development of the fundamental research. Hypersonic Wind Tunnel This test was undertaken in FD-07 hypersonic wind tunnel in CAAA. And an additional objective for the test is to expand the wind tunnel test capabilities fro fully-integrated hypersonic vehicles with airbreathing propulsion system.6. The Mach number ranges from 5 to12 which was divided into two legs: low leg (5-8) and high (10-12). In the test section.5m. 2 American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics .8 T I. This wind tunnel is transient. Julian Allen made an important observation in the 1958 21st Wright Brothers Lecture: “Progress in aeronautics has been brought about more by revolutionary than evolutionary changes in methods of propulsion. Also the slot effects around the strut and the engine jet nozzle were solved.5 Since 60’s last century. But for the complicated configuration vehicles. and blow down free jet one whose nozzle outlet diameter is Φ0. Introduction II.38-4. the hypersonic vehicles like X-43 would meet new problems in the ground test to obtain the aerodynamic parameters. The experiment introduced in this paper was to measure the vehicle aerodynamic parameters with engine jet and inlet ventilating. Also there are Φ350mm optical glass windows on the test section side wall to view the schlieren flow field.7 The purpose of this paper is to develop a totally new method to resolve the jet. the ground testing faced the challenge. Experiment Facilities and Instruments A. such as the effects of the strut. inlet ventilating. 2004. and the strut system problems. some work in 1964.45) at different Mach numbers in the 2. Zukoski and Spaid did some experiments on supersonic under-expanded jet injected into supersonic free-stream (M∞=1. Every Mach number has a corresponding nozzle that can be changed to change the Mach numbers. and is recognized as the worlds fastest “jet powered aircraft.”1 H. At present.5 inches supersonic wind tunnel in California Institute of Technology. Then how to obtain the aerodynamics parameters during wind tunnel testing became challenging. many experiments had been carried out to study the jet. mainly focused on the one effect parameter. The ground testing including: front body/inlet testing. engine jet testing and full size ventilating model testing. specific heat effects. and November 16. And in design of the belly strut it must be considered how to decrease the strut effects to the minimum.3 Engine jet had been studied for a long time. the Scramjet had been studied.

0058 My 10(N·m) 0. Balance measurement range and precision Mx Range Precision 10(N·m) 0. airbreathing system.B. it was considered every possible aspect to design the support system to keep the safety and less effect on the vehicle aerodynamic parameters. and the balance position and the wires pass through hole. and support system and so on. airbreathing tube f). it included the jet tube. wind tunnel block ratio including shock block. Experiment Model In this test. balance e). It was difficult to design the model system because a lot of aspects had to be considered such as similar parameters. Also because of the large mass flow.0004 Z 500(N) 0. jet tube g). airbreathing tube. fuselage c). Model structure sketch C. Figure 1. engine jet nozzle Figure 2.0047 Mz 20(N·m) 0. belly strut (including jet and airbreathing tube) b).0012 Y 500(N) 0. 2 showed the model sketch. jet system. Fig. the key technique was the model design which included the airbreathing and engine jet. FD-07 wind tunnel a). Table 1.0028 X 200(N) 0. For the support system structure abilities. inlet lip d). Instruments and Measurement Precision The balance used in the test was designed especially for this waverider vehicle whose measurement range and precision are shown in the following table.0008 3 American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics .

According to the tests done in the hypersonic wind tunnel. 6) Jet momentum similarity  Pj γ j M 2 S j   P γ M 2S  j =  j j j2 j    2  P∞ γ ∞ M ∞ S r  F  P∞ γ ∞ M ∞ S r  M     7) Jet thrust coefficient similarity  Sj    P  Pj  (1 + γ j M 2j ) − 1  =  S γS jM 2  Pj (1 + γ j M 2j ) − 1       2   S r γ ∞ M ∞  P∞  M F  r ∞ ∞  ∞     When (Pj/P∞)F= (Pj/P∞)Ｍ. the inlet had a very good ventilating flow mass in the hypersonic flow field. “cold jet” and “hot jet” could obtain the same interference aerodynamic characteristic of the vehicle. And the circumstance pressure was the pressure in the test section that was P∞=1388Pa at P0=2. Then: γ j M 2  γ j M 2  j j =    R jT j  R jT j   M  F   9) Jet expansion boundary similarity. then: γ jM 2 F = γ jM 2 M j j ( ) ( ) That was when the jet momentum was similar.9 According to the hypersonic wind tunnel flow-field conditions. So it must leave a slot between the balance and the model. We hoped to obtain good results by taking a new method to measure the aerodynamic parameters disturbed by airbreathing and engine jet. we could simulate the following parameters: 1) Jet media. And the correction of the boundary layer in the inlet was considered too. kinematic similarity and thermodynamic similarity. Experiment Results Waverider propulsion/fuselage hypersonic wind tunnel test with engine jet was very complicated especially considering the inlet airbreathing. 2) Free stream flow. For preventing 4 American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics . When the data signals were amplified 10000 times. III. It was still a challenge to the wind tunnel capabilities and test plan. 8) Jet mass flow similarity  Pj2γ j M 2 S 2 ( RT ) ∞   Pj2γ j M 2 S 2 ( RT ) ∞  j j j j   = 2  2 2 2 P∞ γ ∞ M ∞ Sr2 ( RT ) j  P∞ γ ∞ M ∞ S r2 ( RT ) j    M F   When (Pj/P∞)F= (Pj/P∞)Ｍ. we used the HBM amplifier to filter and amplify. it was very hard to keep dynamic similarity. Then we could get the aerodynamic payloads on the vehicle body. all the concern parameters including the streamline. and keep the slot between the engine nozzle and the vehicle body.The hypersonic wind tunnel flow total pressure. and kept the same size area ratio with the vehicle. For this kind of test it was usually obtained the aerodynamics data by separating inlet and the engine jet effects. Also it must keep the slot between the inlet and the vehicle. By doing these. the flow would be blocked by shock in the tube if the tube had different cross section at supersonic conditions. In this test. We made the model according to the scale strictly. So usually we only simulated the main similar parameters to do this the test. But the slot will affect the aerodynamic parameters when the inside flow existed especially with engine jet on. For the force measurements. In the test we could adjust the jet total pressure to adjust the pressure ratio. 4) et Mach number. and kept the same size area ratio with the vehicle. Before the data were acquired. even a lot of tests were undertaken before. IV. total temperature and the balance out data were acquired by SYSTEM8400 electric scan pressure system and NEFF470 data acquisition system whose sampling rate is 10000 points/sec. Chose the same Mach number with the flight condition M∞=6. So we used the cold air to simulate the engine jet. For the tube flow. Filter can get rid of the wind tunnel fixed frequency and other disturbed wave effects. 3) Pressure ratio P’. 5) Configuration similarity.0MPa. we took belly strut that had less effect on engine jet and the aerodynamic characteristics of the fins. we could obtain the high precision data. the jet thrust was similar too. we had to separate the balance and the model. local Mach number were simulated. Similar Parameters In the hypersonic wind tunnel tests. To support the vehicle. before simulated the inlet ventilating.

inside flow effects on the vehicle body. 4. the axial force decreased and the pressure center moved back to the vehicle bottom. Jet and airbreathing on (α=0º) Figure 6.9 showed the curves when the inlet cowl was closed with jet and without jet. a strong shock and a strong separation shock would occur. Jet and airbreathing off (α=0º) Figure 4. But when the jet occurred. When the inlet cowl was closed. The complicated flow field occurred around the inlet lip and the engine jet nozzle exit. From those curves we could draw that when the engine jet was on. the inlet lip bow shock and the separation 5 American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics . the normal force decreased about 75%. in the test we took maze structure to minimize the slit. the axial force decreased. and Fig. When the jet was on. we calibrated the curves of the engine jet nozzle total pressure P0j. At the angle of attack α=2º. and the pressure center moved backward. Comparing to the condition the inlet cowl was closed. the jet had bad effects on the vehicle pressure center. To adjust the engine jet pressure ration. 5. The same regularity is happen to the axial force. So to keep the every part matching each other during the test carried out in the wind tunnel. the engine caused the normal force increased about 15%. Fig. Jet on. the normal force increased obviously. zero normal force angle of attack changed from 3. Fig. the normal force increased obviously. Figure 6 showed flow field of the engine jet and the free stream flow. When the inlet cowl was open. P’=30) Figure 10. 12 showed the aerodynamic characteristics of the vehicle comparing with jet and without jet at the condition when the inlet cowl was open. the normal force decreased very much. airbreathing off (α=0º) Figure 5. Figure 7. the bow shock height decrease and the strength became weak because of the inlet ventilating. At the angle of attack.8. These two tests were carried out at the condition pressure ration p’=30. see Fig.5º to -3º. 3 and Fig. Figure 3. This was because when the inlet was open. which caused a much larger separation area. But at the angle of attack α=-2º. and the cross point of the head shock and the bow shock moved forward.5º to 3º. according to which we can get the static pressure of the engine jet exit. This was caused by the flow field disturbed by engine jet and free stream. Because the data would have errors but the flow-field could show the vehicle flight condition. and the zero normal force angles changed from -3. and the axial force decreased about 8%. from which we could see the jet boundary shock and separation shock. shown in Fig. we design the rigid balance to avoid the touch of the balance and the vehicle body. the normal force difference between the inlet open and close condition decreased. First we analyzed the flow-flied during the test that would be helpful for us to understand the vehicle flight conditions and the data results. Then the pressure ratios were obtained. when the inlet was open. These two experiments were carried out at the pressure ratio q’=10. 11 and Fig. Jet and airbreathing on (α=4º.

Figure 7. Normal force vs. AOA (P’=10) Figure 9. Normal force vs. AOA (P’=30) 6 American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics .shock became weak. Pressure center vs. the effects of the engine jet became dramatically. AOA (P’=10) Figure 8. AOA (P’=30) Figure 11. Pressure center vs. then the pressure before the inlet lip decreased. Axial force vs. AOA (P’=10) Figure 10. AOA (P’=30) Figure 12. Also we could see that with the pressure ratio became bigger. Axial force vs.

it could be obtained the following conclusions: 1) Belly strut had less effect on the aerodynamics of the vehicle and the main parts of the vehicle. Axial force vs. jet. the jet expanded widely. Comparing the pressure center at negative angle of attack and the positive angle of attack. No matter the inlet cowl closing or opening. The test researched the effects of the inlet cowl closing or opening. To solve the problem. 3) Increasing with the pressure ratio. Comparing to the tests undertaken at the pressure p’=9. Before the slots were blocked. 4) The inlet cowl closing or opening had an important effect on the vehicle aerodynamic parameters. 2) Engine jet made the normal force increase. but the axial force decreased. and the pressure center move backward. Figure 15. and the pressure ratio on the waverider aerodynamic parameters. and more and more parts of the vehicle were in the jet flow field. When the inlet was open. support system. Conclusions Comparing to the other engine jet experiments.8 and p’=30. Normal force vs.14 and Fig. AOA Figure 14. the engine jet had similar effect regularity.8 and p’=30. and a special method was used to solve the slot effects on the vehicle. From the test results. Figure 13. Pressure center vs. axial force decrease. and the jet and inlet ventilating tubes were designed. V. AOA The entire test results talked above was obtained by blocking the slots around the inlet and the engine jet nozzle.15 showed the aerodynamic characteristics of the vehicle. the normal force and axial force would decrease obviously.Figure 13. the data acquired in the tests were a mess. Fig. 7 American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics . AOA To study the jet pressure ratio effects on the vehicle aerodynamic parameters. we used a kind of soft glue that must be soft enough not to affect the aerodynamic parameters of the vehicle body. this experiment presented the aerodynamic parameters of the waverider propulsion/fuselage at the test conditions simulated both the engine jet and the inlet ventilating. it could be drawn that the jet pressure ratio had obvious effects on the vehicle aerodynamic parameters. we chose the inlet cowl open condition to do the experiments at different pressure ratios p’=9. the effects on the vehicle aerodynamics became much stronger. the main jet parameters were simulated. It could be drawn that the normal force increased with the pressure ratio increasing. And during the test. it could be drawn that the jet pressure ratio would affect the actual 0 angle of attack. This was because when the pressure ratio increased.

AEDC-TR-66-127. 4. Anderson. R. K. Macgraw Hill. McClinton: “X-43-Scramjet Power Breaks the Hypersonic Barrier Dryden Lectureship in Research for 2006.W. 5 John D.Cabell.C. Arnold Engineering Development Center. Beijing Technology University. and Karen F.6 to 1. 6 Zhao chengqing. 8 Alan Pope. Spaid F W. 1 8 American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics . Rock. Jiang yi.Witte. Puster. A.L. 10. D. E. Goin. Reno. References Charles R. “Interference Effects Produced by a Cold Jet Issuing Normal to the Airstream from a Flat Plate at Free Stream Mach Numbers from 0.Acknowledgments The authors are grateful to Professor Tian wenbing and Shen qing for discussing the engine jet parameters simulation and the details of the experiment. No.” The Twenty-First Wright Brothers Lecture. AIAA 2003-4406. April 1958.” AIAA 2006-1. 2. Kennith L. Gas Jet Aerodynamics. “Secondary injection of gases into a supersonic flow [J]”. AIAA Journal. Lawrence D.Trexler. AIAA-963243. and G. R. 2 H.Huebner. JR. “The NASA Langley Scramjet Test Complex”. 1965. Oct. 44th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit. Rogers. Julian Allen: “Hypersonic Flight and the Re-entry Problem. 1998. 1981. 9-12 January 2006.Guy.S. The authors also thanked the help of members in the FD-07 wind tunnel in China Academy of Aerospace Aerodynamic. Journal of the Aerospace Sciences. Diskin. 25. 9 Reichenau. No. “Propulsion Airframe Integration Test Techniques for Hypersonic Airbreathing Configurations at NASA Langley Research Center”. High-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing. VOL.4”.. June 1966. 4 Zukoski E E. Carl A. 3 David W. 7 R.E. 1964. Vol.. Fundamentals of Aerodynamics.6. Nevada.