See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/300470187

Study on Fluidic Thrust Vectoring Techniques for Application in V/STOL Aircrafts

Article  in  SAE Technical Papers · September 2015

DOI: 10.4271/2015-01-2423

CITATIONS READS
4 2,681

5 authors, including:

Samarth Jain Soumya Roy

Purdue University Rio Tinto
4 PUBLICATIONS   7 CITATIONS    4 PUBLICATIONS   6 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Vasu Kumar Naveen Kumar

Texas A&M University Delhi Technological University
12 PUBLICATIONS   15 CITATIONS    132 PUBLICATIONS   1,213 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Engine design optimization View project

Production of Biodiesel from Tree borne oil. View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Naveen Kumar on 12 February 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Downloaded from SAE International by Vasu Kumar, Sunday, February 28, 2016

Study on Fluidic Thrust Vectoring Techniques for Application 2015-01-2423

in V/STOL Aircrafts Published 09/15/2015

Samarth Jain, Soumya Roy, Dhruv Gupta, Vasu Kumar, and Naveen Kumar
Delhi Technological University

CITATION: Jain, S., Roy, S., Gupta, D., Kumar, V. et al., "Study on Fluidic Thrust Vectoring Techniques for Application in V/STOL
Aircrafts," SAE Technical Paper 2015-01-2423, 2015, doi:10.4271/2015-01-2423.

Copyright © 2015 SAE International

Abstract possibly even the elimination, of conventional aerodynamic control

surfaces such as horizontal and vertical tails. This would reduce
The art and science of thrust vectoring technology has seen a gradual
weight, drag, and radar cross section, all of which can extend an
shift towards fluidic thrust vectoring techniques owing to the potential
aircrafts range and capabilities.
they have to greatly influence the aircraft propulsion systems. The prime
motive of developing a fluidic thrust vectoring system has been to reduce
The components of a thrust vectoring system include a working fluid
the weight of the mechanical thrust vectoring system and to further
source which is mounted on the aircraft and a vectoring nozzle which
simplify the configuration. Aircrafts using vectored thrust rely to a lesser
forms a passage for the working fluid, thereby acting as an extended
extent on aerodynamic control surfaces such as ailerons or elevator to
conduit [1]. The vectoring nozzle allows the working fluid to change
perform various maneuvers and turns than conventional-engine aircrafts
its exit direction with respect to the inlet and correspondingly
and thus have a greater advantage in combat situations. Fluidic thrust
changes the thrust vector of the aircraft.
vectoring systems manipulate the primary exhaust flow with a secondary
air stream which is typically bled from the engine compressor or fan.
There are two methods by which thrust vectoring can be achieved:
This causes the compressor operating curve to shift from the optimum
Mechanical thrust vectoring systems and Fluidic thrust vectoring
condition, allowing the optimization of engine performance. These
systems. Mechanical thrust vectoring systems make use of gimbaling
systems make both pitch and yaw vectoring possible. This paper
the nozzle, moving hinged flaps into the path of the jet exhaustor
elucidates the research efforts which have been made to develop
making use of divergent flaps to deflect the jet exhaust flow[2].Even
multifunctional nozzles employing fluidic thrust vectoring techniques,
though the mechanical thrust vectoring system is effective, its
such as, co-flow, counter-flow, shock vector control, throat skewing and
complexity, weight, integration and aerodynamically inefficiency
synthetic jet actuators and also makes a comparison of the intrinsic
have proven to be major hindrances in its effective utilization [3].
features of each method. It also makes an overview of how fluidic thrust
Fluidic thrust vectoring systems have been developed in order to
vectoring has been utilized in the development of V/STOL aircrafts over
achieve thrust vectoring capabilities similar to mechanical ones while
the years and how it can be integrated with the next generation of fighter
featuring a simpler and light weight system having fixed geometry
and civilian aircraft platforms.
and capable of being implemented with stealth capabilities[4, 5, 6, 7].

Introduction Extensive research on fluidic thrust vectoring systems has been

carried out so that the secondary air stream can be introduced into the
Thrust vectoring technique provides moments to rotate a flying
primary jet flow to create an off-axis deflection of the jet thrust in
vehicle, providing control of the altitude and flight path of aerial
contrast to the mechanical systems wherein vectored thrust was
vehicles. It works upon the principle of deflecting the line of action of
achieved by the deflection of divergent flaps or vanes [8, 9, 10]. The
the thrust of an aircraft away from the centerline so that when
fluidic thrust vectoring techniques which have been developed till
resolved into its components, the deflected thrust can generate an
date include co-flow, counter-flow, shock vector control, throat
additional component of thrust perpendicular to the centerline. Thrust
skewing and synthetic jet actuators.
vectoring can provide control effectiveness superior to conventional
aerodynamic surfaces at some flight conditions, and it can extend the
The vertical and/or short take-off and landing (V/STOL) systems
aircraft performance envelope by allowing operation in the post-stall
provide an aircraft the capability to hover, take-off and land
regime. In addition, thrust vectoring can improve takeoff and landing
vertically. An aircraft having V/STOL capability can operate on
performance on short or damaged runways and aircraft carrier decks.
various modes, such as, VTOL (vertical take-off and landing), STOL
The use of thrust vectoring techniques allows the reduction, and
(short take-off and landing) and/or STOVL (short take-off and
 Downloaded from SAE International by Vasu Kumar, Sunday, February 28, 2016

vertical landing) [11,12]. These systems evolved primarily because of considered to be saturated. The secondary flow which is required to
the use of thrust vectoring control systems based on mechanical achieve this condition is still considerable, with at least 5% of the
actuation, however, fluidic thrust vectoring systems hold the potential flow being required to initiate the operation of the system.
to augment V/STOL capability of an aircraft by reducing the weight
and complexity of the thrust vectoring system, thus, enhancing the
thrust efficiency and overall performance level of the aircraft.

Fluidic Thrust Vectoring Techniques

Co-Flow Thrust Vectoring
Co-flow thrust vectoring is achieved by utilizing the principle of Coanda
effect, as illustrated in Figure 1, involves the attachment of a jet flow to
a nearby surface, even when the surface curves away from the initial jet
direction[13]. The Coanda effect can be increased by passing a thin
layer of high velocity turbulent air tangentially to the surface.
Figure 1. Coanda effect resulting in jet impingement [14].
In co-flow fluidic thrust vectoring system, a secondary air stream is
blown in the form of a momentum injection which follows the profile
of the Coanda surface and entrains the primary flow into a curved
path. Due to the presence of the Coanda surface, entrainment by the
secondary jet is inhibited on the side nearest to the surface. This
entrained air then produces a pressure gradient which is perpendicular
to the primary jet centerline. As a result of this, a localized low-
pressure region is formed leading to an increase in the entrainment
rate on the side of the secondary jet which is unbounded by the
Coanda surface. Thus, in conjunction with small changes in the local
flow field of the primary jet flow, this effect leads to thrust vectoring.
The co-flow thrust vectoring is also be facilitated by positioning the
curved surfaces to the rear of the engine nozzle and then introducing
a secondary stream of air flowing parallel to the Coanda surface
[15].Figure 2 shows co-flow fluidic thrust vectoring where To is the
resultant thrust, Fx is the actual thrust of the primary jet, Fz,tv
represents the thrust vectoring force generated and ςtv represents the
thrust vectoring angle [16].
The use of Coanda effect as a means of providing vectored thrust has
been fraught with difficulties. Since variable Coanda surfaces were
required to achieve linear control, it became very difficult to control
attached jet flows and early systems were therefore, limited to
vectoring angles of only about 9 deg. It was later concluded by
Mason [17] that a maximum vectoring angle of about 12.5° can be
achieved by increasing the secondary mass flow rate. However, at this
condition, no further deflection is possible and the system is
Figure 2. Co-flow fluidic thrust vectoring technique [16].
Co-flow method is considered to be the most suitable fluidic thrust
vectoring system for practical use as both the primary and secondary
flows are parallel. However, since the co-flow method is based on
Coanda effect, it can cause instability in certain operating ranges of
fluidic thrust vectoring. Hysteresis effect, attendant losses and
physical complexity in incorporating the surrounding structure with
the nozzles pose a significant problem in implementing this method.
Research on co-flow method has led to improvement in several
critical design parameters of the nozzle geometry, which has
potentially reduced the pressure losses arising from the ducting of the
secondary flow [18]. A co-flow fluidic thrust vectoring system has
been developed for use on low observable unmanned air vehicles
operating in the subsonic flight regime. Known as the FLAVIIR
Demon UAV[19], it utilizes co-flow systems consisting of a high
aspect ratio nozzle with thin secondary slots and a turbocharger
compressor wheel, constructed to generate the secondary air supply.
Touted as the world's first flapless plane, it was designed,
manufactured, assembled and ground tested at Cranfield University in
partnership with BAE Systems.
Counterflow Thrust Vectoring
The counterflow thrust vectoring (CFTV) concept was first proposed
by Strykowski and Krothapali [20]. The principle of CFTV is based
on the pulling of small amounts of secondary flow in a counter-
parallel direction to the primary flow of the jet which leads to a
marked improvement in the turbulent mixing characteristics of the
shear layer. The application of counterflow on only one side of the jet
leads to more rapid mixing of the shear layer as compared to the
opposing free shear layer causing an imbalance in entrainment,
leading to a cross-jet pressure gradient. The jet is bent by the pressure
gradient in the direction of the applied counterflow, resulting in a
vectored primary flow. This has been illustrated in Figure 3. Without
a collar surface only a small degree of jet turning is possible because
of the entrainment differential, however the addition of an extended
collar surface makes CFTV a viable technology [21, 22].
Fluidic counterflow thrust vectoring studies have shown that the
collar is the most vital component to the CFTV system as it amplifies
the entrainment differential effect in two ways. Firstly, it channelizes
the secondary flow, thereby, effectively creating a countercurrent
mixing layer over the entire length of the collar. Secondly, it
intensifies the cross stream pressure gradient by restricting the natural
entrainment of the jet.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Vasu Kumar, Sunday, February 28, 2016

jet unattached, thrust-vectoring angle is 12 deg and the thrust

coefficient is 0.945. A maximum thrust-vectoring angle achieved is
15 deg at NPR = 5, but the thrust coefficient is only 0.92 [16].

The advantage with CFTV is that no moving parts are directly

Figure 3. Counterflow fluidic thrust vectoring technique [23].
Even though the collar is essential to ensure optimal efficiency of the
CFTV system, still the hysteresis and bistability problem generated
by the collar disrupts the continuity of the operating surface. This
bistability problem causes the jet to attach to the wall of the nozzle,
referred to as Coanda Effect, and reach a stable equilibrium under
certain conditions [24, 25].
The loss of control because of the collar and the reduction in control
pressure beyond that which was required to cause the attachment of
the jet with the nozzle wall makes the implementation of continuous
vector-control system very difficult.
required to steer the jet. As a result of this, the reliability of the
system is greatly enhanced and since no surface of the system is in
direct contact with the high temperature and high velocity exhaust
gases, it eliminates the need for expensive high temperature materials
and cooling systems. A greater percentage of thrust is recovered as
the jet steers itself and this helps in increasing the aircraft
performance. Counter flow also leads to a reduction in jet noise and
emissions from the nozzle as it causes a higher mixing flow [29].
Additionally, the CFTV system can be retrofitted into an existing
aircraft's engine without significant alteration of the airframe. This
results in a reliable and robust system with a relatively lower initial
and maintenance cost [30].
However, CFTV suffers from limitations such as suction supply source,
stability with a highly over-expanded nozzle, unstable equilibrium
effects, thrust loss and airframe integration [31, 32]. Therefore, while
designing a CFTV system, it has to be ensured that the suction collars
and slots are of small size so as to have minimum impact on the aircraft
weight and drag. This will help in developing CFTV as a more efficient
and widely acceptable thrust vectoring technique.
Table 1. Comparison between co-flow and counterflow fluidic thrust vectoring
techniques.

This situation can however be avoided if the geometry of the collar is

properly designed. A longer collar accordingly becomes more
preferable as the pressure forces can then act on a larger surface area
to achieve the same net surface force and this consequently requires a
lower amount of counterflow to sustain the given vector angle. This
clearly shows that the collar geometry has to be optimized in order to
optimize the performance of a CFTV system [26]. The design of the
collar geometry should incorporate three qualities: aerodynamic
stability, vector efficiency and ability to operate continuously up to
Shock Vector Control
the maximum desired vector angle.
Shock vector control (SVC) is based on the asymmetric injection of a
secondary flow into the divergent section of a convergent-divergent
The presence of a collar inhibits the free-entrainment process and the
nozzle. This injection causes a low pressure region to be developed at
transverse pressure field generated consequently leads to further
the downstream of the injection port, disturbing the flow, and leading to
surface pressure reductions. This transient phenomenon continues
the development of a strong oblique shock wave. As the primary flow
until the jet reaches a stable equilibrium wherein the transverse
interacts with the oblique shock wave, there is a change in flow
pressure forces across the jet must balance with the centrifugal forces
properties across it, causing the flow to change direction, thus, vectoring
demanded by the jet's curvature. When a CFTV system is to be
the flow away from the injection port, as shown in Figure 4 [33].
designed, the most important thing which has to be kept in is that the
jet attachment with the wall can only occur if equilibrium can be
sustained. This means that the entrainment mechanisms within the jet
must be able to sustain the low pressure necessary to hold the jet
attached to the wall. It was observed that the shorter the collar, the
sharper the jet must turn in order to attach and thus a lower bubble
pressure will be required. Furthermore, with a short collar, the shear
layer has less contact with the bubble region. This makes it more
difficult for the pumping mechanism within the jet to generate the
low pressure required to hold itself to the wall. Consequently, if the
collar is sufficiently short, attachment will not occur [27, 28].

The use of CFTV allows the generation of large thrust-vector angles

Figure 4. Shock vector control fluidic thrust vectoring technique [34].
with small secondary flow rate which in turn allows more air to be
directed through the engine. At nozzle pressure ratio (NPR) = 8 with
 Downloaded from SAE International by Vasu Kumar, Sunday, February 28, 2016

SVC has demonstrated thrust vectoring efficiencies of 0.9 - 4 degrees
per percent of flow injection and thrust efficiencies in the range of
0.86 - 0.94 [35]. The best thrust-vectoring efficiency achieved is 4.4
deg per percent injection at NPR = 3, with the thrust coefficient to be
only 0.891. The thrust coefficient can be improved to 0.935 at NPR =
6, however, thrust-vectoring efficiency is reduced to 2.2 deg per
percent injection [36].
SVC is characterized by loss of thrust due to the passage of the
primary flow through the oblique shock wave. The pressure
differential at the nozzle exit is varied by the resulting free stream
velocities, shifting the shock wave attachment point further into the
nozzle and causing a reduction in the effectiveness of the nozzle.
Still, this system has a greater efficiency as compared to equivalent
mechanical systems having a secondary mass flow requirement of
6-10%[37].However, in spite of the increased efficiency, it must be
ensured that the oblique shock wave should not become too strong. If
this happens, the other end of the shock wave impinges on the
opposite nozzle wall, leading to the generation of a reflected shock
wave of reduced intensity which vectors the primary flow in the
opposite direction, thus, degrading the thrust vectoring performance
and efficiency. Also, the system faces over-expansion losses as it has
to operate at highly over-expanded conditions in order to achieve
large vectoring angles[38,39].
Fluidic Throat Skewing
Fluidic throat skewing is based on the symmetric injection of a
secondary flow in the throat of a supersonic convergent-divergent
nozzle in order to create virtual aerodynamic surfaces for jet area
control and asymmetric injection for skewing the sonic plane. Due to
asymmetric injection at the throat, using injecting points located at
different points along the nozzle axis, reorientation of the sonic plane
takes place causing the primary flow from the nozzle to turn, as
shown in Figure 5. The sonic plane is further skewed with help of
supplemental injection ports located downstream of the throat
injection ports. This helps to further increase the thrust vector angle.
The vectoring angle is mainly dependent on the offset between the
injection points and on other factors such as the expansion ratio.
Vectoring can be accomplished at all throttled operating conditions
by controlling the injection flow rate both at the throat of the nozzle
and at the flap[43].

Since SVC is achieved by fluidic injection into the divergent portion of

the nozzle, no mechanical hardware is required other than control
valves and therefore the problem associated with moving flaps is
eliminated. However, a major problem associated with the fluidic thrust
vectoring system is that the secondary stream injected into the nozzle Figure 5. Fluidic throat skewing technique [44].
draws air from the primary air supply and this reduces the maximum
In fluidic throat skewing technique, the thrust losses due to vectoring are
possible thrust that can be achieved by the engine. And if the amount of
low as the vectoring takes place on the subsonic side of the nozzle throat
secondary air drawn from the primary air supply is reduced in order to
shockwave at lower speeds. Also, this system does not require any
maximize the thrust of the engine, then the fluidic thrust vectoring will
additional mechanical means to control the area of the throat as
be minimized and the benefits of fluidic thrust vectoring will become
compared to other fluidic nozzles(possible only at zero vectoring angles).
negligible when compared to movable flaps [40].
Fluidic throat skewing has demonstrated high thrust ratios in the
In order to overcome this constraint, the concept of utilizing multiple
range of 0.94 to 0.98 and vector efficiencies up to 2.15 deg per
streams for fluidic thrust vectoring was conceived to maximize the
percent injection [45].Using an aft deck configuration at certain
pitch thrust vector angle without increasing the secondary flow
conditions, throat skewing method can achieve high thrust efficiency
requirement. In an experimental study conducted at NASA Langley
of up to 3 deg per percent injection, making it one of the most
Research Centre, it was observed that when the number of injection
promising forms of fluidic thrust vectoring[46].
ports was increased from one to two, the pitch thrust vectoring
capability improved without any lowering of thrust performance at
Tests have been conducted at static free stream conditions for this
NPR of less than 4 and high SPR [41].
method, with the nozzle operating condition in the range of
NPR=1.4-4.0, and fluidic injection flow rate up to 15% of the primary
This was done by making use of location-controllable injection ports
flow. The results showed that, at NPR=2, the throat shifted 45 deg
that can optimize vectoring over a wide range of pressure ratios. The
with as little as 2% injection, but the thrust vectoring angle is only
multiple port fluidic injection works by creating two oblique shocks.
3.3 deg. Increasing injection flow rate to 15% increases thrust
The first shock takes place upstream of the first injection port, while
vectoring angle to 22 deg at NPR = 2. So, the thrust vectoring
the second shock is between the two injection ports. The two oblique
efficiency is only about 1.65 deg per percent injection [47].
shocks created by the fluidic injection cause an asymmetric pressure
distribution in the nozzle, helping in optimizing the shock vector
Dual throat nozzle (DTN) fluidic thrust vectoring technique has been
effect produced. It was also observed that increasing the SPR caused
developed as an extension to fluidic throat skewing method.
the upstream oblique shock to get stronger and move closer to the
According to Flamm [48], it is capable of achieving higher thrust-
throat while the downstream shock got stronger and moved closer to
vectoring efficiencies without large thrust efficiency penalties for
the upstream injection port. This resulted in degradation of the thrust
vectoring operation as compared to any other fluidic thrust vectoring
vectoring effect produced by shock vector and therefore, it is essential
technique reported in the literature [49, 50]. Developed at NASA
that for the SPR to be kept at less than 4 to aid thrust vectoring [42].
Langley Research Center, it utilizes the establishment of vortices in
 Downloaded from SAE International by Vasu Kumar, Sunday, February 28, 2016
variable recessed cavities in order to enable thrust vectoring. As
shown in Figure 6, a separated cavity is located downstream of the
nozzle throat in addition to the fluidic throat skewing components,
which maximizes the pressure differentials in order to obtain increased
thrust-vectoring efficiencies. A new virtual aerodynamic surface of
minimum area is formed at the downstream of the geometric
minimum due to the asymmetric injection of secondary flow in the
minimum area of the upstream. This causes skewing of the sonic line,
thus, vectoring the primary flow from the nozzle. It has been
investigated that the thrust vector angle and thrust efficiency decreases
with a decrease in the angle of divergence of the cavity and increases
with an increase in the angle of convergence of the cavity. For
injection rates less than 4 percent of the primary flow rate, injection
slot generated larger thrust vector angles while injection holes were
found to be more efficient for a range of injection rates [51].
Figure 6. Dual throat nozzle fluidic thrust vectoring technique [44].
Therefore, with the presence of the cavity regions along with fluidic
throat skewing, the thrust vectoring is enhanced to a greater level.
Table 2. Comparison between shock vector control and fluidic throat skewing
thrust vectoring techniques.
Synthetic Jet Actuation
Synthetic jet actuation has evolved as a very promising fluidic thrust
vectoring method because it allows for a simplified flow control by
making use of zero net mass flux actuators. These actuators consist of
an oscillating diaphragm which repeatedly draws in and ejects a small
amount of the primary flow into a cavity via an orifice, thus
resembling a constant jet of secondary flow. Since each diaphragm is
driven by a piezoelectric driver, no mechanical or fluid connections
are required for the actuators to operate. Synthetic jet actuators
deflect the primary jet towards the wall by creating time-periodic
disturbances because of an increase in entrainment into the forced
segments of the jet shear layer, which in turn, lowers the local
pressure between the jet and the wall of the diffuser. This causes the
exhaust from the nozzle to be vectored [52].
The flow field analysis of a two-dimensional synthetic jet, formed
normal to an orifice in a flat plate, was studied [53] and it was found
that these jets are synthesized by a periodic formation and subsequent
advection of a train of counter-rotating vortex pairs. These vortices
are formed at the edge of the jet orifice by the time-periodic motion
of a diaphragm bound to a sealed cavity underneath the orifice plate
as shown in Figure 7. In particular, owing to the suction flow, the
time-averaged static pressure near the exit plane of a synthetic jet is
lower than the ambient pressure and as a result of this; both the
streamwise and cross-stream velocity components of the jet reverse
their direction during the actuation cycle. The entrainment of the
primary jet fluid by the adjacent synthetic jet consequently leads to
alteration of the static pressure near the flow boundary and results in
deflection of the primary jet toward the synthetic jet leading to a
thrust vectoring effect even in the absence of an extended control
surface like a diffuser or collar [54, 55, 56]. In case such an extension
was present in the nozzle, then it would restrict the suction flow on
that side of the jet centreline and would cause an increase in the flow
rate on the opposite side of the jet orifice, thereby leading to the
formation of a stagnation point between the primary jet and the
co-flowing synthetic jet. This will result in the degradation of the
thrust vectoring effect [57, 59]. Therefore, if an extended control
surface has to be used in the case of synthetic jet actuation, its
geometry must be optimized accordingly.
Figure 7. Synthetic jet actuation thrust vectoring technique [58].
In the work of Smith and Glezer [59] the time variation of the
vectoring angle was measured at primary jet centreline velocities
ranging from 5 to 20 m/s and the plot of the corresponding
characteristic vectoring time with the primary jet speed showed that
the characteristic vectoring time of the primary jet decreases almost
linearly with the primary jet speed. The maximum vectoring angle
was found to be 30 deg when the vertical structure resembling the
starting vortex was formed at the primary jet centerline and this range
of vectoring angle is the maximum which can be achieved out of all
the possible thrust vectoring techniques. The analysis of the pressure
field [52] also showed that the vectoring force increases with the
primary jet speed and, in most cases, reaches a maximum before it
begins to decrease.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Vasu Kumar, Sunday, February 28, 2016

The synthetic control jets employed in this fluidic thrust vectoring surface installed on the trailing edge of the wing. This provides a
method are synthesized from the working fluid of the flow system in novel aerodynamic control system using the engine exhaust and bleed
which they are finally deployed and thus, in contrast to conventional air to provide the aerodynamic forces which are usually provided
continuous jets or pulsed jets, synthetic jets are able to transfer linear conventional aerodynamic control surfaces. Thus, by controlling the
momentum to the flow without net mass injection across the flow boundary layer conditions, the fluidic control system can also provide
boundary [59]. It is because of this that synthetic jet actuators are greater lift or drag during take-off and landing, providing this system
attractive, in addition, the localized combination of alternating with STOL capability. However, the system incorporates a secondary
blowing and suction effects generated eliminate the need for an engine with the only purpose of providing bleed air to meet high
additional fluid source, unlike other fluidic methods, and extraneous supply of air mass flow rate required for secondary jet. If the engine
pumping and piping requirements. A major drawback of jet vectoring bleed would have been used to obtain the bleed, it would have greatly
using synthetic jets is that most of the studies on synthetic jet reduced the main engine performance [37].
actuation have been carried out at low primary jet velocities and this
has shown the vectoring angle to decrease with increase in the Currently, research is being conducted to further integrate secondary
primary jet velocity. This gives an indication that this system would Coanda jet thrust vectoring system and synthetic jet actuators into the
be unlikely to vector the high speed/pressure flows experienced FLAVIIR Project so as to augment lift and control of an aerial vehicle
within an actual exhaust nozzle, therefore efforts need to be made in and achieve an optimal design and build for a real aircraft [63].
order to determine the exact behavior of synthetic jets in high speed
exhaust nozzles.
Cirrus Vision SF50
Cirrus has developed a single-engine, low wing, seven seater, high
Application of Fluidic Thrust Vectoring performance light aircraft, Vision SF50, having a unique engine
Techniques in V/STOL Aircrafts installation configuration that employs non-moving components to
create a thrust vectoring effect. This is a typical example of fluidic
Fluidic thrust vectoring systems hold the potential of bringing about a
thrust vectoring system integrated into an air craft giving it STOL
breakthrough in V/STOL aircraft systems by increasing their thrust
capability. It is based upon Williams FJ33-5A turbofan engine
efficiency and overall performance levels. The primary challenge in
generating1,800lbf (8.0kN) thrust and utilizes the Williams ‘Exact
developing such a fluidic thrust vectoring system has been to control
Nozzle’ technology which uses non-moving geometry to create a
the stagnation zones and high secondary air flow requirements which
thrust vectoring effect that essentially changes with altitude[64].
can lead to a decrease in the engine performance and an increase in
fuel consumption. Simultaneously, the fluidic thrust vectoring system
The Exact Nozzle is a proprietary and innovative design by Williams
so designed should be able to operate effectively at all flight
that uses the Coanda effect to result in a varying thrust with no
conditions whilst satisfying the design constraints of low cost, low
moving parts. The FAA certification of such a passive system is less
weight and minimal impact on the radar cross section signature. The
risky than other active designs making it more attractive for
number of research studies which have been carried out into fluidic
commercial applications. The thrust vectoring is at its greatest at
thrust vectoring is very limited. NASA's Langley Research Centre
lower altitudes where cruise efficiency is not as important, while at
has been at the forefront in conducting a number of studies on
higher altitudes the thrust gets in line with the aircraft direction to
counterflow, co-flow and throat skewing fluidic thrust vectoring
provide better cruise performance. However, greater nozzle vectoring
methods [60]. The only commercial fluidic thrust vectoring system
results in better flying qualities but reduces cruise speed[37].
which has been developed till to date is the Exact nozzle for use on
the Cirrus aircraft. The FLAVIIR Project is another significant effort
Cirrus has reported that the prototype has completed about800hoursof
in developing a co-flow thrust vectoring system. Besides this, there
flight testing and approximately 1000 hours of engine running tests
have been a number of smaller research efforts such as the one in
till February 2014 and is planning to start production of the SF50
Cranfield University. The following section makes a review of all
Vision jets, thereby fueling a strong demand to improve the V/STOL
such efforts in developing a fluidic thrust vectoring system.
capability provided by fluidic thrust vector control in subsonic and
supersonic jets[65].
FLAVIIR Project
BAE Systems in collaboration with Cranfield University and
Pilatus PC-24
University of Manchester has developed the Demon UAV, the world's
The Pilatus PC-24 is a regional jet which has been developed to
first flapless aerial vehicle. The Demon Unmanned Aerial Vehicle
operate from short, paved and even unpaved surfaces, thereby
(UAV) features a turbojet engine and a total vehicle weight of 90 kg
providing it STOL capability to operate form runways as short as
with dimensions of 3m in length and 2.5 m wingspan. The Demon is
820m.The PC-24 employs two Williams FJ44-4A engines with a
able to achieve controlled roll maneuvers without using any moving
maximum take-off thrust of 3,435 lbf per engine. Moreover, an
conventional control surfaces (such as flaps, ailerons and elevators)
additional 5 percent power is available via a new automatic thrust
and is representative of a full-size aerial vehicle [61, 62]. In Demon
reserve feature, which increases the thrust up to 3,600 lbf[66]. These
UAV, the conventional straight jet nozzle has been replaced by a
engines are based on the William's ‘Exact Nozzle’ technology capable
fluidic thrust vectoring nozzle and utilizes the Coanda effect based on
of producing passive thrust vectoring using the Coanda effect. The
the co-flow concept in order to achieve manoeuvering. The fluidic
nozzle vectors thrust to generate a nose-up pitching force as opposed
thrust vectoring system guides the air from a rectangular exhaust
to the nose-down pitching of the aircraft in a go-around motion or
nozzle over upper and lower Coanda surfaces to establish pitch
during sudden application of high power.
vectoring. In order to control roll, bleed air is blown over a Coanda
 Downloaded from SAE International by Vasu Kumar, Sunday, February 28, 2016
An anti-ice inlet and an integral pre-cooler have also been
incorporated by in the engine in order to condition the engine bleed
air and reduce the drag losses. The PC-24 does not require an APU
and provides ground power efficiently with little noise by activating
the Williams' Quiet Power Mode. Pilatus has already begun building
the prototype PC-24 in it's Switzerland headquarters and expects to
roll out its first serial production aircraft by 2017[67].
Conclusions
The future of air superiority will greatly depend on the development and
production of manned and unmanned combat aircrafts which will be
supermanoeuverable and will have overall improved vehicle
performance. A wholly integrated and optimized exhaust system
consisting of a multifunctional nozzle, employing fluidic thrust
vectoring technology will lead to an increase in the survivability and
installed performance of the aircraft. The integration of fluidic thrust
vectoring technology into an aircraft's existing systems has led to a
weight reduction of 28-40% by implementing fluidic throat area control;
a 43-80% reduction in weight by implementing fluidic throat area and
exit area control; a 7-12% improvement in engine thrust-to-weight ratio;
and a 37-53% reduction in nozzle procurement and life cycle costs.
The authors find that in spite of the increased benefits that a fluidic
thrust vectoring system offers over the conventional mechanical
thrust vectoring system, only a handful of such systems have been
developed. As per the present literature, of all the fluidic thrust
vectoring systems developed till date, the throat skewing method is
theoretically the most efficient and desirable technique which can be
employed in a multifunctional nozzle owing to its high thrust
efficiency and relatively simple structure. The only major drawback
that this method faces is that the vectoring angle which can be
achieved is small and therefore it limits the maneuvering ability of an
aircraft. The loss in this ability can however be mitigated by the use
of dual throat nozzles(DTN). The shock vector control method also
has a simple geometry and can achieve a large vectoring angle but
this comes at the cost of the thrust ratio of the primary exhaust flow,
hence, this technique has still not been embraced.
The co-flow method was found to be the most widely used fluidic
thrust vectoring owing to its recent applications in a number of
projects including the FLAVIIR Demon UAV, Cirrus Vision SF50 and
Pilatus PC-24. Both the co-flow and counterflow fluidic thrust
vectoring techniques are practically attainable and can be easily
retrofitted in the engine nozzle without major changes in the airframe.
But since these methods are based on the Coanda effect, the resulting
jet impingement makes the flow regime unstable in certain ranges of
fluidic thrust vectoring. Moreover, these methods require additional
suction of the secondary jet stream; thereby they increase the
complexity and weight of the thrust vectoring system.
In this regard, jet vectoring using synthetic jet actuation has grown to
become very promising because the secondary jet stream required in
this case is synthesized from the working fluid of the flow system and
therefore, zero net mass flux is ensured across the primary flow. The
authors find that since synthetic jet actuation has been studied only
for low primary jet velocities, therefore this fluidic thrust vectoring
system needs further investigation specifically for high primary jet
velocities before being deployed in an exhaust nozzle.
References
1. Nguyen, L.T.; Gilbert, W.P.; Impact of Emerging Technologies
on Future Combat Aircraft Agility. AIAA-90-1304, May 1990.
2. Gal-Or B., Fundamental Concepts of Vectored Propulsion,
Journal of Propulsion v 6 No.6, Nov-Dec 1990.
3. Hunter C.A. and Deere K.A., Computational Investigation of
Fluidic Counterflow Thrust Vectoring, AIAA Paper No. 99-
2669, June 1999.
4. Chiarelli C., Johnsen R. K. and Shieh C. F., Fluidic Scale Model
Multi-Plane Thrust Vector Control Test Results. AIAA 93-2433.
5. Deere K. A., PAB Simulations of a Nozzle with Fluidic
Injection for Yaw Thrust-Vector Control, AIAA 98-3254.
6. Federspiel J. and Bangert L. L., Fluidic Control of Nozzle Flow-
Some Performance Measurements. AIAA 95-2605.
7. Collins E. G., Feedback Control for Counterflow Thrust
Vectoring, proceeding of the 2004 American Control Conference
Boston, Massachusetts, 2004.
8. Chiarelli, C.; Johnsen, R. K.; and Shieh, C. F.: Fluidic Scale
Model Multi-Plane Thrust Vector Control Test Results. AIAA
93-2433, June 1993.
9. Federspiel, J.; Bangert, L.; Wing, D.; and Hawkes, T.; Fluidic
Control of Nozzle Flow - Some Performance Measurements.
AIAA 95-2605, July 1995.
10. Anderson, C. J.; Giuliano, V. J.; and Wing, D. J.: Investigation
of Hybrid Fluidic/Mechanical Thrust Vectoring for Fixed-Exit
Exhaust Nozzles. AIAA 97-3148, July 1997.
11. Petrov, A. V.; Aerodynamics of STOL Airplanes with powered
high-lift systems. 28th International Congress Of The
Aeronautical Sciences, ICAS 2012.
12. Pascoa, C. J.; Dumas, A.; Trancossi, M.; Stewart, P.; A review
of thrust vectoring in support of a V/STOL non-moving
mechanical propulsion system; Central European Journal of
Engineering-3(3)-2013-374-388. DOI:10.2478/S13531-013-
0114-9.
13. Panitz, T.; Wasan, D.T.; Flow Attachment to Solid Surfaces: The
Coanda Effect, AIChE Journal v18 No.1, pp 51-57, January 1972.
14. Flamm, J. D.; Experimental Study of a Nozzle Using Fluidic
Counterflow for Thrust Vectoring. AIAA 98-3255, July 1998.
15. Trancossi, M., “An Overview of Scientific and Technical
Literature on Coanda Effect Applied to Nozzles,” SAE Technical
Paper 2011-01-2591, 2011, doi:10.4271/2011-01-2591.
16. Wing, D.; Static Investigation of Two Fluidic Thrust Vectoring
Concepts on a Two Dimensional Convergent Divergent Nozzle,
NASA TM 4574, December 1994.
17. Mason, M. S.; Fluidic thrust vectoring of low observable
aircraft; CEAS Aerospace Research Conference; Cambridge,
10-12 June 2002.
18. Sobester, A.; Keane, A. J.; Multi-objective Optimal Design of a
Fluidic Thrust Vectoring Nozzle, AIAA Paper- 6916, 2006.
19. Gu, D. W.; Natesan, K.; Postlethwaite, I.; Modelling and robust
control of fluidic thrust vectoring and circulation control for
unmanned air vehicles; Proc. IMechE Vol. 222 Part I: J. Systems
and Control Engineering; DOI:10.1243/09596518JSCE485.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Vasu Kumar, Sunday, February 28, 2016
20. Strykowski, P. J.; Krothapalli, A.; The Countercurrent Mixing
Layer: Strategies for Shear- Layer Control. AIAA 93-3260, July
1993.
21. Strykowski, P. J.; Krothapalli, A.; Wishart, D.; Enhancement of
Mixing in High-Speed Heated Jets Using a Counterflow Nozzle,
AIAA Journal Volume 31, number 11. November 1993.
22. Strykowski, P. J.; Wilcoxon, R. K.; Mixing Enhancements Due
to Global Oscillations in Jets with Annular Counterflow, AIAA
Journal, vol 31, no. 3, March 1993, pp. 564-570.
23. Deere, K. A.; Berrier, B. L.; Flamm, J. D.; and Johnson, S.
K.; Computational Study of Fluidic Thrust Vectoring using
Separation Control in a Nozzle. AIAA-2003-3803, June 2003.
24. Schmid, G. F.; Strykowski, P. J.; Jet Attachment Behavior
Using Counterflow Thrust Vectoring, Proceedings of 13th ONR
Propulsion Conference, Minneapolis, MN, 2000.
25. Newman, B. G.; The deflection of plane jets by adjacent
boundaries-Coanda effect; Boundary Layer and Blow Control, its
Principles and Application. Permagon Press, pp. 232-264, 1961.
26. Giuliano V. J.; Wing D. J.; Static Investigation of a Fixed-
Aperture Exhaust Nozzle Employing Fluidic Injection for
Multiaxis Thrust Vector Control. AIAA 97-3149.
27. Strykowski, P. J.; Niccum, D. L.; The Influence of Velocity and
Density Ratio on the Dynamics of Spatially Developing Mixing
Layers. Physics Today, Vol 4, #4, pp 770-781, 1992.
28. Van der Veer, M. R.; Counterflow Thrust Vectoring of a
Subsonic Rectangular Jet. Master's Thesis, University of
Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, 1995.
29. Washington, D. M.; Alvil, F. S.; Multiaxis Fluidic Thrust
Vector Control of a Supersonic Jet Using Counterflow. AIAA
JOURNAL Vol. 34, No. 8, August 1996.
30. Van der Veer, M.; Strykowski, P. J.; Counterflow Thrust Vector
Control of Subsonic Jets: Continuous and Bistable Regimes,
Journal of Propulsion and Power v13 No.3, 1997.
31. Washington, D. M.; Alvil, F. S.; Multiaxis Fluidic Thrust
Vector Control of a Supersonic Jet Using Counterflow, AIAA
JOURNAL Vol. 34, No. 8, August 1996.
32. Strykowski, P. J.; Forliti, D. J.; Flow Control Applications using
Countercurrent Shear, International Symposium on Recent
Advances in Experimental Fluid Mechanics, India, 2000.
33. Gridley, M. C.; Walker, S. H.; Inlet and Nozzle Tech. for 21st
Century Aircraft, ASME 96-GT-244.
34. Karen, A. D.; Bobby, L. B.; A Computational Study of a
New Dual Throat Fluidic Thrust Vectoring Nozzle Concept.
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Shock
Vector Control, 2005.
35. Neely, A. J.; Gesto, F. N.; Performance Studies of Shock Vector
Control Fluidic Thrust Vectoring. 43rd AIAA/ASME/SAE/
ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference & Exhibit, Cincinnati, OH,
AIAA 2007-5086.
36. Abeyounis, W. K.; Bennett, B. D. Jr.; 1997, Static Internal
Performance of an Over Expanded Fixed-Geometry, Non-
Axisymmetric Nozzle With Fluidic Pitch-Thrust-Vectoring
Capability. NASA Paper No. TP-3645.
37. Clarke, A. J.; The Conceptual Design of Novel Future UAV's
Incorporating Advanced Technology Research Components;
PhD Thesis; Cranfield University, 2011.
38. Zmijanovic, V.; Lago, V.; Palerm, S.; Oswald, J. et al.; Thrust
Shock Vector Control of an Axisymmetric C-D Nozzle via
Transverse Gas Injection. 28th International Symposium on
Shock Waves 2012, pp 171-177; DOI:10.1007/978-3-642-
25685-1_28.
39. Saito, T.; Fujimoto, T.; Numerical studies of shock vector
control for deflecting nozzle exhaust flows. Shock Waves 2009,
pp 985-990 DOI:10.1007/978-3-540-85181-3_31.
40. Hunter, C. A.; Experimental, Theoretical, and Computational
Investigation of Separated Nozzle Flows. AIAA-98-307, July 1998.
41. Waithe, K. A.; Deere, K. A.; Experimental and Computational
investigation of multiple injection ports in a convergent-
divergent nozzle for fluidic thrust vectoring. AIAA-2003-3802,
June 2003.
42. Carlson, J. R.; A Nozzle Internal Performance Prediction
Method. NASA TP-3221, 1992.
43. Yagle P. J.,; Miller D. N.,; Demonstration of Fluidic Throat
Skewing for Thrust Vectoring in Structurally Fixed Nozzles,
ASME Vol. 123, 2001.
44. Li L.; Numerical and Experimental Studies of Fluidic Thrust
Vectoring Mechanisms. Muroran Institute of Technology;
Doctoral Dissertation; December 2011.
45. Aso, S.; Okuyama, S.; Ando, Y.; Experimental Study on
Interacting Flow Fields Induced by Normally Injected
Secondary Flow Through a Slot Nozzle Into Supersonic Flow.
Memoirs Faculty Eng., Kyushu Univ., vol. 51, no. 1, Mar. 1991,
pp. 53 62.
46. Miller, D. M.; Yagle, P. J.; and Hamstra, J. W.; Fluidic Throat
Skewing for Thrust Vectoring in Fixed-Geometry Nozzles.
AIAA Paper No. 99-0365, 37th AIAA Aerospace Sciences
Meeting, Reno, NV, January 1999.
47. Deere, K.A; PAB3D Simulation of a Nozzle With Fluidic
Injection For Yaw Thrust-Vector Control. AIAA-98-3254.
DOI:10.2514/6.1998-3254.
48. Flamm, J. D.; Deeret, K. A.; Mason, M. L.; Berrier, B. L; et al.;
Design Enhancements of the Two-Dimensional, Dual Throat
Fluidic Thrust Vectoring Nozzle Concept. AIAA-2006-3701;
3rd AIAA Flow Control Conference, June 2006.
49. Flamm, J. D.; Deere, K. A.; Berrier, B. L.; Johnson, S. K; An
Experimental Study of a Dual Throat Fluidic Thrust Vectoring
Nozzle Concept. AIAA-2005-3503, DOI:10.2514/6.2005-3503.
50. Deere, K. A.; Berrier, B. L.; Flamm, J. D.; Johnson, S. K.; A
Computational Study of a Dual Throat Fluidic Thrust Vectoring
Nozzle Concept. AIAA-2005-3502. DOI:10.2514/6.2005-3502.
51. Deere, K. A.; Flamm, J. D.; Berrier, B. L.; Johnson, S. K.;
Experimental Study of an Axisymmetric Dual Throat Fluidic
Thrust Vectoring Nozzle Concept for Supersonic Aircraft
Application. AIAA-2007-5084. DOI:10.2514/6.2007-5084.
52. Smith, B. L.; Glezer, A.; Vectoring a high aspect ratio
rectangular air jet using a zero-net-mass-flux control jet. Bull.
Am. Phys. Soc. 39, 1994.
53. Smith, B. L.; Glezer, A.; Jet vectoring using synthetic jets.
J. Fluid Mech. (2002), vol. 458, pp. 1-34; DOI:10.1017/
S0022112001007406.
54. Smith, B. L.; Swift, G. W.; Synthetic jets at large Reynolds
number and comparison to continuous jets. AIAA Paper
20013030.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Vasu Kumar, Sunday, February 28, 2016

55. Raman, G.; Cornelius, D.; Jet mixing control using excitation 64. Cirrus Vision SF50, “http://cirrusaircraft.com/vision/”
from miniature oscillating jets. AIAA J. 33, 365-368, 1995. (Retrieved on March 2015).
56. Koch, C. R.; Closed loop control of a round jet/diffuser in 65. Cirrus poised to fly first Vision SF50, “http://www.
transitory stall. PhD thesis, Stanford University. flightglobal.com/news/articles/cirrus-poised-to-fly-first-vision-
57. Smith, B. L.; Synthetic jets and their interaction with adjacent sf50-395314/” (Retrieved on March 2015).
jets. PhD thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology School of 66. Pilatus PC-24, http://www.pilatus-aircraft.com/#275 (Retrieved
Mechanical Engineering, 1999. on March 2015).
58. Smith, B. L.; Glezer, A.; Vectoring and small-scale motions 67. Williams to power new Pilatus PC-24, as two other Williams
effected in free shear flows using synthetic jet actuators. AIAA Turbofans receive FAA Certification and begin production,
Paper 97-0213. “http://www.williams-int.com/news/williams-to-power-new-
59. Smith, B. L.; Glezer, A.; The formation and evolution of pilatus-pc-24-as-two-other-williams-turbofans-receive-faa-
synthetic jets. Phys. Fluids 10, 2281-2297, 1998. certification-and-begin-production” (Retrieved on March 2015).
60. Deere, K. A.; Summary of Fluidic Thrust Vectoring Research
Definitions/Abbreviations
Conducted at NASA Langley Research Center. AIAA-2003-3800.
V/STOL - Vertical and/or short take-off and landing
61. Gu, D. W.; Natesan, K.; Postlethwaite, I.; Modelling and robust
control of fluidic thrust vectoring and circulation control for STOL - Short take-off and landing
unmanned air vehicles; Proc. IMechE Vol. 222 Part I: J. Systems STOVL - Short take-off and vertical landing
and Control Engineering; DOI:10.1243/09596518JSCE485. FTV - Fluidic Thrust Vectoring
62. FLAVIIR Project - Demon UAV, “http://www.cranfield.ac.uk/ CFTV - Counterflow thrust vectoring
research/research-activity/case-studies/flaviir-project-demon-
SVC - Shock Vector Control
uav.html” (Accessed on March 2015).
NPR - Nozzle Pressure Ratio
63. FLAVIIR Project-Research focus-Aerodynamics, “http://www.
flaviir.com/aerodynamics.htm” (Retrieved on March 2015). SPR - Secondary Pressure Ratio
DTN - Dual Throat Nozzle

The Engineering Meetings Board has approved this paper for publication. It has successfully completed SAE’s peer review process under the supervision of the session organizer. The process
requires a minimum of three (3) reviews by industry experts.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or
otherwise, without the prior written permission of SAE International.

Positions and opinions advanced in this paper are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of SAE International. The author is solely responsible for the content of the paper.

ISSN 0148-7191

http://papers.sae.org/2015-01-2423

View publication stats