15

th.
Annual (International) Conference on Mechanical Engineering-ISME2007
May 15-17, 2007, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran
XXXX should be replaced by paper number ISME2007-3056

Numerical Computation of Supersonic-Subsonic Ramjet Inlets; a Design Procedure

M. Akbarzadeh M. J. Kermani
Graduate Student Assistant Professor
mecmohsen2001@gmail.com mkermani@aut.ac.ir

Department of Mechanical Engineering
Amirkabir University of Technology (Tehran Polytechnic)
Tehran, Iran, 15875-4413

multiple shock waves generated by the external-
compression surfaces and the cowl and by the internal-
compression surfaces from the cowl lip to the engine
face.
In this paper three different kinds of ramjet inlets are
studied. These are inlet 1 as simple spike, inlet 2 as
multi shocks external compression and inlet 3 as mixed
compression. They are analyzed by Euler equations
using Roe scheme with 3
rd
order accurate in space and
second order accurate in time and also second order
predictor-corrector MacCormack scheme (second order
in both time and space), [1]. Most of the computations
in high speed aerodynamics are performed in the
supersonic combustion engine inlets. In contrast, in this
study the flow of the interior part of engine inlet is
directed to a subsonic combustion chamber and is much
more complicated by forming a terminal normal shock.
The effect of combustion in the present study modeled
by imposing a high back pressure level associated with
the combustion, [2]. The results are compared with each
other and that of the commercial FLUENT software
package.

Governing Equations
The governing equations of flow motion are 2D,
unsteady, compressible and inviscid in full conservative
form with no body forces which are given below,

0 = +

H
y
G
x
F
t
Q
(1)

where Q , F , G and H are:
`

=
t
e
v
u
Q

+
=
0
2
uh
uv
p u
u
F

+
=
0
2
vh
p v
uv
v
G

=
0
2
1
vh
v
uv
v
r
H

, (2)
and is equal zero (2D analysis).

Abstract
The performance of three different ramjet engine inlets
is numerically considered in this study. The geometries
used are planar with the free stream Mach = 2.5. Inlet 1
is chosen from literature, a single oblique shock
followed by a normal one, which given a low value of
total pressure recovery. Inlets 2 and 3 are designed in a
way to produce a series of oblique shocks merging at
the cowl lip of the engine followed by a normal shock.
The compression process in inlet 2 is completely
performed in external part of the inlet. Instead inlet 3 is
given a mixed internal and external compression.
Inviscid Roe scheme with 3
rd
order accurate in space
and second order accurate in time and second order
predictor-corrector MacCormack scheme are applied in
this study and also commercial FLUENT software
package. The results are in good agreement with
literature.
Keywords: Supersonic Inlet, Multi Staging External
Compression, Mixed External and Internal
Compression, Roe Scheme, MacCormack Scheme

Introduction
The engine inlet is of prime importance for all air-
breathing propulsion systems. Its major function is to
collect the atmospheric air at free stream Mach number,
slow it down (probably involving a change of direction)
and so compress it efficiently. In this role the inlet is
performing an essential part of the engine cycle and its
efficiency is directly reflected in the engine
performance. In addition, the inlet must present the air
to the downstream component at the suitable velocities
and with an acceptable degree of uniformity of velocity
and pressure under any flight condition. Finally, the
inlet has to achieve all this with minimum external drag
and minimum disturbance to the external flow around
aircraft.
The supersonic inlet consists of a spike (center-body or
fore-body) and an integrated duct, in which the initial
compression is being carried out by the spike. The
principle of staging a supersonic compression so as to
reduce the loss of inlet total pressure is considered in
this study to modify inlet efficiency. By increasing the
Mach number, oblique shock numbers that needed to
save total pressure are increasing as well. The analysis
of mixed-compression inlet flow is considered in the
third inlet and is complicated by the formation of
2
not exceed the maximum for shock attachment at a
defined Mach number especially in second inlet, it limits
numbers and angles of oblique shocks.

3.2 Inlet 2
The inlet is to be, is considered for Mach = 2.5
(according to the free stream speed of this study) and of
wedge type (planar geometry) with shocks focused at the
lip of engine cowl. Literature suggests that four shocks
are needed and corresponding optimum flow turning
angle is 5 . 31 , but with simple calculations can show
that the external shock attachment limit is 30 . This
could be observed assuming say, 3 lip vertex angle and
using 27 cowl internal angle. With optimum flow
turning the reverse angle of the duct would be 5 . 4 and a
trial calculation for 5 . 9 , 5 . 10 and 5 . 11 wedge turns
(first, second and third wedge angle respectively ) leads
to a value 31 . 1 for the Mach number of the terminal
normal shock. The calculations proceed as follows,

= 5 . 9
1
= 38 . 31
1
= 107 . 2
2
M
= 5 . 10
2
= 84 . 37
2
= 72 . 1
3
M
= 5 . 11
3
= 63 . 48
3
= 31 . 1
4
M

The values of sin M are successively 10 . 1 , 06 . 1 and
99 . 0 which, while not equal, are not greatly disparate,
so the Oswatich principle is considered. Intersection of
the first shock with the bounding streamline (defined by
the required engine mass flow) locates the intake lip and
itself helps the engine to operate in its full mass flow
capacity. By striking appropriate angles back from the
lip the leading edges of the second and third wedges are
located. Inside the duct following a 5 . 4 reverse
angling, the shape is such as to give a subsonic diffuser
terminating at the engine face. The external cowl line,
following an initial 3 vertex angle, is an arbitrary shape
and also terminating at the position of engine face.
Inlets 2 and 3 are designed in a way to produce a series
of oblique shocks merging at the cowl lip of the engines
followed by a normal shock. The geometry and
computational grid of inlet 2 are shown in figure 2 and
3, respectively.


Fig2. Geometry of inlet 2


The working fluid is assumed as an ideal gas with constant
specific heat value.

RT P = (3)

Geometry and Boundary Conditions
3.1 Inlet 1
Inlet 1 is chosen from literature, [3]. The simplest form of
staged compression is the two-shock inlet in which a
single angle wedge or cone projects forward of the duct.
For the explanation of boundary condition, figure 1 is
shown. Apart from the quantities of boundary conditions
of inlet 1 which will be given in next parts, the boundary
conditions at the inlet is set to 40 kPa static pressure value
and Mach number = 2.5. The flow is also assumed to be
arriving to the computational domain as normal. At the
exit plan, static pressure boundary is used. In this study the
flow of the interior part is directed to a subsonic
combustion chamber. The effect of combustion is
simulated by imposing constant pressure levels associated
with combustion of the exit of the engine inlet. All flow
parameters are extrapolated to the top of the computational
domain and it is taken far enough from the engine inlet, so
the oblique shocks generated from the spike leading edge
and cowl lip can not reach this boundary. At the center
line (from inlet plan to the leading edge of the spike), a
symmetry condition is enforced.

Fig1. Geometry, boundary condition and computational
grid for inlet 1

For a two dimensional oblique shock of angle the loss
is that corresponding to the component Mach number
normal to the shock. The decreasing rate of total pressure
loss with increasing oblique shock numbers makes it
possible to advise systems of supersonic compression by
stages, yielding high pressure recovery overall. The
numbers and type of stages used depend upon free stream
Mach number and some other factors. Corresponding to
Oswatitsch principle for two dimension systems,
maximum shock pressure recovery is obtained when the
oblique shocks are of equal strength, [4].

1 1 2 2 1 1
sin sin sin

= = =
n n
M M M L
(4)

Limit on numbers of oblique shock is that the flow in
passing through the compression system produced by
spike is turned outwards from the inlet axis and requires to
be turned back to the axial direction within the subsonic
diffuser. With efficient compression the turning angles can
be quite large. Also the external angle of the cowl must
3

Fig5. Computational grid for inlet 3
domain 1 ) 30 229 ( , domain2 ) 41 173 (

Flow solvers
The main goals of this study were developing a CFD
solver code for solving the flow fields of different kinds
of ramjet engine inlet diffusers which are designed in a
way that are proper for supersonic speeds with subsonic
inflow engines and also designing two inlets which have
got almost suitable pressure recovery in supersonic
speeds.
The two schemes, used in this study are (1) Roe scheme
with 3
rd
order accurate in space and second order
accurate in time as an upwind scheme and (2) second
order predictor-corrector MacCormack scheme (second
order in both time and space)[5,6]. In the first case,
using Roe scheme as an approximate Riemann solver
(ARS) for solving linearized form of the fluid equations
is followed by a penalty in which the entropy conditions
are not satisfied, as the expansion shocks (physically
impossible phenomena in nature) are valied solution of
the linearized fluid equations. Therefore expansion
shocks are captured in the same way as the expansion
waves are captured. This problem is fixed by an entropy
correction technique and the corresponding entropy
correction formula is chosen from reference [7], which is
suitable on a wide variety of test cases and can cause the
expansion shock to totally disappear from the sonic-
expansion regions. A first order upwind scheme is also
applied using commercial FLUENT software package,
so the results are compared with each other and with the
results of FLUENT software too.

Results
The present computation is performed for the inlet
geometries which are shown above, and some of results
are given in this part. For the first case the quantities of
boundary conditions are given in the following table and
is considered for comparing to the literature (in fact a
case study for the result validation).

Table1. Boundary conditions of inlet 1

M
Inflow
Static
pressure
(Pa)
Static back
pressure
(Pa)
Inflow
static temp.
(K)
3.0 2815 39694 113

Figures 6 and 7 show the Mach number and static
pressure contours, respectively.




Fig3. Computational grid for inlet 2;
domain 1 ) 25 200 ( , domain2 ) 48 154 (

3.3 Inlet 3
The outward turning of flow that goes with external
compression leads to the use of outward angles on the inlet
cowl, which even with attached shocks, result in
significant drag. Mixed compression implies the use of
both external and internal compression, in appropriate
degrees, in order to relieve the external drag problem of
the former whilst avoiding excessive boundary layer or
other disadvantages from the later. The third inlet is shown
in figure 4. The first two compressions are external and
give
o
20
total turn. The shocks are focused at the lip
where a reverse
o
5 . 11
turn is made by means of the
internal cowl angle. The second wedge is continued until it
meats the reversed shock. A
o
5 . 11
change of direction of
the surface at this interaction cancels shock reflection and
allows the normal shock to be positioned. This type of
inlet diffuser may be termed 50/50 external/internal. In all
above inlets, the computational domain is divided in to 2
regions and computational grid is produced by solving
Laplace's equations in each of them. The geometry and
computational grid of inlet 2 are shown in figure 4 and 5,
respectively.


Fig4. Geometry of inlet 3







4

(b)
Fig 8. Contours of Mach for inlet 2 (Roe scheme);
(a) Pback = 450000 Pa, (b) Pback = 495000 Pa


(a)

(b)
Fig 9. Contours of static pressure for inlet 2
(Roe scheme); (a) Pback = 495000 Pa,
(b) Pback = 450000 Pa

The most comprehensive study is performed in third
case (and the most efficient inlet in this study, as will be
shown in the next parts).
Figures 10 and 11 show the contour of Mach number for
two different conditions; first the supercritical condition
and second near critical condition in which the normal
shock wave is placed near the throat of engine inlet.
Static pressure counters for inlet 3, are shown in figure
12.
Like inlet 2, the flow enters to the engine at Mach
number of about 0.5.



Fig 6. Mach number contours (critical condition) by
Roe scheme


Fig 7. Static pressure contours (critical condition) by
Roe scheme

The obtained results are in very good agreements with
literature and critical condition is obtained at the same
back pressure that is presented by literature (this case is
studied for validating the obtained results) [3].
The contours of Mach number and static pressure for inlet
2 are shown in figures 8 and 9, respectively.
The flow enters to the engine at Mach number of about 0.5
(that is usually recommended for subsonic combustion jet
engines) [4].
The boundary conditions of inlets 2 and 3 are given in the
following table in which a wide range of back pressure is
studied, until achieving critical conditions.

Table2. Boundary conditions of inlets 2 and 3

M
Inflow Static
pressure
(Pa)
Static back
pressure
(Pa)
Inflow
static temp.
(K)
2.5 40000 - 250


(a)
5

(a)

(b)
Fig 12. Static pressure contours (inlet 3),
(a) Roe scheme Pback = 530000 Pa, (b) MacCormack
scheme Pback = 500000 Pa

The Static back pressure corresponding to critical
condition for each inlet is given in table 3.

Table3. Static back pressure at critical conditions
Roe Scheme
(Pa)
MacCormack
Scheme (Pa)
Inlet 2 525000 500500
Inlet 3 533000 506500

The static back pressures predicted by MacCormack
scheme are a bit lower than the other (Roe Scheme). it
might be because of more instability in flow field
especially near critical condition which is an almost
instable situation and because of the most diffusion that
there is in MacCormack scheme and the pseudo
unsteadiness that is entered to the flow field by this
scheme.
Figure 13 shows the configuration of total temperature
contours for inlet 1.


(a)

(a)

(b)
Fig 10. Mach number contours, (MacCormack scheme),
(a) Pback = 480000 Pa, (b) Pback = 500000 Pa


(a)

(b)
Fig 11. Mach number contours, (Roe scheme),
(a) Pback = 500000 Pa, (b) Pback = 530000 Pa





6
(3) Design of the subsonic diffuser poses
different problems in studied cases, however
because it is greatly dependent on the engine
installation situation, no generalization is
attempted.

Conclusion
Supersonic inlet design is a difficult task due to the
complex flow physics and computational limitations.
Three different ramjet engine inlets studied in this paper
which the first one was chosen from literature (for
validating the obtained results). The two last inlets
designed in such a way to produce three oblique shocks
merging at the engine cowl lip leads to staging the
compression process to avoid high total pressure losses.
Flux difference Roe scheme and MacCormack scheme
are applied to the above inlets and the results compared
with each other and that of the commercial FLUENT
software package. A good agreement shown in the
results.

List of Symbols
Oblique shock angle
Wedge angle
p
Static pressure
back
p Static back pressure (at
the end of inlet)
0
h Total enthalpy
H vector multiplier
t
e Total energy

References
[1] Kermani, M. J., and Plett, E. G., 2001 Roe
Scheme in Generalized Coordinates: Part I-
Formulations, AIAA Paper # 2001-0086
[2] Duncan B., Thomas S., 1992, Computational
Analysis of Ramjet Engine Inlet Interaction,
SAE, ASME, and ASEE, Joint Propulsion
Conference and Exhibit, 28th, Nashville, TN,
July 6-8, 12 p.
[3] Gossiping P., Lesage F., Champlain Aide.,
1998, The Application of Computational Fluid
Dynamics (CFD) For the Design of Rectangular
Supersonic Intakes, Proceedings of CFD 98
Conference.
[4] Goldsmith E.L., Sedona J., 1999, Intake
Aerodynamics, Blackwell Science, Second
Edition.
[5] Kermani, M. J., and Plett, E. G., 2001 Roe
Scheme in Generalized Coordinates: Part II-
Application to Inviscid and viscous Flows,
AIAA Paper # 2001-0087
[6] Kermani, M. J., Simulation of the Viscous
Turbulent and multi-Dimensional Gasdynamics
effects on Flows in Inlet Diffusers of
Supersonic Vehicles", Ph.D. thesis, Department
of Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering,
Carleton University, Canada, 2001
[7] Kermani, M. J., and Plett, E. G., 2001
Modified Entropy Correction Formula for the
Roe Scheme, AIAA Paper # 2001-0083

(b)
Fig 13. configuration of total temperature contours (a) Roe
scheme, (b) Fluent software

As expected for inviscid flow, total temperature remains
constant throughout the computational domain. This is
also a self-consistency check for obtained results.
Engine cowl pressure drag force and total pressure
recovery at the end of the inlet diffusers are given in table
4. As mentioned already, the cowl drag force of the second
inlet is more than the third inlet and that is because of
more cowl lip angle that forms stronger oblique shock
started at the apex of cowl engine Whereas, there is not
obvious difference between their pressure recovery so,
with our assumptions (inviscid analysis) the third inlet is
the most efficient.

Table 4. Engine cowl pressure drag force and total
pressure recovery (at critical conditions)
Cowl
pressure
drag force
(N)
Total
pressure
recovery
(Roe
scheme)
Total
pressure
recovery
(Fluent
software)
Inlet 1 - 0.44 0.456
Inlet 2 36934.055 0.861 0.854
Inlet 3 11568.173 0.858 0.839

Comparing the three recent inlets; first, second and third
inlet, the following results are noticeable:

(1) apart from the first inlet which is not efficient
and is considered as a validation for produced
CFD codes (and we do not consider it more), the
sequence of compression Mach numbers are the
same in two last inlets and so is the throat size
(assuming the same mass flow capacity) and so
is the pressure recovery.

(2) The shortest possible supersonic section (defined
by the distance from fore body apex to normal
shock) has been used in each case, consistent
with the particular design philosophy, this
section is nevertheless longer in third than in
second and because of it and increasing
enclosure of shock wave, boundary layer (which
is neglected in current study) might be expected
to be more adverse in third than in the second.
On the other hand because of more cowl angle of
second inlet than the third, pressure drag
corresponding to the external shape of the cowl
is more than the third. So there is a compromise
between the more efficient internal flow of the
former and lower pressure drag of the latter.