NASA TECHNI CAL NOTE

m
*o
N
N
I
n
z
c
4
m
4
z
N A S A TN D-2263
- ---_.
DYNAMI C PRESSURE A N D THRUST
CHARACTERISTICS OF COLD JETS
DI SCHARGI NG FROM SEVERAL
EXHAUST NOZZLES DESI GNED
FOR VTOL DOWNWASH SUPPRESSION
by C. C. Higgins and T. W. Wuinwright
Prepared under Contract No. NASw-462 by
THE ROEING COMPANY
Renton, Washington
f or
NATI ONAL AERONAUTI CS A ND SPACE A DMI NI STRA TI ON WASHI NGTON, D. C. APRI L 1964
TECH LIBRARY KAFB, NM
0354982
DYNAMI C PRESSURE AND THRUST CHARACTERI STI CS OF COLD J ETS
DI SCHARGI NG FROM SEVERAL EXHAUST NOZZLES
DESI GNED FOR VTOL DOWNWASH SUPPRESSI ON
B y C. C. Hi ggi ns and T. W. Wai nwri ght
Prepared under Contract No. NASw-461 by
THE BOEING COMPANY
Renton, Washi ngton
This report was reproduced photographically
from copy supplied by the contractor.
NATI ONAL AERONAUTI CS AND SPACE ADMI NI STRATI ON
For sale by the Offi ce of Techni cal Services, Department of Commerce,
Washi ngton, D.C. 20230 -- Price $2.00
DYNAMIC PRESSURE AND THRUST CHARACTERISTICS
OF COLD J ETS DISCHARGING FROM SEVERAL EXHAUST NOZZLES
DESIGNED FOR VTOL DOWNWASH SUPPRESSION
By C. C. Higgins and T. W. Wainwright
SUMMARY
Several exhaust nozzle models were tested on a stati c ri g using cold air
flow to find the effect of exit design on thrust and jet wake dynamic pressure for
use in VTOL downwash suppression. Data from both free jet and ground plane
tests are presented to define dynamic pressure along the j et wake centerline and
along the ground surface. Results show that three basi c nozzle design factors
can be very effective in causing rapid dynamic pressure decay in the jet wake
with smal l effect on nozzle velocity coefficient.
compared throughout the mixing region for each nozzle and are shown to be
si mi l ar.
Dynamic pressure profiles are
INTRODUCTION
Ground impingement of the downwash from any VTOL ai rcraft can produce
operational problems of varying degree, depending on the type of landing site
being used and disc-loading of the l i ft system.
wash problem is a function of the maximum dynamic pressure in the jet wake at
the ground surface, a general trend of designing for low-disc-loading l i f t devices
on many current VTOL ai rcraft has resulted. However, high-speed airplane
mission requi rements have resulted in aircraft designs incorporating separate
lift j et engines or combined l i ft and crui se turbo-fan engines. On jet VTOL air-
craft currently in use, operations have been restri cted in some manner to mini-
mi ze ground damage.
reduction of exposure ti me by means of short ground rol l or l i ft nozzle rotation
at take-off.
Since the severity of the down-
Such restri cti ons have included using hardened sites or
A significant amount of research has been accomplished by several inves-
tigators in attempts to understand the action of a jet impinging on the ground and
in finding the l i mi ts of erosion resi stance that various surfaces have to jet
impingement, as described in references 1 to 3.
to develop various coverings, coatings, and structures that improve the erosion
characteri sti cs of ground surfaces.
shown to be effective, but, in most cases, logistic problems and installation re-
quirements make it desirable to minimize or eliminate the need for ground prep-
aration. This can be done only by reduction of the ground impingement dynamic
pressures. The apparently conflicting requirements for jet engines in VTOL
aircraft and low ground dynamic pressures have led to this study of exhaust noz-
zle design factors which, by increasing the rate of mixing with ambient air, will
alleviate the ground impingement problem.
Also, there have been efforts
Many of the surface treatments have been
This investigation involved the testing of twelve nozzle configurations, in-
cluding: ci rcul ar designs which attempted to vary upstream turbulence; rectan-
gul ar sl ot designs for a study of exit peri meter/area rati o and exit wal l angle;
and sectored configurations for the effect of exit area subdivision.
zl es were tested on a stati c, cold air flow ri g at the Airplane Division of The
Boeing Company, Renton, Washington. Measurements of thrust and jet wake
dynamic pressure were made for each nozzle at pressure rati os ranging from
1.4 to 2.4. Free j et wake surveys were made by traversi ng the jet at several
downstream locations, and a ground plane was used to obtain dynamic pressures
radially along the surface after j et impingement.
These noz-
The si mi l ari ty of the nozzles used in this program to those used in pre-
vious sound suppression work i s apparent, and the objective is basically the
same, namely, to i ncrease the rate of j et mixing, although the effectiveness of
a sound suppressor nozzle is pri mari l y due to changes in the directivity and
frequency of the noise, references 4 and 5. Thus sound suppression character-
i sti cs of a nozzle may or may not be related to the reduction of dynamic pres-
sure in the jet wake, which i s the goal of a VTOL downwash suppression nozzle.
This research was sponsored by the National Aeronautics and Space Ad-
ministration through the Office of Grants and Research Contracts under contract
NASW -46 1.
SY MBO LS
R
cF
V
C
e
aspect rati o, D2/Area or length/width
mass flow coefficient, actual mass flow /ideal mass flow
effective velocity coefficient, effective exit velocity/ideal
exit velocity. Effective velocity =(thrust /mass fl0w)actual
di ameter of nozzle exit, inches
2
I
X
* *5qz
X
max
Y
25s-
Y
.L
max
h
n
pt
pt
+z
n
P
P
di ameter of a ci rcul ar nozzle with exit area equal to that of
a non-circular nozzle, inches
length of rectangular exit planform, inches
width of rectangular exit planform, inches
radi al distance from center of ground plane, inches
axes of a right hand coordinate system with the Z axis in the
direction of flow. Also designates distances along each re-
spective axi s from center of nozzle exit, inches
designation of an axi s intermediate between segments of noz-
zl es No. 11 and No. 12
distance from core or "apparent core" to any point in the
mixing region, measured parallel to the X axi s, inches
(ref. : figure 12)
distance from core or "apparent core" to reference contour
at twenty-five per cent dynamic pressure, inches (ref. :
figure 12)
distance from core or "apparent core'' to any point i n the
mixing region, measured parallel to the Y axi s? inches
(ref. : figure 12)
distance from core or "apparent core'' to reference contour
at twenty-five per cent dynamic pressure, inches (ref. :
figure 12)
height above the ground plane, inches
number of exit segments
atmospheri c pressure, lbs /sq ft
total or stagnation pressure, l bs/sq f t
total or stagnation pressure at the nozzle exit, l bs/sq ft
total or stagnation pressure at any specified point in the
jet wake: l bs/sq f t
total or stagnation pressure at any specified point on, or
adjacent to the ground plane, I bs/sq f t
3
I
compressi bl e dynamic pressure, pt - po, l bs/sq ft
q
qn
compressi bl e dynamic pressure at the nozzle exit, ptn - po,
lbs /sq f t
compressible dynamic pressure at any specified point in the
j et wake, ptz - po, l bs/sq ft
9,
maximum dynamic pressure measured at any specified trans-
max
verse plane perpendicular to the Z axi s, pt
sq ft
- Po, 1bS/
9,
Zmax
compressi bl e dynamic pressure at any specified point on, or
adjacent to, the ground plane, pt
maximum compressible dynamic pressure measured on, or
adjacent to, the ground plane at specified distances of the
ground plane from the nozzle, pt
gmax
99
- po, l bs/sq ft
g
q
9max
- pol I bs/sq ft
total or stagnation temperature, OF
n
t t
B
total or stagnation temperature at nozzle exit, O F
nozzle wall divergence angle, referred to the longitudinal
axi s of the nozzle, degrees
e angle subtended by a nozzle sector, degrees
APPARATUS AND PROCEDURE
Models
The nozzle models used in this program are described in figures 1 to 3 .
Nine basi c convergent nozzle designs were tested including a ci rcul ar, fi ve rec-
tangular-slot, and three multiple-segment nozzles. The ci rcul ar nozzle had
provisions for incorporating turbulence-generating i nserts consisting of a sand-
paper lining, vortex generators, and concentric rings. The rectangular slot
nozzles provided variations in exit aspect ratio and wall angle.
segment nozzles had the exit area divided equally into 2, 4, or 12 sectors.
The multiple-
All nozzles were designed to have the same physical exit area as that of
the three inch di ameter ci rcul ar nozzle.
to approximately the same cross-sectional area distribution from entrance to
exit. The ci rcul ar nozzles varied somewhat from
the non-circular nozzles because a straight throat section was required for the
turbulence i nserts. Because the resulting profile of nozzles No. 7. 8, and 9
when viewed from the side resembl es that of the Greek lettei-A , these nozzles
have been termed "delta nozzles. ' I
In addition, the nozzles were designed
This i s shown in figure 4.
4
I
The models were fabricated from mild steel and fiberglass to be consist-
ent with the cold air test requi rement.
Nozzle Ai r Rig
The arrangement of the test facility which was used f or this program is
shown schematically in figure 5, with further details shown photographically in
figure 6. Additional details of the instrumentation are shown in figure 7.
The nozzle models were installed on a bellmouth adapter at the end of the
24 inch inside-diameter plenum chamber.
i nteri or of the plenum chamber reduced the effective plenum si ze to 20 inches
inside diameter. I nternal baffles and a fine mesh screen in the plenum chamber
insured uniform distribution of the flow at the entrance of the bellmouth section.
The plenum was hung from a super-structure by means of four flexures which
minimized resi stance to fore and aft motion. Ai r was introduced into the plenun
by way of a flexible bellows joint arrangement. Nozzle thrust was measured by
a strai n gaged thrust ring installed between the plenum assembl y and the rigidly
supported air supply pipe.
Acoustical lining installed on the
Airflow was measured with an ASME long radius flow nozzle upstream of
the load cel l and flow rate was controlled by two valves, one upstream and one
downstream of the flow nozzle. The dual valve arrangement maintained a con-
stant Mach number through the flow nozzle for all data points and nozzle si zes.
Filtered air for the nozzle tests was obtained from a laboratory supply system
at approximately 70F with a dew point of -40F or less.
Pressure measurements in the jet wake were obtained with a traversi ng
probe mounted downstream of the plenum. Operation of this probe was remote-
ly controlled to vertical, lateral, or longitudinal positions with respect to the
nozzles. Pressure readings were transmitted through transducers to the re-
cording equipment.
A 56 inch di ameter ground plane was installed on rails downstream of the
A five-tube total pressure rake which measured pressures along a
The pres-
plenum.
radial traverse above the surface was attached to the ground plane.
sure tubes covered a height of .05 to 1.0 inches above the ground plane.
ground plane could be located at distances up to 20 feet from the nozzle.
The
All data obtained from nozzle testing was automatically recorded on IBM
punch card equipment which made it possible to decrease data reduction ti me
to approximately one day. In addition, a Moseley x-y plotter was used to record
jet wake pressure for on-line evaluation of nozzle performance.
5
I
Data Accuracy
Calibrations of the static ri g instrumentation showed that pressure
measurements were accurate within f 0.5 per cent in all axes, thrust scatter
band width was 2.0 per cent, and air flow scatter band was 0.7 per cent. Al-
though the test data scatter band appears l arge, repetition of the test runs si x
or more ti mes provided a grouping of the data from which mean values of
thrust and airflow were determined. It was found that these mean values were
within f 0.5 per cent of the values obtained on another extremely sensitive and
preci se nozzle calibration ri g normally accepted as a standard within The
Boeing Company.
The velocity profile of the air entering the nozzle models was closely
checked with a rake incorporating ten total pressure probes located in the ten-
ter of five equal areas. Distortion was found to be negligible for more than 90
per cent of the nozzle inlet diameter.
Plots of the jet wake traverses indicated that mi nor profile distortion oc-
curred, with the amount of distortion dependent upon the dynamic pressure
gradients and the level of pressures being measured. Attempts to eliminate
this distortion were not successful. During the dynamic pressure traverses, it
was apparent that intense, l arge scal e turbulence was often encountered. No
corrections were made in the measurements for the effects of turbulence, con-
sequently the absolute value of dynamic pressure may be somewhat in doubt for
specific points. On occasion, random variations of f 0.05 nozzle exit dynamic
pressure were noted; however, most data appeared to fall within a band f 0.01
nozzle exit dynamic pressure.
Because of uncertainties associated with static pressure measurements in
an intensely turbulent stream, all dynamic pressure measurements were ob-
tained as a differentia1 pressure between the indicated probe total pressure and
atmospheric pressure. Presentation of the data in this form introduced effects
of compressibility, but these were minimized by the low nozzle pressure rati o
used for most of the tests.
RESULTS
Nozzle Performance Evaluation
Effective velocity and mass flow coefficients determined for all nozzles
are presented in figure 8. Nozzle pressure rati o was vari ed from 1.4 to 2.4,
and all tests were conducted with laboratory supply air of 60 to 80F. The data
shown were obtained by visually fairing resul ts of six or more individual tests
on each nozzle over the range of pressure rati os indicated.
6
Effective velocity coefficients were based on the rati o of effective jet
velocity, determined from measured thrust and mass flow, to isentropic j et
velocity resulting from the nozzle pressure rati o and temperature.
coefficients were based on the ratio of measured mass flow to theoretical mass
flow determined by the nozzle area, pressure ratio, and temperature. When
nozzle exit area is correctl y selected to compensate for variation of mass flow
coefficients , nozzle thrust efficiency is specified solely by effective velocity
coefficient; consequently, effective velocity coefficient provides the best means
of comparing the performance of various nozzle designs.
Mass flow
The two factors which were found to influence nozzle performance signifi-
cantly included (1) internal roughness or flow obstructions near the nozzle
throat section (nozzles no. 2 and 3) , and (2) divergence of the nozzle walls
(nozzles no. 7 , 8, and 9). Both factors were found to be dependent upon nozzle
pressure rati o, with the l osses minimized at the higher nozzle pressure ratios.
As may be seen from the resul ts for nozzles no. 1, 2, 3, and 4, thrust l osses
were l argest for obstructions placed in the high velocity regions of the nozzle.
Despite the l arge amount of blockage introduced by the turbulence rings with
configuration no. 4, thrust l osses were nominal because of the low velocities at
that location. The data clearly indicate that both effective velocity and mass
flow coefficients decrease with increasing divergence angle for the delta noz-
zl es, but the effect of increasing aspect rati o is l ess well defined.
Comparison of the effective velocity and mass flow coefficients for noz-
zles no. 1, 5, 6, 10, and 11 indicates that variation of nozzle exit planform had
only smal l effect upon these coefficients. Consideration of the resul ts of nozzle
no. 12, however, suggests that the effective velocity coefficient may be adverse-
ly affected by changes of planform in which the nozzle exit peri meter is greatly
increased over that of a ci rcul ar nozzle. The data do not permi t precise defini-
tion of this trend, nor will the data permi t isolation of the effects of other design
variables (such as the number and radii of internal corners, area progression
changes , surface roughness , etc. ). The variation of mass flow coefficient
shows even l ess dependence on nozzle peri meter than does the effective velocity
coefficient; consequently, it may be concluded from these data that friction
l osses associated with l arge nozzle wetted areas may be a secondary factor in
determining nozzle performance.
Free J et Wake Surveys
Surveys of the dynamic pressures in the free jet wake were completed for
all nozzles operating at a pressure rati o of 1.5. The maximum values of dy-
namic pressure at each survey station are presented as a function of distance
from the nozzle exit in figure 9. These data at a nozzle pressure rati o of 1.5
show that substantial reductions of dynamic pressure in the free j et wake may
be achieved by each of three methods, namely:
7
1)
distribution of the nozzle exit area in the shape of a long rectan-
gular slot; i. e. , increased aspect rati o of the nozzle exit plan-
form. (nozzle no. 6 )
2)
introduction of l ateral components into the flow pri or to discharge
from the nozzle, as is accomplished with the delta nozzles.
(nozzles no. 7, 8, and 9)
subdivision of the nozzle into several el ements (nozzles no. 10,
11, and 12).
3)
The data of figure 9a indicate al so that dynamic pressure degradation of
the free jet wake is influenced only to a smal l degree by disturbances or turbu-
lence introduced into the stream pri or to discharge from the nozzle. Two pos-
sible explanations for these resul ts may be considered:
1)
the scal e and intensity of the turbulence generated in the
nozzle were of such a smal l magnitude and persi sted for such
a short ti me that the jet was essentially free of turbulence at
the nozzle exit.
2) turbulence of the scal e, intensity, and orientation that was
generated in the nozzle does not play a significant part in the
j et wake mixing process.
Of the two possible explanations offered, the l atter appears to be more plaus-
ible.
Comparison of the resul ts of nozzles no. 1 and no. 5, figures 9a and 9b,
shows that changes of the nozzle exit planform from a ci rcul ar to a square shape
had a very mi nor effect upon the dynamic degradation characteri sti cs of the
wake. I ncreasing the nozzle exit aspect rati o from 1.0 to 6.0, nozzles no. 5
and 6, figure 9b, significantly changed the dynamic pressure degradation char-
acteri sti cs of the rectangular nozzles, but increasing the aspect ratio from 2. 0
to 5. 0, nozzles no. 7 and 9, figure 9c, for delta nozzles with a 30" divergence
angle made a much smal l er change in degradation characteri sti cs. In this case,
the effect of divergence angle dominates al l other variables in determining dy-
namic pressure degradation.
An interesting effect associated with multiple element nozzles is shown
in figure 9d. Comparison of the resul ts of nozzles no. 10, 11, and 12 shows a
crossi ng of the degradation curves at distances of ten equivalent nozzle diam-
eters or more; these resul ts are believed to be caused by a merging of the
smal l j et segments into a very much l arger j et wake. The resulting degradation
rate of the l arge j et is much l ess than that of the smal l er j ets, consequently,
the degradation curves exhibit a "plateau" in which very little reduction of max-
imum dynamic pressures occur. Note that this effect is much l ess pronounced
8
I
with nozzle no. 11than with nozzle no. 12; this is a reflection of the f ewer num-
ber of segments used in nozzle no. 11.
During free j et wake surveys of ci rcul ar nozzle no. 1, it was noted that a
distinct instability in the shape and degradation characteri sti cs of the wake oc-
curred at pressure rati os of approximately 2.1 or greater. At the higher noz-
zle pressure rati os, the j et wake appeared to divide into a two-lobe pattern
which would rotate slowly around the longitudinal axis of the nozzle.
havior was apparently associated with the appearance of shock wave formations
at the nozzle exit, and it was noted that any obstruction immediately adjacent to
the nozzle exit would change the occurrence and shape of the lobed jet wake pat-
tern.
instability characteri sti cs. ) This instability, although completely reproducible
with the ci rcul ar nozzle no. 1, was never observed with any of the other noz-
zles.
This be-
(For example, placing a hand near the nozzle would alter the jet wake
Because of the instability noted above, jet wake surveys were completed
for a range of nozzle pressure rati os from 1.1 to 2 . 4 with ci rcul ar nozzle no.
1, as shown in figure loa. In addition to the usual jet wake surveys at selected
nozzle pressure rati os, a variable pressure survey was conducted with the
probe located at the point in the jet wake where maximum values had been pre-
viously measured f or the various survey stations; this data i s shown al so in
figure loa.
Because instabilities of the type noted above were not observed with the
other nozzles, only limited jet wake surveys at nozzle pressure rati os other
than 1.5 were taken. These resul ts are presented in figure 10b through 10d.
J et wake contour maps of equal dynamic pressure levels were constructed
for various nozzles operating at a pressure rati o of 1.5 by cross-plotting data
from traverses of the free jet wake at various stations downstream of the noz-
zle; these contour maps are shown in figure 11.
length of the dynamic pressure contours appears to be associated with increased
width or dispersion of the jet wake. The contour maps show that non-circular
jet wakes apparently mix in such a manner that the jet wake approaches a cir-
cular cross-section at some point well downstream of the nozzle.
teri sti c may be seen in the plot for the rectangular nozzle, AR =6, figure l l c,
and the delta nozzle, AR =5, f l =5", figure l l d. The strong influence of delta
nozzle divergence angle is apparent in the plot for nozzle no. 9, AR =5, B =
30, figure l l e: the jet wake does not approach symmetry within the range f or
which data are available.
In general, reduction of the
This charac-
I t should be noted here that the edge of the j et designated by the symbol
qz/ % 3 0 exi sts only as a threshold sensitivity for the equipment used in the
wake surveys. Although the boundaries determined in this manner are some-
what fictitious, they provide a basis of comparison of jet spreading character-
is tics. While not determined precisely, the threshold sensitivity of the equip-
ment appeared to be on the order of 0. 0075 psi, which is 0.1'2 of dynamic
9
I
pressure at nozzle exit for the test condition shown. In considering the above
profile maps, as wel l as the similitude plots which follow, it should be noted
that individual measurements in turbulent flow may vary widely with time. Be-
cause of random variation of both instantaneous and mean values with time,
some latitude in interpretation of the resul ts obtained at specific points is pos-
sible. In general, all data were interpreted in a manner which would provide
conservative values of dynamic pressure degradation.
The resul ts obtained from the free jet wake surveys were analyzed in a
manner si mi l ar to that of references 6 through 10 to determine the regions of
the j et where similitude of the mixing processes existed. If similitude exi sts,
velocity profiles at various distances from the nozzle can be made congruent
by suitable choice of velocity and width scale factors, and the analysis of the
mixing region wi l l be considerably simplified.
shown by means of numerous experimental and theoretical studies during the
past fifty years (references 6 through 10) that the wake of ci rcul ar j ets is char-
acteri zed by velocity distributions which are approximately similar at l arge
distances from the nozzle. As a resul t of this similitude, the development of
a ci rcul ar jet may be described by specifying the variation of velocity along the
longitudinal axi s of the jet, together with a typical l ateral dimension related to
the spreading of the jet. Previous investigators have successfully extended
analyses of this type to the jet wake of two-dimensional sl ot nozzles, and it was
believed that the resul ts of the current tests presented an opportunity to inves-
tigate whether similitude exists f or a variety of nozzle shapes with three-
dimensional jet wakes. Although velocity rati os are normally used in si mi l ar-
ity studies, the current analyses were conducted using the data as available in
terms of dynamic pressure rati os.
Previ ous investigators have
Establishment of similitude in this manner requi res knowledge of (1) the
transverse distance from the jet axi s to the initiation of the active mixing
region; i .e., distance to the outer extremity of the core or "apparent coreTf
region, and (2) location of a consistent reference point somewhere in the mix-
ing region. The reference point commonly chosen is the point where the veloc-
ity is one-half that of the maximum velocity measured during each traverse:
the corresponding reference point in the present tests was selected as the point
where dynamic pressure was twenty-five percent of the maximum value meas-
ured during each probe traverse across the jet. Fi gure 12 i l l ustrates the geom-
etry used to specify each of the above quantities, together with a plot illustrating
the variation of the core, or "apparent core,
nozzles.
width for various non-circular
The core is defined to be that region in the center of the jet wake in which
the velocity or dynamic pressure is undiminished f rom that at the nozzle exit,
i . e., that area in which no mixing has occurred. The "apparent core" is de-
fined to be that region exclusive of the core in which the velocity or dynamic
pressure is essentially constant and equal in value to the maximum value which
may be measured at any given axial distance from the nozzle. The values of
velocity or dynamic pressure in the "apparent core" are always less than those
10
in the core region.
progression of mixing along two or more coordinate axes toward the center of
the jet.
The "apparent core" provides a means of describing the
The location of the twenty-five percent reference contours of dynamic
pressure, together with the dynamic pressure similarity profiles , are shown
for all nozzles in figure 13. From these plots, it is apparent that a high degree
of two-dimensional similitude does exi st in the mixing region of each of the noz-
zles. It is al so apparent from the twenty-five percent reference contours that
these contours were often quite non-linear with respect to distance from the
nozzle exit. Greatest non-linearities were noted for the delta nozzles and the
segmented nozzles, which is an indication that the high rates of dynamic
pressure degradation were obtained from the three-dimensional aspects of these
nozzle designs. It should be noted that similitude does not appear to be pre-
served in regions where merging of two or more jets occur; i.e. , near the axis
of the twelve-segment nozzle, figure 13j.
The resul ts shown in figure 13 thus indicate that mixing processes in
non-circular nozzles may be considered si mi l ar in the sense that the non-
dimensionalized dynamic pressure distribution of the mixing regions for all
nozzles may be approximated by a single curve. However, the utility of this
finding is virtually negated by the non-linear characteri sti cs of the "apparent
core" region and the twenty-five percent dynamic pressure reference contours.
Further study of methods to predi ct the boundary of the "apparent core" and the
twenty-five percent dynamic pressure reference contour wi l l be necessary in
order to properly define three-dimensional jet wake characteri sti cs.
Other information rel ated to the mixing processes may al so be derived
from the twenty-five percent reference contours.
directly related to the spread of these reference contours, and it i s apparent
that jet spreading does not occur uniformly along the various coordinate axes.
This is shown in figure 13d, 13e, 13f, and 13g. I t is readily apparent that the
j et wakes of nozzle no. 6, figure 13d, and nozzle no. 8, figure 13f, approach
symmetry at some point downstream of the nozzle, while the jet wakes of noz-
zle no. 7, figure 13e, and nozzle no. 9, figure 13g, do not approach symmetry
within the distances downstream of the nozzle for which data are available.
These resul ts with nozzles no. 7 and no. 9 again demonstrate the strong influ-
ence of l arge nozzle divergence angles upon j et wake spreading and degradation
character i s ti cs .
The spread of the jet wake i s
The data shown f or nozzle no. 10, figure 13h, nozzle no. 11, figure 13i,
and nozzle no. 12, figure 13j, i l l ustrate some of the variations of jet wake
spreading and degradation which may be encountered with multiple element noz-
zles. In these plots, the jet wake from a single sector of the various nozzles is
analyzed in the same manner as was done with the preceding nine nozzles. How-
ever, the unsymmetrical shape of the jet wake led to an analysis of the inner and
outer portion of the jet separately (the terms "inner" and "outer" are related to
the longitudinal axi s of the nozzle, i. e., that part of the pie-shaped j et wake he-
l l
tween the longitudinal axi s of the nozzle and the point of maximum dynamic
pressure was termed the "inner" region while the remaining truncated sector of
the jet wake was termed the outer region of the wake).
region of the j et showed a distinctly non-linear mixing characteri sti c which i s
associated with the merging of the jets near the longitudinal axi s of the nozzle.
The disappearance of the twenty-five percent reference contour is an indication
that the center of the wake for the complete nozzle had merged into one region
with all dynamic pressures greater than twenty-five percent of the maximum
dynamic pressure which existed at that distance from the nozzle. From figures
13h, 13i, and 13j, it may be seen that merging of the j ets occurred more rapid-
ly as the number of nozzle segments became l arger. It is al so significant that
the spread of the twenty-five percent reference contours for the outer mixing
region became less as the number of nozzle segments became l arger. In this
respect, the spreading characteri sti cs of a nozzle with a l arge number of seg-
ments may approach the spreading characteri sti cs of a ci rcul ar nozzle.
In parti cul ar, the inner
Ground Plane Surveys
Surveys of the dynamic pressure over the ground plane were obtained with
a traversing, five-element, total pressure rake. Static pressure taps were al so
positioned flush with the ground plane surface at five radial locations, figure 7.
The maximum dynamic pressures measured adjacent to the ground plane are
shown in figure 14, together with the stagnation pressures sensed by the pressure
tap at the center of the ground plane.
Because of the limited number of radial stations, the location and magni-
tude of maximum dynamic pressure adjacent to the ground plane were not
identified. However, stagnation pressure measured at the ground plane provides
a di rect measure of the maximum possible value of dynamic pressure which may
exist over the ground plane.
Nozzle pressure rati o was found to have a very minor effect upon dynamic
pressure degradation, figure 14a.
observed in the free jet surveys was confirmed by a corresponding reduction in
the stagnation or dynamic pressures measured on or above the ground plane,
figures 14a to 14m. Data for the segmented nozzles indicate that the maximum
dynamic pressure along the ground plane is represented by the centerline stagna-
tion pressure only at Z/De greater than 10. At the cl oser ground plane locations
maximum stagnation pressure occurs at some radial distance from the center.
The reduction in dynamic pressures previously
The distribution of dynamic pressures above the ground is presented in
figures 15 and 16. Fi gure 15 again illustrates the smal l effect of nozzle pres-
sure ratio upon the dynamic pressures at the ground surface, while figure 16
shows the variation of dynamic pressure distribution above the ground plane for
various nozzles at a pressure rati o of 1.5. I t is apparent from these plots that
dynamic pressure distributions above the ground plane for non-circular nozzles
departed substantially from the profiles associated with conventional ci rcul ar
nozzles.
12
The plots of figure 16 show the development of dynamic pressure profiles
for various axial and radial distances from the nozzle and ground plane.
apparent that the combined effects of free stream mixing and boundary l ayer
growth contribute to a rapid degradation of dynamic pressures in a radial direc-
tion from the point of jet wake impingement on the ground plane.
nozzles, highest dynamic pressures in the radial flow over the ground plane
were found at heights of 0.05 nozzle di ameter or less above the surface of the
ground plane. However, f or non-circular nozzles , the highest dynamic pres-
sures in the radial flow over the ground were found at heights of 0.07 nozzle
diameter or higher above the ground plane. The data for nozzle no. 12, figure
16m: when compared with that of nozzle no. 1, fi gure 12a, show particularly
well changes of distribution of dynamic pressure over the ground plane that may
be anticipated as the resul t of i ncreased mixing pri or to impingement with the
ground surface.
may al so exhibit differences of shape and maximum values, depending upon the
coordinate axis surveyed. These characteri sti cs are particularly evident in the
plots for nozzle no. 6, figure 16f, nozzle no. 7, figure 16g, nozzle no. 8, fig-
ure lGh, nozzle no. 9, figure 16i, nozzle no. 10, figure 16j, and nozzle no. 11,
figure 16k.
impingement with the ground surface will be reflected in a much thicker flow
profile over the ground surface.
minimize erosion of loosely held ground surfaces.
I t is
For ci rcul ar
The profiles of dynamic pressure for non-circular nozzles
The figures al so indicate that coalescence of the j ets pri or to
A profile of this type may be desirable to
DISCUSSION
In order to present more concisely some of the resul ts of these tests,
five nozzles were selected f or comparison of the thrust and free j et wake dy-
namic pressure degradation characteri sti cs, figure 17. Effective thrust coeffi-
cient shows a smal l variation with nozzle pressure ratio, while dynamic pres-
sure degradation vari es principally as a function of axial distance from the
nozzle exit to the plane of measurement. Both effective thrust coefficient and
dynamic pressure degradation show l arge variation with nozzle configuration;
however, the changes related to dynamic pressure degradation are much l arger
than are the changes in effective thrust coefficient. For example; at a nozzle
pressure ratio of 1.5 and a distance of four di ameters from the nozzle exit, the
twelve segment nozzle was found to reduce dynamic pressures in the jet wake
by more than eighty percent of that of the ci rcul ar nozzle, while effective veloc-
ity coefficient was reduced by only three and one-half percent. In the case of
the delta nozzle ( f i =5", AR =5.0) at a nozzle pressure ratio of 1.5 and a dis-
tance of four di ameters from the nozzle exit, the results show a fifty percent
reduction in dynamic pressure with l ess than one percent reduction in effective
velocity coefficient. I t may be noted that the delta nozzle ( @ =30", AR =5) was
also very effective in achieving dynamic pressure degradation of more than 80'X :
however, the effective velocity coefficient was reduced by approximately seven
percent with this nozzle design.
13
Further analyses of the interrelationship of dynamic pressure degrada-
tion and thrust are shown in figure 18. Using the difference between the free
j et dynamic pressure of a ci rcul ar nozzle and that of other nozzles as a cri te-
rion, it may be seen that maximum reductions of dynamic pressure relative to
that of the ci rcul ar nozzle are achieved in the range of four to eight nozzle di-
ameters from the nozzle exit. Significantly, the greatest reductions are
achieved at the correspondingly cl oser locations with respect to the nozzle exit.
Figure 18 al so indicates that a l arge reduction of dynamic pressures may be
achieved with smal l thrust l osses. For two nozzles tested, no. 6 and no. 11,
no thrust l osses were i ncurred despite the fact that dynamic pressures were
greatly reduced from that of the ci rcul ar nozzle. Within certain limits, it may
be concluded that dynamic pressure degradation of the free jet wake i s virtually
independent of nozzle thrust performance.
pressure degradation, a reduction of nozzle thrust is indicated by the data.
For the l argest values of dynamic
Correlation of free jet wake dynamic pressure degradation characteri sti cs
as a function of nozzle exit peri meter i s shown in figure 19.
pressure degradation appears to i ncrease with increasing nozzle exit peri meter,
it i s clear that other factors al so exert a very l arge influence upon dynamic
pressure degradation. This effect is shown most cl earl y in the data for delta
nozzles no. 8 and 9 of figure 19. Both nozzle no. 8 and no. 9 had essentially
equal values of exit peri meter, but the nozzle divergence angle for nozzle no. 8
was 5", compared with a corresponding divergence angle of 30" for nozzle no. 9.
The curves were fai red through data points of nozzles no. 7 and no. 9 because
both nozzles had the same divergence angle of 30".
Although dynamic
During analysis of the data, i t was found that the curves of figure 19a were
not completely defined by the rectangular nozzles tested in the present program.
Additional data, shown by the flagged symbols in fi gure 12a, were obtained from
reference 4 by computing j et wake dynamic pressures, then extrapolating the
resul ts to a nozzle pressure rati o of 1.5 to be consistent with the other nozzle
data.
Replotting the data of figure 19a, with aspect rati o of the nozzle exit as a
pri mary variable, produced the resul ts shown in figure 20.
from reference 4 were utilized again as shown by the flagged symbols in figure
20. I t is clear from figure 20 that increasing aspect rati o resul ts in lower
dynamic pressures in the exhaust jet wake: however, the change of dynamic
pressure as a function of aspect rati o becomes progressively less as aspect
ratio i s increased.
Extrapolated data
By combining data from figures 19 and 20, it was found that the effect of
delta nozzle divergence angle could be represented by the curves shown in figure
21. It is apparent from these curves that increasing nozzle divergence angle
provides corresponding lower dynamic pressures in the exhaust jet wake, with
progressively smal l er benefits obtained as nozzle divergence angle i ncreases.
14
A comparison of maximum dynamic pressures in the free j et wake with the
maximum dynamic pressures or stagnation pressures measured on or adjacent
to the ground plane is shown in figure 22.
that the ground plane did not substantially change the free jet mixing character-
istics.
those nozzles with very rapid jet wake degradation characteri sti cs were l east
affected by the presence of the ground plane.
From these resul ts, it is apparent
Although the effect of the ground plane was si mi l ar for all nozzles tested,
CONCLUDING REMARKS
Several smal l -scal e exhaust nozzle models have been evaluated with re-
spect to nozzle performance and jet wake degradation characteri sti cs. Effec-
tive velocity and mass flow coefficients were found to be related primarily to
internal passage details (i. e. , roughness and wal l divergence), while jet wake
degradation characteri sti cs were related to nozzle exit planform, divergence of
the flow at the nozzle exit, and subdivision of the j et wake into smal l er ele-
ments. The present resul ts indicate that additional dynamic pressure degrada-
tion may be achieved by nozzle designs which combine all three of these factors,
(i. e. , nozzle exit planform, flow divergence, and subdivisions of the wake).
Although thrust l osses do not appear to be directly related to dynamic degrada-
tion characteri sti cs, it appears that nozzle designs for maximum dynamic
pressure degradation wi l l be somewhat l arger, wi l l have more wetted surface
area, and wi l l be more susceptible to internal flow l osses than ci rcul ar nozzles.
Nozzles which incorporate flow divergence (as exemplified by the delta nozzles)
wi l l be penalized al so by the cosine law of vectored thrust components.
The present resul ts indicate that a high degree of si mi l ari ty exi sts
throughout the free jet mixing region of each nozzle; however, strong three-
dimensional effects make prediction of the boundaries and reference contours
of the mixing region difficult.
The close correlation between free jet wake characteri sti cs and the dy-
namic pressure imposed upon the ground plane has been demonstrated, and i t
is evident that any significant reduction of dynamic pressures in the free jet
wake wi l l produce a corresponding reduction of the dynamic pressures imposed
upon the ground surface.
Airplane Division, The Boeing Company
Renton, Washington
October 25, 1963
15
REFERENCES
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10,
Kuhn, Richard E. : An Investigation to Determine Conditions Under Which
Downwash from VTOL Ai rcraft Will Start Surface Erosion From Various
Types of Terrai n. NASA TN D-56, September 1959.
Morse, A. : VTOL Bownwash I mpingement Study, Summary Report.
TREC Technical Report 61-37, Hiller Ai rcraft Corp., August 1960.
Grotz, C. A. : Simulated VTOL Exhaust I mpingement on Ground Surfaces.
D2-6791, The Boeing Company, J une 1960.
Laurence, J ames C., and Benninghaff, J ean M. : Turbulence Measure-
ments in Multiple I nterfering Ai r J ets. NACA TN 4029, December 1957.
Coles, Willard D. : J et Engine Exhaust Noi se From Slot Nozzles. NASA
TN D-60, September 1959.
Prandtl, L. : The Mechanics of Viscous Fluids. (Included in Durand's
Aerodynamic Theory, Volume 111, Division G, 1935, J ulius Springer,
Berlin. )
Schlichting, H. : Boundary Layer Theory, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1955.
Townsend, A. A. : The Structure of Turbulent Shear Flow. Cambridge
University Press, London, 1956.
J ohannesen, N. H. : Further Results on the Mixing of Free Axially Sym-
metri cal J ets of Mach Number 1.40. A.R.C. 20, 281, F. M. 2817,
N. 88. University of Manchester, May 1959.
Kolpin, Marc A. : Flow in the Mixing Region of a J et. ASRL TR 92-3,
Massachusetts I nstitute of Technologv. J une 1962.
16
I
A.
B.
C.
D.
PARALLEL SECTION (ADAPTER FOR INSERTS)
SMOOTH I NSERT (USED WITH NOZZLE CONFIGURATION NO. 1)
SANDPAPER I NSERT (USED WITH NOZZLE CONFIGURATION NO. 2)
VORTEX GENERATOR I NSERT (USED WITH NOZZLE CONFIGURATION NO. 3)
E. CONVERGENT SECTION (USED WITH NOZZLE CONFIGURATIONS NO. 1
THROUGH NO. 4)
F.
NOTE:
CONFIGURATION NO. 4 CONSISTED OF NOZZLE CONFIGURATION NO. 1
TURBULENCE RINGS (USED WITH NOZZLE CONFIGURATION NO. 4)
WITH THE ADDITION OF THE TURBULENCE RINGS UPSTREAM OF THE CON-
VERGENT SECTION
Figure 1. - Circular nozzle configurations.
17
NO. 7
NO. IO
NO. 5
RECTANGULAR NOZZLES
NO. 8
DELTA NOZZLES
NO. 1 1
SEGMENTED NOZZLES
NO. 6
NO. 9
NO. 12
Figure 2. - Non-circular nozzle configurations.
18
(X AXIS)
-(Z AXIS)- - -@ - (V AXIS)
I
DIAMETER
I
INSERT 4
INSERT 1 INSERT 2 INSERT 3
(a) CIRCULAR NOZZLE AND INSERTS
Figure 3. - Nozzle configurations.
------I--
5
6
7
8
9
+
0 2.66 2.66
0 6.51 1.08
30" 3.76 1.88
5" 5.94 1.19
30" 5.94 1.19
(X AXIS)
I
I
- L
- - w
NOZZLE
NUMBER I f l I L I w
b) RECTANGULAR SLOT NOZZLES
AXIS)
Figure 3. - Continued.
8.0 t
DIAMETER
I
10
11
12
I - -+(Z AXIS) - - &
2 36"
4 18"
12 6"
AXIS)
' \NOZZLE
I SEGMENT
(X AXIS)
NOZZLE I NUMBER OF 1
NUMBER SEGMENTS
(c) MULTIPLE SEGMENT NOZZLES
Figure 3. - Concluded.
BELLMOUTH INSTRUMENTATION TRANSITION NOZZLE
12 SECTION =j= SECTION
MAXIMUM ENVELOPE,
NON-CIRCULAR NOZZLES
CIRCULAR NOZZLES
4
CIRCULAR NOZZLE
I NSERT LOCATION
(NOZZLE 1, 2, 8. 3)
TURBULENCE RINGS (NOZZLE NO. 4)
I
1
I
1
- I
I
I
I
I
I
7-
- CIRCULAR NOZZLES
(EXCLUDING INSERTS) -
NON-CIRCULAR NOZZLES
-
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
L
L
16
28 32 40
0 4
DISTANCE FROM PLENUM - INCHES
Figure 4. - Typical nozzle cross-sectional area and Mach number progression.
22
I
Figure 5. - Schematic of test rig and facilities.
TEST RIG PLENUM CHAMBER
GROUND PLANE WITH
TOTAL PRESSURE RAKE
THRUST MEASURING RING
WITH STRAIN GAGES
Figure 6.- Photographs of test rig.
24
GROUND
(a) J ET WAKE TRAVERSING PROBE
PLENUM CHAMBER
24.75" OD; 20" ID
TRAVERSING J ET
I
(b) GROUND PLANE PRESSURE
INSTRUMENTATION
WAKE PROBE
z- - \P= _ _ _ _ _
MOVEABLE GROUN
PLANE (56 IN. DIA
( c ) TEST RIG ARRANGEMENT
Figure 7. - Schematic of t est ri g and instrumentation.
25
U
0)
-
U
3 .92
9
Lu
2
L
.88
U
Lu
U
L
3
0
NOZZLE PRESSURE RATIO, p, /p,
n
(a) CIRCULAR NOZZLES
Figure 8. - Variation of effective velocity and mass flow coefficients with nozzle pressure ratio.
26
U
u
I-
6
2
U U
E
>.
e
U
9
w
w
c
>
L
t:
LL
LL w
1 .oo
.96
.92
1.00
.96
VU
I-
5 .92
2
U U
E
2 .a4
3 .E8
9
U
v)
. EO
1 .o
I
I-
7-
- -l-=-
-- I
I
RECTANGULAR NOZZLES
- - - - - - -
----- DELTA NOZZLES
I
1. 2 1.4 I i i i i i i 1.6 1 .E 2.0 2.2 2.4
NOZZLE PRESSURE RATIO, ptn/p,
(b) RECTANGULAR AND DELTA NOZZLES
Figure 8. - Continued.
27
P)
U
I-
5
8
L!
LL LL
>
c
U
9
W
>
W
I-
2
E
U
U W
1 .oo
LL
U - 96
c
L!
E
.92
i
3
3 .88
LL
vr
.84
.80
1 .o 1.2 1.4 1
N O Z Z L E PRESSURE R A T I O, ptn/p,
( c ) SEGMENT ED N O Z Z L E S
I
1-
I
I -
I
I
I
2.2 2.4
Figure 8. - Concluded.
28
(a) CIRCULAR NOZZLE
I I I I
1 .o
.8
.6
.4
C
= -
\ . L
E
0-
C
@
5
2
c
W e
v)
W
E LL
2 1.01
2
Z
>
n
.8
.6
. 4
. 2
0
0
I rrI
7
I
I
f
I
r
I
5 10
+ I
I
T r
T'
NOZZLE CONFIGURATION
SMOOTH THROAT
SANDPAPER
VORTEX GENERATORS
TURBULENCE RINGS
P+"/P, ='- 5
I I I I I I
I I7-l I I I
(b) RECTANGULAR NOZZLE
NOZZLE CONFIGURATION
0 . 5 R = l
6 & = 6
45 50
AXIAL DISTANCE FROM NOZZLE EXIT/EQUIVALENT CIRCULAR NOZZLE DIAMETER, Z/De
Figure 9.- J et wake dynamic pressure degradation.
29
(c) DELTA NOZZLES
1.
C
0-
x
0
E
0-
(d) SEGMENTED NOZZLES
AXIAL DISTANCE FROM NOZZLE EXIT/EQUIVALENT CIRCULAR NOZZLE DIAMETER, Z/De
Figure 9.- Concluded.
30
....... _. . . ... ..
IO 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 d I:
. . -
NOZZLE P, /Po
n- __
1 2.36
1 2.36
1 2.01
2.01
1
2.01
I
1.50
1
1
1
-
-
~
-
-
1.271
-
1.097
-
AXIAL DISTANCE FROM NOZZLE EXIT/EQUIVALENT CIRCULAR NOZZLE DIAMETER , Z/D,
1.2 1.4 1.6 1 .8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.
NOZZLE PRESSURE RATIO , ptn /po
(a) CIRCULAR NOZZLE NO. 1
Figure 10. - J et wake dynamic pressure degradation for various nozzle pressure ratios,
31
0 5
0
I-
*
30
NOZZLE
0
0
35
6
6
p t /Po
n-
2.01
1.50
45
AXIAL DISTANCE FROM NOZZLE EXIT/EQUIVALENT CIRCULAR NOZZLE DIAMETER , Z/D,
Q
e
W
i
I
I
1
I
I
i
I
I
2.2-
NOZZLE PRESSURE RATIO p
2.4
/ Po
.~
UD.5
0
2
4
6
8
10
12.5
15
17.5
20
25
30
40
1
I
I
2.8
(b) RECTANGULAR NO L ZE NO. 6 ( A l =6)
Figure 10. - Continued.
32
I II
NOZZLE
~
X
0
0
i
I
I
I
I
- I
35
3
15
3
2
.--c
2. 5
45 50
AXIAL DISTANCE FROM NOZZLE EXIT/EQUIVALENT CIRCULAR NOZZLE DIAMETER , Z/D,
2 1. 0-
$ 1
2 1
*81
I
I
I
* 2 1
0 - I
.41
1 .o
~
1
2.2 2.4 2. 6 2.8
NOZZLE PRESSURE RATIO
pt n / p,
(c) DELTA NOZZLE NO. 9 ( A =5,@= 30")
Figure 10. - Continued.
33
NOZZLE
Pt n- /Po
2.36
X
0
0
12
12
12
I
I
I
i
I
2.01
1.50
5 10 1
AXIAL DISTANCE FROM NOZZLE EXIT/EQUIVALENT CIRCULAR NOZZLE DIAMETER , Z/D,
_ _ .
2
",".
t
0 ~. -1
I
i
1
A:
1
I -
2. 2
El
0
a
P
cl
a
0
10 I1
20
1
I
g
2. 0
:: t 3. 7
2.6
-
2.
NOZZLE PRESSURE RATIO , pt n /po
(d) TWELVE SEGMENT NOZZLE NO. 12
Figure 10. - Concluded.
34
(a) CIRCULAR NOZZLE NO. 1
i
+
F=
I
I
-0.6- li
(b) - RECTANGULAR NOZZLE NO. 5 (A? =1 )
DISTANCE FROM NOZZLE EXIT/EQUIVALENT CIRCULAR NOZZLE DIAMETER , Z/De
Figure 11.- Jet wake dynamic pressure maps.
35
I
X AXIS
DISTANCE FROM NOZZLE EXIT/EQUIVALENT CIRCULAR NOZZLE DIAMETER , Z/De
(c) RECTANGULAR NOZZLE NO. 61_R =6)
Figure 11. - Continued.
36
X AXIS
+4
Y AXIS
i
DISTANCE FROM NOZZLE EXIT/EQUIVALENT CIRCULAR NOZZLE DIAMETER , Z/De
(d) DELTA NOZZLE NO. 8 ( R =5, B= 5')
Figure 11. - Continued.
37
Y AXIS
DISTANCE FROM NOZZLE EXIT/EQUIVALENT CIRCULAR NOZZLE DIAMETER , Z/De
(e) DELTA NOZZLE NO. 9 ( .4=5, b= 30')
Figure 11. - Continued.
38
X AXIS
i r r r r
+4
I 1
0 rrrrr 4 a
DISTANCE FROM NOZZLE EXIT/EQUIVALENT CIRCULAR NOZZLE DIAMETER , Z/De
(f ) TWELVE SEGMENT NOZZLE NO. 12
Figure 11. - Concluded.
39
I
I
. 1---11. . 1 ....
I111111 I I I1 11111111 I 1 I I I I I 1 1 1 I1I I I I1111 1 1 1 1 . 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I ,111. I, -I
GEOMETRY OF MI XI NG ZONE
BOUNDARY OF 0. 25qz
" APPARENT CORE" \ mox
DISTANCE FROM JET AXIS TO BOUNDARY OF " APPARENT CORE'.'
\
AXIAL DISTANCE FROM NOZZLE EXIT/
EQUIVALENT CIRCULAR NOZZLE DIAMETER, Z/ De
A
= 4
Figure 12. - Definition of mixing zone geometry for similarity analyses.
40
25% REFERENCE CONTOURS
0
4
NOZZLE
0 1 SMOOTH CIRCULAR
- 2 SANDPAPER I NSERT
i l
I I
I I
1 1
I I,
I I
1 1
fl
8 12
d
16 20
AXIAL DISTANCE FROM NOZZLE EXIT/EQUIVALENT CIRCULAR NOZZLE DIAMETER - Z/De
SIMILARITY PROFILES NO. 2 SIMILARITY PROFILES NO. 1
0 .4 .a 1.2
TRANSVERSE MI XI NG DISTANCE RATIO, x/x.25qz
(a) CIRCULAR NOZZLES NO. 1 B 2 mOX
Figure 13. - J et wake 25% reference contours and similarity profiles.
1.6 2.0
41
25% REFERENCE CONTOURS
B
E
\"
P
4
E
Iz
Z
>-
n
0-
I-
<
w
In
In w
3
5
9
2.8
2.4
2.0 I 1 1 2 3 VORTEX GENERATORS
4 TURBULENCE RINGS
0 4 ' 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36
AXIAL DISTANCE FROM NOZZLE EXIT/EQUIVALENT CIRCULAR NOZZLE DIAMETER - Z/De
SIMILARITY PROFILES NO. 4 SIMILARITY PROFILES NO. 3
0
TRANSVERSE MIXING DISTANCE RATIO, X/X
(b) CIRCULAR NOZZLES NO. 3 6 4
Figure 13. - Continued.
. 2 q z
ma X
42
25% REFERENCE CONTOURS
d
tt
d
f
tt
/
/
- p+ /Po =1.5
n
I
4 28 8 12 16 36 40
AXIAL DISTANCE FROM NOZZLE EXIT/EQUIVALENT CIRCULAR NOZZLE DIAMETER, Z/D,
SI MI LARl TY PROFILES
1 .o
4
I !
1%
I
I
I
.4
.8
.6
.4
.2
0
0 .8 1.2 1.6 2.0
TRANSVERSE MIXING DISTANCE RATIO, x/X.,
max
4,
( c ) RECTANGULAR NOZZLE NO. 5 (4 =1 )
Figure 13. - Continued.
43
REFERENCE C
12
AXIAL DISTANCE FROM NOZZLE EXIT/EQUIVALENT CIRCULAR NOZZLE DIAMETER , Z/De
.4 .8 1. 2 1.6 2.0
max
TRANSVERSE MI XI NG DISTANCE RATIO
*Ix. 25 q,
max
(d) RECTANGULAR NOZZLE NO. 6 (Al =6 )
ILES Y AXIS
1 . I
1.6 2.0
Figure 13. - Continued.
44
25% REFERENCE CONTOURS
i
- 1 T
0
a 12 4
16 20 24 28 32 36 40
AXIAL DISTANCE FROM NOZZLE EXIT/EQUIVALENT CIRCULAR NOZZLE DIAMETER , Z/De
SlMlLARrTY PROFILES X AXIS
SIMILARITY PROFILES Y AXIS
0
.a 1.2 1.6 .a 1.2 2.0 0 .4 1.6 2.0
TRANSVERSE MI XI NG DISTANCE RATIO
Y/Y.,, 4,
'Ix. 25 q,
max max
(e) DELTA NOZZLE NO. 7 ( R =2.0, d =30)
Figure 13. - Continued.
45
25% REFERENCE CONTOURS
AXIAL DISTANCE FROM NOZZLE EXIT/EQUIVALENT CIRCULAR NOZZLE DIAMETER , Z/De
SIMILARITY PROFILES X AXIS
1
0 .4
SIMILARITY PROFILES Y AXIS
0 .4 .E 1. 2 1.6 2.0
25qz TRANSVERSE MI XI NG DISTANCE RATIO Y/Y.25qz
mox max
(f) DELTA NOZZLE NO. 8 ( R =5.0, p = 5' )
Figure 13. - Continued.
46
25% REFERENCE CONTOURS
0 4 a 12
AXIAL DISTANCE FROM NOZZLE EXIT/EQUIVALENT CIRCULAR NOZZLE DIAMETER , Z/De
SIMILARITY PROFILES Y AXIS SIMILARITY PROFILES X AXIS
"
U
0 .4 .a 1.2 1.6 2.
x'x. 25qz
max
47
25% REFERENCE CONTOURS
AXIAL DISTANCE FROM NOZZLE EXIT/EQUIVALENT CIRCULAR NOZZLE DIAMETER, Z/De
SIMILARITY PROF@
INNER MI XI NG REGION
SIMILARITY PROFILES
OUTER MI XI NG REGION
TRANSVERSE MI XI NG DISTANCE RATIO, X/X
. 25qz
max
(h) TWO SEGMENT NOZZLE NO. IO
P
Figure 13. - Continued.
48
I
25% REFERENCE CONTOURS
IO
8
6
4
2
0
J
Q
2.0
-c I
I
I
I
&
5
I I I I I 1 1 1 1
X - OUTER CONTOUR
-+- INNER CONTOUR
4 8 12
24
-
28 32 36 40
AXIAL DISTANCE FROM NOZZLE EXIT/EQUIVALENT CIRCULAR NOZZLE DIAMETER , Z/De
J
SlMlLARllY PROFILES
I NNER MI XI NG REGION
1.6 1.2
~
I
I
4 P
L L
I
I
.a
SIMILARITY PROFILES
OUTER MI XI NG REGION
a
.4 0 .4 .8 1.2 1.6 2.0
TRANSVERSE MI XI NG DISTANCE RAT10,X/xa25qZ
max
(i)
FOUR SEGMENT NOZZLE NO. I 1
Figure 13. - Continued.
49
25% REFERENCE CONTOURS
" 0 4 a 12 16 20 24
AXIAL DISTANCE FROM NOZZLE EXIT/EQUIVALENT CIRCULAR NOZZLE DIAMETER Z/De
SIMILARITY PROFILES
OUTER MI XI NG REGION
' - O W .8
;r t# -.4
1.2 1.6 2.0 2.0 1.6 1.2 .a .4 0 .4
TRANSVERSE MI XI NG DISTANCE RATIO, X/XeZ5
max
qz
(j) TWELVE SEGMENT NOZZLE NO. 12
Figure 13. - Concluded.
50
1
E
0-
\
E
m
0-
2 4 6 8 10
DISTANCE FROM CENTER OF GROUND PLANE/
EQUIVALENT CIRCULAR NOZZLE DIAMETER , R/De
( 0) CIRCULAR NOZZLE NO. 1
0 5
El 10
0 20
p /p =1.5
4 30
+" O
FLAG SYMBOLS (I) =STAGNATI ON
PRESSURES ON SURFACE OF
GROUND PLANE.
Figure 14. - Maximum ground plane dynamic pressure at various distances from the nozzle.
51
(b) CIRCULAR NOZZLE !0,2
1
C
\"
X
0)
U
I
2
4
5
n
n
I %
0
-
(c) CIRCULAR NOZZLE NO. 3
DISTANCE FROM CENTER OF GROUND PLANE/
EQUIVALENT CIRCULAR NOZZLE DIAMETER r R/D,
0 5
El 10
0 20
4 30
p , / p =1.5
n o
FLAG SYMBOLS ( F ) =STAGNATION
PRESSURES ON SURFACE OF
GROUND PLANE.
Z/De
0 5
El 10
0 20
a 30
p+ /Po= 1.5
n
Figure 14. - Continued.
52
(d) CIRCULAR NOZZLE NO. 4
0 5
El IO
0 20
4 30
FLAG SYMBOLS ( f ) =STAGNATI ON
PRESSURES ON SURFACE OF
GROUND PLANE.
(e) RECTANGULAR NOZZLE NO. 5 ( A ? =1 )
Z/D
e
0 5
a 10
0 20
4 30
DISTANCE FROM CENTER OF GROUND PLANE/
EQUIVALENT CIRCULAR NOZZLE DIAMETER , R/D.
Figure 14. - Continued.
53
X AXIS
Y AXIS
0 1 I Y Y I I 1 -
0 2 4 6 8 1
DISTANCE FROM CENTER OF GROUND PLANE/
I
EQUIVALENT CIRCULAR NOZZLE DIAMETER, R/D,
(f) RECTANGULAR NOZZLE NO. 6 ( R =6 )
FLAG SYMBOLS (I ) =STAGNATION
PRESSURES ON SURFACE OF
GROUND PLANE.
0 5
El 10
0 20
d 30
Figure 14. - Continued.
54
X AXIS
I
I '
I
I
I
I
I
I
fL
-.$id
2
Y AXIS
4 6 8 10
DISTANCE FROM CENTER OF GROUND PLANE/
EQUIVALENT CIRCULAR NOZZLE DIAMETER, R/D,
(9) DELTA NOZZLE NO. 7 ( R =2, B = 30')
Pt /Po= l.5
n
FLAG SYMBOLS ( r ) =STAGNATI ON
PRESSURES ON SURFACE OF
GROUND PLANE.
Pt /Po=
n
Figure 14. - Continued.
55
X AXIS
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
+
Y AXIS
2 4 6 8
0
0
DISTANCE FROM CENTER OF GROUND PLANE,'
EQUIVALENT CIRCULAR NOZZLE DIAMETER, R/D,
(h) DELTA NOZZLE NO. 8 ( ,& =5, /? =5')
Pt /Po = .5
n
FLAG SYMBOLS ( P) =STAGNATION
PRESSURES ON SURFACE OF
GROUND PLANE.
Z/De
0 5
El 10
0 20
30
P, /Po =l.5
n
Figure 14. - Continued.
56
X AXIS
1 .o
.8
.6
C
\ =
g .4
I+!
2
4 . 2
n
Z
3
8 0
w W
>
0
e
Q,
Lu .1.0
2
z
u_ -8
3
5
2 .4
I-
w
v) W
Z
>
.6
3
X
. 2
0'
0 2
Y AXIS
4 6 8 10
DISTANCE FROM CENTER OF GROUND PLANE/
EQUIVALENT CIRCULAR NOZZLE DIAMETER, R/De
(i)
DELTA NOZZLE NO. 9 ( R =5, 6 =30)
0 5
El IO
0 20
P, /Po= 1.5
n
FLAG SYMBOLS (4 =STAGNATION
PRESSURES O N SURFACE OF
GROUND PLANE.
me
0 5
El 10
0 20
P, / P =1.5
n o
Figure 14. - Continued.
57
I
1
C
0-
\
X
E
m
0-
W
Z
n
Z
3
4
Q
IIIIIIIIII I I I I
X AXIS
C T -
s!
0
Y AXIS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
- -
DISTANCE FROM CENTER OF GROUND PLANE/
EQUIVALENT CIRCULAR NOZZLE DIAMETER I R/D,
(j) TWO SEGMENT NOZZLE NO. 10
Z/De
0 5
I3 10
0 20
4 30
Ptn/P0 = . 5
FLAG SYMBOLS (1) =STAGNATION
PRESSURES ON SURFACE OF
GROUND PLANE.
Figure 14. - Continued.
58
X AXIS
1
-
8 10
DISTANCE FROM CENTER OF GROUND PLANE/
EQUIVALENT CIRCULAR NOZZL E DIAMETER, R/De
(k) FOUR SEGMENT NOZZLE NO. 11
0 5
10
0 20
4 30
Ptn/Po = - 5
FLAG SYMBOLS ( I ) =STAGNATI ON
PRESSURES O N SURFACE OF
GROUND PLANE.
Z/De
0 5
0 10
0 20
p, /Po= 1.5'
4 30
n
Figure 14. - Continued.
59
X AXIS
I AXIS
r r i
2 4
. -
.
i
3L 1
I
I
DISTANCE FROM CENTER OF GROUND PLANE/
EQUIVALENT CIRCULAR NOZZLE DIAMETER I R/De
(m) TWELVE SEGMENT NOZZLEXO. 12
me
0 5
El 10
0 20
4 30
pt / Po= 1.5
n
FLAG SYMBOLS ( r) =STAGNATION
PRESSURES ON SURFACE OF
GROUND PLANE.
Z/De
0 5
El 10
0 20
pt /Po =1.5
a 30
n
Figure 14. - Concluded.
60
Z/ De =5
Z/ De =5
DYNAMI C PRESSURE RATIO OVER GROUND PLANE , qg/qn
CIRCULAR NOZZLE NO. 1
R/De
0 2
a 3
0 5
4 9
pt /p,= 1.5
n
R /De
0 2
a 3
0 5
4 9
pt/P,= 2.0
n
Figure 15. - Effect of nozzle pressure ratio upon dynamic pressure distribution
adjacent to ground plane.
61
I
(a) CIRCULAR NOZZLE NO. 1
Z/D =10 Z/De =5
(b) CIRCULAR NOZZLE NO. 2
z/D, =5 Z/De =IO
0 .2 . 3 .4 .5 0 . 2 . 3 .4
Z/D, =20
Z/De =20
0 . 2
DYNAMIC PRESSURE RATIO OVER GROUND PLANE, qg/q,
Figure 16. - Dynamic pressure distribution adjacent to ground plane for various nozzles and
distances of the ground plane from nozzle exit.'
UD, =30
Z/De =30
0 .2
Q,
w
VD, =5
.4 I - - - - - - -
V
I-
f
a
2
2
VDe =5
E
h a 4
Z
d
n
. 3
13
;
9 .2
s
8
5 . 1
Z
Y
n
0
0 . 1 . 2 . 3 .4 . 5
(c) CIRCULAR NOZZLE NO. 3
Z/De =10
(d) CIRCULAR NOZZLE NO. 4
YD, =10
DYNAMIC PRESSURE RATIO OVER GROUND PLANE, qg/q,
Figure 16. - Continued.
Z/De =20
I - - - -
Z/De =20
. 1 . 2
&De =30
vDe =30
.1 .2
(e) RECTANGULAR NOZZLE NO. 5 ( A =1 )
Z/De =5 Z/D, =IO
0 .2 . 3 . 4 .5 0 . 1 . 2 . 3 .4
DYNAMIC PRESSURE RATIO OVER GROUND PLANE , qg/q,
UD, =20 Z/De =30
0 . 1 . 2
Figure 16. - Continued.
Z/De =5
. 4
I-
f
a
2
s
3
z .4
4
a
2
3
a.
5J . 3
8
g . 2
Y
i3
5
Z
. I
n
0
Z/D, =5
-------
X AXIS
Z/D, =IO Z/D, =20 Z/De =30
Y AXIS
Z/De =10
-
0 . I . 2 .3 .4
DYNAMIC PRESSURE RATIO OVER GROUND PLANE, qg/q,
Z/De =20
0 . I .2
Z/D, =30
0 .1 . 2
(f) RECTANGULAR NOZZLE NO. 6 ( A =6)
Figure 16. - Continued.
+' De =5
X AXIS
Z/De =10
7
Z/D, =20
c
t
1
5
Z/De =30
Y AXIS
Z/De =10
-
YD, =20 Z/De =30
0 . 2 . 3 .4
DYNAMIC PRESSURE RATIO OVER GROUND PLANE, q9/q,
(9) DELTA NOZZLE NO. 7 ( R =2, P = 30')
Figure 16. - Continued.
no
>
6
:
9
n
id
c
W
N
0
Z
CL
$
Y
t
a
L
9
h
U
I-
3
3
8
5
n
Z
3
w
>
E
f
Z
Y
n
Z/De =5
Z/D, =5
.4r--------,
. 3
.2
.I
.5
0
0 . 2 . 3 .4
X AXIS
Z/De =IO
-
Z/De =20
< ' - - - - - -
h
Y AXIS
Z/De =10
-
- 0 2 -
0 . 2 . 3 . 4
DYNAMIC PRESSURE RATIO OVER GROUND PLANE, qg/q,
(h) DELTA NOZZLE NO. 8 ( R =5, f i =5")
Figure 16. - Continued.
&/ De =20
I ----
0 . 2
Z/De =30
Z/D, =30
0 . 2
89
DISTANCE ABOVE GROUND PLANE/EQI
0 - la w A
JIVALENT CIR LCULAR NOZZLE DIAMETER, h/D,
0 N w P
0
x AXIS
Z/De =IO
-
Z/De= 20 Z/D, =30
Z/De =5
Y AXIS
Z/De= 10
-
Z/D, =20
I I I I I I 117
I - - - -
0 .2 . 3 .4 .5
DYNAMIC PRESSURE RATIO OVER GROUND PLANE , qg/q,
(j) TWO SEGMENT NOZZLE NO. 10
R/D,
0 2
E l 3
0 5
4 9
p /p =1.5
t" O
-
Figure 16. - Continued.
Z/D, =5
X AXIS
Z/D, =10
-
I AXIS
Z/D, =IO
-
0 . I . 3 .4
Z/D, =20
DYNAMIC PRESSURE RATIO OVER GROUND PLANE r qg/qn
(k) FOUR SEGMENT NOZZLE NO. 11
Figure 16. - Continued.
Z/De =20
.2 . I
Z/D, =30
Z/D, =30
0 . 2
Z/De =5
x AXIS
Z/D, =IO
-
Z/D, =20
Z/D, = 5
I I I I I
. 2 . 3 .4 .5
I E
Z/De =IO
0 .1 . 2 . 3 . 4
Z/D, =20
DYNAMIC PRESSURE RATIO OVER GROUND PLANE , q9/q,
(m) TWELVE SEGMENT NOZZLE NO. 12
Figure 16. - Concluded.
0 .1 . 2
Z/D, =30
1111
Z/De =30
. I . 2
I
1
1
I
-- t7
1
I
I
TA (B=
1
4
-I-
I
I
I
I
I
- -I-
, R= 5
-TWEL\
-u;
I
1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.1
NOZZLE PRESSURE RATIO, p,n
'Po
1 .o
C
\ =
g . 8
E
0-
P
2
2 .4
& .2
cr 2 .6
Y
e
vl
;
Z
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
AXIAL DISTANCE FROM NOZZLE EXIT/EQUIVALENT CIRCULAR NOZZLE DIAMETER, Z/De
Figure 17.- Comparison of thrust and jet wake degradation characteristics of five nozzles.
72
I
0
I
EFFECTIVE VELOCITY COEFFICIENT, Cv
e
Figure 18. - Variation of maximum dynamic pressure degradation with distance and thrust
for various nozzles.
73
(a)l RECTANGULAR NOZZLES
NOZZLES
8 & 9
- _
0 . 2 . 3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1 .o
NOZZLE EXIT PERIMETER RATIO, I De/2(W+L)
(b) DELTA NOZZLES
Figure 19. - Variation of dynamic pressure degradation with peri meter for various nozzles.
74
NOZZLES
Figure 19. - Concluded.
75
NOTE: FLAG SYMBOLS ( 3 =DATA EXTRAPOLATED
FROM NACA TN 4029, REFERENCE NO. 4
0 1 2
ASPECT RATIO, D 2/A OR L/W
3 4 5 6 7
Figure 20. - Effect of aspect ratio upon dynamic pressure degradation for various nozzles.
76
I '-
R = 5
-
pt /P, =1.5
n
NOZZLE DIVERGENCE ANGLE 8, DEGREES
Figure 21. - Effect of delta nozzle divergence angle B upon dynamic pressure degradation.
77
1 .o
.8
.6
r= .4
X
E
n . 2
m
0-
Z
Q
C
Q X
d
d
NE 0
0-
I-
P+/Po =1 .:
n
i i
I 1
I I
+=I==
1 .o
0 CIRCULAR NOZZLE - 1
A SEGMENTED NOZZLE - 12
0 RECTANGULAR NOZZLE - 6
.8
0 DELTA NOZZLE - 9
.6
STAGNATION
.4
. 2
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 I I
AXIAL DISTANCE FROM NOZZLE EXIT/EQUIVALENT CIRCULAR NOZZLE DIAMETER, YD,
Figure 22. - Comparison of free j et wake surveys with ground plane surveys.
78
NASA-Langley, 1964 D-2263
- ~ . . .
I
. -,
"The National Aeronautics and Space Administration . . . shall . . .
provide for the widest practical appropriate dissemination of information
expansion of human knowledge of phenomena in the atmosphere and space."
", : ?a;,,
' .-.'<> :... .
.. ,,.
. . concerning its activities and the results thereof . . . objectives being the
. ,
- NAT~ NAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ACT OF 1950
NASA SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL PUBLICATIONS
TECHNICAL REPORTS:
important, complete, and a lasting contribution to existing knowledge.
TECHNICAL NOTES:
of importance as a contribution to existing knowledge.
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUMS: Information receiving limited distri-
bution because of preliminary data, security classification, or other reasons.
CONTRACTOR REPORTS: Technical information generated in con-
nection with a NASA contract or grant and released under NASA auspices.
TECHNICAL TRANSLATIONS: Information published in a foreign
language considered to merit NASA distribution i n English.
TECHNICAL REPRINTS: Information derived from NASA activities
and initially published in the form of journal articles or meeting papers.
SPECIAL PUBLICATIONS: Information derived from or of value to
NASA activities but not necessarily reporting the results of individual
NASA-programmed scientific efforts. Publications include conference
proceedings, monographs, data compilations, handbooks, sourcebooks,
and special bibliographies.
Scientific and technical information considered
Information less broad in scope but nevertheless
Det oi l s on t he ovai l obi l i t y o f these publ i cot i ons may be obt ai ned f r om:
SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL INFORMATION DIVISION
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
Washington, D.C. 20546