SHOCKLESS INTAKE DESIGN OF HYPERSONIC MISSILE

By
Abdul Rehman
&
Aftab Ali

Supervisor
Dr. Khalid Parvez

Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Institute of Space Technology, Islamabad
2018

i
 A thesis submitted to the

Institute of Space Technology

In partial fulfillment of the requirements

For the degree of Bachelor of Science in

Aerospace Engineering

By

Abdul Rehman

&

Aftab Ali

Supervisor

Dr. Khalid Parvez

Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Institute of Space Technology, Islamabad

July, 2018

i
 Institute of Space Technology
Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Approval Page

SHOCKLESS INTAKE DESIGN OF HYPERSONIC

MISSILE

By

Abdul Rehman
&
Aftab Ali

APPROVAL BY BOARD OF EXAMINERS

_________________________

Dr. Khalid Parvez

ii
 AUTHORS DECLARATION

We take full responsibility of the research work conducted during the FYP thesis titled

“Shockless Intake Design of Hypersonic Missile". We solemnly declare that the research

and development work presented in the FYP is done solely by us with no significant help

from any other person: however, small help wherever taken is duly acknowledged. We

have also written the complete thesis ourselves. Moreover, we have not presented this

thesis or any part of this thesis previously to any other degree awarding institution within

Pakistan or abroad.

We understand that the management of IST has zero tolerance policy towards plagiarism.

Therefore, we as the authors for the above-mentioned thesis solemnly declare that no

portion of our thesis has been plagiarized and any material used in the Thesis from other

sources is properly referenced. Moreover, the thesis does not contain any literal citing

(verbatim) of more than 70 words (total) even by giving a reference unless. We have

obtained the written permission of the publisher to do so. Furthermore, the work

presented in the thesis is our own original work and we have positively cited the related

work of the other researchers by clearly differentiating our work from their relevant

work.

We further understand that if we are found guilty of any form of plagiarism in our thesis

work even after our graduation the Institute reserves the right to revoke our BS degree.

Moreover, the Institute will also have the right to publish our names on its website that

keeps the record of the students who plagiarized their thesis work.

iii
 __________________________

Abdul Rehman

140101068

___________________________

Aftab Ali

140101007

I hereby acknowledge that the submitted thesis is the final version and should be

scrutinized for plagiarism as per IST policy.

________________________
Dr. Khalid Parvez

Dated: __________________

________________________

Verified by Plagiarism Cell Officer

Dated: __________________

iv
 Copyright © 2018

This document is jointly copyrighted by the author(s) and the Institute of Space

Technology (IST). Both the author(s) and IST can use, publish or reproduce this

document in any form. Under the copyright law no part of this document can be

reproduced by anyone, except copyright holders, without the permission of the author(s).

v
 DEDICATION

We would like to dedicate this work to our parents who have supported us through our
entire lives and have made us capable to be where we are right now. Also, we would like
to thank our supervisor who guided us every step of the way and various other colleagues
who helped us in enhancing our knowledge regarding the subject.

vi
 ABSTRACT

A hypersonic intake has been designed which has maximum pressure recovery and

minimum losses. For this a theory formulation and MATLAB Code for 2-D wedge using

oblique shock relations and for cone using Taylor Macoll equation has been developed.

Along with this Different Design Geometries has been created and the appropriate

geometries were selected on which CFD Fluent analysis has done and both the numerical

and analytical results were compared.

vii
 PROJECT OBJECTIVE STATEMENT

The problem our Final Year Project catering is to increase the efficiency of combustion

chamber of the air-breathing engine. We will increase the efficiency of an intake and as a

result the efficiency of the air-breathing engine, in our case scramjet engine, will be

increased. By using conventional intakes in case of high speed flow, the efficiency is

greatly reduced by intake as pressure recovery is greatly dropped due to the strong shock

formation.

Our FYP deals with this problem and provides a conceptual design and solution for

pressure recovery drop. Our FYP will also help in intake design having more efficiency

in future.

viii
 PROJECT SUMMARY

We design a hypersonic intake which has maximum pressure recovery and minimum

losses thus, it has higher efficiency. This increases the efficiency of combustion chamber

due to minimum total pressure loss. For this purpose, after theory formulation we

developed MATLAB Code for 2-D wedge using oblique shock relations and for cone

using Taylor Macoll equations. By using these codes we draw different design

geometries on CATIA to demonstrate our results. The appropriate geometries weree

selected on which CFD Fluent analysis has done and both the numerical and analytical

results were compared.

ix
 Table of Contents

Approval Page ii

Authors Declaration iii

Dedication vi

Abstract vii

Project Objective Statement viii

Project Summary ix

List Of Figures xiv

1. Introduction 1

2. Literature Review 4

2.1 Books 4

3. Work Distribution 5

4. Work Flow Diagram 6

5. Timeline 7

6. Methodology 8

7. Work Done 9

7.1 Formulation Of Theory 9

7.2 Matlab Flow Chart Of Wedge 12

7.3 Matlab Solution For Cone 12

7.4 Results Of Matlab For Wedge 13

x
7.5 Results Of Matlab For Cone 17

7.6 Geometry 19

7.6.1 5-4(10) 21

7.6.2 8-8-7-6-5(3) 22

7.6.3 Selected Geometry At Different Machs With Variable Lengths 23

7.6.4 Selected Geometry At Different Machs With Constant Shape 28

7.7 Cone 31

7.8 Wedge Cfd Analysis 33

7.8.1 Solver 33

7.8.2 Model 34

7.8.3 Materials 35

7.8.4 Boundary Conditions 36

7.9 25-Degrees Angle Wedge 39

7.10 1-Degree Step Up To 25-Degree 41

7.11 Circular Geometry 44

7.12 Analysis For Selected Geometries 46

7.12.1 5-4(10) 47

7.12.2 8-8-7-6-5(3) 49

7.13 Cone 67

7.13.1 General 67

xi
 7.13.2 Model 68

7.13.3 Materials 69

7.13.4 Boundary Conditions 70

7.13.5 For Mach 2.5 72

7.13.6 At Mach 2 74

8. Comparison 76

9. Discussion 78

9.1 Wedge 78

9.2 Cone 80

10. Societal Impact 82

11. Environmental Benefits 83

12. Conclusion 84

13. Future Work 86

14. Appendix 87

14.1 Matlab Code For Wedge 87

14.2 Cone Taylor Macoll Matlab Code 88

15. References 92

xii
Table No. Table Caption Page No.

3.1 Work Distribution 5

7.1 Different Machs at Different Number of Deflections 13
7.2 Isentropic Relations Results 16
7.3 Cone Angle and Mach number and Pressure Recovery 17
8.1 Free Stream Mach and Obtained Mach Number 76
8.2 Pressure Recovery against Different Mach Numbers 77

xiii
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure No. Fig Caption Page No.

1.1 Scram Jet Intake 2

1.2 Different Intakes 3

1.3 Different Intakes 3

4.1 Procedure Of Work 6

5.1 Gantt Chart 7

7.1 Oblique Shock Formation Around A Wedge 10

7.2 Oblique Shock Geometry 10

7.3 Wedge Process Flow Chart 12

7.4 Cone Taylor Macoll Process Flow Chart 13

7.5 Mach Number Vs. Deflection Angle 14

7.6 Pressure Recovery Vs. Deflection Angle 15

7.7 Isentropic Mach Number Vs. Deflection Angle 16

7.8 Cone Angle Vs. Mach Number 18

7.9 Cone Angle Vs. Total Pressure Recovery 18

7.10 30-Degree Deflection Angle 19

7.11 Angle Divided Into Two Parts 20

7.12 Angle Divided Into 5 Parts 21

7.13 5-4(10) Geometry 22

7.14 8-8-7-6-5(3) Geometry 23

7.15 Geometry At Free Stream Mach Number 2 24

xiv
7.16 Free Steam Mach Number 2.5 25

7.17 Free Steam Mach 3 25

7.18 Geometry At Free Stream Mach Number 3.5 26

7.19 For Free Stream Mach Number 4.5 27

7.20 For Free Stream Mach 5 27

7.21 At Free Stream Mach Number 4 28

7.22 At Free Stream Mach Number 3.5 29

7.23 At Free Stream Mach Number 3 30

7.24 At Free Stream Mach 2.5 31

7.25 At Free Stream Mach 2 31

7.26 Cone At Mach Number 4 With Cone Angle Of 40 Degree 32

7.27 Fluent Solver Settings 34

7.28 Fluent Model Selection 35

7.29 Fluent Material Selection 36

7.30 Boundary Conditions 37

7.31 Boundary Conditions Parameters 38

7.32 25-Degree Wedge Mesh 39

7.33 Mach Number Contour For 25-Degree Wedge 40

7.34 Total Pressure Contour For 25-Degree Wedge 41

7.35 Mesh For Up To 25-Degree Step 42

7.36 Mach Number Contour Up To 25-Degree Step 43

7.37 Total Pressure Contour Up To 25-Degree Step 44

7.38 Mach Number Contour For Circular Geometry 45

xv
7.39 Total Pressure Contour For Circular Geometry 46

7.40 Mesh For 5-4(10) Geometry 47

7.41 Mach Number Contour For 5-4(10) Geometry 48

7.42 Total Pressure Contour For 5-4(10) Geometry 49

7.43 Mesh At Free Stream Mach Number 5 50

7.44 Mach Number Contour When Free Stream Mach Is 5 51

7.45 Total Pressure Recovery At Free Stream Mach Number 5 52

7.46 Mesh At Free Stream Mach Number 4.5 53

7.47 Mach Number Contour At Free Stream Mach 4.5 53

7.48 Total Pressure Recovery Contour At Mach 4.5 54

7.49 Mesh For 8-8-7-6-5(3) Geometry 55

7.50 Mach Number Contour For 8-8-7-6-5(3) Geometry 56

7.51 Total Pressure Contour For 8-8-7-6-5(3) Geometry 57

7.52 Mesh At Free Stream Mach 3.5 58

7.53 Mach Number Contour At Free Stream Mach 3.5 59

7.54 Total Pressure Recovery At Free Stream Mach 3.5 60

7.55 Mesh At Mach 3 60

7.56 Mach Number Contour At Free Stream Mach Of 3 61

7.57 Total Pressure Recovery 62

7.58 Mesh At Mach 2.5 63

7.59 Mach Number Contour At Free Stream Mach 2.5 64

7.60 Total Pressure Recovery Contour At Free Stream Mach 2.5 65

7.61 Mesh At Mach 2 66

xvi
7.62 Mach Number Contour At Free Stream Mach 2 66

7.63 Total Pressure Recovery Contour 67

7.64 For Cone Solver Settings 68

7.65 Mode For Cone 69

7.66 Material Selection 70

7.67 Boundary Condition For Cone 71

7.68 Boundary Conditions 71

7.70 Mesh At Free Stream Mach 2.5 72

7.71 Mach Number Contour At Free Stream Mach 2.5 73

7.72 Total Pressure Recovery At Free Stream Mach Number 2.5 73

7.73 Mesh At Mach 2 74

7.74 Mach Number Contour At Free Stream Mach 2 75

xvii
 1. INTRODUCTION

The speed which is above Mach Number 5 falls in the hypersonic regime. Hypersonic

flight has been keen interest of many engineers and scientist. In 1950s and 1960s it was

clear that rocket flight had it advantage in space access applications and in ballistic

applications. But for hypersonic flight air breathing engines were required. Following are

important differences between air breathing engines and rockets.

1. The specific impulse of an air breathing engine is much higher than the rockets,

due to the fact that rockets carry both fuel and oxidizer

2. Weight of air breathing engines is much higher as compared to the rockets

3. For flight air breathing engines provide a greater maneuverability as compared to

the rockets.

Thus it made clear that the hypersonic engine can carry out the role of cruise and

recoverable space launch mission which a rocket could not.

Supersonic combustion ramjet or scram jet engines are used for the hypersonic flights. In

case of scram jet engines the hypersonic Mach number of 5 and above is reduced to a

supersonic Mach number up to 1.8 or 2 so that supersonic combustion takes place. We

focus on the intake of the scream jet engine.

The primary purpose of an intake of an air breathing engine is to capture air and

compress it. The performance of an intake is based upon two factors

1. Capability of compression

2. Flow losses

1
Hypersonic intakes fall in 3 different categories depending upon the method of

compression.

1. External compression

2. Mixed compression

3. Internal compression

Following diagram shows the basic of a scram jet engine.

Fig. 1.1. Scram Jet Intake

Following are different examples of the intakes,

2
Fig. 1.2. Different intakes

Fig. 1.3. Different Intakes

3
 2. LITERATURE REVIEW

In regards to the designing of shockless hypersonic intake, following are the research

publications which will form the basis of our work. The abstract and conclusions are

given below of each research publications.

1. Shockless Hypersonic intakes [1]

2. Applications of Busemann Inlet Designs for Flight at Hypersonic Speeds [2]

3. On Recent Developments Related to Flow Starting in Hypersonic Air Intakes [3]

4. A new type shock free axisymmetric supersonic flow [4]

5. Hypersonic Air Intake Design for High Performance and Starting [5]

6. Starting in Hypersonic Intakes [6]

2.1 Books

For purpose of designing a shock less hypersonic intake for a missile, following are few

books on basis of which we will precede our work regarding the development of theory.

 The Dynamics and Thermodynamics of Compressible Fluid Flow by Ascher H.

Shapiro Volume II [7]

o In this book following two chapters are our focus which form basis and

reference for theory formation

 Chapter 17: Axially Symmetric Supersonic Flow

 Chapter 19:Flows With Shock Waves

 Scram Jet Propulsion by E.T Curran and S.N.B. Murthy Vol 189 [8]

o In this book our main focus is on following chapter

 Chapter 7: Scram Jet Inlets

4
 3. WORK DISTRIBUTION

Following is the distribution of the required tasks.

Table 3.1
Work Distribution

ABDUL REHMAN AFTAB ALI

Literature study Literature study

MATLAB Code for MATLAB code for 2D-

Cone wedge

CAD Models CAD Models

CFD CFD

5
 4. WORK FLOW DIAGRAM

Following is the work flow chart in which we performed our work throughout the

semester.

Fig. 4.1. Procedure of work

6
 5. TIMELINE

Following diagram shows the Gantt chart for this project. The timeline of the project was

according to this Gantt chart.

Fig. 5.1. Gantt Chart

7
 6. METHODOLOGY

For our work we used both the analytical and numerical scheme to perform our work.

First MATLAB code was made and thus analytical results were obtained. Then Fluent

ANSYS analysis was made on the geometries obtained on the basis of analytical results.

Finally, a comparison was made between both results obtained an error was calculated.

The Maximum percentage error allowed was 10%.

8
 7. WORK DONE

Following work was done in 7th semester. The work was completed in a chronological

method after the research literature review was done.

1. Formulation of theory

a. MATLAB Code Wedge

b. Cone

2.

3. CATIA Geometry

4. Fluent ANSYS analysis

7.1 Formulation of Theory

Since we have to design a high flow intake thus our work was divided into two parts.

1. 2D wedge

2. Cone

In 7th semester our work was focused on 2D wedge part. For this purpose, wedge

relations i.e. oblique shock relations were used to develop the MATLAB code.

In 8th semester our work was focused on cone part. For this purpose, MATLAB code has

been developed using Taylor McColl equations.

Following are the relations which were used in making MATLAB codes.

Following is the oblique shock obtained when a supersonic flow is passed through the

wedge.

9
 Fig. 7.1. Oblique shock formation around a wedge
The Mach angle is given by following formula

Following is the oblique shock geometry which shows how oblique shock is formed.

Fig. 7.2. Oblique shock geometry

10
 Where Mn2 is the Mach number of normal shock and M2 is the Mach number

after oblique shock.

Where Mn1 can be found by following equation,

Thus, using above relations, a MATLAB code was made and following data was

obtained.

Thus, following results were obtained at Mach Number 4, which formed the basis of our

geometry.

Also, Parendtle Meyer solutions were also used for isentropic case.

For Cone effects Taylor Macoll equation was used. Following equation is the differential

form of Taylor Macoll equation.

11
The above solution was solved numerically on MATLAB.

Both codes are shown in the appendix and also process flow chart is given blow.

7.2 MATLAB Flow Chart of Wedge

The appendix 1 shows the MATLAB code for wedge.

Fig. 7.3. Wedge Process Flow chart

7.3 MATLAB Solution for Cone

The appendix 2 shows the MATLAB code for Cone solution.

12
 Fig. 7.4. Cone Taylor Macoll Process Flow chart

7.4 Results of MATLAB for Wedge

Following results were obtained from MATLAB codes and results were tabulated and

graphs were obtained

Table 7.1
Different Machs at Different Number of Deflections

Oblique Shock
Total M2 M2 M2
M2 for Pressure Pressure Pressure Pressure
Deflection for 3 for 5 for 10
1 parts Ratio Ratio Ratio Ratio
Angle parts parts parts
5 3.6383 0.9887 3.6448 0.9987 3.6453 0.9995 3.6456 0.9999
10 3.2861 0.9254 3.3274 0.991 3.331 0.9967 3.3325 0.9992
15 2.929 0.8038 3.0386 0.9732 3.0483 0.9902 3.0524 0.9975
20 2.5686 0.6524 2.7716 0.9443 2.7908 0.9792 2.7991 0.9947
25 2.2091 0.5039 2.522 0.9048 2.5536 0.9636 2.5675 0.9906
30 1.8485 0.3767 2.2862 0.8566 2.3328 0.9435 2.3535 0.9853

13
 35 1.4646 0.273 2.061 0.8021 2.125 0.9194 2.1538 0.9787
40 ---- ------ 1.8429 0.7437 1.927 0.8917 1.9653 0.9708
45 ---- ------ 1.6273 0.6835 1.7355 0.861 1.7849 0.9617

From above table it can clearly be seen that as we increase the deflection angle the Mach

number after shock decreases. Greater the deflection angle more the Mach number

decrease and a strong shock is formed. Also, it has been observed the greater the

deflection angle thus there is more losses.

The results were also obtained by dividing the deflection angle into different parts. It is

clearly seen the greater the deflection angle parts are less will be the pressure losses also

less Mach number is reduced. Thus, flow becomes more isentropic. On basis of above

following graphs were plotted to illustrate the results

Mach Number Vs Deflection Angle

4
Mach Number

0
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Deflection Angle

No Division 3 parts 5 Parts 10 parts

Fig. 7.5. Mach number Vs. Deflection Angle

The above graph shows that as Deflection angle changes from 5 degrees to 45 degree the

Mach number after shock decreases. More over strong shocks are formed when higher

the deflection angle.

14
Moreover, it is also observed that as number of division increases the shock wave after

deflection also becomes weaker. Moreover, greater the deflection angle divisions more

smoothly the Mach number after shock decreases and also weak shocks are formed.

Similarly, a graph is plotted for pressure recovery, following results are obtained.

Pressure Recovery vs Deflection Anlge

1.2
Pressure Recovery

0.8
No Division
0.6
3 Parts
0.4
5 parts
0.2 10 Parts

0
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

Deflection Angle

Fig. 7.6. Pressure Recovery Vs. Deflection Angle

The above graph shows that as deflection angle increase the pressure recovery drops

significantly. This shows that pressure losses are greatly increased and as a result strong

shock in formed.

When deflection angle is divided into parts then as a result pressure recovery is increased.

Greater the parts are more is the pressure recovery. The drawback of the above is that

when greater parts the angle is divided the more difficult it will be.

Now since our task was to achieve flow as isentropic as far as possible i.e greater

pressure recovery and minimum losses. Thus, following isentropic results were obtained,

15
 Table 7.2
Isentropic Relations Results

For Isentropic

Total Deflection
M2
Angle

5 3.64564
10 3.33297
15 3.0538
20 2.80187
25 2.57213
30 2.36054
35 2.16367
40 1.97848
45 1.8021

On the basis of above results following graph was plotted from above table,

Isentropic Relation
4
3.5
3
MACH NUMBER

2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
DEFLECTION ANGLE

Fig. 7.7. Isentropic Mach number Vs. Deflection Angle

16
7.5 Results of MATLAB for Cone

Applying Taylor Macoll solution following results were obtained from MATLAB code

and were tabulated and graphs were made. Since our work was only restricted to 2d

wedge so we didn’t proceed further and was included in future task.

Table 7.3
Cone Angle and Mach number and Pressure Recovery

Conical Shock

CONE
M2 for 1 parts Pressure Ratio M2 for 7 parts Pressure Ratio
Angle

9 3.589 0.9952 1.978 0.9902

10 3.527 0.9907 1.95 0.9825

11 3.466 0.9843 1.782 0.9718

12 3.405 0.9757 1.817 0.9585

13 3.342 0.9643 1.465 0.941

14 3.277 0.9502 1.316 0.9203

The above table shows that as angle increases pressure recovery and Mach number

reduces. i.e have a direct relationship.

17
 CONE ANGLE VS MACH NO
3.65
3.589
3.6
3.527
3.55
3.5 3.466
3.45
MACH NO M2

3.405
3.4
3.342
3.35
3.277
3.3
3.25
3.2
3.15
3.1
9 10 11 12 13 14
CONE ANGLE

Fig. 7.8. Cone Angle Vs. Mach Number

The above shows that greater the cone angle less will be Mach number and show direct

relation.

CONE ANGLE VS TOTAL PRESSURE RECOVERY

1 0.9952
0.9907
0.99 0.9843
TOTAL PRESSURE RECOVERY

0.98 0.9757

0.97 0.9643

0.96
0.9502
0.95

0.94

0.93

0.92
9 10 11 12 13 14
CONE ANGLE

Fig. 7.9. Cone Angle Vs. Total Pressure Recovery

18
The above graph shows that as we increase the cone angle the pressure recovery start to

decrease.

7.6 Geometry

On basis of above MATLAB code following results we obtained different geometries and

did Fluent ANSYS analysis to illustrate the shock formation and as a result we obtained

final geometry.

First a simple wedge was formed with 30-degree angle and Mach number after shock was

calculated when initial Mach number was 4.

Fig. 7.10. 30-Degree deflection angle

The above Fig. showed that the pressure recover was just 0.38 and Mach number was

reduced from 4 to 1.84. This should that we needed to reduce angle or puts it into parts as

stated above.

19
A second geometry was made in such a way that the deflection angle was divided into 2

parts.

Fig. 7.11. Angle divided into two parts

This showed that for Mach number 4 the Mach number reduced to 1.848 while pressure

recovery for this was 0.6031. it was a little better design as compared to previous

geometry.

Using MATLAB code, another geometry was made with deflection angle divided into

multiple parts. The effect of this was that according to MATLAB results Mach number

was decreased from 4 and also it had more pressure recovery.

20
 Fig. 7.12. Angle divided into 5 parts
This shows that Mach number was 1.831 and pressure recovery was about 0.8767, but

ANSYS results were different because of the fact that Mach waves didn’t converge at

point.

On the basis of above data and also MATLAB code following geometries were selected

which had following angle.

1. 5 degrees then 4degree angle of 10 steps

2. 8 degrees angle again 8 degrees then 7 degrees then 6 and in the end 5 degree of 3

steps.

7.6.1 5-4(10)

Following geometry was selected in which Mach number was obtained as 1.79 while

pressure recovery was 0.9656 moreover all shocks converged at a single point. Fluent

CFD analysis was made on it and both results were compared.

21
 Fig. 7.13. 5-4(10) Geometry

7.6.2 8-8-7-6-5(3)

The second geometry was selected in which all Mach waves converged at a particular

point. The Mach wave achieved was 1.796 in the end while pressure recover in this was

about 0.906.

22
 Fig. 7.14. 8-8-7-6-5(3) Geometry
7.6.3 Selected Geometry at Different Machs with Variable Lengths

The selected geometry having angle 8-8-7-6-(5) were then adjusted with different Mach

numbers call the shock waves formed were captured at a point

Following Mach numbers were taken under consideration

 Mach 2

 Mach 2.5

 Mach 3

 Mach 3.5

 Mach 4

 Mach 4.5

 Mach 5

23
7.6.3.1 Free Stream Mach 2

Following geometry was made at Mach 2.

Fig. 7.15. Geometry at free stream Mach Number 2

Three Mach waves were formed and all meet at a point. The pressure recovery obtained

was about 0.98. i.e only 2% pressure loss were obtained.

7.6.3.2 Free stream Mach 2.5

At free stream Mach number 25. Following geometry was made with the help of

MATLAB code. The geometry has 0.97 pressure recovery. The error in this case is about

3 percent only.

24
 Fig. 7.16. Free steam Mach number 2.5
7.6.3.3 Free Stream Mach Number 3

Following geometry was obtained at free steam Mach number 3 and as a result pressure

recovery obtained in this case is about 0.95.

Fig. 7.17. Free steam Mach 3

25
7.6.3.4 Free Stream Mach 3.5

Following geometry was obtained through MATLAB code when input Mach number was

3.5. Total pressure recovery obtained at this Mach number is about 0.93

Fig. 7.18. Geometry at free stream Mach number 3.5

7.6.3.5 Free Stream Mach 4.5

Following geometry was obtained at 4.5 Mach number. More over the pressure recovery

obtained at this free stream velocity is 0.87.

This reduction in pressure recovery is because of the pressure losses and more over high

velocity and other boundary layer viscosity.

26
 Fig. 7.19. For free stream Mach number 4.5
7.6.3.6 Free Stream Mach Number 5

When subjected to a free stream Mach number5 following geometry was obtained and as

a result pressure recovery at this point is 0.8456.

Fig. 7.20. For free stream Mach 5

27
7.6.4 Selected Geometry at Different Machs with Constant Shape

The selected geometry without changing the shape of geometry was observed for

different Mach numbers. We make the geometry so that all waves combine at a point and

we insert cowl lip below this point as shown in figure. The black dark line shows the

cowl in this figure

Fig. 7.21. At free stream Mach number 4

For Mach number 3.5 the selected geometry makes the week shock waves as shown in

the following figure. In this case all waves are not meted at a point. For this case we

insert the cowl lip below the point where any two waves meted out at first, in this way

combination of waves are out of the inflow into the intake. Wave makes stronger shock

waves outside the cowl lip as shown in the following figure

28
 Fig. 7.22. At free stream Mach number 3.5
Similarly, for Mach number 3 the selected geometry makes the week shock waves as

shown in the following figure. All waves in present case are not meted at a point. In this

case we insert the cowl lip below the point where any two waves meted out at first, in this

way combination of waves are out of the inflow into the intake. Wave makes stronger

shock waves outside the cowl lip as shown in the following figure

29
 Fig. 7.23. At free stream Mach number 3
Similar is the case for Mach numbers below 3 as shown in the following figures. All

waves are not meted at a point. In these cases, also we insert the cowl lip below the point

where any two waves meted out at first, in this way combination of waves are out of the

inflow into the intake. Wave makes stronger shock waves outside the cowl lip and does

not affect the pressure loss in the ingoing flow to the inlet. The black dark lines show the

outside cowl cover in the figures.

30
 Fig. 7.24. At free stream Mach 2.5

Fig. 7.25. At free stream Mach 2

7.7 Cone

For cone on the basis of Taylor Macoll equation is used.

31
More over from MATLAB code it has been observed that large angle is required to

reduce Mach number from design Mach 4 to a supersonic Mach below 2 such as 1.6 or

1.8 i.e. to reduce Mach angle from 4 to 1.6 a minimum angle of 40 degree is required.

In double cone the shock wave is stable up to Mach 2, and becomes unstable at higher

Mach numbers and start oscillations after Mach 2.2 [9]. So, we would not use double or

higher angle division cones in hypersonic intake.

Following shows that a large angle is required

Fig. 7.26. Cone at Mach number 4 with cone angle of 40 degree

32
7.8 Wedge CFD ANALYSIS

For CFD analysis fluent solver was used for this purpose. Also, in fluent solver inviscid

and K-omega model was method was used. The geometry was drawn in CATIA and file

was imported in it. Mesh quality was maintained to minimum of 0.7.

Also, all the calculations were made for Mach number 4.

We did CFD analysis of following of following geometries before we did CFD analysis

of our selected geometry in order to validate and have general idea of the trend.

These were the setting used for all the CFD analysis

7.8.1 Solver

For our CFD analysis Density based solver was used.

The reason for choosing this solver is the fact that it is used for high speed flows.

While in contrast pressure field solver is used when there is low subsonic flow.

Following Fig. shows the solver setting for our CFD analysis

33
 Fig. 7.27. Fluent Solver settings

We choose planar and steady condition. The reason for this is that our body is 2D

symmetric and we want time to be steady

7.8.2 Model

For CFD analysis non-viscous model was chosen to observe shock waves also energy

equation was also turned on

The reason for turning on energy equation is due to the fact that we are studying high

speed flow and thus it is necessary to turn on the energy equation.

Following Fig. shows the models selected

34
 Fig. 7.28. Fluent Model selection
Non-viscous model was selected due to reason that our aim was to observe shocks in

non-viscous flow

7.8.3 Materials

For material selection we choose air and put it as ideal gas. So that we can observe our

flow easily

35
 Fig. 7.29. Fluent Material Selection
7.8.4 Boundary Conditions

For boundary conditions we defined wedge as wall while other surface as pressure far

field. Following figure shows the boundary conditions,

36
 Fig. 7.30. Boundary Conditions

The three boundary conditions were specified

1. Pressure far field

2. Symmetry

3. Wall

The pressure far field is the boundary where air flows. Symmetry is defined because our

body is 2D symmetric. While Wall represents the wedge surface. This is the place where

flow hits and as a result shock phenomenon is observed.

Following Fig. shows the boundary conditions selected in Fluent. Also, Mach number

and pressure is input.

37
 Fig. 7.31. Boundary conditions parameters
The pressure used was ground pressure which is 101325 Pascal. Also, Mach number was

set to 4. The flow was directed to flow along the positive x-axis.

On basis of above setting different geometries CFD analysis was made. Then a final 2

geometries were selected.

38
7.9 25-Degrees Angle Wedge

First CFD analysis was made for a 25 degrees angle. This was done because for initial

shock behavior observation so that we could know how shocks behave under this 25-

degree angle.

Mesh:

Following is the mesh done for 25-degree wedge.

Fig. 7.32. 25-Degree wedge Mesh

The mesh quality for this purpose was 0.9 and was maximum so that our results are most

accurate.

39
When 25-degree deflection angle wedge was used then a clear shock was observed

Mach Number

Following Fig. shows how Mach number varies across a wedge.

Fig. 7.33. Mach number contour for 25-degree wedge

This shows that a shock is formed as a result Mach number is reduced to 2.87. Moreover,

it is clear that a shock is formed which starts right from the start of wedge.

Total Pressure

Also following graph shows the pressure recovery

40
 Fig. 7.34. Total pressure contour for 25-degree wedge

This graph shows that pressure is dropped across the wedge in this case is 0.64 i.e. 64%.

This shows that a strong shock is formed in order to reduce Mach number. Thus, this

forms the basis of analysis.

7.10 1-Degree Step up to 25-Degree

The second analysis was done on a 25-degree wedge, but this time a step of 1-degree up

to 25 was made. This was done in order to observe how it affects the shocks and whether

shock gets weak or not.

Mesh

Following is the mesh was selected for this geometry.

41
 Fig. 7.35. Mesh for up to 25-degree step
The quality of mesh was taken as 0.7 for this configuration.

Mach Number

Following is the Mach number contour was generated

42
 Fig. 7.36. Mach number contour up to 25-degree step
This shows that initially shocks are weaker but then they become strong gradually and

final Mach number is 2.27 is achieved.

Total Pressure

Following is the total pressure graph,

43
 Fig. 7.37. Total Pressure contour up to 25-degree step
The above graph shows that pressure is decrease as shocks meet up and strong shock is

formed. The pressure recovery observed at the end was about 0.65%. this shows that

initially pressure recovery was greater but as soon as shocks meets up strong shock is

formed and pressure recovery is greatly reduced.

7.11 Circular Geometry

The 3rd geometry was made was circular. This was also done so that we can observe how

weak shocks are formed and do they converge with each other or not.

Mach Number

Following is the result for Mach number,

44
 Fig. 7.38. Mach number Contour for Circular Geometry
This shows that Mach number gradually decrease up to 2.07. More over shocks are

weaker at start. Then these weak shocks i.e. Mach waves start to meet up and become

strong. This in the end a strong shock is observed.

Total Pressure

Following is result for total pressure recovery,

45
 Fig. 7.39. Total Pressure Contour for Circular Geometry
This shows that pressure is reduced and a strong shock is formed at end. But initially

there is less pressure loss because of the Mach-waves formation. The Pressure recovery

observed for this was about 0.69. This also shows that shocks start to meet up in circular

geometry as well.

More over results are similar to 1-degree step wedge up to 25-degree.

7.12 Analysis for Selected Geometries

Thus, of one the basis of above CFD analysis and also with MATLAB code following 2

geometries were selected,

1. 5-4(10)

2. 8-8-7-6-5(3)

46
7.12.1 5-4(10)

First geometry was selected had 5-degree first step and then 10 steps of 4-degree. This

was done so that shocks converge at appoint.

Mesh

Following mesh was used for this geometry,

Fig. 7.40. Mesh for 5-4(10) geometry

Mesh quality for this purpose we choose was 0.8 to 0.9. The mesh was made in fluent

own mesh module. We choose hexagonal mesh because its computational time is less and

it’s more accurate.

Mach Number

Following Mach number contour was generated

47
 Fig. 7.41. Mach Number Contour for 5-4(10) geometry

This shows that Mach number is reduced gradually in such a manner that weak shocks

are formed. All the weak shocks formed meet at a particular point. And generate a strong

shock.

The point where all shocks are meeting we will put cowl lip at that particular point.

Since our goal is to reduce Mach number but with greater pressure recovery so, we need

weak shocks. As only weak shocks and meet up and give strong shocks thus we put cowl

lip there. The above what happens is not our concern.

This shows that all weak shocks converge at a point where strong shock is formed. The

Mach number were shocks converge below which we put cowl lip is 1.88

48
Total Pressure

Following total pressure contour was obtained.

Fig. 7.42. Total Pressure Contour for 5-4(10) geometry

This shows that how total pressure varies across the wedge. Moreover, it is clearly seen

that the place where all shocks are meeting up have greater pressure loss as compared to

point which have weak shocks. The pressure recovery obtained was 0.93.

7.12.2 8-8-7-6-5(3)

The second geometry selected has 8 degrees of first step then again 8-degree of another

step the 7 and 6 degrees of steps. Then in the end 5 degree of 3 steps were made. This

was done to achieve maximum pressure recovery and minimum pressure loss and reduce

Mach number below 2.

The above geometry was subjected to different Mach numbers starting from Mach

number 2 to 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5 and 5. At each free stream Mach number following are the

details.

49
7.12.2.1 At Mach 5

For Mach 5, CFD things are described in following sections.

Mesh

Following meshing was done for a free stream Mach number 5

Fig. 7.43. Mesh at Free stream Mach number 5

The minimum quality obtained was 0.7. More over structured meshing was done for this

purpose along with face splitting.

The advantage of structural mesh in this case is the observation of shockwaves and how

they are formed. Also, computational time is greatly reduced because of structural

meshing.

Mach Number

Following Mach number contours were obtained when free stream Mach is 5.

50
 Fig. 7.44. Mach number contour when free stream Mach is 5
This shows that initially weak shocks are being formed. Then these all weak shocks i.e.

Mach waves converge at a particular point.

This point serves as the place where below Cowl lip will be placed.

The Mach number achieved was 1.99 which our point of concern. The place where all

shocks are meeting and form a strong shock we are not concerned with that.

Total Pressure

51
 Fig. 7.45. Total Pressure recovery contour at free stream Mach number 5
The total pressure contour clearly shows that all weak shocks i.e. Mach waves are

meeting at a particular point. The pressure recovery obtained is 0.858

7.12.2.2 At Mach 4.5

For Mach 4.5, CFD things are described in following sections.

Mesh

Following mesh was generated in fluent mesh module.

52
 Fig. 7.46. Mesh at free stream Mach number 4.5
The mesh used was structural mesh as a result shock wave phenomenon is easily

observed.

Mach Number

Following Mach number was contour was generated.

Fig. 7.47. Mach number contour at free stream Mach 4.5

53
This shows that Mach waves are being formed and all Mach waves converge at a point

and as a result strong shock is formed.

The Mach number observed at this point is 1.82.

Total Pressure

Following total pressure contour is obtained,

Fig. 7.48. Total pressure recovery contour at Mach 4.5

The above shows that the pressure recovery observed is 0.86

7.12.2.3 At Mach 4

For Mach 4, CFD things are described in following sections.

Mesh

Following mesh was generated in fluent mesh module.

54
 Fig. 7.49. Mesh for 8-8-7-6-5(3) Geometry

The quality was chosen 0.7 to 0.8. The hexagonal mesh was used for this purpose.

Moreover, boundaries were refined mesh. The hexagonal mesh was chosen because it has

less computational time and also gives accurate results.

Mach Number

Following Mach number contour was generated.

55
 Fig. 7.50. Mach number Contour for 8-8-7-6-5(3) Geometry
This shows that initially weak shocks are being formed. Then these all weak shocks i.e.

Mach waves converge at a particular point.

This point serves as the place where below Cowl lip will be placed.

The Mach number achieved was 1.81 which our point of concern. The place where all

shocks are meeting and form a strong shock we are not concerned with that.

Total Pressure

Following total pressure contour is obtained,

56
 Fig. 7.51. Total Pressure Contour for 8-8-7-6-5(3) Geometry
The total pressure contour clearly shows that all weak shocks i.e. Mach waves are

meeting at a particular point. The pressure recovery obtained is 0.94

7.12.2.4 At Mach 3.5

For Mach 3.5, CFD things are described in following sections.

Mesh

Following mesh was generated in fluent mesh module,

57
 Fig. 7.52. Mesh at free stream Mach 3.5
The structural mesh was made for Mach 3.5. Also in this case meshing was done in such

a manner that mesh was concentrated at an angle. This was done to observe shock waves

when free stream velocity hit the inlet wall.

Mach Number

Following Mach number contour was generated,

58
 Fig. 7.53. Mach number contour at free stream Mach 3.5
The above results clearly indicate that Mach waves formed meet at a point and below this

point cowl lip will be placed.

The Mach number observed in this case is 1.55.

Total Pressure

Following total pressure contour is obtained,

59
 Fig. 7.54. Total pressure recovery at free stream Mach 3.5
The total pressure recovery observed in this case is 0.93.

7.12.2.5 At Mach 3

Mesh

Following mesh was generated in fluent mesh module.

Fig. 7.55. Mesh at Mach 3

60
The above mesh is also structured meshing. More over the quality of above mesh is

minimum of 0.63.

Mach number

Following Mach number contour was generated

Fig. 7.56. Mach number contour at free stream Mach of 3

The above contours show that all Mach waves formed converge at a point. Below this

point cowl lip will be placed. The Mach number observed is 1.25.

Total Pressure

Following total pressure contour is obtained,

61
 Fig. 7.57. Total pressure recovery
This above shows that the pressure recovery obtained is 0.95.

7.12.2.6 At Mach 2.5

Mesh

Following mesh was generated in fluent mesh module.

62
 Fig. 7.58. Mesh at Mach 2.5
The structural meshing was used for this purpose. The meshing elements were

concentrated at angle so that shock phenomenon is observed more clearly.

Mach Number

Following Mach number contour was generated

63
 Fig. 7.59. Mach number contour at free stream Mach 2.5
These shows that weak shock waves i.e. Mach waves are formed and all meet at a point.

Total Pressure

Following total pressure contour is obtained,

64
 Fig. 7.60. Total pressure recovery contour at free stream Mach 2.5
The above contour indicates that a disruption in the end is due to the fact that transition

region is achieved. In this case cowl lip is placed below and as a result it can be avoided.

The pressure recovery obtained in this case is 0.95.

7.12.2.7 At Mach 2

Mesh

Following mesh was generated in fluent mesh module.

65
 Fig. 7.61. Mesh at Mach 2
The structural mesh was done in this case.

Mach Number

Following Mach number contour was generated

Fig. 7.62. Mach number contour at free stream Mach 2

The above mesh shows that weak shocks are being formed.

66
Total Pressure

Following total pressure contour is obtained,

Fig. 7.63. Total pressure recovery contour

The above shows that 0.97 pressure recovery is obtained

7.13 Cone

For CFD analysis of cone, a cone can easily be treated as a 2-dimensional problem in

fluent provided the boundary conditions are to be changed in fluent solver. The process is

same as that of the 2D wedge relations except of the fact that there is change in boundary

conditions.

For Fluent following settings were used,

7.13.1 General

Density based solver was used because we are dealing with high speed flow and thus

density-based solver is well suited for this purpose.

67
More over since we are using cone, in this case we use axisymmetric condition.

Fig. 7.64. For cone solver settings

7.13.2 Model

For this purpose, we used inviscid model, this is due to the fact that we are only

observing two phenomenon Mach number and pressure recovery thus its computational

cheap to do that.

68
 Fig. 7.65. Mode for cone
7.13.3 Materials

For material air is treated as ideal gas.

69
 Fig. 7.66. Material selection
7.13.4 Boundary Conditions

The boundary condition for cone is same as that of the wedge case. Only thing different

in this case is the axis boundary condition. In this case the symmetry boundary condition

is replaced by axis boundary. Following Fig. shows the boundary condition

70
 Fig. 7.67. Boundary condition for cone

Fig. 7.68. Boundary Conditions, A= Pressure far field, B=Axis and C=Wall

71
7.13.5 For Mach 2.5

First analysis was done for the Mach 2.5. Since in cone we use flow in axial direction

following results were obtained.

Mesh

Following is the mesh obtained for free stream <ach 2.5

Fig. 7.69. Mesh at free stream Mach 2.5

The mesh quality for above was minimum 0.7. The mesh in this case is structural

mesh.

Mach Number

Following is the Mach number contour when free stream Mach is 2.5,

72
 Fig. 7.70. Mach number contour at free stream Mach 2.5

Pressure Recovery

Following is the pressure recovery contour,

Fig. 7.71. Total Pressure recovery at free stream Mach number 2.5

73
7.13.6 At Mach 2

Following are the results for Mach number 2,

Fig. 7.72. Mesh at Mach 2

Following is the mesh done for Mach 2. The mesh in this case is structural mesh along

with mesh quality of 0.7.

Mach

Following Mach number contour was obtained,

74
 Fig. 7.73. Mach number contour at free stream Mach 2

Total Pressure Recovery

Following is the total pressure recovery contour obtained

Fig. 7.74. Absolute Pressure contour for Mach 2

75
 8. COMPARISON

Following is the comparison of results obtained from MATLAB code and CFD analysis

Table 8.1
Free Stream Mach and Obtained Mach Number

Free stream
Analytical results Numerical results Percentage error
Mach number

5 1.99 2.16 8%

4.5 1.82 1.87 3%

4 1.79 1.81 2%

3.5 1.55 1.67 8%

3 1.25 1.40 11%

2.5 1 1.15 14%

2 1 1.1 10%

76
 Table 8.2
Pressure Recovery against Different Mach Numbers

Free stream
Analytical results Numerical results Percentage error
Mach number

5 0.8456 0.85 1%

4.5 0.877 0.86 1.2%

4 0.90 0.94 4%

3.5 0.93 0.90 3%

3 0.95 0.94 1%

2.5 0.97 0.95 2%

2 0.98 0.96 2%

77
 9. DISCUSSION

In following section is the discussion from the above results of both the wedge and cone

as well as comparing the numerical results along with the analytical results obtained

through MATLAB coding. Also, we have reference in form of literature study.

9.1 Wedge

In case of wedge, it can be seen clearly that a wedge with multiple angles is required to

obtain the desire results. Moreover greater the Mach number greater the number of

shocks is obtained. Since we dealt with the scramjet case in which combustion is done in

supersonic Mach number less than 2. Thus, the above design having initial Mach number

8 then again, a step of Mach 8 followed by step of 7 and 6, in the end 3 steps of

consecutive 5 degree were sufficient to fulfill our purpose.

It has been seen that in our geometry instead of strong shock waves, multiple Mach

waves are being formed. These all Mach waves converge at a specific point and as a

result strong shock wave is formed. The point below this is considered as the point for

cowl lip. More over when wedge is subjected to different free stream Mach number then

the length changes respectively but angles remain same, because it’s much more efficient

to increase or decrease length instead of moving cowl lip. Also, all Mach waves converge

at a specific point.

When wedge is subjected to the hypersonic Mach number of 5, from both the numerical

and analytical results it has been clear that pressure is greatly dropped. But when

compared to other inlets at this high speed this drop is very insignificant and thus it

obtains a very high efficiency. This is due to the fact that a large number of Mach waves

78
are being formed along with the shock waves of was weak strength. Thus, a pressure

recovery of 0.85 was obtained and total percentage error is 1%.

Similarly, when wedge is subjected to a lower Mach number of 4.5 the results obtained

are also similar but the pressure recovery increases from 0.85 to 0.86 with just percentage

error of 1.2%. Also, we conclude that since Mach number is reduced thus less weak

shock i.e. Mach waves are required to achieve the desired Mach number hence pressure

recovery is increased.

When Mach number is further dropped to 4, the pressure recovery further increases.

More over Mach 4 is our design Mach number. This was the point which formed the

basis of our intake. Intake was optimized for other Mach number on the basis of this

Mach 4. Thus free stream Mach 4 is our reference Mach number. More over the pressure

recovery obtained at this in 0.94. The error is just about 4%. More over at this Mach

number the intake is considered to be in most suitable length.

Further reducing the Mach number further increases the pressure recovery along with the

increase in length of the intake. Since intake is designed for high speed flow thus it has

been observed that it best behaves when Mach is above 3. At Mach 3.5 the pressure

recovery observed is 0.90 with percentage error of 3%.

When further reduced to Mach 3 the efficiency jumps to 94% with percentage error of

1%.

When further reduced to Mach 2.5 and 2 it has been observed that since we didn’t change

the angle only the length thus due to this Mach is reduced more and also transition region

79
is formed which also alters the results. But without transition region formation the

efficiency is 0.95 and pure Mach waves are being formed.

9.2 Cone

In case of cone, Taylor Macoll equations are used and conical shocks are formed instead

of the oblique shocks. These shocks are weaker as compared to the oblique shocks and

thus provide more pressure recovery then the same oblique shock. But the drawback is

that a large angle is required when Mach number is high.

In double cone the shock wave is stable up to Mach 2, and becomes unstable at higher

Mach numbers and start oscillations after Mach 2.2 [9]. So, we would not use double or

higher angle division cones in hypersonic intake.

From literature review and also with the MATLAB code along with CFD results it has

been made clear that too large angle is required to reduce the Mach number.

For example, at free stream Mach 4, the angle required to reduce it to 1.7 is 40 degrees.

This 40-degree is half cone angle. And hence a large cone is formed which alters the

required results due to boundary layer formation.

More over when we step is used in case of cone after double steps the results again start

to alter this is due to fact that conical shock is different from that of the oblique shock.

Thus, due to this fact we cannot increase steps in cone as we did in case of oblique shock.

Also cone in a 3d problem but in fluent it can easily be treated as that of a 2d case as

stated by the Cornell University Lecture. When axisymmetric condition along with the

axis boundary condition is given in fluent, fluent treat it as a cone and we observe same

results as that of a full 3D cone.

80
This method is computationally much cheaper and requires less time and gives same

results.

In cone since we cannot give steps as well as large angle is required for high speed Mach.

There for cone is best suited for a low supersonic Mach number 2 and 2.5.

At 4 which is our design Mach number, does not give satisfactory results and very large

angle is required.

81
 10. SOCIETAL IMPACT

When we talk about societal impact our main concern is how it will shape or help the

society. Since our project is related to R&D, thus its impact in on the aerospace defense

sector. Since we are dealing with air-breathing engine inlet so, our concern is its

efficiency.

Our aim was to design an inlet having maximum pressure recovery and minimum losses.

Thus, due to this fact we can say that our societal impact is that we save fuel and increase

efficiency thus, helping in economy.

82
 11. ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS

We consider environmental benefits, since we are increasing the efficiency of the air-

breathing inlet. Thus, with increase in efficiency the performance of the air-breathing

engine increases thus, less emission of harmful carbon dioxide and nitrogen oxide in the

environment.

83
 12. CONCLUSION

From the results obtained from MATLAB code and CFD analysis. Following two

geometries were selected. Since our goal was to obtain Mach number below 2 and along

with maximum pressure recovery as possible. Two geometries selected are

1. 5-4(10)

2. 8-8-5-6(3)

The above result table shows that percentage error is very less in both the geometries.

Moreover, we also conclude that greater the steps are divided greater is pressure recovery

but as a consequence it becomes more and more impractical. Also, simply dividing into

steps doesn’t lead to low pressure recovery because shocks start meeting together thus a

stronger translation effect occurs.

From above CFD Fluent Analysis and MATLAB Code following results were deduced

1. With such angle distribution Mach waves were formed and clearly visible

2. All Mach waves met at a point. This is the point at which cowl lip will be placed.

3. The efficiency of above all is much higher and cruising Mach its above 90%.

Which is excellent in case of such high Mach number

4. At cruise Mach of 4 the inlet gives maximum pressure recovery and minimum

losses.

5. At Mach 2 because of low Mach number and high angle it gives less efficiency.

6. It has been clearly observed that at high Mach number above 3 efficiencies

greatly increased.

7. Cone is not suited for high Mach number such as 3 or above.

84
8. From MATLAB results it was clear that large angles were required to bring high

Mach such as 4 and above to a supersonic compression.

85
 13. FUTURE WORK

We developed a conceptual design of an inlet which behaves as shockless i.e. forms

Mach waves instead of the shock waves. The future work in this regard is practical design

of the inlet. Moreover, a practical way has to implement this inlet.

86
 14. APPENDIX

14.1 MATLAB CODE FOR WEDGE

%%MATLAB code for wedge

%%using static pressure as ground 101325 pascals
p1=101325; % Static Pressure at sea level in Pa
gamma=1.4;
n=0;
pr=1;
M1=input('Enter the value of free stream Mach number = ');
i=0;
total_pressure=0;

theta =input('Enter value Smallest Division of Theta = ');

m=input('Enter the multiple of Smallest Theta''s = ' );

display( ' Total Value of Deflection angle (Theta) ');

Tt=theta*m;
display(Tt)
for i=1:1:m
theta1=theta*pi/180; %angle in radian
mu=asin(1/M1);

c=tan(mu)^2;
a=((gamma-1)/2+(gamma+1)*c/2)*tan(theta1);
b=((gamma+1)/2+(gamma+3)*c/2)*tan(theta1);
d=sqrt(4*(1-3*a*b)^3/((27*a^2*c+9*a*b-2)^2)-1);
Beta=atan((b+9*a*c)/(2*(1-3*a*b))-(d*(27*a^2*c+9*a*b-2))/(6*a*(1-
3*a*b))*tan(n*pi/3+1/3*atan(1/d)))*180/pi;
beta1=Beta
Mn1=M1*sind(beta1);
Mn2=sqrt(((1+((gamma-1)/2)*Mn1^2)/(gamma*Mn1^2-((gamma-1)/2))));
theta1=theta1*180/pi;
M2=Mn2/sind(beta1-theta1);

po1=p1*(1+((gamma-1)/2)*M1^2)^(gamma/(gamma-1));
p2=p1*(1+(2*gamma/(gamma+1))*(Mn1^2-1));
po2=p2*(1+((gamma-1)/2)*M2^2)^(gamma/(gamma-1));
pr1=po2/po1;

pr=pr1*pr;
M1=M2;

87
end

display(' Mach Number After Compression Waves ')

M_last=M1;
display(M_last)
display(' Total Pressure Ratio ')
Pr_total=pr;
display(Pr_total)

14.2 CONE TAYLOR MACOLL MATLAB CODE

%%no loop function for input values

Minf=4;%input('put value of the free stream Mach number = ');
thetas=input('enter deflection angle= ');
gamma=1.4%input('put the value of gamma= ');
solvecone(thetas,Minf,gamma)

Main function

function [thetac,Mc,sol]=solvecone(thetas,Minf,gamma)
% Solves the right circular cone at zero angle of attack in supersonic
flow
% thetas - shock angle [degrees]
% Minf - upstream Mach number
% gamma - ratio of specific heats
pr=1;
% Convert to radians
thetasr=thetas*pi/180.0;

if (thetasr<=asin(1/Minf))
thetac=0.0; Mc=Minf;
return;
end
p1=101325; % pascal at sealevel0ft

% Calculate initial flow deflection (delta) just after shock...

delta=thetabetam(thetasr,Minf,gamma);
Mn1=Minf*sin(thetasr);
Mn2=sqrt((Mn1^2+(2/(gamma-1)))/(2*gamma/(gamma-1)*Mn1^2-1));
M2=Mn2/(sin(thetasr-delta))

po1=p1*(1+((gamma-1)/2)*Minf^2)^(gamma/(gamma-1));
p2=p1*(1+(2*gamma/(gamma+1))*(Mn1^2-1));
po2=p2*(1+((gamma-1)/2)*M2^2)^(gamma/(gamma-1));

88
 pr1=po2/po1
pr=pr1*pr
%plot(pr,thetas)
%xlabel('pressure recovery oblique shock')
%ylabel('deflection angle')
%grid on
%hold on

% All values are non-dimensionalized!

% Calculate the non-dimensional velocity just after the oblique shock
V0=(1+2/((gamma-1)*M2^2))^(-0.5);
% Calculate velocity components in spherical coordinates
Vr0=V0*cos(thetasr-delta);
Vtheta0=-V0*sin(thetasr-delta);
% Calculate initial values for derivatives
dVr0=Vtheta0;
% Assemble initial value for ODE solver
y0=[Vr0;dVr0];

% Set up ODE solver

% Quit integration when vtheta=0
% See: coneevent.m
% Set relative error tolerance small enough to handle low M
options=odeset('Events',@coneevent,'RelTol',1e-5);
% Solve by marching solution away from shock until either 0 degrees or
flow
% flow tangency reached as indicated by y(2)==0.
% See cone.m
[sol]=ode15s(@cone,[thetasr 1e-10],y0,options,gamma);
% Check if we have a solution, as ode15s may not converge for some
values.
[n,m]=size(sol.ye);
thetac=0.0;
Mc=Minf;
% If ODE solver worked, calculate the angle and Mach number at the
cone.
if (n>0 & m>0 & abs(sol.ye(2))<1e-10)
thetac=sol.xe*180.0/pi
Vc2=sol.ye(1)^2+sol.ye(2)^2;
Mc=((1.0/Vc2-1)*(gamma-1)/2)^-0.5

%po1c=p1*(1+((gamma-1)/2)*Minf^2)^(gamma/(gamma-1));
%p2c=p1*(1+(2*gamma/(gamma+1))*(Mn1^2-1));
%po2c=p2c*(1+((gamma-1)/2)*Mc^2)^(gamma/(gamma-1));
%prc1=po2c/po1c
%prc=prc1*pr

%plot(prc,thetas)
%xlabel('pressure recovery of cone')
%ylabel('deflection angle')
%grid on
%hold on

%plot(thetac,thetas)
%xlabel('cone angle')
%ylabel('shock deflection angle')

89
%grid on

%hold on

end

Cone vector subfuncton

function [value,isterminal,direction]=coneevent(theta,y,gamma)
% Check cone solution for point where vtheta=0
% theta - current angle
% y - current solution vector
% gamma - ratio of specific heats

value=zeros(2,1);
isterminal=zeros(2,1);
direction=zeros(2,1);

%Quit if Vr goes negative (which shouldn’t happen!)

value(1)=1.0;
if (y(1)<0.0)
value(1)=0.0;
end
isterminal(1)=1;
direction(1)=0;

%Quit if Vtheta goes positive (which occurs at the wall)

value(2)=1.0;
if (y(2)>0.0)
value(2)=0.0;
end
isterminal(2)=1;
direction(2)=0;

Beta function

function [theta]=thetabetam(beta,M,gamma)
% Return theta for beta-theta-M relationship for oblique shocks
% beta - shock angle in radians

90
% M - upstream Mach number
% gamma - ratio of specific heat
%Cut off at Mach wave angle
if (beta<=asin(1/M)) theta=0; return;
end
theta=atan(2*cot(beta)*((M*sin(beta))^2-
1)/(M^2*(gamma+cos(2*beta))+2));

Differentialfunction

function [dy]=cone2(theta,y,gamma)
% y is a vector containing vr, vr’
% Governing equations are continuity, irrotationality, & Euler’s
equation.
dy=zeros(2,1);

dy(1)=y(2);
dy(2)=(y(2)^2*y(1)-(gamma-1)/2*(1-y(1)^2-
y(2)^2)*(2*y(1)+y(2)*cot(theta)))...
/((gamma-1)/2*(1-y(1)^2-y(2)^2)-y(2)^2);

91
 15. REFERENCES

1. S. H. Miri, "Shock-less Hypersonic Intakes," Theses and dissertations, no. 1361,

2012.

2. D. V. Wie and S. Molder, "Applications of Busemann Inlet Designs for Flight at

Hypersonic Speeds," AlAA, 1992.

3. E. V. Timofeev, a. R. B. Tahir and S. M¨older, "On Recent Developments Related

to Flow Starting in Hypersonic Air Intakes," AIAA, 2008.

4. R. Selescu, "A new type shock free axisymmetric supersonic flow," Non Linear

Anaylsis, no. 47, pp. 4949-4960, 2001.

5. E. T. Sannu Mölder, Hypersonic Air Intake Design for High Performance and

Starting, Montreal: NATO, OTAN.

6. P. Donde, A. G. Marathe and K. Sudhakar‡, "Starting in Hypersonic Intakes," in

42nd AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference & Exhibit,

Sacramento, California, 9 - 12 July 2006.

7. A. H. Shapiro, The Dynamics And Thermodynamics of Compressible Fluid Flow,

Ronald.

8. E. C. a. S. Murthy, Scram Jet Propulsion, AIAA.

9. H. Kleine and K. Hiraki, "Supersonic flow over double cone geometries,"

Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, p. 101, 2005.

92