Aerospace Science and Technology 10 (2006) 659–667

www.elsevier.com/locate/aescte

Experimental investigation of isolated inlets for high agile missiles

Experimentelle Untersuchungen an isolierten Einläufen

für hochagile Flugkörper
Dirk Herrmann ∗ , Klaus Triesch
Institute of Aerodynamics and Flow Technology, Wind Tunnel Section, DLR, 51147 Cologne, Germany
Received 26 October 2005; received in revised form 2 May 2006; accepted 2 May 2006
Available online 26 September 2006

Abstract
Experimental studies are accomplished with two axially symmetric inlet models with different internal compressions. Main interest lies in
covering a large and flexible maneuver range at supersonic speed. This requires an analysis of the performance such as pressure recovery and
mass flow.
The inlets are analyzed at the design Mach number MA = 3 in an angle of attack range of 0◦  α  30◦ in the Vertical Wind Tunnel (VMK)
in Cologne. The tests indicate an operability up to α = 30◦ . Furthermore a loss of pressure recovery and mass flow is discovered at an angle of
attack of α  18◦ . Accordingly boundary layer bleed is implemented to get a better pressure recovery and a delayed buzzing.
© 2006 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.
Zusammenfassung
Experimentelle Untersuchungen sind an vollrotationssymmetrischen Einlaufmodellen mit unterschiedlicher Innenverdichtung durchgeführt
worden. Besonderes Interesse liegt darin, dass im Überschallflug ein möglichst großer und flexibler Manöverbereich abgedeckt werden kann.
Dazu werden Leistungsmerkmale wie Druckrückgewinn und Massendurchsatz analysiert.
Für die Auslegungsmachzahl MA = 3 sind die Einläufe in einem Anstellwinkelbereich von 0◦  α  30◦ in der Vertikalen Messstrecke Köln
(VMK) untersucht worden. Die Experimente bestätigen eine Funktionsfähigkeit bis α = 30◦ . Weiter zeigt sich, dass ab einem Anstellwinkel von
α  18◦ Verluste im Druckrückgewinn und Massendurchsatz auftreten. Durch den Einsatz der Grenzschichtabsaugung wird eine Verbesserung
im Druckrückgewinn und ein Herauszögern des Brummens ermöglicht.
© 2006 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Axially symmetric inlet; Ramjet; Boundary layer bleed; Supersonic flow

Schlüsselwörter: Rotationssymmetrischer Einlauf; Ramjet; Grenzschichtabsaugung; Überschallströmung

1. Introduction The air is absorbed by the ramjet’s inlet and is compressed

Missiles at supersonic speed like ramjets extract the oxygen
for the combustion from the atmosphere, unlike rockets, which
carry solid or liquid fuel. Therefore weight can be saved, but it
is reliant on a sufficient amount of air.
* Corresponding author
E-mail address: dirk.herrmann@dlr.de (D. Herrmann).
1270-9638/$ – see front matter © 2006 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ast.2006.05.004
for subsonic combustion. This operation must be assured.
Hence, it is obvious that the external influences can be of high
relevance. Thus it is important that the inlet provides the engine
with air mass flow with the required pressure recovery for the
combustion.
Several studies were performed to analyze mass flow and
pressure recovery with different inner geometric concepts [1,2].
Further studies concentrate on the combustion and engine be-
havior [3] as well as fuel injection techniques [4,5].
660 D. Herrmann, K. Triesch / Aerospace Science and Technology 10 (2006) 659–667

Nomenclature

l reference length . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . m δCowl angle of the cowl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ◦

ṁ mass flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . kg s−1 μ viscosity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . kg m−1 s−1
p pressure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pa ρ density . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . kg m−3
pPitot Pitot pressure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pa κ ratio of specific heat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –
u velocity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . m s−1
Subscripts
x, y, z Cartesian coordinates
A reference area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . m2 st static
M Mach number . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – t total condition
R gas constant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . J kg−1 K−1 A design (shock-on-lip)
Re Reynolds number Re = ρ0 u0 l/μ 0 free stream condition
T temperature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . K 1,2 positions
α angle of attack . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ◦ 3 position before throttle
δCone angle of the cone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ◦ 4 position of throttle’s reference area

According to these studies it is important to assure the func-

tionality of the ramjet and to investigate its performance for
a flexible maneuver range. The flexibility must be assured for
high angles of attack while approaching the target. In this phase
the important component is the air breathing engine of the ram-
jet.
In order to achieve high flight agility, the performance of
two inlet configurations is investigated at the Wind Tunnel Sec-
tion Cologne of the DLR, where a long tradition of investigat-
ing ramjet inlet performances is existing e.g. see [6,7]. These
current investigations are in the context of the DLR-project
“Hochagiler Flugkörper” (HaFK).
The air breathing inlet is integrated in the very front of the
main body of the missile. It possesses two cones, which are used
for external compression. The reason for choosing cones is the
minimization of boundary layer effects of the main body [8].
The advantage of the cone is a minor total pressure recovery
loss; in comparison to a wedge of the same half angle, the front
shock for a cone will detach at a smaller Mach number [8].
Nevertheless the three dimensional flow of the cone tends to an
unsymmetrical flow, which can lead to a restriction in the inlet’s
agility [8].
This paper describes the experimental techniques and results
of these air breathing inlets at the free stream Mach number of
M0 = 2.99 with an angle of attack range of 0◦  α  30◦ . This
study proves operability of the inlets. Nevertheless, a perfor-
mance drop at an angle of attack of α  18◦ is identified as well.
After this introduction the wind tunnel and the inlet mod-
els are described in Section 2. The tests and the validation of Fig. 1. Configuration in the Vertical Wind Tunnel (VMK) at maximum angle of
the performance with pressure recovery and mass flow ratio is attack.
shown in Section 3. Furthermore the cause of loss in pressure
recovery and mass flow is analyzed with Schlieren photos, oil The VMK (Fig. 1) is a free jet facility. It is designed as an
flow visualizations and Pitot pressure measurements. engine test plant, which is able to simulate sea level flight con-
ditions at Mach numbers up to 2.8. Using different axially sym-
2. Experimental set-up metrical nozzles the flight Mach number from a subsonic range
of 0.5 to 0.95 and a supersonic range of 1.6 to 3.2 can be ad-
2.1. Wind tunnel VMK justed over test durations between 30 to 60 seconds.
Fig. 1 shows the model installed inside the VMK test sec-
The experiments are conducted in the Vertical Wind Tunnel tion just mounted over the nozzle. The model is supported by
VMK [9] of the German Aerospace Center (DLR) in Cologne. a special device to adjust the angle of attack. On the model a
 D. Herrmann, K. Triesch / Aerospace Science and Technology 10 (2006) 659–667 661

measurement pipe is integrated and a throttle is mounted at the
rear of the inlet.
The measurement techniques which are applied are Schlieren
and oil flow visualization as well as Pitot- and pressure mea-
surement.
2.2. Models and flow condition
The three axially symmetric inlet models HaFK-0, HaFK-1
and HaFK-2 with mixed compression are designed with the
characteristic-method based on [10], which has in-house mod-
ifications. The results of the calculations are presented in the
following Fig. 2.
The inlets are designed for a free stream Mach number of
MA = 3.0 (shock-on-lip) and have a self-start Mach number of
M0 = 2.2. The geometry of HaFK-0, HaFK-1 and HaFK-2 dif-
fer in their second cone angle δ Cone,2 and internal compression
(see Table 1).
Main focus is lying in the choice of external compression
(δ Cone,2 variation) this is intimately connected with the design
of the cowl angle and the inlet’s inside compression. The cowl
(and δ Cowl respectively) has to imply a smooth deflection so that
the resulting shock does not initiate a flow separation on the
main body; furthermore, the self-start and the self-start Mach
number must be assured by designing the main body contour
for inside compression.
HaFK-1 has a lower external compression and the influence
of the larger inside compression is minor. Hence, it was ex-
pected that the pressure recovery is worse than the others, so
HaFK-0 and HaFK-2 were built. The maximal pressure recov-
ery that can be reached for a three shock system (two oblique
shocks and a normal shock) at M0 = 3.0 is 75% [8,11,12], when
each oblique shock is of equal strength [11]. Thus, this inlet has
a higher pressure recovery and this contains a design with larger
cone angles, which in turn leads to a higher drag. Further, this
kind of inlet with boundary layer bleed has a larger mass flow
loss because of the higher compression and the effects of un-
symmetrical flow (as aforementioned) come to the fore.
Fig. 3 represents a photo of the two-cone inlet. At its throat
are integrated segments (Fig. 4), which are arranged in 3 mm
wide 45◦ -steps and are separated from each other with 2 mm
bars. The segments allow a certain amount of boundary layer
bleed to leave the inlet. This is possible through a hollow main
body. It is connected with bleed ducts, which lead the air out of
the inlet (Fig. 4). One bleed duct exit is seen at the right side of
Fig. 3.
The air breathing inlets HaFK-0 and HaFK-2 are tested be-
tween an angle of attack of 0◦ and 30◦ in increments of 3◦ with
and without boundary layer bleed (see Table 2). The flow condi-
tion is given with a free stream Mach number of M0 = 2.99 and
total conditions of Tt0 = 293 K and respectively pt0 = 25.3 bar.
This condition results in a Reynolds number of 2 × 108 m−1 .
2.3. Measurement techniques
For the analysis of the inlet’s performance its mass flow ra-
tio and pressure recovery have to be measured. These analyses
require a measurement configuration, which results are given

Fig. 3. Two-cone inlet (HaFK-0).

Fig. 4. Sketch of model attachment and bleed ducts of HaFK-2.

Fig. 2. Results of the characteristic-method for model HaFK-0 and MA = 3.0.
Table 2
Table 1 Test conditions
Geometry of axially symmetric inlet models
Model M0 (–) α-range (◦ ) Bleed segments
Model δ Cone,1 (◦ ) δ Cone,2 (◦ ) δ Cowl (◦ ) Inside compression (%) HaFK-0 2.99 0. . . 30 closed
HaFK-0 13.0 25.0 15.0 10.1 2.99 0. . . 21 open
HaFK-1 13.0 23.0 13.0 17.8 HaFK-2 2.99 0. . . 21 closed
HaFK-2 13.0 27.0 17.0 8.8 2.99 0. . . 21 open
662 D. Herrmann, K. Triesch / Aerospace Science and Technology 10 (2006) 659–667

Fig. 5. Measurement configuration.

Fig. 7. 26◦ cone with Pitot rake.

During the test run the throttle is closing (arrow direction in

Fig. 6). This results in the vertical line with constant mass flow
and rising pressure recovery (supercritical condition). Whilst
closing, the pressure at the throttle is rising and the normal
shock is moving upstream, until it jumps out of the inlet and
forms a detached shock (subcritical condition). The maximum
pressure recovery has been reached in the throat (critical condi-
tion).
When the shock is outside and in front of the inlet’s entrance
the result is mass flow loss. A part of the flow does not enter
the inlet anymore but generates spillage. Outside, the condi-
tion is getting unstable while the throttle still closes. The shock
jumps in and out of the inlet. This unstable condition is known
as buzzing [15], which are pressure fluctuations. The buzzing
is detected with an rms-meter [16] and is shown as a vertical
Fig. 6. Example of inlet characteristic diagram (HaFK-0 at M0 = 2.99, α > 0◦ ). line on certain points in the subcritical region of Fig. 6, where
the value is normalized with pt0 . During buzzing strong struc-
in an inlet characteristics diagram. The measurement configu- tural loads can damage the model, so the pressure fluctuations
ration is shown in Fig. 5. are used as an abort criterion and the throttle opens at once.
To investigate the incident flow regarding the interaction
The inlet is mounted in front of the measurement pipe, which
with the inlet’s cones, Schlieren photos [17] and oil flow vi-
is connected to the throttle. The throttle, which has been cali-
sualization are used. For further analysis Pitot measurement is
brated in a bezel measuring section after [13,14], allows mea-
used as well. For this Pitot pressure is recorded at the shoulder
suring the air mass flow passing through the inlet. The variable
of a cone with an angle of 26◦ (0.5δ Cone,1 ) with two Pitot rakes
area of this throttle can be changed by a hydraulic system fixed
à 7 Pitot tubes, which can be rotated in 15◦ steps like in Fig. 7.
to the potentiometer in order to generate different levels of pres-
The measurement quality of the Pitot pressure is affected
sure recovery. From measurement parameters (p st , M0 , pt0 ) the
by the angle between tube and flow direction. The results for
following main characteristic ratios can be calculated:
angles below 10◦ are not significantly affected by the measure-
The pressure recovery
ment error [18]. To know these errors for larger angles, the flow
  κ angles with the corresponding Pitot pressure difference have to
pt3 pst3 (κ − 1) 2 κ−1
= 1+ M3 be known. First of all the flow angles at the cone’s shoulder are
pt0 pt0 2
calculated with a Fluent solver. Secondly, to get the error be-
and mass flow ratio cause of larger angles, Pitot pressure is measured with the Pitot
  κ+1 rakes (without cone) in the undisturbed flow with different an-
ṁ3 1 pt3 √ κ − 1 2 − 2(κ−1)
= √ A3 M3 κ 1 + M3 . gles of attack.
ṁ0 ṁ0 RTt 2
These equations results from the continuity equation ṁ3 = 3. Experimental results
ṁ4 , where the pressure loss is negligible (pt3 = pt4 ) and isen-
tropic flow as well as M4 = 1 is preconditioned at the throttle’s 3.1. Effects of boundary layer bleed
reference area. The outcome of this is
Using boundary layer bleed the expectation is to improve
 2  2(κ−1)
κ+1
A3 1 1 + κ−1 2 M3
the inlet’s performance. Therefore the performance is compared
= κ+1
. without and with boundary layer bleed. Fig. 8 shows character-
A4 M3 2 istic diagrams with different angles of attack without boundary
Further, M3 can be calculated iteratively, which is needed for layer bleed at M0 = 2.99. The second inlet HaFK-2 has been
pressure recovery and mass flow ratio. Both are plotted for the measured up to α = 21◦ because of the low mass flow at high
inlet characteristic diagram like in Fig. 6. angle of attack.
 D. Herrmann, K. Triesch / Aerospace Science and Technology 10 (2006) 659–667
Fig. 8. Inlet characteristic of HaFK-0 and HaFK-2 at M0 = 2.99.
The HaFK-2 inlet reveals a larger pressure recovery, because
of higher external compression (Fig. 8). The mass flow itself
decreases at growing angle of attack, because the incident flow
“sees” a reduced effective inlet area. Another feature of both
inlets is the loss in the mass flow at α > 15◦ .
For an improvement the tests’ results with boundary layer
bleed are pointed out in the following. The implementation of
boundary layer bleed leads to a larger pressure recovery and
as expected to a loss in mass flow at supercritical condition. In
comparison with HaFK-2, the HaFK-0 inlet has a lower internal
compression and therefore possesses a lower mass flow loss.
These results are shown in Fig. 9; they reveal a mass flow loss
of about 4.5% for HaFK-2 and as anticipated a smaller mass
flow loss for HaFK-0 (about 2.5%). Another result of these tests
with boundary layer bleed is that the boundary layer effects like
separation from the inner walls are reduced.
With the boundary layer bleed the characteristics are differ-
ent. The inlet does not start buzzing right after the supercritical
condition like in Fig. 8, but the pressure recovery ratio increases
with a slight loss of mass flow. Whilst the shock moves up
to the throat, the pressure increases (supercritical condition).
Reaching the throat more air is pushed out through the bleed
segment while the pressure recovery rises. At the throat the
663
Fig. 9. Inlet characteristic of HaFK-0 and HaFK-2 with boundary layer bleed at
M0 = 2.99.
Mach number is small and this results to a smaller loss of pres-
sure recovery. This behavior is demonstrated in Fig. 9.
What is remarkable at the operation condition is the lasting
mass flow loss. The early appearance of these losses has been
decreased. Now, the high mass flow loss occurs at α > 18◦ ,
due to boundary layer development and the formation of vortex
systems.
The inlets show similar behavior in the performance at the
self-start Mach number M0 = 2.2. The cones’ shocks do not fo-
cus at the cowl at this low Mach number. Therefore the spillage
is larger and likewise the sensibility of mass flow loss is minor
for small angles of attack (0◦  α  9◦ ). For these angles the
mass flow at the supercritical operation is almost identical.
3.2. Effects of mass flow losses
Looking for the reason of mass flow loss at high angle of
attack, the first idea was that the cause might be found in the
air flow towards the two-cone inlet. Hence, on the windward
side the pressure is higher than on the leeward side. To avoid
664 D. Herrmann, K. Triesch / Aerospace Science and Technology 10 (2006) 659–667
Fig. 10. HaFK-0 with flow straighteners and removed cowl.
Fig. 11. Inlet characteristics with flow straighteners of HaFK-0 at M0 = 2.99.
cross flow inside the inlet, flow straighteners in X-formation
are installed (Fig. 10). The results show Fig. 11.
In comparison to Fig. 9 it becomes obvious that the influ-
ences of flow straighteners are not significant.
In order to understand the reason of mass flow loss other
flow visualization techniques, like oil flow and Schlieren tech-
nique are used. Two Schlieren photos – taken at supercritical
condition at M0 = 2.99 – of the two-cone inlet (HaFK-0) are
displayed at α = 0◦ and α = 30◦ in Fig. 12.
In the lower part of each image the wind tunnel nozzle is sit-
uated. The flow field extending from the nozzle is bounded by
the shear layer; within lays the free stream flow, which is in turn
bounded by the Mach cone. Looking at the model at the design
Mach number and α = 0◦ the cone’s shocks are well focused
on the cowl. At α = 30◦ on the leeward side no shocks appear.
Otherwise on the windward side the shock system has inten-
sified. At that condition a detached shock at the second cone
causes spillage although the throttle is open. Nevertheless, this
fact does not explain a sudden decrease in mass flow. It seems
that complex flow phenomena like boundary layer separation,
vortex formation, etc. are responsible for this behavior.
According to this decrease in mass flow, a closer look on the
Schlieren photos reveals a normal shock in front of the inlet’s
Fig. 12. Schlieren photos of HaFK-0 at α = 0◦ and α = 30◦ , M0 = 2.99.
entrance on the windward side. Fig. 13 shows the sudden ap-
pearance of this shock between α = 12◦ to α = 18◦ in front of
the cowl. This normal shock is blocking the inlet’s entrance;
therefore less mass flow enters the inlet.
Another flow effect, which is entering the inlet, is the sli-
pline. Its appearance because of the cones’ shock interaction is
influencing the inlet’s performance at subcritical condition. At
this condition the slipline can be responsible for buzzing, which
is discussed in [19].
To get a closer look at the cones’ flow field, surface stream-
lines are visualized by oil flow technique at the cones’ surface.
In Fig. 14 the oil flow image is presented.
Just below the bleed segments, the implication of the cowl’s
reflection shock is pictured. Looking at the first cone, stream-
lines are clearly to see, which circulate around the cone and
lead into a thicker line. This behavior points at a separation of
the flow from the cone and leads to leeward vortices, which are
discussed in detail in the next section.
3.3. Effects of the leeward flow
For an improved understanding of the vortex development,
Pitot pressure at a cone’s shoulder, which is described in Sec-
tion 2.3, is measured and oil flow images are taken. The tests
are performed in the VMK at a Mach number of M0 = 2.49
with α = 25◦ and α = 15◦ . Fig. 15 presents a side view of the
cone with leeward and windward surface streamlines including
separation- and reattachment lines e.g. of the primary vortex.
 D. Herrmann, K. Triesch / Aerospace Science and Technology 10 (2006) 659–667
Fig. 13. Schlieren photos of HaFK-2 at α = 12◦ and α = 18◦ , M0 = 2.99.
Fig. 14. Surface streamlines of inlet at α = 30◦ , M0 = 2.99 (removed cowl).
665
Fig. 15. Surface streamlines of the leeward and windward side of the cone at
α = 25◦ (left) and α = 15◦ (right).
Fig. 16. Surface streamlines of the leeward side of the cone at α = 25◦ (left)
and α = 15◦ (right).
The surface streamlines in Fig. 15 circulate from the wind-
ward side to the leeward side in a similar way. These side views
reveal a varying behavior on the leeward side, which is demon-
strated more clearly in Fig. 16.
Each of the images show symmetric streamlines develop-
ing from the apex of the cone. At α = 15◦ patterns of surface
streamlines of two counter rotating vortices are interpreted.
They are expanding from the apex of the inlet’s cones. The oil
flow image at α = 25◦ is conspicuous different. The different
patterns of the streamlines point at a complex vortex system.
Most conspicuous are the sharp black lines, where the oil paint
has been wiped off. They seem to be an indication of embed-
ded shocks like in [20]. Another possibility is an indication of
induced shocks from vortices. These shocks were also found in
similar investigations of [21].
Fig. 17 introduces the flow field at the cone’s shoulder. The
results of the Pitot measurements are displayed in combination
with the oil flow images. Each black dot in Fig. 17 symbolizes
666 D. Herrmann, K. Triesch / Aerospace Science and Technology 10 (2006) 659–667
Fig. 17. Pitot measurement and oil flow images at a) α = 25◦ and b) α = 15◦ .
a Pitot tube, where the Pitot pressure is recorded. Between the
dots the pressure ratio is triangulated.
Obviously the higher pressure losses are at a larger angle
of attack. The position of the low pressure losses have also
changed in comparison to smaller angles of attack. They are
closer to the center of the leeward side. So it is comprehensi-
ble that these vortices are jointly responsible for the reduction
in performance.
4. Conclusions
The performance analyses of the two axially symmetrical in-
let models with different mixed compressions, which are tested
in the Vertical Wind Tunnel (VMK) of the German Aerospace
Center (DLR) in Cologne, showed an operability over an angle
of attack range of 0◦  α  30◦ .
For angles of attack α > 15◦ the inlet characteristics show
a loss in mass flow (and pressure recovery). An improvement
of the inlet’s performance shows the result with the modifica-
tion of boundary layer bleed for an angle of attack increase of
α = 3◦ . This is a positive outcome as the start of buzzing is
delayed and thereby the flight condition is extended.
To reduce the losses, flow straighteners for a possible cross
flow inside the inlet have been installed, but have no success.
A cause of the mass flow losses is found upstream, in front of
the inlet’s entrance. The losses are generated by a shock sys-
tem on the windward side of the cone, which is responsible
for the spillage. At the leeward side tests show an appearance
of symmetrical vortex systems, which are developing from the
apex and are getting more complex with larger angle of attack.
Further tests at the cone’s shoulder enforce the impression of
vortex systems; pressure losses duplicate and increase in value
with higher angle of attack. These effects intermix and enter the
inlet together, so the inlet’s performance is affected.
This study shows the influence of the interaction between
incident flow and the ramjet’s inlet. The flow effects like vortex-
and shock systems are interfering with the ramjets performance.
They are responsible for the losses and can affect the capability
of the combustion.
For future investigations it is important to minimize the
losses and control the flow effects. One way is to separate the
effects of intermixing. For this purpose only a segment of the
complete axially symmetrical inlet is chosen for further stud-
ies. According to its position at the front of the model the
expectation is to identify each effect without intermixing and
to improve the inlet’s performance.
Acknowledgements
This study was carried out in frame of the DLR-project
“Hochagiler Flugkörper” (HaFK). The authors gratefully ac-
knowledge the support by DLR “Aeronautics and Energy Pro-
gram Directorate”.
References
[1] T. Kanda, T. Hiraiwa, M. Izumikawa, T. Mitani, Measurement of mass
capture ratio of scramjet inlet models, AIAA 2003-11.
[2] A. Nedungadi, D.H. Van Wie, Understanding isolator performance oper-
ating in the separation-shock mode, AIAA-04-3832.
[3] K. Kato, T. Kanda, K. Kobayashi, K. Kundo, A. Murakami, Experimental
study of downstream combustion ramjet-mode, AIAA 2005-617.
[4] K. Inoue, S. Aso, A study on new injectors with slotted nozzle for im-
provement of supersonic mixing, AIAA-2004-4208.
[5] M. Kodera, T. Sunami, K. Itoh, Numerical simulation of a scramjet engine
for Jaxa’s flight experiments using HyShot, AIAA 2005-3355.
[6] H.-L. Weinreich, K. Triesch, Comparison of performances of different cir-
cular intakes, AGARD-CP-526 (1992) 23-1–23-8.
[7] W.-D. Pohl, E.-O. Krohn, Multiple-inlet configuration for missiles with
skin-to-turn control mode, AGARD-CP-526 (1992) 24-1–24-13.
[8] K. Hünecke, Flugtriebwerke – Ihre Technik und Funktion, 1. Auflage,
Stuttgart, 1976.
[9] K. Triesch, E.-O. Krohn, Die Vertikale Meßstrecke (VMK) der DFVLR in
Köln-Porz, DFVLR-Mitt. 86-22.
[10] B.H. Anderson, Design of supersonic inlets by a computer program incor-
porating the method of characteristic, NASA TN-D-4960, 1968.
[11] K. Oswatitsch, Der Druckrückgewinn bei Geschossen mit Rück-
stoßantrieb bei hohen Überschallgeschwindigkeiten, Deutsche Versuch-
sanstalt für Luftfahrt e.V., Bericht Nr. 49, Dezember 1957.
[12] E.L. Goldsmith, J. Seddon, Practical intake aerodynamic design, in: J.
Seddon (Ed.), Aerodynamic Factors in Design, in: AIAA Education Se-
ries, AIAA, Washington, DC, 1993, pp. 1–20, Chapter 1.
[13] N.N., DIN EN ISO 5167-1, Durchflussmessung von Fluiden mit Drossel-
geräten in voll durchströmten Leitungen mit Kreisquerschnitt – Teil 1: All-
gemeine Grundlagen und Anforderungen (ISO 5167-1:2003), Deutsche
Fassung EN ISO 5167-1:2003, DIN Deutsches Institut für Normung e.V.,
Beuth Verlag GmbH, Berlin, Januar 2004.
[14] N.N., DIN EN ISO 5167-2, Durchflussmessung von Fluiden mit Drossel-
geräten in voll durchströmten Leitungen mit Kreisquerschnitt – Teil 2:
Blenden (ISO 5167-1:2003), Deutsche Fassung EN ISO 5167-1:2003,
DIN Deutsches Institut für Normung e.V., Beuth Verlag GmbH, Berlin,
Januar 2004.
[15] E.-O. Krohn, Inlet buzz in ramjets and its suppression, ISABE 87-7006
and AIAA (1987) 110–117.
[16] Analog Devices, Integrated Circuit True rms-to-dc Converter, AD536,
Datenblatt.
 D. Herrmann, K. Triesch / Aerospace Science and Technology 10 (2006) 659–667 667

[17] G.S. Settles, Schlieren and Shadowgraph Techniques – Visualizing Phe-
nomena in Transparent Media, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2001.
[18] W. Nitsche, Strömungsmechanik, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg,
1994.
[19] G. Jungclaus, Neue experimentelle Ergebnisse zur Entstehung und Struk-
tur von Ferri- und Dailey-Instabilitäten („Brummen”), Z. Flugwiss. Wel-
traumforsch. 14 (1990) 256–262.
[20] S.J. Boersen, Reynolds number effects on pressure and normal force dis-
tributions along conically pointed circular cylinder at free-stream Mach
number of 2.3, NLR TR 75124 U, Netherlands, 1975.
[21] S.N. Seshadri, K.Y. Narayan, Possible types of flow on Lee-surface of
delta wings at supersonic speeds, Aeronautical Journal 5 (1988) 185–199.