NASA Sonic Boom Wind Tunnel Testing
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Low-Boom Technology↗
Engineering topics
Melissa B Carter
Publications and source records attributed to Melissa B Carter.
X-59 Sonic Boom Test Results from the NASA Glenn 8- by 6-Foot Supersonic Wind Tunnel
A wind tunnel test was conducted to investigate near-field sonic boom pressure signatures of the X-59 Low-Boom Flight Demonstrator aircraft. A 1.62%-scale model of the aircraft was fabricated for the wind tunnel test, which took place in the NASA Glenn 8- by 6-Foot Supersonic Wind Tunnel in September and October 2021. The model had provisions for being mounted by a swept blade strut that attached at top of model ahead of the inlet, or by a rear-entry sting that held the model at the location of the nacelle. The model had alternate parts for ±0.5° deflections of the flaps, ailerons, and stabilator, and ±1° deflections of the T-tail. Off-body static pressure measurements of the flow field below the model were made on a pressure rail which had 420 orifices along its tip. The model was positioned at various heights from the rail by vertical movement of the tunnel strut, and at various longitudinal stations relative to the rail by means of a linear actuator mounted between the wind tunnel strut and the balance. Spatial averaging of model pressure signatures acquired over a range of longitudinal positions reduced the effects of tunnel flow distortions and the interference of the rail flow field and shocks on the model pressure signatures. The test was run at approximate Mach numbers of 1.36, 1.4, and 1.47, and the model was set at various angles of attack and roll relative to the rail. Plots of the model signatures for representative variations of Mach number, model angles, control deflections, and height relative to the rail are provided throughout the report. Repeatability was generally very good and gave confidence in the quality of the measurements. The signatures measured at various heights from the rail provided insight into the aging of the model shocks as they propagated from 1.2 to 3 body lengths from the model. Off-track signatures up to 45° from centerline obtained by rolling the model gave indications of the shock flow fields across the width of the sonic boom carpet. The deflections of the various control surfaces allowed assessment of the boom sensitivity to the control surface movements.
Sonic boom↗
USM3D Simulations for the Third AIAA Sonic Boom Prediction Workshop
The NASA USM3D flow solver was used to compute test cases for the Third AIAA Sonic Boom Prediction Workshop (SBPW3). The test cases included a nearfield biconvex shock-plume interaction wind tunnel model and the C608 Low Boom Flight Demonstrator. Numerical simulations were conducted on the mixed-element and tetrahedral grids provided by the workshop committee, as well as a family of grids generated by an in-house approach known as BoomGrid. The nearfield pressure signatures were extracted and propagated to the ground, and the perceived loudness levels on the ground were computed. The USM3D nearfield pressure signatures, corresponding ground signatures, and loudness levels on the ground were compared with that of mean values from other workshop participants. The effect of three flux-limiters on the accuracy of nearfield pressure signature prediction was investigated and results were compared with that of mean values from other workshop participants. The effect of using wall-function models for predicting nearfield pressure signatures was also evaluated. Results showed that the overpressure signatures extracted from the wall-modeled simulations and the wall-resolved simulations are in good agreement. The use of wall functions (wall-modeled simulations) allowed for approximately 23% savings in the time to solution and yielded comparable perceived loudness levels on the ground to the wall-resolved Reynolds-averaged Navier Stokes simulations.
Supersonics↗
Nearfield Summary and Analysis of the Third AIAA Sonic Boom Prediction Workshop C608 Low Boom Demonstrator
A summary and statistical analysis of the nearfield Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) submissions for the Third AIAA Sonic Boom Prediction Workshop is provided with a focus on the C608 Low Boom Flight Test Demonstrator. The C608 is more complex in terms of geometry and propulsion boundary conditions than previous workshops cases and is more representative of vehicles with lower ground loudness and the potential for lower annoyance. The nearfield signatures submitted by the participants are propagated to the ground to compute statistics of loudness measures over the vehicle sonic boom carpet. Principle component analysis is used to extract the primary variation modes. Context from previous sonic boom workshops indicates that this workshop has the lowest variation even though the case is more challenging because it is quieter and more complex. The international state-of-the-art results documented in this summary indicates that nearfield CFD variation is low enough for meaningful low-boom design and can contribute toward the discussion of replacing the prohibition of overland supersonic flight with a certification standard.
sonic boom↗
Near Field Summary and Analysis of the Third AIAA Sonic Boom Prediction Workshop Shock-Plume Interaction Case
This paper will provide a summary and comparison of the results for the shock-plumeinteraction case, also known as the Bi-Convex case, from the 3rd AIAA Sonic BoomPrediction Workshop that was held in January 2020. The paper will include results from theparticipants, analysis of the results against existing experimental data, as well as look as theimpact of grid resolution
Melissa B Carter↗
Nearfield Summary and Analysis of the Third AIAA Sonic Boom Prediction Workshop C608 Low Boom Demonstrator
A summary and statistical analysis of the nearfield Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD)submissions for the Third AIAA Sonic Boom Prediction Workshop is provided with a focus onthe C608 Low Boom Flight Test Demonstrator. The C608 is more complex in terms of geometryand propulsion boundary conditions than previous workshop cases and is more representativeof vehicles with lower ground loudness and the potential for lower annoyance. The nearfieldsignatures submitted by the participants are propagated to the ground to compute statisticsof loudness measures over the vehicle sonic boom carpet. Principle component analysis isused to extract the primary variation modes. Context from previous sonic boom workshopsindicates that this workshop has the lowest variation even though the case is more challengingbecause it is quieter and more complex. The results documented in this summary indicate thatthe international state-of-the-art for nearfield CFD has a variation that is small enough formeaningful low-boom design and analysis. Low-boom configuration analysis methods with lowvariation are important tools to develop certification processes for addressing the prohibitionon overland supersonic commercial flight.
sonic boom CFD workshop c608↗
USM3D Simulations for Third Sonic Boom Workshop
The NASA USM3D flow solver was used to compute test cases for the Third AIAA Sonic Boom Prediction Workshop (SBPW3). The test cases include a nearfield biconvex shock-plume interaction wind tunnel model, and the C608 Low Boom Flight Demonstrator. Numerical simulations were conducted on the mixed-element and tetrahedral grids provided by the workshop committee, as well as a family of grids generated by an in-house approach for sonic boom analyses known as BoomGrid. The near-field pressure signatures were extracted, propagated to the ground and the perceived loudness levels on the ground were computed. The USM3D near-field pressure signatures, corresponding ground signatures, and loudness levels on the ground are compared with that of mean values from other workshop participants. The effect of three flux-limiters on the accuracy of near-field pressure signatures prediction was investigated and results are compared with that of mean values from other workshop participants. The effect of using wall function grids in accurately predicting near-field pressure signatures was also evaluated.
Supersonics↗
Nearfield Summary and Analysis of the Third AIAA Sonic Boom Prediction Workshop C608 Low Boom Demonstrator
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Sonic Boom↗