Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “REYNOLDS NUMBER”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 37 records · Page 2

Measurements of Local Heat Transfer and Pressure on Six 2-Inch-Diameter Blunt Bodies at a Mach Number of 4.95 and at Reynolds Numbers Per Foot up to 81 x 10(exp 6)

Measurements of the local heat transfer and pressure distribution have been made on six 2-inch-diameter, blunt, axially symmetric bodies in the Langley gas dynamics laboratory at a Mach number of 4.95 and at Reynolds numbers per foot up to 81 x 10(exp 6). During the investigation laminar flow was observed over a hemispherical-nosed body having a surface finish from 10 to 20 microinches at the highest test Reynolds number per foot (for this configuration) of 77.4 x 10(exp 6). Though it was repeatedly possible to measure completely laminar flow at this Reynolds number for the hemisphere, it was not possible to observe completely laminar flow on the flat-nosed body for similar conditions. The significance of this phenomenon is obscured by the observation that the effects of particle impacts on the surface in causing roughness were more pronounced on the flat-nosed body. For engineering purposes, a method developed by M. Richard Dennison while employed by Lockheed Aircraft Corporation appears to be a reasonable procedure for estimating turbulent heat transfer provided transition occurs at a forward location on the body. For rearward-transition locations, the method is much poorer for the hemispherical nose than for the flat nose. The pressures measured on the hemisphere agreed very well with those of the modified Newtonian theory, whereas the pressures on all other bodies, except on the flat-nosed body, were bracketed by modified Newtonian theory both with and without centrifugal forces. For the hemisphere, the stagnation-point velocity gradient agreed very well with Newtonian theory. The stagnation-point velocity gradient for the flat- nosed model was 0.31 of the value for the hemispherical-nosed model. If a Newtonian type of flow is assumed, the ratio 0.31 will be independent of Much number and real-gas effects.

Cooper, Morton↗

Transition Reynolds Numbers of Separated Flows at Supersonic Speeds

Experimental research has been conducted on the effects of wall cooling, Mach number, and unit Reynolds number on the transition Reynolds number of cylindrical separated boundary layers on an ogive-cylinder model. Results were obtained from pressure and temperature measurements and shadowgraph observations. The maximum scope of measurements encompassed Mach numbers between 2.06 and 4.24, Reynolds numbers (based on length of separation) between 60,000 and 400,000, and ratios of wall temperature to adiabatic wall temperature between 0.35 and 1.0. Within the range of tile present tests, the transition Reynolds number was observed to decrease with increasing wall cooling, increase with increasing Mach number, and increase with increasing unit Reynolds number. The wall cooling effect was found to be four times as great when the attached boundary layer upstream of separation was cooled in conjunction with cooling of the separated boundary layer as when only the separated boundary layer was cooled. Wall cooling of both the attached and separated flow regions also caused, in some cases, reattachment in the otherwise separated region. Cavity resonance present in the separated region for some model configurations was accompanied by a large decrease in transition Reynolds number at the lower test Mach numbers.

Larson, Howard K.↗

Aerodynamics of Slender Bodies at Mach Number of 3.12 and Reynolds Numbers from 2 x 10(exp 6) to 15 x 10(exp 6) IV : Aerodynamic Characteristics of Series of Four Bodies Having Near-parabolic Noses and Cylindrical Afterbodies

Pressure distributions and forces for a series of four bodies of revolution having nose-fineness ratios varying from 4 to 10 have been obtained and compared with theory for a Mach number of 3.12, a Reynolds number range of 2x10(sup)6 to 14x10(sup)6, and angles of attack from zero to 9 degrees. In general, a comparison of the experimental data with a second-order theory showed good agreement for the range of variables investigated.

BODIES - FITNESS RATIO↗

Aerodynamics of Slender Bodies at Mach Number of 3.12 and Reynolds Numbers from 2 x 10(exp 6) to 15 x 10(exp 6) V : Aerodynamic Load Distributions for a Series of Four Boattailed Bodies

Pressure distributions for a series of four boattailed bodies of revolution were obtained and compared with theory for a Mach number of 3.12, a Reynolds number range of 2 x 10 to 6th power to 14 x 10 to the 6th power, and angles of attack from zero to 9 degrees. Second-order theory adequately predicted the pressure distribution for regions free of the effects of cross-flow separation.

Moskowitz, Barry↗

Heat-Transfer and Pressure Measurements from a Flight Test of the Third 1/18-Scale Model of the Titan Intercontinental Ballistic Missile up to a Mach Number of 3.86 and Reynolds Number per Foot of 23.5 x 10(exp 6) and a Comparison with Heat Transfer

Heat-transfer and pressure measurements were obtained from a flight test of a 1/18-scale model of the Titan intercontinental ballistic missile up to a Mach number of 3.86 and Reynolds number per foot of 23.5 x 10(exp 6) and are compared with the data of two previously tested 1/18-scale models. Boundary-layer transition was observed on the nose of the model. Van Driest's theory predicted heat-transfer coefficients reasonably well for the fully laminar flow but predictions made by Van Driest's theory for turbulent flow were considerably higher than the measurements when the skin was being heated. Comparison with the flight test of two similar models shows fair repeatability of the measurements for fully laminar or turbulent flow.

Graham, John B., Jr.↗

Reynolds number influences in aeronautics

Reynolds number, a measure of the ratio of inertia to viscous forces, is a fundamental similarity parameter for fluid flows and therefore, would be expected to have a major influence in aerodynamics and aeronautics. Reynolds number influences are generally large, but monatomic, for attached laminar (continuum) flow; however, laminar flows are easily separated, inducing even stronger, non-monatomic, Reynolds number sensitivities. Probably the strongest Reynolds number influences occur in connection with transitional flow behavior. Transition can take place over a tremendous Reynolds number range, from the order of 20 x 10(exp 3) for 2-D free shear layers up to the order of 100 x 10(exp 6) for hypersonic boundary layers. This variability in transition behavior is especially important for complex configurations where various vehicle and flow field elements can undergo transition at various Reynolds numbers, causing often surprising changes in aerodynamics characteristics over wide ranges in Reynolds number. This is further compounded by the vast parameterization associated with transition, in that any parameter which influences mean viscous flow development (e.g., pressure gradient, flow curvature, wall temperature, Mach number, sweep, roughness, flow chemistry, shock interactions, etc.), and incident disturbance fields (acoustics, vorticity, particulates, temperature spottiness, even electro static discharges) can alter transition locations to first order. The usual method of dealing with the transition problem is to trip the flow in the generally lower Reynolds number wind tunnel to simulate the flight turbulent behavior. However, this is not wholly satisfactory as it results in incorrectly scaled viscous region thicknesses and cannot be utilized at all for applications such as turbine blades and helicopter rotors, nacelles, leading edge and nose regions, and High Altitude Long Endurance and hypersonic airbreathers where the transitional flow is an innately critical portion of the problem.

Bushnell, Dennis M.↗

Heat Transfer and Boundary-Layer Transition on a Highly Polished Hemisphere-Cone in Free Flight at Mach Numbers Up to 3.14 and Reynolds Numbers Up to 24 x 10(exp 6)

A highly polished hemisphere-cone having a ratio of nose radius to base radius of 0.74 and a half-angle of 14.5 was flight tested at Mach numbers up to 4.70. Temperature and pressure data were obtained at Mach numbers up to 3.14 and a free-stream Reynolds number of 24 x 10(exp 6) based on body diameter. The nose of the model had a surface roughness of 2 to 5 microinches as measured with an interferometer. The measured Stanton numbers were in good agreement with theory. Transition Reynolds numbers based on the laminar boundary-layer momentum thickness at transition ranged from 2,190 to 794. Comparison with results from previous tests of blunt shapes having a surface roughness of 20 to 40 microinches showed that the high degree of polish was instrumental in delaying the transition from laminar to turbulent flow.

Buglia, James J.↗

Effects of independent variation of Mach and Reynolds numbers on the low-speed aerodynamic characteristics of the NACA 0012 airfoil section

A comprehensive data base is given for the low speed aerodynamic characteristics of the NACA 0012 airfoil section. The Langley low-turbulence pressure tunnel is the facility used to obtain the data. Included in the report are the effects of Mach number and Reynolds number and transition fixing on the aerodynamic characteristics. Presented are also comparisons of some of the results with previously published data and with theoretical estimates. The Mach number varied from 0.05 to 0.36. The Reynolds number, based on model chord, varied from 3 x 10 to the 6th to 12 x 10 to the 6th power.

Ladson, Charles L.↗

Aerodynamics of Slender Bodies at Mach Number of 3.12 and Reynolds Numbers from 2 x 10(exp 6) to 15 x 10(exp 6) : Body of Revolution with Near-parabolic Forebody and Cylindrical Afterbody

An experimental investigation of the aerodynamic characteristics of a slender, square-based body of revolution was conducted at a Mach number of 3.12 for angles of attack from 0 degree to 10 degrees and for Reynolds numbers from 2 x 10(exp 6) to 15 x 10(exp 6). Boundary-layer measurements at zero angle of attack are compared with several compressible flow formulating for predicting boundary-layer characteristics. Comparison of experimental pressure and force values with theoretical values showed good agreement for low angles of attack. The measured mean skin-friction coefficients agreed well with those predicted by Mangler's transformation for laminar flow over cones.

LOADS, AERODYNAMIC↗

Aerodynamic Heating and Boundary-Layer Transition on a 1/10-Power Nose Shape in Free Flight at Mach Numbers up to 6.7 and Free-Stream Reynolds Numbers up to 16 x 10(exp 6)

A modified 1/10-power nose shape has been tested in free flight at Mach numbers up to 6.7 and free - stream Reynolds numbers based on diameter up to 16 X 10(exp 6). Measured heating rates were presented and compared with calculated values. Agreement ranges from poor on the forward portion of the nose to good on the rearward portion. The local Reynolds numbers of transition based on calculated momentum thickness varied between 1, 600 and 350. Laminar flow was maintained at momentum thickness Reynolds numbers of about 1,000 until the free-stream Reynolds number based on a length of 1 foot reached about 27 X 10(exp 6). At slightly higher free-stream Reynolds numbers transition occurred at momentum thickness Reynolds numbers as low as 250.

Garland, Benjamine J↗

Force test of a 0.88 percent scale 142-inch diameter solid rocket booster (MSFC model number 461) in the NASA/MSFC high Reynolds number wind tunnel (SA13F)

The results are presented of a force test of a .88 percent scale model of the 142 inch solid rocket booster without protuberances, conducted in the MSFC high Reynolds number wind tunnel. The objective of this test was to obtain aerodynamic force data over a large range of Reynolds numbers. The test was conducted over a Mach number range from 0.4 to 3.5. Reynolds numbers based on model diameter (1.25 inches) ranged from .75 million to 13.5 million. The angle of attack range was from 35 to 145 degrees.

Johnson, J. D.↗

Design and Testing of a Blended Wing Body With Boundary Layer Ingestion Nacelles at High Reynolds Numbers

A knowledge-based aerodynamic design method coupled with an unstructured grid Navier-Stokes flow solver was used to improve the propulsion/airframe integration for a Blended Wing Body with boundary-layer ingestion nacelles. A new zonal design capability was used that significantly reduced the time required to achieve a successful design for each nacelle and the elevon between them. A wind tunnel model was built with interchangeable parts reflecting the baseline and redesigned configurations and tested in the National Transonic Facility (NTF). Most of the testing was done at the cruise design conditions (Mach number = 0.85, Reynolds number = 75 million). In general, the predicted improvements in forces and moments as well as the changes in wing pressures between the baseline and redesign were confirmed by the wind tunnel results. The effectiveness of elevons between the nacelles was also predicted surprisingly well considering the crudeness in the modeling of the control surfaces in the flow code. A novel flow visualization technique involving pressure sensitive paint in the cryogenic nitrogen environment used in high-Reynolds number testing in the NTF was also investigated.

Campbell, Richard L.↗

Effect of Reynolds Number and Mach Number on flow angularity probe sensitivity

Preliminary calibrations were performed on nine flow angularity probes in the Langley 7- by 10-Foot High-Speed Tunnel (7 x 10 HST) and the Langley 0.3-Meter Transonic Cryogenic Tunnel (0.3-m TCT). These probes will be used in surveying the test section flows of the National Transonic Facility (NTF). The probes used in this study have a pyramid head with five pressure orifices. The calibrations consisted of both isolated probe measurements and rake-mounted multiprobe measurements that covered a range of subsonic Mach numbers up to 0.90 and Reynolds numbers per foot up to 40 X 10 to the 6th power. The preliminary calibration in the 7 x 10 HST included testing the probes both individually and in a rake. The 0.3-m TCT calibration tested two probes singly at varying Reynolds numbers. The results from these tests include Mach number, Reynolds number, and rake-mounting effects. The results of these tests showed probe sensitivity to be slightly affected by Mach number. At Reynolds numbers per foot above 10 x 10 to the 6th power, the probe did not exhibit a Reynolds number sensitivity.

Smith, L. A.↗

Experimental Investigation of a Hypersonic Glider Configuration at a Mach Number of 6 and at Full-Scale Reynolds Numbers

The aerodynamic characteristics of a hypersonic glider configuration, consisting of a slender ogive cylinder with three highly swept wings, spaced 120 apart, with the wing chord equal to the body length, were investigated experimentally at a Mach number of 6 and at Reynolds numbers from 6 to 16 million. The objectives were to evaluate the theoretical procedures which had been used to estimate the performance of the glider, and also to evaluate the characteristics of the glider itself. A principal question concerned the viscous drag at full-scale Reynolds number, there being a large difference between the total drags for laminar and turbulent boundary layers. It was found that the procedures which had been applied for estimating minimum drag, drag due to lift, lift curve slope, and center of pressure were generally accurate within 10 percent. An important exception was the non-linear contribution to the lift coefficient which had been represented by a Newtonian term. Experimentally, the lift curve was nearly linear within the angle-of-attack range up to 10 deg. This error affected the estimated lift-drag ratio. The minimum drag measurements indicated that substantial amounts of turbulent boundary layer were present on all models tested, over a range of surface roughness from 5 microinches maximum to 200 microinches maximum. In fact, the minimum drag coefficients were nearly independent of the surface smoothness and fell between the estimated values for turbulent and laminar boundary layers, but closer to the turbulent value. At the highest test Reynolds numbers and at large angles of attack, there was some indication that the skin friction of the rough models was being increased by the surface roughness. At full-scale Reynolds number, the maximum lift-drag ratio with a leading edge of practical diameter (from the standpoint of leading-edge heating) was 4.0. The configuration was statically and dynamically stable in pitch and yaw, and the center of pressure was less than 2-percent length ahead of the centroid of plan-form area.

Seiff, Alvin↗

Lift, Drag, and Pitching Moments of an Arrow Wing Having 80 Degree of Sweepback at Mach Numbers from 2.48 to 3.51 and Reynolds Numbers up to 11.0 Million

Measurements were made of the lift, drag, and pitching moments on an arrow wing (taper ratio of zero) having an aspect ratio of 1.4 and a leading-edge sweepback of 80 (degrees). The wing was designed to have a subsonic leading-edge and a Clark-Y airfoil with a thickness ratio of 12 percent of the chord perpendicular to the wing leading edge. The wing was tested both with and without the wing tips bent upward in an attempt to alleviate possible flow separation in the vicinity of the wing tips. Small jets of air were used to fix transition near the wing leading edge. Force results are presented for Mach numbers of 2.48, 2.75, 3.04, 3.28, and 3.51 at Reynolds numbers of 3.5 and 9.0 million and for a Mach number of 3.04 at a Reynolds number of 11.0 million. The measured aerodynamic characteristics are compared with those estimated by linear theory. The maximum lift-drag ratio measured was much less than that predicted. This difference is attributed to lack of full leading-edge thrust and to the experimental lift-curve slope being about 20 percent below the theoretical value.

Hopkins, Edward J.↗