The effects of different wing configurations on missile aerodynamics

Abstract

In the present study, missile aerodynamic analysis is performed using different wing config-urations at subsonic and transonic speeds. The wing is critical component in point of aero-dynamic efficiency for a missile that speed is especially closer to transonic level because of flow separation. Flow on the wings may adversely effect tailfins of missile at high speed since it may cause vortex generation and flow disturbances. There are few studies that investigate the missile wing using different configurations at critical speeds when examined the previ-ous studies. Therefore, in this study, three different wing configurations are investigated and aerodynamic performance is compared with each other at 0.7 and 0.9 Mach numbers and 5° angle of attack (AoA). In beginning of this study, missile model with only tailfins is selected from previous study that contains experimental data. Because the experimental data for the selected missile model are available at supersonic speeds, the aerodynamic analysis to verify the solutions is carried out at supersonic speeds. After wing is mounted to the selected missile, aerodynamic analysis is carried out using three different wing configurations that are Tapered Leading Edge, Tapered Trailing Edge, and Double Tapered wings. Lift to drag ratio (CL/CD) is calculated to compare wing configurations and it is concluded that Tapered Leading Edge wing configuration shows higher performance then other wing configurations. CL/CD values are 2.327, 2.306, 2.303 at 0.7 Mach number and 2.45, 2.429, 2.423 at 0.9 Mach number for Tapered Leading Edge, Tapered Trailing Edge, and Double Tapered, respectively. When the results are compared each other, CL/CD values at 0.9 Mach number is higher about % 5.28, %5.33 and %5.21 than the CL/CD values at 0.7 Mach number for missile with Tapered Leading Edge, Tapered Trailing Edge, and Double Tapered, respectively.

Keywords

• Missile Aerodynamics
• Turbulence Model
• Missile Wing Configuration
• CFD

References

1. REFERENCES
2. [1] Teo HH. Aerodynamic predictions, comparisons, and validations using Missilelab and Missile Datcom (97). [Naval Postgraduate School Thesis]. California, USA: The NPS Institutional Archive; 2008.
3. [2] Sooy TJ, Schmidt RZ. Aerodynamic predictions, comparisons, and validations using missile Datcom (97) and aeroprediction 98 (AP98). J Spacecraft Rockets 2005;42:257265. [CrossRef]
4. [3] Abney EJ, McDaniel MA. High angle of attack aerodynamic predictions using missile Datcom. 23rd AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference 6-9 June 2005, Toronto, Ontorio Canada, 2005. [CrossRef]
5. [4] Lesieutre DJ, Love J, Dillenius M, Blair AB Jr. Recent applications and improvements to the engineering-level aerodynamic prediction software misl3. In: AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, 40th, Reno, 2002.
6. [5] Silton SI. Navier-Stokes computations for a spinning projectile from subsonic to supersonic speeds. J Spacecraft Rockets 2005;42:223231. [CrossRef]
7. [6] Smith KD. A Comparison of Two Inviscid Numerical Approaches to Modeling the Flow Field about a Supersonic Ballistic Object: The Method of Characteristics and a Finite Volume Euler Solution [Dissertation Thesis]. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute; 2009.
8. [7] Khanolkar NP, Bhushan B, Siddharth M, Borrison E, Sinha J. Analysis of aerodynamic characteristics of a missile configuration. In: 2017 International Conference on Infocom Technologies and Unmanned Systems (Trends and Future Directions) (ICTUS); 2017:877882. IEEE. [CrossRef]

9. [8] Guy Y, Morrow JA, McLaughlin TE. The effects of canard shape on the aerodynamic characteristics of a generic missile configuration. AIAA Paper 99-4256, 1999. [CrossRef]
10. [9] McDaniel MA, Evans C, Lesieutre DJ. The effect of tail fin parameters on the induced roll of a canard-controlled missile. In: 28th AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference; 2010:4226. [CrossRef]
11. [10] Li CC, Tai CS, Lai CC, Fu SM, Tsai YC. Study of the aerodynamic characteristic and flight trajectories in a tail fin-stabilized projectile with different shapes. Procedia Eng 2014;79:108113. [CrossRef]
12. [11] Honkanen T, Tuisku T, Pankkonen A. CFD simulations and wind tunnel experiments of a generic split-canard air-to-air missile at high angles of attack in turbulent subsonic flow. In: AIAA Atmospheric Flight Mechanics Conference; 2011:6335. [CrossRef]
13. [12] Vidanović N, Rašuo B, Damljanovic DB, Vukovic DS, Curcic DS. Validation of the CFD code used for determination of aerodynamic characteristic of non-standard AGARD-B calibration model. Therm Sci 2014;18:12231233. [CrossRef]
14. [13] Ageev N, Pavlenko A. Minimization of body of revolution aerodynamic drag at supersonic speeds. Aircraft Eng Aerospace Technol 2016;88:246256. [CrossRef]
15. [14] Yin J, Lei J, Jiang S, Yin X. The aerodynamic characteristics and its estimation method of finned missile experiencing spin-deformation coupling motion. Aerosp Sci Technol 2021;115:106806. [CrossRef]
16. [15] Li Y, Yi L, Ao Y, Ma L. Simulation analysis the aerodynamic characteristics of variable sweep wing missile. J Phys Conf Ser 2020;1570:012073. [CrossRef]
17. [16] Yi L, Li Y, Ma L, Ao Y, Wang Y. Analysis of aerodynamic characteristics of missile with different sweep angle under supersonic condition. J Phys Conf Ser 2021;1802:042003. [CrossRef]
18. [17] Vidanović N, Rašuo B, Kastratović G, Maksimović S, Ćurčić D, Samardžić M. Aerodynamic–structural missile fin optimization. Aerosp Sci Technol 2017;65:2645. [CrossRef]
19. [18] Ryan K. Trajectory optimization and aerodynamic modeling of long range morphing projectiles [Dissertation Thesis]. Maryland, USA: University of Maryland, College Park; 2011.
20. [19] Vidanović N, Rašuo B, Kastratović G, Grbović A, Puharić M, Maksimović K. Multidisciplinary shape optimization of missile fin configuration subject to aerodynamic heating. J Spacecraft Rockets 2020;57:510527. [CrossRef]
21. [20] Şumnu A, Güzelbey IH. CFD simulations and external shape optimization of missile with wing and tailfin configuration to improve aerodynamic performance. J Appl Fluid Mech 2021;14:17951807. [CrossRef]
22. [21] Vasile JD, Bryson J, Fresconi F. Aerodynamic Design Optimization of Long Range Projectiles using Missile DATCOM. AIAA Scitech 2020 Forum 2020:1762. [CrossRef]
23. [22] Şumnu A, Güzelbey İH, Öğücü O. Aerodynamic shape optimization of a missile using a multiobjective genetic algorithm. Int J Aerosp Eng 2020;2020:1528435. [CrossRef]
24. [23] Menter FR. Two-equation eddy-viscosity turbulence models for engineering applications. AIAA J 1994;32:15981605. [CrossRef]
25. [24] Anderson JD, Wendt J. Computational Fluid Dynamics. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1995.
26. [25] Singh A. Aerodynamic analysis on missile design. Int J Sci Dev Res 2020;5:255262.