4.7 Article

Optimization transpiration cooling of nose cone with non-uniform permeability

期刊

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2018.07.134

关键词

Optimization transpiration cooling; Non-uniform permeability; Nose cone; Cooling effectiveness; Coolant allocation

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51376168]
  2. China Academy of Aerospace Aerodynamics

向作者/读者索取更多资源

With the development of active thermal protection techniques (TPTs), optimization transpiration cooling (OTC) design, to enhance the cooling effect in stagnation regions and decrease coolant load, has become a critical issue in the research and development of hypersonic vehicles. One of the possible OTC approaches is using a non-uniform porous material to vary the coolant allocation within pores. This paper presents an experimental and numerical investigation on the transpiration cooling performances of two wedge shaped nose cones. One is for OTC, made of a special porous matrix with non-uniform permeability to ensure the largest porosity near the stagnation point, and the other is for traditional transpiration cooling (TTC), consisting of a general uniform porous matrix. Surface temperature and cooling effectiveness of the two nose cones are investigated in the experiments. The data show that in comparison with TFC, OTC can effectively enhance the cooling effectiveness in stagnation regions through a locally high permeability, and improve the uniformity of the temperature distribution within the entire nose cone. To exhibit the coolant flow characteristics within the pores, two-dimensional numerical simulations are carried out by commercial software FLUENT, and the numerical method is validated by the experimental data. The numerical results indicate that OTC with non-uniform permeability can provide an optimized coolant allocation and decrease the driving force required by the coolant transport to the stagnation region. (C) 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据