A comparison of scramjet integral analysis techniques
Two integral analysis methods are compared in order to establish their relative effectiveness in estimating the performance characteristics of a scramjet engine. While the first method is a two-step process that assumes constant ara combustion followed by constant Mach number combustion, the second...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of propulsion and power 1985-03, Vol.1 (2), p.156-158 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 158 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 2 |
| container_start_page | 156 |
| container_title | Journal of propulsion and power |
| container_volume | 1 |
| creator | Sullins, G. A Waltrup, P. J |
| description | Two integral analysis methods are compared in order to establish their relative effectiveness in estimating the performance characteristics of a scramjet engine. While the first method is a two-step process that assumes constant ara combustion followed by constant Mach number combustion, the second is a one-step process in which combustion is assumed to follow a Crocco presure-area relationship. Results indicate that the constant property process underpredicts the expected engine performance, especially at the end-of-boost-phase Mach number of 3.5. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.2514/3.22774 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_aiaa_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2313012411</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2313012411</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a376t-d0c4d721e1383c925898feb08d7836ec318a1f44e5d8e56ae50c56326d7e02a43</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqN0E1Lw0AQBuBFFKxV_AsBRfGQurPfPZbiFxS86HlZNxNNyZe7Cdh_b2oKgnrwNId5eId5CTkFOmMSxDWfMaa12CMTkJyn3Gi1TyZUC5MKJc0hOYpxTSkoo_SEyEXim6p1oYhNnTR5En1w1Rq7pKg7fA2uTFztyk0sYtKhf6uL9x7jMTnIXRnxZDen5Pn25ml5n64e7x6Wi1XquFZdmlEvMs0AgRvu50yaucnxhZpMG67QczAOciFQZgalciipl4ozlWmkzAk-JRdjbhua7d3OVkX0WJauxqaPlonhRTGE_wcCBT3Asx9w3fRh-HAwHDgFJgAGdTkqH5oYA-a2DUXlwsYCtduWLbdfLQ_yfJSucO476ze7-ovt1rbNcpv3ZdnhR8c_AQidhlA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2313012411</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A comparison of scramjet integral analysis techniques</title><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Sullins, G. A ; Waltrup, P. J</creator><creatorcontrib>Sullins, G. A ; Waltrup, P. J</creatorcontrib><description>Two integral analysis methods are compared in order to establish their relative effectiveness in estimating the performance characteristics of a scramjet engine. While the first method is a two-step process that assumes constant ara combustion followed by constant Mach number combustion, the second is a one-step process in which combustion is assumed to follow a Crocco presure-area relationship. Results indicate that the constant property process underpredicts the expected engine performance, especially at the end-of-boost-phase Mach number of 3.5.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0748-4658</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1533-3876</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.2514/3.22774</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Reston: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics</publisher><subject>Supersonic combustion ramjet engines</subject><ispartof>Journal of propulsion and power, 1985-03, Vol.1 (2), p.156-158</ispartof><rights>Copyright American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Mar/Apr 1985</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a376t-d0c4d721e1383c925898feb08d7836ec318a1f44e5d8e56ae50c56326d7e02a43</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-a376t-d0c4d721e1383c925898feb08d7836ec318a1f44e5d8e56ae50c56326d7e02a43</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27903,27904</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Sullins, G. A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Waltrup, P. J</creatorcontrib><title>A comparison of scramjet integral analysis techniques</title><title>Journal of propulsion and power</title><description>Two integral analysis methods are compared in order to establish their relative effectiveness in estimating the performance characteristics of a scramjet engine. While the first method is a two-step process that assumes constant ara combustion followed by constant Mach number combustion, the second is a one-step process in which combustion is assumed to follow a Crocco presure-area relationship. Results indicate that the constant property process underpredicts the expected engine performance, especially at the end-of-boost-phase Mach number of 3.5.</description><subject>Supersonic combustion ramjet engines</subject><issn>0748-4658</issn><issn>1533-3876</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1985</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqN0E1Lw0AQBuBFFKxV_AsBRfGQurPfPZbiFxS86HlZNxNNyZe7Cdh_b2oKgnrwNId5eId5CTkFOmMSxDWfMaa12CMTkJyn3Gi1TyZUC5MKJc0hOYpxTSkoo_SEyEXim6p1oYhNnTR5En1w1Rq7pKg7fA2uTFztyk0sYtKhf6uL9x7jMTnIXRnxZDen5Pn25ml5n64e7x6Wi1XquFZdmlEvMs0AgRvu50yaucnxhZpMG67QczAOciFQZgalciipl4ozlWmkzAk-JRdjbhua7d3OVkX0WJauxqaPlonhRTGE_wcCBT3Asx9w3fRh-HAwHDgFJgAGdTkqH5oYA-a2DUXlwsYCtduWLbdfLQ_yfJSucO476ze7-ovt1rbNcpv3ZdnhR8c_AQidhlA</recordid><startdate>19850301</startdate><enddate>19850301</enddate><creator>Sullins, G. A</creator><creator>Waltrup, P. J</creator><general>American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7TB</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H8D</scope><scope>L7M</scope></search><sort><creationdate>19850301</creationdate><title>A comparison of scramjet integral analysis techniques</title><author>Sullins, G. A ; Waltrup, P. J</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a376t-d0c4d721e1383c925898feb08d7836ec318a1f44e5d8e56ae50c56326d7e02a43</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1985</creationdate><topic>Supersonic combustion ramjet engines</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Sullins, G. A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Waltrup, P. J</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Mechanical & Transportation Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Aerospace Database</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><jtitle>Journal of propulsion and power</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Sullins, G. A</au><au>Waltrup, P. J</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A comparison of scramjet integral analysis techniques</atitle><jtitle>Journal of propulsion and power</jtitle><date>1985-03-01</date><risdate>1985</risdate><volume>1</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>156</spage><epage>158</epage><pages>156-158</pages><issn>0748-4658</issn><eissn>1533-3876</eissn><abstract>Two integral analysis methods are compared in order to establish their relative effectiveness in estimating the performance characteristics of a scramjet engine. While the first method is a two-step process that assumes constant ara combustion followed by constant Mach number combustion, the second is a one-step process in which combustion is assumed to follow a Crocco presure-area relationship. Results indicate that the constant property process underpredicts the expected engine performance, especially at the end-of-boost-phase Mach number of 3.5.</abstract><cop>Reston</cop><pub>American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics</pub><doi>10.2514/3.22774</doi><tpages>3</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0748-4658 |
| ispartof | Journal of propulsion and power, 1985-03, Vol.1 (2), p.156-158 |
| issn | 0748-4658 1533-3876 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2313012411 |
| source | Alma/SFX Local Collection |
| subjects | Supersonic combustion ramjet engines |
| title | A comparison of scramjet integral analysis techniques |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-27T12%3A49%3A24IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_aiaa_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20comparison%20of%20scramjet%20integral%20analysis%20techniques&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20propulsion%20and%20power&rft.au=Sullins,%20G.%20A&rft.date=1985-03-01&rft.volume=1&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=156&rft.epage=158&rft.pages=156-158&rft.issn=0748-4658&rft.eissn=1533-3876&rft_id=info:doi/10.2514/3.22774&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_aiaa_%3E2313012411%3C/proquest_aiaa_%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2313012411&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |