September 2005

NASA/TP-2005-213766

High Reynolds Number Investigation of a

Flush-Mounted, S-Duct Inlet With Large

Amounts of Boundary Layer Ingestion

Bobby L. Berrier, Melissa B. Carter, and Brian G. Allan

Langley Research Center, Hampton, Virginia
The NASA STI Program Office . . . in Profile

Since its founding, NASA has been dedicated to the

advancement of aeronautics and space science. The

NASA Scientific and Technical Information (STI)

Program Office plays a key part in helping NASA

maintain this important role.

The NASA STI Program Office is operated by

Langley Research Center, the lead center for NASA’s

scientific and technical information. The NASA STI

Program Office provides access to the NASA STI

Database, the largest collection of aeronautical and

space science STI in the world. The Program Office is

also NASA’s institutional mechanism for

disseminating the results of its research and

development activities. These results are published by

NASA in the NASA STI Report Series, which

includes the following report types:

• TECHNICAL PUBLICATION. Reports of

completed research or a major significant phase

of research that present the results of NASA

programs and include extensive data or

theoretical analysis. Includes compilations of

significant scientific and technical data and

information deemed to be of continuing

reference value. NASA counterpart of peerreviewed formal professional papers, but having

less stringent limitations on manuscript length

and extent of graphic presentations.

• TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM. Scientific

and technical findings that are preliminary or of

specialized interest, e.g., quick release reports,

working papers, and bibliographies that contain

minimal annotation. Does not contain extensive

analysis.

• CONTRACTOR REPORT. Scientific and

technical findings by NASA-sponsored

contractors and grantees.

• CONFERENCE PUBLICATION. Collected

papers from scientific and technical

conferences, symposia, seminars, or other

meetings sponsored or co-sponsored by NASA.

• SPECIAL PUBLICATION. Scientific,

technical, or historical information from NASA

programs, projects, and missions, often

concerned with subjects having substantial

public interest.

• TECHNICAL TRANSLATION. Englishlanguage translations of foreign scientific and

technical material pertinent to NASA’s mission.

Specialized services that complement the STI

Program Office’s diverse offerings include creating

custom thesauri, building customized databases,

organizing and publishing research results ... even

providing videos.

For more information about the NASA STI Program

Office, see the following:

• Access the NASA STI Program Home Page at

http://www.sti.nasa.gov

• E-mail your question via the Internet to

help@sti.nasa.gov

• Fax your question to the NASA STI Help Desk

at (301) 621-0134

• Phone the NASA STI Help Desk at

(301) 621-0390

• Write to:

 NASA STI Help Desk

 NASA Center for AeroSpace Information

 7121 Standard Drive

 Hanover, MD 21076-1320
National Aeronautics and

Space Administration

Langley Research Center 

Hampton, Virginia 23681-2199

September 2005

NASA/TP-2005-213766

High Reynolds Number Investigation of a

Flush-Mounted, S-Duct Inlet With Large

Amounts of Boundary Layer Ingestion

Bobby L. Berrier, Melissa B. Carter, and Brian G. Allan

Langley Research Center, Hampton, Virginia
Available from:

NASA Center for AeroSpace Information (CASI) National Technical Information Service (NTIS)

7121 Standard Drive 5285 Port Royal Road

Hanover, MD 21076-1320 Springfield, VA 22161-2171

(301) 621-0390 (703) 605-6000

The use of trademarks or names of manufacturers in the report is for accurate reporting and does not

constitute an official endorsement, either expressed or implied, of such products or manufacturers by the

National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
Abstract

An experimental investigation of a flush-mounted, S-duct inlet with

large amounts of boundary layer ingestion has been conducted at

Reynolds numbers up to full-scale. The study was conducted in the

NASA Langley Research Center 0.3-Meter Transonic Cryogenic Tunnel.

In addition, a supplemental computational study on one of the inlet

configurations was conducted using the Navier-Stokes flow solver,

OVERFLOW. The objectives of this investigation were to (1) develop

and check out a new high Reynolds number test capability for flushmounted inlets, (2) evaluate the performance of S-duct inlets with large

amounts of boundary layer ingestion at Reynolds numbers up to fullscale, (3) provide a database for CFD tool validation on this class of

inlet, and (4) provide a baseline inlet for future inlet flow-control studies.

Tests were conducted at Mach numbers from 0.25 to 0.83, Reynolds

numbers (based on aerodynamic interface plane diameter) from

5.1 million to 13.9 million (full-scale value) and inlet mass-flow ratios

from 0.29 to 1.22, depending on Mach number. Results of the study

indicated that increasing Mach number, increasing boundary layer

thickness (relative to inlet height) or ingesting a boundary layer with a

distorted profile decreased inlet performance. At Mach numbers above

0.4, increasing inlet airflow increased inlet pressure recovery but also

increased distortion. Finally, inlet distortion was relatively insensitive to

Reynolds number, but pressure recovery increased slightly with

increasing Reynolds number.

Introduction

Highly integrated boundary layer ingesting

(BLI), offset or S-duct inlets have the potential

benefits of reduced drag, size and weight by

eliminating the boundary layer diverter and

shortening the inlet duct; reduced ram drag by

reducing the momentum of the inlet flow (refs. 1

and 2); and lowered observability. However, to

obtain these benefits from a system level requires

that acceptable pressure recovery and distortion

levels be maintained for engine operation.

The use of S-duct inlets is not new, even for

commercial vehicles. The Boeing 727 (ref. 3) and

Lockheed L-1011 (ref. 4) successfully used offset

or S-duct inlet designs. In addition, because

many new military aircraft have diverterless

S-duct inlet systems, design issues have obviously

been solved when the inlet is integrated on the

forward portion of the vehicle with small amounts

of boundary layer to ingest. Design guidelines for

S-duct diffusers without significant amounts of

BLI seem to be well defined (refs. 5–7).

However, design issues become more intractable when the inlet is integrated on the aft portion

of the vehicle. The early Blended-Wing-Body

(BWB) transport configuration (refs. 8 and 9)

with either mail-slot or individual flush mounted

inlets is an example of this type of inlet integration. The BWB has approximately a 25-in. thick

boundary layer near the wing-body trailing edge,

which is about 25- to 30-percent of the inlet

height for a flush-mounted inlet on this configuration. Although this amount of BLI may be a

formidable challenge, several published (ref. 2)

and unpublished system studies have indicated

large benefits for this amount of BLI (up to

10-percent reduction in fuel burn, for example) if

the problems associated with BLI can be solved.

The two major technical challenges that must

be addressed for BLI, S-duct inlets integrated on

the aft portion of the vehicle are the complex
2

external inlet aerodynamics and the nonuniform

engine-face flow distribution. The complex

external inlet aerodynamics is driven by thick,

degraded boundary layers approaching the inlet,

wing/body shocks at transonic speeds, and adverse pressure gradients caused by wing/body

closure and inlet blockage. Nonuniform engine

face distributions are driven by S-duct diffuser

effects (secondary- or cross flows for example),

ingested low-momentum boundary layer flow,

and internal separation. Failure to adequately

resolve these issues results in low inlet pressure

recovery and high inlet pressure distortion, thus

reducing available thrust and engine operability

and possibly negating the benefits realized from

the configuration design.

A search of open literature revealed no experimental information on BLI S-duct inlet performance for inlets with large amounts of BLI

operating at realistic conditions. Most BLI investigations reported in the literature either considered only small amounts of BLI (maximum

boundary layer thickness of 10 percent inlet

diameter) or were conducted at extremely low

Mach and Reynolds numbers (refs. 10 to 14). The

objectives of this study were to develop a new

high Reynolds number inlet test capability for

BLI inlets, evaluate the performance of S-duct

inlets with large amounts of BLI (boundary layer

thickness of about 30-percent of inlet height) at

realistic operating conditions (high subsonic

Mach numbers and full-scale Reynolds numbers),

provide a unique data set for CFD tool validation,

and provide a baseline inlet for future inlet flowcontrol studies.

Symbols

Figure 1 presents sketches showing the definition of several of the most important inlet geometric parameters.

a distance between the inlet lip highlight

station (x = 0) and the inlet throat

station (see fig. 1), in.

A area, in2

AC inlet capture (highlight) area; area

enclosed by inlet highlight (see fig. 1

for highlight definition), and tunnel

wall, in2

Ai inlet throat area, in2

A0 inlet mass-flow streamtube at

freestream conditions, in2

A2 area at AIP station (diffuser exit), in2

A0/AC inlet mass-flow ratio, ratio of actual

airflow to the ideal capture airflow

AR aspect ratio, Wi/2Hi

b distance between inlet highlight height

and inlet throat height (see fig. 1), in.

Cp static pressure coefficient, (p-p)/q

D2 duct diameter at AIP (see fig. 1), in.

DPCPavg average SAE circumferential distortion

descriptor

DPRPi SAE radial distortion descriptor for ring

i on AIP total-pressure rake

e super ellipse shape parameter

H boundary layer shape factor, *

/

Hi height of inlet throat (see fig. 1), in.

Hmax maximum height of inlet cowl (see fig.

1), in.

H distance between inlet throat centroid

and inlet duct centroid, or total distance

between inlet throat centroid and duct

exit centroid, in.

i ring number on AIP total-pressure rake

(Value increases from hub region to tip

region.)

L length of inlet duct from throat to AIP

(see fig. 1), in.
3

M free-stream Mach number

MAIP local Mach number at AIP station based

on wall p/pt, ratio (See fig. 1 and table

1 for AIP location.)

Mmatch Mach number required by CFD to

match boundary layer velocity profile of

experiment

Mt local throat Mach number based on wall

p/pt, ratio (See fig. 1 and table 1 for

throat location.)

p local static pressure, psi

pavg,i average total pressure for ring i on AIP

total-pressure rake

pl,avg,i average total pressure in low-pressure

region (defined by extent) for ring i on

AIP total-pressure rake

psls sea level standard pressure, 14.696 psi

pt total pressure, psi

pt,BL total pressure measured by boundary

layer rake, psi

ptPlug,avg average total pressure at mass-flow

plug, psi

pt,2 total pressure measured at AIP station,

psi

pt,2,avg area weighted average total pressure at

AIP

pt, free-stream total pressure, psi

p free-stream static pressure, psi

pt,2/pt, inlet pressure recovery, pt,2,avg/pt,

q free-stream dynamic pressure, psi

r curve fit correlation factor

R radius, in.

Re/FT Reynolds number per foot, 1/ft

ReD2 Reynolds number based on duct AIP

diameter

Tsls sea level standard temperature, 518.7°R

TtPlug,avg average total temperature at mass-flow

plug, °R

Tt, free-stream total temperature, °R

Wact airflow rate measured by venturi, lb/sec

Wi inlet throat maximum width (see fig. 1),

in.

WPlugC corrected airflow rate at mass-flow

plug, lb/sec

W2C corrected airflow rate at AIP, lb/sec

x axial distance downstream of inlet lip

highlight (see fig. 1), in.

x1 axial distance downstream of inlet

throat (see fig. 1), in.

y lateral distance from inlet centerline,

positive to right looking upstream, in.

z vertical distance measured from tunnel

wall, positive away from wall (see fig.

1), in.

z1 vertical distance measured from estimated boundary layer displacement

thickness (est*

) at start of lower duct

wall (see fig. 1), in.

measured boundary layer thickness, in.

est estimated tunnel wall boundary layer

thickness at M = 0.85, 0.501 in.

* measured boundary layer displacement

thickness, in.

*

est estimated boundary layer displacement

thickness, est/8, 0.063 in.

 measured boundary layer momentum

thickness, in.
4

Abbreviations:

AIP aerodynamic interface plane

BLI boundary layer ingesting

BWB blended wing body

CD compact disk

CFD computational fluid dynamics

IGES Initial Graphics Exchange Specification

MPI message-passing interface

SAE Society of Automotive Engineers

SST Shear-Stress Transport

Apparatus and Methods

Test Facility

The experimental study was conducted in the

NASA Langley Research Center 0.3-Meter Transonic Cryogenic Tunnel (refs. 15 and 16). The

closed-loop, fan-driven tunnel has a 13- by 13-in.

test cross-section with adaptive upper and lower

walls. The facility can run in air or gaseous

nitrogen. For high Reynolds number testing, the

test medium is gaseous nitrogen, which is injected

as a cryogenic liquid that permits testing at temperatures as low as 140°R. The wind tunnel can

operate with total pressure ranging from 14.7 to

88 psi, Mach numbers ranging from 0.1 to 0.9,

and Reynolds numbers up to 100 million per ft.

Varying free-stream total pressure and total

temperature can independently control Reynolds

number and free-stream dynamic pressure.

Model

The Boeing Company, under contract with

NASA, designed four BLI S-duct inlets (denoted

inlets A, B, C, and D herein) to fit in the design

space of a large BWB transport configuration as

well as smaller military fighter type applications

with flush-mounted inlets. Geometry of the four

inlet designs is included on the enclosed compact

disk (CD) in Initial Graphics Exchange Specification (IGES) and Unigraphics formats. A new

tunnel sidewall was designed and fabricated so

that the inlet models could be mounted flush with

the wall. Photographs of one of the inlets

mounted on the new sidewall are shown in figure 2. The diffuser section of the inlet extended

through the wall into the wind-tunnel plenum.

Figure 3 presents a photograph of the plenum side

of the inlet installation with the outer wind-tunnel

wall removed. At the exit of the diffuser, the flow

entered an instrumentation section for measuring

inlet distortion and pressure recovery at the

Aerodynamic Interface Plane (AIP). After being

ducted through a 180-degree turn (see fig. 3), the

flow proceeded through a mass-flow plug assembly that included pressure and temperature

instrumentation and a calibrated bellmouth/plug

combination for measuring inlet mass-flow rate.

An insulated and heated motor box contained the

motor and gear drive system that permitted the

mass-flow plug to operate at cryogenic temperatures. Finally, the flow was ducted outside the

wind tunnel and vented into atmospheric

conditions.

The inlet flow was driven by the pressure differential between the tunnel total pressure and the

atmospheric pressure, that is, the tunnel total

pressure had to be set higher than atmospheric

pressure for the inlet to operate. A ratio of freestream total pressure to atmospheric pressure

greater than two was maintained for the entire

test. Thus, unlike most inlet models, the current

test apparatus contained no ejector system to

pump the inlet flow.

Figure 4 presents details of the model geometry, and values of important inlet geometric

parameters are tabulated for each inlet in table 1.

Two inlets (A and B) had nearly semicircular

throat aperture shapes with an aspect ratio,

Wi/2Hi, of 0.95, while the other two inlets, C and

D, had semi-elliptic throat aperture shapes with an

aspect ratio of 1.42 (see table 1). By moving the

upper duct wall closer to the lower duct wall, it

was hypothesized that the semi-elliptical aperture

shape might impart a favorable pressure field

from the upper diffuser wall upon the lower

diffuser wall.
5

Inlet lip geometries associated with each inlet

are shown in figure 4(e). Inlets A and C had an

a/b ratio (a measure of lip thickness) equal to 2.0

(denoted “thick lip” herein); inlets B and D had an

a/b ratio equal to 3.0 (denoted “thin lip” herein).

It was hypothesized that the thin lip design

(a/b = 3.0) would improve performance at Mach

numbers near cruise (M = 0.85) when compared

to the performance of the thick lip design

(a/b = 2.0), which generally would be expected to

provide better inlet performance at low speeds

(ref. 14).

The diffuser “centerline” distribution was the

same on all four inlets; however, because of the

two different aperture shapes, there were two

different diffuser designs with inlets A and B

having one design, and inlets C and D sharing the

other. Diffuser geometry design parameters are

shown in figure 4(f) for inlets A and B, and in

figure 4(g) for inlets C and D. The diffuser

“centerline” distribution, which starts at est* at

the inlet throat (z1 = 0, see fig. 1(a)) and ends at

the center of the round duct at the AIP station, and

the duct cross-sectional area distribution are

presented in the top half of figures 4(f) and 4(g).

Duct aspect ratio (AR) distribution and duct

superellipse shape parameter (e) distribution are

presented in the bottom half of figures 4(f) and

4(g) as a function of duct quadrant. The diffuser

is divided into four quadrants about the duct

centerline distribution with the quadrants being

symmetrical about the vertical plane of symmetry.

The quadrant shapes are defined by the superellipse shape parameter e and equation 1.

 x1

e

 + z1

e

 = 1.0 (1)

Finally, Gerlach shaping was used in the design of the diffuser cross sections to help control

secondary flows. Gerlach shaping controls secondary flows by altering the localized crosssectional areas. In regions of low-speed flow, the

area is decreased to accelerate the flow, and the

area is increased to decelerate the flow in regions

of high-speed flow.

As shown in the figure 2 photographs, the

inlets were mounted flush on the tunnel wall to

simulate a boundary layer ingesting inlet. Thus,

the inlet model scale was dictated by the wind

tunnel wall boundary layer height, combined with

the objective of obtaining about 30 percent

boundary layer ingestion based on inlet height

(approximately what would occur on a BWB

aircraft). An estimated wind tunnel wall boundary layer height est of 0.501 in. was obtained

from reference 17, and the inlets were scaled to

2.5 percent of a full-scale BWB aircraft to obtain

/Hi values of about 0.29 and 0.36 for the semicircular and semi-elliptical inlets, respectively.

Model inlet throat area was determined by the

full-scale BWB maximum corrected airflow at top

of climb flight conditions (2080 lb/sec), est, and

model scale. The corresponding maximum corrected airflow desired for the model was

1.30 lb/sec (2080 lb/sec  0.0252). However,

geometric area at the inlet throat had to be larger

than the computed throat flow area (based on the

maximum corrected airflow) to accommodate the

ingested boundary layer. Thus, the geometric area

at the inlet throats was increased over the computed throat flow area by an amount equal to the

estimated boundary layer displacement thickness

(est* = est /8) times the inlet throat width Wi.

As mentioned previously, the wind tunnel wall

boundary layer was used to simulate the aircraft

boundary layer buildup in front of a flush

mounted inlet. The boundary layer growth on a

flat plate is probably not a true simulation of the

boundary layer growth on the aft part of a fuselage or wing. Such boundary layers are likely to

have high values of shape factor caused by

adverse pressure gradients, shock boundary layer

interactions (at cruise) and possibly even boundary layer separation. In an attempt to determine

the impact of a distorted (but not necessarily

realistic) boundary layer profile on inlet performance, tests were conducted with two “fences”

installed in front of inlet configuration A, as

shown in figures 2(b) and 4(h).
6

Instrumentation

Figure 5 contains sketches and tables that

show model instrumentation locations. Instrumentation sketches and locations (including

tunnel wall instrumentation that is not included in

this report) are also provided on the enclosed CD.

The instrumentation in the inlet diffusers consisted of 72 or 73 static pressure orifices; inlets C

and D have one additional static pressure orifice

on the diffuser top wall centerline (total of 30)

than do inlets A and B (total of 29). There are

29 orifices on each of the inlet lower wall centerlines and 7 orifices on each sidewall centerline of

each inlet. Locations of the diffuser static pressure orifices are listed in figures 5(b) and 5(c). In

addition to diffuser internal static pressures, static

pressures were also measured at 10 locations on

the tunnel wall centerline upstream of the inlet

installation; these locations are provided in

figure 5(d).

An equal area-weighted 40-probe total pressure rake (see fig. 5(a)) that consisted of 8 arms

located 45° apart, with 5 probes on each arm, was

installed at the AIP (duct exit) to measure total

pressure distributions at the AIP. A portion of

the AIP total pressure rake can be seen in the

figure 2(a) photograph.

The instrumentation in the mass-flow plug assembly downstream of the AIP station (see fig. 3)

included 3 rakes located 120° apart, 3 rings, each

containing 3 static pressures, located in the bellmouth wall; and a potentiometer that measured

plug position (r2

 = 0.999978). Each of the 3 rakes

contained 5 total pressures, 1 static pressure, and

1 total temperature port.

The boundary layer on the wind-tunnel wall

was measured by using an 8-probe boundary layer

rake and static pressure orifice mounted outside

the inlet at the nominal inlet highlight plane (see

fig. 2(b)). Figure 5(e) presents location information of the rake probe faces relative to each inlet

highlight.

Data Reduction

Facility flow parameters, wall static pressures,

and model pressures were computed from measurements that use standard facility instrumentation that resulted in the following uncertainty

values:

Parameter Uncertainty

M 0.002

pt, 0.3 psia

Tt, 0.1 °K

p 0.015 psia

pt,2 0.030 psia

The mass-flow plug assembly (see fig. 3) was

calibrated against a secondary mass-flow standard

(multiple critical venturis) at the NASA Langley

Research Center’s Jet Exit Facility to provide

corrected airflow rate at the mass-flow plug

station WplugC as a function of plug position and

total pressure. The secondary mass-flow standard

had a quoted accuracy of 0.1 percent over a massflow range of 0.1 to 20.0 lb/sec. The calibration

of the mass-flow plug assembly consisted of runs

during which the mass-flow plug position was

held constant (relative to the bellmouth) while the

total pressure was increased. Eleven different

plug locations were tested with multiple runs to

assess repeatability. Actual mass-flow rate Wact

through the mass-flow plug assembly was measured by a critical venturi. The corrected airflow

rate at the AIP W2C is then defined by equations (2a) and (2b).

 WPlugC = Wact( ) TtPlug,avg Tsls

ptPlug,avg psls

(2a)

 W2C = WPlugC ptPlug,avg p ( ) t2 (2b)

The ring intensity (magnitude of the circumferential pressure defect for each AIP rake ring);

ring extent (angular region or extent, in degrees,

in which ring pressures are below the average
7

pressure of the rake ring); DPRP (radial distortion

descriptor), DPCPavg (average circumferential

distortion descriptor); and pt,2/pt, (inlet pressure

recovery) were computed by using the SAE

recommended practices reported in reference 18.

All empirical sensitivity constants in the SAE

distortion descriptors defined in reference 18 were

set to 1.0 and the offset terms were set to 0.0. As a

result, the average circumferential distortion

descriptor DPCPavg is equal to the average of the

ring intensities and is defined by equations (3a)

and (3b); inlet pressure recovery is defined by

equation (4); and the SAE radial distortion descriptor is defined by equation (5).

 DPCPavg = Intensityi

5 ,

i=1

i=5

 (3a)

where Intensityi = pavg,i  pl,avg,i

pavg,i

(3b)

and i = ring number

 pt,2/pt, = pt,2,avg/pt, (4)

 DPRPi = pt,2,avg  pavg,i

pt,2,avg

(5)

Test Conditions

One of the test objectives was to evaluate the

performance of S-duct inlets with large amounts

of BLI at realistic operating conditions (high

subsonic Mach numbers and full-scale Reynolds

numbers). To obtain full-scale Reynolds numbers, the current test was conducted with gaseous

nitrogen, injected as a cryogenic liquid, as the test

medium. A nominal full-scale Reynolds number

(based on engine diameter) for a notional BWB

transport aircraft is 13.9 106

 at Mach 0.85 and

39 000 feet altitude. The nominal test conditions

for this study are listed in table 2. Actual test

conditions for each inlet configuration tested

(including inlet A with boundary fences installed)

are shown in tables 3 through 7.

Because the model was attached to the tunnel

sidewall, angle of attack and angle of sideslip

were fixed at zero degrees. Although the goal of

the study was to test at the cruise Mach number of

0.85, the facility adaptive wall capability was

inoperable during the study, and the walls were

locked in a fixed position. As a result, the maximum Mach number that could be tested was

M = 0.83, and the inlet was tested over a Mach

range of 0.25 to 0.83 at the full-scale cruise

Reynolds number (or maximum possible at

M = 0.25 and 0.40) of 13.9 106

. As indicated in

table 2, a Reynolds number sweep was conducted

at M = 0.83. In addition, the Reynolds number

case of 8.6 106 was tested at two different

combinations of tunnel total temperature and total

pressure.

As mentioned previously, model design, including inlet throat area, was driven by an estimated wind tunnel wall boundary layer height est

of 0.501 in. and a desire to obtain /Hi values of

about 0.29 and 0.36 for the semi-circular and

semi-elliptical inlets, respectively. Unfortunately,

the actual boundary layer height measured during

the test was approximately 30 percent larger than

the estimated height; the larger measured  and

/hi values are listed in tables 3 through 7.

The inlet mass-flow was adjusted by changing

the plug position relative to the bellmouth. The

maximum design value (at top of climb) of the

mass-flow rate per inlet throat area (W2C/Ai) was

nominally about 42 lbm/sft2 (1.3 lbm/sec ÷ Ai,

ft2). As discussed previously, to pass this amount

of airflow, the inlet throat was increased by an

amount equal to an estimated displacement thickness est* to account for the ingested boundary

layer. Due to the larger than estimated boundary

layer thickness on the tunnel wall, the inlet throat

was undersized (too small a displacement thickness accounted for) and the actual maximum

airflow value obtained was less than the desired

42.8 lbm/sft2

 as shown in table 2. A correlation

of corrected airflow per unit of inlet area W2C/Ai

with inlet mass-flow ratio A0/AC is provided in

figure 6 for each inlet investigated to allow the

reader to convert airflow into either parameter.
8

Numerical Approach

The steady-state flow field for the BLI inlet A

was computed by using the flow solver code,

OVERFLOW (refs. 19 and 20), developed at

NASA. This code solves the compressible Reynolds averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) equations

using the diagonal scheme of reference 21. The

RANS equations are solved on structured grids by

using the overset grid framework reported in

reference 22. This overset grid framework allows

for the use of structured grids for problems that

have complex geometries. To improve the convergence of the steady-state solution, the

OVERFLOW code also includes a low-Mach

number preconditioning option and a multi-grid

acceleration routine. All simulations in this study

used the two-equation (k-) Shear-Stress Transport (SST) turbulence model (ref. 23).

The numerical simulations were performed

using the parallel version of the OVERFLOW

code (ref. 24). This code uses the MessagePassing Interface (MPI) and can run on a tightly

coupled parallel machine or a network of workstations. The code distributes zones to individual

processors and can split larger individual zones

across multiple processors by using a domain

decomposition approach.

The structured overset grid system was generated using the Chimera Grid Tools package

reported in reference 25. Two views of the computational grid are shown in figure 7. The upper

portion of figure 7 shows a close-up view of the

overset grids on the inlet surface. The numerical

simulations had seven overset grids with approximately five million grids points. Table 8

shows a summary of the grids and their dimensions. The internal inlet flow was discretized by

using two grids, a hyperbolic grid for the near

wall flow and a grid for the inlet core flow. This

two-grid approach was used to obtain good

orthogonal grid spacing at the inlet wall in the

semicircular region at the entrance of the inlet.

Other grids included a grid around the inlet lip

and cowling. A background flat-plate grid was

used to generate the boundary layer ingested by

the inlet. Two block grids were used to create a

transition from the coarse background grid to the

finer inlet grids.

The numerical simulations modeled the BLI

inlet and flat plate, neglecting the effects of the

tunnel walls present during the experimental

study. To match the experimental flow conditions,

the flat plate length ahead of the inlet and the

free-stream Mach number were adjusted to

closely match the boundary layer velocity measured near the inlet face. In the first numerical

simulation, the flat-plate length was adjusted to

match the experimental boundary layer height.

This simulation used the experimental free-stream

Mach number that was measured upstream of the

test section. Figure 8 shows the boundary layer

rake data for the high and low Mach number cases

at a given inlet mass-flow rate. Figure 8 indicates

that the Mach number at the boundary layer edge

for the numerical simulations was slightly higher

than the experiment. The free-stream Mach

number for the simulations was then adjusted to

match the velocity measured at the boundary layer

rake. The free-stream Mach number for the

M = 0.25 case was adjusted to Mmatch = 0.234 in

the numerical simulation, producing a better

match to the boundary layer velocity, as shown in

figure 8. For the M = 0.833 case, the free-stream

Mach number was reduced to Mmatch = 0.784,

which resulted in a better match to the boundary

layer velocity.

The boundary layer comparison in figure 8

shows that the boundary layer profile is slightly

different in the experiment for the high Mach

number case as compared to the numerical simulations. The boundary layer in the experiment has

less energy near the wall than the numerical

simulation does. The boundary layer for the

experiment was generated from the tunnel wall

and not from a splitter plate, which may account

for the difference in the boundary layer profiles.

The distortion for the numerical simulations

was computed by interpolating the total pressure

from the fine grid numerical solutions onto locations of the 40-probe rake. These interpolated

total pressure values were then used to compute

distortion by using the same analysis as
9

performed on the experimental data to eliminate

the resolution sensitivity of the distortion

calculation.

Results

Results of this investigation are presented in

plotted, tabular, and electronic (see enclosed CD

that also includes tunnel wall data not presented

herein) forms. When data at similar test conditions are presented on the same plot from multiple

data points, nominal or average test condition

values are listed in keys and titles. Plotted experimental and computational results are presented as follows:

Figure

Views of the overset BLI inlet

computational grids. 7

A comparison of the boundary layer

profiles on the side of the inlet for the

experiment and numerical simulations. 8

Effect of inlet mass-flow ratio on

Inlet A duct pressure distributions:

M = 0.250, Re/FT = 33.48 x 106 9(a)

M = 0.402, Re/FT = 51.66 x 106 9(b)

M = 0.603, Re/FT = 68.44 x 106 9(c)

M = 0.804, Re/FT = 69.36 x 106 9(d)

M = 0.832, Re/FT = 68.92 x 106 9(e)

Effect of inlet mass-flow ratio on

Inlet B duct pressure distributions:

M = 0.250, Re/FT = 33.27 x 106 10(a)

M = 0.402, Re/FT = 51.09 x 106 10(b)

M = 0.606, Re/FT = 67.67 x 106 10(c)

M = 0.804, Re/FT = 68.20 x 106 10(d)

M = 0.831, Re/FT = 68.05 x 106 10(e)

Effect of inlet mass-flow ratio on

Inlet C duct pressure distributions:

M = 0.249, Re/FT = 33.33 x 106 11(a)

M = 0.400, Re/FT = 50.50 x 106 11(b)

M = 0.601, Re/FT = 67.90 x 106 11(c)

M = 0.802, Re/FT = 68.15 x 106 11(d)

M = 0.832, Re/FT = 68.22 x 106 11(e)

Effect of inlet mass-flow ratio on

Inlet D duct pressure distributions:

M = 0.248, Re/FT = 33.47 x 106 12(a)

M = 0.401, Re/FT = 51.20 x 106 12(b)

M = 0.604, Re/FT = 67.80 x 106 12(c)

M = 0.802, Re/FT = 68.21 x 106 12(d)

M = 0.829, Re/FT = 68.28 x 106 12(e)

CFD solution for total pressure and

Mach contour maps on inlet A

centerline

M = 0.250, Mmatch = 0.234 13(a)

M = 0.833, Mmatch = 0.784 13(b)

Computational results on inlet A

showing surface static pressure ratio

and streamlines

M = 0.250, Mmatch = 0.234 14(a)

M = 0.833, Mmatch = 0.784 14(b)

Effect of inlet geometry on duct

pressure distributions

M = 0.248, Re/FT = 33.78 x 106

,

A0/AC = 0.759, W2C/Ai = 20.08

lb/sec-ft2 15(a)

M = 0.400, Re/FT = 50.77 x 106

,

A0/AC = 0.494, W2C/Ai = 20.10

lb/sec-ft2 15(b)

M = 0.606, Re/FT = 68.11 x 106

,

A0/AC = 0.526, W2C/Ai = 29.20

lb/sec-ft2 15(c)

M = 0.803, Re/FT = 68.27 x 106

,

A0/AC = 0.555, W2C/Ai = 35.62

lb/sec-ft2 15(d)

M = 0.833, Re/FT = 68.05 x 106

,

A0/AC = 0.555, W2C/Ai = 36.15

lb/sec-ft2 15(e)

Effect of inlet mass-flow on tunnel

wall boundary layer profiles. Inlet A

M = 0.250 and M = 0.402 16(a)

M = 0.603 and M = 0.804 16(b)

Effect of Mach number on tunnel

wall boundary layer profiles

Inlet A 17(a)

Inlet B 17(b)

Inlet C 17(c)

Inlet D 17(d)
10

Effect of inlet mass-flow ratio and

Mach number on boundary layer

shape factor. 18

Pressure recovery and distortion

results for inlet A, fence off

M = 0.248, Re/FT = 33.47 x 106 19(a)

M = 0.402, Re/FT = 51.66 x 106 19(b)

M = 0.603, Re/FT = 68.44 x 106 19(c)

M = 0.804, Re/FT = 69.36 x 106 19(d)

M = 0.832, Re/FT = 66.92 x 106 19(e)

M = 0.830, W2C/Ai = 20.42 lb/sec-ft2

(A0/AC = 0.308) 19(f)

M = 0.832, W2C/Ai = 36.73 lb/sec-ft2

(A0/AC = 0.560) 19(g)

Pressure recovery and distortion

results for inlet A, fence on

M = 0.248, Re/FT = 33.47 x 106 20(a)

M = 0.400, Re/FT = 50.78 x 106 20(b)

M = 0.602, Re/FT = 68.53 x 106 20(c)

M = 0.807, Re/FT = 68.29 x 106 20(d)

M = 0.833, Re/FT = 68.56 x 106 20(e)

M = 0.831, W2C/Ai = 36.63 lb/sec-ft2

(A0/AC = 0.555) 20(f)

Pressure recovery and distortion

results for inlet B

M = 0.250, Re/FT = 33.27 x 106 21(a)

M = 0.402, Re/FT = 51.09 x 106 21(b)

M = 0.606, Re/FT = 67.67 x 106 21(c)

M = 0.804, Re/FT = 68.20 x 106 21(d)

M = 0.831, Re/FT = 68.05 x 106 21(e)

M = 0.830, W2C/Ai = 20.37 lb/sec-ft2

(A0/AC = 0.314) 21(f)

M = 0.832, W2C/Ai = 36.85 lb/sec-ft2

(A0/AC = 0.573) 21(g)

Pressure recovery and distortion

results for inlet C

M = 0.252, Re/FT = 33.33 x 106 22(a)

M = 0.400, Re/FT = 50.50 x 106 22(b)

M = 0.601, Re/FT = 67.90 x 106 22(c)

M = 0.802, Re/FT = 68.15 x 106 22(d)

M = 0.832, Re/FT = 68.22 x 106 22(e)

M = 0.832, W2C/Ai = 19.96 lb/sec-ft2

(A0/AC = 0.293) 22(f)

M = 0.829, W2C/Ai = 36.20 lb/sec-ft2

(A0/AC = 0.543) 22(g)

Pressure recovery and distortion

results for inlet D

M = 0.248, Re/FT = 33.47 x 106 23(a)

M = 0.401, Re/FT = 51.20 x 106 23(b)

M = 0.604, Re/FT = 67.80 x 106 23(c)

M = 0.802, Re/FT = 68.21 x 106 23(d)

M = 0.829, Re/FT = 68.28 x 106 23(e)

M = 0.829, W2C/Ai = 19.91 lb/sec-ft2

(A0/AC = 0.305) 23(f)

M = 0.833, W2C/Ai = 36.03 lb/sec-ft2

(A0/AC = 0.561) 23(g)

Effect of Mach number and inlet

mass-flow on pressure recovery

and distortion

Inlet A, fence off 24(a)

Inlet A, fence on 24(b)

Inlet B, fence off 24(c)

Inlet C, fence off 24(d)

Inlet D, fence off 24(e)

Comparison of experimental and

computational AIP total pressure

contours for inlet A 25

Comparison of experimental and

computational performance values

for inlet A 26

Effect of inlet geometry on inlet

pressure recovery and distortion

Pressure recovery 27(a)

Distortion 27(b)

Effect of Reynolds number on Inlet

B duct pressure distributions at M =

0.832 and W2C/Ai = 36.79 lb/secft2

 (A0/AC = 0.573). 28

Effect of Reynolds number on tunnel

wall boundary layer profiles

Inlet A 29(a)

Inlet B 29(b)

Inlet C 29(c)

Inlet D 29(d)

Effect of Reynolds number on

boundary layer thickness and shape

factor. M = 0.83.

Inlet A 30(a)

Inlet B 30(b)
11

Inlet C 30(c)

Inlet D 30(d)

Inlet A with and without boundary

layer fence; A0/AC = 0.558. 30(e)

Effect of Reynolds number on pressure

recovery and distortion, M = 0.831

Inlet A, fence off 31(a)

Inlet A, fence on 31(b)

Inlet B, fence off 31(c)

Inlet C, fence off 31(d)

Inlet D, fence off 31(e)

Effect of boundary layer fence on

Inlet A duct pressure distributions.

M = 0.251, Re/FT = 33.94 x 106

,

A0/AC = 1.161, W2C/Ai = 31.60

lb/sec-ft2 32(a)

M = 0.401, Re/FT = 51.46 x 106

,

A0/AC = 0.714, W2C/Ai = 29.44

lb/sec-ft2 32(b)

M = 0.603, Re/FT = 68.69 x 106

,

A0/AC = 0.627, W2C/Ai = 35.06

lb/sec-ft2 32(c)

M = 0.809, Re/FT = 68.58 x 106

,

A0/AC = 0.545, W2C/Ai = 35.47

lb/sec-ft2 32(d)

M = 0.833, Re/FT = 67.84 x 106

,

A0/AC = 0.553, W2C/Ai = 36.35

lb/sec-ft2 32(e)

Effect of fence on tunnel wall

boundary layer profiles. Inlet A

M = 0.251 and M = 0.401 33(a)

M = 0.600 33(b)

M = 0.804 and M = 0.833 33(c)

Effect of distorted entrance boundary

layer profile on inlet performance

W2C/Ai = 29.40 lb/sec-ft2 34(a)

W2C/Ai = 35.66 lb/sec-ft2 34(b)

Discussion of Results

Typical Inlet Performance

Inlets for podded transport nacelles at subsonic

cruise typically have pressure recovery values of

0.98 or better and negligible distortion. Any pressure recovery losses incurred for this inlet type

are dominated by friction drag and lip separation

(only at off-design conditions). It is not unusual to

assume perfect pressure recovery (pt,2/pt, = 1.0)

during aircraft conceptual design for these type

inlets (ref. 26).

For BLI S-duct inlets, duct curvature and

boundary layer ingestion introduces additional

losses to inlet pressure recovery and increases

flow distortion at the AIP. The first bend in an

S-duct inlet diffuser causes a top-to-bottom

pressure differential that creates secondary flows

along the diffuser wall (refs. 11 and 27); this

secondary flow tends to migrate the wall boundary layer toward the low pressure side of the bend

(lower wall for the current investigation). If

sufficient boundary layer is accumulated, it

produces a lift-off effect or separation of the inlet

core flow. Although it might be expected that the

second bend in an S-duct would reverse or mitigate this effect, studies have indicated that such is

not the case. Typical pressure recovery losses for

an S-duct relative to a straight duct are about

2 percent (refs. 11 and 26). An additional pressure recovery penalty is incurred because of

boundary layer ingestion. Studies have indicated

that increasing ingested boundary layer thickness

to nominal /Hi values of about 0.1 to 0.2 (significantly less than the /Hi of the current investigation; see tables 3 through 7) causes about a

2 percent penalty (refs. 7 and 13).

Effect of Mach Number and Inlet Airflow

Figures 9 through 12 present the effects of

Mach number and airflow on the static pressure

distributions on the tunnel wall that leads into the

inlet and inside the inlet diffuser. One of the

electronic scanning pressure measurement devices

was initially undersized, and some of the pressures on Inlet A were off-scale at some test conditions. These data are replaced by a dashed line

fairing (see figures 9(c) through 9(e)). This

problem was corrected for tests conducted on the

other inlets.

Based on the static pressure ratios shown in

figures 9 through 12, throat Mach number Mt

ranges from about 0.25 to about 0.60 for the test
12

conditions of the current test and increases with

free-stream Mach number and inlet airflow. At

M = 0.25, the external flow on the tunnel wall

accelerates or expands (as indicated by a

decreasing pressure ratio trend) as it approaches

the inlet, particularly at high inlet airflows

(A0/AC > 1.0). Except for the highest value of

W2C/Ai at M = 0.40, when A0/AC < 1.0, the external flow decelerates or compresses as it approaches the inlet at all other test conditions.

The previously discussed flow features on the

wall ahead of the inlet face can also be seen in the

CFD results shown in figures 13 and 14. At inlet

mass-flow ratios greater than 1.0 (see figs. 13(a)

and 14(a)), Mach number increases (flow accelerates), and static pressure on the wall decreases as

the inlet streamtube converges as it approaches

the inlet face. At inlet mass-flow ratios less than

1.0 (see figs. 13(b) and 14(b)), the Mach number

decreases (flow decelerates) and static pressure on

the wall increases as the inlet streamtube diverges

as it approaches the inlet face.

For semicircular inlets A and B, the flow

inside the diffuser generally decelerates on the

bottom wall, accelerates on the upper wall, and

remains at a relatively constant velocity on the

sidewalls (see figs. 9 and 10). A small region of

flow separation and reattachment, indicated by a

pressure plateau that is more easily observed in

figure 15, possibly occurs at some conditions on

the top diffuser wall at approximately 2.5 < x/D2

< 3.0. For semi-elliptical inlets C and D at high

values of inlet airflow, the diffuser flow initially

accelerates on the bottom wall and decelerates on

the upper wall up to about x/D2 = 0.06 (see

figs. 11 and 12). At x/D2 = 0.06, it appears that

the flow on the lower wall separates and a pressure plateau is reached between 0.06 < x/D2 < 1.8.

This separation region creates a virtual diffuser

wall that causes a reduction in the diffuser crosssectional area and flow acceleration on the top

wall in this same region of the diffuser. At about

x/D2 = 1.8, the flow on the bottom wall reattaches

and decelerates in the compression turn ahead of

the AIP. The flow on the top wall downstream of

x/D2 = 1.8, where the flow again fills the diffuser

duct, finishes a deceleration caused by the first

(compression) turn on the top wall and then

accelerates around the upper wall second (expansion) turn ahead of the AIP.

The effect of inlet airflow on the measured

tunnel wall, boundary layer profiles is shown in

figure 16, and the effect of Mach number on the

measured tunnel wall boundary layer profiles is

shown in figure 17. The location of the boundary

layer rake, relative to the inlet, is shown in figures 2(b), 4(h), and 5(e). The boundary layer

characteristics (height, momentum thickness, and

displacement thickness) derived from the boundary layer profiles (see ref. 28) are provided in

tables 3 through 7. It should be noted that the

tunnel wall boundary layer thickness was underestimated and the boundary layer rake was fabricated too short (top probe at z = 0.58 compared to

maximum boundary layer thickness of over 0.62).

The boundary layer profile data were extrapolated

to obtain boundary layer thickness  values; this

procedure introduces additional error into the

boundary layer characteristics computed from the

boundary layer profiles.

As indicated in figure 16, inlet airflow had

relatively little effect on boundary layer profile;

this result indicates that the sensitivity of the

tunnel wall boundary layer measurements—with

varying inlet flow streamtube upstream of the

inlet face (small for low values of A0/AC and large

for high values of A0/AC)—was low. Varying

Mach number had a large impact on boundary

layer profiles, as shown in figure 17. Boundary

layer total pressure decreased significantly with

increasing Mach number (often termed degraded

boundary layer “health”). An examination of the

data in tables 3 through 7 indicates that, except

for M = 0.25, which had a large amount of data

scatter, boundary layer height generally ranged

between 0.53 in. and 0.67 in. and had no discernable trend with inlet airflow or free-stream Mach

number. Such was not the case for boundary

layer shape factor. Figure 18 presents the effect

of inlet airflow and free-stream Mach number on

the boundary layer shape factor. The lines shown

in this figure represent a linear curve fit of all

the shape factor data obtained at each Mach

number tested. Increasing Mach number causes
13

significant increases in boundary layer shape

factor (deterioration of boundary layer health);

boundary layer separation occurs at H 1.8 to 2.4

(ref. 29). A slight increasing trend of H with

increasing inlet mass-flow ratio is also indicated.

Thus, the boundary layer measurements were not

totally independent of inlet airflow.

Figures 19 through 23 present total-pressureratio contour maps, distortion descriptor details

(computed by using the SAE recommended

practices given in reference 18), and pressure

recovery values for all inlet configurations and

test conditions. Data from these figures are

plotted in figure 24 to show the effects of Mach

number and inlet airflow on pressure recovery and

SAE circumferential distortion. Several total

pressure contour maps at the AIP are also transferred to this figure. Descriptions of the distortion

parameters are provided in the “Data Reduction”

section of this report. Corresponding internal

duct static pressure distributions are shown in

figures 9 through 12 and boundary layer profiles

are shown in figures 16 and 17.

The effects of Mach number and inlet airflow

on pressure recovery pt,2/pt, are shown on the

upper portion of figure 24. Increasing Mach

number resulted in very large reductions in inlet

pressure recovery. This trend with Mach number

is typical of most inlets, but the losses are exaggerated by the S-duct diffuser shape and the large

amount of boundary layer ingestion. As discussed previously, total pressure in the boundary

layer (over 30 percent of the total inlet flow)

decreased significantly with increasing freestream Mach number (see fig. 17). The losses

indicated in figure 24 are larger than those

reported from previous investigations of BLI. At

M = 0.25, where measured losses were less than

1 percent, the pressure recovery loss is primarily

caused by skin friction and some small BLI

effects (note the total-pressure-ratio contour maps

at M = 0.25 in fig. 24). As indicated by the totalpressure-ratio contour plots at M = 0.83 that show

a large low-pressure region near the diffuser

bottom wall (particularly at high airflow rates

near cruise), pressure recovery losses at high

Mach numbers are dominated by duct curvature

and BLI effects, and pressure recovery losses of

up to 6.7-percent were measured depending on

inlet airflow and configuration. Pressure recovery

losses were largest for inlets C and D that had

larger amounts of BLI. Pressure recovery losses

this high could be devastating to engine performance and commercial viability of a BLI transport

concept unless the losses can be mitigated by

advanced technology or the benefits of BLI

(reduced weight, drag, and so on) that were

discussed in the “Introduction” more than offset

the pressure recovery (thrust) losses in a total

system analysis.

As indicated in figure 24, inlet pressure recovery is also a function of inlet airflow. At

M = 0.25, where duct curvature and BLI effects

are very small, pressure recovery decreases

slightly with increasing airflow, while at M > 0.4,

pressure recovery increases with increasing

airflow.

At low Mach numbers and low airflow or

throttle settings, the inlet is able to meet airflow

requirements with very small losses (basically

friction) and thus pressure recovery is high.

However, at high throttle settings, the inlet throat

is too small and the inlet must pull more air into

the duct from the surrounding flow field (streamtube larger than inlet capture area; A0/AC > 1.0) as

indicated by the converging CFD wall surface

streamlines presented in figure 14(a). This converging inlet airflow streamtube may not only

cause larger lip losses (internal lip separation can

occur in the extreme case, especially for thin lips)

but also pull additional boundary layer into the

inlet from the inlet sides and thus lower pressure

recovery. Figure 6 can be used to convert the

inlet airflow values given in figure 24 to inlet

mass-flow ratio A0/AC values. For example, inlet

mass-flow ratios vary from 0.76 to 1.17 at

M = 0.25 for inlet A.

At high subsonic Mach numbers, the inlet is

operating near design, and consequentially pressure recovery losses will be dominated by duct

curvature and BLI effects because all other losses

will be small. Since the percentage of BLI relative to total airflow decreases with increasing
14

airflow (the amount of BLI remains nearly constant), pressure recovery increases with increasing

airflow at M > 0.4.

The effect of Mach number and inlet airflow

on the SAE circumferential distortion descriptor

(ref. 18) is shown on the bottom portions of figure 24. Acceptable static distortion levels are

generally considered to be below about 0.04 to

0.05 for commercial applications. Based on this

criterion, the distortion levels for the current inlets

are unacceptable at Mach numbers and airflows

near maximum cruise (M = 0.85 and W2C/Ai 

42.0 lb/sec-ft2

).

Inlet distortion generally increased with increasing Mach number until a peak was reached

and then decreased. The Mach number at which

DPCPavg peaked increased with increasing inlet

airflow and the peak value increased with increasing inlet airflow. The peak distortion value

was not reached for the highest values of airflow

tested. The worst distortion cases can easily be

selected from the total-pressure ratio contour

maps shown in figure 24. It should be noted that

although increased airflow was beneficial to

pressure recovery at M > 0.40, the opposite was

generally true for distortion over the same range.

The distortion results discussed previously indicate that some form of flow control could be

beneficial for the inlets of this study (refs. 11, 13,

and 30 through 34). Experimental and CFD flow

control results on the inlet A geometry are given

in references 33 and 34.

Computational results on inlet A are compared

to experimental results in figures 25 and 26.

Additional CFD results on inlet A are reported in

reference 33. Qualitatively, the experimental and

computational studies give similar results as

shown in figure 25. Both show little distortion at

M = 0.25 and a large area of low total pressure

near the duct bottom wall at M = 0.83. As discussed previously, these low pressure regions are

caused by the ingestion of large amounts of low

energy boundary layer flow and secondary flow

effects induced by the S-duct diffuser geometry

and would result in reduced inlet pressure recovery and increased inlet distortion. Both studies

also indicate that the low-pressure regions grow in

size and intensity at M = 0.83 with increasing

inlet airflow. Some flow asymmetry can be noted

in the experimental contour map at M = 0.83 and

A0/AC = 0.556; such flow asymmetries are not

captured by the CFD because the geometry and

flow conditions are assumed to be left/right

symmetrical.

Quantitative CFD results are shown in figure 26 by solid symbols. The four CFD data

points correspond to the four total-pressure contour maps shown in figure 25. Although the CFD

results predict pessimistic pressure recovery

results (larger losses), the trends of pressure

recovery with increasing Mach number and inlet

airflow are well predicted. The reversal in trend

with increasing inlet airflow at M = 0.25 and

M = 0.83 is captured by the CFD predictions.

CFD predictions for distortion are in excellent

agreement with experimental data.

Effect of Inlet Geometry

Four inlet geometries, two aperture shapes

(semi-circular and semi-elliptical) with two lip

thicknesses each, were tested in the current investigation. The semi-circular shape (inlets A and B)

is similar to the BWB BLI inlet design (refs. 8, 9,

and 11). The semi-elliptical shape was selected as

a variable to (1) take advantage of a potentially

favorable pressure field of the upper diffuser wall

upon the lower diffuser wall and thus weaken

internal secondary flows, and (2) increase the

amount of boundary layer ingested and thus take

advantage of potential BLI benefits (refs. 1 and

2). Note that these benefits are not addressed in

the current investigation. The thick lip (a/b = 2.0)

was designed for cruise conditions between

0.77 < M < 0.83 and the thin lip (a/b = 3.0) was

designed for cruise at M > 0.83. Figure 27 presents a comparison of the inlet performance for

these configurations as a function of Mach number. Figure 15 presents comparisons of duct static

pressure distributions for the four inlet configurations. The effects of inlet geometry were small at

low speeds (M  0.40). At M > 0.40, the semicircular aperture shape (inlets A and B) generally
15

produced higher pressure recovery and lower

distortion than the semi-elliptical aperture shape

(inlets C and D). For a given inlet throat area, a

flush-mounted semi-elliptical inlet will ingest

more boundary layer than a semi-circular inlet

because it is wider than and not as tall as a semicircular inlet, which results in an increase in

measured nominal /Hi from 0.358 for the semicircular inlets to 0.434 for the semi-elliptical

inlets. If the semi-elliptical shape produced any

favorable effects on the internal, induced secondary flows, they were more than offset by the

detrimental effects of BLI discussed previously

for figure 24. In fact, the pressure distributions

shown in figure 15 indicate that the static pressures on the duct bottom wall were relatively

independent of inlet cowl geometry.

In general, inlet lip thickness only had a minor

effect on inlet performance. As mentioned previously, the facility adaptive wall capability was

inoperable at the time of this study, and Mach

numbers above 0.83 could not be obtained. Thus,

the potential benefits of a thinner lip at M > 0.83

could not be verified, but regardless, any potential

benefit would appear to be small from simple

extrapolation of the data.

Effect of Reynolds Number

The 0.3-Meter Transonic Cryogenic Tunnel

has the capability to vary Reynolds number (by

varying temperature and total pressure) for a

constant value of free-stream Mach number. As

indicated by the nominal test conditions shown in

table 2, Re/FT values from 25 106

 to 68 106

were tested for each inlet configuration at

M = 0.83. The Re/Ft value of 68 106

 provides

the full-scale Reynolds number value of

13.9 106

 (based on D2) for a BWB transport

aircraft. The boundary layer characteristics with

varying Reynolds number are tabulated in the

(b) part of tables 3 through 7. Distortion and

pressure recovery data with varying Reynolds

number are tabulated in tables 9 through 13.

Figure 28 presents the effect of Reynolds

number on static pressure ratio distributions

(facility wall and internal duct) for inlet B; these

data are typical for the other inlets. Although the

effect is small, p/pt, tends to increase slightly

with increasing Reynolds number.

The effect of Reynolds number on the boundary layer profiles is shown in figure 29 and is

generally small. As would be expected from the

boundary layer profile results, the effects of

Reynolds number on the boundary layer characteristics shown in figure 30 are also small, especially for shape factor H. The boundary layer

data exhibit more scatter than typically expected

and is more than likely the result of a boundary

layer rake that was too short, as discussed previously. Evaluating the boundary layer height 

data as a set indicates that boundary layer thickness tends to decrease slightly with increasing

Reynolds number as would be expected.

The effect of Reynolds number on inlet performance is presented in figure 31 as a function of

airflow at a nominal Mach number of 0.831.

Increasing Reynolds number increased inlet

pressure recovery, pt,2/pt,, by up to one half

percent. Although it is difficult to correlate this

effect with the boundary layer thickness results

shown in figure 30 because of data scatter, this

performance improvement is most likely the

result of thinner boundary layers (less BLI) at the

higher Reynolds numbers as indicated previously.

As shown on the bottom of figure 31, Reynolds

number has a negligible effect on the SAE circumferential distortion descriptor. The insensitivity of distortion to Reynolds number indicates

that free-stream Reynolds number had little effect

on the diffuser internal flow field (secondary

flows, separation, and so on) for the inlets tested.

Effect of Boundary Layer Profile

The measured shape factor of the natural

boundary layer in the 0.3-Meter Transonic Cryogenic Tunnel at the inlet face plane was about 1.5.

In flight, the boundary layer entrance profile can

be quite different from that created on a wind

tunnel facility wall because of other factors such

as shock-boundary layer interaction and/or separation, for example. To obtain a measure of inlet

performance sensitivity to boundary layer profile
16

shape, two boundary layer fences were mounted

in front of inlet A. A photograph of the installation is shown in figure 2(b), and a sketch of the

fence installation is shown in figure 4(h). Upstream devices such as chains, fences, and backward steps to perturb boundary layer characteristics have been used in several previous

investigations (see refs. 10, 11 and 13). It should

be noted that at some unknown time during the

fence-on testing, a portion of the fence upper

wires (see fig. 4(h)) broke and were lost downstream. However, all data at each test condition

were recorded simultaneously; inlet performance,

duct static pressure distributions, and boundary

layer characteristics were all measured with the

same fence condition at any given test condition.

Measured boundary layer characteristics for inlet

A with fences installed are tabulated in table 4,

and inlet performance data with the fences on are

tabulated in table 10 and figure 20.

Figure 32 presents the effect of the boundary

layer fences on the diffuser static pressure ratio

distributions. In general, static pressure ratio was

slightly decreased throughout the duct by adding

the boundary layer fences. As might be expected,

addition of the boundary layer fences had a significant effect on boundary layer profiles as

shown in figure 33. At Mach numbers above

0.25, the fences cause a significant defect in the

boundary layer profile below z/D2 = 0.1. This

result indicates that the upper fence wires were

probably lost before the M = 0.4 test condition

was reached because the upper wire was located

at z/D2 of about 0.18, and the lower wire was

located at z/D2 of about 0.09. It might be expected that the effect of fences on the boundary

layer profile would cause a significant impact on

boundary layer shape factor H. The effect of the

boundary layer fences on the boundary layer

shape factor, as well as the boundary layer height,

is shown in figure 30(e). The boundary layer

fences caused an increase in boundary layer shape

factor (H increased from about 1.5 to about 1.6),

which indicates a deterioration of boundary layer

health from the fence off case. Boundary layer

separation can occur for values of H above 1.8

(ref. 29).

Figure 34 presents the effect of a distorted

boundary layer profile on the performance of inlet

A. Distortion of the boundary layer profile was

detrimental to inlet pressure recovery and distortion. The results shown in the upper parts of

figure 34 for the effect of a distorted boundary

layer profile are almost identical to those reported

in reference 13. The investigation reported in

reference 13 used a backward facing step to

perturb the boundary layer and measured a 0.0071

reduction in pressure recovery at a throat Mach

number of 0.7 as a result of distorting the entrance

profile; the current investigation resulted in a

0.004 to 0.006 reduction in pressure recovery at a

free-stream Mach number of 0.6 and a 0.007 to

0.008 reduction in pressure recovery at a freestream Mach number of 0.8 as a result of distorting the entrance profile. However, an opposite

trend on inlet distortion was measured in the

current investigation from that reported in reference 13. In reference 13, although a thick boundary layer and a thick boundary layer with distorted entrance profile both caused higher

distortion than a thin boundary layer, perturbing

the thick boundary layer actually reduced inlet

distortion from that produced by the unperturbed

thick boundary layer. In the current investigation,

perturbing the entrance profile of a thick boundary layer (significantly thicker than that reported

in ref. 13) increased inlet distortion. Although the

fences used in the current investigation may not

produce a realistic inlet entrance boundary layer

profile, the results make it clear that inlet performance is not only a function of the amount of

BLI but also a function of upstream disturbances

and resulting boundary layer health (shape factor).

Conclusions

A new high Reynolds number test capability

has been developed for the NASA Langley Research Center 0.3-Meter Transonic Cryogenic

Tunnel. By using this new capability, an experimental investigation of four S-duct inlet configurations with large amounts of boundary layer

ingestion (nominal boundary layer thickness of

about 40-percent of inlet height) was conducted at

realistic operating conditions (high subsonic
17

Mach numbers and full-scale Reynolds numbers).

A computational study of one of the inlets was

also conducted. The results from this investigation have indicated the following conclusions.

1. Ingestion of a large amount of boundary

layer into an S-duct inlet causes a significant

decrease in inlet pressure recovery in addition to

the losses associated with duct friction, inlet lip

separation, or duct curvature.

2. Increasing free-stream Mach number was

generally detrimental to boundary layer ingesting

(BLI) S-duct inlet performance (pressure recovery

and distortion). Duct curvature and BLI effects

dominate the losses at high subsonic speeds.

3. Increasing engine airflow (engine throttle

setting) increased inlet pressure recovery at Mach

numbers above 0.4 but also increased inlet distortion. The increase in pressure recovery is attributable to a reduction in the relative amount of BLI

(absolute amount remains relatively constant) as

inlet mass-flow is increased.

4. At a Mach number of 0.25, increasing the

inlet throttle setting decreased inlet pressure

recovery. At this speed, the inlet mass-flow ratio

is generally greater than 1.0 (inlet flow stream

tube area is larger than inlet throat area) and the

amount of boundary layer pulled into the inlet

from the adjacent surfaces beside the inlet

increases with increasing engine throttle setting.

5. Because of increased boundary layer ingestion, inlets with semi-elliptical apertures have

lower inlet performance (lower pressure recovery

and higher distortion) than inlets with semicircular apertures. Inlet lip thickness had only

negligible effects on inlet performance for the

range of variables tested in the current study.

6. Increasing Reynolds number had a negligible effect on inlet distortion but increased inlet

pressure recovery.

7. Distorting the inlet entrance boundary layer

profile had a significant adverse effect on inlet

performance.

8. Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) was

able to capture the inlet pressure recovery and

distortion trends with increasing Mach number

and inlet airflow. In particular, CFD predicted the

reversal in pressure recovery trend with increasing inlet mass-flow at low and high Mach

numbers

References

1. Smith, Leroy H.: Wake Ingestion Propulsion

Benefit. J. of Aircraft and Power, vol. 9, no. 1,

Jan.-Feb., 1993.

2. Daggett, David L.; Kawai, Ron; and Friedman,

Doug: Blended Wing Body Systems Studies:

Boundary Layer Ingestion Inlets With Active Flow

Control. NASA/CR-2003-212670, Dec., 2003.

3. Ting, C.T.; Kaldschmidt, G.; and Syltebo, B.E.:

Design and Testing of New Center Inlet and

S-Duct for B-727 Airplane With Refanned JT8D

Engines. AIAA Paper 75-0059, Jan., 1975.

4. Ingells, Douglas J.: L-1011 TriStar and the

Lockheed Story. Aero Publishers, 1973.

5. Tindell, R.H.: Highly Compact Inlet Diffuser

Technology. AIAA-87-1747, July, 1987.

6. Mayer, David W.; Anderson, Bernhard H.; and

Johnson, Timothy A.: 3D Subsonic Diffuser

Design and Analysis. AIAA 98-3418, 1998.

7. Little, B.H., Jr.; and Trimboli, W.S.: An Experimental Investigation of S-Duct Diffusers for HighSpeed Prop-Fans. AIAA-82-1123, June, 1982.

8. Liebeck, R.H.; Page, M.A.; and Rawdon, B.K.:

Blended-Wing-Body Subsonic Commercial Transport. AIAA 98-0438, Jan. 1998.

9. Roman, D.; Allen, J.B.; and Liebeck, R.H.:

Aerodynamic Design Challenges of the BlendedWing-Body Subsonic Transport. AIAA-2000-4335,

2000.

10. Anabtawi, Amer J.; Blackwelder, Ron F.; Liebeck,

Robert; and Lissaman, Peter: Experimental

Investigation of Boundary Layer Ingesting

Diffusers of a Semi-Circular Cross Section.

AIAA-98-0945, 1998.
18

11. Anabtawi, Amer J.; Blackwelder, Ron F.;

Lissaman, Peter B.S.; and Liebeck, Robert H.: An

experimental Investigation of Boundary Layer

Ingestion in a Diffusing S-Duct With and Without

Passive Flow Control. AIAA 99-0739, 1999.

12. Anabtawi, Amer J.; Blackwelder, Ron F.; Liebeck,

Robert H.; and Lissaman, Peter B.S.: An Experimental Study of the Effect of Offset on Thick

Boundary Layers Flowing Inside Diffusing Ducts.

AIAA 99-3590, 1999.

13. Ball, W.H.: Tests of Wall Blowing Concepts for

Diffuser Boundary Layer Control. AIAA-84-1276,

1984.

14. Seddon, J.; and Goldsmith, E. L.: Intake Aerodynamics. AIAA Educational Series, 1985.

15. Mineck, Raymond E.; and Hill, Acquilla S.:

Calibration of the 13- by 13-Inch Adaptive Wall

Test Section for the Langley 0.3-Meter Transonic

Cryogenic Tunnel. NASA Technical Paper 3049,

Dec. 1990.

16. Rallo, Rosemary A.; Dress, David A.; and Siegle,

Henry J. A.: Operating Envelope Charts for the

Langley 0.3-Meter Transonic Cryogenic Wind

Tunnel. NASA TM 89008, Aug. 1986.

17. Seifert, Avi; and Pack, LaTunia G.: Active Control

of Separated Flows on Generic Configurations at

High Reynolds Numbers. AIAA 99-3403, 1999.

18. Anon.: Gas Turbine Engine Inlet Flow Distortion.

Soc. of Automotive Engineers Report ARP-1420,

March 1978.

19. Buning, P.G.; Jespersen, D.C.; Pulliam, T.H.;

Klopfer, W.M.; Chan, W.M.; Slotnick, J.P.; Krist,

S.E.; and Renze, K.J.: OVERFLOW User’s

Manual Version 1.8m, Tech. Rep., NASA Langley

Research Center, 1999.

20. Jespersen, D.C.; Pulliam, T.H.; and Buning, P.G.:

Vortex Generator Modeling for Navier-Stokes

Codes, AIAA 97-0644, 1997.

21. Pulliam, T.H.; and Chaussee, D.S.: A Diagonal

Form of an Implicit Approximate-Factorization

Algorithm, J. of Computational Physics, vol. 39,

February 1981, pp. 347-363.

22. Steger, J.L.; Dougherty, F.C.; and Benek, J.A.: A

Chimera Grid Scheme, Advances in Grid

Generation, edited by K.N. Ghia and U. Ghia,

vol. 5 of FED, ASME, New York, NY, 1983.

23. Menter, F.: Improved Two-Equation Turbulence

Models for Aerodynamic Flows, Tech. Rep. TM

103975, NASA Langley Research Center,

Hampton, VA 23681-2199, 1992.

24. Murphy, K.; Buning, P.; Pamadi, B.; Scallion, W.;

and Jones, K.: Status of Stage Separation Tool

Development for Next Generation Launch Technologies, AIAA paper 04-2595, June 2004.

25. Chan, W.M.; and Gomez, R.J.: Advances in

Automatic Overset Grid Generation Around

Surface Discontinuities, AIAA Paper 99-3303, July

1999.

26. Raymer, Daniel P.: Aircraft Design: A Conceptual

Approach. Third Edition. AIAA Educational

Series. AIAA, Inc., 1999.

27. Wellborn, S.R.; Reichert, B.A.; and Okiishi, T.H.:

An Experimental Investigation of the Flow in a

Diffusing S-Duct. AIAA-92-3622, 1992.

28. Coles, D.: The Law of the Wake in the Turbulent

Boundary Layer. J. of Fluid Mech. 1:191-226,

1956.

29. Schlichting, Hermann: Boundary Layer Theory.

McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc. 1960.

30. Anderson, B.H.; and Gibb, J.: Vortex-Generator

Installation Studies on Steady-State and Dynamic

Distortion. J. of Aircraft, vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 513-

520, 1998.

31. Anderson, B.H.; and Gibb, J.: Vortex Flow Control

Applied to Aircraft Intake Ducts. Proceedings of

the Royal Aeronautical Society Conference on

High Lift and Separation Control. Paper No. 14,

Bath, UK, March, 1995.

32. Anderson, Jason M.; Burdisso, Ricardo; and Ng,

Wing: An Active Flow Distortion Control System

for Serpentine Inlets. Proceedings of International

Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition,

New Orleans, LA. IMECE2002-NCA-33049, Nov.

2002.
19

33. Allan, Brian G.; Owens, Lewis R.; Berrier, Bobby

L.: Numerical Modeling of Active Flow Control in

a Boundary Layer Ingesting Offset Inlet. 2nd AIAA

Flow Control Conference, Portland, Oregon.

AIAA-04-2318. June, 2004.

34. Gorton, Susan Althoff; Owens, Lewis R.; Jenkins,

Luther N.; Allan, Brian G.; and Schuster, Ernest P.:

Active Flow Control on a Boundary-LayerIngesting Inlet. AIAA-2004-1203.
20

Table 1. Values of Important Geometric Parameters

Variable Inlet A Inlet B Inlet C Inlet D

Hmax, in. 2.185 2.143 1.757 1.691

L, in. 7.697 7.697 7.684 7.684

L + a, in. 8.174 8.355 8.033 8.109

a, in. 0.477 0.658 0.349 0.425

b, in. 0.239 0.219 0.174 0.142

a/D2 0.195 0.269 0.143 0.174

Hi, in. 1.703 1.703 1.405 1.405

Wi, in. 3.249 3.249 3.980 3.980

Ai, in2 4.400 4.400 4.455 4.455

AC, in2 5.760 5.634 5.876 5.634

H, in. 2.543 2.543 2.417 2.417

D2, in. 2.448 2.448 2.448 2.448

A2, in2 4.707 4.707 4.707 4.707

L/D2 3.144 3.144 3.139 3.139

H/L 0.330 0.330 0.314 0.314

A2/Ai 1.070 1.070 1.057 1.057

Wi/2Hi or AR 0.95 0.95 1.42 1.42

a/b 2.0 3.0 2.0 3.0
21

snoiti dno Ctse Tl ani mo N. 2 el ba T

T M

,t p R , ,t ni/f bl , 2 TF/ e R x 01 6- e R 2 D x 01 6- W C2 A/ i ces/ bl , tf 2 A0 A/ C

22. 1- 37. 0 4. 43- 0. 02 9. 6 43 56 081 52. 0

18. 0- 84. 0 9. 43- 0. 02 4. 01 15 36 081 04. 016. 0- 53. 0 7. 53- 0. 02 9. 31 86 26 081 06. 055. 0- 03. 0 1. 63- 0. 02 9. 31 86 15 081 08. 0

75. 0- 92. 0 8. 63- 0. 02 9. 31 86 05 081 38. 0

75. 0- 92. 0 8. 63- 0. 02 6. 11 75 24 081 38. 0

75. 0- 92. 0 8. 63- 0. 02 6. 8 24 13 081 38. 0

75. 0- 92. 0 0. 83- 2. 02 6. 8 24 35 062 38. 075. 0- 92. 0 0. 83- 2. 02 1. 7 53 44 062 38. 075. 0- 92. 0 0. 83- 2. 02 1. 6 03 83 062 38. 0

75. 0- 92. 0 0. 83- 2. 02 1. 5 52 23 062 38. 0

pee ws hca M

pee ws e R

. el bani at bo mu mi xa meht er e w04. 0 dna 52. 0 = Mt a seul av TF/ e RehT: et o N
22

ff OecneF, At el nI r of at a Dr eya Lyr adnuo Bdna snoiti dno Ctse T. 3 el ba T

spee ws wolf-ssa M) a(

M tf/ e R x 01 6- W C2 A ces/ mbl , 0 A/ C ni , H/ i * ni , ni , H

702. 1 5720. 0 6230. 0 591. 0 233. 0 067. 0 526. 0 93. 33 052. 0

172. 1 2250. 0 3660. 0 633. 0 275. 0 370. 1 788. 0 22. 33 052. 0

282. 1 9450. 0 4070. 0 433. 0 965. 0 101. 1 519. 0 03. 33 152. 0

103. 1 2160. 0 6970. 0 863. 0 726. 0 561. 1 769. 0 20. 43 152. 0872. 1 2840. 0 6160. 0 923. 0 165. 0 394. 0 126. 0 11. 05 104. 0

982. 1 9050. 0 5560. 0 633. 0 275. 0 117. 0 698. 0 30. 25 204. 0

682. 1 3640. 0 5950. 0 213. 0 135. 0 647. 0 349. 0 58. 25 404. 0

453. 1 3540. 0 3160. 0 723. 0 755. 0 763. 0 726. 0 65. 76 206. 0

063. 1 6740. 0 7460. 0 433. 0 965. 0 625. 0 998. 0 25. 96 406. 0

163. 1 2540. 0 5160. 0 813. 0 245. 0 985. 0 400. 1 91. 86 306. 0

863. 1 9050. 0 6960. 0 053. 0 695. 0 826. 0 170. 1 15. 86 406. 0274. 1 1540. 0 4660. 0 633. 0 275. 0 213. 0 326. 0 66. 96 308. 0

774. 1 2640. 0 2860. 0 633. 0 275. 0 454. 0 309. 0 79. 96 508. 0

074. 1 4340. 0 8360. 0 123. 0 645. 0 315. 0 710. 1 58. 86 308. 0

674. 1 4740. 0 9960. 0 143. 0 085. 0 645. 0 080. 1 49. 86 508. 0

094. 1 9640. 0 9960. 0 143. 0 085. 0 803. 0 226. 0 45. 96 928. 0794. 1 3740. 0 8070. 0 833. 0 675. 0 744. 0 998. 0 60. 07 238. 0394. 1 5440. 0 4660. 0 123. 0 645. 0 805. 0 020. 1 34. 86 438. 0594. 1 5740. 0 1170. 0 833. 0 675. 0 655. 0 311. 1 56. 76 338. 0
23

dedul cno C. 3 el ba T

spee wsr eb mun sdl onye R) b(

M tf/ e R x 01 6- W C2 A ces/ mbl , 0 A/ C ni , H/ i * ni , ni , H

594. 1 6050. 0 7570. 0 863. 0 726. 0 903. 0 726. 0 *30. 52 828. 0

594. 1 0050. 0 8470. 0 863. 0 726. 0 803. 0 626. 0 *01. 03 928. 0

494. 1 4940. 0 8370. 0 863. 0 726. 0 013. 0 826. 0 *11. 53 828. 0

594. 1 1940. 0 4370. 0 953. 0 116. 0 803. 0 526. 0 *60. 24 038. 0005. 1 4940. 0 1470. 0 953. 0 116. 0 603. 0 126. 0 00. 34 338. 0

294. 1 5740. 0 9070. 0 053. 0 695. 0 703. 0 126. 0 91. 85 928. 0

094. 1 9640. 0 9960. 0 143. 0 085. 0 803. 0 226. 0 45. 96 928. 0

015. 1 2050. 0 7570. 0 953. 0 116. 0 465. 0 331. 1 *28. 42 238. 0

605. 1 1940. 0 9370. 0 953. 0 116. 0 565. 0 431. 1 *18. 92 238. 0

205. 1 3840. 0 5270. 0 053. 0 695. 0 765. 0 531. 1 *46. 43 038. 0

894. 1 7740. 0 4170. 0 143. 0 085. 0 565. 0 031. 1 *51. 14 928. 0205. 1 2940. 0 0470. 0 953. 0 116. 0 655. 0 411. 1 65. 14 438. 0

994. 1 9740. 0 8170. 0 143. 0 085. 0 655. 0 311. 1 16. 65 338. 0

594. 1 5740. 0 1170. 0 833. 0 675. 0 655. 0 311. 1 56. 76 338. 0

Tl ani mo N*

,t Tl ani mon; R 062 = ,t . at adr eht oll a r of R 081 =
24

n OecneF, At el nI r oFat a Dr eya Lyr adnuo Bdna snoiti dno Ctse T. 4 el ba T

spee ws wolf-ssa M) a(

M tf/ e R x 01 6- W C2 A ces/ mbl , 0 A/ C ni , H/ i * ni , ni , H

453. 1 0660. 0 4980. 0 953. 0 116. 0 680. 1 309. 0 87. 33 152. 0

123. 1 5470. 0 4890. 0 953. 0 116. 0 651. 1 469. 0 68. 33 152. 0

794. 1 5570. 0 1311. 0 773. 0 246. 0 617. 0 209. 0 88. 05 004. 0

414. 1 4170. 0 0101. 0 143. 0 085. 0 218. 0 520. 1 76. 05 104. 0515. 1 1760. 0 7101. 0 863. 0 726. 0 725. 0 509. 0 91. 86 306. 0

515. 1 0860. 0 0301. 0 143. 0 085. 0 626. 0 270. 1 68. 86 206. 0

865. 1 8850. 0 2290. 0 863. 0 726. 0 454. 0 909. 0 73. 86 208. 0

416. 1 3750. 0 5290. 0 923. 0 165. 0 445. 0 880. 1 12. 86 218. 0

175. 1 3750. 0 1090. 0 953. 0 116. 0 744. 0 709. 0 01. 96 338. 0

806. 1 1650. 0 2090. 0 923. 0 165. 0 055. 0 801. 1 20. 86 238. 0
25

dedul cno C. 4 el ba T

pee wsr eb mun sdl onye R) b(

M tf/ e R x 01 6- W C2 A ces/ mbl , 0 A/ C ni , H/ i * ni , ni , H

665. 1 4650. 0 3880. 0 863. 0 726. 0 844. 0 809. 0 *11. 52 438. 0

765. 1 0650. 0 8780. 0 953. 0 116. 0 944. 0 909. 0 *01. 03 238. 0

865. 1 8550. 0 5780. 0 953. 0 116. 0 944. 0 909. 0 *79. 43 138. 0

175. 1 3650. 0 5880. 0 953. 0 116. 0 944. 0 909. 0 *07. 14 138. 0265. 1 4650. 0 1880. 0 953. 0 116. 0 944. 0 809. 0 87. 14 038. 0

665. 1 5650. 0 4880. 0 953. 0 116. 0 844. 0 809. 0 71. 75 238. 0

175. 1 3750. 0 1090. 0 953. 0 116. 0 744, 0 709. 0 01. 96 338. 0

406. 1 8650. 0 1190. 0 833. 0 675. 0 755. 0 521. 1 *89. 42 038. 0

906. 1 3650. 0 6090. 0 633. 0 275. 0 855. 0 721. 1 *77. 92 038. 0

216. 1 1650. 0 4090. 0 433. 0 965. 0 065. 0 921. 1 *83. 53 038. 0

716. 1 2650. 0 0190. 0 233. 0 565. 0 065. 0 921. 1 *50. 14 928. 0706. 1 5650. 0 8090. 0 433. 0 965. 0 155. 0 511. 1 46. 14 238. 0

506. 1 0650. 0 9980. 0 233. 0 565. 0 155. 0 511. 1 62. 75 938. 0

806. 1 1650. 0 2090. 0 923. 0 165. 0 055. 0 801. 1 20. 86 238. 0

Tl ani mo N*

,t Tl ani mon; R 062 = ,t . at adr eht oll a r of R 081 =
26

Bt el nI r of at a Dr eya Lyr adnuo Bdna snoiti dno Ctse T. 5 el ba T

spee ws wolf-ssa M) a(

M tf/ e R x 01 6- W C2 A ces/ mbl , 0 A/ C ni , H/ i * ni , ni , H

972. 1 6160. 0 8870. 0 773. 0 246. 0 077. 0 916. 0 38. 33 842. 0

943. 1 8970. 0 7701. 0 324. 0 027. 0 990. 1 398. 0 82. 33 152. 0

582. 1 6850. 0 3570. 0 053. 0 695. 0 852. 1 110. 1 20. 33 842. 0

682. 1 3950. 0 2670. 0 863. 0 726. 0 262. 1 630. 1 89. 23 452. 0982. 1 9050. 0 6560. 0 633. 0 275. 0 605. 0 226. 0 71. 15 004. 0

053. 1 6370. 0 4990. 0 324. 0 027. 0 427. 0 498. 0 23. 15 104. 0

503. 1 5650. 0 7370. 0 953. 0 116. 0 518. 0 710. 1 09. 05 704. 0

782. 1 0350. 0 2860. 0 953. 0 116. 0 578. 0 870. 1 59. 05 004. 0

163. 1 7740. 0 9460. 0 633. 0 275. 0 073. 0 026. 0 99. 76 206. 0

673. 1 0950. 0 2180. 0 683. 0 856. 0 435. 0 798. 0 06. 76 706. 0

863. 1 1250. 0 2170. 0 953. 0 116. 0 906. 0 120. 1 24. 76 806. 0263. 1 1840. 0 4560. 0 323. 0 055. 0 856. 0 890. 1 56. 76 706. 0

684. 1 2540. 0 2760. 0 833. 0 675. 0 713. 0 916. 0 91. 86 308. 0

864. 1 8540. 0 3760. 0 953. 0 116. 0 364. 0 998. 0 15. 86 008. 0

084. 1 5740. 0 3070. 0 953. 0 116. 0 625. 0 220. 1 00. 86 808. 0

484. 1 4940. 0 4370. 0 953. 0 116. 0 175. 0 701. 1 90. 86 408. 0505. 1 9640. 0 6070. 0 053. 0 695. 0 313. 0 026. 0 72. 86 928. 0984. 1 4540. 0 6760. 0 053. 0 695. 0 754. 0 998. 0 65. 86 038. 0194. 1 1640. 0 8860. 0 053. 0 695. 0 125. 0 320. 1 81. 76 238. 0005. 1 8840. 0 3370. 0 953. 0 116. 0 075. 0 911. 1 71. 86 338. 0
27

dedul cno C. 5 el ba T

spee wsr eb mun sdl onye R) b(

M tf/ e R x 01 6- W C2 A ces/ mbl , 0 A/ C ni , H/ i * ni , ni , H

315. 1 2940. 0 4470. 0 863. 0 726. 0 413. 0 426. 0 *79. 42 928. 0

905. 1 2840. 0 7270. 0 953. 0 116. 0 513. 0 526. 0 *49. 92 928. 0

605. 1 5740. 0 6170. 0 953. 0 116. 0 613. 0 626. 0 *48. 43 728. 0

205. 1 9640. 0 4070. 0 953. 0 116. 0 513. 0 526. 0 *78. 14 928. 0215. 1 7840. 0 6370. 0 953. 0 116. 0 313. 0 026. 0 92. 14 138. 0

705. 1 3740. 0 3170. 0 953. 0 116. 0 213. 0 916. 0 02. 75 138. 0

505. 1 9640. 0 6070. 0 053. 0 695. 0 313. 0 026. 0 72. 86 928. 0

505. 1 9640. 0 5070. 0 143. 0 085. 0 575. 0 031. 1 *45. 52 238. 0

994. 1 6640. 0 9960. 0 143. 0 085. 0 675. 0 031. 1 *75. 03 728. 0

305. 1 5640. 0 9960. 0 833. 0 675. 0 675. 0 331. 1 *79. 43 438. 0

105. 1 6640. 0 9960. 0 053. 0 695. 0 775. 0 431. 1 *96. 14 438. 0405. 1 1940. 0 9370. 0 953. 0 116. 0 175. 0 021. 1 93. 24 038. 0

994. 1 7840. 0 0370. 0 953. 0 116. 0 175. 0 911. 1 14. 75 038. 0

005. 1 8840. 0 3370. 0 953. 0 116. 0 075. 0 911. 1 71. 86 338. 0

Tl ani mo N*

,t Tl ani mon; R 062 = ,t . at adr eht oll a r of R 081 =
28

Ct el nI r of at a Dr eya Lyr adnuo Bdna snoiti dno Ctse T. 6 el ba T

spee ws wolf-ssa M) a(

M tf/ e R x 01 6- W C2 A ces/ mbl , 0 A/ C ni , H/ i * ni , ni , H

744. 1 3021. 0 1471. 0 436. 0 198. 0 437. 0 316. 0 50. 43 742. 0

504. 1 4201. 0 9341. 0 095. 0 928. 0 950. 1 198. 0 80. 33 942. 0

524. 1 2201. 0 7541. 0 975. 0 318. 0 591. 1 100. 1 30. 33 842. 0

413. 1 0760. 0 0880. 0 754. 0 246. 0 712. 1 630. 1 71. 33 252. 0533. 1 4270. 0 7690. 0 094. 0 986. 0 974. 0 616. 0 59. 05 004. 0

243. 1 2070. 0 2490. 0 974. 0 376. 0 496. 0 298. 0 26. 05 004. 0

743. 1 0070. 0 2490. 0 864. 0 856. 0 597. 0 410. 1 28. 94 693. 0

603. 1 5550. 0 4270. 0 534. 0 116. 0 118. 0 940. 1 06. 05 304. 0

493. 1 3460. 0 6980. 0 974. 0 376. 0 153. 0 516. 0 85. 86 795. 0

093. 1 8750. 0 4080. 0 534. 0 116. 0 415. 0 798. 0 06. 76 106. 0

593. 1 9850. 0 2280. 0 644. 0 726. 0 385. 0 710. 1 66. 76 106. 0863. 1 3050. 0 8860. 0 014. 0 675. 0 316. 0 170. 1 67. 76 406. 0

674. 1 0050. 0 8370. 0 644. 0 726. 0 792. 0 516. 0 34. 86 308. 0

984. 1 3250. 0 9770. 0 644. 0 726. 0 834. 0 798. 0 14. 86 108. 0

094. 1 2250. 0 8770. 0 534. 0 116. 0 005. 0 120. 1 47. 76 208. 0

784. 1 8840. 0 5270. 0 704. 0 275. 0 435. 0 780. 1 20. 86 108. 0294. 1 9740. 0 5170. 0 534. 0 116. 0 292. 0 516. 0 05. 86 338. 0405. 1 5050. 0 0670. 0 534. 0 116. 0 134. 0 698. 0 00. 86 538. 0115. 1 1150. 0 2770. 0 534. 0 116. 0 994. 0 330. 1 04. 86 138. 0005. 1 3740. 0 9070. 0 504. 0 965. 0 335. 0 001. 1 99. 76 038. 0
29

dedul cno C. 6 el ba T

spee wsr eb mun sdl onye R) b(

M tf/ e R x 01 6- W C2 A ces/ mbl , 0 A/ C ni , H/ i * ni , ni , H

105. 1 4740. 0 1170. 0 644. 0 726. 0 392. 0 916. 0 *70. 52 928. 0

894. 1 4640. 0 5960. 0 534. 0 116. 0 592. 0 126. 0 *20. 03 928. 0

394. 1 8540. 0 3860. 0 534. 0 116. 0 492. 0 916. 0 *00. 53 928. 0

194. 1 6440. 0 4660. 0 424. 0 695. 0 592. 0 026. 0 *60. 24 928. 0005. 1 5840. 0 7270. 0 534. 0 116. 0 292. 0 616. 0 60. 24 538. 0

694. 1 9840. 0 1370. 0 534. 0 116. 0 292. 0 516. 0 61. 75 238. 0

294. 1 9740. 0 5170. 0 534. 0 116. 0 292. 0 516. 0 05. 86 338. 0

494. 1 1540. 0 4760. 0 504. 0 965. 0 945. 0 431. 1 *01. 52 728. 0

894. 1 9340. 0 8560. 0 793. 0 755. 0 745. 0 531. 1 *51. 03 838. 0

094. 1 3340. 0 6460. 0 493. 0 455. 0 055. 0 631. 1 *58. 43 928. 0

684. 1 4240. 0 0360. 0 983. 0 645. 0 255. 0 731. 1 *67. 14 828. 0505. 1 8840. 0 5370. 0 424. 0 695. 0 635. 0 801. 1 22. 24 038. 0

605. 1 3840. 0 7270. 0 704. 0 275. 0 535. 0 401. 1 81. 75 138. 0

005. 1 3740. 0 9070. 0 504. 0 965. 0 335. 0 001. 1 99. 76 038. 0

Tl ani mo N*

,t Tl ani mon; R 062 = ,t . at adr eht oll a r of R 081 =
30

Dt el nI r of at a Dr eya Lyr adnuo Bdna snoiti dno Ctse T. 7 el ba T

spee ws wolf-ssa M)a(

M tf/ e R x 01 6- W C2 A ces/ mbl , 0 A/ C ni , H/ i * ni , ni , H

524. 1 5611. 0 9561. 0 436. 0 198. 0 077. 0 216. 0 48. 33 642. 0

754. 1 9901. 0 1061. 0 216. 0 068. 0 701. 1 498. 0 35. 33 942. 0

364. 1 3011. 0 4161. 0 216. 0 068. 0 542. 1 999. 0 19. 23 742. 0

514. 1 0001. 0 5141. 0 755. 0 287. 0 452. 1 710. 1 86. 33 052. 0543. 1 2670. 0 5201. 0 215. 0 027. 0 894. 0 216. 0 81. 15 993. 0

953. 1 5470. 0 3101. 0 094. 0 986. 0 627. 0 598. 0 06. 15 104. 0

063. 1 7370. 0 1001. 0 094. 0 986. 0 328. 0 410. 1 19. 05 004. 0

553. 1 3570. 0 0201. 0 215. 0 027. 0 158. 0 350. 1 35. 15 204. 0

093. 1 1360. 0 7780. 0 864. 0 856. 0 563. 0 316. 0 46. 86 695. 0

804. 1 2460. 0 4090. 0 864. 0 856. 0 135. 0 998. 0 07. 76 016. 0

604. 1 6360. 0 4980. 0 754. 0 246. 0 016. 0 910. 1 33. 76 006. 0404. 1 4460. 0 4090. 0 974. 0 376. 0 446. 0 090. 1 39. 66 216. 0

084. 1 1150. 0 6570. 0 754. 0 246. 0 903. 0 316. 0 83. 86 897. 0

305. 1 1650. 0 3480. 0 754. 0 246. 0 754. 0 009. 0 32. 86 508. 0

415. 1 8750. 0 4780. 0 754. 0 246. 0 025. 0 320. 1 05. 86 908. 0

505. 1 2850. 0 5780. 0 754. 0 246. 0 765. 0 701. 1 40. 86 008. 0794. 1 3840. 0 3270. 0 644. 0 726. 0 403. 0 416. 0 06. 86 238. 0415. 1 1350. 0 5080. 0 644. 0 726. 0 254. 0 109. 0 34. 86 038. 0425. 1 7550. 0 8480. 0 644. 0 726. 0 615. 0 420. 1 51. 86 138. 0125. 1 9550. 0 0580. 0 754. 0 246. 0 265. 0 411. 1 04. 86 438. 0
31

dedul cno C. 7 el ba T

spee wsr eb mun sdl onye R) b(

M tf/ e R x 01 6- W C2 A ces/ mbl , 0 A/ C ni , H/ i * ni , ni , H

105. 1 7640. 0 1070. 0 644. 0 726. 0 403. 0 716. 0 *40. 52 628. 0

005. 1 4540. 0 2860. 0 534. 0 116. 0 503. 0 816. 0 *70. 03 828. 0

894. 1 8440. 0 1760. 0 534. 0 116. 0 503. 0 816. 0 *80. 53 928. 0

594. 1 0440. 0 7560. 0 534. 0 116. 0 603. 0 916. 0 *30. 24 828. 0005. 1 7740. 0 5170. 0 644. 0 726. 0 403. 0 416. 0 10. 24 038. 0

205. 1 0840. 0 0270. 0 644. 0 726. 0 203. 0 216. 0 14. 75 338. 0

794. 1 3840. 0 3270. 0 644. 0 726. 0 403. 0 416. 0 06. 86 238. 0

515. 1 3350. 0 8080. 0 754. 0 246. 0 665. 0 621. 1 *84. 52 138. 0

905. 1 0250. 0 4870. 0 644. 0 726. 0 965. 0 821. 1 *99. 92 828. 0

505. 1 7050. 0 3670. 0 534. 0 116. 0 075. 0 921. 1 *29. 43 728. 0

015. 1 6940. 0 9470. 0 534. 0 116. 0 765. 0 721. 1 *73. 24 838. 0345. 1 3460. 0 3990. 0 094. 0 986. 0 945. 0 190. 1 83. 24 038. 0

125. 1 7650. 0 3680. 0 754. 0 246. 0 365. 0 511. 1 60. 75 828. 0

125. 1 9550. 0 0580. 0 754. 0 246. 0 265. 0 411. 1 04. 86 438. 0

Tl ani mo N*

,t Tl ani mon; R 062 = ,t . at adr eht oll a r of R 081 =
32

Table 8. Grid Dimensions for BLI Inlet Numerical Simulations

Grid points Grid description J direction K direction L direction

Total grid

points

Inlet boundary layer 101 301 57 1732857

Inlet core flow 101 51 51 262701

Inlet lip 81 101 41 335421

Inlet cowl 91 82 61 455182

Block at inlet entrance 51 71 76 275196

Flat plate block around inlet 111 96 126 1342656

Flat plate background 141 51 101 726291

Total 5130304
33

M T

,t R , tf/ e R x 01 6- W C2 A ces/ mbl , 0 A/ C p 2,t p/ ,t PCPD gva

500. 0 749. 0 903. 0 726. 0 30. 52 8. 952 828. 0500. 0 849. 0 803. 0 626. 0 01. 03 1. 062 828. 0

500. 0 949. 0 013. 0 826. 0 11. 53 2. 062 828. 0

500. 0 949. 0 803. 0 526. 0 60. 24 7. 062 038. 0

400. 0 949. 0 603. 0 126. 0 00. 34 6. 081 338. 0

500. 0 059. 0 703. 0 126. 0 91. 85 8. 081 928. 0

500. 0 159. 0 803. 0 226. 0 45. 96 7. 081 928. 0

530. 0 459. 0 944. 0 509. 0 81. 52 2. 952 828. 0

530. 0 559. 0 944. 0 409. 0 93. 03 5. 952 928. 0

530. 0 559. 0 844. 0 409. 0 91. 53 9. 952 138. 0

430. 0 659. 0 944. 0 309. 0 31. 24 2. 062 928. 0330. 0 659. 0 844. 0 309. 0 04. 34 9. 971 928. 0

430. 0 759. 0 744. 0 009. 0 59. 85 2. 081 138. 0

430. 0 759. 0 744. 0 998. 0 60. 07 1. 081 238. 0

640. 0 659. 0 705. 0 120. 1 01. 52 5. 062 928. 0

640. 0 759. 0 805. 0 220. 1 61. 03 8. 062 038. 0640. 0 859. 0 905. 0 220. 1 59. 43 0. 162 928. 0

640. 0 959. 0 015. 0 320. 1 97. 14 1. 162 928. 0540. 0 069. 0 805. 0 020. 1 17. 75 7. 081 338. 0540. 0 069. 0 805. 0 020. 1 34. 86 8. 081 438. 0

150. 0 959. 0 465. 0 331. 1 28. 42 6. 952 238. 0050. 0 069. 0 565. 0 431. 1 18. 92 9. 952 238. 0

050. 0 169. 0 765. 0 531. 1 46. 43 3. 062 038. 0940. 0 269. 0 565. 0 031. 1 51. 14 5. 062 928. 0940. 0 169. 0 655. 0 411. 1 65. 14 7. 971 438. 0940. 0 269. 0 655. 0 311. 1 16. 65 9. 971 338. 0

840. 0 369. 0 655. 0 311. 1 56. 76 1. 081 338. 0

ff OecneF, At el nI no spee wSr eb mu Nsdl onye Rr of at a Dnoitr otsi Ddna yr evoce Rer usser P. 9 el ba T
34

M T

,t R , tf/ e R x 01 6- W C2 A ces/ mbl , 0 A/ C p 2,t p/ ,t PCPD gva

430. 0 059. 0 844. 0 809. 0 11. 52 1. 062 438. 0430. 0 159. 0 944. 0 909. 0 01. 03 2. 062 238. 0

430. 0 259. 0 944. 0 909. 0 79. 43 6. 062 138. 0

430. 0 159. 0 944. 0 909. 0 07. 14 6. 062 138. 0

430. 0 159. 0 944. 0 809. 0 87. 14 5. 081 038. 0

430. 0 159. 0 844. 0 809. 0 71. 75 8. 081 238. 0

430. 0 159. 0 744. 0 709. 0 01. 96 9. 081 338. 0

650. 0 359. 0 755. 0 521. 1 89. 42 8. 062 038. 0

650. 0 459. 0 855. 0 721. 1 77. 92 9. 062 038. 0

650. 0 459. 0 065. 0 921. 1 83. 53 1. 162 038. 0

650. 0 559. 0 065. 0 921. 1 50. 14 4. 162 928. 0650. 0 359. 0 155. 0 511. 1 46. 14 4. 081 238. 0

650. 0 459. 0 155. 0 511. 1 62. 75 7. 081 938. 0

550. 0 559. 0 055. 0 801. 1 20. 86 1. 181 238. 0

n OecneF, At el nI no spee wSr eb mu Nsdl onye Rr of at a Dnoitr otsi Ddna yr evoce Rer usser P. 01 el ba T
35

M T

,t R , tf/ e R x 01 6- W C2 A ces/ mbl , 0 A/ C p 2,t p/ ,t PCPD gva

400. 0 749. 0 413. 0 426. 0 79. 42 9. 062 928. 0400. 0 849. 0 513. 0 526. 0 49. 92 1. 162 928. 0

400. 0 949. 0 613. 0 626. 0 48. 43 4. 162 728. 0

400. 0 059. 0 513. 0 526. 0 78. 14 3. 162 928. 0

400. 0 949. 0 313. 0 026. 0 92. 14 9. 081 138. 0

400. 0 059. 0 213. 0 916. 0 02. 75 2. 181 138. 0

400. 0 159. 0 313. 0 026. 0 72. 86 1. 181 928. 0

330. 0 559. 0 654. 0 998. 0 21. 52 6. 062 828. 0

430. 0 659. 0 754. 0 009. 0 59. 92 0. 162 828. 0

430. 0 659. 0 754. 0 009. 0 69. 43 2. 162 828. 0

430. 0 759. 0 854. 0 109. 0 29. 14 9. 062 928. 0330. 0 659. 0 654. 0 898. 0 59. 14 5. 081 138. 0

330. 0 759. 0 754. 0 898. 0 33. 75 7. 081 138. 0

330. 0 859. 0 754. 0 998. 0 65. 86 7. 081 038. 0

640. 0 759. 0 025. 0 220. 1 99. 42 6. 062 928. 0

640. 0 759. 0 915. 0 320. 1 22. 03 0. 162 638. 0640. 0 859. 0 025. 0 320. 1 98. 43 0. 162 638. 0

540. 0 959. 0 125. 0 320. 1 36. 04 6. 062 038. 0540. 0 959. 0 125. 0 320. 1 74. 65 3. 081 038. 0540. 0 069. 0 125. 0 320. 1 81. 76 5. 081 238. 0

350. 0 859. 0 575. 0 031. 1 45. 52 4. 062 238. 0350. 0 959. 0 675. 0 031. 1 75. 03 3. 062 728. 0

350. 0 959. 0 675. 0 331. 1 79. 43 3. 062 438. 0350. 0 959. 0 775. 0 431. 1 96. 14 7. 952 438. 0250. 0 959. 0 175. 0 021. 1 93. 24 1. 081 038. 0150. 0 069. 0 175. 0 911. 1 14. 75 8. 971 038. 0

150. 0 069. 0 075. 0 911. 1 71. 86 9. 971 338. 0

Bt el nI no spee wSr eb mu Nsdl onye Rr of at a Dnoitr otsi Ddna yr evoce Rer usser P. 11 el ba T
36

M T

,t R , tf/ e R x 01 6- W C2 A ces/ mbl , 0 A/ C p 2,t p/ ,t PCPD gva

110. 0 039. 0 392. 0 916. 0 70. 52 4. 062 928. 0110. 0 139. 0 592. 0 126. 0 20. 03 6. 062 928. 0

110. 0 139. 0 492. 0 916. 0 00. 53 7. 062 928. 0

110. 0 339. 0 592. 0 026. 0 60. 24 5. 062 928. 0

010. 0 139. 0 292. 0 616. 0 60. 24 5. 081 538. 0

010. 0 339. 0 292. 0 516. 0 61. 75 9. 081 238. 0

010. 0 439. 0 292. 0 516. 0 05. 86 0. 181 338. 0

630. 0 149. 0 234. 0 009. 0 10. 52 2. 062 628. 0

630. 0 249. 0 134. 0 998. 0 30. 03 5. 062 038. 0

630. 0 349. 0 234. 0 009. 0 30. 53 5. 062 138. 0

630. 0 449. 0 334. 0 109. 0 50. 24 5. 062 138. 0530. 0 249. 0 924. 0 698. 0 61. 24 3. 081 638. 0

530. 0 449. 0 034. 0 698. 0 24. 75 6. 081 438. 0

530. 0 549. 0 134. 0 698. 0 00. 86 2. 081 538. 0

050. 0 549. 0 894. 0 530. 1 74. 52 3. 062 928. 0

050. 0 649. 0 894. 0 530. 1 65. 03 3. 062 038. 0050. 0 749. 0 994. 0 530. 1 11. 53 4. 062 038. 0

050. 0 849. 0 994. 0 530. 1 67. 14 3. 062 138. 0050. 0 749. 0 994. 0 530. 1 58. 14 6. 081 138. 0050. 0 949. 0 005. 0 530. 1 61. 75 6. 081 138. 0

050. 0 059. 0 994. 0 330. 1 04. 86 8. 081 138. 0750. 0 949. 0 945. 0 431. 1 01. 52 7. 952 728. 0

850. 0 949. 0 745. 0 531. 1 51. 03 2. 062 838. 0750. 0 159. 0 055. 0 631. 1 58. 43 9. 952 928. 0650. 0 259. 0 255. 0 731. 1 67. 14 1. 062 828. 0650. 0 059. 0 635. 0 801. 1 22. 24 4. 081 038. 0

550. 0 159. 0 535. 0 401. 1 81. 75 4. 081 138. 0550. 0 259. 0 335. 0 001. 1 99. 76 6. 081 038. 0

Ct el nI no spee wSr eb mu Nsdl onye Rr of at a Dnoitr otsi Ddna yr evoce Rer usser P. 21 el ba T
37

M T

,t R , tf/ e R x 01 6- W C2 A ces/ mbl , 0 A/ C p 2,t p/ ,t PCPD gva

210. 0 829. 0 403. 0 716. 0 40. 52 1. 062 628. 0210. 0 929. 0 503. 0 816. 0 70. 03 2. 062 828. 0

210. 0 929. 0 503. 0 816. 0 80. 53 2. 062 928. 0

110. 0 139. 0 603. 0 916. 0 30. 24 4. 062 828. 0

110. 0 039. 0 403. 0 416. 0 10. 24 2. 081 038. 0

010. 0 039. 0 203. 0 216. 0 14. 75 5. 081 338. 0

010. 0 339. 0 403. 0 416. 0 06. 86 6. 081 238. 0

730. 0 939. 0 844. 0 998. 0 60. 52 5. 062 238. 0

630. 0 149. 0 054. 0 109. 0 54. 03 1. 162 038. 0

630. 0 249. 0 154. 0 209. 0 08. 53 4. 062 038. 0

630. 0 249. 0 154. 0 209. 0 83. 24 5. 062 038. 0630. 0 249. 0 054. 0 898. 0 29. 14 3. 081 828. 0

630. 0 349. 0 154. 0 009. 0 83. 75 3. 081 138. 0

530. 0 549. 0 254. 0 109. 0 34. 86 6. 081 038. 0

050. 0 249. 0 215. 0 420. 1 66. 42 9. 952 438. 0

940. 0 449. 0 315. 0 420. 1 85. 92 1. 062 338. 0940. 0 549. 0 415. 0 520. 1 52. 43 3. 062 928. 0

940. 0 649. 0 415. 0 520. 1 01. 24 6. 062 538. 0940. 0 649. 0 515. 0 620. 1 68. 14 5. 081 138. 0940. 0 849. 0 615. 0 620. 1 18. 65 3. 081 928. 0

940. 0 849. 0 615. 0 420. 1 51. 86 2. 081 138. 0750. 0 849. 0 665. 0 621. 1 84. 52 8. 952 138. 0

750. 0 949. 0 965. 0 821. 1 99. 92 2. 062 828. 0750. 0 059. 0 075. 0 921. 1 29. 43 1. 062 728. 0850. 0 059. 0 765. 0 721. 1 73. 24 1. 952 838. 0650. 0 749. 0 945. 0 190. 1 83. 24 6. 081 038. 0

650. 0 059. 0 365. 0 511. 1 60. 75 2. 081 828. 0650. 0 159. 0 265. 0 411. 1 04. 86 4. 081 438. 0

Dt el nI no spee wsr eb mu Nsdl onye Rr of at a Dnoitr otsi Ddna yr evoce Rer usser P. 31 el ba T
38D2

H

a

b

t hgil hgi H

Hi

t aor ht t el nI

di ort nec

l ennut dni W

)ll a wedis( r oolf

ti xe r esuffi D

di ort nec

L

t el nI

t aor ht

PI A

noit ats

. wei v edi S) a(

.sr et e marap yrt e moegf o noiti nif ed gni wohs hct ekS- . 1 er ugi F

x

H xa m z

el acs ot t on hct ekS

tse

*

z1

x1
39

.snoit atsti xe r esuffi d dnat aor ht t a ht ap wolf f o wei vt nor F) b(

. dedul cno C- 1 er ugi F

t aor hT

di ort nec

r oolf l ennuT

)ll a wedis(

noit ats) PI A( ti xe r esuffi D maertsn wod gni kool noit atst aor ht t el nI

Hi

Wi H

D2

H xa m

t hgil hgi H

ytiral c r of t esff o er a noit ats) PI A( ti xe r esuffi d dna noit atst aor ht t el nI

y
40

(a) Fence off.

Figure 2. - Photographs of model mounted on tunnel sidewall.

40-probe

AIP Rake

Boundary Layer Rake Location

(Rake Removed)
41

(b) Fence on.

Figure 2. - Concluded.

Boundary Layer Rake

Fence

(2 rows)
42

. devo mer r oodll ehs er usser pl ennuT.ll a wl ennut f o edis kcab morf ht ap wolf t el ni gni wohs hpar got ohP - . 3 er ugi F

noit ats PI A

wolf-ssa M

p ul g l b messa y

det al usnI

xobr ot o m

ot tsuahxE

so mt a p er eh
43

. At el nI ) a(

. el acs e mas ot t on s wei vt norf dna edi S . yrt e moegt el ni f o sli at e D- . 4 er ugi F

All dimensions are in inches.

323. 51

581. 2

435. 7

942. 3

307. 1

844. 2

wei vt nor F wei v edi S

x

z
44

942. 3

307. 1

844. 2

wei vt nor F

341. 2

796. 7

wei v edi S

x

z

194. 51

y

. Bt el nI ) b(

. deunit no C-. 4 er ugi F
45

. Ct el nI ) c(

d. eunit no C- . 4 er ugi F

383. 21

x

z

757. 1

435. 7

844. 2

504. 1

089. 3

wei vt nor F wei v edi S
46

. Dt el nI ) d(

d. eunit no C- . 4 er ugi F

844. 2

504. 1

089. 3

wei vt nor F wei v edi S

x

z

515. 21

196. 1

435. 7
47

2. 14. 16. 18. 1

2.2

2

4. 2

6. 2

8. 0 6. 0 4. 0 2. 0 0 2. 0-

2. 1

4. 1

6. 1

8. 12.2

2

4. 2

6. 2

1 8. 0 6. 0 4. 0 2. 0 0 2. 0-

. pi L) e(

. deunit no C- . 4 er ugi F

ni , x

ni , z

t el nI t el nI A B

t el nI t el nI C D

a

b
48

5. 152

. 2

53

. 3

54

. 4

5

8 6 4 2 0

050

1

51

02

52

8 6 4 2 0

t aor ht f o maertsn wod ecnatsi D t aor ht f o maertsn wod ecnatsi D

ni , A 2

e RA

st nar dauq poT

st nar dauq poT

. Bdna Ast el ni r of r esuffi D)f(

. deunit no C- . 4 er ugi F

53. 44. 454. 45. 4

55. 46. 456. 4

7. 457. 4

st nar dauq mott o B st nar dauq mott o B

2-5. 1-

1-

5. 0-

0

z1 ni ,
49

0

50

1

510252

8 6 4 2 0

5. 1

5.

2

2

5.3

3

5.4

4

5

8 6 4 2 0

n. i ,t aor ht f o maertsn wod ecnatsi D n. i ,t aor ht f o maertsn wod ecnatsi D

ni , A 2

e RA

st nar dauq mott o B

st nar dauq mott o B

st nar dauq poT

st nar dauq poT

. Ddna Cst el ni r of r esuffi D) g(

. deunit no C- . 4 er ugi F

54. 4

5. 4

55. 4

6. 4

56. 4

7. 4

57. 4

2-5. 1-

1-5. 0-

0

z1 ni ,
50

(h) Boundary layer fences.

Figure 4. - Concluded.

0.22

0.44

Tunnel wall

Inlet A 

throat section

0.078 dia end 

post (typ.)

Thin airfoil shaped 

supports (typ.)

0.22 (typ)

0.004 dia. 

wire

0.006 dia. 

wire 0.008 dia. 

tube

0.003 dia. 

wire

Front View

Free-stream velocity

Top View

Inlet A face

Boundary

layer rake

Dim A

0.509

0.442

Fence 1

Fence 2

Dim B

Inlet Dim A Dim B

 A 3.784 -0.091 

 B 3.784 0.090 

 C 4.300 -0.038 

 D 4.300 0.038 
51

(a) AIP station.

Figure 5. - Sketches showing model instrumentation. All dimensions are in inches unless

 noted.

R

Steady state pressure

Rake 1

Rake 2

Rake 3

Rake 4

Rake 5

Rake 6

Rake 7

Rake 8

Steady state pressure measurements located at R = 0.274, 0.660, 0.861,

1.021 and 1.159 on all rakes.

Ring 1

Ring 5
52

Values of x/D2 for duct pressure orifices on left and right sidewalls

Duct Left Sidewall Duct Right Sidewall

Inlet A Inlet B Inlet C Inlet D Inlet A Inlet B Inlet C Inlet D

0.769 0.843 0.709 0.740 0.765 0.839 0.715 0.746

1.308 1.382 1.266 1.297 1.308 1.382 1.273 1.304

1.828 1.902 1.824 1.855 1.822 1.896 1.816 1.847

2.085 2.158 2.082 2.113 2.085 2.158 2.079 2.110

2.351 2.425 2.344 2.375 2.346 2.420 2.344 2.375

2.624 2.698 2.594 2.625 2.619 2.693 2.600 2.632

2.906 2.980 2.853 2.884 2.902 2.976 2.858 2.889

(b) Diffuser, duct left and right sidewalls.

Figure 5. - Continued.

x

D2 = 2.448

AIP station

Tunnel bottom wall

Duct top wall

Duct bottom wall

Duct right and

left sidewalls

z
53

Values of x/D2 for duct pressure orifices on top and bottom walls

Duct Top Wall Duct Bottom Wall

Inlet A Inlet B Inlet C Inlet D Inlet A Inlet B Inlet C Inlet D

0.212 0.286 0.157 0.188 0.201 0.275 0.142 0.173

0.353 0.427 0.296 0.326 0.356 0.430 0.299 0.330

0.511 0.585 0.451 0.486 0.519 0.593 0.471 0.502

0.670 0.743 0.605 0.643 0.670 0.744 0.627 0.658

0.821 0.895 0.664 0.695 0.825 0.899 0.791 0.822

0.962 1.036 0.759 0.790 0.968 1.042 0.945 0.976

1.115 1.189 0.908 0.939 1.112 1.186 1.104 1.135

1.256 1.330 1.061 1.092 1.252 1.326 1.259 1.290

1.418 1.492 1.214 1.245 1.395 1.469 1.416 1.447

1.561 1.635 1.362 1.393 1.536 1.610 1.560 1.591

1.711 1.785 1.509 1.540 1.676 1.750 1.709 1.740

1.782 1.856 1.658 1.690 1.750 1.824 1.781 1.813

1.854 1.928 1.731 1.762 1.819 1.893 1.852 1.883

1.925 1.999 1.808 1.839 1.889 1.963 1.928 1.959

1.998 2.072 1.884 1.915 1.961 2.035 1.996 2.027

2.071 2.145 1.957 1.988 2.033 2.107 2.066 2.097

2.138 2.212 2.020 2.051 2.107 2.181 2.132 2.163

2.202 2.276 2.105 2.136 2.181 2.255 2.207 2.238

2.278 2.352 2.176 2.207 2.254 2.328 2.273 2.304

2.349 2.423 2.249 2.280 2.328 2.402 2.339 2.371

2.425 2.499 2.324 2.355 2.402 2.476 2.403 2.434

2.499 2.573 2.396 2.427 2.479 2.553 2.471 2.502

2.574 2.648 2.467 2.498 2.555 2.629 2.561 2.592

2.647 2.721 2.544 2.575 2.635 2.709 2.607 2.638

2.726 2.800 2.615 2.646 2.710 2.784 2.676 2.708

2.800 2.874 2.686 2.717 2.792 2.866 2.748 2.779

2.880 2.954 2.757 2.788 2.869 2.943 2.821 2.853

2.955 3.029 2.833 2.864 2.951 3.025 2.895 2.926

3.039 3.113 2.903 2.934 3.029 3.103 2.979 3.010

2.981 3.012

(c) Diffuser, duct top and bottom walls.

Figure 5. - Continued.
54

Values of x/D2 for pressure orifices on tunnel wall centerline ahead of inlet face

Inlet A Inlet B Inlet C Inlet D

-8.883 -8.809 -8.936 -8.905

-8.070 -7.996 -8.123 -8.092

-7.249 -7.175 -7.302 -7.271

-6.433 -6.359 -6.486 -6.455

-5.616 -5.542 -5.669 -5.638

-4.797 -4.723 -4.850 -4.819

-3.165 -3.091 -3.218 -3.187

-2.352 -2.278 -2.405 -2.374

-1.531 -1.457 -1.584 -1.553

-0.770 -0.697 -0.824 -0.793

(d) Tunnel wall centerline ahead of inlet face.

Figure 5.- Continued.
55 Dt el nI Ct el nI Bt el nI At el nI

D/ x 2 D/ y 2 D/ z 2 D/ x 2 D/ y 2 D/ z 2 D/ x 2 D/ y 2 D/ z 2 D/ x 2 D/ y 2 D/ z 2

0. 0 757. 1 610. 0 0. 0 757. 1 610. 0- 0. 0 645. 1 730. 0 0. 0 645. 1 730. 0-

9310. 0 757. 1 610. 0 9310. 0 757. 1 610. 0- 9310. 0 645. 1 730. 0 9310. 0 645. 1 730. 0-7230. 0 757. 1 610. 0 7230. 0 757. 1 610. 0- 7230. 0 645. 1 730. 0 7230. 0 645. 1 730. 0-0650. 0 757. 1 610. 0 0650. 0 757. 1 610. 0- 0650. 0 645. 1 730. 0 0650. 0 645. 1 730. 0-7380. 0 757. 1 610. 0 7380. 0 757. 1 610. 0- 7380. 0 645. 1 730. 0 7380. 0 645. 1 730. 0-0611. 0 757. 1 610. 0 0611. 0 757. 1 610. 0- 0611. 0 645. 1 730. 0 0611. 0 645. 1 730. 0-6351. 0 757. 1 610. 0 6351. 0 757. 1 610. 0- 6351. 0 645. 1 730. 0 6351. 0 645. 1 730. 0-

3591. 0 757. 1 610. 0 3591. 0 757. 1 610. 0- 3591. 0 645. 1 730. 0 3591. 0 645. 1 730. 0-

9632. 0 757. 1 610. 0 9632. 0 757. 1 610. 0- 9632. 0 645. 1 730. 0 9632. 0 645. 1 730. 0-

. ekar r eyal yr adnuo B) e(

. dedul cno C- . 5 er ugi F

ll a wl ennuT z
56

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

20 25 30 35 40

A0/AC

W2C/Ai, lb/sec-ft2

(a) Inlet A, fence off.

Figure 6. - Correlation of inlet mass-flow ratio with corrected inlet mass flow.

M

0.25

0.40

0.60

0.80

0.83
57

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

20 25 30 35 40

A0/AC

W2C/Ai, lb/sec-ft2

(b) Inlet B.

Figure 6. - Continued.

M

0.25

0.40

0.60

0.80

0.83
58

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

15 20 25 30 35 40

A0/AC

W2C/Ai, lb/sec-ft2

(c) Inlet C.

Figure 6. - Continued.

M

0.25

0.40

0.60

0.80

0.83
59

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

15 20 25 30 35 40

A0/AC

W2C/Ai, lb/sec-ft2

(d) Inlet D.

Figure 6. - Concluded.

M

0.25

0.40

0.60

0.80

0.83
60

Figure 7. - Views of overset BLI inlet computational grids.

Three quarter front view showing BLI inlet surface grids

Side view section at centerline of the inlet
61

Figure 8. A comparison of boundary layer profiles on side of inlet for experiment and

numerical simulations.
62

 x/D2

(a) M = 0.250, Re/FT = 33.48 x 106.

Figure 9.- Effect of inlet mass-flow ratio on inlet A duct pressure distributions.

0.6

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4

p/pt,

Tunnel and duct bottom wall

Duct top wall

Duct sidewalls

A0/AC W2C/Ai, lb/sec-ft2

0.760 20.46

1.073 29.02

1.165 31.64

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

Open symbol indicates left sidewall

Solid symbol indicates right sidewall
63

x/D2

(b) M = 0.402, Re/FT = 51.66 x 106.

Figure 9.- Continued.

0.6

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4

p/pt,

Duct sidewalls

Duct top wall

Tunnel and duct bottom wall

A0/AC W2C/Ai, lb/sec-ft2

0.493 20.33

0.746 30.87

Open symbol indicates left sidewall

Solid symbol indicates right sidewall

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1
64

x/D2

(c) M = 0.603, Re/FT = 68.44 x 106.

Figure 9.- Continued.

0.6

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4

p/pt,

Tunnel and duct bottom wall

Duct top wall

Duct sidewalls

A0/AC W2C/Ai, lb/sec-ft2

0.367 20.50

0.526 29.42

0.589 32.84

0.628 35.04

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

Open symbol indicates left sidewall

Solid symbol indicates right sidewall
65

 x/D2

(d) M = 0.804, Re/FT = 69.36 x 106.

Figure 9. - Continued.

0.6

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

p/pt,

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4

Tunnel and duct bottom wall

Duct top wall

Duct sidewalls

A0/AC W2C/Ai, lb/sec-ft2

0.312 20.38

0.454 29.56

0.513 33.27

0.546 35.34

Open symbol indicates left sidewall

Solid symbol indicates right sidewall

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1
66

x/D2

(e) M = 0.832, Re/FT = 68.92 x 106.

Figure 9.- Concluded.

0.6

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4

p/pt,

Tunnel and duct bottom wall

Duct top wall

Duct sidewalls

A0/AC W2C/Ai, lb/sec-ft2

0.308 20.37

0.447 29.42

0.508 33.38

0.556 36.41

Open symbol indicates left sidewall

Solid symbol indicates right sidewall

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1
67

x/D2

(a) M = 0.250, Re/FT = 33.27 x 106.

Figure 10.- Effect of inlet mass-flow ratio on Inlet B duct pressure distributions.

0.6

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4

p/pt,

Tunnel and duct bottom wall

Duct top wall

Duct sidewalls

A0/AC W2C/Ai, lb/sec-ft2

0.770 20.24

1.099 29.23

1.262 33.92

Open symbol indicates left sidewall

Solid symbol indicates right sidewall

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1
68

x/D2

(b) M = 0.402, Re/FT = 51.09 x 106.

Figure 10.- Continued.

0.6

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4

p/pt,

Tunnel and duct bottom wall

Duct top wall

Duct sidewalls

A0/AC W2C/Ai, lb/sec-ft2

0.506 20.36

0.724 29.26

0.815 33.27

0.875 35.27

Open symbol indicates left sidewall

Solid symbol indicates right sidewall

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1
69

x/D2

(c) M = 0.606, Re/FT = 67.67 x 106.

Figure 10.- Continued.

0.6

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4

p/pt,

Tunnel and duct bottom wall

Duct top wall

Duct sidewalls

A0/AC W2C/Ai, lb/sec-ft2

0.370 20.28

0.534 29.35

0.609 33.41

0.658 35.92

Open symbol indicates left sidewall

Solid symbol indicates right sidewall

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1
70

x/D2

(d) M = 0.804, Re/FT = 68.20 x 106.

Figure 10.- Continued.

0.6

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4

p/pt,

Tunnel and duct bottom wall

Duct top wall

Duct sidewalls

A0/AC W2C/Ai, lb/sec-ft2

0.317 20.25

0.463 29.43

0.526 33.46

0.571 36.23

Open symbol indicates left sidewall

Solid symbol indicates right sidewall

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1
71

x/D2

(e) M = 0.831, Re/FT = 68.05 x 106.

Figure 10.- Concluded.

0.6

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4

p/pt,

Tunnel and duct bottom wall

Duct top wall

Duct sidewalls

A0/AC W2C/Ai, lb/sec-ft2

0.313 20.29

0.457 29.43

0.521 33.47

0.570 36.63

Open symbol indicates left sidewall

Solid symbol indicates right sidewall

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1
72

x/D2

(a) M = 0.249, Re/FT = 33.33 x 106.

Figure 11.- Effect of inlet mass-flow ratio on Inlet C duct pressure distributions.

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4

0.6

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

p/pt,

Open symbol indicates right sidewall

Solid symbol indicates left sidewall

Tunnel and duct bottom wall

Duct top wall

Duct sidewalls

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

A0/AC W2C/Ai, lb/sec-ft2

0.734 19.82

1.059 28.81

1.217 33.49
73

x/D2

(b) M = 0.400, Re/FT = 50.50 x 106.

Figure 11.- Continued.

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4

p/pt,

Open symbol indicates right sidewall

Solid symbol indicates left sidewall

Tunnel and duct bottom wall

Duct top wall

Duct sidewalls

0.6

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

A0/AC W2C/Ai, lb/sec-ft2

0.479 19.91

0.694 28.83

0.811 33.90
74

x/D2

(c) M = 0.601, Re/FT = 67.90 x 106.

Figure 11.- Continued.

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4

p/pt,

Open symbol indicates right sidewall

Solid symbol indicates left sidewall

Tunnel and duct bottom wall

Duct top wall

Duct sidewalls

0.6

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

A0/AC W2C/Ai, lb/sec-ft2

0.351 19.87

0.514 28.99

0.613 34.62
75

x/D2

(d) M = 0.802, Re/FT = 68.15 x 106.

Figure 11.- Continued.

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4

p/pt,

Open symbol indicates right sidewall

Solid symbol indicates left sidewall

Tunnel and duct bottom wall

Duct top wall

Duct sidewalls

0.6

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

A0/AC W2C/Ai, lb/sec-ft2

0.297 19.89

0.438 29.00

0.534 35.13
76

x/D2

(e) M = 0.832, Re/FT = 68.22 x 106.

Figure 11.- Concluded.

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4

p/pt,

Open symbol indicates right sidewall

Solid symbol indicates left sidewall

Tunnel and duct bottom wall

Duct top wall

Duct sidewalls

0.6

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

A0/AC W2C/Ai, lb/sec-ft2

0.292 19.87

0.431 28.95

0.533 35.55
77

x/D2

(a) M = 0.248, Re/FT = 33.47 x 106.

Figure 12.- Effect of inlet mass-flow ratio on Inlet D duct pressure distributions.

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4

p/pt,

Open symbol indicates right sidewall

Solid symbol indicates left sidewall

Tunnel and duct bottom wall

Duct top wall

Duct sidewalls

0.6

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

A0/AC W2C/Ai, lb/sec-ft2

0.770 19.79

1.107 28.90

1.254 32.89
78

x/D2

(b) M = 0.401, Re/FT = 51.20 x 106.

Figure 12.- Continued.

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4

p/pt,

Open symbol indicates right sidewall

Solid symbol indicates left sidewall

Tunnel and duct bottom wall

Duct top wall

Duct sidewalls

0.6

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

A0/AC W2C/Ai, lb/sec-ft2

0.498 19.79

0.729 28.94

0.851 34.05
79

x/D2

(c) M = 0.604, Re/FT = 67.80 x 106.

Figure 12.- Continued.

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4

p/pt,

Open symbol indicates right sidewall

Solid symbol indicates left sidewall

Tunnel and duct bottom wall

Duct top wall

Duct sidewalls

0.6

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

A0/AC W2C/Ai, lb/sec-ft2

0.365 19.82

0.531 29.05

0.644 35.22
80

x/D2

(d) M = 0.802, Re/FT = 68.21 x 106.

Figure 12.- Continued.

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4

p/pt,

Open symbol indicates right sidewall

Solid symbol indicates left sidewall

Tunnel and duct bottom wall

Duct top wall

Duct sidewalls

0.6

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

A0/AC W2C/Ai, lb/sec-ft2

0.309 19.81

0.457 29.11

0.567 35.79
81

x/D2

(e) M = 0.829, Re/FT = 68.28 x 106.

Figure 12.- Concluded.

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4

p/pt,

Open symbol indicates right sidewall

Solid symbol indicates left sidewall

Tunnel and duct bottom wall

Duct top wall

Duct sidewalls

0.6

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

A0/AC W2C/Ai, lb/sec-ft2

0.304 19.83

0.452 29.11

0.562 36.01
82

p 2,t p/ ,t

0. 43 = TF/ e R, 052. 0 = M x 01 6

W C2 A/ i tf- ces/ bl 20. 92 = 2 A, 0 A/ C 370. 1 =

M, 052. 0 = M)a( hct a m . 432. 0 =

. enilr et nec At el ni no spa mr uot noc hca Mdna er usser pl at ot r of noit ul os DFC- . 31 er ugi F
83

4. 86 = TF/ e R, 338. 0 = M x 01 6

W C2 A/ i tf- ces/ bl 14. 63 = 2 A, 0 A/ C 655. 0 =

M, 338. 0 = M) b( hct a m . 487. 0 =

. dedul cno C- . 31 er ugi F

p 2,t p/ ,t
84

, e R 2 D 87. 6 = x 01 6

W C2 A/ i tf- ces/ bl 20. 92 = 2

, e R 2 D 49. 6 = x 01 6

W C2 A/ i tf- ces/ bl 46. 13 = 2

A0 A/ C M, 370. 1 = hct a m A 432. 0 = 0 A/ C M, 561. 1 = hct a m 052. 0 =

p/ p p/ p

M, 052. 0 = M)a( hct a m . 432. 0 =

.senil maerts dna oit ar er usser p cit ats ecafr us gni wohs At el ni no stl user l anoit at up mo C- . 41 er ugi F

40. 1 00. 1 69. 0 29. 0 88. 0
85

A0 A/ C A 744. 0 = 0 A/ C 655. 0 =

, e R 2 D 92. 41 = x 01 6

W C2 A/ i tf- ces/ bl 24. 92 = 2

, e R 2 D 08. 31 = x 01 6

W C2 A/ i tf- ces/ bl 14. 63 = 2

p/ p p/ p

4. 1 2. 1 0. 1 8. 0 6. 0 4. 0

M, 338. 0 = M) b( hct a m . 487. 0 =

. dedul cno C- . 41 er ugi F
86

x/D2

(a) M = 0.248, Re/FT = 33.78 x 106, A0/AC = 0.759, W2C/Ai = 20.08 lb/sec-ft2.

Figure 15.- Effect of inlet geometry on duct pressure distributions.

0.6

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

0 0.8 1.6 2.4 3.2 4

p/pt,

Duct top wall

Inlet Wi/2Hi a/b

A 0.95 2.0

B 0.95 3.0

C 1.42 2.0

D 1.42 3.0

Duct bottom wall

Duct left sidewall

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1
87

x/D2

(b) M = 0.400, Re/FT = 50.77 x 106, A0/AC = 0.494, W2C/Ai = 20.10 lb/sec-ft2.

Figure 15.- Continued.

0.6

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

p/pt,

Duct top wall

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

0 0.8 1.6 2.4 3.2 4

Inlet Wi/2Hi a/b

A 0.95 2.0

B 0.95 3.0

C 1.42 2.0

D 1.42 3.0

Duct bottom wall

Duct left sidewall

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1
88

x/D2

(c) M = 0.606, Re/FT = 68.11 x 106, A0/AC = 0.526, W2C/Ai = 29.20 lb/sec-ft2.

Figure 15.- Continued.

0.6

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

p/pt,

Duct top wall

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

0 0.8 1.6 2.4 3.2 4

Inlet Wi/2Hi a/b

A 0.95 2.0

B 0.95 3.0

C 1.42 2.0

D 1.42 3.0

Duct bottom wall

Duct left sidewall

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1
89

x/D2

(d) M = 0.803, Re/FT = 68.27 x 106, A0/AC = 0.555, W2C/Ai = 35.62 lb/sec-ft2.

Figure 15.- Continued.

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

0.6

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

p/pt,

Duct top wall

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

0 0.8 1.6 2.4 3.2 4

Inlet Wi/2Hi a/b

A 0.95 2.0

B 0.95 3.0

C 1.42 2.0

D 1.42 3.0

Duct bottom wall

Duct left sidewall
90

x/D2

(e) M = 0.833, Re/FT = 68.05 x 106, A0/AC = 0.555, W2C/Ai = 36.15 lb/sec-ft2.

Figure 15.- Concluded.

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

0.6

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

p/pt,

Duct top wall

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

0 0.8 1.6 2.4 3.2 4

Inlet Wi/2Hi a/b

A 0.95 2.0

B 0.95 3.0

C 1.42 2.0

D 1.42 3.0

Duct bottom wall

Duct left sidewall
91

. 204. 0 = Mdna 052. 0 = M) a(

. At el nI .selif or pr eyal yr adnuobll a wl ennut no wolf-ssa mt el ni f ot ceff E -. 61 er ugi F

D/ z 2

1. 1 1 9. 0 8. 0 7. 0 6. 0

5

0

0. 0

1. 0

51. 0

2. 0

52. 0

1. 1 1 9. 0 8. 0 7. 0 6. 0

84. 33 = TF/ e R, 052. 0 = M x 01 6 66. 15 = TF/ e R, 204. 0 = M x 01 6

A0 A/ C W C2 A/ i f- ces/ bl , 2t

64. 02 067. 0

20. 92 370. 1

49. 92 101. 1

46. 13 561. 1

A0 A/ C W C2 A/ i f- ces/ bl , 2t

33. 02 394. 0

43. 92 117. 0

78. 03 647. 0

p LB,t p/ ,t
92

. 408. 0 = Mdna 306. 0 = M) b(

. dedul cno C-. 61 er ugi F

D/ z 2

1. 1 1 9. 0 8. 0 7. 0 6. 0

50

0. 0

1. 0

51. 0

2. 0

52. 0

1. 1 1 9. 0 8. 0 7. 0 6. 0

44. 86 = TF/ e R, 306. 0 = M x 01 6 63. 96 = TF/ e R, 408. 0 = M x 01 6

A0 A/ C W C2 A/ i f- ces/ bl , 2t

25. 02 763. 024. 92 625. 0

48. 23 985. 040. 53 826. 0

A0 A/ C W C2 A/ i f- ces/ bl , 2t

83. 02 213. 0

65. 92 454. 0

72. 33 315. 0

43. 53 645. 0

p LB,t p/ ,t
93

At el nI ) a(

.selif or preyal yr adnuobll a wl ennut nor eb mun hca Mf ot ceff E -. 71 er ugi F

1. 1 1 9. 0 8. 0 7. 0 6. 0 1. 1 1 9. 0 8. 0 7. 0 6. 0

50

0. 0

1. 0

51. 0

2. 052. 0 wolf ssa mt el ni woL wolf ssa mt el ni hgi H

D/ z 2

TF/ e R hca M x 01 6- A0 A/ C

067. 0 93. 33 052. 0

394. 0 11. 05 104. 0

763. 0 65. 76 206. 0

213. 0 66. 96 308. 0803. 0 45. 96 928. 0

TF/ e R hca M x 01 6- A0 A/ C

561. 1 20. 43 152. 0

826. 0 15. 86 406. 0

645. 0 49. 86 508. 0

555. 0 56. 76 338. 0

p LB,t p/ ,t
94

. Bt el nI ) b(

. deunit no C-. 71 er ugi F

wolf ssa mt el ni woL wolf ssa mt el ni hgi H

D/ z 2

1. 1 1 9. 0 8. 0 7. 0 6. 0

50

0. 0

1. 0

51. 0

2. 052. 0

1. 1 1 9. 0 8. 0 7. 0 6. 0

TF/ e R hca M x 01 6- A0 A/ C

077. 0 38. 33 842. 0

605. 0 66. 15 004. 0

073. 0 99. 76 206. 0

713. 0 91. 96 308. 0

313. 0 72. 86 928. 0

TF/ e R hca M x 01 6- A0 A/ C

262. 1 89. 23 452. 0

578. 0 59. 05 004. 0

856. 0 56. 76 706. 0

175. 0 90. 86 408. 0075. 0 71. 86 338. 0

p LB,t p/ ,t
95

. Ct el nI ) c(

. deunit no C-. 71 er ugi F

1. 1 1 9. 0 8. 0 7. 0 6. 0

wolf ssa mt el ni woL wolf ssa mt el ni hgi H

D/ z 2

1. 1 1 9. 0 8. 0 7. 0 6. 0

5

0

0. 0

1. 0

51. 0

2. 0

52. 0

TF/ e R hca M x 01 6- A0 A/ C

712. 1 71. 33 252. 0

118. 0 06. 05 304. 0

316. 0 67. 76 406. 0

435. 0 20. 86 108. 0

335. 0 99. 76 038. 0

TF/ e R hca M x 01 6- A0 A/ C

437. 0 50. 43 742. 0

974. 0 59. 05 004. 0

153. 0 85. 86 795. 0792. 0 34. 86 308. 0

292. 0 05. 86 338. 0

p LB,t p/ ,t
96

. Dt el nI ) d(

. dedul cno C-. 71 er ugi F

wolf ssa mt el ni woL wolf ssa mt el ni hgi H

D/ z 2

1. 1 1 9. 0 8. 0 7. 0 6. 0

50

0. 0

1. 0

51. 0

2. 0

52. 0

1. 1 1 9. 0 8. 0 7. 0 6. 0

TF/ e R hca M x 01 6- A0 A/ C

452. 1 86. 33 052. 0

158. 0 35. 15 204. 0

446. 0 39. 66 216. 0

765. 0 40. 86 008. 0

265. 0 04. 86 438. 0

TF/ e R hca M x 01 6- A0 A/ C

077. 0 48. 33 642. 0

894. 0 81. 15 993. 0

563. 0 46. 86 695. 0

903. 0 83. 86 897. 0

403. 0 06. 86 238. 0

p LB,t p/ ,t
97

2. 13. 1

4. 15. 1

6. 1

4. 1 2. 1 1 8. 0 6. 0 4. 0 2. 0

M

52. 004. 006. 008. 038. 0

H

.r ot caf epahsr eyal yr adnuob nor eb mun hca Mdna oit ar wolf-ssa mt el ni f ot ceff E- . 81 er ugi F

A0 A/ C
98

(a) M = 0.248, Re/FT = 33.47 x 106.

Figure 19. - Pressure recovery and distortion results for inlet A, fence off.

0.89

1.00

pt,2/pt,

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.000 67.5 -0.004

2 0.003 139.5 -0.002

3 0.006 144.0 0.000

4 0.007 141.6 0.001

5(Tip) 0.007 123.7 0.006

DPCPavg = 0.005 pt,2/pt, = 1.001

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.000 78.8 -0.006

2 0.002 137.3 -0.004

3 0.005 143.3 -0.002

4 0.007 141.6 0.000

5(Tip) 0.011 81.7 0.012

DPCPavg = 0.005 pt,2/pt, = 0.994

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.000 78.8 -0.006

2 0.002 135.0 -0.004

3 0.005 143.3 -0.002

4 0.008 140.7 0.001

5(Tip) 0.012 77.9 0.013

DPCPavg = 0.005 pt,2/pt, = 0.994

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.000 67.5 -0.006

2 0.003 131.2 -0.005

3 0.005 142.4 -0.002

4 0.008 140.7 -0.001

5(Tip) 0.013 76.5 0.014

DPCPavg = 0.006 pt,2/pt, = 0.994

W2C/Ai = 20.46 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.760 W2C/Ai

 = 29.02 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 1.073

W2C/Ai

 = 29.94 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 1.101 W2C/Ai

 = 31.64 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 1.165
99

(b) M = 0.402, Re/FT = 51.66 x 106.

Figure 19. - Continued.

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.008 147.2 -0.003

2 0.017 142.1 0.002

3 0.016 139.8 0.001

4 0.014 136.1 -0.001

5(Tip) 0.012 130.3 0.002

DPCPavg = 0.014 pt,2/pt, = 0.990

0.89

1.00

pt,2/pt,

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.001 97.5 -0.010

2 0.009 139.1 -0.005

3 0.014 142.9 0.000

4 0.018 140.6 0.002

5(Tip) 0.017 127.6 0.013

DPCPavg = 0.012 pt,2/pt, = 0.989

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.001 73.1 -0.010

2 0.007 139.1 -0.005

3 0.013 143.1 -0.001

4 0.018 141.5 0.002

5(Tip) 0.017 127.7 0.014

DPCPavg = 0.011 pt,2/pt, = 0.990

W2C/Ai = 20.33 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.711 W2C/Ai

 = 29.34 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.493

W2C/Ai

 = 30.87 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.746
100

(c) M = 0.603, Re/FT = 68.44 x 106.

Figure 19. - Continued.

0.89

1.00

pt,2/pt,

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.005 152.1 0.008

2 0.014 144.5 -0.003

3 0.017 148.0 -0.007

4 0.018 162.5 -0.005

5(Tip) 0.012 196.2 0.007

DPCPavg = 0.013 pt,2/pt, = 0.975

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.020 146.1 0.008

2 0.037 141.1 -0.003

3 0.035 139.3 -0.007

4 0.030 136.5 -0.005

5(Tip) 0.025 131.3 0.007

DPCPavg = 0.029 pt,2/pt, = 0.977

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.009 133.0 -0.016

2 0.031 140.3 0.000

3 0.038 137.3 0.004

4 0.037 133.0 0.002

5(Tip) 0.031 126.2 0.011

DPCPavg = 0.029 pt,2/pt, = 0.978

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.005 1110 -0.018

2 0.025 137.7 -0.004

3 0.036 137.8 0.003

4 0.039 134.1 0.004

5(Tip) 0.033 125.2 0.015

DPCPavg = 0.028 pt,2/pt, = 0.979

W2C/Ai = 20.52 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.367 W2C/Ai

 = 29.42 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.526

W2C/Ai

 = 32.84 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.589 W2C/Ai

 = 35.04 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.628
101

(d) M = 0.804, Re/FT = 69.36 x 106.

Figure 19. - Continued.

0.89

1.00

pt,2/pt,

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.003 179.1 -0.011

2 0.007 205.4 -0.008

3 0.007 219.4 -0.003

4 0.004 248.0 0.006

5(Tip) 0.004 93.2 0.016

DPCPavg = 0.005 pt,2/pt, = 0.954

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.020 180.0 0.026

2 0.037 154.1 -0.002

3 0.039 141.3 -0.011

4 0.038 138.9 -0.014

5(Tip) 0.033 144.4 0.001

DPCPavg = 0.033 pt,2/pt, = 0.960

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.038 167.5 0.012

2 0.053 146.2 0.003

3 0.048 139.9 -0.005

4 0.042 134.6 -0.011

5(Tip) 0.035 131.0 0.001

DPCPavg = 0.043 pt,2/pt, = 0.963

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.040 149.6 -0.001

2 0.059 141.3 0.005

3 0.051 138.1 -0.001

4 0.043 135.3 -0.008

5(Tip) 0.036 131.1 0.005

DPCPavg = 0.046 pt,2/pt, = 0.965

W2C/Ai = 20.38 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.312 W2C/Ai

 = 29.56 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.454

W2C/Ai = 33.27 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.513 W2C/Ai

 = 35.34 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.546
102

(e) M = 0.832, Re/FT = 66.92 x 106.

Figure 19. - Continued.

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.004 176.3 -0.011

2 0.007 204.5 -0.008

3 0.006 224.8 -0.002

4 0.003 259.3 0.005

5(Tip) 0.004 92.3 0.015

DPCPavg = 0.005 pt,2/pt, = 0.951

0.89

1.00

pt,2/pt,

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.018 175.2 0.027

2 0.036 153.0 -0.002

3 0.039 141.7 -0.013

4 0.041 140.3 -0.015

5(Tip) 0.033 148.6 0.003

DPCPavg = 0.034 pt,2/pt, = 0.957

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.039 171.3 0.015

2 0.055 147.0 0.003

3 0.050 139.5 -0.006

4 0.044 134.8 -0.012

5(Tip) 0.037 131.3 0.000

DPCPavg = 0.045 pt,2/pt, = 0.960

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.041 147.8 -0.003

2 0.062 140.9 0.005

3 0.055 137.7 -0.001

4 0.046 135.4 -0.008

5(Tip) 0.038 131.1 0.006

DPCPavg = 0.048 pt,2/pt, = 0.963

W2C/Ai = 20.37 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.308 W2C/Ai

 = 29.42 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.447

W2C/Ai

 = 33.38 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.508 W2C/Ai

 = 36.41 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.556
103

(f) M = 0.830, W2C/Ai = 20.42 lbm/sec-ft2 (A0/AC = 0.308).

Figure 19. - Continued.

0.89

1.00

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.004 168.8 -0.011

2 0.007 202.7 -0.008

3 0.007 218.4 -0.003

4 0.003 253.9 0.006

5(Tip) 0.003 94.5 0.016

DPCPavg = 0.005 pt,2/pt, = 0.947

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.004 170.2 -0.011

2 0.007 207.2 -0.009

3 0.006 222.4 -0.003

4 0.003 260.1 0.006

5(Tip) 0.003 85.5 0.017

DPCPavg = 0.005 pt,2/pt, = 0.949

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.004 167.3 -0.011

2 0.006 206.6 -0.008

3 0.006 223.0 -0.002

4 0.003 259.7 0.006

5(Tip) 0.003 90.0 0.015

DPCPavg = 0.004 pt,2/pt, = 0.949

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.004 176.3 -0.011

2 0.007 204.5 -0.008

3 0.006 224.8 -0.002

4 0.003 259.3 0.005

5(Tip) 0.004 92.3 0.015

DPCPavg = 0.005 pt,2/pt, = 0.951
104

(g) M = 0.832, W2C/Ai = 36.73 lbm/sec-ft2 (A0/AC = 0.560).

Figure 19. - Concluded.

0.89

1.00

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.042 151.1 -0.003

2 0.065 141.2 0.004

3 0.059 138.7 -0.002

4 0.050 136.2 -0.009

5(Tip) 0.039 131.9 0.009

DPCPavg = 0.051 pt,2/pt, = 0.959

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.038 147.5 -0.006

2 0.064 140.4 0.005

3 0.058 138.0 0.000

4 0.048 135.7 -0.007

5(Tip) 0.039 131.0 0.008

DPCPavg = 0.049 pt,2/pt, = 0.962

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.042 150.6 -0.001

2 0.063 141.8 0.005

3 0.056 138.5 -0.002

4 0.047 135.9 -0.009

5(Tip) 0.038 131.3 0.007

DPCPavg = 0.049 pt,2/pt, = 0.961

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.041 147.8 -0.003

2 0.062 140.9 0.005

3 0.055 137.7 -0.001

4 0.046 135.4 -0.008

5(Tip) 0.038 131.1 0.006

DPCPavg = 0.048 pt,2/pt, = 0.963
105

74. 33 = TF/ e R, 842. 0 = M)a( x 01 6.

. no ecnef , At el ni r of stl user noitr otsi d dna yr evocer er usser P- . 02 er ugi F

98. 0

00. 1

p 2,t p/ ,t

gni R ytisnet nI t net xE PRP D

900. 0- 8. 87 00. 0 ) bu H( 1

700. 0- 5. 011 400. 0 2

200. 0- 0. 641 900. 0 3

200. 0 6. 941 410. 0 4

610. 0 9. 811 310. 0 ) pi T( 5

PCP D gva p 800. 0 = 2,t p/ ,t 299. 0 =

gni R ytisnet nI t net xE PRP D

900. 0- 8. 87 00. 0 ) bu H( 1

700. 0- 4. 211 400. 0 2300. 0- 5. 241 800. 0 3

200. 0 7. 941 410. 0 4

710. 0 8. 711 610. 0 ) pi T( 5

PCP D gva p 800. 0 = 2,t p/ ,t 199. 0 =

W C2 A/ i tf- ces/ bl 65. 13 = 2 A, 0 A/ C 651. 1 = W C2 A/ i tf- ces/ bl 55. 92 = 2 A, 0 A/ C 680. 1 =
106

87. 05 = TF/ e R, 004. 0 = M) b( x 01 6.

. deunit no C- . 02 er ugi F

98. 0

00. 1

p 2,t p/ ,t

gni R ytisnet nI t net xE PRP D

210. 0- 8. 321 300. 0 ) bu H( 1

400. 0- 3. 141 410. 0 2

000. 0 5. 341 020. 0 3

300. 0 9. 141 420. 0 4

410. 0 4. 721 910. 0 ) pi T( 5

PCP D gva p 610. 0 = 2,t p/ ,t 689. 0 =

gni R ytisnet nI t net xE PRP D

310. 0- 1. 37 100. 0 ) bu H( 1

700. 0- 4. 041 900. 0 2

100. 0- 3. 541 810. 0 3

400. 0 1. 641 520. 0 4

710. 0 6. 131 120. 0 ) pi T( 5

PCP D gva p 510. 0 = 2,t p/ ,t 789. 0 =

W C2 A/ i tf- ces/ bl 35. 92 = 2 A, 0 A/ C 617. 0 = W C2 A/ i tf- ces/ bl 35. 33 = 2 A, 0 A/ C 218. 0 =
107

35. 86 = TF/ e R, 206. 0 = M) c( x 01 6.

. deunit no C- . 02 er ugi F

98. 0

00. 1

p 2,t p/ ,t

gni R ytisnet nI t net xE PRP D

600. 0 9. 761 820. 0 ) bu H( 1

500. 0 8. 841 240. 0 2

200. 0- 0. 241 930. 0 3

800. 0- 5. 531 230. 0 4

100. 0- 5. 611 720. 0 ) pi T( 5

PCP D gva p 430. 0 = 2,t p/ ,t 179. 0 =

gni R ytisnet nI t net xE PRP D

510. 0- 7. 041 410. 0 ) bu H( 1

000. 0 3. 241 630. 0 2300. 0 8. 931 140. 0 3

100. 0 4. 431 240. 0 4

210. 0 1. 021 830. 0 ) pi T( 5

PCP D gva p 430. 0 = 2,t p/ ,t 579. 0 =

W C2 A/ i tf- ces/ bl 26. 92 = 2 A, 0 A/ C 725. 0 = W C2 A/ i tf- ces/ bl 80. 53 = 2 A, 0 A/ C 626. 0 =
108

92. 86 = TF/ e R, 708. 0 = M) d( x 01 6.

. deunit no C- . 02 er ugi F

98. 0

00. 1

p 2,t p/ ,t

gni R ytisnet nI t net xE PRP D

530. 0 0. 181 020. 0 ) bu H( 1

100. 0 1. 261 930. 0 2

310. 0- 1. 741 240. 0 3

910. 0- 4. 931 140. 0 4

300. 0- 0. 141 330. 0 ) pi T( 5

PCP D gva p 530. 0 = 2,t p/ ,t 359. 0 =

gni R ytisnet nI t net xE PRP D

530. 0 9. 761 840. 0 ) bu H( 1

100. 0 6. 741 660. 0 2

310. 0- 1. 141 950. 0 3

910. 0- 1. 331 840. 0 4

300. 0- 4. 211 340. 0 ) pi T( 5

PCP D gva p 350. 0 = 2,t p/ ,t 759. 0 =

W C2 A/ i tf- ces/ bl 47. 92 = 2 A, 0 A/ C 454. 0 = W C2 A/ i tf- ces/ bl 06. 53 = 2 A, 0 A/ C 445. 0 =
109

65. 86 = TF/ e R, 338. 0 = M) e( x 01 6.

. deunit no C- . 02 er ugi F

98. 0

00. 1

p 2,t p/ ,t

gni R ytisnet nI t net xE PRP D

530. 0 2. 671 810. 0 ) bu H( 1

100. 0 6. 951 730. 0 2

510. 0- 7. 541 140. 0 3

020. 0- 8. 041 340. 0 4

100. 0- 9. 541 430. 0 ) pi T( 5

PCP D gva p 430. 0 = 2,t p/ ,t 159. 0 =

gni R ytisnet nI t net xE PRP D

310. 0 7. 661 050. 0 ) bu H( 1

700. 0 1. 741 960. 0 2

300. 0- 0. 141 160. 0 3410. 0- 3. 331 050. 0 4

400. 0- 2. 411 440. 0 ) pi T( 5

PCP D gva p 550. 0 = 2,t p/ ,t 559. 0 =

W C2 A/ i tf- ces/ bl 96. 92 = 2 A, 0 A/ C 744. 0 = W C2 A/ i tf- ces/ bl 82. 63 = 2 A, 0 A/ C 055. 0 =
110

(f) M = 0.831, W2C/Ai = 36.63 lbm/sec-ft2 (A0/AC = 0.555).

Figure 20. - Concluded.

0.89

1.00

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.051 162.1 0.011

2 0.070 145.9 0.007

3 0.062 140.3 -0.003

4 0.051 133.1 -0.013

5(Tip) 0.046 109.4 -0.001

DPCPavg = 0.056 pt,2/pt, = 0.955

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.051 167.9 0.015

2 0.070 146.7 0.005

3 0.062 140.3 -0.005

4 0.051 133.4 -0.015

5(Tip) 0.045 113.8 0.000

DPCPavg = 0.056 pt,2/pt, = 0.953

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.052 169.3 0.016

2 0.070 147.3 0.006

3 0.062 141.0 -0.005

4 0.051 133.9 -0.015

5(Tip) 0.046 113.7 -0.002

DPCPavg = 0.056 pt,2/pt, = 0.953

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.050 166.7 0.013

2 0.069 147.1 0.007

3 0.061 141.0 -0.003

4 0.050 133.3 -0.014

5(Tip) 0.044 114.2 -0.004

DPCPavg = 0.055 pt,2/pt, = 0.955
111

0.89

1.00

pt,2/pt,

(a) M = 0.250, Re/FT = 33.27 x 106.

Figure 21. - Pressure recovery and distortion results for inlet B.

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.000 67.5 -0.004

2 0.003 137.0 -0.003

3 0.005 143.2 -0.001

4 0.008 141.7 0.001

5(Tip) 0.008 133.4 0.007

DPCPavg = 0.005 pt,2/pt, = 0.995

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.001 101.3 -0.007

2 0.004 141.7 -0.005

3 0.007 144.8 -0.002

4 0.010 140.8 -0.001

5(Tip) 0.011 88.9 0.015

DPCPavg = 0.006 pt,2/pt, = 0.993

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.000 78.8 -0.007

2 0.002 129.4 -0.006

3 0.005 142.9 -0.004

4 0.007 141.3 -0.002

5(Tip) 0.012 69.6 0.017

DPCPavg = 0.005 pt,2/pt, = 0.993

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.000 78.8 -0.007

2 0.002 133.1 -0.006

3 0.005 144.1 -0.003

4 0.007 141.3 -0.002

5(Tip) 0.013 71.5 0.017

DPCPavg = 0.006 pt,2/pt, = 0.993

W2C/Ai = 20.24 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.770 W2C/Ai = 29.23 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 1.099

W2C/Ai = 33.08 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 1.258 W2C/Ai = 33.92 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 1.262
112

0.89

1.00

pt,2/pt,

(b) M = 0.402, Re/FT = 51.09 x 106.

Figure 21. - Continued.

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.009 147.6 -0.002

2 0.018 141.9 0.002

3 0.016 139.5 0.001

4 0.014 135.0 -0.001

5(Tip) 0.012 133.0 0.002

DPCPavg = 0.014 pt,2/pt, = 0.989

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.003 129.4 -0.011

2 0.012 142.1 -0.005

3 0.018 143.7 -0.001

4 0.021 142.1 0.002

5(Tip) 0.019 134.1 0.015

DPCPavg = 0.015 pt,2/pt, = 0.986

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.001 73.1 -0.012

2 0.007 137.3 -0.008

3 0.013 143.2 -0.003

4 0.019 143.1 0.001

5(Tip) 0.018 133.9 0.021

DPCPavg = 0.012 pt,2/pt, = 0.988

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.000 67.5 -0.012

2 0.006 137.5 -0.008

3 0.012 143.0 -0.003

4 0.018 143.6 0.001

5(Tip) 0.019 135.6 0.022

DPCPavg = 0.011 pt,2/pt, = 0.988

W2C/Ai = 20.36 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.506 W2C/Ai = 29.26 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.724

W2C/Ai = 33.27 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.815 W2C/Ai = 35.27 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.875
113

0.89

1.00

pt,2/pt,

(c) M = 0.606, Re/FT = 67.67 x 106.

Figure 21. - Continued.

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.005 148.1 0.005

2 0.013 142.0 -0.004

3 0.016 151.2 -0.007

4 0.015 177.9 -0.003

5(Tip) 0.010 209.7 0.009

DPCPavg = 0.012 pt,2/pt, = 0.975

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.021 155.4 -0.004

2 0.039 144.2 0.004

3 0.037 140.6 0.000

4 0.032 136.8 -0.004

5(Tip) 0.027 131.5 0.004

DPCPavg = 0.031 pt,2/pt, = 0.975

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.008 133.0 -0.018

2 0.029 143.0 -0.002

3 0.037 140.4 0.003

4 0.038 134.8 0.002

5(Tip) 0.033 126.9 0.014

DPCPavg = 0.029 pt,2/pt, = 0.978

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.005 125.4 -0.019

2 0.024 139.9 -0.006

3 0.034 141.2 0.002

4 0.038 139.0 0.004

5(Tip) 0.036 130.9 0.019

DPCPavg = 0.027 pt,2/pt, = 0.982

W2C/Ai = 20.28 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.370 W2C/Ai

 = 29.35 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.534

W2C/Ai

 = 33.41 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.609 W2C/Ai = 35.92 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.658
114

0.89

1.00

pt,2/pt,

(d) M = 0.804, Re/FT = 68.20 x 106.

Figure 21. - Continued.

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.004 165.9 -0.010

2 0.006 207.0 -0.007

3 0.006 218.9 -0.002

4 0.003 253.1 0.005

5(Tip) 0.004 97.1 0.015

DPCPavg = 0.005 pt,2/pt, = 0.955

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.019 174.1 0.021

2 0.037 153.9 -0.001

3 0.039 142.7 -0.010

4 0.040 140.1 -0.013

5(Tip) 0.033 143.6 0.003

DPCPavg = 0.034 pt,2/pt, = 0.960

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.038 167.3 0.009

2 0.054 146.9 0.003

3 0.051 140.6 -0.004

4 0.045 135.6 -0.011

5(Tip) 0.038 131.1 0.002

DPCPavg = 0.045 pt,2/pt, = 0.961

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.035 147.7 -0.008

2 0.061 141.0 0.004

3 0.057 138.4 0.001

4 0.050 136.0 -0.005

5(Tip) 0.041 131.6 0.008

DPCPavg = 0.049 pt,2/pt, = 0.963

W2C/Ai = 20.25 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.317 W2C/Ai = 29.43 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.463

W2C/Ai = 33.46 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.526 W2C/Ai

 = 36.23 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.571
115

0.89

1.00

pt,2/pt,

(e) M = 0.831, Re/FT = 68.05 x 106.

Figure 21. - Continued.

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.004 174.4 -0.011

2 0.006 206.3 -0.008

3 0.006 222.6 -0.002

4 0.003 255.4 0.006

5(Tip) 0.004 96.9 0.015

DPCPavg = 0.004 pt,2/pt, = 0.951

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.017 169.5 0.019

2 0.034 152.5 -0.003

3 0.039 144.0 -0.011

4 0.041 142.9 -0.012

5(Tip) 0.033 153.0 0.008

DPCPavg = 0.033 pt,2/pt, = 0.958

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.037 171.7 0.012

2 0.055 147.6 0.003

3 0.051 140.5 -0.005

4 0.046 135.8 -0.012

5(Tip) 0.038 132.0 0.002

DPCPavg = 0.045 pt,2/pt, = 0.960

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.039 149.1 -0.006

2 0.064 141.3 0.004

3 0.059 138.8 0.000

4 0.052 135.8 -0.006

5(Tip) 0.043 132.1 0.008

DPCPavg = 0.051 pt,2/pt, = 0.960

W2C/Ai = 20.29 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.313 W2C/Ai = 29.43 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.457

W2C/Ai

 = 33.47 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.521 W2C/Ai = 36.63 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.570
116

0.89

1.00

(f) M = 0.830, W2C/Ai = 20.37 lb/sec-ft2 (A0/AC = 0.314).

Figure 21. - Continued.

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.004 177.2 -0.011

2 0.006 206.6 -0.008

3 0.005 222.1 -0.002

4 0.003 255.0 0.005

5(Tip) 0.003 97.7 0.016

DPCPavg = 0.004 pt,2/pt, = 0.947

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.003 171.6 -0.011

2 0.006 205.9 -0.008

3 0.005 222.1 -0.002

4 0.003 256.7 0.006

5(Tip) 0.003 95.0 0.015

DPCPavg = 0.004 pt,2/pt, = 0.950

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.004 165.9 -0.011

2 0.006 209.4 -0.008

3 0.005 224.5 -0.002

4 0.002 255.4 0.006

5(Tip) 0.004 101.9 0.015

DPCPavg = 0.004 pt,2/pt, = 0.949

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.004 174.4 -0.011

2 0.006 206.3 -0.008

3 0.006 222.6 -0.002

4 0.003 255.4 0.006

5(Tip) 0.004 96.9 0.015

DPCPavg = 0.004 pt,2/pt, = 0.951
117

0.89

1.00

(g) M = 0.832, W2C/Ai = 36.85 lb/sec-ft2 (A0/AC = 0.573).

Figure 21. - Concluded.

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.039 150.9 -0.006

2 0.066 141.8 0.004

3 0.061 139.2 -0.001

4 0.054 135.9 -0.007

5(Tip) 0.044 131.1 0.010

DPCPavg = 0.053 pt,2/pt, = 0.958

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.038 148.8 -0.008

2 0.065 141.2 0.004

3 0.062 138.5 0.000

4 0.054 135.6 -0.006

5(Tip) 0.045 131.4 0.010

DPCPavg = 0.053 pt,2/pt, = 0.959

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.040 151.0 -0.004

2 0.064 141.9 0.004

3 0.059 138.9 -0.001

4 0.052 135.9 -0.007

5(Tip) 0.043 132.1 0.009

DPCPavg = 0.052 pt,2/pt, = 0.959

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.039 149.1 -0.006

2 0.064 141.3 0.004

3 0.059 138.8 0.000

4 0.052 135.8 -0.006

5(Tip) 0.043 132.1 0.008

DPCPavg = 0.051 pt,2/pt, = 0.960
118

0.89

1.00

pt,2/pt,

(a) M = 0.252, Re/FT = 33.33 x 106.

Figure 22. - Pressure recovery and distortion results for inlet C.

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.001 129.4 -0.004

2 0.005 142.0 -0.002

3 0.007 140.1 -0.001

4 0.010 138.8 0.001

5(Tip) 0.009 109.1 0.006

DPCPavg = 0.006 pt,2/pt, = 0.995

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.000 67.5 -0.006

2 0.003 139.5 -0.004

3 0.006 142.9 -0.003

4 0.011 139.5 0.001

5(Tip) 0.017 75.2 0.012

DPCPavg = 0.008 pt,2/pt, = 0.993

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.000 67.5 -0.007

2 0.003 137.0 -0.005

3 0.006 142.0 -0.004

4 0.012 139.6 0.001

5(Tip) 0.021 70.5 0.015

DPCPavg = 0.009 pt,2/pt, = 0.992

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.000 67.5 -0.007

2 0.003 137.0 -0.005

3 0.005 143.2 -0.004

4 0.013 140.0 0.001

5(Tip) 0.022 68.7 0.015

DPCPavg = 0.009 pt,2/pt, = 0.992

W2C/Ai = 19.82 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.734 W2C/Ai = 28.81 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 1.059

W2C/Ai

 = 32.36 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 1.195 W2C/Ai = 33.49 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 1.217
119

0.89

1.00

pt,2/pt,

(b) M = 0.400, Re/FT = 50.50 x 106.

Figure 22. - Continued.

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.010 176.9 0.002

2 0.018 151.3 0.002

3 0.018 141.7 0.000

4 0.016 136.5 -0.003

5(Tip) 0.013 125.9 -0.001

DPCPavg = 0.015 pt,2/pt, = 0.986

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.004 135.6 -0.010

2 0.012 141.7 -0.004

3 0.017 141.4 -0.001

4 0.022 138.8 0.003

5(Tip) 0.021 113.5 0.012

DPCPavg = 0.015 pt,2/pt, = 0.988

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.002 123.8 -0.011

2 0.010 140.0 -0.006

3 0.015 141.3 -0.002

4 0.023 139.2 0.003

5(Tip) 0.025 100.8 0.016

DPCPavg = 0.015 pt,2/pt, = 0.987

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.002 118.1 -0.012

2 0.010 140.8 -0.007

3 0.015 141.3 -0.003

4 0.024 139.6 0.003

5(Tip) 0.029 89.2 0.019

DPCPavg = 0.016 pt,2/pt, = 0.986

W2C/Ai = 19.91 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.479 W2C/Ai = 28.83 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.694

W2C/Ai

 = 32.76 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.795 W2C/Ai = 33.90 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.811
120

0.89

1.00

pt,2/pt,

(c) M = 0.601, Re/FT = 67.90 x 106.

Figure 22. - Continued.

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.005 155.6 0.021

2 0.013 141.2 0.003

3 0.019 141.1 -0.008

4 0.023 143.4 -0.012

5(Tip) 0.021 144.9 -0.004

DPCPavg = 0.016 pt,2/pt, = 0.966

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.021 170.0 0.001

2 0.038 149.4 0.004

3 0.039 141.6 0.001

4 0.035 136.1 -0.005

5(Tip) 0.028 124.0 -0.001

DPCPavg = 0.032 pt,2/pt, = 0.975

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.015 151.9 -0.012

2 0.033 144.0 -0.001

3 0.039 141.6 0.002

4 0.041 136.6 0.002

5(Tip) 0.037 120.4 0.009

DPCPavg = 0.033 pt,2/pt, = 0.974

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.012 144.5 -0.016

2 0.030 143.0 -0.004

3 0.039 141.2 0.002

4 0.043 138.1 0.004

5(Tip) 0.040 117.6 0.015

DPCPavg = 0.032 pt,2/pt, = 0.975

W2C/Ai = 19.87 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.351 W2C/Ai = 28.99 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.514

W2C/Ai

 = 32.87 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.583 W2C/Ai = 34.62 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.613
121

0.89

1.00

pt,2/pt,

(d) M = 0.802, Re/FT = 68.15 x 106.

Figure 22. - Continued.

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.004 133.9 0.006

2 0.011 136.5 -0.004

3 0.014 149.5 -0.006

4 0.014 176.5 -0.003

5(Tip) 0.010 198.8 0.007

DPCPavg = 0.011 pt,2/pt, = 0.938

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.020 189.2 0.046

2 0.037 180.3 0.005

3 0.041 151.1 -0.014

4 0.040 138.7 -0.023

5(Tip) 0.035 130.0 -0.013

DPCPavg = 0.035 pt,2/pt, = 0.949

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.036 181.5 0.023

2 0.058 156.2 0.007

3 0.055 143.1 -0.006

4 0.048 136.3 -0.016

5(Tip) 0.040 124.6 -0.008

DPCPavg = 0.048 pt,2/pt, = 0.953

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.038 171.9 0.006

2 0.064 148.6 0.007

3 0.063 140.4 -0.001

4 0.054 134.9 -0.010

5(Tip) 0.044 122.7 -0.002

DPCPavg = 0.053 pt,2/pt, = 0.955

W2C/Ai = 19.89 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.297 W2C/Ai = 29.00 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.438

W2C/Ai

 = 33.01 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.500 W2C/Ai = 35.13 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.534
122

0.89

1.00

pt,2/pt,

(e) M = 0.832, Re/FT = 68.22 x 106.

Figure 22. - Continued.

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.004 133.9 0.005

2 0.010 136.3 -0.004

3 0.013 148.8 -0.006

4 0.013 174.1 -0.002

5(Tip) 0.009 200.1 0.007

DPCPavg = 0.010 pt,2/pt, = 0.934

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.018 187.2 0.047

2 0.036 177.8 0.005

3 0.041 152.2 -0.015

4 0.042 140.2 -0.025

5(Tip) 0.037 133.4 -0.013

DPCPavg = 0.035 pt,2/pt, = 0.945

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.038 183.2 0.027

2 0.060 157.5 0.008

3 0.058 143.2 -0.007

4 0.051 136.2 -0.018

5(Tip) 0.042 123.9 -0.009

DPCPavg = 0.050 pt,2/pt, = 0.950

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.040 174.7 0.010

2 0.067 149.4 0.008

3 0.066 140.8 -0.002

4 0.056 135.5 -0.012

5(Tip) 0.045 122.8 -0.003

DPCPavg = 0.055 pt,2/pt, = 0.952

W2C/Ai = 19.87 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.292 W2C/Ai

 = 28.95 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.431

W2C/Ai = 33.40 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.499 W2C/Ai = 35.55 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.533
123

0.89

(f) M = 0.832, W2C/Ai = 19.96 lbm/sec-ft2 (A0/AC = 0.293).

Figure 22. - Continued.

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.004 131.7 0.006

2 0.011 134.6 -0.004

3 0.014 147.3 -0.006

4 0.014 169.8 -0.003

5(Tip) 0.010 196.4 0.007

DPCPavg = 0.011 pt,2/pt, = 0.930

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.003 173.0 0.006

2 0.011 135.4 -0.003

3 0.015 146.9 -0.006

4 0.015 168.8 -0.003

5(Tip) 0.010 194.6 0.007

DPCPavg = 0.011 pt,2/pt, = 0.933

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.003 187.5 0.004

2 0.010 140.0 -0.004

3 0.014 150.9 -0.006

4 0.013 174.1 -0.002

5(Tip) 0.010 196.7 0.007

DPCPavg = 0.010 pt,2/pt, = 0.931

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.004 133.9 0.005

2 0.010 136.3 -0.004

3 0.013 148.8 -0.006

4 0.013 174.1 -0.002

5(Tip) 0.009 200.1 0.007

DPCPavg = 0.010 pt,2/pt, = 0.934
124

0.89

1.00

(g) M = 0.829, W2C/Ai = 36.20 lbm/sec-ft2 (A0/AC = 0.543).

Figure 22. - Concluded.

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.039 174.2 0.006

2 0.066 150.5 0.006

3 0.069 141.4 -0.002

4 0.062 135.9 -0.011

5(Tip) 0.048 122.9 0.001

DPCPavg = 0.057 pt,2/pt, = 0.949

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.037 170.6 0.002

2 0.066 148.8 0.006

3 0.068 140.9 0.000

4 0.062 135.2 -0.009

5(Tip) 0.049 122.4 0.001

DPCPavg = 0.056 pt,2/pt, = 0.952

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.040 176.0 0.011

2 0.067 150.6 0.007

3 0.067 141.0 -0.003

4 0.058 135.8 -0.013

5(Tip) 0.047 122.8 -0.002

DPCPavg = 0.056 pt,2/pt, = 0.950

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.040 174.7 0.010

2 0.067 149.4 0.008

3 0.066 140.8 -0.002

4 0.056 135.5 -0.012

5(Tip) 0.045 122.8 -0.003

DPCPavg = 0.055 pt,2/pt, = 0.952
125

0.89

1.00

pt,2/pt,

(a) M = 0.248, Re/FT = 33.47 x 106.

Figure 23. - Pressure recovery and distortion results for inlet D.

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.001 129.4 -0.004

2 0.005 139.8 -0.002

3 0.007 140.3 -0.001

4 0.009 138.3 0.001

5(Tip) 0.009 112.0 0.006

DPCPavg = 0.006 pt,2/pt, = 0.995

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.001 123.8 -0.006

2 0.003 139.5 -0.005

3 0.006 142.0 -0.003

4 0.011 137.1 0.001

5(Tip) 0.017 75.5 0.013

DPCPavg = 0.007 pt,2/pt, = 0.993

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.000 67.5 -0.007

2 0.003 137.0 -0.005

3 0.005 142.5 -0.004

4 0.012 137.0 0.000

5(Tip) 0.021 69.6 0.016

DPCPavg = 0.008 pt,2/pt, = 0.993

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.000 67.5 -0.008

2 0.003 135.0 -0.006

3 0.006 141.2 -0.004

4 0.012 137.0 0.000

5(Tip) 0.021 68.5 0.017

DPCPavg = 0.008 pt,2/pt, = 0.992

W2C/Ai = 19.79 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.770 W2C/Ai = 28.90 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 1.107

W2C/Ai

 = 32.28 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 1.245 W2C/Ai = 32.89 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 1.254
126

0.89

1.00

pt,2/pt,

(b) M = 0.401, Re/FT = 51.20 x 106.

Figure 23. - Continued.

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.010 172.3 0.002

2 0.018 150.9 0.002

3 0.018 142.8 0.000

4 0.016 137.1 -0.003

5(Tip) 0.013 124.4 -0.001

DPCPavg = 0.015 pt,2/pt, = 0.986

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.004 137.2 -0.010

2 0.011 142.0 -0.004

3 0.017 141.5 -0.001

4 0.022 139.5 0.002

5(Tip) 0.021 117.2 0.013

DPCPavg = 0.015 pt,2/pt, = 0.987

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.003 119.1 -0.012

2 0.010 140.0 -0.006

3 0.016 140.8 -0.002

4 0.023 138.6 0.003

5(Tip) 0.024 107.4 0.018

DPCPavg = 0.015 pt,2/pt, = 0.987

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.003 119.1 -0.012

2 0.010 139.5 -0.007

3 0.015 140.2 -0.003

4 0.023 138.6 0.002

5(Tip) 0.026 99.1 0.019

DPCPavg = 0.015 pt,2/pt, = 0.987

W2C/Ai = 19.79 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.498 W2C/Ai = 28.94 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.726

W2C/Ai

 = 32.78 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.823 W2C/Ai = 34.05 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.851
127

0.89

1.00

pt,2/pt,

(c) M = 0.604, Re/FT = 67.80 x 106.

Figure 23. - Continued.

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.005 162.7 0.022

2 0.013 149.0 0.004

3 0.019 145.6 -0.008

4 0.023 145.1 -0.013

5(Tip) 0.021 144.8 -0.005

DPCPavg = 0.016 pt,2/pt, = 0.966

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.022 172.1 0.003

2 0.039 150.6 0.004

3 0.040 141.8 0.000

4 0.035 136.2 -0.006

5(Tip) 0.029 125.2 -0.001

DPCPavg = 0.033 pt,2/pt, = 0.971

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.014 152.3 -0.013

2 0.032 144.4 -0.001

3 0.039 141.6 0.002

4 0.041 137.2 0.002

5(Tip) 0.037 120.7 0.010

DPCPavg = 0.033 pt,2/pt, = 0.974

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.013 150.2 -0.015

2 0.032 143.3 -0.004

3 0.041 141.8 0.002

4 0.044 138.6 0.003

5(Tip) 0.040 119.3 0.014

DPCPavg = 0.034 pt,2/pt, = 0.973

W2C/Ai = 19.82 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.365 W2C/Ai = 29.05 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.531

W2C/Ai = 32.95 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.610 W2C/Ai = 35.22 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.644
128

0.89

1.00

pt,2/pt,

(d) M = 0.802, Re/FT = 68.21 x 106.

Figure 23. - Continued.

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.004 131.7 0.006

2 0.012 132.7 -0.003

3 0.015 145.9 -0.006

4 0.015 172.5 -0.003

5(Tip) 0.011 197.3 0.007

DPCPavg = 0.011 pt,2/pt, = 0.938

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.019 190.8 0.047

2 0.038 180.1 0.005

3 0.041 152.1 -0.015

4 0.041 139.5 -0.024

5(Tip) 0.037 132.8 -0.013

DPCPavg = 0.035 pt,2/pt, = 0.947

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.037 183.6 0.026

2 0.058 158.1 0.007

3 0.056 143.4 -0.007

4 0.049 136.7 -0.017

5(Tip) 0.042 125.8 -0.009

DPCPavg = 0.048 pt,2/pt, = 0.951

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.035 171.1 0.002

2 0.063 149.2 0.006

3 0.066 141.3 0.000

4 0.058 136.3 -0.008

5(Tip) 0.046 122.5 0.000

DPCPavg = 0.054 pt,2/pt, = 0.954

W2C/Ai = 19.81 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.309 W2C/Ai = 29.11 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.457

W2C/Ai

 = 33.06 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.520 W2C/Ai = 35.79 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.567
129

0.89

1.00

pt,2/pt,

(e) M = 0.829, Re/FT = 68.28 x 106.

Figure 23. - Continued.

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.004 138.3 0.005

2 0.011 138.0 -0.004

3 0.014 149.8 -0.006

4 0.014 177.0 -0.002

5(Tip) 0.010 202.5 0.008

DPCPavg = 0.010 pt,2/pt, = 0.933

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.018 189.7 0.048

2 0.036 180.1 0.005

3 0.041 152.6 -0.016

4 0.043 140.8 -0.025

5(Tip) 0.039 134.2 -0.013

DPCPavg = 0.035 pt,2/pt, = 0.945

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.037 184.8 0.031

2 0.057 161.2 0.007

3 0.056 144.4 -0.009

4 0.050 137.0 -0.019

5(Tip) 0.043 126.2 -0.010

DPCPavg = 0.049 pt,2/pt, = 0.948

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.039 173.5 0.007

2 0.066 150.3 0.007

3 0.068 141.6 -0.001

4 0.060 136.4 -0.010

5(Tip) 0.048 122.6 -0.002

DPCPavg = 0.056 pt,2/pt, = 0.951

W2C/Ai = 19.83 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.303 W2C/Ai = 29.11 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.452

W2C/Ai

 = 33.10 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.516 W2C/Ai = 36.01 lb/sec-ft2, A0/AC = 0.562
130

0.89

1.00

(f) M = 0.829, W2C/Ai = 19.91 lb/sec-ft2 (A0/AC = 0.305).

Figure 23. - Continued.

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.004 128.9 0.007

2 0.011 134.3 -0.003

3 0.016 144.8 -0.006

4 0.016 170.4 -0.004

5(Tip) 0.011 197.9 0.007

DPCPavg = 0.012 pt,2/pt, = 0.928

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.003 169.2 0.006

2 0.011 138.4 -0.004

3 0.015 150.6 -0.006

4 0.015 177.2 -0.003

5(Tip) 0.011 200.4 0.007

DPCPavg = 0.011 pt,2/pt, = 0.931

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.004 131.6 0.006

2 0.011 137.0 -0.003

3 0.015 147.2 -0.006

4 0.015 174.2 -0.003

5(Tip) 0.010 199.2 0.006

DPCPavg = 0.011 pt,2/pt, = 0.930

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.004 138.3 0.005

2 0.011 138.0 -0.004

3 0.014 149.8 -0.006

4 0.014 177.0 -0.002

5(Tip) 0.010 202.5 0.008

DPCPavg = 0.010 pt,2/pt, = 0.933
131

0.89

1.00

(g) M = 0.833, W2C/Ai = 36.03 lb/sec-ft2 (A0/AC = 0.561).

Figure 23. - Concluded.

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.038 176.0 0.007

2 0.067 152.8 0.007

3 0.069 142.6 -0.002

4 0.062 136.8 -0.011

5(Tip) 0.050 125.5 -0.001

DPCPavg = 0.057 pt,2/pt, = 0.948

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.038 174.7 0.005

2 0.067 151.2 0.007

3 0.070 141.6 -0.001

4 0.062 136.3 -0.010

5(Tip) 0.050 125.4 -0.001

DPCPavg = 0.058 pt,2/pt, = 0.950

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.039 180.0 0.015

2 0.067 154.3 0.008

3 0.067 142.7 -0.004

4 0.059 136.7 -0.015

5(Tip) 0.047 125.4 -0.005

DPCPavg = 0.056 pt,2/pt, = 0.947

Ring Intensity Extent DPRP

1(Hub) 0.039 173.5 0.007

2 0.066 150.3 0.007

3 0.068 141.6 -0.001

4 0.060 136.4 -0.010

5(Tip) 0.048 122.6 -0.002

DPCPavg = 0.056 pt,2/pt, = 0.951
132

0.95

0.96

0.97

0.98

0.99

1

1.01

0

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9

pt,2/pt,

DPCPavg

M

(a) Inlet A, fence off.

Figure 24. - Effect of Mach number and inlet mass-flow on pressure recovery and distortion.

W2C/Ai, lb/sec-ft2

20.41

29.35

32.40

35.60
133

0.95

0.96

0.97

0.98

0.99

1

pt,2/pt,

DPCPavg

M

(b) Inlet A, fence on.

Figure 24. - Continued.

0

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0.06

0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9

W2C/Ai, lb/sec-ft2

29.63

32.54

35.65
134

pt,2/pt,

DPCPavg

M

(c) Inlet B, fence off.

Figure 24. - Continued.

0.95

0.96

0.97

0.98

0.99

1

0

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0.06

0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9

W2C/Ai, lb/sec-ft2

20.28

29.34

33.34

36.26
135

pt,2/pt,

DPCPavg

M

(d) Inlet C, fence off.

Figure 24. - Continued.

0.93

0.94

0.95

0.96

0.97

0.98

0.99

1

0

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0.06

0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9

W2C/Ai, lb/sec-ft2

19.87

28.92

32.88

35.10
136

pt,2/pt,

DPCPavg

M

(e) Inlet D, fence off.

Figure 24. - Concluded.

0.93

0.94

0.95

0.96

0.97

0.98

0.99

1

0

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0.06

0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9

W2C/Ai, lb/sec-ft2

19.81

29.02

32.84

35.67
137

EXPERIMENTAL COMPUTATIONAL

M = 0.25

RE/FT = 33.2 x 106

A0/AC = 1.073

M = 0.83

RE/FT = 70.1 x 106

A0/AC = 0.447

M = 0.25

RE/FT = 34.0 x 106

A0/AC = 1.165

M = 0.83

RE/FT = 67.6 x 106

A0/AC = 0.556

Figure 25. - Comparison of experimental and computational AIP total pressure contours

for inlet A.
138

0.96

0.95

0.06

0.05

0.04

0.03

0.02

0.01

0

0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9

M

DPCPavg

0.97

0.98

0.99

1.00

pt,2/pt,

Figure 26. - Comparison of experimental and computational performance values for inlet A.

W2C/Ai, lb/sec-ft2

29.35

33.86

Solid symbols indicate

CFD values
139

39. 0

49. 059. 0

69. 0

79. 089. 0

99. 0

1

39. 049. 059. 069. 0

79. 089. 0

99. 01

9. 0 8. 0 7. 0 6. 0 5. 0 4. 0 3. 0 2. 0 9. 0 8. 0 7. 0 6. 0 5. 0 4. 0 3. 0 2. 0

. yr evoce Rer usser P) a(

. noitr otsi d dna yr evocer er usser pt el ni no yrt e moegt el ni f ot ceff E- . 72 er ugi F

p 2,t p/ ,t

M

W C2 A/ i tf-ces/ bl 90. 02 = 2 W C2 A/ i tf-ces/ bl 61. 92 = 2

W C2 A/ i tf- ces/ bl 78. 23 = 2 W C2 A/ i tf-ces/ bl 66. 53 = 2

pi L epahS t el nI

kci hT r al ucri C-i meS A

ni hT r al ucri C-i meS B

kci hT cit pill E-i meS C

ni hT cit pill E-i meS D
140

9. 0 8. 0 7. 0 6. 0 5. 0 4. 0 3. 0 2. 0

10

0. 0

20. 030. 0

40. 050. 060. 0

10

0. 0

20. 030. 040. 050. 0

60. 0

9. 0 8. 0 7. 0 6. 0 5. 0 4. 0 3. 0 2. 0

. noitr otsi D) b(

. dedul cno C- . 72 er ugi F

PCP D gva

M

W C2 A/ i tf- ces/ bl 90. 02 = 2 W C2 A/ i tf-ces/ bl 61. 92 = 2

W C2 A/ i tf- ces/ bl 78. 23 = 2 W C2 A/ i tf-ces/ bl 66. 53 = 2

pi L epahS t el nI

kci hT r al ucri C-i meS A

ni hT r al ucri C-i meS B

kci hT cit pill E-i meS C

ni hT cit pill E-i meS D
141

0.6

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4

Tunnel and duct bottom wall

Duct top wall

Duct left sidewall

p/pt,

x/D2

Figure 28. - Effect of Reynolds number on inlet B duct pressure distributions at

M = 0.832 and W2C/Ai

 = 36.79 lb/sec-ft2 (A0/AC = 0.573).

Re/FT 10-6 Tt, R pt, , lb/in2

25.54 260.4 32.19

34.97 260.3 44.05

42.39 180.1 31.07

57.41 179.8 41.97

x 68.17 179.9 49.74

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1
142

At el nI ) a(

.selif or pr eyal yr adnuobll a wl ennut nor eb mun sdl onye Rf ot ceff E -. 92 er ugi F

D/ z 2

1. 1 1 9. 0 8. 0 7. 0 6. 0

50

0. 0

1. 0

51. 0

2. 0

52. 0

1. 1 1 9. 0 8. 0 7. 0 6. 0

TF/ e R x 01 6-

30. 5211. 5300. 3491. 85

45. 96

TF/ e R x 01 6-

28. 4246. 43

65. 1416. 6556. 76

A, 928. 0 = M 0 A/ C W, 803. 0 = C2 A/ i tf-ces/ bl 14. 02 = 2 A, 238. 0 = M 0 A/ C W, 065. 0 = C2 A/ i tf- ces/ bl 96. 63 = 2

p LB,t p/ ,t
143

. Bt el nI ) b(

. deunit no C-. 92 er ugi F

D/ z 2

1. 1 1 9. 0 8. 0 7. 0 6. 0

50

0. 0

1. 0

51. 02. 052. 0

1. 1 1 9. 0 8. 0 7. 0 6. 0

TF/ e R x 01 6-

79. 4248. 43

92. 1402. 75

72. 86

TF/ e R x 01 6-

45. 52

79. 4393. 2414. 7571. 86

A, 928. 0 = M 0 A/ C W, 413. 0 = C2 A/ i tf-ces/ bl 43. 02 = 2 A, 238. 0 = M 0 A/ C W, 375. 0 = C2 A/ i tf- ces/ bl 87. 63 = 2

p LB,t p/ ,t
144

. Ct el nI ) c(

. deunit no C-. 92 er ugi F

1. 1 1 9. 0 8. 0 7. 0 6. 0 1. 1 1 9. 0 8. 0 7. 0 6. 0

50

0. 0

1. 0

51. 0

2. 0

52. 0

D/ z 2

TF/ e R x 01 6-

01. 52

58. 43

22. 2481. 7599. 76

TF/ e R x 01 6-

70. 52

00. 53

60. 24

61. 75

05. 86

A, 928. 0 = M 0 A/ C W, 145. 0 = C2 A/ i tf- ces/ bl 90. 63 = 2 A, 238. 0 = M 0 A/ C W, 392. 0 = C2 A/ i tf-ces/ bl 49. 91 = 2

p LB,t p/ ,t
145

. Dt el nI ) d(

. dedul cno C-. 92 er ugi F

D/ z 2

1. 1 1 9. 0 8. 0 7. 0 6. 0

50

0. 0

1. 0

51. 0

2. 0

52. 0

1. 1 1 9. 0 8. 0 7. 0 6. 0

TF/ e R x 01 6-

40. 52

80. 53

10. 24

14. 75

06. 86

TF/ e R x 01 6-

84. 5260. 75

04. 86

A, 038. 0 = M 0 A/ C W, 403. 0 = C2 A/ i tf-ces/ bl 88. 91 = 2 A, 138. 0 = M 0 A/ C W, 465. 0 = C2 A/ i tf-ces/ bl 40. 63 = 2

p LB,t p/ ,t
146

(a) Inlet A.

Figure 30. - Effect of Reynolds number on boundary layer thickness and shape

factor. M = 0.83.

H

Re/FT 10-6

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

1.2

1.3

1.4

1.5

1.6

20 30 40 50 60 70

/Hi

A0/AC

0.308

0.561
147

(b) Inlet B.

Figure 30. - Continued.

H

Re/FT 10-6

/Hi

A0/AC

0.314

0.573

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

1.2

1.3

1.4

1.5

1.6

20 30 40 50 60 70
148

(c) Inlet C.

Figure 30. - Continued.

H

Re/FT 10-6

/Hi

A0/AC

0.293

0.542

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

1.2

1.3

1.4

1.5

1.6

20 30 40 50 60 70
149

(d) Inlet D.

Figure 30. - Continued.

H

Re/FT 10-6

/Hi

A0/AC

0.304

0.563

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

1.2

1.3

1.4

1.5

1.6

20 30 40 50 60 70
150

(e) Inlet A with and without boundary layer fence; A0/AC = 0.558.

Figure 30. - Concluded.

H

Re/FT 10-6

/Hi

Fence off

Fence on

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

1.3

1.4

1.5

1.6

1.7

20 30 40 50 60 70
151

0.94

0.95

0.96

0.97

0.98

0.99

1

(a) Inlet A, fence off.

Figure 31. - Effect of Reynolds number on pressure recovery and distortion. M = 0.831.

W2C/Ai, lb/sec-ft2

pt,2/pt,

DPCPavg

Re/FT 10-6

25.03

34.97

57.86

68.92

20 25 30 35 40

0

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0.06
152

0.94

0.95

0.96

0.97

0.98

0.99

1

(b) Inlet A, fence on.

Figure 31. - Continued.

W2C/Ai, lb/sec-ft2

pt,2/pt,

DPCPavg

Re/FT 10-6

25.05

35.18

57.22

68.56

20 25 30 35 40

0

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0.06
153

0.94

0.95

0.96

0.97

0.98

0.99

1

(c) Inlet B, fence off.

Figure 31. - Continued.

W2C/Ai, lb/sec-ft2

pt,2/pt,

DPCPavg

Re/FT 10-6

25.15

34.91

57.10

68.05

20 25 30 35 40

0

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0.06
154

(d) Inlet C, fence off.

Figure 31. - Continued.

W2C/Ai, lb/sec-ft2

pt,2/pt,

DPCPavg

0.92

0.93

0.94

0.95

0.96

0.97

0.98

15 20 25 30 35 40

0

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0.06

Re/FT 10-6

25.16

35.00

57.23

68.22
155

(e) Inlet D, fence off.

Figure 31. - Concluded.

W2C/Ai, lb/sec-ft2

pt,2/pt,

DPCPavg

0.92

0.93

0.94

0.95

0.96

0.97

0.98

15 20 25 30 35 40

0

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0.06

Re/FT 10-6

25.16

34.97

57.39

68.28
156

x/D2

(a) M = 0.251, Re/FT = 33.94 x 106, A0/AC = 1.161, W2C/Ai = 31.60 lb/sec-ft2.

Figure 32.- Effect of boundary layer fence on Inlet A duct pressure distributions.

0.6

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4

p/pt,

Tunnel and duct bottom wall

Duct top wall

Fence off

Fence on Fence 1

Fence 2

Duct left sidewall

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1
157

x/D2

(b) M = 0.401, Re/FT = 51.46 x 106, A0/AC = 0.714, W2C/Ai = 29.44 lb/sec-ft2.

Figure 32.- Continued.

0.6

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

p/pt,

Tunnel and duct bottom wall

Duct top wall

Fence off

Fence on

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

Fence 1

Fence 2

-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4

Duct left sidewall

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1
158

x/D2

(c) M = 0.603, Re/FT = 68.69 x 106, A0/AC = 0.627, W2C/Ai = 35.06 lb/sec-ft2.

Figure 32.- Continued.

0.6

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4

p/pt,

Tunnel and duct bottom wall

Duct top wall

Fence off

Fence on

Fence 1

Fence 2

Duct left sidewall

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1
159

x/D2

(d) M = 0.809, Re/FT = 68.58 x 106, A0/AC = 0.545, W2C/Ai = 35.47 lb/sec-ft2.

Figure 32.- Continued.

0.6

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4

p/pt,

Tunnel and duct bottom wall

Duct top wall

Fence off

Fence on

Fence 1

Fence 2

Duct left sidewall

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1
160

x/D2

(e) M = 0.833, Re/FT = 67.84 x 106, A0/AC = 0.553, W2C/Ai = 36.35 lb/sec-ft2.

Figure 32.- Concluded.

0.6

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

p/pt,

Tunnel and duct bottom wall

Duct top wall

Fence off

Fence on

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4

Fence 1

Fence 2

Duct left sidewall

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

1
161

. 104. 0 = Mdna 152. 0 = M) a(

. At el nI .selif or pr eyal yradnuobll a wl ennut no ecnef f ot ceff E -. 33 er ugi F

D/ z 2

1. 1 1 9. 0 8. 0 7. 0 6. 0

50

0. 0

1. 0

51. 02. 052. 0

1. 1 1 9. 0 8. 0 7. 0 6. 0

ff o ecneF

no ecneF

49. 33 = TF/ e R, 152. 0 = M x 01 6 161. 1 = CA/ 0 A, 64. 15 = TF/ e R, 104. 0 = M x 01 6 417. 0 = CA/ 0 A,

p LB,t p/ ,t
162

. 06. 0 = M) b(

. deunit no C-. 33 er ugi F

D/ z 2

ff o ecneF

no ecneF

1. 1 1 9. 0 8. 0 7. 0 6. 0

50

0. 0

1. 0

51. 0

2. 0

52. 0

1. 1 1 9. 0 8. 0 7. 0 6. 0

68. 86 = TF/ e R, 406. 0 = M x 01 6 525. 0 = CA/ 0 A, 96. 86 = TF/ e R, 306. 0 = M x 01 6 726. 0 = CA/ 0 A,

p LB,t p/ ,t
163

. 338. 0 = Mdna 408. 0 = M) c(

. dedul cno C-. 33 er ugi F

D/ z 2

ff o ecneF

no ecneF

1. 1 1 9. 0 8. 0 7. 0 6. 0

50

0. 0

1. 0

51. 0

2. 0

52. 0

1. 1 1 9. 0 8. 0 7. 0 6. 0

71. 96 = TF/ e R, 408. 0 = M x 01 6 454. 0 = CA/ 0 A, 48. 76 = TF/ e R, 338. 0 = M x 01 6 355. 0 = CA/ 0 A,

p LB,t p/ ,t
164

pt,2/pt,

DPCPavg

M

(a) W2C/Ai

 = 29.40 lb/sec-ft2.

Figure 34. - Effect of distorted entrance boundary layer profile on inlet performance.

0.95

0.96

0.97

0.98

0.99

1

0

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0.06

0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9

Fence off

Fence on
165

pt,2/pt,

DPCPavg

M

(b) W2C/Ai

 = 35.66 lb/sec-ft2.

Figure 34. - Concluded.

Fence off

Fence on

0.95

0.96

0.97

0.98

0.99

1

0

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0.06

0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved

OMB No. 0704-0188

2. REPORT TYPE 

Technical Publication

 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE

High Reynolds Number Investigation of a Flush-Mounted, S-Duct Inlet 

With Large Amounts of Boundary Layer Ingestion

5a. CONTRACT NUMBER

 6. AUTHOR(S)

Berrier, Bobby L.; Carter, Melissa B.; and Allan, Brian G.

 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)

NASA Langley Research Center

Hampton, VA 23681-2199

 9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Washington, DC 20546-0001

 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION

 REPORT NUMBER

L-19131

10. SPONSOR/MONITOR'S ACRONYM(S)

NASA

13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

Berrier, Carter, and Allan, Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA.

An electronic version can be found at http://ntrs.nasa.gov

12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

Unclassified - Unlimited

Subject Category 02

Availability: NASA CASI (301) 621-0390 

19a. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE PERSON

STI Help Desk (email: help@sti.nasa.gov)

14. ABSTRACT

An experimental investigation of a flush-mounted, S-duct inlet with large amounts of boundary layer ingestion has been conducted at 

Reynolds numbers up to full scale. The study was conducted in the NASA Langley Research Center 0.3-Meter Transonic Cryogenic Tunnel. 

In addition, a supplemental computational study on one of the inlet configurations was conducted using the Navier-Stokes flow solver, 

OVERFLOW. Tests were conducted at Mach numbers from 0.25 to 0.83, Reynolds numbers (based on aerodynamic interface plane 

diameter) from 5.1 million to 13.9 million (full-scale value), and inlet mass-flow ratios from 0.29 to 1.22, depending on Mach number. 

Results of the study indicated that increasing Mach number, increasing boundary layer thickness (relative to inlet height) or ingesting a 

boundary layer with a distorted profile decreased inlet performance. At Mach numbers above 0.4, increasing inlet airflow increased inlet 

pressure recovery but also increased distortion. Finally, inlet distortion was found to be relatively insensitive to Reynolds number, but 

pressure recovery increased slightly with increasing Reynolds number.

15. SUBJECT TERMS

Inlet; S-duct, Offset; Boundary layer ingestion; Distortion; Pressure recovery

18. NUMBER

 OF 

 PAGES

170

19b. TELEPHONE NUMBER (Include area code)

(301) 621-0390

a. REPORT

U

c. THIS PAGE

U

b. ABSTRACT

U

17. LIMITATION OF 

 ABSTRACT

UU

Prescribed by ANSI Std. Z39.18

Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8-98)

3. DATES COVERED (From - To)

5b. GRANT NUMBER

5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER

5d. PROJECT NUMBER

5e. TASK NUMBER

5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER

23-066-50-AE

11. SPONSOR/MONITOR'S REPORT

 NUMBER(S)

NASA/TP-2005-213766

16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF:

The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, 

gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this 

collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and 

Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person 

shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number.

PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS.

1. REPORT DATE (DD-MM-YYYY)

01- 09 - 2005