Top Qs
Timeline
Chat
Perspective

Nose cone design

Geometry and construction of the foremost tip of airplanes, spacecraft and projectiles From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Nose cone design
Remove ads

Given the problem of the aerodynamic design of the nose cone section of any vehicle or body meant to travel through a compressible fluid medium (such as a rocket or aircraft, missile, shell or bullet), an important problem is the determination of the nose cone geometrical shape for optimum performance. For many applications, such a task requires the definition of a solid of revolution shape that experiences minimal resistance to rapid motion through such a fluid medium.

Thumb
General parameters used for constructing nose cone profiles.
Remove ads

Nose cone shapes and equations

Summarize
Perspective

Von Kármán

The Haack series designs giving minimum drag for the given length and diameter, the LD-Haack where C = 0, is commonly called the Von Kármán or Von Kármán ogive.

Aerospike

Thumb
An aerospike on the UGM-96 Trident I

An aerospike can be used to reduce the forebody pressure acting on supersonic aircraft. The aerospike creates a detached shock ahead of the body, thus reducing the drag acting on the aircraft.

Remove ads

Nose cone drag characteristics

Summarize
Perspective

For aircraft and rockets, below Mach 0.8, the nose pressure drag is essentially zero for all shapes. The major significant factor is friction drag, which is largely dependent upon the wetted area, the surface smoothness of that area, and the presence of any discontinuities in the shape. For example, in strictly subsonic rockets a short, blunt, smooth elliptical shape is usually best. In the transonic region and beyond, where the pressure drag increases dramatically, the effect of nose shape on drag becomes highly significant. The factors influencing the pressure drag are the general shape of the nose cone, its fineness ratio, and its bluffness ratio.[3]

Influence of the general shape

Thumb
Closeup view of a nose cone on a Boeing 737

Many references on nose cone design contain empirical data comparing the drag characteristics of various nose shapes in different flight regimes. The chart shown here seems to be the most comprehensive and useful compilation of data for the flight regime of greatest interest.[4] This chart generally agrees with more detailed, but less comprehensive data found in other references (most notably the USAF Datcom).

Thumb
Comparison of drag characteristics of various nose cone shapes in the transonic to low-mach regions. Rankings are: superior (1), good (2), fair (3), inferior (4).

In many nose cone designs, the greatest concern is flight performance in the transonic region from Mach 0.8 to Mach 1.2. Although data are not available for many shapes in the transonic region, the table clearly suggests that either the Von Kármán shape, or power series shape with n = 1/2, would be preferable to the popular conical or ogive shapes, for this purpose.

Thumb
General Dynamics F-16 with a nose cone very close to the Von Kármán shape

This observation goes against the often-repeated conventional wisdom that a conical nose is optimum for "Mach-breaking". Fighter aircraft are probably good examples of nose shapes optimized for the transonic region, although their nose shapes are often distorted by other considerations of avionics and inlets. For example, an F-16 Fighting Falcon nose appears to be a very close match to a Von Kármán shape.

Influence of the fineness ratio

The ratio of the length of a nose cone compared to its base diameter is known as the fineness ratio. This is sometimes also called the aspect ratio, though that term is usually applied to wings and tails. Fineness ratio is often applied to the entire vehicle, considering the overall length and diameter. The length/diameter relation is also often called the caliber of a nose cone.

At supersonic speeds, the fineness ratio has a significant effect on nose cone wave drag, particularly at low ratios; but there is very little additional gain for ratios increasing beyond 5:1. As the fineness ratio increases, the wetted area, and thus the skin friction component of drag, will also increase. Therefore, the minimum drag fineness ratio will ultimately be a trade-off between the decreasing wave drag and increasing friction drag.

Remove ads

See also

Further reading

  • Haack, Wolfgang (1941). "Geschoßformen kleinsten Wellenwiderstandes" (PDF). Bericht 139 der Lilienthal-Gesellschaft für Luftfahrtforschung: 14–28. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2007-09-27.
  • U.S. Army Missile Command (17 July 1990). Design of Aerodynamically Stabilized Free Rockets. U.S. Government Printing Office. MIL-HDBK-762(MI).

References

Loading related searches...

Wikiwand - on

Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.

Remove ads