National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Fundamental Aeronautics Program

Supersonics Project

Project Overview
Peter Coen
Project Manager

2011 Technical Conference

March 15-17, 2011
Cleveland, Ohio
[Link]
Presentation Outline
• Overview
– Project principles and strategy
– Technical Challenges
– Assessment of goals and technology portfolio
• Technical Highlights
• NRAs & Partnerships
• Upcoming Activities
• Summary

2
Guiding Principles and Motivation

3
Project Overarching Goal & Focus

Overall Project Goal:

Tool and technology development that
addresses challenges in the broad spectrum of
supersonic flight

Focus Area:
Overcoming the technology barriers to
practical civil supersonic airliners

4
Overcoming the Barriers

Environmental
• Reduce sonic boom noise to allow supersonic overland flight
• Noise levels acceptable for airport communities
• Minimize impact of high altitude cruise emissions

Efficiency
• Improve fuel burn to enable economical operations
• Integrate high speed aircraft with other airspace traffic

5
Supersonic Project Technical Challenges
Sonic Boom Community Response Airport Noise
• Realistic models for propagation of low noise sonic boom • Improved prediction techniques for
• Methodology to measure and predict community supersonic propulsion noise
response (indoor & outdoor) to low noise sonic boom • Innovative nozzle designs for highly
integrated propulsion systems

High Altitude Emissions

Supersonic Cruise Efficiency • Improved analysis and
• Tools and technologies for integrated measurement tools
propulsion and aerodynamic analysis and • Low emissions combustor
design concepts
• High performance propulsion components
• Sonic Boom and Drag reduction technologies

Light Weight, Durable Engines/Airframes

• Materials, test and analysis methods for airframe and Aeroservoelastic Analysis and Design
engine efficiency, durability and damage tolerance • ASE/flight dynamic and propulsion analysis
and design tool development and validation
• Include propulsion effects: APSE analysis and
Integrated Multi-Discipline System Design design tools
• Develop improved system level analysis and design
capabilities, achieving low sonic boom and high performance • Integration of Supersonic Aircraft in
• Integrate discipline level tools into the vehicle level analysis NextGen System (with Airspace Program)
models. – Determine the characteristics for an airspace
• Develop innovative, integrated concept designs and assess system that enables supersonic aircraft to
utilize their full capabilities
technology needs and impacts
6
Investment Strategy
• Primary focus on Technical Challenges
– Foundational, Discipline and Multidiscipline Level activities
– Identify and address solutions “at the seams” between conventional disciplines
• Pursue multidiscipline and flight validation where resources permit
• Majority of effort is supersonics unique, overlapping with other
projects where strong synergy exists
• Incorporate an element of long term foundational research with
potential high payoffs
– May not align with a particular Tech Challenge
• Develop facilities and measurement capabilities for unique
supersonic problems
• Maximize leverage of investment and partnership with external
communities
• Maintain technical excellence and workforce stability

7
 Project Organization Aligns with Tech Challenges

• Sub Projects Organized By Project Manager: Peter Coen (LaRC)

PROJECT

Technical Challenges Deputy Project Manager: Kaz Civinskas (GRC)

LEVEL

• Technical Leads for Sub-Project Project Scientist: Dr. Lou Povinelli (GRC)
providing overall technical
direction and oversight DPM For DPM for DPM for GRC: DPM for
• Deputy by Centers for Execution ARC: DFRC: Vacant LaRC:
Oversight and Project Integration Don Durston Tom Jones APM Dave Richwine
Clayton Meyers

SIA: Lori Ozoroski (LaRC), Systems Integration Systems Integration Systems Integration
Clayton Meyers (GRC) & Assessment & Assessment & Assessment
SCE-P: Ray Castner (GRC), Supersonic Cruise Supersonic Cruise Supersonic Cruise
SCE-A: Linda Bangert (LaRC) Efficiency - Airframe Eff. - Propulsion Efficiency - Airframe
SUB-PROJECT LEVEL

LDE: Dale Hopkins (GRC) Light Weight, Light Weight,

LDA: Dr. Phil Bogert (LaRC) Durable Engines Durable Airframes

Airport Noise: Propulsion Acoustics Acoustics

Dr. James Bridges (GRC) ARC DFRC Integration

Sonic Boom Comm. Resp.: Sonic Boom Flt. Res. Sonic Boom Modeling
Dr. Alexandra Loubeau (LaRC)
High Altitude Emissions: High Altitude
Dr. Dan Bulzan (GRC) Emissions LaRC
Aeroservoelasticity: Aeroelasticity Aero-Propulso-Servo- Aeroelasticity,
Dr. Walt Silva (LaRC) Elasticity (APSE) APSE

Flight Research & Validation: Flt. Res. Tools FRV External Vision Sys
Dan Banks (DFRC) GRC
Center in () is Tech. Lead Resource Analyst (RA): Resource Analyst (RA): Lead RA: Mary Neuzil RA: Pamela Stacy
Christian Aguilar Susan Moreno NRA Manager: Vacant Project Scheduler:
Leslie Letzinger 8
Technology Challenge Goals
• NASA defined an
initial set of design
parameters and
performance levels
for practical
supersonic airliners
in the near, mid
and far term time
frames
• Systems Studies
have been used to
determine if these
goals are valid and
N+1 “Conventional” N+2 Small Supersonic Airliner N+3 Efficient, Multi Mach Aircraft
achievable

9
Current Project Strategy and Direction
• Assess and update technology challenge goals through concept
development and systems analysis
• Assess technology performance required to achieve tech challenge
goals
• Identify gaps in current technology portfolio
• Focus research effort on the key Technology Challenge: Reduce
sonic boom noise to allow supersonic overland flight
– Design tools and techniques for aircraft with very low sonic boom noise
• Supersonic Cruise Efficiency: High fidelity tools
• System Level Design: Multi-fidelity, Multidiscipline design framework
and tools for low boom/low drag design
– Understand reaction to sonic booms from the above designs & lay the
groundwork for noise based sonic boom standards
• Sonic Boom Community Response: Sonic boom propagation,
transmission into structures and indoor and outdoor human
response

10
Assessing Goals and Portfolio
• FY06 Planning established initial goals and research portfolio
– Many sources of quality input

• New assessment was deemed valuable to bring project up to date

– Current market
– New technology
– New configuration direction (Boom constrained)
– NextGen development

• Baseline configuration needed

• Recommendation from previous review panels

• Two studies conducted, completed in FY09 & 10

11
Assessing Goals and Portfolio
N+2 System Study
• Boeing, Rolls-Royce, Pratt & Whitney, and Georgia
Tech team effort
• Baseline concept for the N+2 timeframe developed for
a balanced set of requirements
• Key Results
• NASA N+2 Goals difficult to achieve in 2020
• Integrated propulsion cycle design process demonstrated
• Includes cycle parameters in vehicle optimization
• Configuration shaping for low boom is a key
technology
• Configuration is being used as baseline in
many SUP research efforts

NASA N+2 Small Systems Study

Supersonic Airliner (2020) Results
Environmental Goals
Sonic Boom 65 – 70 PLdB 90 PLdB
Airport Noise (cum below stage 4) – 10 EPNdB – 5 EPNdB
Cruise Emissions (g/kg fuel) < 10 Not evaluated
Performance Goals
Cruise Speed Mach 1.6 - 1.8 Mach 1.6
Range 4000 nm 3800 nm
Payload 35 – 70 pax 30 pax
Fuel Efficiency (pax-nm/lb-fuel) >3.0 1.57

12
Assessing Goals and Portfolio
N+3 Concept and Technology Studies
PROBLEM
National need to gain understanding of advanced airframe and
propulsion concepts, as well as corresponding enabling technologies,
that address the many challenges for commercial aircraft entering
service in the 2030-35 timeframe (N+3).
OBJECTIVE
Stimulate thinking to create revolutionary aircraft solutions that
dramatically improve the performance, environmental impact and
operational flexibility of future aircraft. Determine high payoff
technologies and research opportunities that will enable these
solutions.
Lockheed
APPROACH
NRA-competed awards for N+3 Concept Studies selected 6
Concept
industry/university teams. 4 teams addressed subsonic transports, and Vehicle
2 studied supersonic transports.

Boeing
Concept
Vehicle
13
 N+3 Airframe & Propulsion Technologies
• Prioritized Technologies from N+3 System Studies align well with the SUP research portfolio
• Detailed roadmaps were used to guide several adjustments in out-year plans

14
Key Elements of Research Strategy
In house research maximizing the use of
NASA’s skilled workforce and unique facilities

Sponsored research with the Research Partnerships with

best minds in the US organizations with similar
University and Industry goals (OGA, US Industry,
communities International)
15
 Key APG Milestones Successfully Completed

Adjoint-Based Design for Configuration Shaping FY 09

Objective:
Apply nonlinear aero (CFD) and knowledge of
desired near field pressures to shape
configuration geometry
Significance:
• Low boom designs can be created based on
non-linear flow solution data
• Can mitigate or exploit flow features to
create unique solutions

Computational Modeling of Integrated Inlet & Fan Performance FY 10

Objective:
• Understand coupling of inlet and fan flowfields in unconventional
inlet shapes and potential effects on performance and stability
Significance
• New tools will enable the analysis and design of inlet/fan
systems that achieve the levels of efficiency and sonic boom
noise required for viable supersonic civil aircraft.
• Allow for the analysis of non traditional inlet shapes for highly
integrated design of the next generation of supersonic aircraft 16
Key Research Successes in All Technical Challenge Areas
1 - Cruise Efficiency, Systems Level Design

Grid Techniques & Solver

Target Signature and Vehicle Shape Design
Improvements for Boom Prediction

Low Sonic Boom Inlet Design & Test Multi-Fidelity Design and Analysis Process
17
Key Research Successes in All Technical Challenge Areas
2 – Sonic Boom, Noise & Emissions

Cruise

Takeoff

Highly Variable Cycle Nozzle

Test and Analysis

Indoor Sonic Boom Subjective Test

Facility Operational Low NOx Combustor Concept
Development & Testing
18
Key Research Successes in All Technical Challenge Areas
3 – Lightweight, Durable Airframes & Engines, Aeroelasticity

Progress Failure Analysis Validation Ceramic Matrix Composite Components

Aeroelastic Control
Law Development &
Test

19
Key Research Successes in All Technical Challenge Areas
4 – Flight Research & Validation

Flight Component of Sonic Boom Research

Supersonic Boundary Layer Transition

Motorglider Microphone Platform Development

F-15 Flowfield Calibration 20
Additional Investment in Supersonics:
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA)

• Project research content has benefited substantially from

augmentation funding in past fiscal years
– Facility and Measurement capability improvement
– Optional NRA tasks and new NRA awards
– Multi-Discipline systems validation

• 2009 ARRA investment has been used primarily to augment sonic

boom related technical challenge research
– Supersonic Cruise Efficiency
• Sonic boom design validation (2 awards: Boeing and Lockheed Teams)
• Validation wind tunnel tests
• Large Scale Low Boom Inlet wind tunnel test (+ measurement hardware)
– Sonic Boom Community Response
• New NRA awards for community response pilot project and focus boom
– Airport Noise
• Wind tunnel testing of Supersonic Inlet & High Variable Cycle Nozzle

21
Key Elements of Research Strategy
In house research maximizing the use of
NASA’s skilled workforce and unique facilities

Sponsored research with the Research Partnerships with

best minds in the US organizations with similar
University and Industry goals (OGA, US Industry,
communities International)
22
Supersonic NRA Investments

Recent and Planned NRA Solicitations

Year Solicitation Topics Awards
2008 Light Wt, Durable Airframes, High Altitude Emission (Combustor Concepts) 4
2008 N+3 Concepts and Technologies for Supersonic Aircraft in 2035 2
2009 Concepts for Systems Validation (ARRA Funds) 2
2009 Sonic Community Response (Auralization, Community Response, Focusing) 4
2011 Broad Solicitation (all Tech Challenges) TBD
23
NRA Impact on Project Tech Challenges
• SUP project philosophy stressed integration of NRA with Tech Challenge research
• Integration and impact of NRA investment has far exceeded expectations.
– Innovative research results
– Unique, effective research partnerships
– Research and test hardware development
• Examples:
Supersonic Cruise Efficiency
– Notre Dame University, NASA Team Supersonic boundary layer transition suppression via
distributed roughness
– UIUC, Gulfstream, NASA Team: Micro-ramp flow control for low boom supersonic inlets
Sonic Boom Community response
– Industry/University team address all aspects of community response
High Altitude Emissions
– Industry NASA team: Low emission combustor concept development and testing
Light Weight, Durable Engines/Airframes
– University, Industry NASA Team: Development and Validation of PFA tools
– University, Industry, Government Team: Ceramic composite components for jet engines
Aeroelasticity
– Industry NASA Team: Development and test of ASE control laws
+ Many more
24
NRA Investment
System Level Validation of Low Boom Design
• Two large awards under NRA (May 2010)
– Boeing
– Lockheed (GE, Liberty Works subs)
– Phase 1 runs through May 2011
• Principal objectives
– Mature low boom design tools
– Validate with wind tunnel tests in Ames 9x7 SWT
– Include propulsion airframe interaction, inlet and
nozzle effects
– Validate noise reduction concepts
– Improve model design and data measurement
techniques
• Significant In-house involvement
– Research Interaction
– Wind Tunnel and other test facilities

25
Key Elements of Research Strategy
In house research maximizing the use of
NASA’s skilled workforce and unique facilities

Sponsored research with the Research Partnerships with

best minds in the US organizations with similar
University and Industry goals (OGA, US Industry,
communities International)
26
Partnerships
On-Going
• FAA PARTNER Center of Excellence, Cooperatively pursue research supporting sonic boom
standards development
• Japan Aerospace eXploration Agency (JAXA) – Sonic Boom Modeling
• Japan Aerospace eXploration Agency (JAXA) – Supersonic Boundary-Layer Transition
• Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation, Low Boom Experimental Vehicle (LBEV) Program, Annex 8 – 11
• Mesoscribe Technologies, Inc., Novel High Temperature Ceramic Sensors
• Rolls-Royce Corporation, Testing of Production Metallic and Prototype Advanced Composite
Sandwich Structure Fan Cases
• NAVAIR, 2009 Lakehurst Engine Test
• DOE - NETL Pittsburgh, Laser Heat Flux Testing of TBC Overlay Coatings
• Siemens Energy Inc., Thermal Barrier Coatings High Heat Flux Testing, Dev. & Life Prediction
• DemVal Inc., Advanced Thermal Barrier Coating Systems for F100 Engine
• Maverick Corporation, Low-Cost Fabrication of High Temperature Composites
• Sulzer Metco (US) Inc, Evaluation of Sulzer Metco Processed Low Conductivity Thermal Barrier
Coating (TBC) Systems
• Rolls-Royce NA Technologies, Materials Selection and Preliminary Component Design
• USAF AFRL, SiC/SiC Turbine Airfoil Material
• Boeing Company, Damage Prediction
• DOE/Sandia National Laboratories, Peridynamic Theory and Computational Modeling
• Aerion, Supersonic Boundary Layer Transition Prediction / Flight Test

27
 Partnership:
Gulfstream Aerospace
• Effective Space Act approach to pursue Supersonic collaborations with GAC across
all 4 Aero Centers
• Expertise and resources are leveraged and shared in pursuit of the required tools
and technologies for a Low Boom Experimental Vehicle (LBEV)

Annex 2 - eXternal Vision System

Annex 5 – Low Drag/Low Boom Vehicle (XVS) Flight Test
Design & Model Mounting Invest.
Annex 7 – MDAO of Bypass Flowpath
in a Supersonic Prop. System

Annex 11 – LBEV Prelim. Design

Req. and System Definition

Annex 9 – Computational Design

Studies for Low-boom Aircraft

Annex 6 – Coupled Analysis of

Supersonic Low Boom Inlet & Fan

Annex 8 - Sonic Booms

on Big Structures Annex 10 – Test of a Low-Boom
Annex 4 –Human Response
External Comp Supersonic Inlet
to Rattles & Booms
28
Partnership:
NASA/Navy/GE F-404 jet noise test
• NASA 48-microphone phased array deployed by NASA Glenn researchers at
Navy’s Lakehurst engine test stand in July 2009.
• Document acoustic impact of new chevrons on F/A-18’s General Electric F-404
engine, addressing noise load on Navy carrier personnel.
• Compared modification of sound field with that found in NASA model scale
chevron nozzle tests conducted at NASA GRC also in collaboration with GE and
Navy.
Sound source distributions

Base
nozzle at
mil power

Chevron
nozzle at mil
power Array48

29
Research Dissemination:
FY09-10 SUP Publications Summary

229 Publications Journals

• 68 Peer-reviewed (49 NASA, 19 NRA) • AIAA Journal (9)
• 135 Conference (85 NASA, 50 NRA) • Int’l (4)
• 15 NASA Reports • J. of Propulsion & Power (3)
• 11 Other Publications • ASME J. of Fluids Engineering (2)
– Contractor Reports • Procedia Engineering (2)
– Dissertations • Applied Physics Letters (2)
– Books • Acta Materialia (2)
• J. American Ceramic Society (2)
75 Presentations • 31 Other Journals (1 each)
• Workshops
• Overviews
• Invited FY10 -11 Project Bibliography
will be included on Meeting DVD

30
 Upcoming Activities in Supersonics

• FY 11 APG Milestone – MDAO for Cruise Efficiency & Boom

• Boom & Drag Prediction/Design invited session, AIAA Applied Aero Conf, June 2011
• N+2 System Validation Testing at ARC 9x7 (Boeing/LM/NASA)
• Inlet bleed modeling experiments to support advanced inlet design tools
• Demonstrate adv. engine turbine EBC feasibility & durability for SiC/SiC CMC airfoils
• Demonstrate the viability of a low density/high temp. shape memory alloy
• Complete validation of RANS- & LES-based noise prediction codes
• Testing of Low Noise Nozzle Concepts (GE & RRLW)
• Flametube Testing of RR/GE/UTRC Low Emissions Concepts (in progress)
• Community response and operational effects flight experiments (NRA partners)

31
Summary
• The Supersonic Project is developing tools and technologies for the broad
spectrum of supersonic flight with a focus on overcoming the barriers to
civil aircraft, particularly overland supersonic cruise
• Our goals and technology portfolio are relevant to the above strategy and
NASA and National goals
• Organization by technical challenges inspires innovative solutions at the
seams between traditional research disciplines
• The project has defined a high quality research portfolio that emphasizes
effective partnering of in-house, funded and cooperative elements
• The project’s research is being broadly disseminated and applied by
partners
• The project is executing well, according to a plan that is adaptable and
changes in response to knowledge
gained and other valued input

32
Supersonics Technical Sessions

• Tuesday PM • Thursday AM
– Technology Challenge Overviews – Cruise Efficiency - Airframe
(15 minute presentations) – Cruise Efficiency - Propulsion
• Wednesday AM – Flight Research & Validation
– Lightweight, Durable Engines • Thursday PM
– Lightweight, Durable Airframes – Systems Integration and
– Aeroservoelasticity Assessment
• Wednesday PM – High Altitude Emissions
– Sonic Boom Modeling
– Airport Noise
– Feedback Session
(Open Forum 1 hr)

Join us in the Ambassador Ballroom one level down

33
 Thank you!

Next Speaker: Dr. Jim Pittman, PM for Hypersonics

34
34