PDR Report0

"Graviton"
Student Project
PDR Summary Paper

Team Members:
Stepovoy Kiril
Rudin Irena
Barlevi Barak
Yung Omer
Chapnik Amir
Kremerman Jeremy
Faibish Raz
Shafir Aviad
Elroi Oren
Rabich Michael

Academic Advisor:
Uri Peled
2012
Graviton Team
Technion
January 2012
Graviton Student Project
January 2012

1
Summary

"Graviton" is a long range air to air missile. The project's main objective
is to substitute the currently used AIM-120 AMRAAM. In order to
achieve better performance, to double the kinematic range
1
without
compromising size and weight characteristics too much to stay in
compliance with current fighter aircraft carry features.
To achieve the desired result, we have tried different aerodynamic
configurations to reduce drag and optimize lift, several thrust profiles for
optimal cruise speed and various materials for reduced body and parts
weight.
The final configuration has been chosen after analytically calculating the
aerodynamic coefficients and using a simulation program in Matlab to
numerically obtain the range.

1
Kinematic range - A missiles kinematic range can be described as the maximum theoretical
range at which it can intercept a target.
January 2012

2
Contents
Summary ..................................................................................................................... 1
Introduction ................................................................................................................. 5
"Market Survey" Missiles available today ...................................................................... 6
MICA ....................................................................................................................... 6
METEOR ................................................................................................................... 7
R-37 (Arrow) ............................................................................................................. 8
Novator K-100 .......................................................................................................... 9
R-77M1 (Adder) ...................................................................................................... 10
AIM-120D AMRAAM................................................................................................ 11
Missile Carriage .......................................................................................................... 12
1. External Carriage: ................................................................. 12
2. Conformal Carriage: ........................................................... 12
3. Internal Carriage:................................................................... 13
Launchers .................................................................................................................. 14
1. Rail Launcher: ............................................................................ 14
2. Ejection Launcher: ............................................................... 15
Design constraint ........................................................................................................ 16
F-16 ....................................................................................................................... 16
F-15 ....................................................................................................................... 17
F-35 ....................................................................................................................... 19
Summary: ............................................................................................................... 20
The guideline of the GRAVITON design The AMRAAM .................................................. 21
Aerodynamics ............................................................................................................ 22
Background: ........................................................................................................... 22
Objectives: ............................................................................................................. 23
Aerodynamic coefficients calculation:........................................................................ 23
Validity of the calculations: ................................................................................... 24
Geometry of the AMRAAM: ..................................................................................... 26
Attaining drag reducing configuration: ....................................................................... 27
Maneuverability: ..................................................................................................... 35
Propulsion system ...................................................................................................... 37
Theory ................................................................................................................... 37
Calculation and formulas.......................................................................................... 38
January 2012

3
Ramjet Engine ........................................................................................................ 42
How it Works? ..................................................................................................... 42
There are different types of Ramjet engine: ............................................................ 43
Advantages and disadvantages of the different types .............................................. 43
Chosen configuration ........................................................................................... 44
First analysis ....................................................................................................... 44
Assumptions: ...................................................................................................... 44
Equations: .......................................................................................................... 45
Results ............................................................................................................... 46
Structure ................................................................................................................... 47
Requirements: ........................................................................................................ 47
Method of analysis: ................................................................................................. 47
Stress analysis for the aero surfaces ....................................................................... 47
Strength analysis for the aero surfaces ................................................................... 48
Weight analysis for the aero surfaces ........................................................................ 50
Assumptions we used: .......................................................................................... 51
Weight calculation results for the aero surfaces: ......................................................... 52
AMRAAM 120-A Fin Geometry .............................................................................. 52
AMRAAM 120-A Wing Geometry ........................................................................... 52
Graviton - Fin Geometry ....................................................................................... 53
Graviton Wing Geometry ................................................................................... 53
Structure strength analysis ....................................................................................... 54
Results: .................................................................................................................. 55
Total Weight Assessment ......................................................................................... 55
Temperature Consideration...................................................................................... 56
Simulation ................................................................................................................. 57
Blocks Diagram - Simulation Six DOF .......................................................................... 58
The Dynamic Model................................................................................................. 59
AMRAAM Missile (Trim Flight 1000m) ....................................................................... 61
Graviton Missile (Trim Flight 1000m, Acceleration + 2 Pulses Thruster) ......................... 64
Data Comparison .................................................................................................... 67
AMRAAM: Chase & Head On .................................................................................... 68
Graviton vs. AMRAAM: Chase & Head On .................................................................. 68
Special Versions of Graviton: .................................................................................... 69
January 2012

4
Graviton Missile (Trim Flight 1000m ,Acceleration Only) .......................................... 70
Graviton Missile (Trim Flight 1000m, Acceleration + 4 Pulses Thruster) ...................... 72
Graviton Missile (Trim Flight 1000m, Ramjet) .......................................................... 75
Developmental Configuration (Trim Flight 1000m) ...................................................... 78
Trajectory Flight Design Example:.............................................................................. 79

January 2012

5
Introduction

Since the beginning of time, man has always had dreams of flight.
There have been many tales in history of people attempting flight. There
is one even in mythology of a father and son team which constructed
wings and flew from their prison. Alas, the boy didn't hear his father's
warning and flew too close to the son, causing the glue holding the
wings together to dissolve and fell down into the never to be seen or
heard from again.
Since the beginning of powered flight, it has been utilized in military
applications and improving in all aspects.
The AMRAAM was first used at the end of 1992, it has been improving
even since and the latest version is rated to have a maximum range of
about 100km. In continuation to this tendency, we decided to design a
new and improved missile with double the maximum range of the
AMRAAM. Due to technological advances, we allowed ourselves to
reduce the size of the inner components to accommodate a larger
engine.
The final configuration incorporates a larger volume body, optimized
aerodynamic profile and an increased engine size and multi-pulse type
thrust profile.

January 2012

6
"Market Survey" Missiles available today

Presented here are the missiles which we have found. We have selected
our reference missile (the AIM-120 AMRAAM) as the reference point for
the project based on the following findings.

MICA

Length Diameter Wingspan
3.1m 160mm 320mm

Purpose/Role Launch and forget, All weather, Flare resistant, Multi target
Manufacturer MBDA missile systems
Country of origin France
Range 80+km
Speed Mach 4
Propulsion system Solid booster with thrust vectoring
Guidance Inertial Guidance (Activa Radar, Imaging IR)
Warhead 12 kg focused splinters HE warhead
Price Unknown
Launch platform Rafale, Mirage 2000, F16
Weight 112kg
January 2012

7
METEOR
Purpose/Role multi-shot capability against long range maneuvering targets in
a heavy electronic countermeasures (ECM) environment
Manufacturer MBDA missile systems
Country of origin Euro Union
Range 100+ km
Speed Mach 4+
Propulsion system Solid booster
Guidance Active Radar, Inertial Mid-ranged + datalink updates
Warhead High Explosive Blast-Fragmentation
Price 100000000
Launch platform Eurofighter, Rafale, JAS 39 Gripen
Weight 185 kg

3.65m 178mm ???
January 2012

8
R-37 (Arrow)

Purpose/Role
Shooting down AWACS and other C4ISTAR aircraft
Manufacturer Vympel
Country of origin
Russia
Range 150-398 km
Speed Mach 6
Propulsion system
Solid rocket
Guidance Inertial + mid-course updates, semi-active + active radar
Warhead 60 kg HE, fragmenting
Price Unknown
Launch platform
MIG-31
Weight 600 kg
4.2m 380mm 700mm
January 2012

9
Novator K-100
Purpose/Role
Shooting down AWACS and other C4ISTAR aircraft
Manufacturer NPO Novator & DRDO
Country of origin
Russia
Range 200+ km
Speed Mach 4
Propulsion system
Solid-propellant tandem rocket
Guidance Inertial + mid-course guidance, active radar
Warhead 50 kg HE fragmentation (KS172)
Price Unknown
Launch platform
Su-27, Su-30, Su-35
Weight 724 kg

6.01m+
1.4m(booster)
400mm 610mm
January 2012

10
R-77M1 (Adder)
Purpose/Role
multi-purpose missile for both tactical and strategic aircraft
for fire-and-forget use against a range of aircraft from
hovering helicopters to high speed, low altitude aircraft
Manufacturer Vympel
Country of origin
Russia
Range 160 km
Speed Mach 4.5
Propulsion system
Solid fuel rocket motor (R-77), air-breathing ramjet
(R-77M1)
Guidance Inertial + mid-course guidance, active radar
Warhead 22 kg HE, fragmenting
Price ???
Launch platform
MiG-21, MiG-29, MiG-31, Su-27, Su-35
Weight 266 kg

3.6m 200mm 350mm
January 2012

11
AIM-120D AMRAAM
Purpose/Role
air-to-air missile (AAM) capable of all-weather day-and-
night operations
Manufacturer Huges/Raytheon
Country of origin
USA
Range 75-100 km
Speed Mach 4
Propulsion system
High-performance directed rocket motor
Guidance INS, active radar
Warhead High explosive blast-fragmentation 23 kg
Price 7000000 $
Launch platform
Harrier, F15, F16, F18, F22, Eurofighter
Weight 152 kg (335 lbs)

3.7m 180mm 530mm
January 2012

12
Missile Carriage

There are 3 types of missile carriages:

1. External Carriage:
Conventional external carriage is the method where missile and
bombs are hanging on the outside of the aircraft under its wing.
Advantages: High firepower load-out because of large number of
possible stores location on aircraft body and wing.
Disadvantages: Because our missiles are situated outside the plane
they cause an increase to the plane RCS (radar cross section) and to
the aircraft drag. Other disadvantages include problem in the
interaction with the aircraft control system and potentially adverse
aero-elasticity.

2. Conformal Carriage:
Conformal carriage is the method used by the F-15 where missiles
and bombs are attached on the aircraft body.
Advantages: By attaching the missiles on the aircraft body we get a
lower RCS and lower drag in comparison to conventional external
carriage.
January 2012

13
Disadvantages: Disadvantages of this method is the need for
specialized stores and aircraft attachment for each type of aircraft.

3. Internal Carriage:
Internal carriage required the aircraft to have an inner bay where the
missile/bombs can be stored.
Advantages: since the weapons are located inside the aircraft
Internal carriage has the lowest RCS and the lowest Drag.
Disadvantages: Disadvantages include, span constraint to ensure the
weapon to fit inside the bay, theres concerns for the bay acoustics,
the bay vibration as well as concern for flow field angularities near
the aircraft and concerns about save separation at high dynamic
pressure.

The GRAVITON missile should be capable of carrying bye all three types
mentioned above.
January 2012

14
Launchers

There are two types of aircraft missile launchers being used to launch
AMRAAM missiles:
1. Rail Launcher:
The term rail launcher may be applied to launchers making use of rails,
tubes, long ramps, and even tall vertical towers. All provide, to a varying
degree, constraint to the weapon while it is moving on the launcher, and
they thus provide a considerable amount of flight control. For
uncontrolled weapons, such as rockets, the rails must be fairly long so
that the rocket is constrained for a longer portion of the rocket motor
burning time to provide the necessary initial velocity vector control. If
the missile is equipped with a guidance system, the rail length can
usually be reduced. Long-range weapons, guided or unguided, normally
require a longer rail since their initial acceleration is comparatively low
relative to short-range weapon. Rail launchers may be fixed or movable.
They may serve as ready service storage for missiles and provide
facilities for fueling and servicing. The simplicity of design of rail
launchers also promotes reliability and ease of maintenance and repair.
Airborne launcher rails, because of space and air flow-field problems,
are usually very short. As a rule, the greater the speed the missile had
achieved at separation from the launcher, the less the air-flow field
effects will influence missile flight.

January 2012

15
Example: Trapeze launcher: (A trapeze launcher is required for lock-on-
before-launch missiles.)

2. Ejection Launcher:
Impulse launchers for weapon ejection are employed for both free-fall
and self-propelled weapons. Their main purpose is to ensure that the
weapon safely clears the delivery vehicle. Ejection is usually
accomplished by the expansion of high-pressure gases from a
compressed air supply or from ignition of a propellant charge. Because it
is used for ejection purposes only, the impulse is small, and the launcher
can be built to withstand the shock of launching without the need for
excessive structural strength or special devices. Thus, launchers of this
type are fairly light and simple in design.

January 2012

16
Design constraint
Heavy constraints exist on the missile geometry/mass for it to be
compatible with any aircraft. Since we are located in Israel we are
interested in making the Graviton compatible with fighters used today
and in the near future by the IDF. Those fighters are; the F-16, the F-15
and the F-35.
The Graviton has to replace the AMRAAM, thats why we can assume it
shall be placed at the same pylons the AMRAAM is located today.
By finding those pylons we can make a list of all missile which use that
pylon and thus we can take the heaviest missile mass as our mass
constraint and the biggest missile geometry as our geometrical
constraints, we shall do this for all 3 planes and choose our constraints
by comparing the 3 results.
F-16

pylon 9 8 7 7A 6 5R 5 5L 4 3A 3 2
1
Loc cm 0 0,85 1,55 1,55 2,75 3,7 4,5 5,2 6,15 7,35 7,35 8,1
9
Loc m 0 0,93 1,7 1,7 3 4 4,9 5,7 6,7 8 8 8,8
9,8
Cap lb 425 700 3500 450 4500 550 2200 550 4500 450 3500 700
425
Cap at 9g
lb
425 450 2000 450 2500 550 1200 550 2500 450 2000 450
425
weapon a/a a/a a/a-
a/s
a/a a/s
fuel
pod Pod
fuel
pod a/s
fuel
a/a a/a-
a/s
a/a
a/a
January 2012

17
AMRAAM is usually situated at pylons 1-2-8-9
Weight constraint on new missile: 425lb
Other air-to-air missile include:
- AIM-7 sparrow
- AIM-9 sidewinder
- IRIS-T
- Python-4
- AIM-120 AMRAAM
The longest length an air-to-air missile has on the F-16 is 3.7m so we
take this length as our length constraint. Wing span constraint: very
difficult to calculate since not much information exists on pylon height,
and space between pylons, also missile are attached in X-configuration.
To avoid making mistakes the sparrow has the biggest wingspan of
0.81m.

F-15
- The F-15E has a Total of 15 external stores. McDonnell Douglas
has developed a new weapons attachment system for the F-15E,
known as tangential carriage.
- The F-15E can carry up to 23,000 lb of external fuel or ordnance.

January 2012

18

Left wing Left CFT inboard Right CFT
inboard
Right Wing
AIM-9
Sidewinder
STA-2A
STA-2B
STA-8A
STA-8B
AIM-120
AMRAAM
STA-2A
STA-2B
STA-3C
STA-4C
STA-7C
STA-6C
STA-8A
STA-8B
AIM-7 Sparrow STA-3C
STA-4C
STA-7C
STA-6C

No information on weapon store weight capability has been found so we
assume that for STA-2 and STA-8 the biggest weight found there is that
January 2012

19
of the AMRAAM 335 lb, and on stations STA-3, STA-4, STA-6, STA-7 the
heaviest weight is that of sparrow 510lb.
The smallest distance between missiles is situated between STA-2A and
STA-2B and STA-8A and STA-8B. From measurement that distance is
0.51m
max length constraint is again as the AMRAAM: 3.7m

F-35

stat 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
store a/a a/a,
a/s
a/a,
a/s
a/a,
a/s
a/a gun a/a a/a,
a/s
a/a,
a/s
a/a,
a/s
a/a
Cap.
lb
300 2500 5000 2500 350 1000 350 2500 5000 2500 300
Loc m 1,46 1,82 2,77 4,3 4,66 5,35 6,07 6,19 7,64 8,59 9,32

January 2012

20
Weapons on F-35:
- AIM-120 AMRAAM
- AIM-132 ASRAAM
- AIM-9x sidewinder
- IRIS-T
- MBDA meteor (pending further funding)
- JDRADM (after 2020)

Weight constraint for our missile is:
- Interior: 350lb
- Exterior: 2,500lb
Length constraint:
- Interior: as AMRAAM 3,7m
- Exterior: as AMRAAM 3,7m
Wing span constraint:
- Interior: 44,7 cm
- Exterior:53 cm

Summary:
All 3 aircrafts are compatible with the meteor, thats why we can assume
the meteor mass as our weight constraint and we can assume the
AMRAAM C (which fit in the F-35 inner bay) geometry as our geometrical
constraints.

January 2012

21
The guideline of the GRAVITON design The
AMRAAM

Since the main objective of the project is a long range air to air missile to
replace the currently used AMRAAM, the AMRAAM has been used as a
reference/starting point for the design.

This is a schematic drawing showing the relative size of the missile's
elements in both the AMRAAM and the Graviton.
The Graviton's characteristics will be explained and discussed at length
during each of the projects main subject.

Graviton
January 2012

22
Aerodynamics

Background:

The aerodynamic design of the Graviton is an enhancement of the one
of the AMRAAM. Therefore, the changes made to the design are not
substantial, yet essential in order for the Graviton to meet its objectives.

At first, identification of the crucial aerodynamic components had to be
made. In accordance with geometric information derived from various
on-line literature
1
, a numerical assessment of the parameters
, ,
, , , , , , ,
n
r w r t mac
l
d
d C C b AR C A was made. After that, a computational tool
in form of a MATLAB code was made in order to assess the drag and
normal force visited upon the missile. Based on results obtained by the
program, an aerodynamic design which is expected to be good enough
to allow the Graviton to fulfill its mission was suggested.

1
- http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/missile/aim-120.htm
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:AIM-120A_AMRAAM_scheme.svg
January 2012

23
Objectives:

- The aerodynamic design should allow the Graviton to reach a range in
pursuit that is double the one of the AMRAAM

-The maneuverability of the Graviton should be 3 times better than the
one of the evader

Aerodynamic coefficients calculation:

The missile's Aerodynamic coefficients were calculated using empirical
formulas taken from Tactical Missile design 1
st
ed. by Eugene L. Fleeman:

January 2012

24
Where:

The
calculation for the tail is similar to the one of the wing, but based on the
geometry of the tail.
For ( )
0.5
2
1 8 / M AR t
(
< + (

, the calculation of
( )
N
wing
C is based on
Slender Wing Theory, and is independent of Mach number.
For ( )
0.5
2
1 8 / M AR t
(
> + (

, the calculation of
( )
N
wing
C is based on Linear
Wing Theory, and is independent of Aspect Ratio.

Validity of the calculations:

A representative case was examined in order to verify that the results
obtained from the program correlate with credible results from
literature.
Given the canard configuration from NASA TM X-2780 report:

( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
( ) ( )
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
,0 ,0 ,0 ,0
, ,
,0 ,0
, ,

D D D D
total body wave body friction base
D D
wing wave wing friction
N N N N
total body wing tail
C C C C
C C
C C C C
= + +
+ +
= + +
January 2012

25

Results for
,0 D
C achieved by the calculation tool were compared with
those from the official report:

It is notable that both of the results match, and the accuracy achieved by
the MATLAB code is sufficient for primary design.

January 2012

26
Geometry of the AMRAAM:

Identifying the geometry of the AMRAAM was necessary in order to
evaluate its performance, and by that defining the goals of the Graviton.

January 2012

27
Attaining drag reducing configuration:

The following graph displays the variation
,0 ref D
S C as a function of the
diameter of the missile d and its nose length
nose
l :

January 2012

28
- An increase in diameter increases drag
- An increase in nose length decreases drag
- A suitable combination of increase in diameter and nose length
should be found

Close-up on the relevant region of the graph:

As we can see, by selecting 0.198 , 0.915
n
d m l m ( (

= = we manage to
reduce the drag force applied upon the missile. This configuration
reduces drag by 7.2%.

0.915
4.6
0.198
n
l
d
= ~

January 2012

29
Comparing the chosen configuration and the original AMRAAM
configuration:

And in Close-up:

January 2012

30
The volume (Vol. calculation Appendix ***) of the entire missile in its
new configuration is-
3
0.084828
new
m V ( =

Whereas the volume of the original configuration is-
3
0.079753
original
m V ( =

Therefore, by increasing diameter and nose length in the right amount,
we managed to reduce drag and increase the missile's volume too,
which is important for propulsion issues. The new configuration
increases volume by 6.36%.
The following graph displays
,0 D
C as a function of Mach number at an
altitude of | |
5000 m (engine off):

January 2012

31
It can be seen that
,0 D
C is reduced substantially in every Mach number,
especially at supersonic speed. This is good because the missile is
intended to work at supersonic speed.

The graph below compares
,0 D ref
S C for the new and the original
configurations at an altitude of 5000 m (

. This product is proportional to
the drag force applied upon the missile (engine off):

January 2012

32
Due to an increase in the missile's diameter,
ref
S is now bigger and the
reduction in the drag force itself at supersonic speed is smaller, yet
significant.

We will now examine ,
NOR NOR ref
C S C as a function of angle of attack o
at M=2 (engine off):

January 2012

33
Since
NOR ref
C S is proportional to the normal force generated upon the
missile, we note that the normal force hardly changes when the drag
reducing configuration is used.

The next graph displays
,0
NOR
D
C
C
against Mach number at 5 o = , altitude of
| |
5000 m (engine off):

January 2012

34
The following graphs show
,0
,0
,
NOR
D ref
D
C
C
C
S as a function of Mach
number when the missile's engine is on:

In this case, the base drag is smaller and therefore we receive better
results in drag related calculations.

January 2012

35
Maneuverability:

The main requirement is that the Graviton's maneuverability will be 3
times better than the evader's.
The weight of the new configuration is | |
173 kg .
The following graphs present the required angle of attack that the
missile should develop in order to achieve G=10 ( | | 10, 000 m ) , G=30 (
| | 1000 m ):

January 2012

36

January 2012

37
Propulsion system

Theory
A rocket engine, or simply "rocket", is a jet engine that uses only
propellant mass for forming its high speed propulsive jet. Rocket engines
are reaction engines and obtain thrust in accordance with Newton's
third law.
Rocket engines as a group have the highest exhaust velocities, are by far
the lightest, but are the least propellant efficient of all types of jet
engines.
Principle of operation:
Rocket engines produce thrust by the expulsion of a high-speed fluid
exhaust. This fluid is nearly always a gas which is created by high
pressure (10-200 bar) combustion of solid or liquid propellants,
consisting of fuel and oxidiser components, within a combustion
chamber.
The fluid exhaust is then passed through a supersonic propelling nozzle
which uses heat energy of the gas to accelerate the exhaust to very high
speed, and the reaction to this pushes the engine in the opposite
direction.
In rocket engines, high temperatures and pressures are highly desirable
for good performance as this permits a longer nozzle to be fitted to the
engine, which gives higher exhaust speeds, as well as giving better
thermodynamic efficiency.
(Taken form: "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket_engine")

January 2012

38
Calculation and formulas
The main formulas we used are:
-
p b
m A r =
-
0 F c t sp
F C P A I g m = =

capacity
density
A Cross section area of the propelant
A Cross section area of nozzle
r
hrust
C hrust
ressure in the burn chamber
specific
p
b
t
F
c
sp
m mass
propelant
Burnrate
F T
T coefficient
P The p
I The impulse
0
0 g Gravitationon altitude

As part of the plan the project study first the AMMARAM missile as a
reference.
We found a picture of the AMMRAM engine in ATK company site from
which we took the dimensions and propellant data:

January 2012

39
The data that taken:
- Length of burning : 1.498m
- Radius : 0.089m
- Nozzle diameter: 0.06m
- Exit diameter: 0.142m
Data for propellant:
- 0.01
sec
m
r
(
=
(

-
*
1550
sec
m
C
(
=
(

- | |
250 sec
sp
I =
-
3
1700
b
kg
m
(
=
(

- 1.2 =
We study about different cross sections of burning area and what kind of
Thrust vector we can get from it.

January 2012

40
We had to assume that the AMMRAM had steady thrust and we started
to build a program in Matlab that will calculate the thrust according to
burn section.
In order to calculate the burn section vs. time we used the following:

All of the above were taken from: "Archon -
" final project in the Technion.
According to the burning section area the program calculates the thrust
of the engine.

January 2012

41
Another calculation is for the nozzle:

0
5.6
( ) 37, 1.51
1.2
e
c
t
F
e
A
P
A
tables C
P
=

= =
`
=
)
In order to improve the range there were two options:
- Pulses engine
- Bigger engine
There were a few versions of thrust profile:
- Acceleration thrust profile only.
- 2 pulses thrust profile.
- 4 pulses thrust profile.
We knew from calculations that the best profile is: Accelerate to 1000
m/sec and then cruise at that speed.
(The simulation program gave us the same conclusion)
After all the work of aerodynamic and structure teams the dimensions of
the Graviton engine are:
- Length of burning : 2.2902m
- Radius : 0.198m
- Nozzle diameter: 0.0595m
- Exit diameter: 0.1926m
| |
| |
| |
*
2
*
2
85 85
10.5
1.2
15.424 1550
0.002776
85 101325
0.029146
0.0595
0.1926
c
Table
c
e
e
t
c t
t
c
e
t
e
P
P atm
A
P
A
P A mC
m A m
C P
A m
d m
d m
~ =

=
`
=
)
( = = = =

( =

=
=

January 2012

42
Ramjet Engine
Until now weve been working with a rocket propelled engine but since
our goal is to achieve a long range air-to-air missile weve been intrigued
by the ramjet engine. A ramjet engine doesnt need to carry its oxidizer
with him since it takes its oxidizer from the atmosphere around. This
results in the ramjet engine only having to carry a fuel rich sustain
propellant which allows the ramjet engine to have a higher I
sp
than a
solid booster engine and thus it can enable us to achieve a higher range
without having to add to much mass to the missile. Yet a ramjet engine
contains a few problems, for example: a ramjet engine has to be
propelled to M>1 for it to start working and the cones taking air add to
missile drag. A detailed analysis is needed to truly see if a ramjet engine
can give us longer range.

How it Works?
Ramjet propulsion is relatively simple compared to turbojet propulsion;
it has no moving parts. Air enters the inlet at supersonic speed and is
decelerated to low subsonic speed at the combustor entrance.
Downstream of the combustor is a convergent-divergent nozzle, which
accelerates the airflow back to supersonic speed. Because a ramjet is
inefficient at low supersonic Mach number, a rocket is required for
subsonic launch to boost the missile to the ramjet thrust takeover at
about Mach 2.5.

January 2012

43
There are different types of Ramjet engine:
1. Liquid Fuel Ramjet. Hydrocarbon fuel (typically) is injected into the
combustor ahead of a flame holder which stabilizes the flame
resulting from the combustion of the fuel with the compressed air
from the intake(s).
2. Solid Fuel Ramjet. It contains a fuel grain with a hollow center core
for the inlet airflow.
3. Ducted Rocket. A solid fuel gas generator produces a hot fuel-rich gas
which is burnt in the ramcombustor with the compressed air supplied
by the intake(s). The flow of gas improves the mixing of the fuel and
air and increases total pressure recovery.

Advantages and disadvantages of the different types

T
y
p
e

I
s
p

e
n
v
e
l
o
p
e

F
l
i
g
h
t

E
n
e
r
g
y

p
e
r

V
o
l
.

S
e
n
s
i
t
i
v
i
t
y

w
i
t
h

c
o
m
b
u
s
t
i
o
n

c
h
a
m
b
e
r

g
e
o
m
e
t
r
y

C
o
n
v
e
n
i
e
n
c
e

d
e
s
i
g
n

S
a
f
e
t
y

/
S
t
o
r
a
g
e

S
e
n
s
i
t
i
v
i
t
y

w
i
t
h

A
O
A

liquid
Solid
Ducted

January 2012

44
Chosen configuration

First analysis
The initial phase of our analysis is to make simple calulations under the
assumption of an ideal ramjet engine to give us a first idea of a ramjet
engine performance, this are the assumptions made during this first
analysis:

Assumptions:
- Isentropic inlet and nozzle
- P
E
=P
A

- T
02
=T
0A
and T
04
=T
0E

- =1.4

| |
3
2
04
45 10
0.01166
2250
1005
R
in
p
kJ
Q
kg
A m
T k
kJ
C
kg k
(
=
( =
=
(

January 2012

45
Equations:

( ) ( ) 1
air e a e e a
T m f U U A P P ( = + +

( )
( ) 1
e a
P P
air e a
T m f U U ( = +

in
04
0
04
0 0
04
0
1
air a
f a
air R
p a a
e a
a
a a
m U A
T
m T
f
m T Q
C T T
T
U U
T
U M R T
=

| |

|
\ .
= =

| |
| |

|
|
`
\ .
\ .

| |
=
|

\ .

=
)
January 2012

46
Results
The thrust vs. time we got:
AMMRAM:

Graviton:

January 2012

47
Structure
Requirements:
To achieve a lightweight and strong enough structure, in order to
withstand the different loads that evolve before and during the mission.
The aspects, on which we focused, such as structural analysis, came
to meet the requirements:
- Finding the proper materials and thicknesses respectively of the
missile aero surfaces (fins and wings).
- Finding the proper materials which would allow us to achieve
maximum Volume for the propellant (thinner wall thickness).
Method of analysis:
Stress analysis for the aero surfaces
- We used linear strength and elasticity theories, while the
fins/wings were referred as cantilever beam, fixed on one end.
Shear stress calculated as:
( )
( )
ds
V Q y
y
I b
t

=

Bending stress calculated as:
( )
bend
M y
y
I
t

=

Torsion stress calculated as:
( )
tor
T r
r
J
t

=

January 2012

48

Strength analysis for the aero surfaces
- Moment of inertia was calculated for circular
section and square cross section, to examine the shape of
the preferred connection.
- For each given geometry we examined three types of metals in
order to find which the preferred metal is.
- Another result from the strength calculations is the weight for
each fin/wing.
- The strength calculations were made by taking the equivalent
aerodynamic force (which we got from analyzing the aerodynamic
coefficients) at flight conditions of 5000 meter altitude and 30G
load.

January 2012

49

January 2012

50

Weight analysis for the aero surfaces
For the preliminary calculation of the missile weight we used two
methods:
- Initially, to get an approximate estimation, we assumed a uniform
mass distribution along the missile length. Each element was
measured by its relative length.
- For a more accurate result we divided the missile to its different
elements and calculated each element mass according to its
typical density (according to Eugene L. Fleeman / Tactical
Missile design):

Location of connector
January 2012

51

Assumptions we used:
- Each fin/wing has a diamond cross section and the thickness
distribution is linear from the root to the tip.
- The aerodynamic force applied on the fin/wing is uniformly
distributed, therefor we referred it as an equal and concentrated
force at 0.25 of the fin/wing cord (while Mach<2) and at the
center area of the fin/wing (when Mach>2).
- The fin/wing has Uniform density.
- Factor of safety were taken according to the different element of
the missile (according to Eugene L. Fleeman / Tactical Missile
design).
- Failure is when the stress reaches yield point (
y
o
).
- Structural failure will occur at the maximum stress point of the
connection between the fin/wing and body (top or bottom fiber).

January 2012

52
Weight calculation results for the aero surfaces:
AMRAAM 120-A Fin Geometry

AMRAAM 120-A Wing Geometry

January 2012

53
Graviton - Fin Geometry

Graviton Wing Geometry

January 2012

54
Structure strength analysis
During its mission, the missile structure withstands different types of
stresses in consequence of:
- Motor chamber internal pressure.
- Bending moment.
- Buckling from Combined axial compression & bending.
- Manufacturing operations such as drilling, machining,
bending and even carriage.

In order to withstand the different stresses, we need to find the proper
materials and the required shell thickness.
We then built a program that calculates the required thickness and
weight for different materials, so that we could choose the proper
materials under our constraints (mainly total weight).
We used a critical design condition (according to Eugene L. Fleeman /
Tactical Missile design) for the weighted thickness criterion:
t =FOS x Max (t
MinGage
,t
Buckling,Bending
,t
Buckling,AxialCompression
,t
Bending
,t
InternalPressure
)

January 2012

55
Results:
MATERIAL
MOTOR CASE
MATERIAL
FRONT CYLINDER
SHELL THICKNESS [m]
WEIGHT
[Kg]
SHELL THICKNESS
[m]
WEIGHT
[Kg]
PH 15-7Mo 0.0056 62.6875 Al7075-T6 0.0069 6.5224
D6AC 0.0036 39.0696 Al7178-T6 0.0064 6.0426
Ti-6Al-4V 0.0078 48.3492 Ti-6Al-4V 0.0034 5.057
Ti-8Al-1Mo-1V
(Aged) 0.0065 39.606 Ti-8Al-1Mo-1V (Aged) 0.0035 5.057
Graphite-Epoxy
60/40ep 0.0038 9.6289
Graphite-Epoxy
60/40ep 0.0027 1.6297
Graphite-Polyimide
50/50 0.0048 10.552
Graphite-Polyimide
50/50 0.0031 1.6192

Total Weight Assessment

January 2012

56
Total:
- According to the preliminary assessment:
o For all-Aluminum structure 143.8 kg.
o For all-Steel structure 183.3 kg.
From this assessment, and from the knowledge that the motor
case is made of steel, we realize that most of the AMRAAM-120A
elements (mainly structure) are made of Aluminum or similar
lightweight metals (such as Titanium).
- According to the calculated values of the GRAVITON:
For Titanium + Graphite/Epoxy structure 176.7 kg.
- By choosing to use composite materials for the whole
structure, the missile body weight can be reduced to
12.8423 kg

Temperature Consideration
- Stagnation temperatures per Mach number:
2
4
0
0
460.17
1073.73
M
M
T K
T K
=
=
=
=

- Critical temperatures for the examined materials:
4340 1703
D6AC 1700
6
7
4 1877
8 1 0 4
075 75
1
0
18 3
St SAE K
St K
Ti Al V K
Ti Al M V
Al K
K
~
~
~

~
~

- Conclusion: if we choose to build the aero structure from Aluminum, we
would have to use thermal coating in order to withstand the critical
temperatures.
- For the other materials the temperature limitations are negligible.

January 2012

57
Simulation

Objective: A tool for estimation and examination of the missile's
kinematic performance and flight trajectory calculations.
Method: Building a 6 DOF simulation, while initially reducing the number
of DOF to accommodate the development steps of the project (in
practice, 3 DOF in the XOZ plane, control commands: AOA or rate of
pitch angle not by controlling the wing angles).
The simulation program interfaces with the aerodynamics, thrust and
structural functions displayed previously.
Program's functionality:
1. Straight and level flight at a specific height.
2. Ballistic or "designed" flight trajectory.
3. Spatial trajectory flight.
4. All three angles & angle rates calculations.
5. Missile velocity calculations in wind, body & inertial axis.
6. Longitudinal & lateral missile acceleration calculations.
7. Aerodynamic forces and moments calculations (i.e. drag,
normal force, thrust and gravity in body & inertial axis).
8. Missile mass change is taken into account in the force and
moments equations.
9. Calculation and output of the impact range in head-on & chase
scenarios.

January 2012

58
Blocks Diagram - Simulation Six DOF

( ) , ( ) , ( )
fuel
M t M t M t

( ) , ( ) , ( )
fuel
M t M t M t

Atmosp-
here
model
A
e
r
o
d
y
n
a
m
i
c

f
o
r
c
e
s

a
n
d

m
o
m
e
n
t
s

a
n
d

t
h
r
u
s
t

Linear
equations
of motion
Rotational
equations
of motion
January 2012

59
The Dynamic Model

1
2
1. :
0
0
& ' 0
2. :
( )
x
y z
xy xz yz
y z
T T T
x
y fu
z
Assumptions
I I
Missile Symetric shape I I I
I I I
Truster X Axis Only T T
NoTorqe By Fuel Truser s Possition L M N
Force Equation
u qu rv g
M t v ru pw g M
w pv qu g
= = =
= =
= = =
+ (
(
+ +
(
( +

2 2
( )
0
( )
( ) ( )
. [ ]
A x
el t A
A
fuel
q r u X T
d
L r pq M t v Lr Y
dt
q pr w Lq Z
M t M M t
When
L Fuel dis from c g m
( + + ( (
(
( (
=
(
( (
(
( ( +

+
1
2 1 2
.
3. :
sin
sin cos
cos cos
4. :
( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) (
x
y
z
A
fuel
contribution of themassthat is not at C G
Gravity
g g
g g
g g
Torqe Equations
I p L
d
I q I I pr M t L w pv qu Lq Lpr M t L w Lq
dt
u
| u
| u
( (
( (
=
( (
( (

=
+ + + + +
var
2 2 1
.
) ( )
( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
fuel z A
the gravitytorqeof the fuel
contribution of ies mass
fuel
contribution of themassthat is not at C G
contributi
M t L g M
d
I r I I pq M t L v r pw Lr Lpq M t L Lr v
dt
=
+ + + + +
var
( )
fuel y A
the gravitytorqeof the fuel
on of ies mass
M t L g N + =
5. :
sin tan cos tan
cos sin
( sin cos ) / cos
Euler Equations
p q r
q r
q r
| | u u u
u | |
| | u
= + +
= +

January 2012

60

7. &
Body Wind
Wind Body
DCM DCM
cos( ) cos( )
sin( )
sin( ) cos( )
B w
W
B B w
B w
U V
DCM V V
W V
o |
|
o |
=
1
1
tan ( )
sin ( )
b
b B
W
b
W
W
U
DCM
V
V
o
|
6. &
Body Inertial
Inertial Body
DCM DCM
January 2012

61
AMRAAM Missile (Trim Flight 1000m)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
x 10
4
Time [sec]
D
i
s
t
a
n
c
e

[
m
]
AMRAAM Missile Flight Simulation Parameters
Dref= 0.178 [m] Initial Missile Mass=157 [Kg]
Evader Speed =300 [m/s] Pursuer Speed =300 [m/s]
Altitude =1000 [m]
Runing Time until Impact = 25.151 [Sec] For MIN Missile Speed= 500 [m/Sec]
Maximum Range for "Head On" Evader= 25.9691 [Km]
Maximum Range for Evader In Chase = 10.8785 [Km]

Pursuer
Chase Evader
Head ON Evader
Missile
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
0
500
1000
1500
Time [Sec]
M
i
s
s
i
l
e

V
e
l
o
c
e
t
y

[
m
/
S
e
c
]
Missile Speed Vs. Time
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
-10
0
10
20
30
Time [Sec]
M
i
s
s
i
l
e

L
o
n
g
i
t
u
d
i
n
a
l

A
c
c
e
l
a
r
a
t
i
o
n

[
g
]
Missile Longitudinal Accelaration Vs. Time
January 2012

62
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
115
120
125
130
135
140
145
150
155
160
Time [Sec]
M
i
s
s
i
l
e

M
a
s
s

[
K
g
]
Mass Vs. Time
0 20 40 60 80
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
Time [Sec]
P
a
r
a
s
i
t
i
c

D
r
a
g

[
N
]
Parasitic Drag Vs. Time
0 20 40 60 80
0.005
0.01
0.015
0.02
0.025
Time [Sec]
S
r
e
f
*
C
D
0
Sref*CDo Vs. Time
0 20 40 60 80
0
50
100
Time [Sec]
I
n
d
u
c
e
d

D
r
a
g

[
N
]
Induced Drag Vs. Time
0 20 40 60 80
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
Time [Sec]
T
o
t
a
l

D
r
a
g

[
N
]
Total Drag Vs. Time
January 2012

63

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
x 10
4
Time [Sec]
T
h
r
u
s
t

[
N
]
Thrust Vs. Time
January 2012

64
Graviton Missile (Trim Flight 1000m, Acceleration + 2 Pulses Thruster)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
0
2
4
6
8
x 10
4
Time [sec]
D
i
s
t
a
n
c
e

[
m
]
GRAVITON Flight Simulation Parameters
Altitude =1000 [m]

Pursuer
Chase Evader
Head ON Evader
Missile
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
0
500
1000
1500
Time [Sec]
M
i
s
s
i
l
e

V
e
l
o
c
e
t
y

[
m
/
S
e
c
]
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
-10
0
10
20
30
Time [Sec]
M
i
s
s
i
l
e

L
o
n
g
i
t
u
d
i
n
a
l

A
c
c
e
l
a
r
a
t
i
o
n

[
g
]
January 2012

65

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
80
90
100
110
120
130
140
150
160
170
180
Time [Sec]
M
i
s
s
i
l
e

M
a
s
s

[
K
g
]
Mass Vs. Time
0 50 100
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
Time [Sec]
P
a
r
a
s
i
t
i
c

D
r
a
g

[
N
]
0 50 100
0
0.005
0.01
0.015
0.02
Time [Sec]
S
r
e
f
*
C
D
0
Sref*CDo Vs. Time
0 50 100
0
20
40
60
80
Time [Sec]
I
n
d
u
c
e
d

D
r
a
g

[
N
]
0 50 100
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
Time [Sec]
T
o
t
a
l

D
r
a
g

[
N
]
Total Drag Vs. Time
January 2012

66

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
x 10
4
Time [Sec]
T
h
r
u
s
t

[
N
]
Thrust Vs. Time
January 2012

67
Data Comparison

Amraam Trim flight

Graviton Trim flight (2 pulses)
Altitude [m] Head On[km] Chase [km]

Altitude [m] Head On[km] Chase [km]
0 44.22 7.99

0 97.07 44.39
0000 43.79 00.09

0000 92.93 49.40
4000 40.02 04.04

4000 00.74 20.40
4000 44.0 04.32

4000 00.00 23.02
2000 43.04 03.09

2000 79.09 30.79
3000 20.00 09.00

3000 003.49 39.99
9000 22.73 07.04

9000 003.92 94.44
9000 30.34 40.39

9000 049.90 90.02
0000 39.72 42.49

0000 020.93 97.22
7000 92.4 49.30

7000 039.99 07.43
00000 94.99 40.40

00000 099.40 000.0
00000 04.20 43.34

00000 079.94 002.04
04000 73.22 20.40

04000 449.99 044.0
04000 000.07 29.0

04000 490.49 034
02000 049.44 33.00

02000 470.07 099.09
03000 022.04 94.0

03000 424.03 402.04
09000 094.73 90.90

09000 474.97 449.39
09000 004.90 00.77

09000 220.0 494.90
00000 404.99 70.30

00000 300.34 404.92
07000 444.29 000.00

07000
40000 420.0 007.40

40000
January 2012

68
AMRAAM: Chase & Head On

Graviton vs. AMRAAM: Chase & Head On

January 2012

69
Special Versions of Graviton:

- Acceleration Only.
- Acceleration + 4 Pulses.
- Ramjet.

January 2012

70
Graviton Missile (Trim Flight 1000m ,Acceleration Only)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
x 10
4
Time [sec]
D
i
s
t
a
n
c
e

[
m
]
Altitude =1000 [m]

Pursuer
Chase Evader
Head ON Evader
Missile
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
0
1000
2000
3000
Time [Sec]
M
i
s
s
i
l
e

V
e
l
o
c
e
t
y

[
m
/
S
e
c
]
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
-50
0
50
100
Time [Sec]
M
i
s
s
i
l
e

L
o
n
g
i
t
u
d
i
n
a
l

A
c
c
e
l
a
r
a
t
i
o
n

[
g
]
January 2012

71

0 50 100
0
1
2
3
x 10
4
Time [Sec]
P
a
r
a
s
i
t
i
c

D
r
a
g

[
N
]
0 50 100
0
0.005
0.01
0.015
0.02
Time [Sec]
S
r
e
f
*
C
D
0
Sref*CDo Vs. Time
0 50 100
0
50
100
150
Time [Sec]
I
n
d
u
c
e
d

D
r
a
g

[
N
]
0 50 100
0
1
2
3
x 10
4
Time [Sec]
T
o
t
a
l

D
r
a
g

[
N
]
Total Drag Vs. Time
0 1 2 3 4 5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
x 10
4
Time [Sec]
T
h
r
u
s
t

[
N
]
Thrust Vs. Time
January 2012

72
Graviton Missile (Trim Flight 1000m, Acceleration + 4 Pulses Thruster)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
0
2
4
6
8
x 10
4
Time [sec]
D
i
s
t
a
n
c
e

[
m
]
Altitude =1000 [m]

Pursuer
Chase Evader
Head ON Evader
Missile
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
0
500
1000
1500
Time [Sec]
M
i
s
s
i
l
e

V
e
l
o
c
e
t
y

[
m
/
S
e
c
]
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
-20
0
20
40
Time [Sec]
M
i
s
s
i
l
e

L
o
n
g
i
t
u
d
i
n
a
l

A
c
c
e
l
a
r
a
t
i
o
n

[
g
]
January 2012

73

0 50 100
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
Time [Sec]
P
a
r
a
s
i
t
i
c

D
r
a
g

[
N
]
0 50 100
0
0.005
0.01
0.015
0.02
Time [Sec]
S
r
e
f
*
C
D
0
Sref*CDo Vs. Time
0 50 100
0
50
100
Time [Sec]
I
n
d
u
c
e
d

D
r
a
g

[
N
]
0 50 100
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
Time [Sec]
T
o
t
a
l

D
r
a
g

[
N
]
Total Drag Vs. Time
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
80
90
100
110
120
130
140
150
160
170
180
Time [Sec]
M
i
s
s
i
l
e

M
a
s
s

[
K
g
]
Mass Vs. Time
January 2012

74

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
x 10
4
Time [Sec]
T
h
r
u
s
t

[
N
]
Thrust Vs. Time
January 2012

75
Graviton Missile (Trim Flight 1000m, Ramjet)
Basic assumptions of the simulation:
1. The drag coefficient C
D0
was doubled to compensate for roughly
modeled air intake of the engine.
2. A solid booster engine with a weight of 35kg accelerates the missile
to a speed of Mach 2.5.
3. Ramjet engine with 25kg of liquid fuel.
4. Missile's diameter was increased to 22cm.
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
0
2
4
6
8
10
x 10
4
Time [sec]
D
i
s
t
a
n
c
e

[
m
]
GRAVITON RamJet Flight Simulation Parameters
Solid fuel=30Kg Liquid Fuel(RamJet)=25Kg
Altitude =1000 [m]

Pursuer
Chase Evader
Head ON Evader
Missile
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
0
500
1000
1500
Time [Sec]
M
i
s
s
i
l
e

V
e
l
o
c
e
t
y

[
m
/
S
e
c
]
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
-20
0
20
40
Time [Sec]
M
i
s
s
i
l
e

L
o
n
g
i
t
u
d
i
n
a
l

A
c
c
e
l
a
r
a
t
i
o
n

[
g
]
January 2012

76
0 50 100 150
0
5000
10000
15000
Time [Sec]
P
a
r
a
s
i
t
i
c

D
r
a
g

[
N
]
0 50 100 150
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
Time [Sec]
S
r
e
f
*
C
D
0
Sref*CDo Vs. Time
0 50 100 150
-3000
-2000
-1000
0
1000
Time [Sec]
I
n
d
u
c
e
d

D
r
a
g

[
N
]
0 50 100 150
-5000
0
5000
10000
15000
Time [Sec]
T
o
t
a
l

D
r
a
g

[
N
]
Total Drag Vs. Time
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
110
120
130
140
150
160
170
180
Time [Sec]
M
i
s
s
i
l
e

M
a
s
s

[
K
g
]
Mass Vs. Time
January 2012

77

Ramjet results:
A Ramjet engine produces an increased range by 44% compared
to the range achieved by the solid booster with 2 pulse variant
(leading choice).
Due to problematic perfomrmance of a Ramjet engine while
manuvering, the final decision regarding it's integration will be
done during the next semester.

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
x 10
4
Time [Sec]
T
h
r
u
s
t

[
N
]
Thrust Vs. Time
January 2012

78
Developmental Configuration (Trim Flight 1000m)

configuration range
km
Range increase in
percentage
Original AMRAAM 00.09 -
AMRAAM engine extended by
20%
17.2 030%
3 pulse variant of the
AMRAAM engine
00.43 002.2%
"Graviton" acceleration only 40.02 409%
"Graviton" acceleration +
2 pulses
-chosen configuration-
49.40 243%
"Graviton" acceleration + 4
pulses
47.94 492%
"Graviton" Ramjet 34.49 270%

January 2012

79
Trajectory Flight Design Example:

Tragejtory "design" has lead to a range increase of about 25% for the
chosen missile configuration.

0 20 40 60 80 100 120
-2
0
2
4
6
8
10
x 10
4
Time [sec]
D
i
s
t
a
n
c
e

[
m
]
Altitude =1000 [m]

Pursuer
Chase Evader
Head ON Evader
Missile
0 2 4 6 8
x 10
4
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
Distance [m]
A
l
t
i
t
u
d
e

[
m
]
Runing Time Mission = 95.999 [Sec]
Final Range = 77.5977 [Km]
0 50 100
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
Time [Sec]
A
l
t
i
t
u
d
e

[
m
]
Altitude Vs. Time
0 50 100
260
270
280
290
Time [Sec]
T
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e

[
k
]
Temperature Vs. Time
0 50 100
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
Time [Sec]
d
e
n
s
i
t
y

[
K
g
/
m
3
]
Vs. Time

PDR Report0

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Descrizione originale:

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

PDR Report0

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

"Graviton"

Graviton Student Project

Graviton Student Project

Potrebbero piacerti anche