AIAA 2007-4264

A Review of Hypersonics Aerodynamics, Aerothermodynamics and

Plasmadynamics Activities within NASA's Fundamental Aeronautics
Program

Manuel D. Salas*
NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA 23681

The research program of the aerodynamics, aerothermodynamics and

plasmadynamics discipline of NASA’s Hypersonic Project is reviewed. Details are
provided for each of its three components: 1) development of physics-based models
of non-equilibrium chemistry, surface catalytic effects, turbulence, transition and
radiation; 2) development of advanced simulation tools to enable increased spatial
and time accuracy, increased geometrical complexity, grid adaptation, increased
physical-processes complexity, uncertainty quantification and error control; and 3)
establishment of experimental databases from ground and flight experiments to
develop better understanding of high-speed flows and to provide data to validate
and guide the development of simulation tools.

1. Introduction

NASA's Aeronautics Program has undergone a comprehensive restructuring in

order to pursue long-term, cutting-edge research for the benefit of the broad aeronautics
community. The Aeronautics Program consists of three programs, Fundamental
Aeronautics, Aviation Safety and Airspace Systems. Within its Fundamental Aeronautics
Program, NASA is conducting research in four broad projects that are known as: 1)
Subsonic Fixed Wing; 2) Subsonic Rotary Wing; 3) Supersonic; and 4) Hypersonics.
Within the Hypersonics Project several critical disciplines are being addressed. In this
paper the research plans of the Aerodynamics, Aerothermodynamics and
Plasmadynamics (AAP) discipline of the Hypersonics Project [1] are reviewed.

The need for NASA's Hypersonic Project is based on the fact that all access to
earth or planetary orbit, and all entry into the earth's atmosphere or any other planetary
body with an atmosphere from orbit or super-orbital velocity require flight through the
hypersonic regime. The severity of the hypersonic environment was painfully illustrated
when on February 1, 2003 a hole in the thermal protection system (TPS) of the left wing
of the Space Shuttle Columbia allowed hot gases to reach the interior of the craft and
destroyed the vehicle on reentry. If the United States wishes to continue to advance its
capabilities for space access, entry, and high-speed flight within any atmosphere,
improved understanding of the hypersonic flight regime, see Fig. 1, and development of
improved technologies to withstand and take advantage of this environment are required.
The objective of the research conducted under the AAP discipline is in direct support of

*
Associate Principal Investigator for Aerodynamics, Aerothermodynamics and Plasmadynamics of the
Hypersonics Project, Mail Stop 499.

1
 AIAA 2007-4264

developing and validating predictive tools to enable NASA critical missions such as the
Highly Reliable Reusable Launch Systems (HRRLS) and the High Mass Mars Entry
Systems (HMMES).

The AAP program of research has three major components: 1) development of

physics-based models of non-equilibrium chemistry, surface catalytic effects, turbulence,
transition and radiation; 2) development of advanced simulation tools to enable increased
spatial and time accuracy, increased geometrical complexity, grid adaptation, increased
physical-processes complexity, uncertainty quantification and error control; and 3)
establishment of experimental databases from ground and flight experiments to develop
better understanding of high-speed flows and to provide data to validate and guide the
development of simulation tools. The proposed effort lays the foundation for the efficient
use of high-fidelity tools in design and optimization, but work on this area is beyond the
current 5-years horizon of the project.

The AAP program is carried out with the support of four NASA centers, Langley,
Ames, Glenn and Dryden, in collaboration with several partnerships, such as the (Force
Application and Launch from the Continental U.S. (FALCON), Hypersonic International
Flight Research Experiment (HIFiRE), and Hypersonic Boundary Layer Transition (Hy-
BoLT) projects, and through research investments with academia and the private sector.

2. Highly Reliable Reusable Launch Systems

The HRRLS builds on work conducted under NASA’s Next Generation Launch
Technology Program [2]. The current state-of-the-art reliability of launch vehicles is
approximately 1 loss in 50 missions for expendable vehicles and less than 1 in 100 for
manned systems such as the Space Shuttle. The design space for these systems includes
rocket-propelled, hypersonic airbreathing (scramjet) and hybrid systems in single- and
two-stage configurations. With reliability as a figure of merit, airbreathing systems out
perform all rocket systems by orders of magnitude [3], but require a greater degree of
technology development and tight coupling of aerodynamics and propulsion. Critical to
HRRLS is the prediction of aerodynamic and aeroheating characteristics during stage
separation, which involves multiple bodies, flow separation and complex shock
interactions problems with localized heating, and problems associate with sharp leading
edges. Equally important is the design of TPS. Hypersonic air-breathing vehicles spend
most of their atmospheric flight at conditions that make the boundary layer transitional
[4]. TPS design is strongly dependent on detail knowledge of boundary layer transition
and surface heating loads.

3. High Mass Mars Entry Systems

The US Viking missions to Mars began in 1976 and every subsequent Mars
landing mission has been based on the technologies developed for Viking. The
aerodynamic shape of all of these missions has been a variation of the 70-degree sphere
cone aeroshell of the first Viking mission with a TPS based on the SLA-561V material
[5]. The Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) scheduled for launch in 2009 with an entry

2
 AIAA 2007-4264

mass of 2800 kg (0.75 tons) and based on Viking aeroshell shape and TPS material would
be pushing the limits of this technology. Current plans for human exploration call for an
increase of two orders of magnitude in landed mass, four orders of magnitude increase in
landing accuracy with the possibility of a landing site in the highlands of Mars. The
largest challenge posed by Mars entry is its thin atmosphere, approximately .01 the
Earth’s density. It is thick enough to create thermal heating problems, but too thin for
good safety margins for hypersonic deceleration and low terminal velocities. Another
challenge posed by the Mars atmosphere is our current poor knowledge of its variability
and composition with altitude and with the seasons. Designers of entry vehicles pay close
attention to the hypersonic ballistic coefficient:

m
β= ,
CD A

defined by the mass of the entry vehicle, its drag coefficient, and its reference area. They
like low ballistic coefficients to keep the heating rate low and permit hypersonic
deceleration at higher altitudes. The first Viking mission had a ballistic coefficient of 64
kg/m2 and MSL will have a ballistic coefficient of 115 kg/m2. The challenge of future
aeroshell shape design is to obtain high L/D to allow maneuvering while keeping β low.
High β and high diameter shells will incur additional aerothemodynamcs heating due to
radiation and boundary layer transition [6]. TPS design requires extensive experimental
validation due to current modeling uncertainties [7]. Aft-body TPS design is further
complicated by unsteady separated flow and wake interactions with reaction control
systems (RCS) thrusters. Typical flow features associated with a reentry shell shape are
shown on Fig. 2.

4. Physics-based models

In addition to the usual models of turbulence and transition that are required at
low speed, at hypersonic speed models are needed to characterize the equation of state,
chemical kinetics (equilibrium and nonequilibrium), thermal state of species, transport
properties of diffusion models, surface catalysis, radiation and others [8], [9], [2]. In what
follows we describe in some detail the AAP discipline focus on models for boundary
layer transition, chemical kinetics and radiation.

4.1 Laminar to turbulent transition modeling

The laminar boundary layer can be excited by disturbances originating on the

surface or in the free stream. The disturbances on the surface are usually created by
protuberances, roughness, waviness, rapid changes in curvature, degradation of the
surface due to gas-surface interactions such as ablation, and other effects such as surface
vibration, heating and suction. The free-stream disturbances include, among others,
atmospheric turbulence and vorticity fluctuations, particulates, acoustic waves and
electrostatic discharge. Under the right conditions, small-amplitude stationary and/or
non-stationary disturbances entering the boundary layer can amplify either exponentially
or algebraically until nonlinear effects come into play. Alternatively, the disturbances

3
 AIAA 2007-4264

may be sufficiently strong to begin with, such that the linear growth phase is bypassed
and turbulence occurs rather rapidly. The problem is further complicated by the fact that
several instability mechanisms are possible, among them: attachment line instability,
Mack’s first- and second-mode streamwise instabilities, crossflow instabilities in 3D
boundary layers, and Görtler instability over regions of concave curvature. For
hypersonic flows, the region between the onset of transition and the onset of fully
developed turbulent flow (i.e., the transition region) can be quite long, sometimes of the
order of the length of the vehicle. Because of the multitude of instability modes and the
various ways in which each of those may be triggered, a general model of laminar to
turbulent transition would probably never be realized.

Due to their limited range of validity, simple parameter correlations, such as

correlations based on Mach number, Reynolds number and some external-disturbance
parameter, are accompanied by a substantial degree of uncertainty in cases involving
excursions from the measurement database underlying those correlations [10].
Nonetheless, in many hypersonic applications, simple correlations are the only tools
available. A case in point is the tool developed for transition prediction in support of the
Space Shuttle return to flight [12]. This tool consists of a correlation of transition data for
protuberances and cavities, which was acquired in conventional ground facilities and
calibrated against the small amount of available flight data for the Space Shuttle. The tool
is currently being used for making recommendations as to fly-as-is or to repair the
surface damage prior to the return flight.

For flows dominated by a benign disturbance environment and linear growth of

instability modes, transition onset correlations based on the integrated amplification of
N
the wave amplitude (i.e., e type methods) offer the next level of sophistication [13]. The
N
e method represents to a large degree the state of the art of physics based transition
prediction methods across a wide range of Mach numbers. For transition scenarios
involving extensive regions of nonlinear disturbance growth leading up to strong
amplification of high-frequency secondary instabilities, more sophisticated methods
based on the Nonlinear Parabolized Stability Equations (NPSE) will be preferable [14].
The NPSE are obtained by parabolizing the nonlinear disturbance equations and, like the
Parabolized Navier Stokes Equations, can be solved by a spatial marching technique as
long as the stability problem is governed by downstream propagating signals. To obtain
further insight into the mechanism of transition (regardless of whether it is initiated by
linear instabilities or bypass mechanisms), one has to resort to Direct Numerical
Simulations (DNS) of transition [15]. For hypersonic flows, this represents a substantial
challenge.

As part of the ongoing AAP discipline effort, research is being conducted into all
of the methods outlined above with an emphasis on the linear and nonlinear PSE and
DNS methods. The AAP discipline is currently funding multi-year research efforts at
Stanford University and at the University of California, Los Angeles to develop and
validate DNS capability for transition due to discrete roughness, ablation effects, real-gas
effects, and surface suction and blowing. The expectations are that we will be able to
identify and characterize the key transition mechanisms in these cases, which could be

4
 AIAA 2007-4264

subsequently incorporated into simpler models. The drawback of this approach is the
need for accurate initial and boundary conditions and the restrictions on geometric
complexity and the magnitude of the Reynolds number due to algorithmic and hardware
limitations, respectively.

4.2 Chemical kinetics modeling

The simulation of real gas effects requires extensive chemical data to model the
chemical reactions, the internal energies and the interaction terms connecting them. In the
o o
Earth atmosphere O2 begins to dissociate at 2000 K, N2 begins dissociation at 4000 K,
o
O and N begin to ionize at 9000 K. Chemistry models and chemical databases for the
Earth and Martian atmospheres are available in the literature; however in many cases the
data contains large uncertainties. The reaction rate and internal energy transfer rate
constants are evaluated from experiments, models with adjustable parameters, or from ab
initio calculations that involve quantum chemistry calculations.

The current focus of the AAP discipline effort is to develop accurate databases for
N2, CO2, CO, CN and C2 chemistry. This effort is a cooperative effort lead by W. M.
Huo, of Huo Consulting, and NASA researchers. The effort is directed at a detailed study
of the chemistry of N2, CO2, CO, CN and C2 and the following studies are representative
of the effort:

• Calculation of energy transfer rates for N 2 (v1 , J1 ) + M → N 2 (v1′ , J1′ ) + M ,

where v and J denote the vibrational and rotational states and M includes N2,
N, O2, and O. In the case of M being N2 or O2, its (v, J) states are accounted
for explicitly. In the past these energy transfer rate constants have been
estimated using simplified models. Accurate values are lacking.
• Calculation of dissociation rate constants for N 2 (v1 , J1 ) + M → N + N + M . M
includes N2, N, N+, O2, and O. For N2 dissociation rates Candler and
Olejniczak [16] have shown that over the temperature range of interest
( 5000 − 10000 K) there is an order of magnitude uncertainty in the rate
o o

constant of various databases.

• Calculation of dissociation rate constants for CO2 + Ar → CO + O + Ar and for
CO + O → C + O2 and CO + O → C + O + O . Radiation from the products of
these reactions, CO, C and O, is prominent in Mars entry. The study of CO2
dissociation is to determine if the radiative state of CO can be produced
directly by the dissociation process, a feature not tested by previous
experiments. There is an order of magnitude uncertainty in the experimental
data for the second and third reactions.
• Calculation of electron impact excitation cross sections of selected states of
the ablation products of CN and C2 and calculation of electron impact
ionization cross sections for N, O, N2, O2, and NO. At present the CN
excitation cross section is assumed to be the same as NO and C2 is not
accounted for. For electron impact ionization, current data for atoms are based

5
 AIAA 2007-4264

on classical estimates and have large uncertainties. Current models do not

account for molecular ionization.
• Studying the coupling of vibration, translation and free electrons and the
choice of vibrational and free electron temperatures in high enthalpy N2 gas.
Currently several models are available for relating vibrational and free
electron temperatures resulting in different radiation intensities. This study
will help determine the best model.

The calculations described above are based on solving the Schrödinger equation
at a large number of nuclear geometries (20,000 to 30,000 points) to determine the
interaction potential. An analytic fit of the discrete interaction potential is then used in the
Hamilton’s equation describing the nuclear motion to obtain the reaction rates. Quasi-
classical trajectory calculations based on the Hamilton’s equation are used to bypass the
slow convergence of the Schrödinger equation in the calculation of energy transfer
among the vibrational energy levels in the N2- N2 system, see [17] for more details.

4.3 Radiation modeling

The need for accurate prediction of radiative heating was expressed by Gnoffo
[9]: “Advanced materials for thermal protection systems in conjunction with large
aerobrake diameters offer the possibility of nonablating, reusable aerobrakes. The large
diameters reduce convective heating but increase radiative heating. However, the present
uncertainty in nonequilibrium radiative heating component of the total heating to such
aerobrakes is sufficiently large to severely compromise design options for reusable TPS.”
Radiative heating calculations require the solution of the radiative transfer equation
(RTE) [18], a five-dimensional integro-differential equation, at thousands of spectral
frequencies, and since radiation is attenuated as it travels through the flow, the radiation
intensity has to be closely coupled to every point in the flow field line of sight. As might
be expected, the solution of the RTE coupled to the flow solver is both mathematically
complex and computationally intensive. In order to reduce the computational complexity
most radiation heating calculations today use simple line-of-sight or tangent-slab (one-
dimensional model with properties varying only in the transverse direction) approximate
models [19], [20]. To advance the state-of-the-art, the AAP discipline is supporting
research at the Pennsylvania State University to develop an efficient, high fidelity
radiation code. The key components of this effort are:

• Implementation of the full-spectrum k-distribution method [21]. This method

originated in the atmospheric and combustion sciences. It uses a reordering of the
absorption coefficient to reduce the number of RTE evaluations by 4 to 5 orders
of magnitude without affecting the accuracy of the results.
• A spherical harmonics RTE solver will be tightly coupled into both Direct
Simulation Monte Carlo (DSMC) solvers and Navier-Stokes solvers. The
spherical harmonics method is a high-order spectral method for the solution of the
RTE [22].

6
 AIAA 2007-4264

• An overlay technique will be developed to model spallation particulates in the

Navier-Stokes solvers. This technique has been used to study soot transport on
rocket plumes [23].
• The new capability will be validated using data from Stardust and Apollo
missions.

5. Simulation tool development

CFD simulations of vehicles flying at hypersonic speeds are extremely

challenging. In addition, since we have “limited ability to adequately represent
hypersonic flow experimentally, the challenge for hypersonic CFD predictions become
even more difficult because substantial experimental data for a variety of flows and flight
conditions are not available” [4] for validation. Among the outstanding issues in
hypersonic flow simulation are: incorporation of boundary layer transition location
models, simulation of ablation and other gas-surface interactions, accurate modeling of
radiation (see §4.3), accurate simulation of time-dependent separated flows, turbulent
transport in the presence of real gas effects, handling of complex geometries and control
surfaces, simulation of RCS jets, accurate simulation of localized heating due to jet and
shock impingement, grid adaptation to resolve critical flow features such as shocks and
shear layers, and quantification of errors and modeling uncertainties. Many of these
needed capabilities further complicate the numerical techniques needed by making the
equations extremely stiff and difficult to integrate in time.

Today the state-of-the-art for hypersonic flow simulations consists of second

order discretization, shock capturing, schemes on structured grids with some limited, but
rapidly advancing, capabilities with unstructured grids. Representatives of the structured
grid codes are the LAURA (Langley Aerothermodynamic Upwind Relaxation Algorithm)
[24] and DPLR (Data-Parallel Line Relaxation) [25] codes. Both of these codes are
highly advanced, highly tested and both are parallel implicit methods using multi-block
grid topology. The US3D (UnStructured 3D) [26] code represents the state-of-the-art for
unstructured codes for hypersonic flows. Two common problems of these state-of-the-art
codes are: 1) high levels of dissipation making them poor candidates for Large Eddy
Simulation (LES); and 2) inadequate grid convergence properties. For a detailed
comparison of forebody convective and radiative heating predictions capabilities for
these three codes see [27].

To advance the current state-of-the-art, the AAP discipline is supporting research

in h-p multigrid, unstructured, discontinuous Galerkin methods, high-order unstructured
spectral difference methods using Runge-Kutta and Newton-Krylov schemes for time
advancement, adaptive numerical dissipation control, adaptive grid refinement and
uncertainty quantification and control. The adaptive grid refinement and uncertainty
quantification work leverages adjoint and error estimation efforts that are common to
other Projects within Fundamental Aerodynamics. It is expected that the new methods
will result in substantial gains in computational efficiency, flexibility and reliability for
LES and DNS simulations.

7
 AIAA 2007-4264

Work is also underway to advance the state-of-the-art capabilities in modeling the

non-continuum flow regime. Today DSMC [28] is the main tool for simulation in this
flow regime. Research is under way to develop new methods that are more efficient than
DSMC and that can bridge the gap between the continuum (Navier-Stokes simulation)
and non-continuum (particle simulation) [29].

The CFD work is being conducted at the Langley, Ames and Glenn Research
Centers and in collaboration with the University of Minnesota and the University of
Wyoming. For more details see Ref. [30].

6. Experimental databases

Experimental work in ground base facilities and in flight in support of modeling

and CFD validation is being conducted across a wide range of topics. Three of these
activities are described here.

6.1 Experimental studies of base-flow about blunt reentry vehicles

The AAP discipline is supporting research at the LENS II CALSPAN facility [31]
to obtain laminar, transitional and base flows on large-scale model sizes of HMMES-like
reentry capsules. The LENS II facility operates in the Mach number range of 3 to 10 and
Reynolds number range of 105 to 1010 per meter with a test time of up to 100 ms. The
objective is to evaluate and improve current models of transitional and turbulent flows
and flow chemistry used to predict aerothermal loads in air, carbon dioxide, and other
planetary environments. The tests planned will include studies of the effects of the
support system. To this end, experiments with conventional sting-mounting, see Fig. 3,
wire-mounting and free-flying support will be conducted. Measurements of surface
pressure and surface heat transfer are planned. Both mean and fluctuation measurements
are planned to provide data for both Reynolds averaged and LES simulations. Schlieren
video photography will provide flow field diagnostic information about shock wave
structure and global flow field features in the wake of the capsule. The effects of RCS
jets in all support arrangements, using nitric-oxide as a gas tracer, will be investigated. In
collaboration with NASA, planar laser-induced fluorescence [32] diagnostic testing is
planned.

6.2 Experimental studies of isolated roughness

The AAP discipline is supporting research at the hypersonic quiet-flow Ludwieg

tube wind tunnel [33] of Purdue University. The tunnel is the only operational high-
Reynolds number (11.5x106 per meter) hypersonic (Mach 6) quiet tunnel in the world.
The tunnel provides a 6 to 10 seconds runtime about once per hour with a typical quiet
interval of about 7 seconds, the interval depends on the stagnation pressure. The planned
experiment will place a roughness element within the laminar boundary layer of the
tunnel wall at a location of about 74 inches from the throat. The boundary-layer profile at
this location is already known from a previous study [34]. The boundary layer thickness
o
is about 3/4 inches at 20-psia stagnation pressure and at a stagnation temperature of 160

8
 AIAA 2007-4264

C at this location. At 140-psia stagnation pressure the boundary layer thickness reduces to
3/10 inches. The thickness of the boundary layer is about an order of magnitude larger
than would normally be observed on a model, enabling detailed measurements of the
flow field profiles. The incoming boundary layer will have some disturbances in it, even
though it is laminar. These disturbances could include 1st-mode, 2nd-mode and Görtler
waves. Prior to the experiment, the boundary layer will be surveyed and the effects of
these disturbances will be characterized. The roughness element will sit on a metal blank
fitted to a window opening. Additional windows allow for observation of the wake
behind the element. Hot wire, fast dynamic pressure transducers, temperature sensitive
paint and oil flows will be used to characterize the flow field. This effort will be
conducted in collaboration with researchers at NASA, the University of Minnesota and
the University of California at Los Angeles and will provide validation data for modeling
and numerical studies.

6.3 Hypersonic boundary layer transition (Hy-BoLT) experiment

NASA has designed a wedge-like nose cone with rounded shoulder, see Fig. 4, to
fly on the first flight of the ATK-GASL ALV X-1 rocket, see Fig. 5. This rocket has a
gross weight of 43,000 lbs, a length of 54 ft, a diameter of 50 inches, and can achieve a
maximum Mach number of 12.6. The flight is expected to take place in October 2007
from NASA’s facility at Wallops Island, Virginia. The wedge-like nose carries on each
side a plate of about 24 inches by 90 inches which will be instrumented to measure
boundary layer transition. One side of the wedge will be used to study natural boundary
layer transition. Numerical simulations indicate that the surface streamlines will turn
towards the shoulders of the wedge, because of the lower pressure on this conical region.
Due to the combined effect of cold wall and leading edge bluntness, the growth of 1st-
mode and 2nd-mode instabilities will not be great enough to cause boundary layer
transition, however, the simulations predict that in the Mach number range of 3 to 4.5 (at
about 33 seconds to 44 seconds into the flight) the laminar boundary layer will transition
due to cross-flow instability [35]. The transition line, located towards the shoulders, is
expected to move from about 20 inches from the nose at Mach 3 to about 40 inches at
Mach 4. The plate will be heavily instrumented with thermocouples, dynamic pressure
gages, hot film gages and a boundary layer pressure rake. High-frequency
instrumentation in the range of 20 to 100 kHz will be used to identify velocity
fluctuations and pressure disturbances associated with the cross-flow instability. The data
will be reduced in flight by an onboard computer and transmitted to the ground. On the
other side of the wedge a roughness transition experiment will be conducted to provide
additional data to the boundary layer Shuttle return to flight tool set [12]. This experiment
will take place at about Mach 7, or about 55 seconds into the flight. Transition on this
side will be triggered by 3 protuberances located at about 20 inches from the nose of the
wedge. One protuberance will be 5x5x0.5 inches in dimension, another will be 5x.5x.05
inches in dimension and the last one will be a cavity 2.75x0.92 inches and 0.38 inches
deep. A total of 99 strategically located thermocouples will be used to map the transition
zone associated with each trip. For more details on this and other experiments see
References [36] and [37].

9
 AIAA 2007-4264

7. Summary

The Aerodynamic, Aerothermodynamics, and Plasmadynamics discipline of

NASA’s Hypersonic Project has an extensive research effort to develop and validate
predictive tools to enable NASA critical missions such as the Highly Reliable Reusable
Launch Systems and the High Mass Mars Entry Systems. In this review some of the
critical components of this effort have been described including some of its modeling,
computational and experimental activities. The program is still evolving and additional
collaborative efforts both through partnerships with other government agencies, industry
and universities are expected in the coming years.

References

[1] Mansour, N., Pittman, J. and Olson, L., “Fundamental Aeronautics Hypersonics
Project at NASA: Overview”, AIAA Paper No. AIAA-2007-4263, June 2007.
[2] Cockrell, C. E.., Jr., “Aerosciences, Aero-Propulsion and Flight Mechanics
Technology Development for NASA’s Next Generation Launch Technology Program”,
AIAA Paper No. 2003-6948, AIAA International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems
and Technology Conference, Norfolk, VA, December 2003.
[3] Curran, F., et al “The Benefits of Hypersonic Airbreathing Launch Systems for
Access to Space”, AIAA Paper No. AIAA-2003-5265, 39th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE
Joint Propulsion Conference, Huntsville, AL, July 2003.
[4] Bertin, J. J. and Cummings, R. M., “Critical Hypersonic Aerothermodynamic
Phenomena”, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 2006, 38, pp129-157.
[5] Braum, R. D. and Manning, R. M., “Mars Exploration Entry, Descent and Landing
Challenges” JSR, Vol. 44, No. 2, March-April 2007.
[6] Wright, M., Edquist, K. and Hollis, B., “Status of Aerothermal Modeling for Current
ad Future Mars Exploration Missions”, Paper 428, 2006 IEEE Aerospace Conference,
Big Sky, MT, March 2006.
[7] Bose, D. and Wright, M. J., “Uncertainty Analysis of Laminar Aeroheating
Predictions for Mars Entries”, AIAA Paper No. AIAA-2005-4682, June 2005.
[8] Tirsky, G. A., “Up-to-date Gasdynamic Models of Hypersonic Aerodynamics and
Heat Transfer with Real Gas Properties”, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 1993, 25, pp 151-181.
[9] Cheng, H. K, “Perspectives on Hypersonic Viscous Flow Research”, Annu. Rev.
Fluid Mech. 1993, 25, pp 455-484.
[10] Gnoffo, P. A., “Planetary-entry Gas Dynamics”, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 1999, 31,
pp 459-494.
[11] Schneider, S. P., “Hypersonic Laminar-Turbulent Transition on Circular Cones and
Scramjet Forebodies”, Progress in Aerospace Sciences, 40, 2004, pp 1-50.
[12] Berry, S. A, et al, “Overview of Boundary Layer Transition Research in Support of
Orbiter Return to Flight”, AIAA Paper No. AIAA-2006-2918, 9th AIAA/ASME Joint
Thermophysics and Heat Transfer Conference, San Francisco, CA, June 2006.
[13] Reed, H. L., Saric, W. S. and Arnal, D., “Linear Stability Theory Applied to
Boundary Layers”, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 1996, 28, pp 389-428.
[14] Herbert, T., “Parabolized Stability Equations”, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 1997, 29, pp
245-283.

10
 AIAA 2007-4264

[15] Kleiser, L. and Zang, T., “Numerical Simulation of Transition in Wall-Bounded

Shear Flows”, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 1991, 23, pp 495-537.
[16] Candler, G. V. and Olejniczak, J., “Nitrogen Dissociation Rates in Complex
Hypersonic Flows”, AIAA Paper No. AIAA-1997-2500, June 1997.
[17] Schwenke, D. W., “Calculation of Rate Constants for the Three-Body
Recombination of H2 in the Presence of H2”, J. of Chem. Phys., 89, 1988, pp 2076-2091.
[18] Modest, M. F., “Radiative Heat Transfer”, 2nd Edition, Academic Press, NY, 2003.
[19] Park, C., “Calculation of Nonequilibrium Radiation in the Flight Regimes of
Aeroassisted Orbital Transfer Vehicles”, Thermal Design of Aeroassisted Orbital
Transfer Vehicles, 96, 1985, pp 395-418.
[20] Hartung, L. C., “Predicting Radiative Heat Transfer in Thermochemical
Nonequilibrium Flow Fields”, NASA TM 4564, 1994.
[21] Modest, M. F., “Narrow-Band and Full-Spectrum k-Distribution for Radiative Heat
Transfer”, J. Quant. Spectrosc. Radiat. Transfer, 76, 2003, pp 69-83.
[22] Yang, J. and Modest, M. F., “Elliptic PDE Formulation of High-Order P-N
Approximations for Radiative Transfer”, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, to appear, April
2006.
[23] Viswanath, K., et al, “Investigation of Soot Combustion in Underexpanded Jet
Plume Flows”, J. Thermoph. Heat Transfer, 19, 2005, pp 282-293.
[24] Gnoffo, P., “Upwind-Biased Point-Implicit Relaxation Strategies for Viscous
Hypersonic Flows”, AIAA Paper No. AIAA-89-1972, June 1989.
[25] Wright, M., Candler, G. V. and Bose, D., “Data-Parallel Line Relaxation Method for
the Navier-Stokes Equations”, AIAA J., 36, 1998, pp 1603-1609.
[26] Nompelis, I., Drayna, T. W. and Candler, G. V., “A Parallel Unstructured Implicit
Solver for Hypersonic Reacting Flow Simulation”, AIAA Paper No. AIAA-2005-4867,
June 2005.
[27] Hash, D., et al, “FIRE II Calculations for Hypersonic Nonequilibrium
Aerothermodynamics Code Verification: DPLR, LAURA and US3D”, AIAA Paper No.
AIAA-2007-005, January 2007.
[28] Bird, G. A., “Molecular Gas Dynamics and the Direct Simulation of Gas Flows”,
Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1994.
[29] Barth, T., “On Discontinuous Galerkin Approximations of Boltzmann Moment
Systems with Levermore Closure”, CMAME, Vol.195, 2006, pp 3311-3330.
[30] Yoon, S., Gnoffo, P., White, J., and Thomas, J., “Computational Challenges in
Hypersonic Flow Simulations”, AIAA Paper No. AIAA-2007-4265, June 2007.
[31] Holden, M. S. and Parker, R. A., “LENS Hypervelocity Tunnels and Application to
Vehicle Testing at Duplicated Flight Conditions”, Chapter 4 of Advanced Hypersonic
Test Facilities, Lu, F. K. and Marren, D. E. Eds. AIAA Progress in Astronautics and
Aeronautics Series, Vol. 198, Reston, VA, 2002.
[32] Danehy, P., et al, “Planar Laser-Induced Fluorescence (PLIF) Investigation of
Hypersonic Flowfields in a Mach 10 Wind Tunnel”, AIAA Paper No. AIAA-2006-3442,
June 2006.
[33] Schneider, S. P., “Laminar-Flow Design for a Mach-6 Quiet-Flow Wind Tunnel
Nozzle”, Current Science, 76, September 2000, pp 70-799.
[34] Skoch, C., “Disturbances From Shock/Boundary-Layer Interactions Affecting
Upstream Hypersonic Flows”, Ph. D. Thesis, Purdue University, December 2005.

11
 AIAA 2007-4264

N
[35] Malik, M., “eMalik3D: An e Code for Three-Dimensional Flow Over Finite Swept
Wings”, High Technology Report No. HTC-9502, April 1995.
[36] Berry, S., Chen, F., Wilder, M. and Reda, D., “Boundary Layer Transition
Experiments in Support of the Hypersonics Program”, AIAA Paper No. AIAA-2007-
4266, June 2007.
[37] Horvath, T., Berry, S., Blanchard, R., Schwartz, R., Ross, M. and Tack, S., “Shuttle
Entry Imaging Using Infrared Thermography”, AIAA Paper No. AIAA-2007-4267, June
2007.

12
 AIAA 2007-4264

Figure 1. Flow regimes encountered in hypersonic flow as a function of vehicle speed

and altitude. For reference a typical Space Shuttle trajectory is drawn.

Figure 2. Typical flow features of a reentrycapsule.

13
 AIAA 2007-4264

o
Figure 3. MSL 70 sphere-cone model for test at the LENS II CALSPAN facility.

Figure 4. Hy-BoLT nose cone configuration.

Figure 5. Artist rendition of Hy-BoLT nose cone riding on ATK GASL’s ALV-X1
rocket.

14