You are on page 1of 422

Professional Development

Short Course on

Tactical Missile Design

Eugene L. Fleeman
Tactical Missile Design
E-mail: GeneFleeman@msn.com
Web Site: http://genefleeman.home.mindspring.com

2/24/2008

ELF

Outline
Introduction / Key Drivers in the Design Process
Aerodynamic Considerations in Tactical Missile Design
Propulsion Considerations in Tactical Missile Design
Weight Considerations in Tactical Missile Design
Flight Performance Considerations in Tactical Missile Design
Measures of Merit and Launch Platform Integration
Sizing Examples
Development Process
Summary and Lessons Learned
References and Communication
Appendices ( Homework Problems / Classroom Exercises,
Example of Request for Proposal, Nomenclature, Acronyms,
Conversion Factors, Syllabus )
2/24/2008

ELF

Emphasis Is on Physics-Based, Analytical Sizing


of Aerodynamic Configuration
Area

Emphasis

Aero Configuration Sizing


Aero Stability & Control
Aero Flight Performance
Propulsion
Structure
Weight
Warhead
Miss Distance
Cost
Additional Measures of Merit
Launch Platform Integration

Primary Emphasis

Seeker, Sensors, and Electronics

Secondary Emphasis

Power Supply

Tertiary Emphasis

Safe, Arm, and Fuzing


2/24/2008

ELF

Not Addressed

Tactical Missiles Are Different from Fighter Aircraft


Tactical Missile
Characteristics

Example of
State-of-the-Art

Axial Acceleration
Maneuverability
Speed / altitude
Dynamic pressure
Size
Weight
Production cost
Observables
Range
Kills per use
Target acquisition
Superior
2/24/2008

Comparison With
Fighter Aircraft

AGM-88
AA-11
SM-3
PAC-3
Javelin
FIM-92
GBU-31
AGM-129
AGM-86
Storm Shadow
LOCAAS
Better

Comparable
ELF

Inferior
4

Aero Configuration Sizing Parameters


Emphasized in This Course

Nose Fineness

Propulsion Sizing /
Propellant or Fuel

Diameter

Stabilizer
Geometry / Size

Wing Geometry / Size

Thrust
Profile

Flight Conditions ( , M, h )
Flight Control
Geometry / Size

2/24/2008

ELF

Length

Conceptual Design Process Requires Evaluation


of Alternatives and Iteration
Mission / Scenario
Definition

Update
Initial

Weapon
Requirements,
Trade Studies
and Sensitivity
Analysis
Launch Platform
Integration

Revised
Trades / Eval

Initial
Reqs

Alt
Concepts

Initial Carriage /
Launch

Effectiveness / Eval

Baseline
Selected
Iteration

Refine
Weapons
Req

Weapon Concept
Design Synthesis

Alternate Concepts Select Preferred Design Eval / Refine

Technology
Assessment and
Dev Roadmap

Initial Tech
Tech Trades

Initial
Revised
Roadmap Roadmap

Note: Typical conceptual design cycle is 3 to 9 months. House of Quality may be used to translate customer requirements
to engineering characteristics. DOE may be used to efficiently evaluate the broad range of design solutions.

2/24/2008

ELF

Missile Concept Synthesis Requires Evaluation


of Alternatives and Iteration
Define Mission Requirements
Alt Mission
Establish Baseline
Alt Baseline
Aerodynamics
Propulsion
Weight

Resize / Alt Config / Subsystems / Tech

Trajectory
Meet
Performance?

No

Yes
Measures of Merit and Constraints

No

Yes
2/24/2008

ELF

Examples of Air-Launched Missile Missions /


Types
Air-to-air

Example SOTA

Short range ATA. AA-11.

Maneuverability

Medium range ATA. AIM-120.

Performance / weight

Long range ATA. Meteor.

Range

10 feet

Air-to-surface
Short range ATS. AGM-114.

Versatility

Medium range ATS. AGM-88.

Speed

Long range ATS. Storm Shadow. Modularity

Permission of Missile Index. Copyright 1997Missile.Index All Rights Reserved


2/24/2008

ELF

Examples of Surface-Launched Missile Missions /


Types
Surface-to-surface

Example SOTA

Short range STS. Javelin.

Size

Medium range STS. MGM-140.

Modularity

Long range STS. BGM-109.

Range

10 feet

Surface-to-air

2/24/2008

Short range STA. FIM-92.

Weight

Medium range STA. PAC-3.

Accuracy

Long range STA. SM-3.

High altitude

Permission of Missile.Index. Copyright 1997Missile.Index All Rights Reserved


ELF

Aero Configuration Sizing Has High Impact on


Mission Requirements
Impact on Weapon Requirement
Aero Measures of Merit
Aero Configuration
Sizing Parameter

Other Measures of Merit

Range / Time to RobustMiss ObservWeight Maneuver Target


ness
Lethality Distance ables Survivability Cost

Constraint
Launch
Platform

Nose Fineness
Diameter
Length
Wing Geometry / Size
Stabilizer Geometry / Size
Flight Control
Geometry / Size
Propellant / Fuel
Thrust Profile
Flight Conditions
( , M, h )
Very Strong
2/24/2008

Strong

Moderate
ELF

Relatively Low
10

Example of Assessment of Alternatives to


Establish Future Mission Requirements
Measures of Merit
Alternatives for Precision Strike

Cost per
Shot

Number of
Launch Platforms
TCT
Required
Effectiveness

Future Systems
Standoff platforms / hypersonic missiles
Overhead loitering UCAVs / hypersonic missiles
Overhead loitering UCAVs / light weight PGMs
Current Systems
Penetrating aircraft / subsonic PGMs

Standoff platforms / subsonic missiles


Note:

Superior

Good

Average

Poor

Note: C4ISR targeting state-of-the-art for year 2010 projected to provide sensor-to-shooter / weapon connectivity
time of less than 2 m and target location error ( TLE ) of less than 1 m for motion suspended target.
2/24/2008

ELF

11

C4ISR Tactical Satellites and UAVs Have High


Impact on Mission Capability

LaunchPlatforms
Platforms
Launch

Off-boardSensors
Sensors
Off-board

FighterAircraft
Aircraft
Fighter
Bomber
Bomber

TacticalSatellite
Satellite
Tactical
UAV
UAV

Ship/ Submarine
/ Submarine
Ship
UCAV
UCAV

PrecisionStrike
StrikeWeapons
Weapons
Precision
HypersonicSOW
SOW
Hypersonic
SubsonicPGM
PGM
Subsonic
SubsonicCM
CM
Subsonic

TimeCritical
CriticalTargets
Targets
Time
TBM/ TEL
/ TEL
TBM
SAM
SAM

C3
C3
OtherStrategic
Strategic
Other

Note: C4ISR targeting state-of-the-art for year 2010 projected to provide sensor-to-shooter / weapon connectivity
time of less than 2 m and target location error ( TLE ) of less than 1 m for motion suspended target.
2/24/2008

ELF

12

Example of System-of-Systems Analysis to


Develop Future Mission Requirements
t1

TBM Launch
Launch Pt Rcvd

t2

100

t3

Hypersonic
Missile Launch

HM Intercept
at XXX nm

Altitude 1000 ft

t0

3. Alt / Speed / RCS Required


For Survivability

60
40
20
0

4. Lethality
W/H W3 > W2
W/H W2 > W1
Warhead W1

Lethality / Concrete
Penetration ( ft )

Time, Min

Range 3 > R2
Range 2 > R1
Range 1

3-4

1-2

120
100
80
60
40
20
0

4000
6000
2000
Average Speed to Survive, fps

2- 3

Cruise Missile Launch

2. Time To Target

RCS1

80

5. Campaign Model Weapons


Mix ( CM, Hypersonic
Missile ) Results
RCS2 > RCS1
( eg., Korean Scenario )

4-5

1. Compare Targeting of Subsonic Cruise Missile


Versus Hypersonic Missile

50
40
30
20
10

2/24/2008

1000

2000
3000 4000
Average Speed, fps

5000

ELF

1000 2000
3000
Impact Velocity, fps

4000

Selected For All:


Value of Speed /
Range
Time Urgent Targets
High Threat
Environments
Buried Targets
Launch Platform
Alternatives
Operating and
Attrition Cost in
Campaign
Weapon Cost in
Campaign
Mix of Weapons in
Campaign
Cost Per Target Kill
C4ISR Interface

13

Example of Technological Surprise Driving


Immediate Mission Requirements

Sidewinder AIM-9L ( IOC 1977 )


Performance
+/- 25 deg off boresight

Archer AA-11 / R-73 ( IOC 1987 )

6.5 nm range

Performance
> +/- 60 deg off boresight
20 nm range

New Technologies
TVC
Split canard
Near-neutral static margin
+/- 90 deg gimbal seeker
Helmet mounted sight

2/24/2008

ELF

Note: AIM-9L maneuverability shortfall compared to


Archer drove sudden development of AIM-9X.
14

Missile Concept Synthesis Requires Evaluation


of Alternatives and Iteration
Define Mission Requirements
Alt Mission
Establish Baseline
Alt Baseline
Aerodynamics
Propulsion
Weight

Resize / Alt Config / Subsystems / Tech

Trajectory
Meet
Performance?

No

Yes
Measures of Merit and Constraints

No

Yes
2/24/2008

ELF

15

Baseline Design Benefits and Guidelines


Benefits of Baseline Design
Allows simple, conceptual design methods to be used with good
accuracy
Well documented benchmark / configuration control / traceability
between cause and effect
Balanced subsystems
Gives fast startup / default values for design effort
Provides sensitivity trends for changing design
Baselines can cover reasonable range of starting points
Baselines can normally be extrapolated to 50% with good accuracy

Guidelines
Dont get locked-in by baseline
Be creative
Project state-of-the-art ( SOTA ) if baseline has obsolete subsystems
Sensors and electronics almost always need to be updated

2/24/2008

ELF

16

Example of Missile Baseline Data


Configuration Drawing

Weight / Geometry

11.6

37

11.5

Body
16.5

Transport Air Duct


Payload Bay

Fore-body

Aftbody
Engine

Tail ( Exposed )

126.0

76.5
Mid-body

Aft-body

Area ( 2 panels ), ft2


Wetted area ( 4 panels ), ft2
Aspect ratio ( exposed )
Taper ratio
Root chord, in
Span, in. ( exposed )
L.E. sweep, deg
M.A.C., in
Thickness ratio
X MAC, in
Y MAC, in ( from root chord )

Tail Cone
159.0

171.0

Note: Dimensions are in inches

Reference values:

Source: Bithell, R.A. and Stoner, R.C. Rapid Approach for Missile Synthesis, Vol. II, Air-breathing
Synthesis Handbook, AFWAL TR 81-3022, Vol. II, March 1982.

Reference area, ft2


Reference length, ft

Aerodynamics

C
0
0

3
2
M, Mach Number

C
D

4.0

.40

-.4

.1

-.8

-1.2

Mach

.30

1.5

0
.20

4 2.0

M, Mach Number

3.0
4.0

4.0
3.0
2.0

12

1.5

16

, Angle of Attack ~ deg

Mach

.10

-1.6

1.2

4
8
12
, Angle of Attack ~ deg

1.2

Mach
1.2
1.5
2.0

3.0

3.0
4.0

2.0

Isp, Specific Impulse, sec

.05

SRef = 2.264 ft2


LRef = Dref = 1.698 ft
Xcg @ Sta 82.5 in.

.2

Axial Force Coefficient, CA

Pitching Moment Coefficient, Cm

C
N ~ per deg

.10

1,000

15,000

500

Note:
=1

142.5
142.5

31.6
31.0
37.0
70.0
1,262.6
476.0
1,738.6
31.0
11.5
1,781.1
449.0
2,230.1

165.0
165.0
164.0
157.2
81.8
87.0
83.2
164.0
126.0
84.9
142.5
96.5

Ramjet Engine Station Identification

1.0

0
0

12

16

Rocket Propulsion

h = SL

Note:
=1

10

M, Mach Number

, Angle of Attack ~ deg

0
0

h = 40K ft

1.0

2.0

Note: Constant altitude flyout

( ISP )Booster = 250 sec

20

h = 20K ft

h = 60K ft

h = 80K ft

2.0

ML = 0.80
constant altitude flyout

1.0

0
0

20
40
h, Altitude 1,000 ft

60

3.0
Time ~ sec

4.0

5.0

6.0

3.0

2.5

2.0

20
40
60
h, Altitude 1,000 ft

80

M, Mach Number

House of Quality

60,000 ft
300

200
40,000 ft
20,000 ft
h = SL

Note:
ML = 0.8, Constant Altitude Flyout
0
0
1
2
3
Example:
Breguet Range for Mach 3 / 60 Kft flyout:
M, Mach Number
Rmax = V ISP ( L / D )Max ln [ WBC / ( WBC - Wf )]
= 2901 ( 950 ) ( 3.15 ) ln ( 1739 / ( 1739 - 476 )) = 2,777,192 ft or 457 nm

5,000
0

Free Stream
Inlet Throat
Subscripts
0
Free stream conditions ( Ramjet Baseline A0 = 75.4 in2 at Mach 4, = 0 deg, Note: AC = 114 in2 )
1
Inlet throat ( Ramjet Baseline A1 = AIT = 41.9 in2 )
2
Diffuser exit ( Ramjet Baseline A2 = 77.3 in2 )
3
Flame holder plane ( Ramjet Baseline A3 = 287.1 in2 )
4
Combustor exit ( Ramjet Baseline A4 = 287.1 in2 )
20.375 in diameter
5
Nozzle throat ( Ramjet Baseline A5 = 103.1 in2 )
6
Nozzle exit ( A6 = 233.6 in2 )
Ref
Reference Area ( Ramjet Baseline Body Cross-sectional Area, SRef = 326 in2 )

400
Range ~ nm

44.5
33.5

10,000

500

2/24/2008

101.2
80.0
112.0
121.0
121.0

30

16

Flight Performance

100

95.2
103.0
30.0
20.0
5.0

20,000

SRef = 2.264 ft2


LRef = DRef = 1.698 ft
Xcg @ Sta 82.5 in.

.3

33.5
33.5
60.0
60.0

1,500

.4

-.2

Normal Force Coefficient, CN

m ~ per deg

SRef = 2.264 ft2


LRef = DRef = 1.698 ft
Xcg @ Sta 82.5 in.

2.264
1.698

15.7

64.5
510.0

Inlet capture area


Ac = 114 in2
Inlet throat area
Reference area
120
Nozzle throat area
Specific impulse
Equivalence ratio operating fuel / air ratio divided by fuel / air ratio for stochiometric combustion

Ramjet Propulsion

-.4

+ .4

Tailcone2.24
Exit Duct
8.96
Controls
1.64
Fins ( 4 )0.70
End of 16.5
Cruise
23.0
Ramjet Fuel ( 6.9 ft3 )
37.0
Start of Cruise
14.2Nozzle ( Ejected )
Boost
0.04 Port
Frangible
150.5
End of Boost
5.4
Boost Propellant
Booster Ignition

15.9
42.4
129.0

Ac
AIT
SRef
A5
Isp

Boost Thrust ~ 1000 lbs

43.5

28.33
Midbody
Inlet68.81
0.58
Electrical
N/A
Hydraulic
Fuel15.0
Distribution

CG Sta, In.

Boost Range ~ nm

23.5
Nose

Boost Propellant
Booster, and
Ramjet Engine

20.375
Payload
Bay
8.39
Warhead

Weight, lb

Paredo Sensitivity for DOE


Nondimensional Range Sensitivity
to Parameter

Sta 0.

Ramjet Fuel

Warhead

Forebody
171.0
Guidance

T, Net Thrust, lb

Guidance

( CD0 )Nose Corrected = ( CD0 )Nose Uncorrected x ( 1 - Ac / SREF )

17.7
8.36
Component
0.52
Nose 0.29

Length, in
Diameter, in
Fineness ratio
Volume, ft3
Wetted area, ft2
Base area, ft2 ( cruise )
Boattail fineness ratio
Nose half angle, deg

Boost Nozzle

Chin
Inlet

Conical forebody angle, deg


Ramp wedge angle, deg
Capture area, ft2
Throat area, ft2

Burnout Mach Number

Sta 150.3

20.375 dia

Flow Path Geometry

Inlet

1.5
1
0.5
0
ISP

-0.5

Fuel
Weight

Thrust

-1

CD0, Zero- CLA, LiftCurveLift Drag


Slope
Coefficient
Coefficient

Inert
Weight

Parameter
4

Sea Level Flyout at Mach 2.3


40 Kft Flyout at Mach 2.8

ELF

20 Kft Flyout at Mach 2.5


60 Kft Flyout at Mach 3.0

17

Baseline Design Data Allows Correction of


Computed Parameters in Conceptual Design
PCD, C = ( PB, C / PB, U ) PCD, U
PCD, C
PB, C
PB, U
PCD, U
Example

Parameter of conceptual design, corrected


Parameter of baseline, corrected ( actual data )
Parameter of baseline, uncorrected ( computed )
Parameter of conceptual design, uncorrected (computed )

Ramjet Baseline with RJ-5 fuel ( heating value = 11,300,000 ft-lbf / lbm )
Advanced Concept with slurry fuel ( 40% JP-10 / 60% boron carbide =
18,500,000 ft-lbf / lbm )
Flight conditions: Mach 3.5 cruise, 60k ft altitude, combustion temperature
4,000 R
Calculate specific impulse ( ISP )CD,C for conceptual design, based on corrected
baseline data
( ISP )B, C = 1,120 s
( ISP )B, U = 1387 s
( ISP )CD, U = 2,271 s
( ISP )CD, C = [( ISP )B, C / ( ISP )B, U ] ( ISP )CD, U = [( 1120 ) / ( 1387 )] ( 2271 ) = 0.807 ( 2271 )
= 1,834 s

2/24/2008

ELF

18

Summary of This Chapter


Overview of Missile Design Process
Examples
Tactical missile characteristics
Conceptual design process
SOTA of tactical missiles
Aerodynamic configuration sizing parameters
Processes that establish mission requirements
Process for correcting design predictions

Discussion / Questions?
Classroom Exercise

2/24/2008

ELF

19

Introduction Problems
1.

2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
2/24/2008

The missile design team should address the areas of mission / scenario
definition, weapon requirements, launch platform integration, design, and
t_______ a_________.
The steps to evaluate missile flight performance require computing
aerodynamics, propulsion, weight, and flight t_________.
Air-to-air missile characteristics include light weight, high speed, and high
m______________.
Air-to-surface missiles are often versatile and m______.
Four aeromechanics measures of merit are weight, range, maneuverability,
and t___ to target.
The launch platform often constrains the missile span, length, and w_____.
An enabling capability for hypersonic strike missiles is fast and accurate
C____.
An enabling capability for large off boresight air-to-air missiles is a h_____
m______ sight.
A baseline design improves the accuracy and s____ of the design process.
ELF

20

Outline
Introduction / Key Drivers in the Design Process
Aerodynamic Considerations in Tactical Missile Design
Propulsion Considerations in Tactical Missile Design
Weight Considerations in Tactical Missile Design
Flight Performance Considerations in Tactical Missile Design
Measures of Merit and Launch Platform Integration
Sizing Examples
Development Process
Summary and Lessons Learned
References and Communication
Appendices ( Homework Problems / Classroom Exercises,
Example of Request for Proposal, Nomenclature, Acronyms,
Conversion Factors, Syllabus )
2/24/2008

ELF

21

Missile Concept Synthesis Requires Evaluation


of Alternatives and Iteration
Define Mission Requirements
Alt Mission
Establish Baseline
Alt Baseline
Aerodynamics
Propulsion
Weight

Resize / Alt Config / Subsystems / Tech

Trajectory
Meet
Performance?

No

Yes
Measures of Merit and Constraints

No

Yes
2/24/2008

ELF

22

Missile Diameter Tradeoff


Drivers toward Small Diameter
Decrease drag
Launch platform diameter constraint

Drivers toward Large Diameter


Increase seeker range and signal-to-noise, better resolution and tracking
Increase blast frag and shaped charge warhead effectiveness ( larger diameter
higher velocity fragments or higher velocity jet )
Increase body bending frequency
Subsystem diameter packaging
Launch platform length constraint

Typical Range in Body Fineness Ratio 5 < l / d < 25


Man-portable anti-armor missiles are low l / d ( Javelin l / d = 8.5 )
Surface-to-air and air-to-air missiles are high l / d ( AIM-120 l / d = 20.5 )
2/24/2008

ELF

23

Small Diameter Missiles Have Low Drag


D = CD q SRef = 0.785 CD q d2

D / CD, Drag / Drag Coefficient, lb

100000

Note: D = drag in lb, CD = drag coefficient, q = dynamic pressure in psf,


d = diameter ( reference length ) in ft

10000

Dynamic Pressure =
1,000 psf
Dynamic Pressure =
5,000 psf
Dynamic Pressure =
10,000 psf

1000

100

Example for Rocket Baseline:


d = 8 in = 0.667 ft

10

Mach 2, h = 20k ft, ( CD )Powered = 0.95

12

16

20

q = 1/2

V2

= 1/2 ( M a )2

= 1/2 ( 0.001267 ) [( 2 ) ( 1037 )]2 = 2,725 psf

d, Diameter, in

D0 / CD = 0.785 ( 2725 ) ( 0.667 )2 = 952


0

D0 = 0.95 ( 952 ) = 900 lb


2/24/2008

ELF

24

Large Diameter Radar Seeker Provides Longer


Detection Range and Better Resolution
RD = { n3/4 / [ 64 2 K T B F L ( S / N ) ]}1/4 Pt 1/4 d
100

3dB = 1.02 / d, 3dB in rad

Assumptions: Negligible clutter, interference, and


atmospheric attenuation; non-coherent radar ( only
signal amplitude integrated ); uniformly illuminated
circular aperture; receiver sensitivity limited by
thermal noise
Symbols:

= Target radar cross section, m2


n = Number of pulses integrated
= Wavelength, m
K = Boltzmans constant = 1.38 x 10-23 J / K
T = Receiver temperature, K
B = Receiver bandwidth, Hz
1
F = Receiver noise factor
0
5
10
15
20 L = Transmitter loss factor
S / N = Signal-to-noise ratio for target detection
d, Diameter, Inches
Pt = Transmitted power, W
d = Antenna diameter
Example Seeker Range for Transmitted Power Pt = 100 W, nm
Example: Rocket Baseline
Example Seeker Range for Transmitted Power Pt = 1,000 W, nm
d = 8 in = 0.20 m, Pt = 1000 W, = 0.03 m ( f = 10 GHz )
Example Seeker Range for Transmitted Power Pt = 10,000 W, nm
RD = Target detection range = { ( 10 ) ( 100 )3/4 / [ 64 (
Example Seeker Beam Width, deg
0.03 )2 ( 1.38 x 10-23 ) ( 290 ) ( 106 ) ( 5 ) ( 5 )( 10 )]}1/4 (
Note for figure: = 10 m2, n = 100, = 0.03 m ( f = Transmitter
1000 )1/4 ( 0.203 ) = 13,073 m or 7.1 nm
frequency = 10 x 109 Hz ), T = 290 K, B = 106 Hz ( 10-6 s pulse ), F 3dB = 3-dB beam width = 1.02 ( 0.03 ) / 0.203 = 0.1507
= 5, L = 5, S / N = 10
rad or 8.6 deg
10

2/24/2008

ELF

25

Large Diameter IR Seeker Provides Longer


Detection Range and Better Resolution
RD = Target detection range, m
( IT ) = Target radiant intensity between 1 and 2=
IFOV = dp / [ ( f-number ) do ]
L ( 2 - 1 ) AT, W / sr
a = Atmospheric transmission
Ao = Optics aperture area, m2
10
D* = Specific detectivity, cm Hz1/2 / W
fp = Pixel bandwidth, Hz
Ad = Detectors total area, cm2
( S / N )D = Signal-to-noise ratio required for detection
1
= Emissivity coefficient
0
2
4
6
8
10 L = Spectral radiance ( Plancks Law ) = 3.74 x 104 / {

4
do, Optics Diameter, Inches
5 { e[ 1.44 x 10 / ( TT )] 1 }}, W cm-2 sr-2 m-1
2 = Upper cutoff wavelength for detection, m
Example Seeker Range for Exo-atmospheric, km
1 = Lower cutoff wavelength for detection, m
Example Seeker Range for Humidity at 7.5 g / m3, km
AT = Target planform area, cm2
Example Seeker Range for Rain at 4 mm / hr, km
= Average wavelength, m
Example Seeker IFOV, 10-5 rad
TT = Target temperature, K
IFOV = Instantaneous field-of-view of pixel, rad
Example: do = 5 in = 0.127 m, exo-atmospheric
4
f-number = dspot / ( 2.44 )
L = 3.74 x 104 / { 45 { e{ 1.44 x 10 / [ 4 ( 300 ) ]} 1 }} = 0.000224 W cm-2 sr-2
dp = Pixel diameter, either m
m-1, ( IT ) = 0.5 ( 0.000224 ) ( 4.2 3.8 ) 2896 = 0.1297 W / sr, Ad =
256 x 256 x ( 20 m )2 = 0.262 cm2, f-number = 20 / [ 2.44 ( 4 ) ] = 2.05 dspot = Spot resolution if diffraction limited = dp, m
RD = { 0.1297 ( 1 ) ( 0.01267 ) { 8 x 1011 / [( 250 )1/2 ( 0.262 )1/2 ]} ( 1 )-1
Figure: dT = 2 ft ( 60.96 cm ), TT = 300 K, 1 = 3.8 m,
}1/2 = 12, 740 m
2 = 4.2 m, = 0.5, = 4 m, FPA ( 256 x 256, 20 m
IFOV = 0.000020 / [ 2.05 ( 0.127 )] = 0.0000769 rad
), D* = 8 x 1011 cm Hz1/2 / W, ( S / N ) = 1, f = 250 Hz.
100

RD = { ( IT ) a Ao { D* / [( fp )1/2 ( Ad )1/2 ]} ( S / N )D-1 }1/2

2/24/2008

ELF

26

First Mode Body Bending Frequency, rad / s

Missile Fineness Ratio May Be Limited by


Impact of Body Bending on Flight Control
BB = 18.75 { E t / [ W ( l / d

10000

Assumes body cylinder structure, thin skin, high


fineness ratio, uniform weight distribution, free-free
motion. Neglects bulkhead, wing / tail stiffness.
BB = First mode body bending frequency, rad / s
E = Modulus of elasticity in psi
t = Thickness in inches
W = Weight in lb
l / d = Fineness ratio

) ]}1/2

E t / W = 1,000 per in
E t / W = 10,0000 per in
E t / W = 100,000 per in

1000

Example for Rocket Baseline:

100
0

10

20

30

l / d, length / diameter

l / d = 18
EAVG = 19.5 x 106 psi
tAVG = 0.12 in
W = 500 lb
E t / W = 19.5 x 106 ( 0.12 ) / 500 = 4680 per in
BB = 18.75 ( 4680 / 18 )1/2 = 302 rad / sec = 48 Hz
Actuator = 100 rad / sec = 16 Hz
BB / Actuator = 302 / 100 = 3.02 > 2

Derived from: AIAA Aerospace Design Engineers Guide, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 1993.
2/24/2008

ELF

27

Nose Fineness Tradeoff


High Nose Fineness Superior Aerodynamically, Low Observables
Example: lN / d = 5 tangent ogive

Low Nose Fineness Ideal Electromagnetically, High Propellant Length / Volume


Example: lN / d = 0.5 ( hemisphere )

Moderate Nose Fineness Compromise Dome


Examples: lN / d = 2 tangent ogive

lN / d = 2 faceted

lN / d = 2 window

lN / d = 2 multi-lens

d
ow
Wind
2/24/2008

ELF

28

Faceted and Flat Window Domes Can Have Low


Dome Error Slope, Low Drag, and Low RCS
Firestreak

Mistral

SLAM-ER
Faceted Dome ( Mistral ) Video

JASSM

THAAD
2/24/2008

ELF

29

Supersonic Body Drag Driven by Nose Fineness


while Subsonic Drag Driven by Wetted Area
( CD0 )Body = (CD0 )Body,Friction + ( CD0 )Base + ( CD0 )Body, Wave
(CD0 )Body,Friction = 0.053 ( l / d ) [ M / ( q l )]0.2. Based on Jerger reference, turbulent boundary layer, q in psf, l in ft.
( CD0 )Base,Coast = 0.25 / M, if M > 1 and (CD0 )Base,Coast = ( 0.12 + 0.13 M2 ), if M < 1
( CD0 )Base,Powered = ( 1 Ae / SRef ) ( 0.25 / M ), if M > 1 and ( CD0 )Base,Powered = ( 1 Ae / SRef ) ( 0.12 + 0.13 M2 ), if M < 1
( CD0 )Body, Wave = ( 1.59 + 1.83 / M2 ) { tan-1 [ 0.5 / ( lN / d )]}1.69, for M > 1. Based on Bonney reference, tan-1 in rad.

Note: ( CD )Body,Wave = body zero-lift wave drag coefficient, ( CD )Base = body base drag coefficient, ( CD )Body, Friction = body skin
0
0
0
friction drag coefficient, ( CD )Body = body zero-lift drag coefficient, lN = nose length, d = missile diameter, l = missile body
0
length, Ae = nozzle exit area, SRef = reference area, q = dynamic pressure, tan-1 [ 0.5 / ( lN / d )] in rad.
Example for Rocket Baseline:

10

0.1

0.01
0

(CD0)Body,Wave;
lN / d = 0.5
(CD0)Body,Wave;
lN / d = 1
(CD0)Body,Wave;
lN / d = 2
(CD0)Body,Wave;
lN / d = 5
(CD)Base,Coast

( CD )Body, Wave ( CD )Body, Friction


0

( CD )Base

lN / d = 2.4, Ae = 11.22 in2, SRef = 50.26 in2, M =


2, h = 20k ft, q = 2725 psf, l / d = 18, l = 12 ft
( CD )Body, Friction = 0.053 ( 18 ) { ( 2 ) / [( 2725 )
0
( 12 ) ]}0.2 = 0.14
( CD )Base Coast = 0.25 / 2 = 0.13
( CD )Base Powered = ( 1 - 0.223 ) ( 0.25 / 2 ) = 0.10
( CD )Body, Wave = 0.14
0

( CD )Body, Coast = 0.14 + 0.13 + 0.14 = 0.41

M, Mach Number

( CD )Body, Powered = 0.14 + 0.10 + 0.14 = 0.38


0

2/24/2008

ELF

30

Moderate Nose Tip Bluntness Causes a


Negligible Change in Supersonic Drag
Steps to Calculate Wave Drag of a Blunted Nose
1.

Relate blunted nose tip geometry to pointed nose tip geometry


lN
dNoseTip

2.

dRef

Compute (CD0 )Wave,SharpNose for sharp nose, based on the body reference area
( CD )Wave,SharpNose = ( 1.59 + 1.83 / M2 ) { tan-1 [ 0.5 / ( lN / d )]}1.69
0

3.

Compute ( CD0 )Wave,Hemi of the hemispherical nose tip ( lNoseTip / dNoseTip = 0.5 ), based on the
nose tip area
( CD0 )Wave,Hemi = ( 1.59 + 1.83 / M2 ) {[ tan-1 ( 0.5 / ( 0.5 )]}1.69 = 0.665 ( 1.59 + 1.83 / M2 )

4.

Finally, compute ( CD0 )Wave,BluntNose of the blunt nose, based on the body reference area
( CD0 )Wave,BluntNose = ( CD0 )Wave,SharpNose ( SRef - SNoseTip ) / SRef + ( CD0 )Wave,Hemi SNoseTipi / SRef

Example Rocket Baseline ( dRef = 8 in ) with 10% Nose Tip Bluntness at Mach 2

2/24/2008

( CD0 )Wave,SharpNose = [ 1.59 + 1.83 / ( 2 )2 ] [ tan-1 ( 0.5 / 2.4)]1.69 = 0.14


dNoseTip = 0.10 ( 8 ) = 0.8 in
SNoseTip = dNoseTip2 / 4 = 3.1416 ( 0.8 )2 / 4 = 0.503 in2 = 0.00349 ft2

( CD0 )Wave,Hemi = 0.665 [ 1.59 + 1.83 / ( 2 )2 ] = 1.36

( CD0 )Wave,BluntNose = 0.14 ( 0.349 - 0.003 ) / 0.349 + ( 1.36 ) ( 0.003 ) / ( 0.349 ) = 0.14 + 0.01 = 0.15
ELF

31

Boattail Decreases Base Pressure Drag Area

Base Pressure Drag Area


Without Boattail

dRef

BT
With Boattail

During Motor Burn After Motor Burnout


dBT

Note: Boattail angle BT and boattail diameter dBT limited by propulsion nozzle packaging, tail flight
control packaging, and flow separation
Reference: Chin, S. S., Missile Configuration Design, McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, 1961
2/24/2008

ELF

32

Boattailing Reduces Drag for Subsonic Missiles


CDO, Example Zero-Lift Drag Coefficient

0.45
Nose

0.40
3.00

0.35

Center body

Boattail

6.00
10.50

1.50

0.30
0.25
0.20

dBT / dRef = 1.0


dBT / dRef = 0.9
dBT / dRef = 0.8 Note:
dBT / dRef = 0.6
dBT = Boattail Diameter
dBT / dRef = 0.4
dRef = Body Reference Diameter

0.15
0.10
0.05
0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

5.5

Note: Boatail half angle should be less than 10 deg, to avoid flow separattion.
Source: Mason, L.A., Devan, L. and Moore, F.G., Aerodynamic Design Manual for Tactical Weapons, NSWC TR 81-156, July
1981
2/24/2008
ELF
33

Lifting Body Has Higher Normal Force


CN = [( a / b ) cos2 + ( b / a ) sin2 ] [ sin ( 2 ) cos ( / 2 ) + 2 ( l / d ) sin2 ]
Note:
If negative, CN negative
Based on slender body theory ( Pitts, et al ) and cross flow theory ( Jorgensen ) references
Valid for l / d > 5
Example l / d = length / diameter = 20
a/b=3
1/2
d=2 (ab)
= 0

150

CN,
100
Example
Normal
Force
Coefficient
for l / d = 20 50

CN

2b

a/b=2

2a

20

a/b=1

40

60

80

100

, Angle of Attack, Deg


2/24/2008

ELF

34

L / D Is Impacted by CD0, Body Fineness, and


Lifting Body Cross Section Geometry
L / D = CL / CD = ( CN cos CD0 sin ) / ( CN sin + CD0 cos )
For a lifting body, CN = [( a / b ) cos2 ( ) + ( b / a ) sin2 ( ) ] [ sin ( 2 ) cos ( / 2 ) + 2 ( l / d ) sin2 ]

L / D,
Lift / Drag

High drag, low fineness body ( a / b = 1, l / d = 10, CDO = 0.5 )


Low drag nose ( a / b = 1, l / d = 10, CDO = 0.2 )
High fineness, low drag ( a / b = 1, l / d = 20, CDO = 0.2 )
Lifting body, high fineness, low drag ( a / b = 2 @ = 0, l / d =
20, CDO = 0.2 )

CN

1
0

20

40

60

80

100

2b

2a

, Angle of Attack, Deg


Note:
If negative, L / D negative
d = 2 ( a b )1/2
Launch platform span constraints ( e.g., VLS launcher ) and length constraints ( e.g., aircraft compatibility )
may limit missile aero configuration enhancements
2/24/2008

ELF

35

Lifting Body Requires Flight at Low Dynamic


Pressure to Achieve High Aero Efficiency
L / D = CL / CD = ( CN cos CDO sin ) / ( CN sin + CDO cos )
CN = [( a / b ) cos2 ( ) + ( b / a ) sin2 ( ) ] [ sin ( 2 ) cos ( / 2 ) + 2 ( l / d ) sin2 ]
Example L / D, Lift / Drag

Example:
q = 500 psf

a / b = 1 L / D = 2.40
a / b = 2 L / D = 3.37

q = 5,000 psf
a / b = 1 L / D = 0.91

a / b = 2 L / D = 0.96

0
100

1000

10000

100000

q, Dynamic Pressure, lb / ft2


Circular Cross Section ( a / b = 1 )

2/24/2008

Lifting Body ( a / b = 2 )

Note. Example figure based on following assumptions:


Body lift only ( no surfaces ), cruise flight ( lift = weight ), W = L = 2,000 lb, d = 2 ( a b )1/2, S = 2 ft2,
l / d = 10, CD0 = 0.2
ELF

36

Trade-off of Low Observables and ( L / D )Max


Versus Volumetric Efficiency

( L / D )Max, ( Lift / Drag )Max

Tailored
Weapons

5
Conventional
Weapons
( circular
cross section )

Advantages:
( L / D )Max
Low RCS

Lower

Advantages:
Payload
Launch Platform
Integration

4
Radar
Cross
Section
3
2

Circular
4
Cross Section

6
Body Planform Area

10

( Body Volume )2/3


2/24/2008

ELF

37

Cm / and Static Margin Define Static


Stability
xAC

Statically Stable: Cm / < 0,


with xac behind xcg

Statically Unstable: Cm / > 0,


with xac in front of xcg

xCG

Cm

Non-oscillatory
Divergent

Non-oscillatory
Convergent

Oscillatory
Convergent

xCG

Cm

xAC

Oscillatory
Divergent

Note: Statically unstable missile requires high bandwidth autopilot.


Autopilot negative rate feedback provides stability augmentation.

2/24/2008

ELF

38

Body Aerodynamic Center Is a Function of Angle


of Attack, Nose Fineness, and Body Length
Distance to Body Aerodynamic
Center / Length of Nose

( xAC )B / lN = 0.63 ( 1 - sin2 ) + 0.5 ( lB / lN ) sin2

5
4

total length of body /


length of nose = 1
total length of body /
length of nose = 2
total length of body /
length of nose = 5
total length of body /
length of nose = 10

3
2
1

Example:

19.2

143.9

Rocket Baseline Body

20

40

60

80

Angle of Attack, Deg

100

lB / lN = 143.9 / 19.2 = 7.49


= 13 deg
( xAC )B / lN = 0.81

Note: Based on slender body theory ( Pitts, et al ) and cross flow theory ( Jorgensen ) references. No flare.
( xAC )B = Location of body aerodynamic center, lN = length of nose, = angle of attack, lB = total length of body.

2/24/2008

ELF

39

Flare Increases Static Stability


CN = ( CN )B + ( CN )F

( C N )B

+M

( CN )F
d dF

+
x=0

( xac )B

lN

xAC xCG

Based on Slender Body Theory:

xF l B
( xac )F

( CN )F = 2 [( dF / d )2 1 ]
( xac )F = xF + 0.33 lF [ 2 ( dF / d ) + 1 ] / [ ( dF / d ) + 1 ]
( CN )B = 2 per rad
( xac )B = 0.63 lN

M = 0 at Aerodynamic Center. For a Body-Flare:


( CN )B {[ xCG ( xAC )B ] / d } + ( CN )F [ xCG ( xAC )F ] / d = - [( CN )B + ( CN )F ]
[( xAC xCG ) / d ]

Static Margin for a Body-Flare


( xAC xCG ) / d = - {( CN )B {[ xCG ( xAC )B ] / d } + ( CN )F {[ xCG ( xAC )F ] / d }} /
[( CN )B + ( CN )F ]
2/24/2008

ELF

40

Flare Increases Static Stability ( cont )


Example of Static Margin for THAAD ( Statically Unstable Missile )
CN = ( CN )B + ( CN )F
(C )
N B

( CN )F
14.6 18.7 in

( xac )B = 57.7

91.5
146.9
xAC = 140.9

230.9 242.9
( xac )F = 237.1

( CN )F = 2 [( 18.7 / 14.6 )2 1 ] = 2 [(1.28)2 1 ] = 1.28 per rad


( xac )F = 230.9 + 0.33 ( 12.0 )[ 2 ( 18.7 / 14.6 ) + 1 ] / [ ( 18.7 / 14.6 ) + 1 ] = 237.1 in
( xac )B = 0.63 ( 91.5 ) = 57.7 in
xCGLaunch = 146.9 in
( xAC xCG )Launch / d = - { 2 {[ 146.9 57.7 ] / 14.6 } + 1.28 {[ 146.9 237.1 ] / 14.6 }}
/ [ 2 + 1.28 ] = - 0.41

2/24/2008

ELF

41

Tail Stabilizers Have Lower Drag While Flares


Have Lower Aero Heating and Stability Changes

Type Stabilizer

Drag

Span

Heating

CN Tail Control

Flare ( e.g., THAAD )

Tails ( e.g., Standard Missile )

Note:
2/24/2008

Superior

Good
ELF

Average

Poor
42

Wing Sizing Trades


Advantages of Small Wing / Strake / No Wing

Range in high supersonic flight / high dynamic pressure


Max angle of attack
Launch platform compatibility
Lower radar cross section
Volume and weight for propellant / fuel

Advantages of Larger Wing

Range in subsonic flight / low dynamic pressure


Lower guidance time constant*
Normal acceleration*
High altitude intercept*
Less body bending aeroelasticity ( wing stiffens body )
Less seeker error due to dome error slope ( lower angle of attack )
Less wipe velocity for warhead ( lower angle of attack )
Lower gimbal requirement for seeker

*Based on assumption of aerodynamic control and angle of attack below wing stall
2/24/2008

ELF

43

Most Supersonic Missiles Are Wingless

2/24/2008

Stinger FIM-92

Grouse SA-18

Grison SA-19 ( two stage )

Gopher SA-13

Starburst

Mistral

Kegler AS-12

Archer AA-11

Gauntlet SA-15

Magic R550

Python 4

U-Darter

Python 5

Derby / R-Darter

Aphid AA-8

Sidewinder AIM-9X

ASRAAM AIM-132

Grumble SA-10 / N-8

Patriot MIM-104

Starstreak

Gladiator SA-12

PAC-3

Roland ( two stage )

Crotale

Hellfire AGM-114

ATACM MGM-140

Standard Missile 3 ( three stage )

THAAD

Permission of Missile Index. Copyright 1997Missile.Index All Rights Reserved


ELF

44

Wings, Tails, and Canards with Large Area and


at High Angle of Attack Have High Normal Force
( CN )Surface = [ 4sin cos / ( M2 1 )1/2 + 2 sin2 ] ( SSurface / SRef ), if M > { 1 + [ 8 / ( A )]2 }1/2
( CN )Surface = [ ( A / 2) sin cos + 2 sin2 ] ( SSurface / SRef ), if M < { 1 + [ 8 / ( A )]2 }1/2

( CN )Wing SREF / SW,


Wing Normal Force Coefficient
for Rocket Baseline

Note: Linear wing theory applicable if M > { 1 + [ 8 / ( A )]2 }1/2, slender wing theory applicable if M < { 1 + [ 8 / ( A )]2 }1/2,
A = Aspect Ratio < 3, SSurface = Surface Planform Area, SRef = Reference Area
M < 1.35, based on slender wing theory + Newtonian impact theory
M = 2, based on linear wing theory + Newtonian impact theory
M = 5, based on linear wing theory + Newtonian impact theory
4

Example for Rocket Baseline


Wing
AW = 2.82
SW = 2.55 ft2
SRef = 0.349 ft2
= 13 deg, = 9 deg

M=2
{ 1 +[ 8 / ( A )]2 }1/2 = 1.35

1
0
0

30

60

Since M > 1.35, use linear wing


theory + Newtonian theory
= W = + = 22
( CN )Wing SRef / SW = 4 sin 22
cos 22 / ( 22 1 )1/2 + 2 sin2 22
= 1.083
( CN )Wing = 1.08 ( 2.55 ) / 0.349 =
90
7.91

= W = + , Wing Effective Angle of Attack for Rocket Baseline, Deg


2/24/2008

ELF

45

Aerodynamic Center of a Thin Surface ( e.g.,


Wing, Tail, Canard ) Varies with Mach Number
( xAC / cMAC )Surface = [ A ( M2 1 )1/2 0.67 ] / [ 2A ( M2 1 )1/2 1 ], if M > ~ 2

XAC / CMAC, Surface Non-dimensional


Aerodynamic Center

( xAC / cMAC )Surface = 0.25, if M < ~ 0.7

0.5
0.4

Note: Based on linear wing theory


Thin wing M ( t / c ) << 1
( xAC )Surface = Surface aerodynamic
center distance from leading
edge of ( cMAC )Surface
cMAC = Mean aerodynamic chord
A = Aspect ratio = b2 / S

A=1
A=2
A=3

0.3
0.2

Example: Rocket Baseline Wing

0.1
A = 2.82

xMAC

cMAC = 13.3 in

0
0

M, Mach Number

xAC

cMAC

( xMAC )Wing = 67.0 in


M=2
( xAC / cMAC )Wing = 0.481
( xAC )Wing = 6.4 in from mac leading
edge = 73.4 in from nose tip

2/24/2008

ELF

46

Hinge Moment Increases with Dynamic Pressure


and Effective Angle of Attack
HM = NSurface ( xAC - xHL )Surface
q = 436 psf ( M = 0.8 )
q = 2725 psf ( M = 2 )

Note: Based on linear wing


theory, slender wing theory,
and thin wing ( M ( t / c ) << 1 )
NSurface = Normal force on surface
( two panels )
( xAC - xHL )W = distance from
surface aerodynamic center to
hinge line of surface

q = 1242 psf ( M = 1.35 )


q = 17031 psf ( M = 5 )

HM, Example Hinge Moment, in - lb

30000
25000

Example for Rocket Baseline


Wing Control
N
x

20000

cmac = 13.3 in

xHL = 0.25 cmac

15000

xH

AC

SRef = 0.349 ft2

cm

ac

SW = 2.55 ft2

10000

= 13 deg, = 9 deg
= W = + = 22
M = 2, h = 20k ft, q = 2725 psf

5000

NW = [ CN ( SRef / SW )] qSW =
W
1.083 ( 2725 ) ( 2.55 ) = 7525 lb

0
0

10

20

30

xAC / cmac = 0.48

= W = + , Wing Effective Angle of Attack of Rocket Baseline, Deg HM = 7525 ( 0.48 0.25 ) ( 13.3 )
= 23019 in lb for two panels

2/24/2008

ELF

47

Wings, Tails, and Canards Usually Have Greater


Skin Friction Drag Than Shock Wave Drag
( CD0 )Surface,Friction = nSurface { 0.0133 [ M / ( q cmac )]0.2 } ( 2 SSurface / SRef ), q in psf, cmac in ft
( CDO )Surface,Wave = nSurface ( 1.429 / MLE2 ){( 1.2 MLE2 )3.5 [ 2.4 / ( 2.8 MLE2 0.4 )]2.5 1 } sin2 LE cos LE
tmac b / SRef , based on Newtonian impact theory
nSurfaces = number of surface planforms ( cruciform = 2 )
( CDO )Surface = ( CDO )Surface,Wave + ( CDO )Surface,Friction
q = dynamic pressure in psf

0.4

cmac = length of mean aero chord in ft

Example ( CD )Surface,Friction

= Specific heat ratio = 1.4


M = M cos LE = Mach number leading edge

0.3

LE

LE = leading edge section total angle


LE = leading edge sweep angle

0.2

tmac = max thickness of mac


b = span
Example for Rocket Baseline Wing:

0.1

nW = 2, M = 2, h = 20k ft ( q = 2,725 psf ), cmac = 1.108


ft, SRef = 50.26 in2, SW = 367 in2, LE = 10.01 deg, LE =
45 deg, tmac = 0.585 in, b = 32.2 in, M = 1.41 ( M = 2 )
LE

0
0

10

20
n SSurface / SRef

M / ( q cmac ) = 0.00001 ft / lb
M / ( q cmac ) = 0.001 ft / lb

30

40

50

M / ( q cmac ) = 2 / [ 2725 ( 1.108 )] = 0.000662 ft / lb


n SSurface / SRef = 2 ( 367 ) / 50.26 = 14.60
( CD )Wing,Friction = 0.090

M / ( q cmac ) = 0.0001 ft / lb
M / ( q cmac ) = 0.01 ft / lb

( CD )Wing,Wave = 0.024
0

( CD )Wing = 0.024 + 0.090 = 0.11


O

2/24/2008

ELF

48

Examples of Wing, Tail, and Canard Panel


Geometry Alternatives

Parameter

Triangle

Aft Swept LE

( Delta )

Trapezoid

Variation xAC

Double
Bow Tie

Swept LE

Rectangle

Bending Moment / Friction

Supersonic Drag

RCS

Span Constraint

Stability & Control


Aeroelastic Stab.

= Taper ratio = cT / cR
A = Aspect ratio = b2 / S = 2 b / [( 1 + ) cR ]
yCP = Outboard center-of-pressure = ( b / 6 ) ( 1 + 2 ) / ( 1 + )
cMAC = Mean aerodynamic chord = ( 2 / 3 ) cR ( 1 + + 2 ) / ( 1 + )
2/24/2008

ELF

Note: Superior

Good

Average

Poor

Based on equal surface area and equal span.


Surface area often has more impact than geometry.

49

Examples of Surface Arrangement and


Aerodynamic Control Alternatives
Two Panels
( Mono-Wing )

Three
( Tri-Tail )

Folded

Wraparound

Four
( Cruciform )

Extended

Interdigitated

Six*

Eight*

Balanced Actuation Flap Control


Control

In-line

Note: More than four tails are usually free-to-roll pitch / yaw stabilizers, for low induced roll.
2/24/2008

ELF

50

Most Missiles Use Four Control Surfaces with


Combined Pitch / Yaw / Roll Control Integration
Control Integ

Control Surfaces Example

Control Effect Cost Packaging

Pitch / Yaw

Stinger FIM-92

Pitch / Roll

ALCM AGM-86

Pitch / Yaw / Roll

SRAM

Pitch / Yaw / Roll

Adder AA-12

Pitch + Yaw + Roll

Kitchen AS-4

Pitch / Yaw + Roll

Derby / R-Darter

Note:
2/24/2008

Superior

Good
ELF

Average

Poor
51

There Are Many Flight Control Configuration


Alternatives
Control Design
Alternatives

Control
Tail

Cruciform ( 4 )
Tri-tail ( 3 )
Not Compressed
Folded
Wraparound
Switchblade

Canard

Wingless
Wing
Strake / Canard
In Line with Controls
Interdigitated with Controls
Number ( 2, 3, 4 )

Above
Tail ( 3, 4, 6, 8 )
Rolling Airframe ( 2 ) Tail + Wing
In Line with Controls
Interdigitated with Controls

Wing

TVC or
Reaction Jet
Control

2/24/2008

Fixed Surface
Alternatives

ELF

Above

Tail ( 3, 4, 6, 8 )
Strake / Canard & Tail
In Line with Controls
Interdigitated with Controls

Movable Nozzle
Jet Tab
Jet Vane
Axial Plate
Secondary Injection
Normal Jet / JI
Spanwise Jet / JI

Tail ( 3, 4, 6, 8 )
Tail + Canard / Strake
Tail + Wing

52

Tail Control Is Efficient at High Angle of Attack


CN Trim
( assumed statically stable )

CN at = 0

CNC at = 0

cg

CNC

Efficient Packaging
Low Hinge Moment / Actuator
Torque
Low Induced Rolling Moment
Efficient at High
2/24/2008

CN

Negative

Decreased Lift at Low if


Statically Stable

ELF

53

Tail Control Is More Effective Than Conventional


Canard Control at High Angle of Attack
+

Assumed static stability


Control surface local
angle of attack = +
Panel stalled at high *

Assumed static stability


Control surface local
angle of attack =
Panel not stalled at high

Tail Control

1.0
Conven
Canard
Control

Cl / ( Cl ) = 0

Cm / ( Cm ) = 0

Conventional Canard Control

Tail
Control

0
10 20

1.0
Conven
Canard
Control

20 30

= 0
Tail
Control

10 15 15 30

~ Angle of Attack ( deg )

~ Angle of Attack ( deg )

*Note: Additional forward fixed surfaces ( such as Python 4 ) in front of movable canards alleviate stall
at high . Free-to-roll tails ( such as Python 4 ) alleviate induced roll from canard control at high .
2/24/2008

ELF

54

About 70% of Tail Control Missiles Also Have Wings


JASSM AGM-158

Maverick AGM-65

CALCM

JSOW AGM-154

Tomahawk BGM-109

Taurus KEPD 350

Storm Shadow / Scalp

Popeye AGM-142

Exocet MIM40

TOW2-BGM71D

AMRAAM AIM-120

Sunburn SS-N-22

Standard RIM-66 / 67

RBS-70 / 90

Shipwreck SS-N-19

Super 530

Sea Dart ( two stage )

FSAS Aster

R-37 ( AA-X-13 )

Mica

Adder AA-12

Rapier 2000

SD-10 / PL-12

Seawolf

Permission of Missile Index. Copyright 1997Missile.Index All Rights Reserved


2/24/2008

ELF

55

Tail Control Alternatives: Conventional Balanced


Actuation Fin, Flap, and Lattice Fin
Control
Type of Tail Control

Hinge

Effectiveness

Drag

Moment RCS

Balanced Actuation Fin ( Example: ASRAAM AIM-132 )

Flap ( Example: Hellfire AGM-114 )

Lattice Fin ( Example: Adder AA-12 / R-77 )

Note:
2/24/2008

Superior

Good
ELF

Average

Poor
56

Lattice Fins Have Advantages for Low Subsonic


and High Supersonic Missiles
Advantages
High control effectiveness at
low subsonic and high
supersonic Mach number
Low hinge moment
Short chord length

Disadvantages
High RCS ( cavities, normal
leading edges )
High drag at transonic Mach
number ( choked flow )

Low Subsonic

2/24/2008

ELF

Transonic

Low Supersonic High Supersonic

57

Conventional Canard Control Is Efficient at Low


Angle of Attack But Stalls at High Alpha

CN

CN Trim ( assumed statically stable )


C

NC

CN at = 0

cg

Efficient Packaging
Simplified
Manufacturing
Increased Lift at Low
if Statically Stable

Stall at High if
Statically Stable
Induced Roll
Note:

= CNC at = 0
= CNC at =

2/24/2008

ELF

*Note: Additional forward fixed surface in


front of movable canard alleviates stall at
high . Free-to-roll tails alleviate induced
roll at high . Dedicated roll control
surfaces avoid roll control saturation and
simplify autopilot design.
58

Canard Control Missiles Are Wingless and Most


Are Supersonic
Stinger FIM-92

Grouse SA-18

Grison SA-19 ( two-stage )

Gopher SA-13

Starburst

Gauntlet SA-15

Mistral

AIM-9L

Archer AA- 11

Magic R 550

Python 4

U-Darter

Python 5

Derby / R-Darter

Aphid AA-8

Kegler AS-12

GBU-12

GBU-22

2/24/2008

GBU-27
GBU-28
Permission of Missile Index. Copyright 1997Missile.Index All Rights Reserved
ELF

59

Missiles with Split Canards Have Enhanced


Maneuverability at High Angle of Attack

CN
C
~

NC

Note: = Local angle of attack

Kegler AS-12

Archer AA-11

Aphid AA-8

Magic R 550

Python 4

U-Darter

Note: Forward fixed surface reduces local angle-of-attack for movable canard, providing higher stall angle of attack. Forward
surface also provides a fixed, symmetrical location for vortex shedding from the body.
Python 4 also has free-to-roll tails and separate roll control ailerons.
2/24/2008

ELF

60

Wing Control Requires Less Body Rotation But


Has High Hinge Moment, Induced Roll and Stall

CN ~ CN Trim

V
( small )

cg

Low Body / Dome Error Slope


Fast Response ( if skid-to-turn )

2/24/2008

Poor Actuator Packaging


Large Hinge Moment
Larger Wing Size
Induced Roll
Wing Stall
ELF

61

Wing Control Missile Susceptible to High Vortex


Shedding
Strong vortices from wing interact with tail

Video of Vortices from Delta


Wing at High Angle of Attack

Source: University of Notre Dame web site:


http://www.nd.edu/~ame/facilities/SubsonicTunnels.html
2/24/2008

Source: Nielsen Engineering & Research ( NEAR ) web site:


http://www.nearinc.com/near/project/MISDL.htm
ELF

62

Wing Control Missiles Are Old Technology


Sparrow AIM-7: IOC 1956
Skyflash: IOC 1978
Alamo AA-10 / R-27: IOC 1980
HARM AGM-88: IOC 1983
Aspide: IOC 1986

Permission of Missile Index. Copyright 1997Missile.Index All Rights Reserved


2/24/2008

ELF

63

TVC and Reaction Jet Flight Control


Liquid Injection

Hot Gas Injection

Jet Vane*
12

10

Note: Jet vanes provide roll control and share


actuators with aero control, but have reduced ISP

Axial Plate

Jet Tab

Movable Nozzle
20

15

Note:
TVC and reaction jet flight control provide
high maneuverability at low dynamic pressure

Reaction Jet

TVC usually has lower time constant and


miss distance than aero control

Jet Flow

Reaction jets usually have lower time


constant and miss distance than TVC
Reaction jets can be either impulse jets or
controlled duration jets
2/24/2008

Jet inter.
ELF

Thrust

Jet interaction
64

Most Tactical Missiles with TVC or Reaction Jet


Control Also Use Aero Control
Jet Vane + Aero Control:

Sea Wolf GWS 26

Mica

Sea Sparrow RIM-7

AIM-9X

IRIS-T

A-Darter

Javelin

Jet Tab + Aero Control:


Archer AA-11

Reaction Jet + Aero Control:


PAC-3

Movable Nozzle + Aero Control + Reaction Jet:


SM-3 Standard Missile

Aster FSAF 15

Movable Nozzle + Reaction Jet:


THAAD

Reaction Jet:
LOSAT

2/24/2008

ELF

Example Video of TVC ( FSAF-15 and Javelin ) 65

Skid-to-Turn Is the Most Common Maneuver Law


Skid-To-Turn ( STT )
Advantage: Fast response
Features

STT
LO S

Does not require roll commands from autopilot


Works best for axisymmetric cruciform missiles

Maneuver w / o Roll Command

Bank-To-Turn ( BTT )

Advantage: Provides higher maneuverability for planar


wing, noncircular / lifting bodies, and airbreathers
Disadvantages

Target

BTT ( with
Planar Wing )
LO S

Time to roll
Requires fast roll rate
May have higher dome error slope

Target
Step 1: Roll Until
Wing LOS

Features

Roll attitude commands from autopilot


Small sideslip

LO S

Rolling Airframe ( RA )

Step 2: Maneuver @ Roll


Rate = 0 and Wing LOS

Advantage: Requires only two sets of gyros /


accelerometers / actuators ( packaging for small missile )
Disadvantages for aero control

Reduced maneuverability for aero control


Requires high rate gyros / actuators
Requires precision geometry and thrust alignment

Features
2/24/2008

Bias roll rate and roll moment


Can use impulse steering ( e.g., PAC-3, LOSAT )
Compensates for thrust offset
ELF

Target

RA
LO S

Target
Maneuver with Bias Roll
Moment

Bias Roll Rate ( e.g., 3 Hz )


66

Asymmetric Inlets Require Bank-to-Turn


Maneuvering
Examples of Twin Inlet Missiles with Bank-to-Turn
Twin Side Inlets Ramjet: ASMP
Twin Cheek Inlets Ducted Rocket: HSAD
Twin Cheek Inlets Ducted Rocket: Meteor
Examples of Single Inlet Missiles with Bank-to-Turn
Chin Inlet Ramjet: ASALM
Bottom Inlet Turbojet: BGM-109 Tomahawk
Bottom Inlet Turbojet: Storm Shadow / Scalp
Top Inlet Turbofan: AGM-86 ALCM
2/24/2008

Note: Bank-to-turn maneuvering maintains low sideslip for better inlet efficiency.
ELF

67

X Roll Orientation Is Usually Better Than + Roll


Orientation
Trailing edge
deflection

+ Roll Orientation with Four Tail Surfaces Control of Pitch / Yaw / Roll, Looking Forward from Base
Fin 1
Fin 4

Pitch Up

Fin 2

Yaw Right

Roll Right

Fin 3

X Roll Orientation with Four Tail Surfaces Control of Pitch / Yaw / Roll, Looking Forward from Base
4

Pitch Up

3
Note:

2/24/2008

Yaw Right

Roll Right

+ roll orientation usually has lower trim drag, less static stability and control effectiveness in pitch and yaw, and
statically unstable roll moment derivative ( Cl > 0 ).
X roll orientation has better launch platform compatibility, higher L / D, higher static stability and control
effectiveness in pitch and yaw, and statically stable roll moment derivative ( Cl < 0 ).
ELF

68

Trimmed Normal Force Is Defined at Zero


Pitching Moment
Normal Force, CN

= Trim for either statically unstable tail


control or statically stable canard control
=0
= Trim for either statically stable tail
control or statically unstable canard control

Pitching Moment, Cm

Angle of Attack ( Deg )

2/24/2008

= Max

Trim @ Cm = 0

Angle of Attack ( Deg )


=0

ELF

69

Relaxed Static Margin Allows Higher Trim Angle


of Attack and Higher Normal Force
Note: Rocket Baseline
XCG = 75.7 in.
Mach 2
( + )Max = 21.8 deg, ( CN
16

)
Trim Max

/ = 0.75, ( Static Margin = 0.88 Diam )


/ = 1.5, ( SM = 0.43 Diam )

( CN, Trim )max, Max


Trimmed Normal
Force Coefficient of
Rocket Baseline

/ = , ( SM = 0 )

12

12

16

20

24

( Trim )max, ax Trim Angle of Attack, deg


2/24/2008

ELF

70

Tails Are Sized for Desired Static Margin


CN

( CN ) W

( CN ) T

( CN ) B

+M
+
x = lN
( xAC )B
x=0

( xAC )W

M = 0 at aerodynamic center

xCG xAC

x = lB
( xAC )T

( CN )B {[ xCG ( xAC )B ] / d } + ( CN )W {[ xCG ( xAC )W ] / d } SW / SRef + ( CN )T {[ xCG ( xAC )T ] / d } ST / SRef

= - [( CN )B + ( CN )W SW / SRef + ( CN )T ST / SRef ] [( xAC xCG ) / d ]

Static margin for a specified tail area is


( xAC xCG ) / d = - {( CN )B {[ xCG ( xAC )B ] / d } + ( CN )W {[ xCG ( xAC )W ] / d } SW / SRef + ( CN )T {[ xCG ( xAC )T ] / d } ( ST / SRef )} /

[(CN )B + (CN )W SW / SRef + ( CN )T ST / SRef ]

Required tail area for a specified static margin is


ST / SRef = ( CN )B {[ xCG ( xAC )B ] / d } + ( CN )W {[ xCG ( xAC )W ] / d } ( SW / SRef ) + {[( CN )B + ( CN )W SW / SRef ][( xAC xCG ) / d ]}

/ {( CN )T [( xAC )T xCG ] / d - ( xAC xCG ) / d }

2/24/2008

ELF

71

Larger Tail Area Is Required for Neutral Stability


at High Mach Number
(ST)Neutral / SRef = { (CN)B [ xCG (xAC)B ] / d + (CN)W {[ xCG (xAC)W ] / d } ( SW / SRef )} / {{[ (xAC)T xCG ] / d } (CN)T }
5
0.2
=
)

Assumptions for figure:


XCG l / 2, (XAC)B d, ( XAC )T l d
f
/ S Re
< 6 deg, turbulent boundary layer
( SW
}
l
/
0 (CN)B = 2 per rad
)C W]
)=
f
xA
g)
(CN)T = (CN)W = 4 / [ M2 1 ]1/2, if M
(
/ S Re
n
i
G
w
> { 1 + [ 8 / ( A )]2 }1/2
}( S W
{[ x C ard
l
/
rw
) W]
( fo
C
5 (CN)T = (CN)W = A / 2, if M < { 1 +
xA
2
(
.

- 0 [ 8 / ( A )]2 }1/2
G
=
x
C
)
{[
f
Example Rocket Baseline:
/ S Re
W
S
(
l = 144 in, d = 8 in, SW = 2.55 ft2, SRef =
/l}
]
)W
0.349 ft2, AW = 2.82, (cMAC)W = 13.3 in,
x AC
(

xMAC = 67.0 in from nose tip, burnout


)
G
x
C
g
( xCG = 76.2 in from tip ), Mmax = 3
n
{[
wi
t
f
(a
(xAC)W = 0.49 ( 13.3 ) = 6.5 in from
leading edge of MAC

(ST)Neutral / SRef, Neutral Stability Tail Area /


Reference Area

(xAC)W = 6.5 + 67.0 = 73.5 in from nose

0
0

M, Mach Number

{[ xCG (xAC)W ] / l } ( SW / SRef ) = 0.14


( forward wing )
(ST)Neutral / SRef = 1.69 provides neutral
stability
(ST)Neutral = 1.69 ( 0.349 ) = 0.59 ft2

2/24/2008

ELF

72

Stability and Control Derivatives Conceptual


Design Criteria
| Clr / Cla | < 0.3 ( Roll Due to Rudder Deflection ) | Cl / Cla | < 0.5 ( Roll Due to Roll Angle )
Clr
z

Cla

Cla

Cl

| Cna / Cnr | < 0.2 ( Yaw Due to Aileron Deflection ) | Cm / Cm | < 1 ( Pitch Due to )
x

Cna

Cnr

Cm

Cm

2/24/2008

| Cl / Cla | < 0.3 ( Roll Due to Sideslip )


Cl

| Cn / Cnr | < 1 ( Yaw Due to Sideslip )


x

Cn

Cla

Cnr

Note: The primary control derivative ( larger bold font ) should be larger than the undesirable stability and control derivative.
ELF

73

Most of the Rocket Baseline Body Buildup Normal


Force Is Provided by the Wing
( CN )Total = ( CN )Wing-Body-Tail ( CN )Body + ( CN )Wing + ( CN )Tail
15

CN, Normal Force


Coefficient of
Rocket Baseline

Body + Wing + Tail

10

Body + Wing

5
Body
0

10

15

, Angle of Attack, Deg

20

25
Note for figure: M = 2, = 0

Note: ( CD0 )Total = ( CD0 )Wing-Body-Tail ( CD0 )Body + ( CD0 )Wing + ( CD0 )Tail
( Cm )Total = ( Cm )Wing-Body-Tail ( Cm )Body + ( Cm )Wing + ( Cm )Tail
2/24/2008

ELF

74

Summary of Aerodynamics
Conceptual Design Prediction Methods of Bodies and Surfaces
Normal force coefficient
Drag coefficient
Aerodynamic center / pitching moment coefficient / hinge moment

Design Tradeoffs
Diameter
Nose fineness
Boattail
Lifting body versus axisymmetric body
Wings versus no wings
Tails versus flares
Surface planform geometry
Flight control alternatives
Maneuver alternatives
Roll orientation
Static margin / time to converge or diverge
Tail sizing
2/24/2008

ELF

75

Summary of Aerodynamics ( cont )


Stability and Control Design Criteria
Static stability
Control effectiveness
Cross coupling

Body Buildup
New Aerodynamics Technologies
Faceted / window / multi-lens domes
Bank-to-turn maneuvering
Lifting body airframe
Forward swept surfaces
Neutral static margin
Lattice fins
Split canard control
Free-to-roll tails

Discussion / Questions?
Classroom Exercise
2/24/2008

ELF

76

Aerodynamics Problems
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
2/24/2008

Missile diameter tradeoffs include consideration of seeker range, warhead


lethality, structural mode frequency, and d___.
Benefits of a high fineness nose include lower supersonic drag and lower
r____ c____ s______.
Three contributors to drag are base drag, wave drag, and s___ f_______
drag.
To avoid flow separation, a boatail or flare angle should be less than __ deg.
A lifting body is most efficient at a d______ p_______ of about 700 psf.
At low angle of attack the aerodynamic center of the body is on the n___.
Subsonic missiles often have w____ for enhanced range.
The aerodynamic center of the wing is between 25% and 50% of the m___
a__________ c____.
Hinge moment increases with the local flow angle due to control surface
deflection and the a____ o_ a_____.
Increasing the surface area increases the s___ f_______ d___.
ELF

77

Aerodynamics Problems ( cont )


11.
12.

13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
2/24/2008

Leading edge sweep reduces drag and r____ c____ s______.


A missile with six control surfaces, four surfaces providing combined pitch /
yaw control plus two surfaces providing roll control, has an advantage of
good c______ e____________.
A missile with two control surfaces providing only combined pitch / yaw
control has advantages of lower c____ and good p________.
A tail control missile has larger trim normal force if it is statically u_______.
Lattice fins have low h____ m_____.
Split canards allow higher maximum angle of attack and higher
m______________.
Two types of unconventional control are thrust vector control and r_______
j__ control.
The most common type of TVC for tactical missiles is j__ v___ control.
Three maneuver laws are skid to turn, bank to turn, and r______ a_______.
Bank to turn maneuvering is usually required for missiles with a single wing
or with a_________ inlets.
ELF

78

Aerodynamics Problems ( cont )


21.
22.
23.
24.

25.

2/24/2008

A missile is statically stable if the aero center is behind the c_____ o_


g______.
Tail stabilizers have low drag while a f____ stabilizer has low aero heating
and a relatively small shift in static stability.
If the moments on the missile are zero the missile is in t___.
Total normal force on the missile is approximately the sum of the normal
forces on the surfaces ( e.g., wing, tail, canard ) plus normal force on the
b___.
Increasing the tail area increases the s_____ m________.

ELF

79

Outline
Introduction / Key Drivers in the Design Process
Aerodynamic Considerations in Tactical Missile Design
Propulsion Considerations in Tactical Missile Design
Weight Considerations in Tactical Missile Design
Flight Performance Considerations in Tactical Missile Design
Measures of Merit and Launch Platform Integration
Sizing Examples
Development Process
Summary and Lessons Learned
References and Communication
Appendices ( Homework Problems / Classroom Exercises,
Example of Request for Proposal, Nomenclature, Acronyms,
Conversion Factors, Syllabus )
2/24/2008

ELF

80

Missile Concept Synthesis Requires Evaluation


of Alternatives and Iteration
Define Mission Requirements
Alt Mission
Establish Baseline
Alt Baseline
Aerodynamics
Propulsion
Weight

Resize / Alt Config / Subsystems / Tech

Trajectory
Meet
Performance?

No

Yes
Measures of Merit and Constraints

No

Yes
2/24/2008

ELF

81

High Specific Impulse Is Indicative of Lower Fuel /


Propellant Consumption
ISP, Specific Impulse, Thrust / ( Fuel or Propellant
Weight Flow Rate ), S

4,000
Turbojet: ISP typically constrained by turbine temperature limit
3,000

Ramjet: ISP typically constrained by


combustor insulation temperature limit

2,000

Scramjet: ISP typically


constrained by thermal choking

1,000

Solid Rocket: ISP typically constrained


by safety

Ducted Rocket
0
0

10

12

Mach Number
2/24/2008

ELF

82

Cruise Range Is Driven by L/D, Isp, Velocity, and


Propellant or Fuel Weight Fraction
R = ( L / D ) Isp V In [ WL / ( WL WP )] , Breguet Range Equation
Typical Value for 2,000 lb Precision Strike Missile
Parameter

Subsonic Turbojet
Missile

Liquid Fuel
Ramjet Missile

Hydrocarbon Fuel
Scramjet Missile Solid Rocket

L / D, Lift / Drag

10

Isp, Specific Impulse

3,000 s

1,300 s

1,000 s

250 s

VAVG , Average Velocity

1,000 ft / s

3,500 ft / s

6,000 ft / s

3,000 ft / s

WP / WL, Cruise Propellant or


Fuel Weight / Launch Weight
R, Cruise Range

0.3

0.2

0.1

0.4

1,800 nm

830 nm

310 nm

250 nm

Note:

2/24/2008

Ramjet and Scramjet missiles booster propellant for Mach 2.5 to 4 take-over speed not included in WP
for cruise. Rockets require thrust magnitude control ( e.g., pintle, pulse, or gel motor ) for effective cruise.
Max range for a rocket is usually a semi-ballistic flight profile, instead of cruise flight. Multiple stages may
be required for rocket range greater than 200 nm.
ELF

83

( T / W )Max , ( Thrust / Weight )Max

Solid Rockets Have High Acceleration Capability


1,000

Solid Rocket
.

TMax = 2 Pc At = m Ve
100

10

Ramjet

Turbojet

TMax = ( / 4 ) d2 0 V02 [( Ve / V0 ) 1]
1
0

TMax = ( / 4 ) d2 0 V02 [( Ve / V0 ) 1]

M, Mach Number
Note:
.
Pc = Chamber pressure, At = Nozzle throat area, m = Mass flow rate
d = Diameter, 0 = Free stream density, V0 = Free stream velocity,
Ve = Nozzle exit velocity ( Turbojet: Ve ~ 2,000 ft / s, Ramjet: Ve ~ 4,500 ft / s, Rocket: Ve ~ 6,000 ft / s )
2/24/2008

ELF

84

Turbojet Nomenclature
Inlet

Compressor

Combustor

Turbine

Nozzle

0
Free Stream

Compressor Entrance

Compressor Exit

Inlet Entrance

2/24/2008

5
4

Turbine Exit

Turbine Entrance

ELF

85

High Temperature Compressors Are Required to


Achieve High Pressure Ratio at High Speed
T3, Compressor Exit Temperature, R

T3 T0 { 1 + [( 0 - 1 ) / 2 ] M02 }( p3 / p2 )( 3 - 1 ) / 3
p3 / p2 = 1
p3 / p2 = 2
p3 / p2 = 5
p3 / p2 = 10

0 = 1.4, 3 1.29 + 0.16 e-0.0007 T3

3000

Note: Ideal inlet; ideal compressor; low subsonic,


isentropic flow

2000
T3

1000

Example:
M0 = 2, h = 60k ft ( T0 = 398 R )
p3 / p2 = 5 T3 = 1118 R, 3 = 1.36

0
0

M0, Free Stream Mach Number


T3 = Compressor exit temperature in Rankine, T0 = free stream temperature in Rankine, = specific heat
ratio, M0 = free stream Mach number, p3 = compressor exit pressure, p2 = compressor entrance pressure

2/24/2008

ELF

86

High Turbine Temperature Is Required for High


Speed Turbojet Missiles
T4,Turbojet Turbine Temperature, R

T4 T3 + ( Hf / cp ) f / a, T in R

T3 = 500 R
T3 = 1000 R
T3 = 2000 R
T3 = 4000 R

cp4 0.122 T40.109, cp in BTU / lb / R

5000
4000
3000

T4

2000

Example:
M0 = 2, h = 60K ft ( T0 = 398 R ),
p3 / p2 = 5 T3 = 1118 R

1000
0
0

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0.06

0.07

RJ-5 fuel ( Hf = 14,525 BTU / lb ),


cp = 0.302 BTU / lb / R , f / a =
0.067 ( stochiometric ) T4 =
1118 + ( 14525 / 0.302 ) 0.067 =
4,340 R

f / a, Fuel-to-Air Ratio
T4 = Turbojet turbine entrance temperature in Rankine, T3 = compressor exit temperature in Rankine,
Hf = heating value of fuel, cp = specific heat at constant pressure, f / a = fuel-to-air ratio

2/24/2008

ELF

87

Turbine Material Temperature Limit Is a


Constraint for a High Speed Turbojet Missile
Max Short
Duration Temp

Turbine Material

Temperature Constrained
Turbines for Mach 4 Cruise

ISP for Mach


4 Cruise

3,000R

Nickel Super Alloys

Very Highly Constrained Turbojet,


Air Turbo Rocket, Turbo Ramjet

1,000 s

3,000R

Titanium Aluminides ( lighter


weight than nickel super alloys )

Very Highly Constrained Turbojet,


Air Turbo Rocket, Turbo Ramjet

1,000 s

3,500R

Single Crystal Nickel


Aluminides

Highly Constrained Turbojet

1,200 s

4,000R

Ceramic Matrix Composites

Moderately Constrained Turbojet

1,500 s

4,500R

Rhenium Alloys

Moderately Constrained Turbojet

2,000 s

5,000R

Tungsten Alloys

Slightly Constrained Turbojet

2,500 s

Note: Constrained turbojet for Mach 4 cruise imposes a limit on turbine temperature that is less than ideal. Constraints
could consist of a combination of:
Constraint on compressor pressure ratio to limit turbine temperature
Constraint on fuel-to-air ratio to limit turbine temperature
Use of afterburner to limit turbine temperature

2/24/2008

ELF

88

Turbine-Based Missiles Are Capable of Subsonic


to Supersonic Cruise
Turbojet

SS-N-19 Shipwreck
Firebee II

Turbo Ramjet

Regulus II

SR-71

Air Turbo Rocket

2/24/2008

ELF

89

Compressor Pressure Ratio for Maximum Thrust


Turbojet Is Limited by Turbine Temperature
( p3 / p2 )@Tmax {( T4 / T0 )1/2 / { 1 + [( 0 - 1 ) / 2 ] M02 }}4 / ( 4 - 1 )

( p3 / p2 )@Tmax

Assumptions: Ideal turbojet ( isentropic inlet, compressor, turbine, nozzle; low subsonic and constant pressure
combustion; exit pressure = free stream pressure )
100

10

Example:
M0 = 2.0, h = 60k ft (T0 = 390 R ) , T4 = 3,000 R,
4 = 1.31
( p3 / p2 )@Tmax = {{ ( 3000 / 390 )1/2 / { 1 + [( 1.4 1 ) / 2 ] 2.02 }}1.31/ ( 1.31 1 ) = 6.31
1

Note:
0

0.5

1.5

2.5

M0, Mach Number


T4 = 2000 R
T4 = 4000 R

3.5

T0 = Free stream temperature


T4 = Turbine entrance temperature

T4 = 3000 R
T4 = 5000 R

= Specific heat ratio

Source: Ashley, H., Engineering Analysis of Flight Vehicles, Dover Publications, Inc., New York, 1974

2/24/2008

ELF

90

Turbojet Thrust Is Limited by Turbine Maximum


Allowable Temperature
.

Note:
.

( T / m )IdealMax = Ve V0

Assumption: Ideal turbojet


20

Ve = { 2 cp T5t [ 1 ( p0 / p5t )( 5 - 1 ) / 5 ]}1/2


T5t T4 T3 + T2
T3 T2 ( p 3 / p 2 ) ( 3 - 1 ) / 3

15

=1

T2 T0 { 1 + [( 0 - 1 ) / 2 ] M02 }

/p

p5t p4 ( T5 / T4 )4 / ( 4 - 1 )
p4 = p 3

je t

(p

10

p2 p0 { 1 + [( 0 - 1 ) / 2 ] M02 }0 / ( 0 - 1 )

Ram

Tmax / [( p0 ) ( A0 )], Nondimensional Maximum


Thrust

TIdealMax / ( p0 A0 ) = ( 0 M0 / a0 ) ( T / m )IdealMax

p0 = Free stream static pressure

A0 = Free stream flow area into inlet


T4 = Turbine entrance temperature

0
0

M0, Mach Number


T4 = 2000 R
T4 = 4000 R

T4 = 3000 R
T4 = 5000 R

Example: M0 = 2, h = 60 k ft ( T0 = 390 R, p0
= 1.047 psi ), T4 = 3,000 R, 4 = 1.31, ( p3 /
p2 )@Tmax = 6.31, p2 = 8.19 psi, p3 = 51.7 psi,
A0 = 114 in2, T2 = 702 R, T3 = 1133 R, 3 =
1.36
p5t = 23.0 psi, Ve =
T5t = 2569 R, 5 = 1.32,
.
4524 ft / s, ( T / m )IdealMax = 2588 ft / s,
TIdealMax / p0 A0 = 7.49
TIdealMax = 7.49 ( 1.047 ) ( 114 ) = 894 lb

2/24/2008

ELF

91

Turbojet Specific Impulse Decreases with


Supersonic Mach Number
( ISP )Ideal@Tmax gc cp T0 / ( a0 Hf ) = TIdealMax T0 / [( p0 A0 0 M0 ) ( T4 T3 )]

( ISP )Ideal ( gc ) ( cp ) ( T0) / [ ( a0 ) ( Hf )],


Nondimensional Ideal Specific Impulse

Assumptions: Ideal turbojet ( isentropic inlet, compressor, turbine, nozzle; flow, low subsonic, constant pressure combustion;
exit pressure = free stream pressure), max thrust
Example:
0.8

0.6

Ra
mje

M0 = 2, h = 60k ft ( T0 = 390 R, a0 = 968 ft / s


), RJ-5 fuel ( Hf = 14,525 BTU / lbm ), T4 =
3,000 R, cp = 0.293 BTU / lbm / R, 0 = 1.4
t(p

/p

0.4

=1

Calculate ( ISP )Ideal@Tmax gc cp T0 / ( a0 Hf ) =


0.559
( ISP )Ideal@Tmax = 0.559 ( 968 ) ( 14525 ) / [ 32.2
( 0.293 ) ( 390 )] = 2136 s

Note:
gc = Gravitational constant = 32.2

0.2

cp = Specific heat at constant pressure


T0 = Free stream temperature
0
0

M0, Mach Number


T4 = 2000 R
T4 = 4000 R

a0 = Free stream speed of sound


Hf = Heating value of fuel
TIdealMax = Ideal maximum thrust

T4 = 3000 R
T4 = 5000 R

= Specific heat ratio


T4 = Combustor exit temperature
T3 = Compressor exit temperature

2/24/2008

ELF

92

Tactical Missile Ramjet Propulsion Alternatives


Liquid Fuel Ramjet
Rocket Boost Inboard Profile
Ramjet Sustain Inboard Profile

Note:
Booster Propellant
Fuel

Solid Fuel Ramjet


Boost
Sustain

Solid Ducted Rocket


Boost
Sustain

2/24/2008

ELF

93

High Specific Impulse for a Ramjet Occurs Using


High Heating Value Fuel at Mach 3 to 4

( ISP )Ideal gc cp T0 / ( a0 Hf ) = { M0 {{( T4 / T0 ) / { 1 + [( 0 - 1 ) / 2 ] M02 }}1/2 - 1 } / {{ 1 + [( 0 - 1 ) / 2 ] M02 } {( T4 / T0 ) / {


1 + [( 0 - 1 ) / 2 ] M02 }} 1 }

( ISP )Ideal ( gc ) ( cp ) ( T0) / [ ( a0 ) ( Hf )],


Nondimensional Ideal Specific Impulse

Assumptions: Ideal ramjet, isentropic inlet and nozzle, low subsonic and constant pressure combustion, exit pressure = free
stream pressure, 1
Example for Ramjet Baseline:
0.6
M = 3.5, h = 60k ft ( T0 = 390 R, a0 = 968 ft / s ),
RJ-5 fuel ( Hf = 14,525 BTU / lbm ), T4 = 4,000 R,
cp = 0.302 BTU / lbm / R, 0 = 1.4
Calculate ( ISP )Ideal gc cp T0 / ( a0 Hf ) = { 3.5 {{(
4000 / 390 ) / { 1 + [( 1.4 - 1 ) / 2 ] 3.52 }}1/2 - 1 } / {{
1 + [( 1.4 - 1 ) / 2 ] 3.52 } {( 4000 / 390 ) / { 1 + [(
1.4 - 1 ) / 2 ] 3.52 }} 1 } = 0.372

0.4

( ISP )Ideal = 0.372 ( 968 ) ( 14525 ) / [ 32.2 ( 0.302 ) (


390 ) = 1387 s

0.2

Note:
gc = Gravitational constant = 32.2
cp = Specific heat at constant pressure

0
0

M0, Free Stream Mach Number


T4 / T0 = 3
T4 / T0 = 10

T4 / T0 = 5
T4 / T0 = 15

T0 = Free stream temperature


a0 = Free stream speed of sound
Hf = Heating value of fuel
= Specific heat ratio
T4 = Combustor exit temperature

Source: Ashley, H., Engineering Analysis of Flight Vehicles, Dover Publications, Inc., New York, 1974

2/24/2008

ELF

94

High Thrust for a Ramjet Occurs from Mach 3 to


5 with High Combustion Temperature
TIdeal / ( p0 A0 ) = 0 M02 {{[ T4 / T0 ] / { 1 + [( 0 - 1 ) / 2 ] M02 }}1/2 - 1 }
Assumptions: Ideal ramjet, isentropic inlet and nozzle, low subsonic and constant pressure
combustion, exit pressure = free stream pressure, 1
T / [ PHI ( p0 ) (A0 ) ], Nondimimensional
Thrust

25

Note: T4 and T0 in R

Example for Ramjet Baseline:

20

M0 = 3.5, = 0 deg, h = 60k ft ( T0 = 390 R, p0 =


1.047 psi ), T4 = 4,000 R, ( f / a ) = 0.055, =
0.82, A0 = 114 in2, 0 = 1.4

15

TIdeal / ( p0 A0 ) = 1.4 ( 3.5 )2 {{[ 4000 / 390 ] / { 1


+ [( 1.4 1 ) / 2 ] ( 3.5 )2 }}1/2 1 } = 12.43
TIdeal = 12.43 ( 0.82 ) ( 1.047 ) ( 114 ) = 1216 lb

10

Note:
( T )Ideal = Ideal thrust
p0 = Free stream static pressure

A0 = Free stream flow area into inlet


0 = Free stream specific heat ratio

0
0

M0, Free Stream Mach Number


T4 / T0 = 3
T4 / T0 = 10

T4 / T0 = 5
T4 / T0 = 15

M0 = Free stream Mach number


T4 = Combustor exit temperature
T0 = Free stream temperature
= Equivalence ratio = fuel-to-air ratio /
stochiometric fuel-to-air ratio

Source: Ashley, H., Engineering Analysis of Flight Vehicles, Dover Publications, Inc., New York, 1974

2/24/2008

ELF

95

Ramjet Combustor Temperature Increases with


Mach Number and Fuel Flow
T4 T0 { 1 + [( 0 - 1 ) / 2 ] M02 } + ( Hf / cp ) ( f / a )

T4, Combustor Exit Temperature for RJ-5


Fuel, Rankine

Assumptions: Low subsonic combustion. No heat transfer through inlet ( isentropic


flow ). 1.
T4 = combustor exit temperature in Rankine, T0 = free stream temperature in Rankine,
= specific heat ratio, M0 = free stream Mach number, Hf = heating value of fuel, cp =
specific heat at constant pressure, f / a = fuel-to-air ratio.

6000

Example:
M0 = 3.5

4000

h = 60k ft ( T0 = 390 R )
RJ-5 fuel ( Hf = 14,525 BTU / lb / R )
f / a = 0.055

2000

0 = 1.4
cp = 0.122 T0.109 BTU / lbm / R.
Note: cp 0.302 +/- 5% if 2500 R < T < 5000 R

0
0

Then T4 = 390 { 1 + [( 1.4 1 ) / 2 ] ( 3.5 )2 } +


[( 14525 ) / ( 0.302 )] 0.055 = 3,991 R

M0, Free Stream Mach Number


f / a = 0.01
2/24/2008

f / a = 0.03

f / a = 0.05

f / a = 0.067

Note: ( f / a ) = 1 0.067 for stochiometric combustion of liquid hydrocarbon fuel, e.g., RJ-5.
ELF

96

Ramjet Combustor Entrance Mach Number


Should Be Low, to Avoid Thermal Choking
( M3 )TC = {{ - b + [ b2 4 32 ]1/2 } / ( 2 32 )}1/2
b = 2 3 + ( T4t / T0 )( 1 + 4 )2 / {( 1 + 0.2 M02 )[ 1 + ( 4 1 ) / 2 ]}
Assumptions: Constant area combustion, [( 3 1 ) / 2 ] M32 << 1, isentropic inlet

( M3 )TC, Combustor Entrance Mach


Number with Thermal Choking

0.4

Example:
M0 = 2, h = 60k ft ( T0 = 390 R ), T4t = 4,000 R, 0 = 1.4
4 = 1.29 + 0.16 e-0.0007 ( 4000 ) = 1.300

0.3

T0t = ( 1 + 0.2 M02 ) T0 = 702 R


3 = 1.29 + 0.16 e-0.0007 ( 702 ) = 1.388
b = 2 ( 1.388 ) + ( 4000 / 390 )( 1 + 1.300 )2 / {( 1 + 0.2
( 22 )[ 1 + ( 1.300 1 ) / 2 ]} = - 24.211

0.2

( M3 )TC = {{ 24.211 + [( -24.211 )2 4 ( 1.3882 )


]1/2 } / [ 2 ( 1.3882 )]}1/2 = 0.204

0.1

Note:
( M3 )TC = Combustor entrance Mach number with
thermal choking ( M4 = 1 )

0
0

M0 = Free stream Mach number

M0, Free Stream Mach Number


T4t / T0 = 3
T4t / T0 = 10
2/24/2008

3 = Specific heat ratio at combustor entrance

T4t / T0 = 5
T4t / T0 = 15
ELF

T4t = Combustor exit total temperature


T0 = Free stream static temperature
4 = Specific heat ratio in combustion
97

A Ramjet Combustor with a Low Entrance Mach


Number Requires a Small Inlet Throat Area
AIT / A3 = [( + 1 ) / 2 ]( + 1 ) / [ 2 ( - 1 )] M3 {[ 1 + ( - 1 ) / 2 ] M32 }-( + 1 ) / [ 2 ( - 1 )] = ( 216 / 215 ) M3 ( 1 + M32 / 5 )-3
Assumptions: Isentropic inlet, MIT = 1, = 1.4
Note:

M3, Combustor Entrance Mach Number

AIT = Inlet throat area


A3 = Combustor entrance area

0.8

M3 = Combustor entrance Mach number


= Specific heat ratio
Example:

0.6

Ramjet Baseline
AIT = 41.9 in2

0.4

A3 = 287 in2
AIT / A3 = 41.9 / 287 = 0.1459

0.2

Assume sonic flow ( M = 1 ) at AIT


M3 = 0.085
M3 = 0.085 < ( M3 )TC = 0.204

0
0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

( A )IT / A3, Inlet Throat Area to Combustor Area Ratio

2/24/2008

ELF

98

Typical Ramjet Has Nearly Constant Pressure


Combustion
Assume Rayleigh Flow, with Heat Addition at
Constant Area
Negligible Friction

Pressure Loss in Combustor is Given by


p4 / p3 = ( 1 + 3 M32 ) / ( 1 + 4 M42 )

Mach Number Increase in Combustor Is Given by


T4t / T0 = [( 1 + 3 M32 ) / ( 1 + 4 M42 )]2 ( M4 / M3 )2 { 1 + [( 4 1 ) / 2 ] M42 } / { 1 + [( 3 1 ) / 2 ] M32 }

From Prior Example


M0 = 2, h = 60k ft ( T0 = 390 R ), T4t = 4,000 R, 0 = 1.4, 4 = 1.300, and 3 = 1.388

Assume Ramjet Baseline with Sonic Inlet Throat


AIT / A3 = 41.9 / 287 = 0.1459 M3 = 0.085

Solving Above Equations


M4 = 0.304
p4 / p3 = 0.902

Assumption of Nearly Constant Pressure Combustion Is Reasonably Accurate


10% error
2/24/2008

ELF

99

Minimum Length for the Combustor Is a


Function of Combustion Velocity
( lcomb )min = tcomb Vcomb
Minimum Combustor Length, ft

10

tcomb = 0.001 s
tcomb = 0.002 s
tcomb = 0.004 s

Example for tcomb = 0.002 s and


Subsonic Combustion Ramjet:
Vcomb = 200 ft / s

0.1

( lcomb )min = 0.002 ( 200 ) = 0.4 ft

100

1000

10000

Vcomb, Combustion Velocity, ft / s

Example for tcomb = 0.002 s and


Scramjet:
Vcomb = 3,000 ft / s
( lcomb )min = 0.002 ( 3000 ) = 6.0 ft

2/24/2008

ELF

100

Ramjet Engine / Booster Integration Options


Fuel
Boost Propellant

Low Cruise Drag ( Modern Ramjets )


Integral-Rocket Ramjet ( IRR )

Aft Drop-off Booster

Forward Booster

Podded Drop-off Booster

High Cruise Drag


Podded Ramjet
Podded IRR

Podded Ramjet, Aft Drop-off Booster

Source: Kinroth, G.D. and Anderson, W.R., Ramjet


Design Handbook, CPIA Pub. 319, June 1980
2/24/2008

ELF

101

Inlet
Compatibility

Cost

Carry Drag

Cruise Drag

Ejectables

Weight

Diameter

Length

Selection Factors

Cycle
Compatibility

Ramjet Engine / Booster Integration Trades

Integral Rocket Ramjet ( IRR )


Aft Booster ( Drop-off )

Forward Booster

Podded Booster ( Drop-off )

Podded Ramjet

Podded IRR
Podded Ramjet
Aft Booster ( Drop-off )

Superior

Above Average

Average Below average

Source: Kinroth, G.D. and Anderson, W.R., Ramjet Design Handbook, CPIA Pub. 319, June 1980
2/24/2008

ELF

102

Ramjets with Internal Boosters and No Wings


Have Low Drag
1.2

Podded Ramjet

CD0 = DO / ( q SREF ), Zero-Lift Drag


Coefficient

Podded IRR
Podded Ramjet, Aft Drop
Off Booster
IRR
Aft Drop Off Booster
Forward Booster
Podded Drop Off Booster
IRR
Aft Drop-off Booster

0.8

With Wings

CD0
Without Wings
0.4

Forward Booster
Podded Drop-off Booster
0

Note:
Nose Fineness Ratio 2.25
Nose Bluntness Ratio 0.20

M, Mach Number

Source: Kinroth, G.D. and Anderson, W.R., Ramjet Design Handbook, CPIA Pub. 319, June 1980
2/24/2008

ELF

103

Ramjet Inlet Options


Type Inlet

Sketch

Placement

Nose

Nose-full axisymmetric
Forward underside in nose compression fieldpartial axisymmetric
Forward in nose compression field-cruciform ( four )
axisymmetric

Chin
Forward Cruciform
Axisymmetric
Aft Cruciform
Axisymmetric

Aft-cruciform ( four ) axisymmetric

Under Wing Axisymmetric

In planar wing compression field-twin axisymmetric

Twin Two-dimensional

Aft-twin cheek-mounted two dimensional

Underslung Axisymmetric

Aft underside-full axisymmetric

Underslung Twodimensional

Aft underside-belly mounted two dimensional

Cruciform Two-dimensional

Aft-cruciform ( four ) two dimensional

Source: Kinroth, G.D. and Anderson, W.R., Ramjet Design Handbook, CPIA Pub. 319, June 1980.
2/24/2008

ELF

104

Ramjet Inlet Concept Trades


Prime
Mission
Suitability

STT

W, C

ATS, STA

BTT
STT

T
T

ATS, ATA, STA


ATS, ATA, STA

STT

ATS

BTT

ATS, ATA, STA

BTT

ATS, ATA, STA

BTT

ATS

BTT

ATS, ATA, STA

STT

ATS

inlet Cost

Preferred
Control

Warhead
Shrouding

Preferred
Steering

Drag

Weight

Alpha
Capability

Carriage
Envelope

Recovery

Type Inlet

Pressure

Selection Factors

Note:
BTT = Bank to Turn
STT = Skid to Turn
W = Wing C = Canard
T = Tail

Superior

Above Average

Average Below average

Source: Kinroth, G.D. and Anderson, W.R., Ramjet Design Handbook, CPIA Pub. 319, June 1980
2/24/2008

ELF

105

Current Supersonic Air-breathing Missiles Have


Either a Nose Inlet or Axisymmetric Aft Inlets
United Kingdom
Sea Dart GWS-30
France
ASMP

ANS

AS-17 / Kh-31

Kh-41

SS-N-22 / 3M80

SA-6

SS-N-19

SS-N-26

C-101

C-301

Russia

China
Taiwan
Hsiung Feng III
India
BrahMos
Aft inlets have lower inlet volume and do not degrade lethality of forward located warhead.
Nose Inlet may have higher flow capture, pressure recovery, smaller carriage envelope, and lower drag.
2/24/2008

ELF

106

Shock on Inlet Cowl Lip Prevents Spillage


Inlet w/o External Compression
Inlet Swallows 100% of the Free
Stream Flow
External Compression Required for
Efficient Pressure Recovery if Mach
Number > 2 and Inlet Start at Low
Supersonic Mach number

External Compression Inlet ( with


Spillage )

Spillage
Shocks

Shocks Converge Outside Inlet Lip


( Results in Spillage Air )

External Compression Inlet ( w/o


Spillage )

Shocks

Inlet Swallows 100% of the Free


Stream Flow

2/24/2008

Shocks Converge at Inlet Lip ( Inlet


Captures Maximum Free Stream
Flow )

ELF

107

Shock Wave Angle Increases with Deflection


Angle and Decreases with Mach Number
tan ( + ) = 2 cot 2D ( M2 sin2 2D 1 ) / [ 2 + M2 ( + 1 2 sin2 2D )] , for 2D flow, perfect gas

Theta, 2D Shock Wave Angle @ Gamma =


1.4, Degrees

Note: 2D = 2D shock wave angle, M = Mach number, = angle of attack, = body deflection angle, = specific heat
ratio, conical 0.81 2D

50
Example for Ramjet Baseline:

40

30

20

= 17.7 deg, M = 3.5, = 0 deg, = 1.4


2D = 32 deg

10

conical 0.81 2D = 0.81 ( 32 ) = 26 deg


Approximate estimate of :

0
0

10

15

20

Alpha + Delta, Deflection Angle, Degrees


Mach 2 ( Deltamax = 23 deg )
Mach 5 ( Deltamax = 41 deg )
2/24/2008

2D + + = sin-1 ( 1 / M ) + +
conical 0.81 2D = 0.81 [ sin-1 ( 1 / M ) +
+]

Mach 3 ( Deltamax = 34 deg )

ELF

108

Capture Efficiency of an Inlet Increases with Mach


Number
( A0 / Ac )conical = ( h / l ) ( 1 + M + M ) / [( 1 0.23M + M )( + h / l )] , conical nose with forward inlet
( A0 / Ac )2D = ( h / l ) ( 1 + M + M ) / [( 1 + M )( + h / l )] , 2D nose with forward inlet
Note: A0 / Ac 1, AC = inlet capture area, A0 = free stream flow area, = defection angle in rad, h = inlet height, l =
distance from nose tip to inlet

A0 / Ac, Baseline Ramjet Inlet Capture


Efficiency

stream
lin

A0

streamline
Ac
streamline

0.8

oblique shock

0.6

body
h inlet
stream
lin

Example for baseline ramjet ( conical


nose )

0.4

h = 3 in

0.2

l = 23.5 in
h / l = 0.1277
AC = 114 in2

0
0

Alpha = 0 Deg

= 17.7 deg ( 0.3089 rad )


M = 3.5, = 0 deg

M, Mach Number

2/24/2008

nose

Alpha = 10 Deg
ELF

A0 / Ac = 0.81 A0 = 92 in2
Spillage = Ac - A0 = 114 - 92 = 22 in2
109

Isentropic Compression Allows Inlet Start at


Lower Mach Number
AIT / A0 = 1.728 ( MIE )start [ 1 + 0.2 ( MIE )start2 )-3, Assumptions: 2-D inlet, Isentropic flow through inlet ( n = ), = 1.4
AIT / A0 = ( MIE )start {[ 0.4 ( MIE )start2 + 2 ] / [ 2.4 ( MIE )start2 ]3.5 }{[2.8 ( MIE )start2 0.4 ] / 2.4 }2.5 {[ 1.2 / ( 1 + 0.2 (
MIE )start2 ]}3, Assumptions: 2-D inlet, single normal shock ( n = 1 ), = 1.4

( M )IE, Inlet Entrance Start Mach


Number

Note: AIT = inlet throat area, A0 = free stream flow area, ( MIE )start = inlet entrance start Mach number, = specific heat
ratio, n = number of shocks
4
Example for ramjet baseline
n=

AIT = 0.29 ft2

n=1

Ac = 114 in2 = 0.79 ft2 AIT / Ac = 0.367


Process:
1. Assume ( MIE )start

2. Compute capture efficiency AIT / A0


3. Compute ( MIE )start and compare with
assumed ( MIE )start

4. Iterate until convergence


Limit for isentropic compression

0
0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

AIT / A0
Inlet Start for Isentropic Compression
Inlet Start for Single Normal Shock
2/24/2008

ELF

- From Prior Figure, A0 / Ac = 0.53


- Compute AIT / A0 = ( AIT / Ac ) / ( A0 / Ac ) =
0.367 / 0.53 = 0.69 ( MIE )start = 1.8
Ramjet baseline has mixed compression
with n = 5. Actual inlet start Mach
number is ( MIE )start > 1.8
110

Forebody Shock Compression Reduces the Inlet


Entrance Mach Number
( MIE )2D = {{ 36 M04 sin2 2D - 5 [ M02 sin2 2D - 1 ][ 7 M02 sin2 2D + 5 ]} / {[ 7 M02 sin2 2D - 1 ][ M02 sin2 2D + 5 ]}}1/2

tan ( + ) = 2 cot 2D ( M02 sin2 2D 1 ) / [ 2 + M02 ( 2.4 2 sin2 2D )]


Assumptions: 2D flow, perfect gas, = specific heat ratio = 1.4
Note: MIEt= inlet entrance Mach number, M0 = free stream Mach number, = oblique shock angle, = angle of attack, = body
deflection angle

( M )IE, Inlet Entrance Mach Number

Example for ramjet baseline

= 17.7 deg
( MIE )start = 1.8 ( from prior example )

Compute M0 = 2.55
Note: Ramjet baseline forebody is
conical, not 2D

0
0

10

20

30

40

Alpha + Delta, Local Angle of Attack at Inlet Entrance, Deg


M0 = 2
2/24/2008

M0 = 3

M0 = 5
ELF

111

Optimum Forebody Deflection Angle(s) for Best


Pressure Recovery Increases with Mach Number
Note: Total = Total deflection angle,
1 = 1st deflection angle, 2 = 2nd
deflection, 3 = 3rd deflection.

First External Shock


Second External Shock

Optimum Total Deflection Angle, Deg

60

Optimum deflection angle provides


equal loss in total pressure across
each shock wave.

Total

Optimum deflection angles are


nearly equal for M > 4.

12.1, 15.2, 19.4


11.1, 13.0, 15.5

40

16.1, 22.1

15.0, 18.8
7.6, 8.2, 8.2
10.4, 11.2

20

Example: Optimum forebody deflection angles for


double wedge ( n = 3 ) at Mach 2: 1 = 10.4 deg, 2
= 11.2 deg total = 10.4 + 11.2 = 21.6 deg

0
0

M0, Free Stream Mach Number


n=1
2/24/2008

n=2

n=3

n=4

Isentropic Compression

Reference: Technical Aerodynamics Manual, North American Rockwell Corporation, DTIC AD 723823, June 1970.
ELF

112

Oblique Shocks Prior to the Inlet Normal Shock


Are Required to Satisfy MIL-E-5008B
MIL-E-5008B Requirement: ptInlet / pt0 = 1 0.075 ( M 1 )1.35

PtInlet / pt0, Inlet Total Pressure


Ratio

n = 1 ( Normal Shock )
n = 2 ( 1 Optimum Oblique
Shock + Normal Shock )
n = 3 ( 2 Opt Oblique
Shocks + Normal Shock )
n = 4 ( 3 Opt Oblique
Shocks + Normal Shock
Ideal Isentropic Inlet

0.1

MIL-E-5008B
0.01

Note: 2D flow assumed

M, Mach Number

pt

Inlet

= Inlet total pressure

pt = Free stream total pressure


0

Example: MIL-E-5008B requirement for Mach 3.5 ( pt / pt = inlet = 0.74 ) can be satisfied only if there are more
Inlet
0
than three oblique shocks prior to inlet normal shock.
Source for Optimum 2D Shocks: Oswatitsch, K.L., Pressure Recovery for Missiles with Reaction Propulsion at High
Supersonic Speeds, NACA TM - 1140, 1947.
2/24/2008

ELF

113

High Density Fuels Provide Higher Volumetric


Performance but Have Higher Observables
Type Fuel

Density,
lb / in3

Volumetric
Performance,
BTU / in3

Low
Observables

Turbine ( JP-4, JP-5, JP-7, JP-8, JP-10 )

~ 0.028

559

Liquid Ramjet ( RJ-4, RJ-5, RJ-6, RJ-7 )

~ 0.040

581

HTPB

~ 0.034

606

Slurry ( 40% JP-10 / 60% carbon )

~ 0.049

801

Solid Carbon ( graphite )

~ 0.075

1132

Slurry ( 40% JP-10 / 60% aluminum )

~ 0.072

866

Slurry ( 40% JP-10 / 60% boron carbide )

~ 0.050

1191

Solid Mg

~ 0.068

1200

Solid Al

~ 0.101

1300

Solid Boron

~ 0.082

2040

2/24/2008

Superior

Above average
ELF

Average

Below average
114

Ducted Rocket Design Implications


Excess Fuel from Gas Generator
~ 30 % Behaves more like a rocket ( higher burn rate, higher burn
temperature, lower ISP )
~ 70 % Behaves more like a ramjet ( higher ISP, lower burn rate, lower
burn temperature )

Choice of Fuel
Metal ( e.g., B, Al, Mg ) Higher ISP, higher density, deposits, higher
observables
Carbon based ( e.g., C, HTPB ) Lower observables, higher reliability,
lower ISP

Choice of Oxidizer

AP Higher burn rate, lower hazard, HCl contrail


Min Smoke ( e.g., HMX, RDX ) Lower Observables, lower heating value,
lower burn rate, hazardous

Thrust Magnitude Control Approaches


Pintle or valve in gas generator throat
Retractable wires in grain
2/24/2008

ELF

115

High Propellant Fraction Increases Burnout


Velocity
5000

V = -gc Isp ln (1 - Wp / Wi)


Assumption: T >> D, T >> W sin , = const

4000
Isp = 250 s
V, Missile

3000

Isp = 200 s

Incremental
Burnout Velocity,
2000
ft / s

Example: Rocket Baseline


Wi,boost = WL = 500 lb, Wp, boost = 84.8 lb
ISP, boost = 250 s
WP, boost / Wi = 84.8 / 500 = 0.1696
V = -32.2 ( 250 ) ln ( 1 - 0.1696 ) = 1496 ft / s

1000

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

WP / Wi, Propellant Weight / Initial Missile Weight


2/24/2008

ELF

116

High Specific Impulse Requires High Chamber


Pressure and Optimum Nozzle Expansion
ISP = cd {{[ 2 2 / ( - 1 )] [ 2 / ( + 1 )] ( + 1 ) / ( - 1 ) [ 1 ( pe / pc ) ( - 1 ) / ]}1/2 + ( pe / pc ) - ( p0 / pc ) } c* / gc
.

T = w p ISP = ( gc / c* ) pc At ISP
Isp, Specific Impulse of Rocket Baseline, s

= {[ 2 / ( + 1 )]1 / ( - 1 ) [( -1 ) / ( + 1 )]1/2 } / {( pe / pc )1 / [ 1 - ( pe / pc ) ( - 1 ) / ]1/2 }


Note:
= nozzle expansion ratio
pe = exit pressure
pc = chamber pressure
p0 = atmospheric pressure
.
w P = propellant weight flow rate
At = nozzle throat area ( minimum, sonic, choked )
= specific heat ratio = 1.18 in figure
cd = discharge coefficient = 0.96 in figure
c* = characteristic velocity = 5,200 ft / s in figure
h = 20k ft, p0 = 6.75 psi in figure
Example for Rocket Baseline:

300

250

= Ae / At = 6.2 pe / pc = 0.02488, At = 1.81 in2

200
0

10

20

30

Nozzle Expansion Ratio


pc = 300 psi
pc = 2000 psi

( pc )boost = 1769 psi, pe = 44 psi, ( ISP )boost = 257 s


( ISP ) = 6.2 / ( ISP ) = 1 = 257 / 200 = 1.29
( T )boost = ( 32.2 / 5200 ) ( 1769 ) (1.81 )( 257 ) = 5096 lb

pc = 1000 psi
pc = 3000 psi

( pc )sustain = 301 psi, pe = 7.49 psi, ( ISP )sustain = 239 s


( ISP ) = 6.2 / ( ISP ) = 1 = 240 / 200 = 1.20
( T )sustain = ( 32.2 / 5200 ) ( 301 ) (1.81 )( 240 ) = 810 lb

2/24/2008

ELF

117

High Propellant Weight Flow Rate Requires High


Chamber Pressure and Large Nozzle Throat
.

(pc)At, Chamber Pressure x Nozzle


Throat Area, lb

w p = gc pc At / c*

100000

10000

c* = 4800 ft / s
c* = 5200 ft / s
c* = 5600 ft / s

1000

Rocket Baseline At for Boost:


c* = 5200 ft / s
( pc )boost = 1,769 psi

100

w p = Wp / tb = 84.8 / 3.69 = 23.0 lb / s

10

100

Propellant Weight Flow Rate, lb / s

pc At = c* w p / gc = 5200 ( 23.0 ) / 32.2


= 3,714 lb
At = 3714 / 1769 = 2.10 in2

2/24/2008

Note: At = nozzle throat area, c* = characteristic velocity, w p = propellant weight flow rate, gc = gravitational constant,
pc = chamber pressure
ELF

118

Ab, Rocket Baseline Propellant Burn Area, in2

High Chamber Pressure Requires Large


Propellant Burn Area and Small Nozzle Throat
600

Ab = gc pcAt / ( c*r )

Example Ab for Rocket


Baseline:

r = rpc=1000 psi ( pc / 1000 )n

At= 1.81 in2


= 0.065 lb / in3
n = 0.3
rp

400

c = 1000 psi

= 0.5 in / s

c* = 5,200 ft / s
Tatmosphere = 70 F
For sustain ( pc = 301 psi ):
r = 0.5 ( 301 / 1000 )0.3 = 0.35
in / s

200

Ab = 149 in2
For boost ( pc = 1,769 psi )
r = 0.59 in / s
Ab = 514 in2

0
0

500

1000

1500

2000

Pc, Rocket Baseline Motor Chamber Pressure, psi


Note: Ab = propellant burn area, gc = gravitation constant, At = nozzle throat area, = density of propellant, c* = characteristic velocity,
r = propellant burn rate, rp =1000 psi = propellant burn rate at pc = 1,000 psi, pc = chamber pressure, n = burn rate exponent
c

2/24/2008

ELF

119

Conceptual Design Sizing Process for a Rocket


Motor
1. Define Altitude and Required Thrust-time

New Value ( s )

2. Assume Propellant ( Characteristic Velocity, Nominal


Burn Rate, Burn Rate Exponent ), Chamber Pressure, Burn
Area, and Nozzle Geometry ( Expansion Ratio, Throat Area )

New Value ( s )

3. Compute ISP and


Thrust
OK?
Yes

No

4. Compute Propellant Weight Flow Rate and Propellant Used


OK?
Yes

No

5. Determine Diameter and Length to Satisfy wp and Ae


OK?
Yes
2/24/2008

ELF

No
120

Conventional Solid Rocket Thrust-Time Design


Alternatives with Propellant Cross-Section

Climb at
constant
dynamic
pressure
Fast launch
cruise
Fast launch
cruise high
speed terminal

Thrust ( lb ) Thrust ( lb )

Dive at
constant
dynamic
pressure

Thrust ( lb )

Cruise

Thrust Profile
Thrust ( lb ) Thrust ( lb )

Example Mission

Example Web Cross Section / Volumetric Loading

Constant
Thrust

~ 82%

Burning Time ( s )

End Burner

~90%
Radial Slotted Tube

~ 79%

Regressive
Thrust
Burning Time ( s )

~ 87%

Progressive
Thrust
Burning Time ( s )

Production of Star Web Propellant.

~ 85% Photo Courtesy of BAE

Boost-Sustain
Burning Time ( s )
Boost-Sustain-Boost

~ 85%

Burning Time ( s )
Note: High thrust and chamber pressure require large surface burn area.

2/24/2008

~95%

ELF

Medium Burn Rate Propellant


High Burn Rate Propellant

121

Conventional Rocket Has Fixed Burn while


Thrust Magnitude Control Can Vary Burn Interval
Conventional Fixed Burn Interval ( Boost )

End Burning

Radial Burning

Conventional Fixed Burn Interval ( Boost Sustain )

Concentric Radial Burning


High Burn Rate Boost
Low Burn Rate Sustain

Radial Boost
End Burning Sustain
Simultaneous Burning

Pulse Motor TMC Variable Burn Interval ( Boost Coast Boost / Sustain - Coast )

1st Pulse: Radial Boost


2nd Pulse: End Burning Sustain
Separate Burning ( Pulsed Motor )

1st Pulse: Radial Boost


2nd Pulse: Radial Sustain / Boost
Separate Burning ( Pulsed Motor )

Note: Each pulse increases motor cost approximately 40%.


2/24/2008

ELF

Boost Propellant
Sustain Propellant
122

Tactical Rocket Motor Thrust Magnitude Control


Alternatives
Solid Pulse Motor
High ISP
Limited Pulses

Solid Pintle Motor


Thermal or Mechanical Barriers

Continuously Select Up to
40:1 Variation in Thrust
Reduce MEOP on Hot Day
Good ISP Only If Burn Rate
Exponent n 1

Pintle

Bi-propellant Gel Motor


High ISP

Pressurization

Duty Cycle Thrust

Gelled Oxidizer

Gelled Fuel

Combustion
Chamber

Insensitive Munition
Lower Max Thrust
Toxicity
2/24/2008

ELF

123

Solid Rocket Propellant Alternatives


Burn
,
ISP,
Rate @
Specific Density, 1,000 psi,
Safety Observables
Impulse, s lb / in3
in / s

Type
Min Smoke. No Al fuel or AP
oxidizer. Either Composite with
Nitramine Oxidizer ( CL-20, ADN,
HMX, RDX ) or Double Base. Very low
contrail (H2O).

220 - 255

0.055 - 0.062

250 - 260

0.062

0.25 - 2.0

Reduced Smoke. No Al ( binder


fuel ). AP oxidizer. Low contrail ( HCl ).

0.1 - 1.5

High Smoke. Al fuel. AP oxidizer.


High smoke ( Al2O3 ).

Superior
2/24/2008

260 - 265

Above Average

0.065

Average
ELF

0.1 - 3.0

Below Average
124

Steel is the Most Common Motor Case Material


Type

Temperature

Volumetric
Efficiency

Weight

IM

Airframe /
Launcher
Attachment

Cost

Steel
Aluminum

Strip Steel /
Epoxy Laminate

Composite
Titanium
Superior
2/24/2008

Above Average
ELF

Average Below Average


125

Heat Transfer Drives Rocket Nozzle Materials,


Weight, and Cost
Dome Closeout

Exit Cone
Housing
Throat

2/24/2008

Rocket Nozzle Element

High Heating ( High Chamber


Pressure or Long Burn )
High Cost / Heavy Nozzle

Low Heating ( Low Chamber


Pressure or Short Burn )
Low Cost / Light Weight Nozzle

Housing Material
Alternatives

Steel

Cellulose / Phenolic
Aluminum

Throat Material
Alternatives

Tungsten Insert
Rhenium Insert
Molybdenum Insert

Exit Cone, Dome Closeout,


and Blast Tube Material
Alternatives

Silica / Phenolic Insert


Graphite / Phenolic Insert
Silicone Elastomer Insert

No Insert
Glass / Phenolic Insert

ELF

Cellulose / Phenolic Insert


Silica / Phenolic Insert
Graphite Insert
Carbon Carbon Insert

126

Summary of Propulsion
Emphasis
Turbojet propulsion
Ramjet propulsion
Rocket propulsion

Conceptual Design Prediction Methods


Thrust
Specific impulse

Design Trades
Turbojet turbine material, compressor ratio, and cycle
Ramjet engine / booster / inlet integration
Ramjet fuel
Propellant burn area requirement
Nozzle throat area
Nozzle expansion ratio
Rocket motor grain
Thrust magnitude control
2/24/2008

ELF

127

Summary of Propulsion ( cont )


Design Trades ( cont )
Solid propellant alternatives
Motor case material alternatives
Nozzle materials

New Propulsion Technologies


Hypersonic turbojet
Ramjet / ducted rocket
Scramjet
Combined cycle propulsion
High temperature turbine materials
High temperature combustor
Oblique shock airframe compression
Mixed compression inlet
Low drag inlet
High density fuel / propellant
Endothermic fuel
2/24/2008

ELF

128

Summary of Propulsion ( cont )


New Propulsion Technologies ( cont )
Solid rocket thrust magnitude control
High burn exponent propellant
Low observable fuel / propellant

Discussion / Questions?
Classroom Exercise ( Appendix A )

2/24/2008

ELF

129

Propulsion Problems
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
2/24/2008

An advantage of turbojets compared to ramjets is s_____ thrust.


The specific impulse of a turbojet is often limited by the maximum
allowable temperature of the t______.
The specific impulse of a ramjet is often limited by the maximum allowable
temperature of the c________.
Ducted rockets are based on a fuel-rich g__ g________.
A safety advantage of solid rocket propulsion over liquid propulsion is less
t_______.
A rocket boost to a take-over Mach number is required by ramjets and
s________.
Parameters that enable the long range of subsonic cruise turbojet missiles
are high lift, low drag, available fuel volume, and high s_______ i______.
High thrust and high acceleration are achievable with s____ r_____
propulsion.
In a turbojet the power to drive the compressor is provided by the t______.
ELF

130

Propulsion Problems ( cont )


10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.

2/24/2008

The compressor exit temperature is a function of the flight Mach number


and the compressor p_______ r____.
Compressor exit temperature, fuel heating value, and fuel-to-air ratio
determine the turbojet t______ temperature.
Three types of turbine based propulsion are turbojet, turbo ramjet, and a__
t____ r_____.
Mach number and fuel-to-air ratio determine the ramjet c________
temperature.
An example of a ramjet with low drag and light weight is an i_______ r_____
ramjet.
Russia, France, China, United Kingdom, Taiwan, and India are the only
countries with currently operational r_____ missiles.
100% inlet capture efficiency occurs when the forebody shock waves
intercept the i____ l__.
Excess air that does not flow into the inlet is called s_______ air.
ELF

131

Propulsion Problems ( cont )


18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.

2/24/2008

Starting a ramjet inlet at lower supersonic Mach number requires a larger


area of the inlet t_____.
Optimum pressure recovery across shock waves is achieved when the total
pressure loss across each shock wave is e____.
The specific impulse and thrust of a ramjet are a function of the efficiency
of the combustor, nozzle, and i____.
High density fuels have high payoff for v_____ limited missiles.
The specific impulse of a ducted rocket with large excess fuel from the gas
generator can approach that of a r_____.
High speed rockets require large p_________ weight.
At the throat, the flow area is minimum, sonic, and c_____ .
For an optimum nozzle expansion the nozzle exit pressure is equal to the
a__________ pressure.
High thrust and chamber pressure are achievable through a large propellant
b___ area.
ELF

132

Propulsion Problems ( cont )


27.
28.
29.
30.
31.

2/24/2008

Three approaches to solid rocket thrust magnitude control are pulse motor,
pintle motor, and g__ motor.
A high burn exponent propellant allows a large change in thrust with only a
small change in chamber p_______.
Three tradeoffs in selecting a solid propellant are safety, observables, and
s_______ i______.
A low cost motor case is usually based on steel or aluminum material while
a light weight motor case is usually based on c________ material.
Rockets with high chamber pressure or long burn time may require a
t_______ throat insert.

ELF

133

Outline
Introduction / Key Drivers in the Design Process
Aerodynamic Considerations in Tactical Missile Design
Propulsion Considerations in Tactical Missile Design
Weight Considerations in Tactical Missile Design
Flight Performance Considerations in Tactical Missile Design
Measures of Merit and Launch Platform Integration
Sizing Examples
Development Process
Summary and Lessons Learned
References and Communication
Appendices ( Homework Problems / Classroom Exercises,
Example of Request for Proposal, Nomenclature, Acronyms,
Conversion Factors, Syllabus )
2/24/2008

ELF

134

Missile Concept Synthesis Requires Evaluation


of Alternatives and Iteration
Define Mission Requirements
Alt Mission
Establish Baseline
Alt Baseline
Aerodynamics
Propulsion
Weight

Resize / Alt Config / Subsystems / Tech

Trajectory
Meet
Performance?

No

Yes
Measures of Merit and Constraints

No

Yes
2/24/2008

ELF

135

Designing Light Weight Missile Has High Payoff


Production cost
Logistics cost
Size
Firepower
Observables
Mission flexibility
Expeditionary warfare
2/24/2008

ELF

136

Flight Performance ( Range, Speed,


Maneuverability ) Sensitive to Subsystem Weight
Dome -

Seeker -

Structure

Guidance and
Control -

Power
Supply

High Sensitivity
2/24/2008

Propulsion

Warhead

Low Sensitivity
ELF

Wings

Insulation

Data
Link -

Stabilizers

Flight
Control

- Minor Sensitivity
137

Missile Range is a Function of Launch Weight,


Propellant Weight, and Specific Impulse
V -gc Isp ln ( 1 - WPropellant / Wi )
1000

Assumptions:
I = Launch Incidence Angle = 45 deg for max
range

R V2 sin ( 2i ) / gc

Rmax, Maximum Range, nm

Thrust Greater Than Drag and Weight


Flat, Non-rotating Earth
For Two-Stage Missile with ( Wi )Min : V1 = V2
Example: Two-Stage Missile with Minimum
Weight and Rmax = 200 nm = 1.216 x 106 ft

100

Assume ISP = 250 sec, WPayload = 500 lb, WInert =


0.2 WPropellant
V = [( 32.2 ) ( 1.216 x 106 )]1/2 = 6251 ft / s
V1 = V2 = V / 2 = 3125 ft / s
Wi,SecondStage = WPayload + WInert + WPropellant = 814 lb
Wi, FirstStage = WInert + WPropellant = 85 + 427 = 512 lb

10
100

1000
Wi, Example Initial Launch Weight, lb
Single-Stage Missile

2/24/2008

10000 Wi = Wi,FirstStage + Wi,SecondStage = 1326 lb


Compare: Single-Stage Missile, R = 200 nm

Two-Stage Missile
ELF

V = 6251 = - 32.2 ( 250 ) ln [ 1 WPropellant / (


WPropellant + 0.2 WPropellant + 500 )] Wp = 767
Wi = 1420 lb
138

Missile Weight Is a Function of Diameter and


Length
WL = 0.04 l d2

WL, Missile Launch Weight, lb

10000

Units: WL( lb ), l ( in ), d ( in )

1000

100

10
100

1000

10000

100000

1000000

ld2, Missile Length x Diameter2, in3

2/24/2008

FIM-92

SA-14

Javelin

RBS-70

Starstreak

Mistral

HOT

Trigat LR

LOCAAS

AGM-114

Roland

RIM-116

Crotale

AIM-132

AIM-9M

Magic 2

Mica

AA-11

Python 3

AIM-120C

AA-12

Skyflash

Aspide

AIM-9P

Super 530F

Super 530D

AGM-65G

PAC-3

AS-12

AGM-88

Penguin III

AIM-54C

Armat

Sea Dart

Sea Eagle

Kormoran II

AS34

AGM-84H

MIM-23F

ANS

MM40

AGM-142

AGM-86C

SA-10

BGM-109C

MGM-140

SSN-22

Kh-41

ELF

139

Most Subsystems for Tactical Missiles Have a


Density of about 0.05 lb / in3
Guidance: Flight Control:
0.04 lb / in3 0.04 lb / in3

Dome Material:
0.1 lb / in3

2/24/2008

Warhead:
0.07 lb / in3

Propellant:
0.06 lb / in3

Structure and Motor Case:


0.10 ( Al ) to 0.27 ( steel ) lb / in3

ELF

Data Link:
0.04 lb / in3

Aero Surfaces:
0.05 ( built-up Al ) to 0.27 ( solid
steel ) lb / in3

140

Modeling Weight, Balance, and Moment-of-Inertia


Is Based on a Build-up of Subsystems
Example Missile Configuration
Nose G&C

Wing Section
With Fuel

Inlet Section
Engine
With Fuel
Fuel
Plug

Warhead

Inlet

Model

+z
+x
Legend

Assume Uniform Weight Distribution For a Given Segment


Structure and Subsystems

Engine Structure and Subsystems

Warhead and Structure

Fuel

Inlet Structure and Subsystems

Aero Surfaces

xCG = ( xsubsystem1 Wsubsystem1 + xsubsystem2 Wsubsystem2 + ) / Wtotal


2/24/2008

IY = [ ( Iy,subsystem1 )local + Wsubsystem1 ( xsubsystem1 - xCG )2 / gc + ( Iy,subsystem2 )local + Wsubsystem2 ( xsubsystem2 - xCG )2 / gc + ]
ELF

141

( Iy,local ) g / ( W d2 ), Nondimensional Yaw Local Momen


of Inertia

Moment-of-Inertia Is Higher for High Fineness


Ratio Body
( Iy,cylinder )local = [ W d2 / gc ] [( 1 / 16 ) + ( 1 / 12 ) ( l / d )2 ]

100

( Iy,cone )local = [ W d2 / gc ] [ ( 3 / 80 ) + ( 3 / 80 ) ( l / d )2 ]
er
d
n
i
l
Cy

Cone

10
Example for Ramjet Baseline at Launch ( xcg = 8.04 ft )
Assume missile can be approximated as a conical nose-cylinder

For the cone, d = 1.25 ft, l / d = 1.57, Wcone = 15.9 lb, xcg,cone = 1.308 ft
For the cylinder, l / d = 7.22, d = 1.698 ft, Wcylinder = 2214 lb, xcg,cylinder = 8.09 ft
Iy = ( Iy,cone )local + Wcone ( xcg,cone - xCG )2 / gc + ( Iy,cylinder )local + Wcylinder ( xcg,cylinder xCG )2 / gc

0.1

( Iy,cone )local = [ 15.9 ( 1.25 )2 / 32.2 ] [ 0.0375 + 0.0375 ( 1.57 )2 ] = 0.10 slug-ft2
( Iy,cylinder )local = [ 2214 ( 1.698 )2 / 32.2 ] [ 0.0625 + 0.0833 ( 7.22 )2 ] = 872 slug-ft2
Iy = 0.10 + 22.4 + 872 + 0.16 = 895 slug-ft2

0.01
0

10

20

30

l / d, Length / Diameter
2/24/2008

ELF

142

Structure Design Factor of Safety Is Greater for


Hazardous Subsystems / Flight Conditions
Pressure Bottle ( 2.50 / 1.50 )
Ground Handling Loads ( 1.50 / 1.15 )
3.0

Captive Carriage and Separation Flight Loads ( 1.50 / 1.15 )


Motor Case ( MEOP ) ( 1.50 / 1.10 )
Free Flight Loads ( 1.25 / 1.10 )

2.0
FOS,
Factor of Safety
( Ultimate / Yield )

Castings ( 1.25 / 1.25 )


Fittings ( 1.15 / 1.15 )
Thermal Loads ( 1.00 / 1.00 )

1.0

Note:
0
MIL STDs include environmental ( HDBK-310, NATO STANAG 4370, 810F, 1670A ), strength and rigidity ( 8856 ), and captive
carriage ( 8591 ).
The entire environment ( e.g., manufacturing, transportation, storage, ground handling, captive carriage, launch separation,
post-launch maneuvering, terminal maneuvering ) must be examined for driving conditions in structure design.
FOS for castings is expected to be reduced in future as casting technology matures.
Reduction in required factor of safety is expected as analysis accuracy improves will result in reduced missile weight / cost.

2/24/2008

ELF

143

Structure Concepts and Manufacturing


Processes for Low Parts Count
Structure Manufacturing Process Alternatives
Composites
Metals

Structure
Vacuum
Vacuum
Concept
Compression
Filament
Thermal
Assist
Bag /
Alternatives RTM
Mold
Wind Pultrusion Form Autoclave Cast

Geometry
Alternatives

High
Speed
Strip
Machine Forming Laminate

Monocoque

Lifting Body
Airframe

Axisymmetric
Airframe

Integrally Hoop
Stiffened

Integrally
Longitudinal
Stiffened

Monocoque
Integrally Hoop
Stiffened
Integrally
Longitudinal
Stiffened

Surface

Solid
Sandwich

Note: Manufacturing process cost is a function of recurring cost ( unit material, unit labor ) and non-recurring cost ( tooling ).

Note:
2/24/2008

Very Low Parts Count

Low Parts Count


ELF

Moderate Parts Count High Parts Count


144

Low Parts Count Manufacturing Processes for


Complex Airframes
Vacuum Assisted RTM
Resin

Pump

3D Fiber Orientation

Filament Wind

Helical wind versus


radial wind

Pultrusion .

2D Fiber Orientation ( 0-45-90 deg )

Pour Cup Vent

Metal Casting

Riser
Mold Cavity
Parting Line

2/24/2008

ELF

145

Tactical Missile Airframe Material Alternatives


Type

Tension
( TU / )

Material

Metallic
Aluminum 2219
Increasing
Steel PH 15-7Mo
Cost

Buckling
Max
Stability
Short Life
Temp
( Buckling / )

Thermal
Stress

Joining

Cost

Weight

Titanium 6Al-4V

Composite S994 Glass /


Increasing Epoxy and S994
Glass / Polyimide
Cost
Glass or
Graphite Reinforce
Molding

Graphite / Epoxy
and Graphite
Polyimide

Note:
2/24/2008

Superior

Above Average
ELF

Average

Below Average
146

Strength Elasticity of Airframe Material Alternatives


t = P / A = E
Kevlar Fiber
w / o Matrix
Graphite Fiber
w / o Matrix
( 400 800 Kpsi )

400

Glass Fiber
w / o Matrix

300
Very High Strength Stainless Steel
( PH 15-7 Mo, CH 900 )
High Strength Stainless Steel
( PH 15-7 Mo, TH 1050 )

t, Tensile Stress,
103 psi
200

Titanium Alloy ( Ti-6Al-4V )

100

Aluminum Alloy ( 2219-T81 )

0
0

, Strain, 10-2 in / in
2/24/2008

ELF

Note:
High strength fibers are:
Very small diameter
Unidirectional
High modulus of
elasticity
Very elastic
No yield before failure
Non forgiving failure
Metals:
Ductile,
Yield before failure
Allow adjacent structure
to absorb load
Resist crack formation
Resist impact loads
More forgiving failure

E, Youngs modulus of elasticity, psi


P, Load, lb
, Strain, in / in
A, Area, in2
Room temperature
147

Structural Efficiency at High Temperature of


Short Duration Airframe Material Alternatives
Graphite / Polyimide ( = 0.057 lb / in3 ), 0-45-90 Laminate
Graphite / Epoxy
( = 0.065 lb / in3 )
0-45-90 Laminate
Ti3Al ( = 0.15 lb / in3 )

TU / , Ultimate Tensile Strength /


Density, 105 In.

12.0
10.0

Ti-6Al-4V Annealed Titanium ( = 0.160 lb / in3 )

8.0

PH15-7 Mo Stainless Steel ( = 0.277 lb / in3 ). Note:


Thin wall steel susceptible to buckling.

6.0
Graphite

4.0

Glass
Chopped Epoxy
2219-T81
Composites,
Random Orientation Aluminum
( = 0.101 lb / in3 )
( = 0.094 lb / in3 )

2.0
0

200

400

600

800

1,000

Short Duration Temperature, F


2/24/2008

ELF

148

Hypersonic Missiles without External Insulation


Require High Temperature Structure
( Tmax )Titanium Aluminide 2,500 F )
r=

1
r=
0
r = .9
0 .8

Tr = T0 ( 1 + 0.2 r M2 )

Tr, Recovery Temperature, F

2,000

( Tmax )Single Crystal Nickel Aluminides 3,000 F


( Tmax )Ceramic Matrix Composite 3,500 F

( Tmax )Nickel Alloys ( e.g., Inconel, Rene,


Hastelloy, Haynes )

1,500

Note:
(T )
max Steel

= 1.4

1,000

Tr = Recovery Temperature, R

( Tmax )Ti Alloy

T0 = Free stream temperature, R


Tmax = Max temperature capability

( Tmax )Graphite Polyimide

No external insulation assumed

( Tmax )Al Alloy

500

( Tmax )Graphite Epoxy

0
2/24/2008

M, Mach Number

ELF

r is recovery factor
h = 40k ft ( TFree Stream = 390 R )
Stagnation r = 1
Turbulent boundary layer r = 0.9
Laminar boundary layer r = 0.8
Short-duration flight ( less than
30 m ), but with thermal soak
149

Structure / Insulation Trades for Short Duration Flight


Example Structure / Insulation Concepts

Mach Tmax
Increasing

Hot Metal Structure ( e.g., Al ) without


Insulation

600

0.027

0.22

0.101

0.000722

Hot Metal Structure ( e.g., Al )

600

0.027

0.22

0.101

0.000722

Internal Insulation ( e.g., Min-K )

2000

0.0000051 0.24

0.012

0.00000106

Self-insulating Composite Structure


( e.g., Graphite Polyimide )

1100

0.000109

0.27

0.057

0.00000410

Ext Insulation ( e.g., Micro-Quartz Paint )

1200

0.0000131 0.28

0.012

0.00000226

Cold Metal Structure ( e.g., Al )

600

0.027

0.22

0.101

0.000722

Internal Insulation ( e.g., Min-K )

2000

0.0000051 0.24

0.012

0.00000106

Note:

2/24/2008

Tactical missiles use passive thermal protection ( no active cooling )


Small thickness allows more propellant / fuel for diameter constrained missiles ( e.g., VLS launcher )
Weight and cost are application specific
Tmax = max temp capability, F; k = thermal conductivity, BTU / s / ft2 / F / ft; c = specific heat or thermal
capacity, BTU / lbm / F; = density, lbm / in3; = thermal diffusivity = k / ( c ), ft2 / s
ELF

150

External Insulation Has High Payoff for Short


Duration Flight
1,000

Example Airframe Temperature with No External


Insulator Steel Airframe Selected.

Example Temperature F

900
800

4.0

Mach

700
3.0

600

Mach
Number

500

2.0

400
300

Example Airframe Temperature with 0.012 in Insulator


Aluminum Airframe Acceptable for Short Duration.

200

Note: Short Range Air-to-Air Missile


Launch ~ 0.9 Mach at 10k ft Altitude
Atmosphere ~ Hot Day ( 1% Risk ) Mil-HDBK-310

100
0

1.0

10

12

14

Time After Launch ~ s


2/24/2008

ELF

151

Phenolic Composites Are Good Insulators for


High Temperature Structure and Propulsion
Graphites
Burn
~ 0.08 lb / in3
Carbon / Carbon

6,000
5,000

Bulk Ceramics
Melt
~ 0.20 lb / in3
Zirconium Ceramic,
Hafnium Ceramic

4,000
Tmax, Max
Temperature
Capability,
R

Porous Ceramics
Melt
Resin Impregnated
~ 0.12 lb / in3
Carbon-Silicon
Carbide

3,000
2,000

Low Density
Composites
Char
~ 0.03 lb / in3
Micro-Quartz
Paint, GlassCork-Epoxy,
Silicone Rubber

Plastics
Sublime
Depolymerizing
~ 0.06 lb / in3
Teflon

1,000
0

Medium Density Phenolic


Composites
Char
~ 0.06 lb / in3
Nylon Phenolic, Silica
Phenolic, Glass
Phenolic, Carbon
Phenolic, Graphite
Phenolic

Insulation Efficiency, Minutes To Reach 300 F at Back Wall


2/24/2008

Note:

Assumed Weight Per Unit Area of Insulator / Ablator = 1 lb / ft2


ELF

152

A Thermally Thin Surface ( e.g., Metal


Airframe ) Has Uniform Internal Temperature
Example for Rocket Baseline Airframe:

( dT / dt )t = 0 = ( Tr - Tinitial ) h / ( c z )

Aluminum skin w/o external insulation

dT / dt, Initial Skin Temperature Rate for


Rocket Baseline, Deg F / sec

T = Tr ( Tr Tinitial ) e h t / ( c z )

c = 0.215 BTU / lb / R, = 0.10 lb / in3 = 172.8 lb / ft3,


z = 0.16 in = 0.0133 ft, k = 0.027 BTU / s / ft2 / R / ft

h = k NNU / x

1000

x = 1.6 ft

Thermally thin h ( z / k )surface < 0.1

Assume Mach 2 sustain flight, 20k ft altitude ( T0 =


447 R , k = 3.31 x 10-6 BTU / s / ft2 / R / ft ), Turbulent
boundary layer, x = 1.6 ft

100

Rex = 0 M a0 x / 0 = 12.56 x 106


NNU = 0.0271 Re0.8 = 12947
h = k NNU / x = 0.0268 BTU / s / ft2 / R

10

Test: h ( z / k )surface = 0.0132 < 0.1 thermally thin


Calculate Tr = T0 [ 1 + 0.2 r M2 ] = 447 [ 1 + 0.2 ( 0.9 )
( 2 )2 ] = 769 R

1
0

M, Mach Number

At t = 0, Assume Tinitial = 460 R, or 0 F


( dT / dt )t = 0 = ( 769 - 460 ) ( 0.0268 ) / [( 0.215 )
(172.8 ) ( 0.01333 )] = 17F / s

At a sustain time t = 10 s, T = 769 - ( 769 460 ) e


0.0268 ( 10 ) / [ 0.215 ( 172.8 ) ( 0.0133 )] = 589 R, or 129 F
Note: No external insulation; thermally thin structure ( uniform internal temperature ); Perfect insulation behind airframe; 1-D
heat transfer; Turbulent boundary layer; Radiation neglected; dT / dt = Temperature rate, R / s; Tr = Recovery ( max )
temperature, R; h = Convection heat transfer coefficient, BTU / s / ft2 / R; c = Specific heat, BTU / lb / R; = Density, lb / ft3; z =
Thickness, ft; k = Conductivity, BTU / s / ft2 / R / ft; Re = Reynolds number; NNU = Nusselt number
Reference: Jerger, J.J., Systems Preliminary Design Principles of Guided Missile Design,
D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc., Princeton, New Jersey, 1960
h = sea level

2/24/2008

h = 20K ft

h = 50K ft

h = 80K ft

ELF

153

A Thermally Thick Surface ( e.g., Radome ) Has


a Large Internal Temperature Gradient
[ T ( z, t ) - Tinitial ] / [ Tr Tinitial ] = erfc { z / [ 2 ( t )1/2 ]} e( h z / k ) + h2 t / k2 erfc { z / [ 2 ( t )1/2 ] + h ( t )1/2 / k }
[ T ( 0, t ) - Tinitial ] / [ Tr Tinitial ] = 1 - eh2 t / k2 erfc [ h ( t )1/2 / k ]
Applicable for thermally thick surface: z / [ 2 ( t )1/2 ] > 1

Example: Rocket Baseline Radome

.1
=0

Mach 2, 20k ft alt ( T0 = 447 R ), Turbulent boundary layer,


x = 19.2 in = 1.6 ft, t = 10 s, Tr = 769 R, Tinitial = 460 R

/k1
0

k=1

00

h = 0.0268 BTU / s / ft ( h / k )( t )1/2 = 0.491


Test: z / [ 2 ( t )1/2 ] = 0.0208 / { 2 [ 1.499x10-5 ( 10 )]1/2 } =
0.849 < 1 not quite thermally thick
Inner wall h z / k = 0.935

hz/

hz

0.5

= 1.499 x 10-5 ft2 / s

/k

k=

1 hz

hz

/k

=0

X = 1.6 ft
z = 0.25 in = 0.0208 ft, k = 5.96 x 10-4 BTU / s / ft / R,

hz/

[ T ( z, t ) - ( T )initial ] / [( T )r ( T )initial ]

[ T ( 0.0208, 10 ) - Tinitial ] / [ Tr Tinitial ] = 0.0608


T ( 0.0208, 10 ) = 479 R ( Note: Tinner Tinitial )
Surface h z / k = 0

0
0.1

( h / k )( t )1/2

10

100

[ T ( 0, 10 ) - Tinitial ] / [ Tr Tinitial ] = 0.372


T ( 0, 10 ) = 575 R

Note: T ( z,t ) ( T )initial; 1-D heat transfer; Radiation neglected; Turbulent boundary layer; Tr = Recovery temperature, R; h =
Heat transfer coefficient, BTU / ft2 / s / R; k = Thermal conductivity of material, BTU / s / ft2 / R / ft; = Diffusivity of material,
ft2 / s; zmax = Thickness of material, ft; erfc = Complementary error function
Reference: Jerger, J.J., Systems Preliminary Design Principles of Guided Missile Design,
D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc., Princeton, New Jersey, 1960

2/24/2008

ELF

154

Internal Insulation Temperature Can Be Predicted


Assuming Constant Flux Conduction
[ T ( z, t ) Tinitial ] / [ T ( 0, t ) Tinitial ] = e- z2 / ( 4

t)

Applicable for thermally thick surface: z / [ 2 ( t )1/2 ] > 1


1

( / t )1 / 2 ( z / 2 ) erfc { z / [ 2 ( t )1/2 ]}
Example for Rocket Baseline Airframe Insulation:

[ T ( z, t ) Tinitial ] / [ T ( 0, t ) Tinitial ]

0.10 in Min-K Internal Insulation behind 0.16 in aluminum


Skin
Aluminum
0.16 in
X = 1.6 ft
0.10 in
Min-K
z
Assume M = 2, 20k ft alt, x = 1.6 ft, Tinitial = 460 R, t = 10 s,
zMin-K = 0.10 in = 0.00833 ft, Min-K = 0.00000106 ft2 / s, k =
5.96 x 10-4 BTU / s / ft, h = 0.0268 BTU / s / ft

0.5

Test: z / [ 2 ( t )1/2 ] = 0.00833 / {2 [ 0.00000106 ( 10 )]1/2} =


1.279 > 1 thermally thick
( t )1/2 / z = [ 0.00000106 ( 10 ) ]1/2 / 0.00833 = 0.3907
[ TMin-K ( 0.0217, 10 ) 460 ] / [ TMin-K ( 0, 10 ) 460 ] = 0.0359
Assume ( Tinner )aluminum = ( Touter )Min-K
From prior example, ( Tinner )aluminum = 569 R at = 10 s
Then, ( Touter )Min-K = 569 R at t = 10 s

0
0.1

( t )1/2 / z

10

100

Compute, ( Tinner )Min-K = 460 + ( 569 460 ) 0.0338 = 460 + 4


= 464 R

Note: 1-D conduction heat transfer, Radiation neglected, Constant heat flux input, T ( z,t ) = Inner temperature of insulation
at time t, Tinitial = Initial temperature, T ( 0, t ) = Outer temperature of insulation at time t, = Diffusivity of insulation material,
ft2 / s; zmax = Thickness of insulation material, ft; erfc = Complementary error function
Reference: Carslaw, H. S. and Jaeger, J. C., Conduction of Heat in Solids, Clarendon Press, 1989
2/24/2008

ELF

155

A Sharp Nose Tip / Leading Edge Has High


Aerodynamic Heating
hr, Stagnation Heat Transfer Coeff for
Rocket Baseline at h = 20k ft, BTU / ft2 / s / R

hr = NNUr kr / dNoseTip
0.6

Example for Rocket Baseline Nose Tip:

NNUr = 1.321 RedNoseTip0.5 Pr0.4

Assume M = 2, 20k ft alt, stagnation ( Tr = 805


R ) for a sharp nose tip ( e.g., 1% blunt )

0.5
0.4

dNoseTip / dRef = 0.01 dNoseTip = 0.01 ( 8


in ) = 0.08 in = 0.00557 ft

0.3

RedNoseTip = 0 V0 dNoseTip / r = 3.39 x 104

0.2

NNUr = 223
hr = 0.1745 BTU / ft2 / s / R

0.1

Outer surface temperature after 10 s heating


in sustain flight ( M = const, Tr = const ):

M, Mach Number
1% Bluntness
5% Bluntness

2% Bluntness
10% Bluntness

[ T ( 0, t ) - Tinitial ] / [ Tr Tinitial ] = 1 e h t / k
erfc { h ( t )1/2 / k }

[ T ( 0, 10 ) - 460 ] / [ 805 460 ] = 1 e [( 0.1745 )


( 1.499 x 10-5 ) ( 10 ) / ( 5.96 x 10-4 )2 ] erfc { ( 0.1745 ) [
1.499 x 10-5 ( 10 )]1/2 / ( 5.96 x 10-4 )]} = 0.845

T ( 0, 10 ) = 460 + 345 ( 0.845 ) = 752 R

Note: 1-D conduction heat transfer; Laminar boundary layer; Stagnation heating; Radiation neglected; hr = Convection
heat transfer coefficient for stagnation recovery, BTU / s / ft2 / R; NNUr = Nusselt number for stagnation recovery; kr =
Air thermal conductivity at stagnation recovery ( total ) temperature, BTU / s / ft / R; dNoseTip = Nose tip diameter, ft;
RedNoseTip = Reynolds number based on nose tip diameter, Pr = Prandtl number
Reference: Allen, J. and Eggers, A. J., A Study of the Motion and Aerodynamic Heating of Ballistic
Missiles Entering the Earths Atmosphere at High Supersonic Speeds, NACA Report 1381, April 1953.
2/24/2008

ELF

156

Tactical Missile Radiation Heat Loss Is Usually


Small Compared to Convective Heat Input
QRad = 4.76 x 10-13 T4

100

QRad in BTU / ft2 / s, T in R


Example: Ramjet Baseline
Assume:

10
Radiation Heat
Flux at
Equilibrium
Temperature,
BTU / ft2 / s

Titanium skin with emissivity =


0.3
Long duration ( equilibrium )
heating at Mach 4

h = 80k ft, T0 = 398 R


Turbulent boundary layer ( r =
0.9 ) T = Tr = T0 ( 1 + 0.2 r M2 ) =
1513 R

0.1

Calculate:
QRad = 4.76 x 10-13 ( 0.3 ) ( 1513 )4
= 0.748 BTU / ft2 / s

0.01
0

Cruise Mach Number


Emissivity = 0.1
2/24/2008

Emissivity = 1
ELF

157

Design Concerns for Localized Aerodynamic


Heating and Thermal Stress
Flare / Wedge Corner Flow
Body Joints
Hot missile shell
Cold frames or bulkheads
Causes premature buckling

Shock wave boundary layer


interaction
Separated Flow
High heating at reattachment

Leading Edges

IR Domes / RF Radomes

Hot stagnation temperature on leading edge


Small radius prevents use of external insulation
Cold heat sink material as chord increases in thickness
leads to leading edge warp
Shock wave interaction with adjacent body structure

Large temp gradients due to low thermal conduction


Thermal stress at attachment
Low tensile strength
Dome fails in tension

Note: TS = Thermal stress from restraint in compression or tension = E T


= coefficient of thermal expansion, E = modulus of elasticity, T = T2 T1 = temperature difference.
Example: Thermal Stress for Rocket Baseline Pyroceram Dome, = 3 x 10-6, E = 13.3 x 106 psi
Assume M = 2, h = 20k ft alt, t = 10 s. Based on prior figure, T = TOuterWall TInnerWall = 102 R
Then TS = 3 x 10-6 ( 13.3 x 106 ) ( 102 ) = 4,070 psi
2/24/2008

ELF

158

Examples of Aerodynamic Hot Spots


Nose Tip

Leading Edge
Flare
2/24/2008

ELF

159

WBS,Body Structure Weight, lb

Tactical Missile Body Structure Weight Is about


22% of the Launch Weight
WBS / WL 0.22

1000

100
Example for 500 lb missile
WL = 500 lb
WBS = 0.22 ( 500 ) = 110 lb

10
100

1000

10000

WL, Launch Weight, lb

Hellfire ( 0.22 )
Sidewinder ( 0.23 )
Sparrow ( 0.18 )
Phoenix ( 0.19 )
Harpoon ( 0.29 )
SM 2 ( 0.20 )
SRAM ( 0.21 )
ASALM ( 0.13 )
SETE ( 0.267 )
Tomahawk ( 0.24 )
TALOS ( 0.28 )

Note: WBS includes all load carrying body structure. If motor case, engine, or warhead case carry external
loads then they are included in WBS. WBS does not include tail, wing, or other surface weight.
2/24/2008

ELF

160

Body Structure Thickness Is Based on


Considering Many Design Conditions
Structure Design Conditions That May Drive Airframe Thickness
Manufacturing
Transportation
Carriage
Launch
Fly-out
Maneuvering

Contributors to Required Thickness for Cylindrical Body Structure


Minimum Gage for Manufacturing: t = 0.7 d [( pext / E ) l / d ]0.4. t 0.06 in if pext 10 psi
Localized Buckling in Bending: t = 2.9 r / E
Localized Buckling in Axial Compression: t = 4.0 r / E
Thrust Force: t = T / ( 2 r )
Bending Moment: t = M / ( r2 )
Internal Pressure: t = p r /

High Risk ( 1 ), Moderate Risk ( 2 ), and Low Risk ( 3 ) Estimates of Required Thickness
1.
2.
3.
2/24/2008

t = FOS x Max ( tMinGage , tBuckling,Bending , tBuckling,AxialCompression , tAxialLoad , tBending , tInternalPressure )


t = FOS x ( t2MinGage + t2Buckling,Bending + t2Buckling,AxialCompression + t2AxialLoad + t2Bending + t2InternalPressure )1/2
t = FOS x ( tMinGage + tBuckling,Bending + tBuckling,AxialCompression + tAxialLoad + tBending + tInternalPressure )
ELF

161

Localized Buckling May Be A Concern for


Thin Wall Structure
Buckling,Bending / E 0.35 ( t / r )

Nondimensional Buckling Stress

Buckling,AaxialCcompression / E 0.25 ( t / r )

Bending
Axial Compression
Note: Thin wall cylinder with local buckling

0.1

Buckling / E = Nondimensional buckling stress


BucklingBending = Buckling stress in bending
BucklingAxialCompression = Buckling stress in axial
compression

0.01

E = Youngs modulus of elasticity


t = Airframe thickness

0.001

r = Airframe radius
Min thickness for fab and handling 0.06 in

0.0001
0.001

Example for Rocket Baseline in Bending:

0.01

0.1

t / r, thickness / radius

4130 steel motor case, E = 29.5 x 106 psi


yield = 170,000 psi
t = 0.074 in, r = 4 in
t / r = 0.0185

Note: Actual buckling stress can vary +/- 50%, depending upon typical
imperfections in geometry and the loading.
2/24/2008

ELF

Buckling,Bending / E 0.35 ( 0.0185 ) = 0.006475


buckling,Bending 191,000 psi
buckling,Bending ~ yield
162

Process for Captive and Free Flight Loads


Calculation
Captive Flight
Free Flight

Max Aircraft Maneuver


Per MIL-A-8591

Maneuver Per
Design Requirements

Carriage Load

Weight load
of bulkhead
section
Air Load

Weight load
of bulkhead
section

Air Load
Obtained
By Wind
Tunnel

2/24/2008

Air Load

Note: MIL-A-8591 Procedure A assumes max air


loads combine with max g forces regardless of
angle of attack.
Example of max Calculated by MIL-A-8591 Using
Procedure A for F-18 Aircraft Carriage:
max = 1.5 nz,max Wmax / ( CL q SRef )aircraft
max = 1.5 ( 5 ) ( 49200 ) / [ 0.05 ( 1481 ) ( 400 )] =
12.5 deg

ELF

163

Maximum Bending Moment Depends Upon Load


Distribution
Example for Rocket Baseline:
c = 4, ejection load
l = 144 in

MB = N l / c
C = 8 for uniform loading
w = load per unit length

N = 10,000 lb ( 20 g )

MB = 360,000 in-lb
Total
Load 100,000
N

50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000

Length l Max Bending


Moment MB

Coefficient C
8
7.8
6
4

100

2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000

2,000

10,000

1,000

20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000

500
400
300

10

100

4
2/24/2008

0
l
C = 4 for load at center ( e.g., ejection load )
N = Normal Force
l/2

100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000

200

100

1,000,000

200

2,000,000

C = 6 for linear loading to center


w

1,000

5,000
4,000
3,000

C = 7.8 for linear loading


w
0

200
300
400
500

l = length

ELF

0
l
C = 1 for load at end ( e.g., control force )
N = Normal Force
l
0

164

Bending Moment May Drive Body Structure


Weight
t

t
r
MB

t = MB ( FOS ) / [ r2 Max ]

A=2rt
Iz = IY = r3 t

Note / Assumptions:
Thin cylinder
Circular cross section

Example for Rocket Baseline:


Body has circular cross section
2219-T81 aluminum skin ( ult = 65,000 psi )
r = 4 in
Ejection load = 10,000 lb ( 20 g )
MB = 360,000 in lb
FOS = 1.5
t = 360,000 ( 1.5 ) / [ ( 4 )2 ( 65,000 )] = 0.16 in

2/24/2008

ELF

Solid skin
Longitudinal strength
Axial load stress and thermal
stress assumed small compared
to bending moment stress
= MB r / IZ = MB r / ( r3 t )
= MB / ( r2 t )

165

Tactical Missile Propellant Weight Is about 72%


of Rocket Motor Weight
WP / WM 0.72

WP, Propellant Weight, lb

10000

1000

100

Example for Rocket Baseline


WM = 209 lb
WP = 0.72 ( 209 ) = 150 lb

Increased propellant fraction if:


High volumetric loading

10
10

100

1000

WM, Total Motor Weight, lb


Note: WM includes propellant, motor case, nozzle, and insulation.
2/24/2008

Hellfire ( 0.69 )
Sidewinder ( 0.61 )
Sparrow ( 0.64 )
Phoenix ( 0.83 )
ASALM ( 0.86 )
SM-2 ( 0.76 )
SRAM ( 0.71 )
TALOS ( 0.66 )

ELF

10000

Composite case
Low chamber pressure
Low flight loads
Short burn time
166

Motor Case Weight Is Usually Driven By Stress


from Internal Pressure
Assume motor case is axisymmetric, with a front ellipsoid dome
and an aft cylinder body
Motor Case
Cylinder
Hoop
Stress
Case Dome

Nozzle

Case Cylinder

/2

p
b

Motor Dome
Ellipsoid
Longitudinal
Stress

t t = - 0 p r sin d
( t )Hoop Stress = p r / t

( t )Longitudinal Stress
= [ 2 + ( a / b )2 ] p ( a b )1/2 / ( 6 t )
2a

If a = b ( hemi dome of radius r ),


then ( t )Longitudinal Stress = p r / ( 2 t )

With metals the material also reacts body bending


In composite motor designs, extra ( longitudinal ) fibers must usually be
added to accommodate body bending
2/24/2008

ELF

167

A Composite Motor Case Is Usually Lighter


Weight
Calculate Maximum Effective Operating Pressure ( Burst Pressure )
pburst = pBoost, Room Temp x ek T x ( Design Margin for Ignition Spikes, Welds, Other Design Uncertainty )
Assume Rocket Motor Baseline: diameter = 8 in., length = 55 in, ellipsoid dome a / b = 2, pBoost,RoomTemp =
1769 psi, k = ( p / T ) / pc = 0.14% / F
Assume Hot day T = 160 F ek T = e0.0014 ( 160 - 70 ) = 1.134. Uncertainty factor is 1.134, 1
Assume a 3 uncertainty design margin is provided by, pburst 1769 x ( 1.134 )3 = 2,582 psi

Assume Ultimate Factor of Safety FOS = 1.5


Rocket Baseline Steel Case ( t )ult = 190,000 psi
tHoop = ( FOS ) x pburst x r / t = 1.5 x 2582 x 4.0 / 190,000 = 0.082 in
tDome = ( FOS ) x pburst x ( a b )1/2 x [ 2 + ( a / b )2 ] / ( 6 t ) = 1.5 x 2582 x [ 4 x 2 ]1/2 x [ 2 + ( 2 )2 ] / [ 6 x 190,000 ]
= 0.058 in
Weight = WCylinder + WDome = d tHoop l + ( 2 a b ) tDome = 30.8 + 0.8 = 31.6 lb for steel case

Try Graphite Fiber at t = 450,000 psi Ultimate, Assume 60% Fiber / 40% Epoxy Composite
tHoop = 1.5 x 2582 x 4.0 / [ 450,000 ( 0.60 )] = 0.057 in radial fibers for internal pressure load
tDome = 0.041 in, for internal pressure load
Weight = 11.1 lb for composite case ( w/o insulation, attachment, aft dome, and body bending fiber )
Must also add about 0.015 in of either longitudinal fibers or helical wind to counteract body bending load

2/24/2008

ELF

168

WSurface max1/2 / ( S Nmax1/2 ), Non-dimensional Weight

A Low Aspect Ratio Delta Wing Allows Lighter


Weight Structure
3

WSurface max1/2 / [ S Nmax1/2 ] = [ A ( 1 + 2 )]1/2

Note:

WSurface = S tmac

Surface is 2 panels ( Cruciform wing has 4 panels )


WSurface = Surface weight sized by bending moment

troot = [ FOS Nmax A ( 1 + 2 ) / max,]1/2

= Density

Assumption: Uniform loading

max = Maximum allowable ( ultimate ) stress


tmac = Thickness of mean aero chord cmac

troot = Thickness of root chord croot


Nmax = Maximum load
A = Aspect ratio
= Taper ratio

Example for Rocket Baseline Wing ( 2219-T81


Aluminum ): A = 2.82, = 0.175, cr = 19.4 in, max =
ult = 65k psi
Assume M = 2, h = 20k ft, + = 22 deg
From prior example, Nmax = 7525 lb

0
0

Calculate t = [ 1.5 ( 7525 ) ( 2.82 ) [ 1 + 2 ( 0.175 ) /


3 65000 ]1/2 =root0.813 in

2
A, Aspect Ratio

Taper Ratio = 0

2/24/2008

Taper ratio = 0.5

troot / croot = 0.813 / 19.4 = 0.0419 = tmac / cmac

Taper Ratio = 1

ELF

tmac = 0.0419 ( 13.3 ) = 0.557 in


Wwing max1/2 / [ S Nmax1/2 ] = [ A ( 1 + 2 )]1/2.= 1.95
Wwing = 20.6 lb for 1 wing ( 2 panels )

169

Dome Material Is Driven by the Type of Seeker


and Flight Environment
Seeker
Dome
Material
RF-IR Seeker
Zinc Sulfide
( ZnS )
Zinc Selenide
( ZnSe )
Sapphire /
Spinel
Quartz / Fused
Silica ( SiO2 )
Silicon Nitride
( Si3N4 )
Diamond ( C )
RF Seeker
Pyroceram
Polyimide
IR Seeker
Mag. Fluoride
( MgF2 )
Alon
( Al23O27N5 )
Germanium
( Ge )

2/24/2008

Density
( g / cm3 )

Dielectric
Constant

MWIR /
LWIR
Bandpass

Transverse
Strength
( 103 psi )

Thermal
Expansion
( 10-6 / F )

Max ShortErosion,
Knoop ( kg
Duration
2
/ mm )
Temp ( F )

4.05

8.4

18

350

700

5.16

9.0

150

600

3.68

8.5

28

1650

1800

2.20

3.7

0.3

600

2000

3.18

6.1

90

2200

2700

3.52

5.6

400

8800

3500

2.55
1.54

5.8
3.2

25
17

3
40

700
70

2200
400

3.18

5.5

420

1000

3.67

9.3

44

1900

1800

5.33

- 16.2

15

780

200

Superior

Above Average

ELF

Average

Below Average

Poor
170

topt / ( N 0 ), Non-dimensional Optimum Thickness

Radome Weight May Be Driven by Optimum


Thickness Required for Efficient Transmission
1

WOptTrans = Swet tOptTrans

Note:

tOptTrans = 0.5 n 0 / ( - sin2 i )1/2

WOptTrans = Weight at Optimum Transmission

= Density

90 deg

Swet = Surface wetted area


tOptTrans = Optimum thickness for 100% transmission

n = Integer ( 1, 2, )

0 = Wavelength in air
= Dielectric constant
i = Radar signal incidence angle = 90 deg - -
= Surface local angle
= Seeker look angle
Example for Rocket Baseline Pyroceram Radome:
= 5.8, = 0.092 lb / in3, 0 = 1.1 in, n = 1, tangent
ogive, l = 19.2 in, d = 8 in, Swet = 326 in2
10
= 0 deg ( I )avg 90 0 - 11.8 = 78.2 deg

0.1
1

, Dielectric Constant
Incidence Angle = 0 deg
Incidence Angle = 80 deg

Incidence Angle = 40 deg

tOptYtans = 0.5 ( 1 ) ( 1.1 ) / ( 5.8 0.96 )1/2 = 0.25 in


WOptTrans = 0.092 ( 326 ) ( 0.25 ) = 7.5 lb

2/24/2008

ELF

171

Missile Electrical Power Supply Alternatives


W = WE E + WP P
Measure of Merit

Power Supply
Generator

Lithium Battery

Thermal Battery

Storage Life
Cost
WE, Weight /
Energy
( kg / kW-s )

0.0007

0.0012

0.0125

WP, Weight / Power


( kg / kW )

1.4

1.5

0.3

Voltage Stability
Superior

Above Average

Average

Below Average

Example for Thermal battery: If E = 900 kWs, P = 3 kW W = WEE + WPP = 0.0125 ( 900 ) + 0.3 ( 3 ) = 12.2 kg
Note: Generator provides highest energy with light weight for long time of flight ( e.g., cruise missile ).
Lithium battery provides nearly constant voltage suitable for electronics. Relatively high energy with light weight.
Thermal battery provides highest power with light weight ( may be required for actuators ).
2/24/2008

ELF

172

Electromechanical Actuators Are Light Weight


and Reliable
W = WT TS
Measure of Merit

EM

Cold Gas Pneumatic

Hydraulic

WT, Weight / Stall Torque ( lb /


in-lb )

0.0025

0.0050

0.0034

Rate ( deg / s )

Up to 800

Up to 600

Up to 1000

Bandwidth ( Hz )

Up to 40

Up to 20

Up to 60

Reliability
Cost
Superior

Above Average

Average

Note:

Below Average

Schematic of Cold Gas Pneumatic Actuation

Actuation system weight based on four actuators.


Cold gas pneumatic actuation weight includes actuators, gas bottle,
valves, regulator, and supply lines.
Hydraulic actuation weight includes actuators, gas generator or gas
bottle, hydraulic reservoir, valves, and supply lines.
Stall torque 1.5 maximum hinge moment of single panel.
Example weight for rocket baseline hydraulic actuation at Mach 2, 20k ft alt, = 9 deg, with max control deflection of wing (
= 13 deg ) Hinge moment of one panel = 11,500 in-lb. TS = 1.5 ( 11500 ) = 17,250 in-lb W = WTTS = 0.0034 ( 17250 ) = 59 lb
2/24/2008

ELF

173

Examples of Electromechanical Actuator


Packaging
Canard ( Stinger )

Tail ( AMRAAM )

Jet Vane / Tail ( Javelin )

Movable Nozzle ( THAAD )

2/24/2008

ELF

174

Summary of Weight
Conceptual Design Weight Prediction Methods and Weight
Considerations
Missile system weight, cg, moment of inertia
Factors of safety
Aerodynamic heating
Structure
Dome
Propulsion
Insulation
Power supply
Actuator

Manufacturing Processes for Low Parts Count, Low Cost


Precision castings
Vacuum assisted RTM
Pultrusion / Extrusion
Filament winding
2/24/2008

ELF

175

Summary of Weight ( cont )


Design Considerations
Airframe materials
Insulation materials
Seeker dome materials
Thermal stress
Aerodynamic heating

Technologies
MEMS
Composites
Titanium alloys
High density insulation
High energy and power density power supply
High torque density actuators

Discussion / Questions?
Classroom Exercise ( Appendix A )
2/24/2008

ELF

176

Weight Problems
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
2/24/2008

Propulsion system and structure weight are driven by f_____ o_ s_____


requirements.
For a ballistic range greater than about 200 nautical miles, a t__ s____ missile
is lighter weight.
Tactical missile weight is proportional to v_____.
Subsystem d______ for tactical missiles is about 0.05 lb / in3
Modeling weight, balance, and moment-of-inertia is based on a build-up of
s_________.
Missile structure factor of safety for free flight is usually about 1.25 for
ultimate loads and about 1.10 for y____ loads.
Manufacturing processes that can allow low parts count include vacuum
assisted resin transfer molding of composites and c______ of metals.
Low cost airframe materials are usually based on aluminum and steel while
light weight airframe materials are usually based c________ materials.
Graphite fiber has high strength and high m______ o_ e_________.
ELF

177

Weight Problems ( cont )


10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
2/24/2008

The recovery factors of stagnation, turbulent boundary layer, and laminar


boundary layer are 1.0, 0.9, and ___ respectively.
The most popular types of insulation for temperatures greater than 4,000 R
are charring insulators based on p_______ composites.
Tactical missiles experience transient heating, and with increasing time
the temperature approaches the r_______ temperature.
The inner wall temperature is nearly the same as the surface temperature
for a t________ t___ structure.
A thermally thick surface is a good i________.
A low conductivity structure is susceptible to thermal s_____.
The minimum gauge thickness is often set by the m____________ process.
A very thin wall structure is susceptible to localized b_______.
Ejection loads and flight control loads often result in large b______
moment.
An approach to increase the tactical missile propellant / motor weight
fraction over the typical value of 72% would be c________ motor case.
ELF

178

Weight Problems ( cont )


20.
21.
22.
23.
24.

2/24/2008

The required rocket motor case thickness is often driven by the


combustion chamber p_______.
A low aspect ratio delta wing has reduced w_____.
For low speed missiles, a popular infrared dome material is z___ s______.
A thermal battery provides high p____.
The most popular type of actuator for tactical missiles is an
e________________ actuator.

ELF

179

Outline
Introduction / Key Drivers in the Design Process
Aerodynamic Considerations in Tactical Missile Design
Propulsion Considerations in Tactical Missile Design
Weight Considerations in Tactical Missile Design
Flight Performance Considerations in Tactical Missile Design
Measures of Merit and Launch Platform Integration
Sizing Examples
Development Process
Summary and Lessons Learned
References and Communication
Appendices ( Homework Problems / Classroom Exercises,
Example of Request for Proposal, Nomenclature, Acronyms,
Conversion Factors, Syllabus )
2/24/2008

ELF

180

Missile Concept Synthesis Requires Evaluation


of Alternatives and Iteration
Define Mission Requirements
Alt Mission
Establish Baseline
Alt Baseline
Aerodynamics
Propulsion
Weight

Resize / Alt Config / Subsystems / Tech

Trajectory
Meet
Performance?

No

Yes
Measures of Merit and Constraints

No

Yes
2/24/2008

ELF

181

Flight Envelope Should Have Large Max Range,


Small Min Range, and Large Off Boresight

Off Boresight Flyout Envelope / Range


Max
Min

Forward Flyout Envelope / Range


Max
Min

Examples of Max / Min Range Limitations:


Fire Control System Range and Off Boresight
Seeker Range, Gimbal Angle, and Tracking Rate
Maneuver Capability
Time of Flight
Closing Velocity
2/24/2008

ELF

182

Conceptual Design Modeling Versus Preliminary


Design Modeling
Conceptual Design Modeling
1 DOF [ Axial force ( CDO ), thrust, weight ]
2 DOF [ Normal force ( CN ), axial force, thrust, weight ]
3 DOF point mass [ 3 aero forces ( normal, axial, side ),
thrust, weight ]
3 DOF pitching [ 2 aero forces ( normal, axial ), 1 aero
moment ( pitching ), thrust, weight ]
4 DOF [ 2 aero forces ( normal, axial ), 2 aero moments
( pitching, rolling ), thrust, weight ]

CDO
CN
CA
CN
CA
CN

2/24/2008

ELF

Cm

CA
CN

Cm

Cl

CN

Cm

Cl

CA

Preliminary Design Modeling


6 DOF [ 3 aero forces ( normal, axial, side ), 3 aero
moments ( pitching, rolling, yawing ), thrust, weight ]

CY

CA

Cn

CY
183

1-DOF Coast Equation May Have Good Accuracy


Near Zero Angle of Attack
2.0
1.5

( V )2-DOF / ( V )1-DOF,
Predicted Deceleration
1.0
Comparison for Rocket
Baseline
0.5
0
Note:

2/24/2008

2
4
6
8
Trim, Trim Angle of Attack, Deg

10

.
( V. )2-DOF = Two-degrees-of-freedom deceleration
( V )1-DOF = One-degree-of-freedom deceleration
Rocket baseline during coast
Mach 2, h = 20,000 ft
Trim 0.3 deg for 1-g flyout
ELF

184

3-DOF Simplified Equations of Motion Show


Drivers for Configuration Sizing
+ Normal Force

+ Thrust

+ Moment

<< 1 rad
V

+ Axial Force

..

Configuration Sizing Implication

..

y y q SRef d Cm + q SRef d Cm

( W / gc ) V q SRef CN + q SRef CN - W cos


( W / gc

.
)V T-C

A SRef

q - CN 2 SRef q - W sin

High Control Effectiveness Cm >


Cm , Iy small ( W small ), q large

Large / Fast Heading Change CN


large, W small, q large
High Speed / Long Range Total
Impulse large, CA small, q small

Note: Based on aerodynamic control


2/24/2008

ELF

185

For Long Range Cruise, Maximize V Isp, L / D,


and Weight Fraction of Fuel / Propellant
R = ( V Isp ) ( L / D ) ln [ WBC / ( WBC - WP )] , Breguet Range Equation

R, Cruise Range, ft

1.00E+08

ith Wing
w
t
e
j
o
b
r
onic Tu
s
b
rframe
i
u
A
S
l
c
i
a
r
c
t
i
e
Typ
xisymm
A
h
t
i
w
t
Ramje
Typical
Airframe
c
i
r
t
e
m
th Axisym
i
w
t
e
k
c
o
Typical R

1.00E+07

1.00E+06

Example: Ramjet Baseline at Mach 3 / 60k ft alt


R = 2901 ( 1040 ) ( 3.15 ) ln [ 1739 / ( 1739 - 476 )]
= ( 9,503,676 ) ln [ 1 / ( 1 - 0.2737 )] = 3,039,469 ft
= 500 nm

1.00E+05
0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

WP / WBC, Propellant or Fuel Weight / Weight at Begin of Cruise


( V ISP )( L / D ) = 2,000,000 ft
( V ISP )( L / D ) = 25,000,000 ft

( V ISP )( L / D ) = 10,000,000 ft

Note: R = cruise range, V = cruise velocity, ISP = specific impulse, L = lift, D = drag,
WBC = weight at begin of cruise, WP = weight of propellant or fuel
2/24/2008

ELF

186

Efficient Steady Flight Is Enhanced by High L / D


and Light Weight
Steady Level Flight
L
D

T=D
L=W
T

Steady Climb
TD
L C

W
T=W/(L/D)
Note:

DT

L
D

D
C

W
SIN c = ( T D ) / W = Vc / V
Vc = ( T D ) V / W
RC = h / tan C = h ( L / D )

Small Angle of Attack


Equilibrium Flight
VC = Velocity of Climb
VD = Velocity of Descent
C = Flight Path Angle During Climb
D = Flight Path Angle During Descent
V = Total Velocity
h = Incremental Altitude
RC = Horizontal Range in Steady Climb
RD = Horizontal Range in Steady Dive ( Glide )

2/24/2008

Steady Descent ( Glide )

VC

W
VD

SIN D = ( D T ) / W = VD / V
V D = ( D T ) V / W
RD = h / tan D = h ( L / D )

Reference: Chin, S.S., Missile Configuration Design,


McGraw Hill Book Company, New York, 1961
ELF

187

Flight Trajectory Lofting / Shaping Provides


Extended Range
Apogee or Cruise

Climb

Altitude

Glide
Rapid Pitch Up
Line-Of-Sight Trajectory
RMAX

Range

RMAX

Lofted Trajectory Design Guidelines for Horizontal Launch:

High thrust-to-weight 10 for safe separation


Rapid pitch up minimizes time / propellant to reach efficient altitude
Climb at 0 deg with thrust-to-weight T / W 2 and q 700 psf to minimize drag /
propellant
Apogee at q 700 psf, followed by either ( L / D )MAX cruise or ( L / D )MAX glide

2/24/2008

ELF

188

Small Turn Radius Using Aero Control Requires


High Angle of Attack and Low Altitude Flight
.

RT = V / 2 W / ( gc CN SRef )
Assumption: Horizontal Turn
RT, Example Instantaneous Turn Radius, ft

1000000

Note for Example Figure:


W = Weight = 2,000 lb
a / b = 1 ( circular cross section ), No wings
CN = sin 2 cos ( / 2 ) + 2 ( l / d ) sin2
l / d = Length / Diameter = 10
SRef = 2 ft2
CDO = 0.2
( L / D )Max = 2.5
q( L / D ) 700 psf
Max
( L / D ) = 15 deg
Max
T( L / D ) = 740 lb

100000

10000

Max

Example:
= 10 deg
CN = 0.94

1000
0

10

15

Delta Alpha, Deg


h = sea level
h = 60k ft
2/24/2008

h = 20k ft
h = 80k ft

20 h = 40k ft ( = 0.000585 slug / ft3 )

RT = 2 ( 2,000 ) / [( 32.2 ) ( 0.94 ) ( 2 ) (


0.000585 )] = 112,000 ft
h = 40k ft

ELF

Note: Require ( RT )Missile ( RT )Target, for


small miss distance
189

High Turn Rate Using Aero Control Requires


High Angle of Attack and High Velocity
.

= gc CN V SRef / ( 2 W ), rad / s
Assumption: Horizontal Turn

n=
g
100

Example Gamma Dot, Turn Rate, deg / s

20

15

10

0
0

1000

2000

3000

Velocity, ft / s
Alpha = 15 deg
Alpha = 90 deg
2/24/2008

Alpha = 30 deg

ELF

Example for Lifting Body at Altitude h = 20,000 ft:


Assume:
W = Weight = 2,000 lb
a / b = 1 ( circular cross section )
No wings
Negligible tail lift
Neutral static stability
CN = sin 2 cos ( / 2 ) + 2 ( l / d ) sin2
SRef = 2 ft2
l / d = Length / Diameter = 10
= 15 deg
V = 2000 ft / s
Then:
N = Normal Force = CN q SRef
CN = sin [ 2 ( 15 )] cos ( 15 / 2 ) + 2 ( 10 ) sin2 ( 15 ) =
0.50 + 1.34 = 1.835
q = Dynamic Pressure = 0.5 V2 = 0.5 ( 0.001267 ) (
2000 )2 = 2534 psf
N = 1.835 ( 2534 ) ( 2 ) = 9,300 lb
N / W = 9300 / 2000 = 4.65 g
.
= 32.2 ( 1.835 ) ( 0..001267 ) ( 2000 ) ( 2 ) / [ 2 ( 2000 )]
= 0.0749 rad / s = 4.29 deg / s
190

For Long Range Coast, Maximize Initial Velocity


and Altitude and Minimize Drag Coefficient
V / Vi = { 1 [( gc sin ) / Vi ] t } / { 1 + {[ gc AVG SRef ( CD0 )AVG Vi ] / ( 2 W )} t }
{[ gc AVG SRef ( CD0 )AVG ] / ( 2 W )} R = ln { 1 [ gc2 AVG SRef ( CD0 )AVG / ( 2 W )] [ sin ] t2
+ {[ gc AVG SRef ( CD0 )AVG Vi ] / ( 2 W )} t }

V / Vi @ = 0 deg

Note: Based on 1 DOF coast

0.8

dV / dt = - gc CD0 SRef q / W gc sin


Assumptions:

0.6

= constant

0.4

0 deg

0.2

{[ gc AVG SRef (CD0 )AVG ] / ( 2 W )} R

D > W sin

@ = 0 deg

V = velocity during coast

Vi = initial velocity ( begin coast )

0.5

1.5

[( gc SRef CD Vi ) / ( 2W )] t, Non-dimensional Coast Time


0

2 R = coast range
Vx = V cos , Vy = V sin
Rx = R cos , Ry = R sin

Example for Rocket Baseline:

W = WBO = 367 lb, SRef = 0.349 ft2, Vi = 2,151 ft / s, = 0 deg, ( CD )AVG = 0.9, h = 20,000 ft ( = 0.00127 slug / ft3 ), t = 10 s
0

[( gc SRef ( CD )AVG Vi ) / ( 2 W )] t = {[ 32.2 ( 0.00127 ) ( 0.349 ) ( 0.9 ) ( 2151 )] / [ 2 ( 367 ) ]} 10 = 0.376


0

V / Vi = 0.727 V = 0.727 x 2151 = 1564 ft / s, {[( gc SRef ( CD )AVG )] / ( 2 W )} R = 0.319 Rcoast = 18,300 ft or 3.0 nm
0

2/24/2008

ELF

191

For Ballistic Range, Maximize Initial Velocity,


Optimize Launch Angle, and Minimize Drag
Vx / Vi = cos i / { 1 + {[ gc AVG SRef ( CD0 )AVG Vi ] / ( 2 W )} t }
( Vy + gc t ) / Vi = sin i / { 1 + {[ gc AVG SRef ( CD0 )AVG Vi ] / ( 2 W )} t }

1.2

{[ gc AVG SRef (CD0 )AVG ] / ( 2 W cos i )} Rx

1
0.8

= ln { 1 + [ gc ( )AVG SRef ( CD0 )AVG Vi ] / ( 2 W )} t }

0.6

{[ gc AVG SRef (CD0 )AVG ] / ( 2 W sin i )} ( h hi + gc t2 / 2 )


= ln { 1 + {[ gc AVG SRef ( CD0 )AVG Vi ] / ( 2 W ) t }

0.4

Assumptions: Thrust = 0, = 0 deg, D > W sin , flat earth

0.2
0
0

0.5

1.5

Nomenclature: V = velocity during ballistic flight, Vi = initial


velocity, Rx = horizontal range, h = altitude, hi = initial altitude,
Vx = horizontal velocity, Vy = vertical velocity

{[ gc AVG SRef ( CD )AVG Vi ] / ( 2 W )} t, Non-dimensional Time


0

Example for Rocket Baseline:


W = 367 lb, SRef = 0.349 ft2, Vi = VBO = 2,151 ft / s, i = 0 deg, ( CD )AVG = 0.9, hi = 20,000 ft, AVG = 0.00182 slug / ft3, t = 35 s
0

[ gc SRef ( CD )AVG Vi / ( 2 W )] t = { 32.2 ( 0.00182 ) ( 0.349 ) ( 0.9 ) ( 2151 ) / [ 2 ( 367 ) ]} 35 = 1.821


0

Vx / Vi = 0.354 Vx = 762 ft / s, ( Vy + 32.2 t ) / Vi = 0.354 Vy = - 1127 ft / s, {[ gc SRef ( CD )] / ( 2 W cos i )} Rx = 1.037


0
Rx = 42,900 ft or 7.06 nm, {[ gc AVG SRef ( CD )AVG ] / ( 2 W sin i )} ( h hi + 16.1 t2 ) = 1.037 h = 0 ft

2/24/2008

ELF

192

High Propellant Weight, High Thrust, and Low


Drag Provide High Burnout Velocity
Delta V / ( g ISP ), Nondimensional
Incremental Velocity

V / ( gc ISP ) = - [ 1 ( DAVG / T ) ( WAVG sin / T )] ln ( 1 - Wp / Wi )


0.7

Example for Rocket Baseline:

0.6

Assume = 0 deg
Assume Mi = 0.8, h = 20k ft

0.5

Wi = WL = 500 lb

0.4

For boost, WP = 84.8 lb


WP / WL = 0.1696

0.3

ISP = 250 s

0.2

TB = 5750 lb

0.1

Assume D = DAVG = 635 lb

DAVG / T = 0.110

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

Wp / Wi, Propellant Fraction


DAVG / T = 0

DAVG / T = 0.5

V / [( 32.2 ) ( 250 )] = - ( 1 - 0.110 )


ln ( 1 - 0.1696 ) = 0.1654
V = ( 0.1654 ) ( 32.2 ) ( 250 ) =
1331 ft / s

DAVG / T = 1.0

Note: 1 DOF Equation of Motion with 0 deg, = constant, Wi = initial weight, WAVG = average weight, WP =
propellant weight, ISP = specific impulse, T = thrust, Mi = initial Mach number, h = altitude, DAVG = average drag,
V = incremental velocity, gc = gravitation constant, Vx = V cos , Vy = V sin , Rx = R cos , Ry = R sin
2/24/2008

Note: R = ( Vi + V / 2 ) tB, where R = boost range, Vi = initial velocity, tB = boost time


ELF

193

High Missile Velocity and Lead Are Required to


Intercept High Speed Crossing Targets
VM sin L = VT sin A, Proportional Guidance Trajectory

VM

Note:
Proportional Guidance
VM = Missile Velocity
VT = Target Velocity
A = Target Aspect
L = Missile Lead Angle
Seeker Gimbal

VM / VT

L A

VT

A = 90
Example:
1

A = 45

L = 30 deg
A = 45 deg
VM / VT = sin ( 45 ) / sin ( 30 ) =
1.42

10

20

30

40

50

L, Lead Angle, Deg


2/24/2008

ELF

194

Missile Concept Synthesis Requires Evaluation


of Alternatives and Iteration
Define Mission Requirements
Alt Mission
Establish Baseline
Alt Baseline
Aerodynamics
Propulsion
Weight

Resize / Alt Config / Subsystems / Tech

Trajectory
Meet
Performance?

No

Yes
Measures of Merit and Constraints

No

Yes
2/24/2008

ELF

195

Summary of Flight Performance


Flight Performance Activity in Missile Design
Compute range, velocity, time-to-target, off boresight
Compare with requirements

Discussed in This Chapter


Equations of motion
Flight performance drivers
Propulsion alternatives range comparison
Steady level flight required thrust
Steady climb and steady dive range prediction
Cruise prediction
Boost prediction
Coast prediction
Ballistic flight prediction
Turn radius and turn rate prediction
Target lead for proportional homing guidance
2/24/2008

ELF

196

Summary of Flight Performance ( cont )


Flight Performance Strongly Impacted by
Aerodynamics
Propulsion
Weight

Discussion / Questions?
Classroom Exercise ( Appendix A )

2/24/2008

ELF

197

Flight Performance Problems


1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
2/24/2008

Flight trajectory calculation requires input from aero, propulsion, and w_____.
Missile flight envelope can be characterized by the maximum effective range,
minimum effective range, and o__ b________.
Limitations to the missile effective range include the fire control system,
seeker, time of flight, closing velocity, and m_______ capability.
1 DOF simulation requires modeling only the thrust, weight, and a____ f____.
A 3 DOF simulation that models 3 aero forces is called p____ m___ simulation.
A simulation that includes 3 aero forces ( normal, axial, side ), 3 aero moments
( pitch, roll, yaw ), thrust, and weight is called a _ DOF simulation.

..
The pitch angular acceleration is approximately equal to the second time
derivative of the a____ o_ a_____.
Cruise range is a function of velocity, specific impulse, L / D, and f___ fraction.
If thrust is equal to drag and lift is equal to weight, the missile is in s_____
l____ flight.
Turn rate is a function of normal force, weight, and v_______.
ELF

198

Flight Performance Problems ( cont )


11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.

2/24/2008

Coast range is a function of initial velocity, weight, drag, and the t___ of flight.
Incremental velocity due to boost is a function of ISP, drag, and p_________
weight fraction.
To intercept a high speed crossing target requires a high speed missile with a
high g_____ angle seeker.
An analytical model of a rocket in co-altitude, non-maneuvering flight can be
developed by patching together the flight phases of boost and c____.
An analytical model of a rocket in a short range, off-boresight intercept can be
developed by patching the flight phases of boost and t___.
An analytical model of a guided bomb in non-maneuvering flight can be
developed from the flight phase of a steady d___.
An analytical model of an unguided weapon can be developed from the
b________ flight phase.
An analytical model of a ramjet in co-altitude, non-maneuvering flight can be
developed by patching the flight phases of boost and c_____.
ELF

199

Outline
Introduction / Key Drivers in the Design Process
Aerodynamic Considerations in Tactical Missile Design
Propulsion Considerations in Tactical Missile Design
Weight Considerations in Tactical Missile Design
Flight Performance Considerations in Tactical Missile Design
Measures of Merit and Launch Platform Integration
Sizing Examples
Development Process
Summary and Lessons Learned
References and Communication
Appendices ( Homework Problems / Classroom Exercises,
Example of Request for Proposal, Nomenclature, Acronyms,
Conversion Factors, Syllabus )
2/24/2008

ELF

200

Missile Concept Synthesis Requires Evaluation


of Alternatives and Iteration
Define Mission Requirements
Alt Mission
Establish Baseline
Alt Baseline
Aerodynamics
Propulsion
Weight

Resize / Alt Config / Subsystems / Tech

Trajectory
Meet
Performance?

No

Yes
Measures of Merit and Constraints

No

Yes
2/24/2008

ELF

201

Measures of Merit and Launch Platform


Integration Should Be Harmonized
Launch Platform
Integration /
Firepower

Robustness

Lethality

Cost

Balanced Design
Miss Distance

Reliability
Other
Survivability
Considerations

2/24/2008

Carriage and
Launch
Observables

ELF

202

Tactical Missiles Must Be Robust


Tactical Missiles Must Have Robust Capability to
Handle

Robustness
Launch Platform
Integration /
Firepower

Robustness

Cost

Lethality

Reliability

Miss Distance

Other
Survivability
Considerations

Carriage and
Launch
Observables

Adverse Weather
Clutter
Local Climate
Flight Environment Variation
Uncertainty
Countermeasures
EMI / EMP

This Section Provides Examples of Requirements for


Robustness
2/24/2008

ELF

203

Adverse Weather and Cloud Cover Are Pervasive

North Pole
Region

North Atlantic

NOAA satellite image


of earth cloud cover

Annual Average 1.0


Fraction of
Cloud Cover
0.8
Rising Air Rising Air
Descending
Air

South Pole
Region

0.6

0.4

Argentina, Southern
Africa and Australia
Note: Annual Average Cloud Cover
Global Average
= 61%
Global Average Over Land
= 52%
Global Average Over Ocean = 65%

0.2

0.0
65N

45N

25N

5N

Cloud
Cover
Over Land

Descending
Air

Deserts ( Sahara,
Gobi, Mojave )

85N

Cloud Cover
Over Ocean

5S

25S

45S

65S

85S

Latitude Zone
Reference: Schneider, Stephen H. Encyclopedia of Climate and Weather. Oxford University Press, 1996.
2/24/2008

ELF

204

Radar Seekers Are Robust in Adverse Weather


O2, H2O

1000

ATTENUATION (dB / km)

100

Note:

H2O H2O

O2

EO attenuation through
cloud at 0.1 g / m3 and 100
m visibility
EO attenuation through
rain at 4 mm / h
Humidity at 7.5 g / m3
Millimeter wave and
microwave attenuation
through cloud at 0.1
gm / m3 or rain at 4 mm / h

CO2

10

H2O
O2

H2O, CO2

CO2

H2O

20 C
1 ATM

H2O

EO sensors are ineffective


through cloud cover

O3

0.1
X Ku K Ka Q V W
MILLIMETER
RADAR

0.01
10 GHz
3 cm

100
3 mm

Radar sensors have good to


superior performance
through cloud cover and rain

Very Long Long Mid Short

1 THz
0.3 mm

VISIBLE

INFRARED

SUBMILLIMETER

10
30 m

100
3.0 m

1000
0.3 m

Increasing Frequency
Increasing Wavelength

Source: Klein, L.A., Millimeter-Wave and Infrared Multisensor Design and Signal Processing, Artech House, Boston, 1997
2/24/2008

ELF

205

Radar Seekers Are Desirable for Robust


Operation within the Troposphere Cloud Cover
40

Cumulonimbus ( 2 36k ft )
Cirrus ( 16 32k ft )

30
h,
Altitude,
103 ft

20

Altostratus ( 8 18k ft )
Altocumulus ( 9 19k ft )

10
Stratus ( 1 7k ft )

Cumulus ( 2 9k ft )

Fog

Note:
IR seeker may be able to operate Under the Weather at elevations less than 2,000 ft using GPS / INS midcourse guidance
IR attenuation through cloud cover greater than 100 dB per km. Cloud droplet size ( 0.1 to 50 m ) causes resonance.
mmW has ~ 2 dB / km attenuation through rain. Typical rain drop size ( 4 mm ) is comparable to mmW wavelength.
2/24/2008

ELF

206

Precision Strike Missile Target Sensors Are


Complemented by GPS / INS / Data Link Sensors
Sensor

Adverse
Weather
Impact

ATR / ATA
in Clutter

Range

Moving
Target

Volume
Search
Time

Hypersonic
Dome
Compat.

Diameter
Required

Weight and
Cost

SAR

Active
Imaging
mmW
Passive
Imaging
mmW
Active
Imaging IR
(LADAR)
Active Nonimage IR
(LADAR)
Active Nonimage mmW
Passive
Imaging IR
Acoustic

2/24/2008

GPS / INS /
Data Link

Note:

Maturity

Superior

Good

Below Average
ELF

- Poor
207

Imaging Sensors Enhance Target Acquisition /


Discrimination
Imaging LADAR

Passive Imaging mmW

2/24/2008

Imaging Infrared

Video of Imaging Infrared

ELF

SAR

Video of SAR Physics

208

Example of Mid Wave Long Wave IR Seeker


Comparison
Assume Exo-atmospheric Intercept with
Target diameter DT = 2 ft ( AT = 2919 cm2 ), temperature TT = 300 K, emissivity = 0.5
Diameter of seeker aperture do = 5 in ( Ao = 0.01267 m2 )
Diameter of pixel detector dp = 40 m
Spot resolution if diffraction limited = dspot = dp = 40 m
Temperature of pixel detector Td = 77 K
Focal plane array size 256x256 FPA ( Ad = 1.049 cm2 )
Pixel detector bandwidth fp = 50 Hz ( tinteg = 0.00318 s )
Required signal-to-nose ratio for detection ( S / N )D = 5

First Calculate MWIR Seeker Detection Range


RD = { ( IT ) a Ao { D* / [( fp )1/2 ( Ad )1/2 ]} ( S / N )D-1 }1/2, m
Radiant intensity of target within seeker bandwidth ( IT ) = L ( 2 - 1 ) AT, W sr-1
Spectral radiance of target L = 3.74 x 104 / { 5 { e[ 1.44 x 104 / ( TT )] 1 }}, W cm-2 sr-2 m-1
Assume = 4 m, 2 = 5 m, 1 = 3 m, then
L = 0.000224 W cm-2 sr-2 m-1, ( IT ) = 0.643 W sr-1
Assume Hg0.67Cd0.33Te detector at = 4 m and 77 K D* = 8 x 1011 cm Hz1/2 W-1
RD = { ( 0.643 ) ( 1 ) ( 0.01267 ) {( 8 x 1011 ) / [( 50 )1/2 ( 1.049 )1/2 ]} ( 5 )-1 }1/2 = 13,480 m
2/24/2008

ELF

209

Example of Mid Wave Long Wave IR Seeker


Comparison ( cont )
Next, Calculate LWIR Seeker Detection Range
RD = { ( IT ) a Ao { D* / [( fp )1/2 ( Ad )1/2 ]} ( S / N )D-1 }1/2, m
( IT ) = L ( 2 - 1 ) AT, W sr-1
L = 3.74 x 104 / { 5 { e[ 1.44 x 104 / ( TT )] 1 }}, W cm-2 sr-2 m-1
Assume = 10 m, 2 = 13 m, 1 = 7 m, then
L = 0.00310 W cm-2 sr-2 m-1, ( IT ) = 26.7 W sr-1
Assume Hg0.80Cd0.20Te detector at = 10 m and 77 K D* = 5 x 1010 cm1/2 Hz1/2 W-1
RD = { ( 26.7 ) ( 1 ) ( 0.01267 ) {( 5 x 1010 ) / [( 50 )1/2 ( 1.049 )1/2 ]} ( 5 )-1 }1/2 = 21,600 m
( )( L )max = 2898 / TT, Weins Displacement Law, TT in K

15

Subsonic Airframe

I
LW

10

Mach 4 Airframe

Wavelength for Max Spectral


Radiance, Microns

MWIR Seeker Versus LWIR Seeker Selection Depends Upon Target Temperature

MW
IR

Jet Engine
Rocket Plume
Flare

Example: TT = 300 K

0
0

500

1000

1500

TT, Target Temperature, K

2/24/2008

ELF

2000

( )( L )max = 2898 / TT
= 2898 / 300 = 10.0 m
210

GPS / INS Provides Robust Seeker Lock-on in


Adverse Weather and Clutter
Target Image

480 Pixels

640 Pixels ( 300 m )

175 m

Seeker Lock-on @ 850 m to go ( 1 pixel = 0.47 m )

Seeker Lock-on @ 500 m to go ( 1 pixel = 0.27 m )

3 m GPS / INS error nM

3 m GPS / INS error nM

req

= 0.15 g, < 0.1 m

req

88 m

= 0.44 g, < 0.1 m

44 m

Seeker Lock-on @ 250 m to go ( 1 pixel = 0.14 m )

Seeker Lock-on @ 125 m to go ( 1 pixel = 0.07 m )

3 m GPS / INS error nM

3 m GPS / INS error nM

req

2/24/2008

= 1.76 g, = 0.9 m

req

= 7.04 g, = 2.2 m

Note:
= Target Aim Point and Seeker Tracking Gate, GPS / INS Accuracy = 3 m, Seeker 640 x 480 Image, Seeker
FOV = 20 deg, Proportional Guidance Navigation Ratio = 4, Velocity = 300 m / s, G&C Time Constant = 0.2 s.
ELF

211

Data Link Update at Seeker Lock-on Reduces


Moving Target Error
Target Error at Seeker Lock-on, m

TESeekerLock-on = [ TLE2 + ( VT tLatency )2 ]1/2


1000

VT = 1 m / s
VT = 10 m / s
VT = 100 m / s
VT = 1000 m / s

100

10
0.1

10

100

Target Latency at Seeker Lock-on, s

1000

Example:
TLE = 10 m
tSeekerLock-on = 100 s
tUdate = 90 s
VT = 10 m / s
tLatency = tSeeker- tUdate = 100 90 = 10 s
TESeekerLock-on = [ TLE2 + ( VT tLatency )2 ]1/2
= { 102 + [ 10 ( 10 )]2 ]1/2
= 100.5 m

Note: tSeekerLock-on = Seeker Lock-on time, tUdate = Data Link Update Time, VT = Target Velocity, TLE = Target Location
Error at Update = 10 m
2/24/2008

ELF

212

Optimum Cruise Is a Function of Mach Number,


Altitude, and Planform Geometry
120
Scramjet

h, Altitude, kft

100

q = 200 psf
q = 500 psf
q = 1,000 psf
q = 2,000 psf
q = 5,000 psf
q = 10,000 psf
q = 20,000 psf

Ramjet

80
60
40

Subsonic Turbojet with Low Aspect Ratio Wing

20

Note: q = 1 / 2 ( V2 )

Wingless Subsonic Turbojet

0
0

M, Mach number
Note:
U.S. 1976 Standard Atmosphere
For Efficient Cruise, ( L / D )Max for Cruising Lifting Body Typically Occurs for 500 < q < 1,000 psf
( L / D )Max for Cruise Missile with Low Aspect Ratio Wing Typically Occurs for 200 < q < 500 psf
2/24/2008 q 200 psf lower limit for aero control
ELF

213

Missile Guidance and Control Must Be Robust


for Changing Events and Flight Environment

Level Out
Engine Start Transient

Cruise

Example High Performance Missile Has


Low-to-High Dynamic Pressure
Negative-to-Positive Static Margin
Thrust / Weight / cg Transients
High Temperature
High Thermal Load
High Vibration
High Acoustics

Booster Shutdown
Transient at High Mach
Pitch-Up at High Alpha

Engine Shutdown
Transient

Climb
Booster Ignition
Air Launch at Low
Mach ( high ) /
Deploy
Compressed
Carriage Surfaces
2/24/2008

Pitch-Over at High Alpha

Pitch-Over at
High Alpha
Dive
Terminal at High
Dynamic Pressure
Precision Impact
at 0 Deg

Vertical Launch in Cross Wind ( high )


/ Deploy Compressed Carriage Surfaces
ELF

214

Design Robustness Requires Consideration of


Flight Altitude
Troposphere ( h < 36,089 ft )

Stratosphere ( h > 36089 ft )

T / TSL = 1 6.875 x 10-6 h, h in ft

T = constant = 390 R

p / pSL = ( T / TSL )5.2561

p / pSL = 0.2234 e - ( h 36089 ) / 20807

/ SL = ( T / TSL )4.2561

/ SL = 0.2971 e - ( h 36089 ) / 20807

Characteristic at Altitude /
Characteristic at Sea Level

1
0

20

40

60

80

100

Troposphere Stratosphere

Temperature Ratio
Pressure Ratio
Density Ratio
Speed of Sound Ratio

0.1

0.01

h, Geometric Altitude, kft

U.S. Standard Atmosphere, 1976


TSL = 519 R
pSL = 2116 lb / ft2
SL = 0.00238 slug / ft3
cSL = 1116 ft / s

Note: TSL = Temperature at sea level, pSL = pressure at sea level, SL = density at sea level, cSL = speed
of sound at sea level, h = altitude in ft.
2/24/2008

ELF

215

Variation from Standard Atmosphere

Design Robustness Requires Consideration of


Cold and Hot Atmospheres
Ratio: Cold-to-Standard
Atmosphere
Ratio: Hot-to-Standard
Atmosphere
Ratio: Polar-to-Standard
Atmosphere
Ratio: Tropic-to-Standard
Atmosphere

1.5
( + 30 % )

( - 23% )

0.5

Temp

Density Speed of
Sound

Note:
Based on properties at sea level
U. S. 1976 Standard Atmosphere: Temperature = 519 R, Density = 0.002377 slug / ft3, Speed of sound = 1116 ft / s
2/24/2008

ELF

216

Design Robustness Is Required to Handle Uncertainty


Narrow Uncertainty ( e.g.,
SDD Flight Performance )

Example Normalized PDF

Broad Uncertainty ( e.g.,


Conceptual Design Flight
Performance )
Skewed Uncertainty ( e.g.,
Cost, Weight, Miss
Distance )
Bimodal Uncertainty ( e.g.,
Multi-mode Seeker Target
Location )
Uniform Bias Uncertainty
( e.g., Seeker Aim Point
Bias )

0.5

0
-20

-10

10

20

Typical % Error from Forecast Value


Note for normal distribution: PDF = { 1 / [ ( 2 )1/2 ]} e {[( x - ) / ]
2/24/2008

ELF

2/2}

217

Counter-Countermeasures by Missile Enhance


Design Robustness
Examples of CCM ( Missile )

Examples of CM ( Threat )

Imaging Seeker
Multi-spectral / Multimode Seeker
Temporal Processing
Hardened GPS / INS

EOCM
directed laser
flare
smoke

RFCM
active radar
jammer
chaff

standoff acquisition
Integrated GPS / INS
directional antenna
pseudolite / differential
GPS

Decoy
Low Observables
Speed
Altitude
Maneuverability
Lethal Defense

2/24/2008

ATR / ATA
Speed
Altitude
Maneuverability
Low Observables
Saturation
ELF

218

Examples of Countermeasure-Resistant Seekers


IIR ( I2R AGM-130 )
Two Color IIR ( Python 5 )
Acoustic - IIR ( BAT ) ..
IIR LADAR ( LOCAAS )

ARH mmW ( AARGM )


ARH - IIR ( Armiger ) .
2/24/2008

ELF

219

A Target Set Varies in Size and Hardness


Lethality

Example of Precision Strike Target Set


Air Defense ( SAMs,
AAA )

Launch Platform
Integration /
Firepower

Robustness

Cost

Lethality

Reliability

Miss Distance

Other
Survivability
Considerations

Carriage and
Launch
Observables

Armor
TBM/ TELs

Artillery
Naval

C3II
Counter Air
Aircraft

Transportation Choke
Points ( Bridges,
Railroad Yards, Truck
Parks )

Oil
Refineries

Examples of Targets where Size and Hardness Drive Warhead Design


/ Technology
Small Size, Hard Target: Tank Small Shaped Charge, EFP, or KE
Warhead
Deeply Buried Hard Target: Bunker KE / Blast Frag Warhead
Large Size Target: Building Large Blast Frag Warhead
2/24/2008

Video Example of Precision Strike Targets


ELF

220

76% of Baghdad Targets Struck First Night of


Desert Storm Were C3 Time Critical Targets
Targets: 1. Directorate of Military Intelligence; 2, 5, 8,
13, 34. Telephone switching stations; 3. Ministry of
Defense national computer complex; 4. Electrical transfer
station; 6. Ministry of Defense headquarters; 7. Ashudad

1
4

2
3
6 5
7

23 25
8 24 26
9
10
27
11
21
22

12
13 14
15

20

16
17

28

31
32

29
30

33
34
35
37

36
19
2/24/2008

18

highway bridge; 9. Railroad yard; 10. Muthena airfield ( military


section ); 11. Air Force headquarters; 12. Iraqi Intelligence
Service; 14. Secret Police complex; 15. Army storage depot;
16. Republican Guard headquarters; 17. New presidential
palace; 18. Electrical power station; 19. SRBM assembly
factory ( Scud ); 20. Baath Party headquarters; 21.
Government conference center; 22. Ministry of Industry and
Military Production; 23. Ministry of Propaganda; 24. TV
transmitter; 25, 31. Communications relay stations; 26.
Jumhuriya highway bridge; 27. Government Control Center
South; 28. Karada highway bridge ( 14th July Bridge ); 29.
Presidential palace command center; 30. Presidential
palace command bunker; 32. Secret Police headquarters;
33. Iraqi Intelligence Service regional headquarters; 35.
National Air Defense Operations Center; 36. Ad Dawrah oil
refinery; 37. Electrical power plant
Source: AIR FORCE Magazine, 1 April 1998
ELF

221

Type of Target Drives Precision Strike Missile


Size, Speed, Cost, Seeker, and Warhead
Anti-Fixed Surface Target Missiles ( large size, wings, subsonic, blast frag warhead )
AGM-154

Storm Shadow / Scalp

KEPD-350

BGM-109

AGM-142

Anti-Radar Site Missiles ( ARH seeker, high speed or duration, blast frag warhead )
AGM-88

AS-11 / Kh-58

ARMAT

Armiger

ALARM

Anti-Ship Missiles ( large size, KE / blast frag warhead, and high speed or low altitude )
MM40

AS-34 Kormoran

AS-17 / Kh-31

BrahMos

SS-N-22 / 3M80

Anti-Armor Missiles ( small size, hit-to-kill, low cost, shape charge, EFP, or KE warhead )
Hellfire

LOCAAS

MGM140

AGM-65

LOSAT

Anti-Buried Target Missiles ( large size, high fineness, KE / blast frag warhead )
2/24/2008

CALCM

GBU-28

GBU-31
ELF

Storm Shadow

MGM-140

Permission of Missile Index. 222

Examples of Light Weight Air Launched MultiPurpose Precision Strike Weapons


Weapon

Fixed
Surface
Targets(1)

Moving
Targets(2)

Time
Critical
Targets(3)

Buried
Targets(4)

Adverse
Weather(5)

Firepower(6)

Example New Missile


AGM-65
Small Diameter Bomb
AGM-88

Hellfire / Brimstone /
Longbow
LOCAAS

(1) Multi-mode warhead desired. GPS / INS provides precision ( 3 m ) accuracy.


(2) - Seeker or high bandwidth data link required for terminal homing.

Note:
Superior

(3) - High speed with duration required High payoff of high speed / loiter and powered submunition.

2/24/2008

(4) - KE penetration warhead required High impact speed, low drag, high density, long length.

Good

(5) - GPS / INS, SAR seeker, imaging mmW seeker, and data link have high payoff.

Average

(6) - Light weight required. Light weight also provides low cost ELF

Poor

223

Blast Is Effective at Small Miss Distance


Delta p / p0, Overpressure Ratio to Undisturbed Pressure

p / p0 = 37.95 / ( z p01/3 ) + 154.9 / ( z p01/3 )2 + 203.4 / ( z p01/3 )3 + 403.9 / ( z p01/3 )4


1000

z = r / c1/3
Note:
Based on bare sphere of pentolite ( Ec1/2 = 8,500 ft / s )
p = overpressure at distance r from explosion

100

p0 = undisturbed atmospheric pressure, psi


z = scaling parameter = r / c1/3
r = distance from center of explosion, ft
c = explosive weight, lb

10

Example for Rocket Baseline Warhead:


c = 38.8 lb
h = 20k feet, p0 = 6.8 psi
r = 10 ft
z = 10 / ( 38.8 )1/3 = 2.95

1
0

10

z p01/3 = 5.58
p / p0 = 13.36

z ( p0 )1/3

p = 90 psi
Reference: US Army Ordnance Pamphlet ORDP-2290-Warheads, 1980
2/24/2008

ELF

224

Guidance Accuracy Enhances Lethality


Rocket Baseline Warhead
Against Typical Aircraft Target
PK > 0.5 if < 5 ft ( p > 330 psi,
fragments impact energy > 130k
ft-lb / ft2 )
PK > 0.1 if < 25 ft ( p > 24 psi,
fragments impact energy > 5k ftlb / ft2 )

Note: Rocket Baseline 77.7 lb warhead


C / M = 1, spherical blast, h = 20k ft.
Video of AIM-9X Flight Test Missile Impact on Target
( No Warhead )
2/24/2008

ELF

225

Warhead Blast and Fragments Are Effective at


Small Miss Distance

2.4 m
witness
plate
Roland 9 kg explosively formed warhead
multi-projectiles are from preformed case

Hellfire 24 lb shaped charge warhead


fragments are from natural fragmenting case

Video of Guided MLRS 180 lb blast fragmentation warhead


2/24/2008

ELF

226

Maximum Total Fragment Kinetic Energy


Requires High Charge-to-Metal Ratio
( KE / Mwh ) / Ec, Non-dimensional Kinetic Energy

KE = ( 1 / 2 ) Mm Vf2 = Ec Mc / ( 1 + 0.5 Mc / Mm )
0.4

Low K

Note:
Based on Gurney Equation
Cylindrical Warhead
KE = Total Kinetic Energy
Mm = Total Mass Metal Fragments
Vf = Fragment Velocity
Ec = Energy Per Unit Mass Charge
Mc = Mass of Charge
Mwh = Mass of Warhead = Mm + Mc

KE
High

0.3

0.2

Example:
Rocket Baseline Warhead

0.1

Mc = 1.207 slug
Mm = 1.207 slug
Mc / Mm = 1

0
0

0.5

1.5

Mc / Mm, Charge-to-Metal Ratio

2.5

Ec Mc = 52,300,000 ( 1.207 ) =
63,100,000 ft-lb
KE = 63100000 / [1 + 0.5 ( 1 )]
= 42,100,000 ft-lb

Reference: Carleone, Joseph (Editor), Tactical Missile Warheads (Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics, Vol 155), AIAA, 1993.
2/24/2008

ELF

227

Multiple Impacts Are Effective Against Threat


Vulnerable Area Subsystems

Pk, Probability of Kil

PK = 1 - ( 1 - Av / Atp )nhits
Note:
Av = Target vulnerable area
Atp = Target presented area

1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4

Av / Atp = 0.1
Av / Atp = 0.5
Av / Atp = 0.9

0.3
0.2
0.1
0

Example:
If Av / Ap = 0.1, nhits = 22 gives PK = 0.9
If Av / Ap = 0.9, nhits = 1 gives PK = 0.9

10

15

20

25

30

nhits, Number of Impacts on Target


2/24/2008

ELF

228

Small Miss Distance Improves Number of


Warhead Fragment Hits
nhits = nfragments [ AP / ( 4 2 )]

Number of Fragment Hits

100

Wwh = 5 lb
Wwh = 50 lb
Wwh = 500 lb

80
60

Example for Rocket Baseline:


WWH = 77.7 lb

40

Mc / Mm = 1, Wm = 38.8 lb = 17,615 g
Average fragment weight = 3.2 g

20

nfragments = 17615 / 3.2 = 5505


AP = Target presented area = 20 ft2

0
0

20

40

60

80

Sigma, Miss Distance, ft

2/24/2008

100

= Miss distance = 25 ft
nhits = 5505 { 20 / [( 4 ) ( 25 )2 ]} = 14
Kinetic energy per square foot. = KE
/ ( 4 2 ) = 42100000 / [ 4 ( 25 )2 ] =
5,360 ft-lb / ft2

Note:
Spherical blast with uniformly distributed fragments
nhits = nfragments [ AP / ( 4 2 )]
Warhead charge / metal weight = 1
Average fragment weight = 50 grains ( 3.2 g )
AP = Target presented area = 20 ft2
ELF

229

High Fragment Velocity Requires High Charge-toMetal Ratio


Vf = ( 2 Ec )1/2 [ ( Mc / Mm ) / ( 1 + 0.5 Mc / Mm )]1/2

Vf, Fragment Velocity, ft / s

10000

HMX Explosive
TNT Explosive

8000
6000

Note: Based on the Gurney equation for a


cylindrical warhead

Example:
Baseline Rocket Warhead

4000

HMX Explosive
MC / Mm = 1

2000

Vf = 8,353 ft / s

HMX Explosive ( 2 EC )1/2 = 10,230 ft / s


TNT Explosive ( 2 EC )1/2 = 7,600 ft / s
Vf = Fragment initial velocity, ft / s
Ec = Energy per unit mass of charge, ft2 / s2
Mc = Mass of charge
Mm = Total mass of all metal fragments
Mwh = Mass of warhead = Mm + Mc

0
0

Mc / Mm, Charge-to-Metal Ratio


2/24/2008

ELF

230

Small Miss Distance Improves Fragment


Penetration
Steel Perforation by Fragment ( in )

.5
150 Grains ( 9.7 g )

.375

50 Grains
( 3.2 g )
.25

.125
10

2/24/2008

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Miss Distance ( ft )

90

100

110

120

Note: Typical air-to-air missile warhead


Fragments initial velocity 5,000 ft / s
Sea level
Average fragment weight 3.2 g
Fewer than 0.3% of the fragments weigh more than 9.7 g for nominal 3.2 g preformed warhead fragments
Small miss distance gives less reduction in fragment velocity, enhancing penetration
ELF

231

Hypersonic Hit-to-Kill Enhances Energy on Target


for Missiles with Small Warheads
ET / EC, Total Energy on Target / Warhead
Charge Energy

ET / EC = [( 1 / 2 ) ( WMissile / gc ) V2 + EC ( WC / gc )] / [ EC ( WC / gc )]
9

Weight of
missile /
Weight of
charge = 20

Example for Rocket Baseline:

WMissile = 367 lb

WC = 38.8 lb

WMissile / WC = 9.46

Weight of
missile /
Weight of
charge = 10

V = 2,000 ft / s

( 1 / 2 ) ( WMissile / gc ) V2 = 22.8 x 106 ft-lb )

EC ( WC / gc ) = 63.1 x 106 ft-lb

ET / EC = 1.36

Weight of
missile /
Weight of
charge = 5

1
0
0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

Missile Closing Velocity, ft / s

6000

Weight of
missile /
Weight of
charge = 2

Note: Warhead explosive charge energy based on HMX, ( 2 EC )1/2 = 10,230 ft / s.


1 kg weight at Mach 3 closing velocity has kinetic energy of 391,000 J equivalent chemical energy of 0.4 lb TNT.
2/24/2008

ELF

232

Kinetic Energy Warhead Density, Length, and


Velocity Provide Enhanced Penetration
P / d = [( l / d ) 1 ] ( P / T )1/2 + 3.67 ( P / T )2/3 [( T V2 ) / T ]1/3

P / d, Target Penetration / Penetrator Diameter for


Steel on Concrete

60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0

1000

2000

3000

V, Velocity, ft / s
l/d=2

l/d=5

l / d = 10

4000

Note:
V > 1,000 ft / s
l/d>2
Non-deforming ( high strength, sharp nose )
penetrator
l = Penetrator length
d = Penetrator diameter
V = Impact velocity
P= Penetrator density
T = Target density
T= Target ultimate stress
Example for 250 lb Steel Penetrator
l / d = 10
l = 48 in ( 4 ft )
d = 4.8 in ( 0.4 ft )
Concrete target
P = 0.283 lb / in3 ( 15.19 slug / ft3 )
T = 0.075 lb / in3 ( 4.02 slug / ft3 )
V = 4,000 ft / s
T = 5,000 psi ( 720,000 psf )
P / d = [ 10 1 }( 15.19 / 4.02 )1/2 + 3.67 ( 15.19
/ 4.02 )2/3 [ 4.02 ( 4000 )2 / 720000 ]1/3 = 57.3
P = ( 57.3 ) ( 0.4 ) = 22.9 ft

Source: Christman, D.R., et al, Analysis of High-Velocity Projectile Penetration, Journal of Applied Physics, Vol 37, 1966
2/24/2008

ELF

233

Examples of Kinetic-Kill Missiles

Standard Missile 3 ( NTW )

PAC-3

LOSAT
2/24/2008

THAAD

LOSAT Video
ELF

234

CEP Approximately Equal to 1 Miss Distance


Miss Distance
Launch Platform
Integration / Robustness
Firepower

Missile Circular Error Probable ( 50%


of shots within circle )

Extreme Missile
Trajectory

Cost

Lethality

Reliability

Miss Distance

Survivability

Observables

Missile 1 Miss Distance ( 68%


of shots within circle for a
normal distribution of error )
Median
Trajectory

Target

Presented Target Area


Extreme Missile
Trajectory

For a normal distribution of error:


Probability < 1 miss distance = 0.68
Probability < 2 miss distance = 0.95
Probability < 3 miss distance = 0.997

Hypothetical Plane
Through Target

Source: Heaston, R.J. and Smoots, C.W., Introduction to Precision Guided Munitions, GACIAC HB-83-01, May 1983.
2/24/2008

ELF

235

A Collision Intercept Has Constant Bearing for a


Constant Velocity, Non-maneuvering Target
Example of Collision Intercept
( Line-of-Sight Angle Constant )
.
( Line-of-Sight Angle Rate L = 0 )

Example of Miss
( Line-of-Sight Angle Diverging )
.
( Line-of-Sight Angle Rate L 0 )
Overshoot Miss

t2
( LOS
L

)1 > (

LO S

t1
)0

Seeker Line-of-Sight

Missile

t1

Target

t0
Missile

( LOS )1 = ( LOS )0
L

Seeker Line-of-Sight

t0

Target

Note: L = Missile Lead


A = Target Aspect

2/24/2008

ELF

236

A Maneuvering Target and Initial Heading Error


Cause Miss
Target
A

Missile

Collision
Point

+Z
Maneuvering : d2Z + dZ + N Z = N cos A 1 a t2
T
dt
to t to t cos L 2
Target
dt2
Initial Heading : d2Z + dZ + N Z = VM M
0
dt
to t
Error
dt2
Reference: Jerger, J.J., Systems Preliminary Design
Principles of Guided Missile Design, D. Van Nostrand
Company, Inc., Princeton, New Jersey, 1960
2/24/2008

Note: to - t = 0 at intercept, causing discontinuity in above equations.


N = Effective navigation ratio = N [ VM / ( VM - VT cos A )]
N = Navigation ratio = ( d / dt ) / ( dL / dt )
= Missile time constant, VM= Velocity of missile, M = Initial flight
0
path angle error of missile, to = Total time of flight, aT = Acceleration
of target, VT = Velocity of target
ELF

237

Missile Time Constant Causes Miss Distance


is a measure of missile ability to respond to
target condition changes
equals elapsed time from input of target
return until missile has
completed 63% or ( 1 e-1 ) of corrective
maneuver ( t = )
also called rise time
Contributions to time constant
Control effectiveness ( )
Control dynamics ( e.g., actuator rate ) ( . )
Dome error slope ( Dome )
Guidance and control filters ( Filter )
Other G&C dynamics ( gyro dynamics,
accelerometer, processor latency, etc )
Seeker errors ( resolution, latency, blind range,
tracking, noise, glint, amplitude )

Approach to estimate
= +
2/24/2008

Input

Time
ti

63%
Output

ti

Time

Acceleration Achieved
= 1 e- t /
Acceleration Commanded
Example for Rocket Baseline:
M = 2, h = 20k ft, coast
= + . + Dome

+ Dome

= 0.096 + 0.070 + 0.043 = 0.209 s


ELF

238

Time Constant for Control Effectiveness Is


Driven by Static Margin
Assumptions for
Control surface deflection limited
Near neutral stability

Max, Max

Equation of motion is
..

Max

= [ V2 S d Cm / ( 2 Iy ) ] Max

Integrate to solve for Max

/ 2

Max= [ V2 S d Cm / ( 8 Iy ) ] Max 2

is given by

Max

= [ 8 Iy ( Max / Max ) / ( V2 SRef d Cm )]1/2

Contributors to small

Example for Rocket Baseline:

Low fineness ( small Iy / ( SRef d ))


High dynamic pressure ( low altitude / high
speed )
Large Cm

2/24/2008

W = 367 lb, d = 0.667 ft, SRef = 0.349 ft2, Iy = 94.0 slug-ft2,


M = 2, h = 20k ft ( = 0.001267 slug / ft3 ),
Max = 9.4 deg, Max = 12.6 deg, Cm = 51.6 per rad,
= { 8 ( 94.0 ) ( 9.4 / 12.6 ) / [ 0.001267 ( 2074 )2 ( 0.349 )
( 0.667 ) ( 51.6 ) ]}1/2 = 0.096 s
ELF

239

Time Constant . for Flight Control System Is


Driven by Actuator Rate Dynamics
Max, Max

Assumptions for .

Control surface rate limited ( = Max )


Near neutral stability
.

Equation of motion for = +/- Max

Max

Max

...

= [ V2 S d Cm / ( 2 Iy ) ] Max

Equation
of motion for perfect response
.
= , = Max
..

= [ V2 S d Cm / ( 2 Iy ) ] Max

. is difference between actual response


to Max and perfect ( ) response
Then

Max = 360 deg / s, Max = 12.6 deg

Note:

. = 2 ( 12.6 / 360 ) = 0. 070 s

Response for control rate limit


Response for no control rate limit

. = 2 Max / Max

2/24/2008

- Max Example for Rocket Baseline

ELF

240

Time Constant Dome for Radome Is Driven by


Dome Error Slope
| R | = 0.05 ( lN / d 0.5 ) [ 1 + 15 ( f / f ) ] / ( d / )
Dome = N ( VC / VM ) | R | ( / . )
/ . = ( W / gc ) VM / { q SRef [ CN + CN / ( / )]}

Example for Rocket Baseline at M = 2, h = 20k ft, q =


2725 psf
Assume VT = 1,000 ft / s, giving VC = 3,074 ft / s
Assume N = 4, f = 10 GHz or = 1.18 in, f / f = 0.02
Configuration data are lN / d = 2.4, d = 8 in, SRef = 0.349
ft2, W = 367 lb, CN = 40 per rad, CN = 15.5 per rad, /

= 0.75
Compute | R | = 0.05 ( 2.4 0.5 ) [ 1 + 15 ( 0.02 )] / ( 8 /
1.18 ) = 0.0182 deg / deg
Dome = 4 ( 367 ) ( 3074 ) ( 0.0182 ) / [ 32.2 ( 2725 ) ( 0.349 )
( 40 + 15.5 / 0.75 )] = 0.043 s

2/24/2008

|R| @ d / = 10, Radome Error Slope,


Deg / Deg

Substituting gives Dome = N W VC | R | / { gc q SRef [ CN + CN / ( / )]}

ELF

0.03
f / f = 0.05

0.02

f / f = 0.02
f/f=0
Faceted or
Window
Dome

0.01

Tangent
Ogive
Dome

1
2
3
lN / d, Nose Fineness

Multi-lens
Dome

241

High Initial Acceleration Is Required to Eliminate


a Heading Error
aM t0 / ( VM M ) = N ( 1 t / t0 ) N 2

aM t0 / ( VM M ),
Non-dimensional
Acceleration

Note: Proportional Guidance


=0
t0 = Total Time to Correct
Heading Error
aM = Acceleration of Missile
VM = Velocity of Missile
M = Initial Heading Error of
Missile
N = Effective Navigation Ratio

3
2.5
2 N = 2

0
0
2/24/2008

Example: Exoatmospheric Head-on Intercept, N = 4


Midcourse lateral error at t = 0 ( seeker lock-on ) =
200 m, 1
Rlock-on = 20000 m M = 200 / 20000 = 0.0100 rad
VM = 5000 m / s, VT = 5000 t0 = Rlock-on / ( VM + VT ) =
20000 / ( 5000 + 5000 ) = 2.00 s
aM t0 / ( VM M ) = 4
aM = 4 ( 5000 ) ( 0.0100 ) / 2.00 ) = 100 m / s2
nM = 100 / 9.81 = 10.2 g

0.2

0.6
0.4
t / t0, Non-dimensional Time
ELF

0.8

1.0
242

Missile Minimum Range May Be Driven By 4 to 8


Time Constants to Correct Initial Heading Error
HE = VM M t0 e-( t0 / ) j = 1N 1 {( N - 2 )! [ - ( t0 / )]j / [( j 1 )! ( N j 1 )! j! ]}
If N = 3, HE = VM M t0 e-( t0 / ) [ ( t0 / ) - ( t0 / )2 / 2 ]
If N = 4, HE = VM M t0 e-( t0 / ) [( t0 / ) - ( t0 / )2 + ( t0 / )3 / 6 ]
If N = 5, HE = VM M t0 e-( t0/ ) [( t0 / ) ( 3 / 2 ) ( t0 / )2 + ( t0 / )3 / 2 ( t0 / )4 / 24 ]
If N = 6, HE = VM M t0 e-( t0 / ) [( t0 / ) - 2 ( t0 / )2 + ( t0 / )3 - ( t0 / )4 / 6 + ( t0 / )5 / 120 ]

0.3

N = 3
0.2

Note: Proportional Guidance


( HE )Max shown in figure is the envelope of adjoint solution
( HE )Max = Max miss distance ( 1 ) from heading error, ft
VM = Velocity of missile, ft / s
M = Initial heading error, rad
t0 = Total time to correct heading error, s
= Missile time constant, s
N = Effective navigation ratio

N = 4

| ( HE )Max / ( VM M to ) |

N = 6

0.1

Example: Ground Target, N = 4, = 0.2, GPS /


INS error = 3 m, Rlock-on = 125 m, M = 3 / 125 =
0.024 rad, VM = 300 m / s, t0 = 125 / 300 = 0.42 s
t0 / = 0.42 / 0.2 = 2.1, (HE )Max / ( VM M to ) = 0.12
( HE )Max = 0.12 ( 300 ) ( 0.024 ) ( 0.42 ) = 2.2 m

0
References:

tO /

10

Donatelli, G.A., et al, Methodology for Predicting Miss Distance for Air Launched Missiles, AIAA-82-0364, January 1982
Bennett, R.R., et al, Analytical Determination of Miss Distances for Linear Homing Navigation, Hughes Memo 260, March 1952
2/24/2008

ELF

243

Required Maneuverability Is about 3x the Target


Maneuverability for an Ideal ( = 0 ) Missile
nM / nT = [ N / ( N 2 )] [ 1 ( 1 t / t0 )N 2 ]
Where
t = Elapsed Time
t0 = Time to Target
N = Effective Navigation Ratio

6
nM
,
nT

Assumptions:
=0
VM > VT

N = 2

N = 2.5

Example:
= 0, N = 3, t / t0 = 1

nM / nT = 3

Missile-to-Target
Acceleration 2
Ratio
0

4
6

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

t / t0, Non-Dimensional Time


2/24/2008

ELF

244

Target Maneuvers Require 6 to 10 Time


Constants to Settle Out Miss Distance
0.3

MAN = gc nT 2 e-( t0 / ) j = 2N 1 {( N - 3 )! [ - ( t0 / )]j / [( j 2 )!


( N j 1 )! j! ]}
If N = 3, MAN = gc nT 2 e-( t0 / ) [ ( t0 / )2 / 2 ]
If N = 4, MAN = gc nT 2 e-( t0 / ) [ ( t0 / )2 / 2 - ( t0 / )3 / 6 ]
If N = 5, MAN = gc nT 2 e-( t0 / ) [ ( t0 / )2 / 2 - ( t0 / )3 / 3 + ( t0 /
)4 / 24 ]
If N = 6, MAN = gc nT 2 e-( t0 / ) [ ( t0 / )2 / 2 - ( t0 / )3 / 2 + ( t0 /
)4 / 8 - ( t0 / )5 / 120 ]

N = 3

0.2
( MAN )Max
gc nT 2

Note: Proportional Guidance


( MAN )Max is the envelope of adjoint solution
( MAN )Max = Max miss ( 1 ) from target accel, ft
nT = Target acceleration, g
gc = Gravitation constant, 32.2
= Missile time constant, s
N = Effective navigation ratio
0 = Time of flight, s

N = 4
0.1
N = 6

0
References:

tO /

10

Donatelli, G.A., et al, Methodology for Predicting Miss Distance for Air Launched Missiles, AIAA-82-0364, January 1982
Bennett, R.R., et al, Analytical Determination of Miss Distances for Linear Homing Navigation, Hughes Memo 260, March 1952
2/24/2008

ELF

245

An Aero Control Missile Has Reduced Miss


Distance at Low Altitude / High Dynamic Pressure
Note: Proportional guidance
Target maneuver initiated for max miss ( t0 / = 2 )
( Man )Max in figure = Envelope of adjoint miss
distance
= Missile time constant, s
N = Effective navigation ratio = 4
nT = Target acceleration, g
gc = Gravitation constant = 32.2

Rocket Baseline Maximum Miss Due to Maneuvering


Target, ft

( Man )Max = 0.13 gc nT 2 @ N = 4, t0 / = 2


100

10

h = SL
h = 20k ft
h = 40k ft
h = 60k ft
h = 80k ft

Example for Rocket Baseline at Mach 2, coasting


Assume:
nT = 5g, VT = 1,000 ft / s, head-on intercept
h = 20k ft = 0.209 s

0.1
0

10

( Man )Max = 0.13 ( 32.2 )( 5 )( 0.209 )2 = 0.9 ft


h = 80k ft = 1.17 s

Target Maneuverability, g

( Man )Max = 0.13 ( 32.2 )( 5 )( 1.17 )2 = 28.7 ft


2/24/2008

ELF

246

Glint Miss Distance Driven by Seeker Resolution,


Missile Time Constant, and Navigation Ratio
Sigma / ( bT )Res, Nondimensional Miss Distance
from Glint @ 2 Hz Bandwidth

Glint = KN ( W / )1/2

Note:
Proportional guidance
Adjoint miss distance
Glint = Miss distance due to glint noise, ft
W = Glint noise spectral density, ft2 / Hz
= Missile time constant, s
N = Effective navigation ratio
( bT )Res = Target span resolution at seeker blind range, ft
B = Noise bandwidth, Hz ( 1 < B < 5 Hz )

KN = 0.5 ( 2 KN = 4 )N / 4

0.8

KN = 4 = 1.206
W = ( bT )Res2 / ( 3 2 B )

0.6

0.4

Example: Rocket Baseline at Mach 2, h


= 20k ft altitude = 0.209 s
Assume:

0.2

N = 4
B = 2 Hz
( bT )Res = bt = 40 ft ( radar seeker beam
width resolution of target wing span )

0
0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

Tau, Missile Time Constant, s

N' = 3

N' = 4

N' = 6

Calculate:
W = ( 40 )2 / [ 3 2 ( 2 )] = 27.0 ft2 / Hz
Glint / ( bT )Res = KN ( W / )1/2 / ( bt )Res
= 1.206 ( 27.0 / 0.209 )1/2 / 40 = 0.343

Glint = 0.343 ( 40 ) = 13.7 ft


Reference:
Bennett, R.R., et al, Analytical Determination of Miss Distances for Linear Homing Navigation, Hughes Memo 260, March 1952
2/24/2008

ELF

247

Minimizing Miss Distance with Glint Requires


Optimum Time Constant and Navigation Ratio
= [( MAN )Max2 + ( Glint )2 ]1/2

Note:
Proportional guidance
Adjoint miss distance
( MAN )Max = Max miss distance from
target maneuver, ft
Glint = Miss distance from glint noise, ft
= Missile time constant, s
N = Effective navigation ratio

Rocket Baseline Miss Distance, ft

50
40
30

Example for Rocket Baseline at Mach 2,


h = 20k ft altitude = 0.209 s

20

Assume:
10

N = 4
B = 2 Hz
( bT )Res = 40 ft

0
0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

Tau, Missile Time Constant, s

N' = 3

N' = 4

N' = 6

nT = 5g, VT = 1,000 ft / s, Head-on


From prior figures:
( MAN )Max = 0.9 ft, Glint = 13.7 ft
Calculate:

= [( MAN )Max2 + ( Glint )2 ]1/2 = 13.7 ft


Reference:
Bennett, R.R., et al, Analytical Determination of Miss Distances for Linear Homing Navigation, Hughes Memo 260, March 1952
2/24/2008

ELF

248

Missile Carriage RCS and Launch Plume Are


Considerations in Launch Platform Observables
Launch Platform
Integration /
Firepower

Carriage and

Missile Carriage Alternatives

Robustness

Cost

Lethality

Reliability

Miss Distance

Survivability

Observables

Launch Observables

Internal Carriage: Lowest Carriage RCS


Conformal Carriage: Low Carriage RCS
Conventional External Pylon or External Rail Carriage: High Carriage RCS

Plume Alternatives
Min Smoke: Lowest Launch Observables ( H2O Contrail )
Reduced Smoke: Reduced Launch Observables ( e.g., HCl Contrail from AP
Oxidizer )
High Smoke: High Launch Observables ( e.g., Al2O3 Smoke from Al Fuel )

2/24/2008

ELF

249

Examples of Weapon Bay Internal Carriage and


Load-out
Center Weapon Bay Best for Ejection Launchers

F-22 Bay Loadout: 3 AIM-120C, 1 GBU-32

Video

AMRAAM Loading in F-22 Bay


2/24/2008

F-117 Bay Loadout: 1 GBU-27, 1 GBU-10

B-1 Bay Loadout: 8 AGM-69

Side Weapon Bay Best for Rail Launchers

F-22 Side Bay: 1 AIM-9 Each Side Bay


ELF

RAH-66 Side Bay: 1 AGM-114, 2 FIM92, 4 Hydra 70 Each Side Bay

250

Minimum Smoke Propellant Has Low Observables

High Smoke Example: AIM-7

Reduced Smoke Example: AIM-120

Minimum Smoke Example: Javelin

Particles ( e.g., metal fuel ) at all


atmosphere temperature.

Contrail ( HCl from AP oxidizer ) at T < -10 F


atmospheric temperature.

Contrail (H2O ) at T < -35 F


atmospheric temperature.

High Smoke Motor

Reduced Smoke Motor

Minimum Smoke Motor

2/24/2008

ELF

251

High Altitude Flight and Low RCS Enhance


Survivability
Pt, Radar Transmitted Power
Required for Detection, W

Launch Platform
Integration /
Firepower

Other Survivability
Considerations

Pt = ( 4 )3 Pr R4 / ( Gt Gr 2 )

10000000

Robustness

Cost

Lethality

Reliability

Miss Distance

Survivability

Observables

1000000
100000
Example for Pt = 50,000 W:

10000

Not detected if:


h > 25k ft for = 0.001 m2

1000

h > 77k ft for = 0.1 m2

100
0

20

40

60

80

100

h, Geometric Altitude, kft


RCS = 0.1 m2

2/24/2008

RCS = 0.01 m2

RCS = 0.001 m2

Note:
Range Slant Angle = 20 deg, Gt = Transmitter Gain = 40 dB, Gr = Receiver Gain = 40 dB, = Wavelength = 0.03
m, Pr = Receiver Sensitivity = 10-14 W, = radar cross section ( RCS )
Based on Radar Range Equation with ( S / N )Detect = 1 and Unobstructed Line-of-Sight
ELF

252

Mission Planning and High Speed Enhance


Survivability
Flyby

texp ( V / Rmax ), Non-dimensional Threat


Exposure Time

texp = 2 ( Rmax / V ) cos [

sin-1

( yoffset / Rmax )] treact

2
x

R ma

SAM
Site

yoffset

texp V

Example:
yoffset = 7 nm, Rmax = 10 nm = 60750 ft,
yoffset / Rmax = 0.7, treact = 15 s

0
0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

yoffset / Rmax, Non-dimensional Offset Distance from


Threat
treact ( V / Rmax ) = 0

treact ( V / Rmax ) = 1.0

Note: Based on assumption of constant altitude, constant heading flyby of


threat SAM site with an unobstructed line-of-sight. texp = exposure time to
SAM threat, Rmax = max detection range by SAM threat, V = flyby velocity,
yoffset = flyby offset, treact = SAM site reaction time from detection to launch

2/24/2008

treact V

ELF

If V = 1000 ft / s, treact ( V / Rmax ) = 0.247


texp ( V / Rmax ) = 2 cos [ sin-1 ( 7 / 10 )]
15 ( 1000 / 60746 ) = 1.428 0.247 = 1.181
texp = 1.181 ( 60746 / 1000 ) = 71.7 s
If V = 4000 ft / s, treact ( V / Rmax ) = 0.988
texp ( V / Rmax ) = 0.440
texp = 0.440 ( 60746 / 4000 ) = 6.7 s
253

Low Altitude Flight and Terrain Obstacles


Provide Masking from Threat
hmask = ( hmask )obstacle + ( hmask )earth = hobstacle ( Rlos / Robstacle ) + ( Rlos / 7113 )2
hmask, Altitude that Masks Line-of-Sight
Exposure to Surface Threat, ft

2000

hmask = altitude that allows obstacle and earth


curvature to mask exposure to surface threat LOS, ft
hobstacle = height of obstacle above terrain, ft

1500

Rlos = line-of-sight range to surface threat, ft


Robstacle = range from surface threat to obstacle, ft

1000

Height of low hill or tall tree 100 ft


Height of moderate hill 200 ft
Height of high hill 500 ft

500

Height of low mountain 1000 ft


Example:

0
0

10

20

30

Rlos, Line-of-Sight Range to Surface Threat, nm


Rlos ( hobstacle / Robstacle ) = 100 ft
Rlos ( hobstacle / Robstacle ) = 200 ft
Rlos ( hobstacle / Robstacle ) = 500 ft
Rlos ( hobstacle / Robstacle ) = 1000 ft
2/24/2008

ELF

40

hobstacle = 200 ft
Robstaacle = 5.0 nm = 30395 ft
Rlos = 10.0 nm = 60790 ft
Rlos ( hobstacle / Robstaacle ) = 60790 ( 200 /
30395 ) = 400 ft
hmask = 200 ( 60790 / 30395 ) + ( 60790 /
7113 )2 = 400 + 73 = 473 ft above terrain
254

Insensitive Munitions Improve Launch Platform


Survivability
Critical Subsystems

Rocket motor or fuel tank


Warhead

Severity Concerns Ranking of Power Output - Type


1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Detonation ( ~ 0.000002 s rise time )


Partial detonation ( ~ 0.0001 s rise time )
Explosion ( ~ 0.001 s rise time )
Deflagration or propulsion rise time ( ~ 0.1 s rise time )
Burning ( > 1 s )

Design and test considerations ( MIL STD 2105C )

2/24/2008

Fragment / bullet impact or blast


Sympathetic detonation
Fast / slow cook-off fire
Drop
Temperature
Vibration
Carrier landing ( 18 ft / s sink rate )
ELF

255

High System Reliability Is Provided by High


Subsystem Reliability and Low Parts Count
Typical System Reliability

Rsystem 0.94 = RArm X RLaunch X RStruct X RAuto X


RAct X RSeeker X RIn Guid X RPS X RProp X RFuze X RW/H

Arm ( 0.995 0.999 )

Launch Platform
Integration /
Firepower

Robustness

Cost

Lethality

Reliability

Miss Distance

Survivability

Observables

Reliability

Launch ( 0.990 0.995 )


Structure ( 0.997 0.999 )
Autopilot ( 0.993 0.995 )

Typical Event /
Subsystem

Actuators ( 0.990 0.995 )


Seeker ( 0.985 0.990 )
Inertial Guidance ( 0.995 0.999 )
Power Supply ( 0.995 0.999 )
Propulsion ( 0.995 0.999 )
Fuze ( 0.987 0.995 )
Warhead ( 0.995 0.999 )

0.90

0.92

0.94

0.96

0.98

1.00

Typical Reliability
2/24/2008

ELF

256

Sensors, Electronics and Propulsion Drive


Missile Production Cost
Cost

Dome

Seeker

Structure
Rocket
Airbreather

Guidance and
Control

Power
Supply

Very High
( > 25% Production Cost )

Propulsion
Rocket
Airbreather

Warhead
and Fuzing

High
( > 10% )

Wings

Robustness

Lethality

Reliability

Miss Distance

Survivability

Observables

Stabilizers

Aerothermal Data
Link
Insulation

Moderate
( > 5% )

Launch Platform
Integration /
Firepower
Cost

Flight
Control

Relatively Low
( < 5% )

Note:
System assembly and test ~ 10% production cost
Propulsion and structure parts count / cost of airbreathing missiles are higher than that of rockets
2/24/2008

ELF

257

Sensors and Electronics Occupy a Large Portion


of a High Performance / High Cost Missile.
Example: Derby / R-Darter Missile

Source: http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/missile_systems/air_missiles/derby/Derby.html

2/24/2008

ELF

258

Cost Considerations
Life Cycle
System Development and Demonstration ( SDD )
Production
Logistics

Culture / processes
Relative Emphasis of Cost, Performance, Reliability, Organization Structure
Relaxed Mil STDs
IPPD
Profit

Competition
2/24/2008

ELF

259

SDD Cost Is Driven by Schedule Duration and


Risk
CSDD = $20,000,000 tSDD1.90, ( tSDD in years )

CSDD, SDD Cost in Millions

10000

1000

Example:
5 year ( medium risk ) SDD program

100

Low

Moderate

High

Risk

Risk

Risk

SDD

SDD

SDD

CSDD = $20,000,000 tSDD1.90


= ( 20,000,000 ) ( 5 )1.90
= $426,000,000

10
0

10

12

14

tSDD, SDD Schedule Duration in Years


AGM-142
SLAM
AIM-120A

TOW 2
JDAM
JSOW

SLAM-ER
AGM-130
HARM

MLRS
Harpoon
Javelin

LB Hellfire
ATACMS
BAT

JASSM
Tomahawk
PAC-3

Hellfire II
ESSM
Patriot

Note: SDD required schedule duration depends upon risk. Should not ignore risk in shorter schedule.
-- Source of data: Nicholas, T. and Rossi, R., U.S. Missile Data Book, 1999, Data Search Associates, 1999
SDD cost based on 1999 US$
2/24/2008

ELF

260

Light Weight Missiles Have Low Unit Production


Cost
C1000th $6,100 WL0.758, ( WL in lb )
C1000th, Cost of Missile Number 1000, U.S.$

10000000

Javelin
Longbow Hellfire
AMRAAM
MLRS
HARM
JSOW
Tomahawk

1000000

100000

Example:

10000

2,000 unit buy of 100 lb missile:

10

100
1000
WL , Launch Weight, lb

10000 C1000th $6,100 WL0.758 = 6100 ( 100 )0.758 =


$200,000

Cost of 2,000 missiles = 2000 ( $200000 ) =


$400,000,000

Note:
-- Source of data: Nicholas, T. and Rossi, R., U.S. Missile Data Book, 1999, Data Search Associates, 1999
Unit production cost based on 1999 US$
2/24/2008

ELF

261

Learning Curve and Large Production Reduce


Unit Production Cost
Cx / C1st, Cost of Unit x / Cost of First Unit

Cx = C1st Llog2x, C2x = L Cx , where C in U.S. 99$


1

L = 1.0

L = 0.9
0.1
Example:
For a learning
curve coefficient
of L = 80%, cost of
unit #1000 is 11%
the cost of the first
unit

0.01
1

10

100

L = 0.8
L = 0.7
1000

10000 100000 1E+06

x, Number of Units Produced


Source of data: Nicholas, T. and Rossi, R., U.S. Missile Data Book,
1999, Data Search Associates, 1999
2/24/2008

ELF

Javelin ( L = 0.764, C1st = $3.15M,


Y1 = 1994 )
Longbow HF ( L = 0.761, C1st =
$4.31M, Y1 = 1996 )
AMRAAM ( L = 0.738, C1st =
$30.5M, Y1 = 1987 )
MLRS ( L = 0.811, C1st = $0.139M,
Y1 = 1980 )
HARM ( L = 0.786, C1st = $9.73M,
Y1 = 1981 )
JSOW ( L = 0.812, C1st = $2.98M,
Y1 = 1997 )
Tomahawk ( L = 0.817, C1st =
$13.0M, Y1 = 1980 )

Labor intensive learning curve: L < 0.8


Machine intensive learning curve: L > 0.8 )
Contributors to the learning curve include:
More efficient labor
Reduced scrap
Improved processes
262

Parts Count, Hours, or Cost ( US$ )

Low Parts Count Reduces Missile Unit


Production Cost
1000000
100000
10000
1000
100
10
Parts

Fasteners

Circuit Cards Connectors

Current Tomahawk

Assembly /
Test Hours

Unit
Production
Cost ( US$ )

Tactical Tomahawk

Note: Tactical Tomahawk has superior flexibility ( e.g., shorter mission planning, in-flight retargeting, BDI / BDA,
modular payload ) at lower parts count / cost and higher reliability. Enabling technologies for low parts count include:
casting, pultrusion / extrusion, centralized electronics, and COTS.
2/24/2008

ELF

263

Tactical Missile Culture Is Driven by Rate


Production of Sensors and Electronics
Copperhead Seeker and Electronics Production

Patriot Control Section Production

Video of Hellfire Seeker and Electronics Production

2/24/2008

ELF

264

Logistics Cost Considerations


Wartime Logistics Activity

Peacetime Logistics Activity

Contractor Post-production Engineering


Training Manuals / Tech Data Package
Simulation and Software Maintenance
Configuration Management
Engineering Support
System Analysis
Launch Platform Integration
Requirements Documents
Coordinate Suppliers

Deployment Alternatives
Airlift
Sealift

Combat Logistics

Storage Alternatives
Wooden Round ( Protected )
Open Round ( Humidity, Temp, Corrosion, Shock )

Reliability Maintenance

Launch Platform Integration


Mission Planning
Field Tests
Reliability Data
Maintainability Data
Effectiveness Data
Safety Data

Surveillance
Testing

Maintenance Alternatives
First level ( depot )
Two level ( depot, field )

Disposal
2/24/2008

ELF

265

Logistics Cost Lower for Simple Missile Systems


Simple: Stinger More Sophisticated: Hawk and SLAMRAAM

Very Complex: THAAD

2/24/2008

Complex: PAC-3

Video of Logistics Alternatives

ELF

266

Logistics Is Simpler for Light Weight Missiles

Support Personnel required


for Installation

Support personnel for installation with 50 lb lift limit per person


Support personnel for installation with 100 lb lift limit per person
Machine lift for installation
6
4
2
0
10

100

1000

10000

Missile Weight, lb

Predator ( 21 lb )
2/24/2008

Sidewinder ( 190 lb )

Sparrow ( 500 lb )
ELF

Video of Simple Logistics for a


Light weight Missile

Laser Guided Bomb ( 2,500 lb )


267

Small MEMS Sensors Can Provide Health


Monitoring, Reducing Cost and Weight
Micro-machined Electro-Mechanical Systems ( MEMS )
Small size / low cost semiconductor manufacturing process
2,000 to 5,000 sensors on a 5 in silicon wafer

Wireless ( RF ) Data Collection and Health Monitoring


Distributed Sensors Over Missile
Stress / strain
Vibration
Acoustics
Temperature
Pressure

Reduced Logistics Cost and Improved Reliability


Health monitoring

Reduced Weight and Production Cost


More Efficient Design
2/24/2008

ELF

268

Missile Carriage Size, Shape, and Weight Are


Driven by Launch Platform Compatibility
Launch Platform Integration / Firepower

US Launch Platform

Launcher

Carriage Span / Shape

Length

Weight
Launch Platform
Integration /
Firepower

22

Submarines

263

3400 lb

263

3400 lb

~168

~500 lb to
3000 lb

158

3700 lb

70

120 lb

Miss Distance

Survivability

Observables

22

VLS

Lethality

Reliability

Surface Ships

Robustness

Cost

CLS
22

2/24/2008

28

Helos

Vehicles

Launch
Pods

~24 x 24

Rail
ELF

28

Ground

Rail /
Ejection

Fighters /
Bombers /
UCAVs

13 x 13

269

F-18 C / E

5,000 lb

4,000 lb
E, carry 1

E, carry 2

C, carry 1

C, carry 2
E, carry 3
C, carry 3

E, carry 2

Configuration for Day Operation


with Bring-Back Load
2/24/2008

ELF

+ 2 Inbd Tk + 2 AIM-9

C, carry 2

+ CL Tk + 2 AGM-88

+ 2 Inbd Tk + 2 AIM-9

+ CL Tk + 2 AGM-88

+ CL Tk + 2 AIM-9

+ 2 Inbd Tanks

+ CL Tank

1,000 lb
Clean

Outboard Asymmetric
Bring-Back Load Limit

E, carry 1

+ CL Tk + 2 AIM-9

2,000 lb

C, carry 1

+ 2 Inbd Tanks

Inboard Asymmetric
Bring-Back Load Limit

+ CL Tank

3,000 lb

Clean

Max Strike Weapon


Weight

Light Weight Missiles Enhance Firepower

Configuration for Night Operation


with Bring-Back Load
270

Launch Envelope Limitations in Missile / Launch


Platform Physical Integration
Off Boresight
Seeker field of regard potential obscuring from launch platform

Minimum Range
Launcher rail clearance and aeroelasticity miss at min range
Helo rotor downwash miss at min range

Safety
Launcher retention potential inadvertent release, potential hang-fire
Launch platform local flow field , potential unsafe separation
Launch platform maneuvering potential unsafe separation
Handling qualities with stores potential unsafe handling qualities
Launch platform bay / canister acoustics missile factor of safety
Launch platform bay / canister vibration missile factor of safety
2/24/2008

ELF

271

Store Separation Wind Tunnel Tests Are


Required for Missile / Aircraft Compatibility

F-18 Store Compatibility Test in AEDC 16T

AV-8 Store Compatibility Test in AEDC 4T

Types of Wind Tunnel Testing for Store Compatibility


- Flow field mapping with probe
- Flow field mapping with store
- Captive trajectory simulation
- Drop testing
Example Stores with Flow Field Interaction: Kh-41 + AA-10
2/24/2008

ELF

272

Examples of Rail Launched and Ejection


Launched Missiles

Example Rail Launcher: Hellfire / Brimstone

Example Ejection Launcher: AGM-86 ALCM

Video of Hellfire / Brimstone Carriage / Launch

Video of AGM-86 Carriage / Launch

2/24/2008

ELF

273

Examples of Safe Store Separation

Laser Guided Bombs Drop from F-117

AMRAAM Rail Launch from F-16


2/24/2008

Video of Rapid Drop ( 16 Bombs ) from B-2


ELF

274

Examples of Store Compatibility Problems


Unsafe Separation

2/24/2008

Hang-Fire

ELF

Store Aeroelastic Instability

275

MIL-STD-8591 Aircraft Store Suspension and


Ejection Launcher Requirements
Store Weight / Parameter

30 Inch Suspension

14 Inch Suspension

Weight Up to 100 lb
Lug height ( in )
Min ejector area ( in x in )

Not Applicable

Yes
0.75
4.0 x 26.0

Weight 101 to 1,450 lb


Lug height ( in )
Min lug well ( in )
Min ejector area ( in x in )

Yes
1.35
0.515
4. 0 x 36.0

Yes
1.00
0.515
4.0 x 26.0

Weight Over 1,451 lb


Lug height ( in )
Min lug well ( in )
Min ejector area ( in x in )

Yes
1.35
1.080
4.0 x 36.0

Not Applicable

Ejection Stroke

2/24/2008

ELF

276

MIL-STD-8591 Aircraft Store Rail Launcher


Examples
Rail Launcher

Forward Hanger

LAU-7 Sidewinder Launcher

2.260

LAU 117 Maverick Launcher

1.14

Aft Hanger
2.260

7.23

Note: Dimensions in inches.


LAU 7 rail launched store weight and diameter limits are 300 lb, 7 in
LAU 117 rail launched store weight and diameter limits are 600 lb, 10 in
2/24/2008

ELF

277

Compressed Carriage Missiles Provide Higher


Firepower
Baseline AIM-120B AMRAAM

Compressed Carriage AIM-120C AMRAAM ( Reduced Span Wing / Tail )

Baseline AMRAAM: Loadout


of 2 AMRAAM per F-22 SemiBay
Compressed Carriage
AMRAAM: Loadout of 3
AMRAAM per F-22 Semi-Bay

17.5 in

17.5 in

12.5 in 12.5 in 12.5 in

Video of Longshot Kit on CBU-97

Note: Alternative approaches to compressed carriage include surfaces with small span, folded surfaces, wrap
around surfaces, and planar surfaces that extend ( e.g., switch blade, Diamond Back, Longshot ).
2/24/2008

ELF

278

Example of Aircraft Carriage and Fire Control


Interfaces

Folding
Suspension
Lug

Wing Deploy
Safety Pin

Wing

Folding
Suspension
Lug

Fire Control /
Avionics
Umbilical
Connector

Flight Control
Access Cover

Electrical
Safety Pin

Example: ADM-141 TALD ( Tactical Air-Launched Decoy )


Carriage and Fire Control Interfaces
2/24/2008

ELF

279

Example of Ship Weapon Carriage and Launcher,


Mk41 VLS
Cell
Cell
Before After
Firing Firing

Canister Cell Hatch

Exhaust Hatch
Ship Deck
Missile Cover

Plenum

8 Modules / Magazine

Tomahawk Launch
2/24/2008

Module Gas Management

8 Canister Cells / Module


ELF

Standard Missile Launch


280

Robustness Is Required for Carriage, Shipping,


and Storage Environment
Environmental Parameter Typical Requirement
Surface Temperature

-60 F* to 160 F

Surface Humidity

5% to 100%

Rain Rate

120 mm / h**

Surface Wind

100 km / h steady***

Video: Ground / Sea Environment

150 km / h gusts****
Salt fog

3 g / mm2 deposited per year

Vibration

10 g rms at 1,000 Hz: MIL STD 810, 648, 1670A

Shock

Drop height 0.5 m, half sine wave 100 g / 10 ms: MIL STD 810, 1670A

Acoustic

160 dB

Note: MIL-HDBK-310 and earlier MIL-STD-210B suggest 1% world-wide climatic extreme typical requirement.
* Lowest recorded temperature = -90 F. 20% probability temperature lower than -60 F during worst month of worst location.
** Highest recorded rain rate = 436 mm / h. 0.5% probability greater than 120 mm / h during worst month of worst location.
*** Highest recorded steady wind = 342 km / h. 1% probability greater than 100 km / h during worst month of worst location.
**** Highest recorded gust = 378 km / h. 1% probability greater than 150 km / h during worst month of worst location.
2/24/2008

ELF

281

Summary of Measures of Merit and Launch


Platform Integration
Measures of Merit
Robustness
Warhead lethality
Miss distance
Carriage and launch observables
Other survivability considerations
Reliability
Cost

Launch Platform Integration


Firepower, weight, fitment
Store separation
Launch platform handling qualities, aeroelasticity
Hang-fire
Vibration
Standard launchers
Carriage and storage environment

Discussion / Questions?
Classroom Exercise ( Appendix A )
2/24/2008

ELF

282

Measures of Merit and Launch Platform


Integration Problems
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.

2/24/2008

IR signal attenuation is greater than 100 dB per km through a c____.


GPS / INS enhances seeker lock-on in adverse weather and ground c______.
A data link can enhance missile seeker lock-on against a m_____ target.
An example of a missile counter-counter measure to flares is an i______
i_____ seeker.
Compared to a mid-wave IR seeker, a long wave IR seeker receives more
energy from a c___ target.
High fineness kinetic energy penetrators are required to defeat b_____
targets.
For the same lethality with a blast fragmentation warhead, a small decrease in
miss distance allows a large decrease in the required weight of the w______.
For a blast / frag warhead, a charge-to-metal ratio of about one is required to
achieve a high total fragment k______ e_____.
A blast fragmentation warhead tradeoff is the number of fragments versus the
individual fragment w_____.
ELF

283

Measures of Merit and Launch Platform


Integration Problems ( cont )
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.

2/24/2008

Kinetic energy penetration is a function of the penetrator diameter, length,


density, and v_______.
In proportional homing guidance, the objective is to make the line-of-sight
angle rate equal to z___.
Aeromechanics contributors to missile time constant are flight control
effectiveness, flight control system dynamics, and dome e____ s____.
Miss distance due to heading error is a function of missile navigation ratio,
velocity, time to correct the heading error, and the missile t___ c_______.
A missile must have about t_____ times the maneuverability of the target.
Minimizing the miss distance due to radar glint requires a high resolution
seeker, an optimum missile time constant and an optimum n_________ r____.
Weapons on low observable launch platforms use i_______ carriage.
Weapons on low observable launch platforms use m______ smoke propellant.
For an insensitive munition, burning is preferable to detonation because it
releases less p____.
ELF

284

Measures of Merit and Launch Platform


Integration Problems ( cont )
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.

2/24/2008

Missile system reliability is enhanced by subsystem reliability and low p____


count.
High cost subsystems of missiles are sensors, electronics, and p_________.
Missile SDD cost is driven by the program duration and r___.
Missile unit production cost is driven by the number of units produced,
learning curve, and w_____.
First level maintenance is conducted at a d____.
A standard launch system for U.S. Navy ships is the V_______ L_____ S_____.
Most light weight missiles use rail launchers while most heavy weight missiles
use e_______ launchers.
Higher firepower is provided by c_________ carriage.
The typical environmental requirement from MIL-HDBK-310 is the _% worldwide climatic extreme.

ELF

285

Outline
Introduction / Key Drivers in the Design Process
Aerodynamic Considerations in Tactical Missile Design
Propulsion Considerations in Tactical Missile Design
Weight Considerations in Tactical Missile Design
Flight Performance Considerations in Tactical Missile Design
Measures of Merit and Launch Platform Integration
Sizing Examples
Development Process
Summary and Lessons Learned
References and Communication
Appendices ( Homework Problems / Classroom Exercises,
Example of Request for Proposal, Nomenclature, Acronyms,
Conversion Factors, Syllabus )
2/24/2008

ELF

286

Sizing Examples
Rocket Baseline Missile
Standoff range requirement
Wing sizing requirement
Multi-parameter harmonization
Lofted range comparison

Ramjet Baseline Missile


Range robustness
Propulsion and fuel alternatives
Velocity control

Computer Aided Conceptual Design Sizing Tools


Soda Straw Rocket Design, Build, and Fly
2/24/2008

ELF

287

Air-to-Air Engagement Analysis Process and


Assumptions
F-pole range provides kill of head-on threat outside of
threat weapon launch range
Aircraft contrast for typical engagement
C = 0.18

Typical visual detection range by target ( Required F-pole


range )
RD = 3.3 nm

Typical altitude and speed of launch aircraft, target aircraft,


and missile
h = 20k ft altitude
VL = Mach 0.8 = 820 ft / s
VT = Mach 0.8 = 820 ft / s
VM = 2 VT = 1,640 ft / s
2/24/2008

ELF

288

Assumed Air-to-Air Engagement Scenario for


Head-on Intercept
RL= VM tf + VT tf

t = 0 s (Launch Missile)

RF-Pole = VM tf - VL tf

Blue Aircraft
( 820 ft / s )

Red Aircraft
( 820 ft / s )

Blue Missile
( 1640 ft / s )
RL= Launch Range = 10.0 nm
RF = Missile Flight Range = 6.7 nm

t = tf = 24.4 s ( Missile Impacts Target )


Blue Aircraft
( 820 ft / s )

Red Aircraft
Destroyed
R F-pole = 3.3 nm

2/24/2008

ELF

289

R, Visible Range for 50 ft2 Target, nm

Target Contrast and Size Drive Visual Detection


and Recognition Range

2/24/2008

RD = 1.15 [ Atp ( C CT )]1/2, RD in nm, Atp in ft2


RR = 0.29 RD

Visual Detection Range,


nm
Visual Recognition
Range, nm

Note:
RD = Visual detection range for
probability of detection PD = 0.5
C = Contrast
CT = Visual threshold contrast = 0.02
Atp = Target presented area = 50 ft2
RR = Visual recognition range
F = Pilot visual fovial angle = 0.8 deg
Clear weather
Pilot search glimpse time = 1 / 3 s

4
2

Example:
If C = 0.18
RD = 3.3 nm
RR = 1.0 nm

0
0.01

C = 0.01 C = 0.02

0.1

C, Contrast
C = 0.05 C = 0.1 C = 0.2

ELF

C = 0.5 C = 1.0

290

High Missile Velocity Improves Standoff Range


RF-Pole / RL = 1 ( VT + VL ) / ( VM + VT )

Note: Head-on intercept


RF-Pole = Standoff range at intercept
RL= Launch range

F-Pole Range / Launch Range

VM = Missile average velocity


VT = Target velocity

0.8

VL = Launch velocity

VL / VM = 0
VL / VM = 0.2
VL / VM = 0.5
VL / VM = 1.0

0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

Target Velocity / Missile Velocity


2/24/2008

ELF

Example:
VL = VT
VM = 2 VT
Then VT / VM = VL / VM = 0.5
RF-Pole / RL = 0.33
RF-Pole = RD = 3.3 nm
RL = 3.3 / 0.33 = 10.0 nm
291

Missile Flight Range Requirement Is Greatest for


a Tail Chase Intercept
RF / RL, Missile Flight Range / Launch Range

( RF / RL )Head-on = ( VM / VT ) / [(VM / VT ) + 1 ]
3

( RF / RL )TailChase = ( VM / VT ) / [(VM / VT ) - 1 ]

2.5
2
( RF / RL ) Head-on
( RF / RL ) Tail Chase

1.5

Examples:

Head-on Intercept

0.5
0
0

VM / VT, Missile Velocity / Target Velocity

2/24/2008

ELF

VM = 1,640 ft / s, VT = 820 ft / s
VM / VT = 1640 / 820 = 2
RF / RL = 2 / ( 2 + 1 ) = 0.667
RL = 10.0 nm
RF = 0.667 ( 10.0 ) = 6.67 nm
Tail Intercept at same conditions
RF / RL = 2 / ( 2 1 ) = 2.0
RF = 2.0 ( 10.0 ) = 20.0 nm

292

Drawing of Rocket Baseline Missile Configuration


STA 60.8
19.4

LEmac at
STA 131.6
BL 8.0

3.4
LEmac at STA 67.0
BL 10.2

= 45
16.1

8.0 d
cgBO

STA 125.4
18.5
12.0

cgLaunch
= 57
Rocket Motor

40.2
STA 0

19.2
Nose

46.1
Forebody

62.6
84.5
Payload
Midbody
Bay

Aftbody

138.6 143.9
Tailcone

Note: Dimensions in inches


Source: Bithell, R.A. and Stoner, R.C., Rapid Approach for Missile Synthesis, Vol. 1, Rocket Synthesis
Handbook, AFWAL-TR-81-3022, Vol. 1, March 1982.

2/24/2008

ELF

293

Mass Properties of Rocket Baseline Missile


Component
1
3
2
4
5
6

2/24/2008

Weight, lb.

C.G. STA, in.

4.1
12.4
46.6
7.6
77.7
10.2
61.0
0.0
47.3
23.0
6.5
5.8
26.2
38.6

12.0
30.5
32.6
54.3
54.3
73.5
75.5

107.5
117.2
141.2
141.2
137.8
75.5

Burnout Total
Propellant

367.0
133.0

76.2
107.8

Launch Total

500.0

84.6

Nose ( Radome )
Forebody structure
Guidance
Payload Bay Structure
Warhead
Midbody Structure
Control Actuation System
Aftbody Structure
Rocket Motor Case
Insulation ( EDPM Silica )
Tailcone Structure
Nozzle
Fixed Surfaces
Movable Surfaces

ELF

294

Rocket Baseline Missile Definition


Body

Dome Material
Airframe Material
Length, in
Diameter, in
Airframe thickness, in
Fineness ratio
Volume, ft3
Wetted area, ft2
Nozzle exit area, ft2
Boattail fineness ratio
Nose fineness ratio
Nose bluntness
Boattail angle, deg

Pyroceram
Aluminum 2219-T81
143.9
8.0
0.16
17.99
3.82
24.06
0.078
0.38
2.40
0.0
7.5

Material
Planform area, ft2 ( 2 panels exposed )
Wetted area, ft2 ( 4 panels )
Aspect ratio ( 2 panels exposed )
Taper ratio
Root chord, in
Tip chord, in
Span, in ( 2 panels exposed )
Leading edge sweep, deg

Aluminum 2219-T81
2.55
10.20
2.82
0.175
19.4
3.4
32.2
45.0

Movable surfaces ( forward )

2/24/2008

ELF

295

Rocket Baseline Missile Definition ( cont )


Movable surfaces ( continued )

Mean aerodynamic chord, in


Thickness ratio
Section type
Section leading edge total angle, deg
xmac, in
ymac, in ( from root chord )
Actuator rate limit, deg / s

13.3
0.044
Modified double wedge
10.01
67.0
6.2
360.0

Material
Modulus of elasticity, 106 psi
Planform area, ft2 ( 2 panels exposed )
Wetted area, ft2 ( 4 panels )
Aspect ratio ( 2 panels exposed )
Taper ratio
Root chord, in
Tip chord, in
Span, in ( 2 panels exposed )
Leading edge sweep, deg
Mean aerodynamic chord, in
Thickness ratio
Section type
Section leading edge total angle, deg
xmac, in
ymac, in ( from root chord )

Aluminum 2219-T81
10.5
1.54
6.17
2.59
0.0
18.5
0.0
24.0
57.0
12.3
0.027
Modified double wedge
6.17
131.6
4.0

Fixed surfaces ( aft )

2/24/2008

ELF

296

Rocket Baseline Missile Definition ( cont )


References values
Reference area, ft2
Reference length, ft
Pitch / Yaw Moment of inertia at launch, slug-ft2
Pitch / Yaw Moment of inertia at burnout, slug-ft2

0.349
0.667
117.0
94.0

Rocket Motor Performance ( altitude = 20k ft, temp = 70 F )


Burning time, sec ( boost / sustain )
Maximum pressure, psi
Average pressure, psi ( boost / sustain )
Average thrust, lbf ( boost / sustain )
Total impulse, lbf-s ( boost / sustain )
Specific impulse, lbf-s / lbm ( boost / sustain )

3.69 / 10.86
2042
1769 / 301
5750 / 1018
21217 / 11055
250 / 230.4

Propellant
Weight, lbm ( boost / sustain )
Flame temperature @ 1,000 psi, F
Propellant density, lbm / in3
Characteristic velocity, ft / s
Burn rate @ 1000 psi, in / s
Burn rate pressure exponent
2/24/2008

84.8 / 48.2
5282 / 5228
0.065
5200
0.5
0.3
ELF

297

Rocket Baseline Missile Definition ( cont )


Propellant ( continued )
Burn rate sensitivity with temperature, % / F
Pressure sensitivity with temperature, % / F

0.10
0.14

Rocket Motor Case


Yield / ultimate strength, psi
Material
Modulus of elasticity, psi
Length, in
Outside diameter, in
Thickness, in (minimum)
Burst pressure, psi
Volumetric efficiency
Grain configuration
Dome ellipse ratio

170,000 / 190,000
4130 Steel
29.5 x 106 psi
59.4
8.00
0.074
3140
0.76
Three slots + web
2.0

Nozzle
Housing material
Exit geometry
Throat area, in2
Expansion ratio
Length, in
Exit diameter, in
2/24/2008

4130 Steel
Contoured ( equiv. 15 )
1.81
6.2
4.9
3.78
ELF

298

Rocket Baseline Missile Has Boost-Sustain


Thrust - Time History
8

Boost Total Impulse = Tdt = 5750 ( 3.69 ) = 21217 lb-s

Thrust 1,000 lb
4

2
Sustain Total Impulse = Tdt = 1018 ( 10.86 ) = 11055 lb-s

2/24/2008

Time seconds
ELF

12

16

Note: Altitude = 20k ft, Temperature = 70 F


Total impulse drives velocity change
299

Normal Force ~ CN

Pitching Moment Cm

Rocket Baseline Missile Aerodynamic


Characteristics
0
-4.0

0.6

4.60

M = 1.2 and 1.5

-8.0

3.95

-12.0

2.35
2.0

-16.0
20

M
1.5

16

2.0
2.35
2.87
3.95
4.60

1.2
0.6

12
8
4
0

2/24/2008

SRef = 0.349 ft2, lRef = d = 0.667 ft, CG at STA 75.7, = 0 deg

8
12
16
, Angle of Attack Deg
ELF

20

24
300

K1, K2 ~ Per Deg2

K2

.004

0.2

K1

.002

0.1

CA = CA = 0 + K1 2 + K2

0
1.2

Power Off

0.8
Power On

1.2
0.8
0.4

0.4
0

2/24/2008

.006

0.3

Cm at = 0 deg, Per Deg

CA at = 0 deg

CN at = 0 deg, Per Deg

Rocket Baseline Missile Aerodynamic


Characteristics ( cont )

2
3
4
M, Mach Number

5
ELF

2
3
4
M, Mach Number

5
301

High Altitude Launch Enhances Rocket Baseline


Range
Burnout

Vmax = 2524 ft / s

40

Altitude ~ 103 ft

30

Boost /
Sustain

Termination
Mach = 1.5

Coast

Vmax = 2147 ft / s

20
ML = 0.7
CD

10

AVG

Vmax = 1916 ft / s

= 0.65

Constant Altitude Flight

0
0

10

15

20

25

Range ~ nm
2/24/2008

ELF

302

Low Altitude Launch and High Alpha Maneuvers


Enhance Rocket Baseline Turn Performance
25

Alt.

1 10k ft 15
2 10k ft 10
3 40k ft 15
4 40k ft 10

Cross Range 1,000 ft.

20
15
4
10

Termination at M = 1.0
Marks at 2 s intervals

2
0

-10

-5

10

Down Range 1,000 ft.


Note: Off boresight envelope that is shown does not include the rocket baseline seeker field-of-regard limit ( 30 deg ).
2/24/2008

ELF

303

Paredo Shows Range of Rocket Baseline Driven


by ISP, Propellant Weight, Drag, and Static Margin
1.5
Note: Rocket baseline:

hL = 20k ft, ML = 0.7, MEC = 1.5


R@ ML = 0.7, hL = 20k ft = 9.5 nm

Nondimensional 0.5
Range
Sensitivity to
0
Parameter

Example: 10% increase in propellant


weight 8.8% increase in flight range

Isp

Prop.
Weight

CD0

-0.5

Drag- Static Thrust Inert


Due-to- Margin
Weight
Lift

-1
Parameter
2/24/2008

ELF

304

Boost - Sustain Trajectory Assumptions


Assumptions
1 degree of freedom
Constant altitude

Simplified equation for axial acceleration based on thrust,


drag, and weight
nX = ( T D ) / W

Missile weight varies with burn rate and time


W = WL WP t / tB

Drag is approximated by
D = CDO q S

2/24/2008

ELF

305

Example of Rocket Baseline Axial Acceleration


nX = ( T - D ) / W
15

Note:
tf = 24.4 s
ML = 0.8
hL = 20,000 ft
TB = 5750 lb
tB = 3.69 s
TS = 1018 lb
tS = 10.86 s
D = 99 lb at Mach 0.8
D = 1020 lb at Mach 2.1
WL = 500 lb
WP = 133 lb

nx, Axial Acceleration, g

Boost

10

5
Sustain

0
0

10

15

Coast

20

25

-5
t, Time, s
2/24/2008

ELF

306

Example of Rocket Baseline Missile Velocity vs


Time
V / ( gc ISP ) = - ( 1 - DAVG / T ) ln ( 1 - Wp / Wi ), During Boost-Sustain
V / VBO = 1 / { 1 + t / { 2 WBO / [ gc AVG SRef ( CD )AVG VBO ]}}, During Coast
0

V, Velocity, ft / s

3000

Sustain

2000

Coast

Boost

1000

Note:
ML = 0.8
hL = 20k feet

0
0

10

15

20

25

t, Time, s
2/24/2008

ELF

307

Range and Time-to-Target of Rocket Baseline


Missile Meet Requirements
10

R = Rboost + Rsustain + Rcoast

R, Flight Range, nm

8
Coast

6
(RF)Req = 6.7 nm @ t =24.4 s

Sustain
Note:

ML = 0.8

Boost

hL = 20k ft

0
0

10

15

20

25

t, Time, s
2/24/2008

ELF

308

Sizing Examples
Rocket Baseline Missile
Standoff range requirement
Wing sizing requirement
Multi-parameter harmonization
Lofted range comparison

Ramjet Baseline Missile


Range robustness
Propulsion and fuel alternatives
Velocity control

Computer Aided Conceptual Design Sizing Tools


Soda Straw Rocket Design, Build, and Fly
2/24/2008

ELF

309

Example of Wing Sizing to Satisfy Required


Maneuver Acceleration
Size Wing for the Assumptions
( nZ )Required = 30 g to counter 9 g maneuvering target )
( nZ ) = ( nZ )Wing + ( nZ )Body + ( nZ )Tail

Rocket Baseline @
Mach 2
20,000 ft altitude
367 lb weight ( burnout )

From Prior Example, Compute

Wing = Max = ( + )Max = 22 deg for rocket baseline


Video of Intercept of Maneuvering Target

= 0.75, Body = Tail = 9.4 deg

( nZ )Body = q SRef ( CN )Body / W = 2725 ( 0.349 ) ( 1.28 ) / 367 = 3.3 g ( from body )
( nZ )Tail = q STail [( CN )Tail ( SRef / STail )] / W = 2725 ( 1.54 ) ( 0.425 ) / 367 = 4.9 g ( from tail )
( nZ )Wing = ( nZ )Required - ( nZ )Body - ( nZ )Tail = 30 3.3 4.9 = 21.8 g
( SW )Required = ( nZ )Wing W / { q [( CN )Wing (SRef / SWing )]} = 21.8 ( 367 ) / {( 2725 ) ( 1.08 )} = 2.72 ft2
Note: ( SW )RocketBaseline = 2.55 ft2

2/24/2008

ELF

310

Wing Sizing to Satisfy Required Turn Rate


Assume
.

( )Required > 18 deg / s to counter 18 deg / s maneuvering aircraft

Rocket Baseline @
Mach 2
20,000 ft altitude
367 lb weight ( burnout )
i = 0 deg

Compute
.

= gc n / V = [ q SRef CN + q SRef CN - W cos ( ) ] / [( W / gc ) V ]


/ = 0.75
= + = 22 deg = 12.6 deg, = 9.4 deg
.
= [ 2725 ( 0.349 )( 0.60 )( 9.4 ) +2725 ( 0.349 )( 0.19 )( 12.6 ) 367 ( 1 )] / ( 367 / 32.2 )( 2074 ) = 0.31
rad / s or 18 deg / s

Note: ( SW )RocketBaseline 18 deg / s Turn Rate

2/24/2008

ELF

311

Wing Sizing to Satisfy Required Turn Radius


Assume Maneuvering Aircraft Target with
.

= 18 deg / s = 0.314 rad / s


V = 1000 ft / s
.
( RT )Target = V / = 1000 / 0.314 = 3183 ft

Assume Rocket Baseline @


Mach 2
20,000 ft altitude
367 lb weight ( burnout )

Compute
.

= 18 deg / s ( prior figure )


.
( RT )RocketBaselinet = V / = 2074 / 0.314 = 6602 ft

Note: ( RT )RocketBaselinet > ( RT )Target Rocket Baseline Can Be Countermeasured by Target in a Tight Turn
Counter-Countermeasure Alternatives
Larger Wing
Higher Angle of Attack
Longer Burn Motor with TVC
2/24/2008

ELF

312

Sizing Examples
Rocket Baseline Missile
Standoff range requirement
Wing sizing requirement
Multi-parameter harmonization
Lofted range comparison

Ramjet Baseline Missile


Range robustness
Propulsion and fuel alternatives
Velocity control

Computer Aided Conceptual Design Sizing Tools


Soda Straw Rocket Design, Build, and Fly
2/24/2008

ELF

313

Combined Weight / Miss Distance Drivers: Nozzle


Expansion and Motor Volumetric Efficiency
Parameter

Baseline

Fixed surface number of panels


Movable surface number of panels
Design static margin at launch
Wing movable surface sweep ( deg )
Tail fixed surface sweep ( deg )
Wing movable surface thickness ratio
Nose fineness ratio
Rocket chamber sustain pressure ( psi )
Boattail fineness ratio ( length / diameter )
Nozzle expansion ratio
Motor volumetric efficiency
Propellant density ( lb / in3 )
Boost thrust ( lb )
Sustain thrust ( lb )
Characteristic velocity ( ft / s )
Wing location ( percent total length )

4
4
0.40
45.0
57.0
0.044
2.4
301
0.38
6.2
0.76
0.065
5,750
1,018
5,200
47.5

Sensitivity
Variation
3
2
0.30
49.5
60.0
0.034
2.6
330
0.342
6.82
0.84
0.084
6,325
1,119
5,720
42.75
Note:

Baseline: Weight = 500 lb, Miss distance = 62.3 ft


W* = weight sensitivity for parameter variation = W / W

* = miss distance sensitivity for parameter variation = /


2/24/2008

ELF

W*

+0.054
+0.071
+0.095
-0.205
+0.027
+0.041
-0.016
-0.076
+0.096
-0.114
-0.136
-0.062
+0.014
+0.088
-0.063
+0.181

+0.100
+0.106
+0.167
+0.015
+0.039
+0.005
-0.745
-0.045
+0.140
-0.181
-0.453
+0.012
-0.018
+0.246
-0.077
-0.036

Strong impact with synergy


Strong impact
Moderate impact with synergy
Moderate impact
314

A Harmonized Missile Can Have Smaller Miss


Distance and Lighter Weight
Parameter
Judicious changes
Boost thrust ( lb )
Wing location ( percent missile length to 1/4 mac )
Wing taper ratio
Nose fineness ratio
Nose blunting ratio
Nozzle expansion ratio
Sustain chamber pressure ( psi )
Boattail fineness ratio
Tail leading edge sweep ( deg )
Technology limited changes
No. wing panels
No. tail panels
Wing thickness ratio
Wing leading edge sweep ( deg )
Static margin at launch ( diam )
Propellant density ( lb / in3 )
Motor volumetric efficiency
Measures of Merit
Total weight ( lb )
Miss distance ( ft )
Time to target ( s )
Length ( in )
Mach No. at burnout
Weight of propellant ( lb )
Wing area ( in2 )
Tail area ( in2 )
2/24/2008

*Note:

Value of driving parameter

Baseline Value

Missile Configured for


Minimum:
Weight
Miss Distance

Harmonized

5,750
47.5
0.18
2.4
0.0
6.2
301
0.38
57

3,382
47
0.2
3.2
0.05
15
1,000
0.21
50

3,382
44
0.2
2.55
0.05
15
1,000
0.21
50

3,382
46
0.2
2.6
0.05
15
1,000
0.21
50

4
4
0.044
45
0.4
0.065
0.76

2
3
0.030
55
0.0
0.084
0.84

2
3
0.030
55
0.0
0.084
0.84

2
3
0.030
55
0.0
0.084
0.84

500
62.3
21.6
144
2.20
133
368.6
221.8

385.9
63.1
23.8
112.7
2.08
78.3
175.5
109.1

395.0
16.2
23.6
114.7
2.09
85.4
150.7
134.5

390.1
16.6
23.8
114.9
2.07
85.9
173.8
112.0

ELF

315

Baseline Missile vs Harmonized Missile


144

57

45
2.4
Nose
Fineness; 2.6

Weight ( lb ); 500
390

Propellant Density 0.065


0.084
( lb / in3 );

55

Surfaces;

{ 2 wings / 3 tails
4 wings / 4 tails

50

115
2/24/2008

ELF

316

Sizing Examples
Rocket Baseline Missile
Standoff range requirement
Wing sizing requirement
Multi-parameter harmonization
Lofted range comparison

Ramjet Baseline Missile


Range robustness
Propulsion and fuel alternatives
Velocity control

Computer Aided Conceptual Design Sizing Tools


Soda Straw Rocket Design, Build, and Fly
2/24/2008

ELF

317

Lofted Glide Trajectory Provides Extended Range


Using Rocket Baseline, Compare
Lofted Launch-Coast-Glide Trajectory
Lofted Launch-Ballistic Trajectory
Constant Altitude Trajectory

Assume for Lofted Launch-Coast-Glide Trajectory:


i = 45 deg
= 45 deg during boost and sustain
= 45 deg coast
Switch to ( L / D )max glide at optimum altitude
( L / D )maxg glide trajectory after apogee
hi = hf = 0 ft

Velocity, Horizontal Range, and Altitude During Initial Boost @ = 45 deg


V = - gc ISP [ 1 ( DAVG / T ) - ( WAVG sin ) / T ] ln ( 1 - Wp / Wi ) = -32.2 ( 250 ) [ 1 - ( 419 /
5750 ) 458 ( 0.707 ) / 5750 ] ln ( 1 - 84.8 / 500 ) = 1,303 ft / s
R = ( Vi + V / 2 ) tB = ( 0 + 1303 / 2 ) 3.69 = 2,404 ft
Rx = R cos i = 2404 ( 0.707 ) = 1,700 ft
Ry = R sin i = 2404 ( 0.707 ) = 1,700 ft
h = hi + Ry = 0 + 1700 = 1,700 ft
2/24/2008

ELF

318

Lofted Glide Trajectory Provides Extended


Range ( cont )
Velocity, Horizontal Range, and Altitude During Sustain @ = 45 deg
V = - gc ISP [ 1 ( DAVG / T ) ( WAVG sin ) / T ] ln ( 1 - Wp / Wi ) = -32.2 ( 230.4 ) [ 1 ( 650 /
1018 ) 391 ( 0.707 ) / 1018 ] ln ( 1 - 48.2 / 415.2 ) = 81 ft / sec
VBO = 1303 + 81 = 1,384 ft / s
R = ( Vi + V / 2 ) tB = ( 1303 + 81 / 2 ) 10.86 = 14,590 ft
Rx = R cos i = 14590 ( 0.707 ) = 10,315 ft
Ry = R sin i = 14,590 ( 0.707 ) = 10,315 ft
h = hi + Ry = 1700 + 10315 = 12,015 ft

Velocity, Horizontal Range, and Altitude During Coast @ = 45 deg to h@( L / D )max
Vcoast = Vi { 1 [( gc sin ) / Vi ] t } / { 1 + {[ gc AVG SRef ( CD0 )AVG Vi ] / ( 2 W )} t } = 1384 { 1
[( 32.2 ( 0.707 )) / 1384 ] 21 } / { 1 + {[ 32.2 ( 0.001338 ) ( 0.349 ) ( 0.7 ) ( 1384 )] / ( 2 ( 367 ))}
21 } = 674 ft / s
Rcoast = { 2 W / [ gc AVG SRef ( CD0 )AVG )]} ln { 1 [ gc2 AVG SRef ( CD0 )AVG / ( 2 W )] [ sin ] t2 +
{[ gc AVG SRef ( CD0 )AVG Vi ] / ( 2 W )} t } = { 2 ( 367 ) / [ 32.2 ( 0.001338 ) ( 0.349 ) ( 0.7 )] ln
{ 1 [ (32.2)2 ( 0.001338 ) ( 0.349 ) ( 0.7 ) / (( 2 ( 367 ))] [ 0.707 ] ( 21 )2 + {[ 32.2 ( 0.001338 )
( 0.349 ) ( 0.7 ) ( 1384 )] / ( 2 ( 367 ))} 21 } = 17148 ft
( Rx )coast = ( Ry )coast = Rcoast sin = 17148 ( 0.707 ) = 12124 ft

2/24/2008

ELF

319

Lofted Glide Trajectory Provides Extended Range


( cont )
Flight Conditions At End-of-Coast Are:
t = 35 s
V = 674 ft / s
h = 24,189 ft
q = 251 psf
M = 0.66
( L / D )max = 5.22
( L / D )max = 5.5 deg

Initiate = ( L / D )max = 5.5 deg at h = 24,189 ft


Incremental Horizontal Range During ( L / D )max Glide Is
Rx = ( L / D ) h = 5.22 ( 24189 ) = 126,267 ft

Total Horizontal Range for Elevated Launch-Coast-Glide Trajectory Is


Rx = Rx = Rx,Boost + Rx,Sustain + Rx,Coast + Rx,Glide = 1700 + 10315 + 12124 + 126267 =
150406 ft = 24.8 nm

2/24/2008

ELF

320

Lofted Glide Trajectory Provides Extended


Range ( cont )
Note: Rocket Baseline

30

z End of boost

= 45
de g
Ballis
t ic

Gli
de

s, h = 21,590 ft

Lofted coast apogee, t = 35 s, V = 674 ft / s, h = 24,189 ft

(L

/D

Lofted ballistic impact, t = 68 s,

)m

Lofted

ax

istic

Coas
t@

20

= - 71 deg, V = 1368 ft / s

glide impact, t = 298 s, = - 10.8 deg, V = 459 ft / s

Co-altitude flight impact, t = 115 s, V = 500 ft / s

Susta
in

10

Lofted ballistic apogee, t = 35 s, V = 667 ft /

Ball

h, Altitude, k ft

End of sustain

z
z

Co-altitude

10

20

30

R, Range, nm

2/24/2008

ELF

321

Sizing Examples
Rocket Baseline Missile
Standoff range requirement
Wing sizing requirement
Multi-parameter harmonization
Lofted range comparison

Ramjet Baseline Missile


Range robustness
Propulsion and fuel alternatives
Velocity control

Computer Aided Conceptual Design Sizing Tools


Soda Straw Rocket Design, Build, and Fly
2/24/2008

ELF

322

Ramjet Baseline Is a Chin Inlet Integral Rocket


Ramjet ( IRR )
Sta 150.3
37

11.6
11.5
16.5

Boost Nozzle

20.375 dia
Guidance
Chin
Inlet
Sta 0.

Ramjet Fuel

Warhead

Boost Propellant
Booster, and
Ramjet Engine

Transport Air Duct


23.5

43.5
Forebody

126.0

76.5
Payload Bay

Mid-body

Nose

Aft-body

Tail Cone
159.0

171.0

Note: Dimensions are in inches

Source: Bithell, R.A. and Stoner, R.C. Rapid Approach for Missile Synthesis, Vol. II, Air-breathing
Synthesis Handbook, AFWAL TR 81-3022, Vol. II, March 1982.
2/24/2008

ELF

323

Mass Properties of Ramjet Baseline Missile


Component

Weight, lb

Nose

CG Sta, in

15.9

15.7

Forebody Structure
Guidance

42.4
129.0

33.5
33.5

Payload Bay Structure


Warhead

64.5
510.0

60.0
60.0

Midbody Structure
Inlet
Electrical
Hydraulic System for Control Actuation
Fuel Distribution

95.2
103.0
30.0
20.0
5.0

101.2
80.0
112.0
121.0
121.0

Aftbody Structure
Engine

44.5
33.5

142.5
142.5

Tailcone Structure
Ramjet Nozzle
Flight Control Actuators
Fins ( 4 )
End of Cruise
Ramjet Fuel ( 11900 in3 )
Start of Cruise
Boost Nozzle ( Ejected )
Frangible Port
End of Boost
Boost Propellant
2/24/2008 Booster Ignition

31.6
31.0
37.0
70.0
1,262.6
476.0
1,738.6
31.0
11.5
1,781.1
449.0
2,230.1
ELF

165.0
165.0
164.0
157.2
81.8
87.0
83.2
164.0
126.0
84.9
142.5
96.5

324

Ramjet Baseline Missile Definition


Inlet

Type
Material
Conical forebody half angle, deg
Ramp wedge angle, deg
Cowl angle, deg
Internal contraction ratio
Capture area, ft2
Throat area, ft2

Mixed compression
Titanium
17.7
8.36
8.24
12.2 Percent
0.79
0.29

Dome Material
Airframe Material
Combustor Material
Length, in
Diameter, in
Fineness ratio
Volume, ft3
Wetted area, ft2
Base area, ft2 ( cruise )
Boattail fineness ratio
Nose half angle, deg
Nose length, in

Silicon nitride
Titanium
Insulated Inconel
171.0
20.375
8.39
28.33
68.81
0.58
N/A
17.7
23.5

Body

2/24/2008

ELF

325

Ramjet Baseline Missile Definition ( cont )


Tail ( Exposed )

Material
Planform area ( 2 panels ), ft2
Wetted area ( 4 panels ), ft2
Aspect ratio ( 2 panels exposed )
Taper ratio
Root chord, in
Span, in. ( 2 panels exposed )
Leading edge sweep, deg
Mean aerodynamic chord, in
Thickness ratio
Section type
Section leading edge total angle, deg
xmac, in
ymac, in ( from root chord )

Titanium
2.24
8.96
1.64
0.70
16.5
23.0
37.0
14.2
0.04
Modified double wedge
9.1
150.3
5.4

Reference values
Reference area, ft2
Reference length, ft
2/24/2008

2.264
1.698
ELF

326

Engine Nomenclature and Flowpath Geometry for


Ramjet Baseline
( CD0 )Nose Corrected = ( CD0 )Nose Uncorrected x ( 1 - Ac / SREF )

Ac = Inlet capture area


SRef = Reference area

20.375 in

Ac = 114 in2
120

Ramjet Engine Station Identification


SRef

Subscripts
0
Free stream flow into inlet ( Example, Ramjet Baseline at Mach 4, = 0 deg A0 = 104 in2. Note: AC = 114 in2 )
1
Inlet throat ( Ramjet Baseline A1 = AIT = 41.9 in2 )
2
Diffuser exit ( Ramjet Baseline A2 = 77.3 in2 )
3
Flame holder plane ( Ramjet Baseline A3 = 287.1 in2 )
4
Combustor exit ( Ramjet Baseline A4 = 287.1 in2 )
5
Nozzle throat ( Ramjet Baseline A5 = 103.1 in2 )
6
Nozzle exit ( Ramjet Baseline A6 = 233.6 in2 )
Ref
Reference Area ( Ramjet Baseline Body Cross-sectional Area, SRef = 326 in2 )
2/24/2008

ELF

327

Aerodynamic Characteristics of Ramjet Baseline


SRef = 2.264 ft2
lRef = dRef = 1.698 ft
Xcg @ Sta 82.5 in
= 0 deg
4.0

Normal Force Coefficient, CN

Axial Force Coefficient, CA

.40
Mach
.30

1.2
1.5
2.0

.20

3.0
4.0

.10

0
0

12

16

, Angle of Attack ~ deg

Mach
3.0

1.2
1.5
2.0

2.0

3.0
4.0

1.0

0
0

12

16

, Angle of Attack ~ deg

Source: Reference 27, based on year 1974 computer program from Reference 32.

2/24/2008

ELF

328

Aerodynamic Characteristics of Ramjet Baseline


( cont )

Pitching Moment Coefficient, Cm

+ .4

SRef = 2.264 ft2


lRef = dRef = 1.698 ft
Xcg @ Sta 82.5 in
= 0 deg

-.4
Mach
4.0

-.8

3.0

-1.2

2.0
1.5

-1.6

1.2

12

, Angle of Attack ~ deg

16

Source: Reference 27, based on year 1974 computer program from Reference 32.
2/24/2008

ELF

329

-.4

SRef = 2.264 ft2


lRef = dRef = 1.698 ft
Xcg @ Sta 82.5 in
= 0 deg
= 0 deg.

.4

-.2

.3
C
D

m ~ per deg

Aerodynamic Characteristics of Ramjet Baseline


( cont )

.2

.1

.05

N ~ per deg

.10

M, Mach Number
0
0

2/24/2008

M, Mach Number

Source: Reference 27, based on year 1974 computer program from


Reference 32.
ELF

330

Thrust Modeling of Ramjet Baseline

Tmax, Max Thrust, lb

100000

10000

h = Sea Level
h = 20k ft
h = 40k ft
h = 60k ft
h = 80k ft

Example: M = 3.5, h = 60k ft,


= 1 Max Thrust = 1,750 lb

1000

Note:
Standard atmosphere
T = Tmax

100
0

= 1 if stochiometric ( f / a = 0.0667 )
= 0 deg

M, Mach Number
Figure based on Reference 27 prediction
2/24/2008

ELF

331

Specific Impulse Modeling of Ramjet Baseline

ISP, Specific Impulse, s

1,500

Example: M = 3.5 ISP = 1,120 s

1,000

Note:

500

Standard atmosphere
1
ISP based on Reference 27 computer prediction.
0

M, Mach Number
2/24/2008

ELF

332

Rocket Booster Acceleration / Performance of


Ramjet Baseline
Boost Thrust ~ 1000 lb

30
( ISP )Booster = 250 s
20

10

0
1.0

2.0

3.0

Time ~ s

Standard atmosphere
ML = 0.80
Constant altitude flyout

2.0

Burnout Mach Number

Boost Range ~ nm

1.0

0
0

20

40

60

h, Altitude 1,000 ft
2/24/2008

ELF

4.0

5.0

6.0

20

40

3.0

2.5

2.0

60

h, Altitude 1,000 ft

80
333

Ramjet Baseline Has Best Performance at High


Altitude
500

400

Range ~ nm

60,000 ft
300

200
40,000 ft
100

20,000 ft
h = SL

M, Mach Number

Note: ML = 0.8, Constant Altitude Fly-out

Example, Mach 3 / 60k ft flyout 445 nm. Breguet Range Prediction is R = V ISP ( L / D ) ln [ WBC / ( WBC - Wf )] = 2901 ( 1040 )
( 3.15 ) ln ( 1739 / ( 1739 - 476 )) = 3,039,469 ft or 500 nm. Predicted range is 10% greater than baseline missile data.
2/24/2008

ELF

334

From Paredo Sensitivity, Ramjet Baseline Range


Driven by ISP, Fuel Weight, Thrust, and CD0
Nondimensional Range Sensitivity
to Parameter

1.5
Example: At Mach 3.0 / 60k ft altitude
cruise, 10% increase in fuel weight
9.6% increase in flight range

1
0.5
0
ISP

-0.5

Fuel
Weight

Thrust

-1

CD0, Zero- CLA, LiftLift Drag


CurveCoefficient
Slope
Coefficient

Inert
Weight

Parameter
Sea Level Flyout at Mach 2.3
40k ft Flyout at Mach 2.8
2/24/2008

ELF

20k ft Flyout at Mach 2.5


60k ft Flyout at Mach 3.0
335

Ramjet Baseline Flight Range Uncertainty Is +/- 7%, 1


Parameter

Baseline Value at Mach 3.0 / 60k ft

Uncertainty in Parameter

R / R from Uncertainty

1. Specific Impulse

1040 s

+/- 5%, 1

+/- 5%, 1

2. Ramjet Fuel Weight

476 lb

+/- 1%, 1

+/- 0.9%, 1

3. Cruise Thrust ( = 0.39 )

458 lb

+/- 5%, 1

+/- 2%, 1

4. Zero-Lift Drag Coefficient

0.17

+/- 5%, 1

+/- 4%, 1

5. Lift Curve Slope Coefficient

0.13 / deg

+/- 3%, 1

+/- 1%, 1

6. inert Weight

1205 lb

+/- 2%, 1

+/- 0.8%, 1

Level of Maturity Based on Flight Demo of Prototype, Subsystem Tests, and Integration
Wind tunnel tests
Direct connect, freejet, and booster firing propulsion tests
Structure test
Mock-up
Hardware-in-loop simulation
Flight Test

Total Flight Range Uncertainty at Mach 3.0 / 60k ft Flyout


R / R = [ (R / R )12 + (R / R )22 + (R / R )32 + (R / R )42 + (R / R )52 + (R / R )62 ]1/2 = +/- 6.9%, 1
2/24/2008

R = 445 nm +/- 31 nm, 1

ELF

336

Sizing Examples
Rocket Baseline Missile
Standoff range requirement
Wing sizing requirement
Multi-parameter harmonization
Lofted range comparison

Ramjet Baseline Missile


Range robustness
Propulsion and fuel alternatives
Velocity control

Computer Aided Conceptual Design Sizing Tools


Soda Straw Rocket Design, Build, and Fly
2/24/2008

ELF

337

Slurry Fuel and Efficient Packaging Provide


Extended Range Ramjet
Propulsion / Configuration

Fuel Type / Volumetric


Performance (BTU / in3) /
Density (lb / in3)

Fuel Volume (in3) /


Fuel Weight (lb)

ISP (s) / Cruise


Range at Mach 3.5,
60k ft (nm)

Liquid Fuel Ramjet

RJ-5 / 581 / 0.040

11900 / 476

1120 / 390

Ducted Rocket ( Low Smoke )

Solid Hydrocarbon / 1132 / 7922 / 594


0.075

677 / 294

Ducted Rocket ( High


Performance )

Boron / 2040 / 0.082

7922 / 649

769 / 366

Solid Fuel Ramjet

Boron / 2040 / 0.082

7056 / 579

1170 / 496

Slurry Fuel Ramjet

40% JP-10, 60% boron


carbide / 1191 / 0.050

11900 / 595

1835 / 770

2/24/2008

Note:

Flow Path

Available Fuel

ELF

Rcruise = V ISP ( L / D ) ln [ WBC / ( WBC - Wf )]

338

Sizing Examples
Rocket Baseline Missile
Standoff range requirement
Wing sizing requirement
Multi-parameter harmonization
Lofted range comparison

Ramjet Baseline Missile


Range robustness
Propulsion and fuel alternatives
Velocity control

Computer Aided Conceptual Design Sizing Tools


Soda Straw Rocket, Design, Build, and Fly
2/24/2008

ELF

339

Example of Ramjet Velocity Control Through Fuel


Control
Ramjet Baseline
Equivalence Ratio
Ramjet Baseline Fuel
Flow Rate, lb / s
10
T

Example for Ramjet Baseline:


Mi = 4, h = sea level, T0 = 519R
T+W-D=0

W = WBO = 1263 lb
D = CD q SRef = 3353 CD MI2 = 3353 ( 0.14 )
0
0
( 4 )2 = 7511 lb
Trequired = D - W = 7511 - 1263 = 6248 lb
.

wf = T / ISP = 6248 / 1000 = 6.25 lb / s


= Trequired / T = 1 = 6248 / 25000 = 0.25

0.1
0

Note: Excess air provides cooling of


combustor

Mi, Impact Mach Number at Sea Level


Note: Ramjet baseline, vertical impact at sea level, steady state velocity at impact, T = thrust, W = weight, D = drag,
WBO = burnout. weight, CD = zero-lift drag coefficient, Mi= impact Mach number, Trequired = required thrust for steady
0
state flight, wf = fuel flow rate, ISP = specific impulse, = equivalence ratio ( = 1 stochiometric )

2/24/2008

ELF

340

Sizing Examples
Rocket Baseline Missile
Standoff range requirement
Wing sizing requirement
Multi-parameter harmonization
Lofted range comparison

Ramjet Baseline Missile


Range robustness
Propulsion and fuel alternatives
Surface impact velocity

Computer Aided Conceptual Design Sizing Tools


Soda Straw Rocket Design, Build, and Fly
2/24/2008

ELF

341

Computer Sizing Code Should Have Fast


Turnaround and Be Easy to Use
Objective of Conceptual Design
Search Broad Solution Space
Iterate to Design Convergence

Characteristics of Good Conceptual Design Sizing Code


Fast Turnaround Time
Easy to Use
Directly Connect Predictions of Aeromechanics and Physical
Parameters to Trajectory Code
Simple, Physics Based Methods
Includes Most Important, Driving Parameters
Provides Insight into Relationships of Design Parameters
Stable Computation
Imbedded Baseline Missile Data
Human Designer Makes the Creative Decisions
2/24/2008

ELF

342

Example of DOS-Based Conceptual Sizing


Computer Code ADAM
Conceptual Sizing Computer Program
Advanced Design of Aerodynamic Missiles ( ADAM )
PC compatible
Written in DOS

Aerodynamic Module Based on NACA 1307 Calculates


Static and dynamic stability derivatives
Control effectiveness and trim conditions

3, 4, 5, and 6-DOF Simulation Modules


Proportional guidance
Input provided automatically by aerodynamic module

Configurations Benchmarked with Wind Tunnel Data


Greater than 50 Input Parameters Available
Defaults to benchmark configuration ( s )

2/24/2008

ELF

343

Example of Spreadsheet Based Conceptual


Sizing Computer Code - TMD Spreadsheet
Conceptual Sizing Computer Code
Tactical Missile Design ( TMD ) Spreadsheet
PC compatible
Windows Excel spreadsheet

Based on Tactical Missile Design Short Course and Textbook


Aerodynamics
Propulsion
Weight
Flight trajectory
Measures of merit

2/24/2008

ELF

344

Example of Spreadsheet Based Conceptual


Sizing Computer Code, TMD Spreadsheet
Define Mission Requirements [ Flight Performance ( RMax, RMin, VAVG ) , MOM, Constraints ]
Establish Baseline ( Rocket

, Ramjet

Aerodynamics Input ( d, l, lN, A, c, t, xcg )


Aerodynamics Output [ CD , CN, xac, Cm , L / D, ST ]

Propulsion Input ( pc, , c*, Ab, At, A0, Hf, , T4, Inlet Type )
.
Propulsion Output [ Isp, Tcruise, pt / pt , w , Tboost, Tsustain, VBoost ]
2

Alt Mission
Alt Baseline

Resize / Alt Config /


Subsystems / Tech

Weight Input ( WL, WP, , max )


Weight Output [ WL, WP, h, dT / dt, T, t, buckling, MB, , Wsubsystems, xcg, Iy ]
Trajectory Input ( hi, Vi, Type ( cruise, boost, coast, ballistic, turn, glide )
Trajectory Output ( R, h, V, and versus time )
Meet
Performance?
Yes
Measures of Merit and Constraints
Yes
2/24/2008

ELF

No [ RMax, RMin, VAVG ]


No [ pBlast, PK, nHit,
Vfragments, PKE,
KEWarhead, Total,
HE, MAN, Rdetect,
CSDD, C1000th, Cunit x ]

345

Example of TMD Spreadsheet Sizing Code


Verification: Air-to-Air Range Requirement
Example Launch Conditions
hL = 20k ft
ML = 0.8

Example Requirement
RF = 6.7 nm with tf < 24.4 s

Solutions for Rocket Baseline


ADAM: RF = 6.7 nm at tf = 18 s
TMD Spreadsheet: RF = 6.7 nm at tf = 19 s
3 DOF using wind tunnel aero data: RF = 6.7 nm at tf = 21 s

Differences in Flight Time to 6.7 nm Mostly Due to Zero-Lift Drag Coefficient.


For Example:
ADAM prediction at Mach 2.0: ( CD0 )coast = 0.53
TMD Spreadsheet prediction at Mach 2.0: ( CD0 )coast = 0.57
Wind tunnel aero data at Mach 2.0: ( CD0 )coast = 1.05

Wind Tunnel Data / Baseline Missile Data Correction Required to Reduce


Uncertainty in CD
0

2/24/2008

ELF

346

Sizing Examples
Rocket Baseline Missile
Standoff range requirement
Wing sizing requirement
Multi-parameter harmonization
Lofted range comparison

Ramjet Baseline Missile


Range robustness
Propulsion and fuel alternatives
Surface impact velocity

Computer Aided Conceptual Design Sizing Tools


Soda Straw Rocket Design, Build, and Fly
2/24/2008

ELF

347

Example of Design, Build, and Fly Customer


Requirements
Objective Design, Build, and Fly Soda Straw Rocket with:
Flight Range Greater Than 90 ft
Weight Less Than 2 g

Furnished Property
Launch System
Distance Measuring Wheel
Weight Scale
Micrometer Scale
Engineers Scale
Scissors

Furnished Material
1 Giant Soda Straw: 0.28 in Diameter by 7.75 in Length, Weight = 0.6 g
1 Strip Tabbing: in by 6 in, Weight = 1.4 g
1 Ear Plug: 0.33 0.45 in Diameter by 0.90 in Length, Weight = 0.6 g
1 Super Jumbo Soda Straw: 0.25 in Diameter by 7.75 in Length
2/24/2008

ELF

348

Example of Design, Build, and Fly Customer


Requirements ( cont )
Furnished Property Launch System with Specified Launch Conditions
Launch Tube Diameter: 0.25 in
Launch Tube Length ( e.g., 6 in )
Launch Pressure ( e.g., 30 psi )
Launch Elevation Angle ( e.g., 40 deg )

Predict Flight Trajectory Range and Compare with Test

2/24/2008

ELF

349

Soda Straw Rocket Launcher and Targeting


9. Rocket on Launcher
8. Launch Tube
7. Inclinometer
6b. Manual Valve
Launcher ( 0.1 s
average response )
6a. Solenoid Valve
Launcher ( 0.025 s
average response )
5. Launch Switch
4. Pressure Gauge
3. Air Hose
2. Pressure Tank

1. Pump
11. Rockets with Various Length, Tail Geometry, Nose Geometry, and Other Surfaces
2/24/2008

10. Laser Pointer Targeting Device

ELF

350

It Is Easy to Make a Soda Straw Rocket


1. Cut Large Diameter Giant Soda Straw to Desired
Length
2. Twist and Squeeze Ear Plug to Fit Inside Soda
Straw
3. Slide Ear Plug Inside Soda Straw

4. Cut Adhesive Tabs to Desired Height and Width of Surfaces

5. Apply Adhesive Tabs to Soda Straw


6. Wrap Front of Ear Plug and Straw with Tape
7. Slide Giant Soda Straw Rocket Over Smaller
Diameter Super Jumbo Soda Straw Launch Tube

2/24/2008

ELF

351

Soda Straw Rocket Baseline Configuration

Ear Plug

Soda Straw

Strip Tabbing

0.25 in
0.28 in
0.5 in

lc = 6.0 in
l = 7.0 in

2/24/2008

ELF

352

Soda Straw Rocket Baseline Weight and Balance


Component
Nose ( Plug )
Body ( Soda Straw )
Fins ( Four )
Total

2/24/2008

Weight, g
0.6
0.5
0.5
1.6

ELF

cg Station, in
0.5
3.5
6.75
3.39

353

Soda Straw Rocket Baseline Definition


Body
Material Type
Material density, lb / in3
Material strength, psi
Thickness, in
Length, in
Diameter, in
Fineness ratio
Nose fineness ratio

HDPE Plastic
0.043
4,600
0.004
7.0
0.28
25.0
0.5

Material
Planform area, in2 ( 2 panels exposed )
Wetted area, in2 ( 4 panels )
Aspect ratio ( 2 panels exposed )
Taper ratio
Chord, in
Span ( exposed ), in
Span ( total including body ), in
Leading edge sweep, deg
xmac, in

Plastic
0.25
1.00
1.00
1.0
0.5
0.5
0.78
0
6.625

Fins

2/24/2008

ELF

354

Soda Straw Rocket Baseline Definition ( cont )


Nose
Material Type
Material density, lb / in3
Average diameter
Length

Foam
0.012
0.39 in
0.90 in

Reference Values
Reference area, in2
Reference length, in

0.0616
0.28

Thrust Performance
Inside cavity length, in
Typical Pressure, psi
Maximum thrust @ 30 psi pressure, lb
Time constant, s ( standard temperature )

2/24/2008

6.0
30
1.47
0.025

ELF

355

Soda Straw Rocket Baseline Static Margin


( xAC )B
xCG

xAC
l

( xAC )T

For body-tail geometry, static margin given by


( xAC xCG ) / d = - {( CN )B {[ xCG ( xAC )B ] / d } + ( CN )T {[ xCG ( xAC )T ] / d }( ST /
SRef )} / [( CN )B + ( CN )T ST / SRef ]

For baseline soda straw configuration

xCG = 3.39 in, d = 0.28 in, ( CN )B = 2 per rad, ST = 0.25 in2, SRef = 0.0616 in2
( xAC )B = [( xAC )B / lN ] lN = 0.63 ( 0.14 ) = 0.09 in
( CN )T = AT / 2 = ( 1 ) / 2 = 1.57
( xAC )T = 6.5 + 0.25 ( cmac )T = 6.63

Substituting

( xAC - xCG ) / d = - { 2 ( 3.39 0.09 ) / 0.28 + [ 1.57 ( 3.39 6.63 ) / 0.28 ] [( 0.25 ) /
0.0616 ]} / [ 2 + 1.57 ( 0.25 ) / 0.0616 ] = 6.00 ( statically stable )
xAC = 6.00 ( 0.28 ) + 3.39 = 5.07 in from nose
2/24/2008

ELF

356

Soda Straw Rocket Has High Acceleration Boost


Performance
T = ( p p0 ) A = pgauge ( 1 e t / ) A
a 32.2 T / W, V = a dt, s = V dt

100

V, Velocity, fps

80

60

Note: Time Tics


Every 0.01 s

40

20

0
0

10

s, Distance Traveled During Launch, Inches


pgauge = 15 psi
pgauge = 60 psi
2/24/2008

pgauge = 30 psi

ELF

Thrust ( T ) from Pressurized Tube of Area A


T = ( p p0 ) A = pgauge ( 1 e t / ) A
A = ( / 4 ) ( 0.25 )2 = 0.0491 in2, = Valve Rise Time
Example:
Assume pgauge = 30 psi, lt = 6 in, = 0.025 s ( Average
for Solenoid Valve ), s = lc = 6 in
Thrust Equation Is:
T = 30 ( 1 - e t / 0.025 ) ( 0.0491 ) = 1.4726 ( 1 - e 40.00 t )
Note: Actual Boost Thrust Lower ( Pressure Loss,
Boundary Layer, Launch Tube Leakage, Launch
Tube Friction )
Equations for Acceleration ( a ), Velocity ( V ), and
Distance ( s ) During Boost Are:
a 32.2 T / W = 32.2 ( 1.4726 ) ( 1 - e 40.00 t ) / 0.00352
= 13471.1 ( 1 - e 40.00 t )
V = a dt = 13471.1 t + 336.78 e 40.00 t 336.78
s = V dt = 6735.57 t2 8.419 e 40.00 t 336.78 t +
8.419
End of Boost Conditions Are:
s = lc = 6 in = 0.500 ft t = 0.0188 s
a = 7123 ft / s2 = 221 g
V = 75.2 ft / s
q = V2 = ( 0.002378 ) ( 75.2 )2 = 6.72 psf
M = V / c = 75.2 / 1116 = 0.0674
357

Most of the Soda Straw Rocket Drag Coefficient


Is from Body Skin Friction
CD0 = ( CD0 )Body,Friction + ( CD0 )Base,Coast + ( CD0 )Tail,Friction
= 0.053 ( l / d ) [ M / ( q l )]0.2 + 0.12 + nT { 0.0133 [ M / ( q cmac )]0.2 } ( 2 ST / SRef )

CD0, Zero-Lift Drag Coefficient

1.5

0.5

0
0

10

ST / SRef, Tail Planform Area / Reference Area


V = 40 fps
2/24/2008

V = 80 fps
ELF

Example: V = 75.2 fps, ST = 0.00174 ft2, SRef =


0.000428 ft2 ST / SRef = 4.07
Compute:
CD0 = 0.053 ( 25.0 ){ 0.0674 / [( 6.72 ) ( 0. 583 )]}0.2 +
0.12 + 2 { 0.0133 { 0.0674 / [( 6.72 ) ( 0.0417 )]}0.2 }[ 2
( 4.07 )] = 0.58 + 0.12 + 0.16 = 0.86
Note:
Above Drag Coefficient Not Exact
Based on Assumption of Turbulent Boundary
Layer
Soda Straw Rocket Small Size and Low Velocity
Laminar Boundary Layer Large Boundary Layer
Thickness on Aft Body at Tails
Compute Drag Force:
Dmax = CD qmax SRef = 0.86 ( 6.72 ) ( 0.000428 ) =
0.00247 lb
Compare Drag Force to Weight:
Dmax / W = 0.00247 / 0.00352 = 0.70
Note: Drag Force Smaller Than Weight
358

Soda Straw Rocket Baseline Has a Ballistic Flight


Range Greater Than 90 Feet
Rx = { 2 W cos i / [ gc SRef CD0 ]} ln { 1 + t / { 2
W / [ gc SRef CD0 Vi ]}}

h - hi, Height above Initial Launch


Height, ft

h = { 2 W sin i / [ gc SRef CD ]} ln { 1 + t / { 2
0
W / [ gc SRef CD0 Vi ]}} + hi - gc t2 / 2

Horizontal Range At Impact = Rx = { 2 (

40
Note: Time Tics
every 0.5 s

30

0.00352 ) cos i / [ 32.2 ( 0.002378 ) (


0.000428 ) ( 0.86 )]} ln { 1 + t / { 2 (
0.00352 ) / [ 32.2 ( 0.002378 ) (
0.000428 ) ( 0.86 ) ( 75.2 )]}}
= 249.8 cos i ln ( 1 + 0.301 t )

= 249.8 ( 0.866 ) ln [ 1 + 0.301 ( 1.8 )] =


93.7 ft

20

Height At Impact = h = { 2 ( 0.00352 )

10
0
0

20

40

60

80

100

Rx, Horizontal Range, ft


Gamma = 10 Deg
2/24/2008

Example, Assume lt = 6 in, pgauge = 30 psi, i


= 30 deg, = 0.025 sec, Soda Straw
Baseline, t = timpact = 1.8 s

Gamma = 30 Deg

Gamma = 50 Deg
ELF

sin i / [ 32.2 ( 0.002378 ) ( 0.000428 ) (


0.86 )} ln { 1 + t / { 2 ( 0.00352 ) / [ 32.2
( 0.002378 ) ( 0.000428 ) ( 0.86 ) ( 75.2
)]}} + hi 32.2 t2 / 2
= 249.8 sin i ln ( 1 + 0.301 t ) + hi
32.2 t2 / 2 = 249.8 ( 0.5 ) ln [ 1 + 0.301 (
1.8 )] + hi 32.2 ( 1.2 )2 / 2
= hi + 1.9 ft
359

Soda Straw Rocket Range Driven by Inside


Chamber Length and Launch Angle
0.8

Example: 10% decrease in


inside chamber length
7.7% decrease in range at t =
1.8 s. Note: Result is
nonlinear because inside
chamber length = launcher
length. Increase in lc also
leads to decrease in range.

0.6

Nondimensional
Range
Sensitivity to
Parameter

0.4

Note: Decreased chamber length


shorter duration thrust ( decreased
total impulse ) decreased end-ofboost velocity
Soda Straw Rocket Baseline:
W = Weight = 0.00423 lb
lc = inside chamber length = 6 in
= Time constant to open solenoid
valve = 0.025 s
pgauge = gauge pressure = 30 psi

0.2

i = Initial / launch angle angle = 30 deg


lt = 7 in
0

V = Launch velocity = 75.2 fps


lc

Gamma pgauge

tau

CD0

CD0 = Zero-lift drag coefficient = 0.86


timpact = Time from launch to impact =
1.8 s

-0.2

Rx = Horizontal range = 94 ft
2/24/2008

ELF

360

Soda Straw Rocket Baseline Flight Range


Uncertainty Is +/- 2.4%, 1
Parameter

Baseline Value

Uncertainty in
Parameter

R / R Due to
Uncertainty

1. Inside Chamber Length

6 in

+/- 2%, 1

+/- 1.5%, 1

2. Launch Angle

30 deg

+/- 3%, 1

+/- 1.7%, 1

3. Gauge Pressure

30 psi

+/- 3%, 1

+/- 0.5%, 1

4. Weight

1.6 g

+/- 6%, 1

+/- 0.4%, 1

5. Solenoid Time Constant

0.025 s

+/- 20%, 1

+/- 0.2%, 1

6. Zero-Lift Drag Coefficient

0.86

+/- 20%, 1

+/- 0.2%, 1

Estimate of Level of Maturity / Uncertainty of Soda Straw Rocket Baseline Parameters Based on
Wind tunnel test
Thrust static test
Weight measurement
Prediction methods

Total Flight Range Uncertainty for 30 psi launch at 30 deg


R / R = [ (R / R )12 + (R / R )22 + (R / R )32 + (R / R )42 + (R / R )52 + (R / R )62 ]1/2 = +/- 2.4%, 1
R = 94 ft +/- 2.3 ft, 1
2/24/2008

ELF

361

House of Quality Translates Customer


Requirements into Engineering Emphasis
0

Chamber Length

Tail Planform Area

Flight Range

Weight

74 = ( 7x8 + 3x6 )

26 = ( 7x2 + 3x4 )

Note: Based on House of Quality, inside chamber length most important design parameter.
Note on Design Characteristics Sensitivity
Matrix: ( Room 5 ):

1 - Customer Requirements
2 Customer Importance Rating ( Total = 10 )
3 Design Characteristics
4 Design Characteristics Importance Rating ( Total = 10 )
5 Design Characteristics Sensitivity Matrix
6 Design Characteristics Weighted Importance
7 Design Characteristics Relative Importance

++ Strong Synergy
+ Synergy
0 Near Neutral Synergy
- Anti-Synergy
- - Strong Anti-Synergy
2/24/2008

ELF

362

DOE Explores the Broad Possible Design Space


with a Reasonably Small Set of Alternatives
Design Space for Design of Experiments ( DOE )
Engineering
Characteristics Range

lc, Inside Chamber


Length, in

ST, Tail Planform Area,


in2

Lower Value

0.125

Upper Value

0.25

Full Factorial DOE Based on Upper / Lower Values of k = 2 Parameters:


Number of Combinations = 2k = 22 = 4
Concept

Sketch

lc, Inside Chamber


Length, in

ST, Tail Planform Area,


in2

Big Kahuna

0.25

Shorty

0.25

Stiletto

0.125

Petite

0.125

Note: DOE concepts should emphasize customer driving requirements and the driving engineering characteristics.
2/24/2008

ELF

363

Engineering Experience Should Guide the DOE


Set of Alternatives and the Preferred Design
As an Example, for the Soda Straw Rocket, from
Experience We Know That
Soda Straw Rocket Must Fit on Launcher
Maximum Boost Velocity Occurs When Chamber Length = Launch
Tube Length
Three or Four Tails Best for Stability
Tails That Are Too Small May Result in an Unstable Flight
Tails That Are Too Large Add Weight and Cause Trajectory
Dispersal
Canards Require Larger Tails for Stability, Add Weight, and Cause
Trajectory Dispersal
Wings Add Weight, Add Drag, and Cause Trajectory Dispersal

2/24/2008

ELF

364

Engineering Experience Should Guide the DOE


Set of Alternatives and Preferred Design ( cont )

As an Example, Soda Straw Rocket Geometry Should Be Comparable to an Operational


Rocket with Near-Neutral Static Stability ( e.g., Hydra70 )
Concept

Sketch

l / d,
Total Length /
Diameter

b / d,
Total Tail Span /
Diameter

c / d,
Tail Chord /
Diameter

Big Kahuna

25

2.79

Shorty

17.9

2.79

Stiletto

25

1.89

Petite

17.9

1.89

Hydra 70

15.1

2.66

Note: For a subsonic rocket with the center-of-gravity in the center of the rocket, slender body theory and slender
surface theory give total tail span and chord for neutral stability of bNeutralStability 2 d and cNeutralStability > d
respectively.
2/24/2008

ELF

365

Optimum Design Should Have Balanced


Engineering Characteristics
As an Example, for the Soda Straw Rocket Design We
Should
Reflect Customer Emphasis of Requirements for
Range
Weight

Provide Balanced Emphasis of Most Important Engineering


Characteristics
Chamber Length
Tail Size / Span

2/24/2008

ELF

366

Summary of Sizing Examples


Rocket Powered Missile ( Sparrow Derived Baseline )
Standoff range requirement
Wing area sizing requirements for maneuverability, turn rate, and
turn radius
Multi-parameter harmonization
Ballistic versus lofted glide flight range

Ramjet Powered Missile ( ASALM Derived Baseline )


Robustness in range uncertainty
Propulsion and fuel alternatives
Surface target impact velocity

Computer Aided Sizing Tools for Conceptual Design


ADAM
Analytical prediction of aerodynamics
Numerical solution of equations of motion
2/24/2008

ELF

367

Summary of Sizing Examples ( cont )


Computer Aided Sizing Tools for Conceptual Design ( cont )
TMD analytical sizing spreadsheet ( based on this text )
Analytical prediction of aero, propulsion, and weight
Closed form analytical solution of simplified equations of motion

Soda Straw Rocket Design, Build, and Fly


Static margin
Drag
Performance
Sensitivity study
House of Quality
Design of Experiment ( DOE )

Discussion / Questions?
Classroom Exercise ( Appendix A )
2/24/2008

ELF

368

Sizing Examples Problems


1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
2/24/2008

Required flight range is shorter for a head-on intercept and it is longer


for a t___ c____ intercept.
The rocket baseline center-of-gravity moves f______ with motor burn.
The rocket baseline is an a_______ airframe.
The rocket baseline thrust profile is b____ s______.
The rocket baseline motor case and nozzle are made of s____.
The rocket baseline flight range is driven by ISP, propellant weight
fraction, drag, and s_____ m_____.
Contributors to the maneuverability of the rocket baseline are its body,
tail, and w___.
Although the rocket baseline has sufficient gs and turn rate to
intercept a maneuvering aircraft, it needs a smaller turn r_____.
Compared to a co-altitude trajectory, the rocket baseline has extended
range with a l_____ glide trajectory.
The ramjet baseline has a c___ inlet.
The Mach 4 ramjet baseline has a t_______ airframe.
ELF

369

Sizing Examples Problems ( cont )


12.
13.
14.
15.
16.

17.
18.
19.
2/24/2008

Although the ramjet baseline combustor is a nickel-based super alloy, it


requires insulation, due high temperature. The super alloy is i______.
The flight range of the ramjet baseline is driven by ISP, weight, thrust,
zero-lift coefficient, and the weight fraction of f___.
Extended range for the ramjet baseline would be provided by more
efficient packaging of subsystems and the use of s_____ fuels.
A conceptual design sizing code should be based on the simplicity,
speed, and robustness of p______ based methods.
The House of Quality room for design characteristics weighted
importance indicates which engineering design characteristics are most
important in meeting the c_______ r___________.
Paredo sensitivity identifies the design parameters that are most
i________.
DOE concepts should emphasize the customer driving requirements and
the driving e__________ characteristics
If the total tail span ( including body diameter ) is twice the body
diameter, the missile is approximately n________ s_____.
ELF

370

Outline
Introduction / Key Drivers in the Design Process
Aerodynamic Considerations in Tactical Missile Design
Propulsion Considerations in Tactical Missile Design
Weight Considerations in Tactical Missile Design
Flight Performance Considerations in Tactical Missile Design
Measures of Merit and Launch Platform Integration
Sizing Examples
Development Process
Summary and Lessons Learned
References and Communication
Appendices ( Homework Problems / Classroom Exercises,
Example of Request for Proposal, Nomenclature, Acronyms,
Conversion Factors, Syllabus )
2/24/2008

ELF

371

Relationship of Technology Assessment /


Roadmap to the Development Process
Technology Roadmap Establishes Time-phased
Interrelationships for
Technology development and validation tasks
Technology options
Technology goals
Technology transition ( ATD, ACTD, DemVal, PDRR, SDD )

Technology Roadmap Identifies


Key, enabling, high payoff technologies
Technology drivers
Key decision points
Critical paths
Facility requirements
Resource needs
2/24/2008

ELF

372

Relationship of Design Maturity to the US


Research, Technology, and Acquisition Process
Research

Technology

Acquisition

6.1

6.2

6.3

6.4

6.5

Basic
Research

Exploratory
Development

Advanced
Development

Demonstration
& Validation

System
Development
and
Demonstration

Production

System
Upgrades

~ $0.1B

~ $0.3B

~ $0.9B

~ $0.5B

~ $1.0B

~ $6.1B

~ $1.2B

Maturity Level

Conceptual Design

Drawings ( type ) < 10 ( subsystems )


Technology
Development
~ 10 Years

2/24/2008

Preliminary Design

Detail Design

Production Design

< 100 ( components )

> 100 ( parts )

> 1000 ( parts )

Technology
Demonstration
~ 8 Years

Prototype
Demonstration
~ 4 Years

Full Scale
Development
~ 5 Years

First
Limited Block
~ 2 Years ~ 5
Years

1-3 Block
Upgrades
~ 5-15 Years

Production
Note:
Total US DoD Research and Technology for Tactical Missiles $1.8 Billion per year
Total US DoD Acquisition ( SDD + Production + Upgrades ) for Tactical Missiles $8.3 Billion per year
Tactical Missiles 11% of U.S. DoD RT&A budget
US Industry IR&D typically similar to US DoD 6.2 and 6.3A
ELF

373

Technology Readiness Level ( TRL ) Indicates


the Maturity of Technology
TRL 1- 3

TRL 4

TRL 5

TRL 6

TRL 7

Category 6.1

Category 6.2A

Category 6.2B

Category 6.3

Category 6.4

Basic
research

Exploratory
development
of a
component,
conceptual
design
studies, and
prediction
methods

Exploratory
development
of a
subsystem

Advanced tech
demo of a
subsystem

Prototype
demonstration

Initial assessment component test


2/24/2008

subsystem test integrated subsystems integrated missile


ELF

374

Typical Number of Alternative Concepts


or Number of Design Drawings

Conceptual Design Has Broad Alternatives


While Detail Design Has High Definition
1000

100
Number of Concepts
Number of Drawings

10

1
0

10

15

Time ( Years )

2/24/2008

Conceptual

Prelim.

Detail

Production

Design

Design

Design

Design

ELF

375

US Tactical Missile Follow-On Programs Occur


about Every 24 Years
Short Range ATA, AIM-9, 1949 - Raytheon

AIM-9X ( maneuverability ), 1996 - Hughes

Medium Range ATA, AIM-7,1951 - Raytheon

AIM-120 ( autonomous, speed,


range, weight ), 1981 - Hughes

Anti-radar ATS, AGM-45, 1961 - TI

Hypersonic Missile, > 2007

AGM-88 ( speed, range ), 1983 - TI Hypersonic Missile > 2007


PAC-3 (accuracy), 1992 - Lockheed Martin

Long Range STA, MIM-104, 1966 - Raytheon

Man-portable STS, M-47, 1970 - McDonnell Douglas Javelin ( gunner survivability,


lethality, weight ), 1989 - TI
Long Range STS, BGM-109, 1972 - General Dynamics

Long Range ATS, AGM-86, 1973 - Boeing

AGM-129 ( RCS ), 1983 - General Dynamics

Medium Range ATS, AGM-130, 1983 - Rockwell


1950
2/24/2008

1965

1970

1975

1980

1985

Year Entering SDD


ELF

Hypersonic Missile > 2007

1990

JASSM ( cost, range,


observables ), 1999 - LM
1995
> 2000
376

Missile Design Validation / Technology


Development Is an Integrated Process
Propulsion
Propulsion Model

Rocket Static
Turbojet Static
Ramjet Tests
-Direct Connect
-Freejet

Airframe
Aero Model
Guidance
and Control

Wind Tunnel
Tests

Model Digital Simulation


Seeker

Lab Tests

IM Tests

Structure
Test
Hardware
In-Loop
Simulation
Tower
Tests

Flight Test Progression


( Captive Carry,Jettison,
Separation, Unpowered
Guided Flights, Powered
Guided Flights, Live
Warhead Flights )

Actuators / Initiators
Sensors

Lab Tests

Autopilot / Electronics
Power
Supply
Warhead
2/24/2008

Ballistic Tests

Environment
Tests
Vibration
Temperature

Witness / Arena Tests


ELF

IM Tests

Sled Tests
377

Examples of Missile Development Tests and


Facilities
Airframe Wind Tunnel Test

Propulsion Static Firing with TVC ..

Propulsion Direct Connect Test .

Propulsion Freejet Test

2/24/2008

ELF

378

Examples of Missile Development Tests and


Facilities ( cont )
Warhead Arena Test .

Warhead Sled Test

Insensitive Munition Test ..

Structure Test ..

2/24/2008

ELF

379

Examples of Missile Development Tests and


Facilities ( cont )
Seeker Test .

Hardware-In-Loop

Environmental Test ..

Submunition Dispenser Sled Test


2/24/2008

ELF

380

Examples of Missile Development Tests and


Facilities ( cont )
RCS Test .

Store / Avionics Test

Flight Test .

Video of Facilities and Tests

2/24/2008

ELF

381

Missile Flight Test Should Cover Extremes of


Flight Envelope
Example: Ramjet Baseline Propulsion Test Validation ( PTV )
High L / D Cruise
Flight 7
Flight 3

Booster
Transition:
Thrust - Drag

w
Lo

m
na
y
D

ic

su
s
e
Pr

re

High Aero Heating


Flight 7

Flight 1
Flight 7

Flight 7

Flight 3

Flight 7

a
yn
D
h
Hig

cP
i
m

re
su
s
re

Flight 3

Note: Seven Flights from Oct 1979 to May 1980.


Flight 1 failure of fuel control. As a result of the high thrust, the flight Mach number exceeded the design Mach number.
2/24/2008

ELF

382

Example of Aero Technology Development


Conceptual Design ( 5 to 50 input parameters ) Prediction
Preliminary Design ( 50 to 200 input parameters ) Prediction
Missile DATCOM. Contact: AFRL. Attributes include: Low cost
MISL3. Contact: NEAR. Attributes include: Modeling vortex shedding
SUPL. Contact: NEAR. Attributes include: Paneling complex geometry
AP02. Contact: NSWC. Attributes include: Periodic updates
CFD. Contact: Georgia Tech. Attributes include: Model runs on Parallel
Processing PCs

Preliminary Design Optimization


Response Surface Model: Contact: Georgia Tech. Attributes include
10x more rapid computation
Probabilistic Analysis: Contact: Georgia Tech. Attributes include an
evaluation of design robustness

2/24/2008

ELF

383

Example of Aero Technology Development


( cont )
Wind Tunnel Test Verification
Body buildup force and moment
Control effectiveness and hinge moment
Store carriage and separation
Flow field ( may be required )
Pressure distribution ( may be required )
Plume, heat transfer, and dynamic stability ( usually not
required )
Inlet ( if applicable )

3 to 6-DOF Digital Simulation


Hardware-in-loop Simulation
Detail Design ( over 200 input parameters )
Flight Test Validation
2/24/2008

ELF

384

Example of Missile Technology State-of-the-Art


Advancement: Air-to-Air Missile Maneuverability
Operational Angle of Attack, Deg

60
50

Controls Augmented
with Propulsion
Devices ( TVC,
Reaction Jet )

40
30
20
10
0
1950

1960

1970

1980
Year IOC

2/24/2008

ELF

1990

2000

2010

AIM-7A
AM-9B
R530
AA-8
AIM-54
R550
Skyflash
Python 3
AA-10
Aspide
Super 530D
AA-11
AIM-120
Python 4
AA-12
MICA
AIM-132
AIM-9X

385

Mcruise, Cruise Mach Number

Example of Missile Technology State-of-the-Art


Advancement: Ramjet Propulsion
7
6

Scramjet
Ramjet

5
4
3
2
1
0
1950

1960

1970

1980

1990

2000

2010

Year Flight Demonstration


Cobra
RARE
D-21
ALVRJ
ANS
HyFly
2/24/2008

X-7
Bloodhound
CROW
3M80
Kh-41
SED

Vandal/Talos
BOMARC
SA-6
ASALM
SLAT
ELF

St-450
Typhon
Sea Dart
AS-17 / Kh-31
BrahMos

SE 4400
STATEX
LASRM
ASMP
Meteor
386

Enabling Technologies for Tactical Missiles


Dome
Faceted / Window
Multi-mode
Multi-spectral
Multi-lens

Electronics

G&C
GPS / INS
In-flight Optimize
, Feedback
ATR

Insulation
Hypersonic
High Density

COTS
Central

Power

Data Link
BDI / BDA
In-flight Retarget
Moving Target
Phased Array

Flight Control
EM and
Piezoelectric
TVC / Reaction Jet
Dedicated Roll

MEMS

Seeker
Multi-mode
Multi-spectral
SAR
Strapdown
Uncooled Imaging
High Gimbal

Warhead
High Energy Density
Multi-mode
High Density Penetrator
Boosted Penetrator
Smart Dispenser
Powered Submunition
2/24/2008

Airframe
Lifting Body
Neutral Static Margin
Lattice Fins
Split Canard
Low xAC Wing / Low Hinge Moment Control
Free-to-Roll Tails
Compressed Carriage
Low Drag Inlet
Mixed Compression Inlet
Single Cast Structure
VARTM, Pultrusion, Extrusion, Filament Wind
High Temperature Composites
Titanium Alloy
MEMS Data Collection
Low Observable Shaping and Materials
ELF

Propulsion
Hypersonic Turbine-Based
Liquid / Solid Fuel Ramjet
Variable Flow Ducted Rocket
Scramjet
Combined Cycle Propulsion
High Temperature Turbine
High Temperature Combustor
High Density Fuel / Propellant
High Throttle Fuel Control
Endothermic Fuel
Composite Case
Pintle / Pulsed / Gel Motor
High Burn Rate Exponent Propellant
Low Observable
387

Summary of Development Process


Development Process
Technology roadmap
Development activities
Time frame

Level of Design Maturity Related to Stage of Development


Missile Follow-on Programs
Subsystems Development Activities
Subsystems Integration and Missile System Development
Flight Test Activities
Missile Development Tests and Facilities
State-of-the-Art Advancement in Tactical Missiles
New Technologies for Tactical Missiles
Discussion / Questions?
Classroom Exercise ( Appendix A )
2/24/2008

ELF

388

Development Process Problems


1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.

2/24/2008

A technology roadmap establishes the high payoff technologies g____.


The levels of design maturity from the most mature to least mature are
production, detail, preliminary, and c_________ design.
Technology transitions occur from basic research to exploratory
development, to advanced development, to d____________ and v_________.
Approximately 11% of the U.S. RT&A budget is allocated to t_______
m_______.
In the U.S., a tactical missile has a follow-on program about every __ years.
Compared to the AIM-9L, the AIM-9X has enhanced m______________.
Compared to the AIM-7, the AIM-120 has autonomous guidance, lighter
weight, higher speed, and longer r____.
Compared to the PAC-2, the PAC-3 has h__ t_ k___ accuracy.
Guidance & control is verified in the h_______ in l___ simulation.
Airbreathing propulsion ground tests include direct connect tests and
f______ tests.
Aerodynamic force and moment data are acquired in w___ t_____ tests.
ELF

389

Outline
Introduction / Key Drivers in the Design Process
Aerodynamic Considerations in Tactical Missile Design
Propulsion Considerations in Tactical Missile Design
Weight Considerations in Tactical Missile Design
Flight Performance Considerations in Tactical Missile Design
Measures of Merit and Launch Platform Integration
Sizing Examples
Development Process
Summary and Lessons Learned
References and Communication
Appendices ( Homework Problems / Classroom Exercises,
Example of Request for Proposal, Nomenclature, Acronyms,
Conversion Factors, Syllabus )
2/24/2008

ELF

390

Evaluate Alternatives and Iterate the System-ofSystems Design


Mission / Scenario
Definition

Update
Initial

Weapon
Requirements,
Trade Studies
and Sensitivity
Analysis
Launch Platform
Integration

Revised
Trades / Eval

Initial
Reqs

Alt
Concepts

Initial Carriage /
Launch

Effectiveness / Eval

Baseline
Selected
Iteration

Refine
Weapons
Req

Weapon Concept
Design Synthesis

Alternate Concepts Select Preferred Design Eval / Refine

Technology
Assessment and
Dev Roadmap

Initial
Tech

Tech
Trades

Initial
Revised
Roadmap Roadmap

Note: Typical design cycle for conceptual design is usually 3 to 9 months


2/24/2008

ELF

391

Exploit Diverse Skills for a Balanced Design


Customer ( requirements pull )
mission / MIR weighting

Operations analysts
system-of-systems analysis
System integration engineers
launch platform integration
Missile design engineers
missile concept synthesis
Technical specialists ( technology push )
technology assessment / roadmap
2/24/2008

ELF

392

Utilize Creative Skills


Use Creative Skills to Consider Broad Range of Alternatives
Ask Why? of Requirements / Constraints
Project into Future ( e.g., 5 15 years )
State-of-the-art ( SOTA )
Threat
Scenario / Tactics / Doctrine
Concepts
Technology Impact Forecast

Recognize and Distill the Most Important, Key Drivers


Develop Missile Concept that is Synergistic within a
System-of-Systems
Develop Synergistic / Balanced Combination of High
Leverage Subsystems / Technologies

2/24/2008

ELF

393

Identify and Quantify the High Payoff Measures


of Merit

Max / Min
Range

Lethality

Time to
Target

Reliability

Miss Distance

Observables

Survivability

2/24/2008

Robustness

ELF

Weight

394

Start with a Good Baseline

I would have
used the wheel
as a baseline.

2/24/2008

ELF

395

Conduct Balanced, Unbiased Tradeoffs


Propulsion

Aerodynamics

Production

Structures
Seeker

Guidance and
Control
Warhead Fuze
2/24/2008

ELF

396

Evaluate Many Alternatives

AA- 8 / R-60

Python 4

Magic 550

U-Darter

Python 5

Derby / R-Darter

AIM-9L

Aspide

AA-10 / R-27

Skyflash

AIM-7

R-37

AA-12 / R-77

AIM-9x

Super 530D

AIM-132

AA-11 / R-73

AIM-54

AIM-120

Mica

IRIS-T

Meteor

A-Darter

Taildog

Note: Although all of the above are supersonic air-to-air missiles, they have different configuration geometry
2/24/2008

ELF

397

Search a Broad Design Solution Space ( Global


Optimization vs Local Optimization )

Local Optimum ( e.g., Lowest Cost


Only in Local Solution Space )

Local Optimum ( e.g., Lowest Cost


Only in Local Solution Space )

Global Optimum ( e.g., Lowest Cost in


Global Solution Space ) within Constraints

2/24/2008

ELF

398

Evaluate and Refine as Often as Possible

2/24/2008

ELF

399

Provide Balanced Emphasis of Analytical vs


Experimental

Thomas Edison: "Genius is 1%


inspiration and 99% perspiration."

Albert Einstein: "The only real


valuable thing is intuition."

2/24/2008

ELF

400

Use Design, Build, and Fly Process, for


Feedback That Leads to Broader Knowledge
Prediction Satisfies
Customer
Requirements?

No

Build
Is it Producible?

No

2/24/2008

Wisdom

Where is the wisdom we have lost in


knowledge? Where is the knowledge
we have lost in information?--T. S.
Eliot ( The Rock )

Understanding

Knowledge comes by taking things


apart: analysis. But wisdom comes by
putting things together.--John A.
Morrison

Knowledge

Information

Failure /
Success

Fly ( Test )
Test Results Satisfy
Customer Requirements
and Consistent with
Prediction?

Climb Ladder of Kn
owledge

Design

No

We are drowning in information but


starved for knowledge.--John Naisbitt
( Megatrends: Ten New Directions
Transforming Our Lives )
We learn wisdom from failure much
more than from success. We often
discover what will do, by finding out
what will not do; and probably he who
never made a mistake never made a
discovery.--Samuel Smiles ( Self Help )

Data

Yes
ELF

401

Evaluate Technology Risk

2/24/2008

ELF

402

Keep Track of Assumptions and Develop RealTime Documentation


Its finally
finished ! . . .

2/24/2008

ELF

403

Develop Good Documentation


Technology
Roadmap
Unit production
cost
and developmen
t cost
Weight and balanc
e

Three-view drawing of
preferred concept( s )
Traceability of
system driving MIRs
Sensitivity of system /
subsystem parameters
Mission flight profiles of
preferred concept( s )
Aero and propulsion
characteristics
Justification of
ept(s)
recommended conc
rnative
Sketches of alte
concepts
eighting
MIRs W

2/24/2008

ELF

404

Utilize Group Skills


Preliminary Design 8%

Detail /
Production
Design
30%

Conceptual Design 2%

Other Than
Design
60%
(Test, Analysis,
Configuration
Management, Software,
Program Management,
Integration,
Requirements,
etc.)

Source: Nicolai, L.M., Designing a Better Engineer, AIAA Aerospace America, April 1992
2/24/2008

ELF

405

Balance the Tradeoff of Importance vs Priority

Production Programs /
Detail Design
SDD Programs /
Preliminary Design

2/24/2008

ELF

Advanced Programs /
Conceptual Design

406

Evaluate Alternatives and Iterate the


Configuration Design
Define Mission Requirements
Alt Mission
Establish Baseline
Alt Baseline
Aerodynamics
Propulsion
Weight

Resize / Alt Config / Subsystems / Tech

Trajectory
Meet
Performance?

No

Yes
Measures of Merit and Constraints

No

Yes
2/24/2008

ELF

407

Configuration Sizing Conceptual Design


Guidelines: Aeromechanics
Configuration Sizing Parameter

Aeromechanics Design Guideline

Body fineness ratio


Nose fineness ratio
Boattail or flare angle
Efficient cruise dynamic pressure
Missile homing velocity
Ramjet combustion temperature
Oblique shocks prior to inlet normal
shock to satisfy MIL-E-5008B
Inlet flow capture
Ramjet Minimum cruise Mach number
Subsystems packaging

2/24/2008

ELF

5 < l / d < 25
lN / d 2 if M > 1
< 10 deg
q < 1,000 psf
VM / VT > 1.5
> 4,000 F
> 2 oblique shocks / compressions if M >
3.0, > 3 shocks / compressions if M > 3.5
Shock on cowl lip at Mmax cruise
M > 1.2 x MInletStart , M > 1.2 MMaxThrust = Drag
Maximize available volume for fuel /
propellant

408

Configuration Sizing Conceptual Design


Guidelines: Guidance & Control
Configuration Sizing Parameter

G&C Design Guideline


BB > 2 ACT
/>1
If low aspect ratio, b / d 2, c / d > 1
< 30%
< 0.2 s
n M / nT > 3
3 < N < 5
< btarget
.
.
M> T
RTM < RTT

Body bending frequency


Trim control power
Neutral stability tail-body
Stability & control cross coupling
Airframe time constant
Missile maneuverability
Proportional guidance ratio
Target span resolution by seeker
Missile heading rate
Missile turn radius

2/24/2008

ELF

409

Wrap Up ( Part 1 of 2 )
Missile design is a creative and iterative process that includes
System considerations
Missile concepts and sizing
Flight trajectory evaluation

Cost / performance drivers may be locked in during


conceptual design
Missile design is an opportunity for a diverse group to work
together for a better product
Military customer mission / scenario definition
Operations analysts system-of-systems modeling
System integration engineers launch platform integration
Missile design engineers missile concept synthesis
Technical specialists technology assessment / technology roadmap
2/24/2008

ELF

410

Wrap Up ( Part 2 )
The missile conceptual design philosophy requires
Iteration, iteration, iteration
Evaluation of a broad range of alternatives
Traceable flow-down allocation of requirements
Starting with a good baseline
Paredo sensitivity analysis to determine the most important, driving
parameters
Synergistic compromise / balanced subsystems and technologies
that are high leverage
Awareness of technology SOTA / technology assessment
Technology impact forecast
Robust design
Creative design decisions made by the designer ( not the computer )
Fast, simple, robust, physics-based prediction methods
2/24/2008

ELF

411

Outline
Introduction / Key Drivers in the Design Process
Aerodynamic Considerations in Tactical Missile Design
Propulsion Considerations in Tactical Missile Design
Weight Considerations in Tactical Missile Design
Flight Performance Considerations in Tactical Missile Design
Measures of Merit and Launch Platform Integration
Sizing Examples
Development Process
Summary and Lessons Learned
References and Communication
Appendices ( Homework Problems / Classroom Exercises,
Example of Request for Proposal, Nomenclature, Acronyms,
Conversion Factors, Syllabus )
2/24/2008

ELF

412

References
1. Missile.index, http://missile.index.ne.jp/en/
2. AIAA Aerospace Design Engineers Guide, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 1993
3. Bonney, E.A., et al, Aerodynamics, Propulsion, Structures, and Design Practice, Principles of Guided Missile Design,
D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc., 1956
4. Jerger, J.J., Systems Preliminary Design Principles of Guided Missile Design, Principles of Guided Missile Design, D.
Van Nostrand Company, Inc., 1960
5. Chin, S.S., Missile Configuration Design, McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1961
6. Mason, L.A., Devan, L., and Moore, F.G., Aerodynamic Design Manual for Tactical Weapons, NSWCTR 81-156, 1981
7. Pitts, W.C., Nielsen, J.N., and Kaattari, G.E., Lift and Center of Pressure of Wing-Body-Tail Combinations at Subsonic,
Transonic, and Supersonic Speeds, NACA Report 1307, 1957
8. Jorgensen, L.H., Prediction of Static Aerodynamic Characteristics for Space-Shuttle-Like, and Other Bodies at Angles
of Attack From 0 to 180, NASA TND 6996, January 1973
9. Hoak, D.E., et al., USAF Stability and Control DATCOM, AFWAL TR-83-3048, Global Engineering, 1978
10. Nielsen Engineering & Research (NEAR) Aerodynamic Software Products, http://www.nearinc.com/near/software.htm
11. Ashley, H., Engineering Analysis of Flight Vehicles, Dover Publications, Inc., 1974
12. Anderson, John D. Jr., Modern Compressible Flow, Second Edition, McGraw Hill, 1990
13. Kinroth, G.D. and Anderson, W.R., Ramjet Design Handbook, CPIA Pub. 319 and AFWAL TR 80-2003, June 1980
14. Technical Aerodynamics Manual, North American Rockwell Corporation, DTIC AD 723823, June 1970
15. Oswatitsch, K.L., Pressure Recovery for Missiles with Reaction Propulsion at High Supersonic Speeds, NACA TM 1140, 1947
16. Carslaw, H.S. and Jaeger, J. C., Conduction of Heat in Solids, Clarendon Press, 1988
2/24/2008

ELF

413

References ( cont )
17. Allen, J. and Eggers, A.J., A Study of the Motion and Aerodynamic Heating of Ballistic Missiles Entering the Earths
Atmosphere at High Supersonic Speeds, NACA Report 1381, April 1953.
18. Schneider, S.H., Encyclopedia of Climate and Weather, Oxford University Press, 1996
19. Klein, L.A., Millimeter-Wave and Infrared Multisensor Design and Signal Processing, Artech House, Boston, 1997
20. US Army Ordnance Pamphlet ORDP-20-290-Warheads, 1980
21. Carleone, J. (Editor), Tactical Missile Warheads, AIAA Vol. 155 Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics, American
Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 1993
22. Christman, D.R. and Gehring, J.W., Analysis of High-Velocity Projectile Penetration Mechanics, Journal of Applied
Physics, Vol. 37, 1966
23. Heaston, R.J. and Smoots, C.W., Precision Guided Munitions, GACIAC Report HB-83-01, May 1983
24. Donatelli, G.A. and Fleeman, E.L., Methodology for Predicting Miss Distance for Air Launched Missiles, AIAA-820364, January 1982
25. Bennett, R.R. and Mathews, W.E., Analytical Determination of Miss Distances for Linear Homing Navigation
Systems, Hughes Tech Memo 260, 31 March 1952
26. Nicholas, T. and Rossi, R., US Missile Data Book, 1996, Data Search Associates, 1996
27. Bithell, R.A. and Stoner, R.C., Rapid Approach for Missile Synthesis, AFWAL TR 81-3022, March 1982
28. Fleeman, E.L. and Donatelli, G.A., Conceptual Design Procedure Applied to a Typical Air-Launched Missile, AIAA 811688, August 1981
29. Hindes, J.W., Advanced Design of Aerodynamic Missiles ( ADAM ), October 1993
30. Frits, A.P., et al, A Conceptual Sizing Tool for Tactical Missiles, AIAA Missile Sciences Conference, November 2002
31. Bruns, K.D., Moore, M.E., Stoy, S.L., Vukelich, S.R., and Blake, W.B., Missile DATCOM, AFWAL-TR-91-3039, April
1991
2/24/2008

ELF

414

References ( cont )
32. Moore, F.G., et al, The 2002 Version of the Aeroprediction Code, Naval Surface Warfare Warfare Center, March 2002
33. Nicolai, L.M., Designing a Better Engineer, AIAA Aerospace America, April 1992

2/24/2008

ELF

415

Bibliography of Other Reports and Web Sites


System Design
Fleeman, E.L., Tactical Missile Design, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2006
DoD Index of Specifications and Standards, http://stinet.dtic.mil/str/dodiss.html
Periscope, http://www.periscope1.com/
Defense Technical Information Center, http://www.dtic.mil/
NATO Research & Technology Organisation, http://www.rta.nato.int/
Missile System Flight Mechanics, AGARD CP270, May 1979
Hogan, J.C., et al., Missile Automated Design ( MAD ) Computer Program, AFRPL TR 80-21, March 1980
Rapp, G.H., Performance Improvements With Sidewinder Missile Airframe, AIAA Paper 79-0091, January 1979
Nicolai, L.M., Fundamentals of Aircraft Design, METS, Inc., 1984
Lindsey, G.H. and Redman, D.R., Tactical Missile Design, Naval Postgraduate School, 1986
Lee, R.G., et al, Guided Weapons, Third Edition, Brasseys, 1998
Giragosian, P.A., Rapid Synthesis for Evaluating Missile Maneuverability Parameters, 10th AIAA Applied
Aerodynamics Conference, June 1992
Fleeman, E.L. Aeromechanics Technologies for Tactical and Strategic Guided Missiles, AGARD Paper
presented at FMP Meeting in London, England, May 1979
Raymer, D.P., Aircraft Design, A Conceptual Approach, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 1989
Ball, R.E., The Fundamentals of Aircraft Combat Survivability Analysis and Design, American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, 1985
National Defense Preparedness Association Conference Presentations, http://www.dtic.mil/ndia

2/24/2008

ELF

416

Bibliography of Other Reports and Web Sites ( cont )


System Design ( continued )
Eichblatt, E.J., Test and Evaluation of the Tactical Missile, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
1989
Aircraft Stores Interface Manual (ASIM), http://akss.dau.mil/software/1.jsp
Advanced Sidewinder Missile AIM-9X Cost Analysis Requirements Description (CARD),
http://deskbook.dau.mil/jsp/default.jsp
Wertz, J.R and Larson W.J., Space Mission Analysis and Design, Microprism Press and Kluwer Academic
Publishers, 1999
Directory of U.S. Military Rockets and Missiles, http://www.designation-systems.net/
Fleeman, E.L., et al, Technologies for Future Precision Strike Missile Systems, NATO RTO EN-018, July 2001
The Ordnance Shop, http://www.ordnance.org/portal/
Conversion Factors by Sandelius Instruments, http://www.sandelius.com/reference/conversions.htm
Defense Acquisition Guidebook, http://akss.dau.mil/dag/
Aerodynamics
A Digital Library for NACA, http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/
Briggs, M.M., Systematic Tactical Missile Design, Tactical Missile Aerodynamics: General Topics, AIAA Vol.
141 Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics, American Institute of Aeronautics, 1992
Briggs, M.M., et al., Aeromechanics Survey and Evaluation, Vol. 1-3, NSWC/DL TR-3772, October 1977
Missile Aerodynamics, NATO AGARD LS-98, February 1979
Missile Aerodynamics, NATO AGARD CP-336, February 1983
Missile Aerodynamics, NATO AGARD CP-493, April 1990
Missile Aerodynamics, NATO RTO-MP-5, November 1998
Nielsen, J.N., Missile Aerodynamics, McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1960
2/24/2008

ELF

417

Bibliography of Other Reports and Web Sites ( cont )


Aerodynamics ( continued )
Mendenhall, M.R. et al, Proceedings of NEAR Conference on Missile Aerodynamics, NEAR, 1989
Nielsen, J.N., Missile Aerodynamics Past, Present, Future, AIAA Paper 79-1818, 1979
Dillenius, M.F.E., et al, Engineering-, Intermediate-, and High-Level Aerodynamic Prediction Methods and
Applications, Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, Vol. 36, No. 5, September-October, 1999
Nielsen, J.N., and Pitts, W.C., Wing-Body Interference at Supersonic Speeds with an Application to
Combinations with Rectangular Wings, NACA Tech. Note 2677, 1952
Spreiter, J.R., The Aerodynamic Forces on Slender Plane-and Cruciform-Wing and Body Combinations, NACA
Report 962, 1950
Simon, J.M., et al, Missile DATCOM: High Angle of Attack Capabilities, AIAA-99-4258
Burns, K.A., et al, Viscous Effects on Complex Configurations, WL-TR-95-3060, 1995
Lesieutre, D., et al, Recent Applications and Improvements to the Engineering-Level Aerodynamic Prediction
Software MISL3, AIAA-2002-0274
Moore, F.G., Approximate Methods for Weapon Aerodynamics, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, 2000
1976 Standard Atmosphere Calculator, http://www.digitaldutch.com/atmoscalc/
Compressible Aerodynamics Calculator, http://www.aoe.vt.edu/~devenpor/aoe3114/calc.html
Ashley, H. and Landahl, M., Aerodynamics of Wings and Bodies, Dover Publications, 1965
John, James E.A., Gas Dynamics, Second Edition, Prentice Hall, 1984
Zucker, Robert D., Fundamentals of Gas Dynamics, Matrix Publishers, 1977
Propulsion
Chemical Information Propulsion Agency, http://www.cpia.jhu.edu/
St. Peter, J., The History of Aircraft Gas Turbine Engine Development in the United States: A Tradition of
Excellence, ASME International Gas Turbine Institute, 1999
2/24/2008

ELF

418

Bibliography of Other Reports and Web Sites ( cont )


Propulsion ( continued )
Mahoney, J.J., Inlets for Supersonic Missiles, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 1990
Sutton, G.P., Rocket Propulsion Elements, John Wiley & Sons, 1986
Tri-Service Rocket Motor Trade-off Study, Missile Designers Rocket Motor handbook, CPIA 322, May 1980
Humble, R.W., Henry, G.N., and Larson, W.J., Space Propulsion Analysis and Design, McGraw-Hill, 1995
Jenson, G.E. and Netzer, D.W., Tactical Missile Propulsion, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
1996
Durham, F.P., Aircraft Jet Powerplants, Prentice-Hall, 1961
Bathie, W.W., Fundamentals of Gas Turbines, John Wiley and Sons, 1996
Hill, P.G. and Peterson, C.R., Mechanics and Thermodynamics of Propulsion, Addison-Weshley Publishing
Company, 1970
Mattingly, J.D., et al, Aircraft Engine Design, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 1987
Materials and Heat Transfer
Budinski, K.G. and Budinski, M.K., Engineering Materials Properties and Selection, Prentice Hall, 1999
Matwebs Material Properties Index Page, http://www.matweb.com
NASA Ames Research Center Thermal Protection Systems Expert (TPSX) and Material Properties Database,
http://tpsx.arc.nasa.gov/tpsxhome.shtml
Harris, D.C., Materials for Infrared Windows and Domes, SPIE Optical Engineering Press, 1999
Kalpakjian, S., Manufacturing Processes for Engineering Materials, Addison Wesley, 1997
MIL-HDBK-5J, Metallic Materials and Elements for Aerospace Vehicle Structures, Jan 2003
Metallic Material Properties Development and Standardization ( MMPDS ), http://www.mmpds.org

2/24/2008

ELF

419

Bibliography of Other Reports and Web Sites ( cont )


Materials and Heat Transfer ( continued )
Mallick, P.K., Fiber-Reinforced Composites: Materials, Manufacturing, and Design, Second Edition, Maecel
Dekker, 1993
Chapman, A.J., Heat Transfer, Third Edition, Macmillan Publishing Company, 1974
Incropera, F.P. and DeWitt, D.P., Fundamentals of Heat and Mass Transfer, Fourth Edition, John Wiley and
Sons, 1996
Guidance, Navigation, Control, and Sensors
Zarchan, P., Tactical and Strategic Missile Guidance, AIAA Vol. 124 Progress in Astronautics and
Aeronautics, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 1990
Proceedings of AGARD G&C Conference on Guidance & Control of Tactical Missiles, AGARD LS-52, May 1972
Garnell, P., Guided Weapon Control Systems, Pergamon Press, 1980
Locke, A. S., Guidance, Principles of Guided Missile Design, D. Van Nostrand, 1955
Blakelock, J. H., Automatic Control of Aircraft and Missiles, John Wiley & Sons, 1965
Lawrence, A.L., Modern Inertial Technology, Springer, 1998
Siouris, G.M., Aerospace Avionics Systems, Academic Press, 1993
Stimson, G.W., Introduction to Airborne Radar, SciTech Publishing, 1998
Lecomme, P., Hardange, J.P., Marchais, J.C., and Normant, E., Air and Spaceborne Radar Systems, SciTech
Publishing and William Andrew Publishing, 2001
Wehner, D.R., High-Resolution Radar, Artech House, Norwood, MA, 1995
Donati, S., Photodetectors, Prentice-Hall, 2000
Jha, A.R., Infrared Technology, John Wiley and Sons, 2000
Schlessinger, M., Infrared Technology Fundamentals, Marcel Decker, 1995

2/24/2008

ELF

420

Follow-up Communication
I would appreciate receiving your comments and
corrections on this text, as well as any data,
examples, or references that you may offer.
Thank you,
Gene Fleeman
Tactical Missile Design
E-mail: GeneFleeman@msn.com
Web Site: http://genefleeman.home.mindspring.com

2/24/2008

ELF

421

Outline
Introduction / Key Drivers in the Design Process
Aerodynamic Considerations in Tactical Missile Design
Propulsion Considerations in Tactical Missile Design
Weight Considerations in Tactical Missile Design
Flight Performance Considerations in Tactical Missile Design
Measures of Merit and Launch Platform Integration
Sizing Examples
Development Process
Summary and Lessons Learned
References and Communication
Appendices ( Homework Problems / Classroom Exercises,
Example of Request for Proposal, Nomenclature, Acronyms,
Conversion Factors, Syllabus )
2/24/2008

ELF

422