Core-mounted target-type thrust reverser (CMTTTR) design was proposed by NASA in the second half of the 90 s. NASA carried out several experiments at static conditions, and their acquired results suggested that the performance characteristics of the CMTTTR design fall short to comply with the mandatory thrust reverser (TR) performance criteria, and were therefore regarded as an infeasible design. However, the authors of this paper believe that the results presented by NASA for the CMTTTR design require further exploration to facilitate the complete understanding of its true performance potential. This part 2 paper is a continuation from Part 1 (reverser stowed configuration) and presents a comprehensive three-dimensional (3D) computational fluid dynamics (CFD) analyses of the CMTTTR in deployed configuration. The acquired results are extensively analyzed for aforementioned TR configuration operating under the static operating conditions at sea level, i.e., sea-level static, International Standard Atmosphere (ISA); the analyses at forward flight conditions will be covered in part 3. The key objectives of this paper are: First, to validate the acquired CFD results with the experimental data provided by NASA; this is achieved by measuring the static pressure values on various surfaces of the deployed CMTTTR model. The second objective is to estimate the performance characteristics of the CMTTTR design and corroborate the results with experimental data. The third objective is to estimate the pressure thrust (i.e., axial thrust generated due to the pressure difference across various reverser surfaces) and discuss its significance for formulating the performance of any TR design. The fourth objective is to investigate the influence of kicker plate installation on overall TR performance. The fifth and final objective is to examine and discuss the overall flow physics associated with the thrust reverse under deployed configuration.

References

References
1.
Scott
,
C. A.
, 2000, “Static Performance of Six Innovative Thrust Reverser Concepts for Subsonic Transport Applications: Summary of the NASA Langley Innovative Thrust Reverser Test Program,” NASA Langley Research Centre, Hampton, VA, Report No.
TM-2000-210300
.
2.
Mahmood, T.
,
Jackson, A.
,
Sethi, V.
,
Khanal, B.
, and
Ali, F.
, 2018, “
Computational Fluid Dynamics Investigation of a Core-Mounted-Target-Type Thrust Reverser—Part 1: Reverser Stowed Configuration
,”
ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbine and Power
(accepted).
3.
Chuck
,
C.
,
2001
, “Computational Procedure for Complex Three-Dimensional Geometries Including Thrust Reverser Effluxes and APUs,”
AIAA
Paper No. 2001-3747.
4.
Andrade
,
F. O.
,
Ferreira
,
S. B.
,
Silva
,
L. F. F.
,
Jesus
,
A. A. B.
, and
Oliveira
,
G. L.
,
2006
, “Study of the Influence of Aircraft Geometry on the Computed Flowfield During Thrust Reversers Operation,”
AIAA
Paper No. 2006-3673.
5.
Trapp
,
L. G.
, and
Oliveira
,
G. L.
,
2003
, “Aircraft Thrust Reverser Cascade Configuration Evaluation Through CFD,”
AIAA
Paper No. 2003-723.
6.
Turpin
,
G.
,
Vuillot
,
F.
,
Croisy
,
C.
,
Bernier
,
D.
, and
Mabboux
,
G.
, “Numerical Simulation of Thrust Reverser for Rear Mounted Engine,” Snecma, Safran Group, Courcouronnes, France.
7.
ANSYS, 2011, “ANSYS FLUENT User's Guide,” Release 14.0., ANSYS Inc., Canonsburg, PA.
You do not currently have access to this content.