See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/285641776

Numerical studies of infrared signature levels of complete aircraft

Article  in  Aeronautical Journal -New Series- · April 2001

DOI: 10.1017/S0001924000025422

CITATIONS READS
39 624

4 authors, including:

Shripad P. Mahulikar Shrikrishna Sane

Indian Institute of Technology Bombay Indian Institute of Technology Bombay
88 PUBLICATIONS   1,395 CITATIONS    17 PUBLICATIONS   115 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Uday Gaitonde
Indian Institute of Technology Bombay
19 PUBLICATIONS   515 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Infrared Signature of Aircraft View project

IR stealth technology View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Shripad P. Mahulikar on 07 July 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

T HE A ERONAUTICAL JOURNAL APRIL 2001 number

Numerical studies of infrared signature levels

of complete aircraft
S. P. Mahulikar, S. K. Sane, U. N. Gaitonde† and A. G. Marathe
Department of Aerospace Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology
Bombay, India

ABSTRACT
This paper begins with an outline of the procedure for predicting the γ ratio of specific heats for air
infrared signature emissions from the airframe, engine casing, and λ wavelength of infrared radiation (m)
the plume, and their attenuation by the intervening atmosphere. σ Stephan-Boltzmann constant (5·67 × 10– 8 Wm– 2K– 4)
These emissions are contrasted against the background, to obtain the τ transmissivity
infrared signature levels. The infrared detector’s — noise equivalent
flux density, is proposed as an operational constraint on the flight
envelope. The shift of this newly imposed constraint on the flight en-
velope for several engine-operating conditions, and for turbojet and
Subscripts
turbofan engines is studied. The signature levels from the casing and ac aircraft
plume, of a turbofan and equivalent turbojet engine, are compared at af airframe
different operating points on the flight envelope. Result in the form atmos atmosphere
of a polar plot of infrared signature level variation with aspect is also aw adiabatic wall
examined for low flying missions. The results are analysed to direct bk background
stealth design and operation. cas exposed engine casing
d infrared detector
en engine’s visible internal hot parts
hp hot parts
NOMENCLATURE i referring to i th element in discretisation
As surface area of discretised volume of plume (m2) l referring to local parameter of flow, at boundary layer
C molar concentration of radiation participating gas (moles/lit.) edge in Equation (1.1)
h convective heat transfer coefficient (W/m2K) ne nozzle exit
H aircraft altitude (m) net actual IR signature level
I level of IR signature in infrared detector’s wavelength pl plume
band (Wm– 2) sky referring to sky parameter
L length of line of sight between aircraft and infrared T total instantaneous field of view
detector (m) ¥ ambient
Lb m mean beam length of volume enclosing gases (m)
M Mach number
N number of discretised elements Abbreviations
P total pressure [Pa]
q″ infrared heat flux from source as incident on detector (Wm– 2) IR infrared
r local radius of isothermal surface on plume in Fig. 3 (m) LPT low pressure turbine
rf recovery factor in Equation (1.1) NEFD noise equivalent flux density (Wm– 2)
T temperature (K) TFE/TJE turbofan/turbojet engine
V discretised volume of plume (m3)
x axial distance in plume measured from nozzle exit in
Fig. 3 (m) 1.0 INTRODUCTION
α fuel–air ratio by mass
β angle made by line of sight between detector and aircraft The incorporation of stealth features in military aircraft design is
with vertical (deg–rad) meant for deceiving the active and passive means of surveillance and
ε emissivity tracking, for enhancing the survivability of aircraft in a man-made

Paper No. 2590. Manuscript received 23 October 2000, accepted 18 December 2000.
†Department of Mechanical Engineering.
number THE A ERONAUTICAL JOURNAL
hostile environment. Although certain considerations based on
stealth were much earlier being incorporated, starting from WW2,
they were regarded as secondary issues, the traditional aspects of air-
craft design being the primary considerations. However, the wisdom
acquired through the experience in warfare has emphasised the im-
portance of incorporating survivability enhancement stealth features
as primary considerations in military aircraft design(1-4), even if
stealth features lead to a lower mission attainment measure, due to
sacrifice in aircraft performance. In the past two decades, an increas-
ing number of military aircraft are completely tailored by stealth
considerations.
1.1 Infrared detection
Infrared-guided surface-to-air missiles have been responsible for
several air combat losses, since their introduction, more than 30
years ago. The inherent advantages of passive detection, and the en-
hanced sensitivities and robustness of infrared (IR) detectors after
the invention of tri-metal photon detectors such as mercury-cadmi-
um-telluride or lead-tin-telluride (5-8), have further enhanced the pop-
ularity of IR detection. In these semiconductor based photon detec-
tors, the incident IR radiation induces an electronic transition, which
leads to a change in electrical conductivity (as in photoconductive
detectors) or a change in an output voltage appearing across the ter-
minals (as in photovoltaic detectors). Though IR radiation covers the
wavelength band, 0·77-1,000µm, only two thin slits, viz, 3-5 and
8-12µm, called the first and second atmospheric windows, respec-
tively, are used for surveillance and tracking. From Wien’s Displace-
ment Law, the 3-5µm band corresponds to a relatively higher peak
emission temperature (~452°C) as compared to the 8-12µm band
(~17°C). Hence, the 3-5µm band is generally used for tracking a
missile on to the smaller hot spots of an aircraft, and the 8-12µm
band can also be used for surveillance of the sky, due to higher emis-
sion of larger surface areas at relatively lower temperatures than the
hot spots. The tri-metal photon detectors provide excellent perfor-
mance in the second atmospheric window, and they offer the impor-
tant advantage that they have much less stringent cooling require-
ments, typically 77K, as against 20K for other photon detectors
sensitive in this wavelength band. The photoconductive response of
intrinsic photon detectors may be extended to longer wavelengths, to
cover the complete wavelength band in the second atmospheric win-
dow, by doping with impurities such as germanium, silicon, indium
antimonide, and germanium-silicon alloys(9). Bode and Graham(10)
have compared the performance characteristics and cooling require-
ments of copper-doped germanium and mercury-doped germanium
detectors, in the 8-14µm atmospheric window.
The basic principle of IR detection is discrimination of the aircraft
IR heat flux emission in the detector’s wavelength band with the
background IR heat flux emission (atmospheric emission and/or so-
lar radiation). The emission of IR radiation from various sources in
an aircraft, the attenuation by the intervening atmosphere, and the
resulting interception by the enemy, inadvertently leading to self-be-
trayal by the aircraft in a hostile environment, is elaborated by
Howe(11), in the descriptive article. Howe has also discussed means
of reducing IR emissions, and active stealth techniques like the use
of IR jammers, expendable flare decoys, and towed decoys, to avoid
detection and tracking. However, these active techniques are effec-
tive only if the passive emissions from the aircraft are significantly
lower than the active emission from the decoy. Furthermore, due to
the significantly higher velocities of IR seeking missiles, the aircraft
pilot may not get an opportunity to utilise active stealth techniques.
The IR signature levels are strongly determined by the extent of
atmospheric absorption and scattering, jointly termed as attenuation.
Studies giving an approximate dependence of transmission of IR
radiation through the Earth’s atmosphere on the concentration and
distribution of radiation participating gases have been done, for
instance by Larmore(12).
APRIL 2001
1.2 Models for IR signatures
The benefits experienced by US Army in modelling background area
in the instantaneous field of view of the IR detector have been exam-
ined by Gonda and Gerhart (13). Future modelling directions are also
proposed. Kaushal(14) has presented methods for visualising IR sig-
nature measurements taken around an object from several observa-
tion angles, by varying orientation and elevation angles. These mea-
surements are visualised in the form of a signature globe and ring
chart. These visualisation techniques were contrasted with standard
charting methods, and shown to provide a clear picture of the overall
IR signature of the object, thereby supplementing the standard chart-
ing methods significantly. Dash et al(15) have numerically discussed
the specific contributions of various gas dynamic processes, like in-
viscid–shock and mixing–afterburning, affecting rocket exhaust
plume structure in the altitude range, 0-60km, in terms of their rela-
tive influence on plume IR signature predictions. It should be noted
that the nozzle exit velocities of rocket engines are supersonic, and
generally much higher than those in aircraft engine nozzle exits.
Hence, shock structure is expected to play a significant role in plume
characterisation, and IR signature levels. Dash et al have shown that
the spatial details of the near field inviscid–shock structure in rocket
plumes, significantly affect IR signature levels at higher altitudes
(30–40km). The sensitivities of rocket plume IR emission to varia-
tions in turbulence modeling parameters are presented for flight IR
signature studies. They have demonstrated that under all conditions,
turbulent mixing processes play a dominant role in the prediction of
plume IR signature levels, in rockets. However, Dash and
Pergament(16) have suggested based on their numerical results that at
lower altitudes, typical of aircraft operation, these details provide an
insignificant contribution to plume IR signatures.
There are a few reported models, which provide the IR signature
level of ships. For instance, Zhong and Dai (17) have discussed the
effects of scale factor on IR signature level of the exhaust system,
and resistance to flow due to IR signature suppression devices, on
the basis of scale model tests. Accordingly, estimates of these para-
meters were provided for real ship exhaust systems. Vaitekunas et
al(18) have presented an integrated naval IR target, flare countermea-
sure, and threat model, to provide the tools necessary to develop and
assess the effectiveness of IR signature suppression and countermea-
sures. The IR seeking missile model was constructed from a mini-
mum number of parameters, to keep the model generic, and still pro-
vide a reasonable estimate of IR susceptibility. Schleijpen(19)
calculated the IR signature level of a generic frigate, with and with-
out signature reduction. These signature levels were used to deter-
mine the lock-on range of generic IR seeker heads of anti-ship
missiles.
The IR signatures generated by the kinetically heated flow around
re-entry vehicles, and the high temperature wake that is formed
behind the vehicle, are now being seriously investigated for detec-
tion and subsequent tracking of long-range missiles for their inter-
ception, by tracing the path and projecting its course. As an illustra-
tion of research in this direction, Caledonia (20) has predicted the
non-equilibrium two-dimensional IR signatures in the laminar and
turbulent wakes of re-entry vehicles, over the altitude range of
38-69km. Caledonia has also prepared a model to describe the radia-
tive behaviour of small solid particles that are injected into this
wake, as a result of re-solidification of evaporated ablative material.
1.3 Survey inference
The above survey covered several areas that play their role in IR
signature studies of self-propelled vehicles, and their applications. It
is deduced that comprehensive numerical studies on IR signature
levels of the complete aircraft in the detectors wavelength band are
very limited. It should be noted that numerical experiments have ob-
vious advantages, due to the comfort of varying several design para-
meters, to lead to optimum design for infrared emission camouflage.
Also, there seems to be a dearth of reported studies that illustrate
M AHULIKAR ET AL NUMERICAL STUDIES OF INFRARED SIGNATURE LEVELS OF COMPLETE AIRCRAFT number

methods for presenting comprehensive results for IR signature level
studies of aircraft for several operating points, followed by an analy-
sis and interpretation of such results. This paper begins by an outline
of the numerical procedure used for obtaining the IR signature level
of a complete aircraft in the 8-12µm window, as seen by an IR de-
tector at the ground level. Comprehensive results are presented for
various engine-operating conditions and for two different engines.
2.1 Estimation of q ″af,hp
The steady state temperature of the airframe is determined by a bal-
ance of the convective heat input (due to the high freestream recov-
ery temperature at high Mach numbers), and radiation loss to the
sky, which is given by the non-linear Equation (1) for all the discre-
tised surface elements of the airframe.

hi⋅(Taw,i – Taf,i) = ε af,i⋅σ⋅ (Taf,i

4
– T4sky ) . . . (1)
2.0 PROCEDURE FOR IR SIGNATURE where
LEVEL PREDICTION
 γ −1 2 
The IR signature level depends on the intensity of IR heat flux in the Taw,i = Tl,i ·1 + r f,l,i · ·M l,i  . . . (1.1)
detector's wavelength band emitted by various components of the  2 
aircraft, position of the aircraft with respect to the detector, the
intensity that is attenuated by the intervening atmosphere, and the The heat transfer coefficients over the entire airframe surface are ob-
intensity of IR heat flux of the background emission. Figure 1 sum- tained from the appropriate correlations for Nusselt number for vari-
marises the general procedure for calculating the total IR signature ous geometries and flow conditions, in Truitt (21). The local parame-
level of aircraft. ters in Equation (1.1) are obtained by a flow-solver routine, the
The only approach to deceive IR detectors is to reduce the emitted Panel Code, and by using the properties of International Standard
IR signature to a level, noise equivalent flux density (NEFD), Atmosphere. Once the temperature distribution is thus obtained, the
below which the detector confuses the IR signature level from the IR radiation emitted in the 8-12µm band is obtained from the
aircraft with the noise, so that the use of active techniques like towed Planck’s Law. The intensity incident on the detector is then obtained
decoy or expendable flare is effective. Since IR emission camouflage using the view factor between the airframe and detector surfaces,
may not always be feasible during operation, it is best incorporated which is approximated based on large length of line of sight as com-
at the aircraft design stage itself. Aircraft design is a multidiscipli- pared to the dimensions of the two surfaces. The final expression for
nary optimisation process; design defining the feasible space avail- q″af,hp is given as,
able for operation on the flight envelope, plotted on altitude (H) ver-
sus Mach number (M), the conventional boundaries being the   
structural, aerodynamic, and engine power related constraints. This  12µm  
2C · ô · Cos(â d )  d λ  · dAaf
paper demonstrates the introduction of NEFD as one of the con- q ′′ af,hp= 1 atmos2 ·∫ å af · Cos(â af ) · ∫ 
L  
8µm λ · exp C   
  2 λ · Taf  − 1 
A 5
straints defining this feasible operating space, for aircraft to be oper- 
af

ated in a man-made hostile environment.       

As shown in Fig. 1, aircraft IR signature level is contributed by
several components of the aircraft. The airframe contributes due to
kinetic heating (Iaf,hp), the exposed engine casing due to multimode
heat transfer from the hot turbine exhaust flow (Icas,hp), and gas radia-
tion from the engine exhaust plume (Ipl). The intervening atmosphere
attenuates the IR signature level (characterised by τatmos). For IR
signature studies, the contributions from each component, and the
extent of atmospheric attenuation, has to be predicted.
. . . (2)
In Equation (2), the constants, C1 and C2 are empirically obtained,
and their values are given in most standard references, as for
instance in Siegel and Howell(22), as C1 = 0·596 × 10– 1 6Wm2, and C2
= 0·014387mK. The angles, β af and βd, are the angles made by the
line of sight, with the local normal to the airframe’s elemental area,
dAaf, and with the normal to the detector, respectively. The angle,
β af, is retained inside the area integral over the exposed surface of
the airframe, Aaf, to account for the fact that the exposed area of the
airframe is not necessarily flat. Both integrals in Equation (1) are nu-
merically evaluated. The inner wavelength integral is evaluated by
the trapezoidal rule, and then the outer integral over the airframe
area is evaluated as a summation over the entire exposed airframe
surface, discretised into areas of constant Taf,i, ε af,i, and β af,i.

2.2 Estimation of q ″cas,hp and q″en,hp

The engine casing temperature is obtained from a steady-state multi-
mode heat transfer modeling of the engine layout that commences
from the last stage turbine exit plane onwards up to the nozzle exit.
A typical turbojet engine layout for heat transfer modelling is illus-
trated in Fig. 2. It consists of three coaxial ducts, with gas flows

Figure 1. General procedure for aircraft emitted IR signature level

calculation. Figure 2. Typical TJE layout for multimode heat transfer modelling.
number THE A ERONAUTICAL JOURNAL
through the core and annuli, and freestream flow over the outermost
duct, which is the exposed engine casing. The innermost duct is the
jet nozzle, through which flow the hot combustion products. The
second duct is the shroud in a turbojet engine that acts like a radia-
tion shield, or the bypass duct in a turbofan engine. The annulus
flow is the ram flow in a turbojet engine, or bypass flow in a turbo-
fan engine.
The source of heat are the hot combustion products entering the
jet nozzle, and the freestream flow is expected to be the ultimate
convection heat sink for low velocities of the aircraft, and the sky is
the radiation heat sink. The large length of the jet nozzle (~2m)
results in a large circumferential heat transfer area that elevates the
exposed engine casing temperature above the ambient, resulting in
IR detection.
Generally, the ducts have Biot numbers that are less than 0·1, as
they are relatively thin. Hence, radial conduction need not be mod-
elled, as the outer and inner surface temperatures of the duct are
nearly the same, due to insignificant conduction resistance offered
by the ducts in the radial direction. Further, since the Nusselt num-
bers are generally high due to turbulent flows, temperature change
due to axial conduction through the ducts is negligible as compared
to the axial temperature change due to convection, which implies
that relative to convection resistance, the axial conduction resistance
of the ducts is practically infinite. These points imply that heat con-
duction modeling through the ducts can be safely eliminated. Due to
the highly turbulent nature of gas flows, they are well mixed in the
radial and circumferential directions. Hence, the variation of temper-
atures of the flows and ducts are modeled only axially.
As the temperature of the hot jet flow is high (~1,900K with after-
burner and ~1,000K in the dry mode), surface radiation interchange
becomes significant. Preliminary analyses show that temperature
predictions ignoring surface radiation interchange are meaningless,
even in the dry mode. The trickiest part in surface radiation model-
ling is the estimation of radiation view factors for discretised sur-
faces of the engine layout, in particular, those that involve obstruct-
ing surfaces. To enable analytical solutions for radiation view factors
for all the discretised surfaces, the engine layout is approximated to
three equivalent coaxial cylinders. Also, use of standard geometry of
cylinders generalises the radiation model, since a wider range of
engine geometries can be fitted into this standard geometry, rather
than solving for a specific engine geometry with the complete geo-
metrical details.
The convection boundary conditions are the gas inlet temperatures
and pressures, the freestream parameters, and the convective heat
transfer coefficients. The radiation boundary conditions are the emis-
sivities of all the surfaces, the temperatures of the inlet and exit discs
defining the enclosures, and the sky temperature, which is also the
temperature of the exit discs. Steady state forced convective heat
transfer is modeled in the inner passages and over the outer cylinder,
in conjunction with radiation interchange between the surfaces and
radiation heat loss to the sky from the outer surface of the outer
cylinder and through the exit discs.
Analytical solution is ruled out due to joint radiation and convec-
tion, resulting in a non-linear system. Hence, the engine layout is
axially discretised in to a variable number of elements, Ncas. The
temperature of a gas or wall is assumed constant within an element.
Hence, the outcome of the modeling is a step axial variation in gas
and fluid temperatures, and like any other numerical technique, ana-
lytical solution is expected, as Ncas → ∞. The temperature of gas
flows and ducts within an element are assigned at their centre points.
Axial discretisation of the engine layout leads to discretised
surface elements for surface radiation interchange modeling. As for
instance, inner surfaces of cylinder elements in the presence of an
obstructing coaxial cylinder of smaller radius, and inner cylindrical
surface element of larger radius to outer coaxial surface element of
smaller radius, see each other. The view factors for all relevant
geometries are analytically obtained by following a derived view
factor algebra sequence. View factors are best when obtained analyt-
ically, since the view factor is a double area integral or a quadruple
APRIL 2001
line integral. Hence, by numerical methods, the amount of computa-
tion time increases substantially with accuracy. Further, the benefits
of accuracy gained by higher levels of discretisation can be lost by
rounding-off errors. This holds for a single view factor, and also
when a large number of view factors are required when the engine is
axially discretised into a large number of elements, to obtain finer
temperature distribution.
It is re-emphasised that for engine casing temperature prediction,
the calculation of crucial components like view factors, and convec-
tive and radiative heat flow rates, for all the surfaces in the discre-
tised engine layout, is in situ, and not external. The governing con-
vective and radiative heat transfer equations are solved
simultaneously with the steady flow energy equations for internal
flows, by the Newton-Raphson method approximated for diagonal
dominance of the Jacobian matrix, to give the steady state axial tem-
perature distribution of the three internal fluid flows and walls. The
numerical procedure has been checked for convergence, by monitor-
ing the convergence of centre element temperatures of the three
walls and fluids, as Ncas is increased for odd values, up to 199.
These temperatures have also been experimentally validated. Once
the temperature distribution of the casing is known, its IR signature
level is obtained by following the same procedure outlined in the
previous sub-section (2.1), for airframe.
2.3 Estimation of q ″pl
The engine exhaust plume can be a significant contributor of IR sig-
nature, particularly in the afterburner mode. Prediction of IR signa-
ture level of the plume involves two steps. First, the plume is charac-
terised, i.e. the temperature and concentration of radiation
participating gases, mainly CO2 and H2O (vap), is determined. The
estimation of plume structure by itself is a multifaceted exercise, as
can be appreciated by the research of Dash et al(15), and Dash and
Pergament(16). The morphology of the plume depends upon a number
of parameters at the nozzle exit and freestream, and the nozzle exit
diameter. Since the objective of the present paper is to study the
variation of the infrared signature level of the complete aircraft, and
not to focus specifically on the details of plume radiation, the plume
is characterised by an approximate method that generates quick
results for an extensive study of IR signature levels. For circular noz-
zle exit and hence axisymmetric plume, and neglecting the effect of
a generally much weaker shock structure, if any, at aircraft engine
nozzle exit on the plume structure (as explicitly mentioned by, Dash
and Pergament(16)), the approximate correlation for the plume
temperature distribution is obtained from Spalding(23), by an analogy
between the mixing of nozzle exit and freestream flows in a plume,
and mixing of core gaseous fuel flow and freestream gaseous oxidiz-
er flow.
Once the plume is characterised, the temperature range between
the nozzle exit and ambient, Tne – T∞, is discretised into Npl parts,
giving Npl isothermal surfaces, whose values starting from nozzle
exit and rearward are: Tne, Tne – (Tne – T∞)/Npl, Tne – 2(Tne – T∞)/Npl,
…., Tne – (Tne – T∞) ⋅ (1 – 1/Npl). Figure 3 shows the generated
isothermal surfaces in a plume, for a typical case with the afterburner
mode, for which, Tne = 1,653K, T∞ = 285K, Pne = 2⋅4bar, P∞ =
0⋅9bar, V ne = 795ms– 1, and V ∞ = 390ms– 1. The discretised volume en-
closed between two isothermal surfaces is assigned the average tem-
perature of the two bounding surfaces, giving Npl discretised isother-
mal volumes, whose values are: Tne , Tne – (Tne – T∞)/(2Npl), Tne –
3(Tne – T∞)/(2Npl ), …., Tne – (Tne – T∞)⋅[1 – 3/(2Npl)]. The concentra-
tion of radiation participating gases, CO2 and H2O (vap), is obtained
by assuming the Schmidt number to be unity, which is true for most
gases and their mixtures. Hence, isothermal zones are the same as
iso-concentration zones, and the concentration of the gases at any
point on the plume is obtained from a simple linear relationship with
temperature as,
C = Cne ⋅ (T – T∞)/(Tne – T∞). . . . (3)
 M AHULIKAR ET AL NUMERICAL STUDIES OF INFRARED SIGNATURE
Figure 3. Generated isothermal surfaces on plume in typical afterburner mode.
From the concentrations, the mole fractions and then the partial pres-
sures are obtained. The mean beam length of the gases enclosed in a
discrete isothermal volume for negligible self-absorption, i.e. in the
optically thin limit is first obtained, and then a correction factor of
0·9 is applied for self-absorption, to give the expression as(22),
Lb m = 3·6V/A s . . . (4)
Using partial pressures and mean beam length, the emissivity of each
discretised volume is obtained from Hottel’s Charts(22). Alternative-
ly, when the pressure in the discretised volumes is lower than
500kPa (5bar) and the ratio of the combustion generated products to
the freestream products in the volume corresponds to an equivalent
lean fuel–air ratio, which is generally the case, an alternative expres-
sion for emissivity is used, which given in Lefebvre(24) as,
– 1⋅5
ε pl,i = 1 - exp[–290P i⋅(αi ⋅Lb m)0⋅5⋅Tpl,i ] . . . (5)
The transmissivity of the enclosed gases is calculated from the emis-
sivity, using Kirchoff’s Law. The IR radiation emerging out of the
plume from each discretised volume is obtained after estimating the
amount absorbed by the outer enclosing volumes, which is the basis
of the onion–peel method for plume IR radiation.
2.4 Estimation of τatmos
The relation between the transmissivity (τ) and beam length (Lb) is
given by the Beer’s Law as
τ = exp(–K⋅Lb) . . . (6)
LEVELS OF COMPLETE AIRCRAFT number
for constant extinction coefficient, K. The ‘K’ depends on the con-
centration of radiation participating gases in the atmosphere, which
vary with altitude. For vertical and slant beams of IR radiation, K
varies along the beam, due to variation of density and hence concen-
tration with altitude. Hence, the attenuation by the intervening
atmosphere is modeled from the empirical data of transmissivity of
1km horizontal beam in the 8-12µm band, at various altitudes, for
International Standard Atmosphere. The variation of ‘K’ with alti-
tude is obtained from this data. The transmissivity of the intervening
atmosphere, τatmos, which takes a value between 0 and 1, is then
obtained numerically first for vertical beams, by discretising the line
of sight into smaller beams of constant K. The transmissivity of a
slant beam that makes an angle, β , with the vertical is obtained as,
τslant = (τvert)1/Cosβ . . .(7)
which follows from the Beer’s Law (Equation (6)).
2.5 Estimation of IR signature level
Since the basic principle of IR detection is discrimination with the
background, the IR radiation intensity of the background area must
be calculated. For an IR detector, which is a part of an anti-aircraft
defence system based on the ground, the background is the sky,
which behaves like a black body at sky temperature that is lower
than the local ambient temperature, in the absence of solar radiation.
For a given instantaneous field of view that has captured the aircraft,
the detector receives IR radiation from the aircraft and the back-
ground area in the instantaneous field of view not occupied by the
aircraft. Hence, the unattenuated IR radiation intensity incident on
the detector is given by
 number THE A ERONAUTICAL JOURNAL APRIL 2001

q″ac = q″bk + q″af,hp + q″cas,hp + τpl ⋅ q″en,hp + q″pl + τpl ⋅ q″pl,bk . . .(8)

In Equation (8), part of the emission from the background area cov-
ered by the plume is also included, τpl ⋅ q″pl,bk, since the plume is not
opaque (τpl ≠ 0). When the aircraft is not captured in the instanta-
neous field of view of the detector, the intensity on the detector is
given as,

q″T, bk = q″bk + q″af,hp;bk + q″cas,hp;bk + q″en,hp;bk + q″pl;bk . . .(9)

In Equation (9), the last four terms on the right hand side are the
background intensities that were replaced by the aircraft in Equation
(8). The net IR signature level, i.e. the IR signal, is obtained after
subtracting Equation (9) from Equation (8) as,

Inet = τatmos {(q″af,hp – q″af,hp;bk ) + (q″cas,hp– q″cas,hp;bk ) +

(τ pl⋅q″en,hp – q″en,hp;bk ) + [q″pl – (1 - τpl)⋅q″pl;bk ]} . . .(10)

The four separate terms in the brackets on the right hand side of
Equation (10) are the unattenuated signature levels contributed by
the airframe, the exposed engine casing, the visible internal parts of
the engine (if any), and the engine exhaust plume, respectively.
Hence, Equation (10) is written as,

Inet = Iaf,hp + Icas,hp+ Ie n , h p+ Ipl . . .(10.1)

It should be noted that the contribution from the internal hot parts of
the engine, Ie n , h p, is only when they are visible to the detector, and if
so, the extent varies with aspect.
Figure 4(a) Loci of IR signature levels on flight envelope.
(Typical dry rating).

3.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

3.1 Results on flight envelope

The procedure as outlined in the previous section (2.0) is comput-
erised to generate IR signature levels, defining undetectable flying
zones on the plot of altitude, H, versus Mach number, M. Since this
exercise is performed to guide low observable aircraft design and op-
eration in the vicinity of a man-made hostile environment, conserva-
tive estimates of IR signature levels are presented at a given altitude,
for an aircraft vertically above the IR detector, and for aircraft and
detector surfaces normal to the vertical line of sight. When the air-
craft is flying over the enemy’s anti-aircraft defence system, it is
always advantageous to be safe for the worst situation. For different
H and M, the appropriate engine operating conditions and atmos-
pheric properties are taken as inputs, and the IR signature levels in
the 8-12µm band as incident on the IR detector on ground, are ob-
tained. The IR detector on the ground could be part of the seeker
head of a Shoulder Fired Missile. From the data of IR signature lev-
els, i.e. IR signals, loci of constant IR signals are obtained on the H
versus M plot, in Fig. 4. The points on these loci are obtained by in-
terpolation, since obtaining such points is an inverse problem.
Figure 4(a) shows these loci for a typical dry rating of the engine.
As seen, all these loci slope upward, since at higher M, the same IR
signal is obtained at higher H, i.e. for the same H, the signal increases Figure 4(b) Loci of IR signature levels on flight envelope.
with M. This is because at higher M, the engine needs to produce (NEFD = µ Wm– 2, for typical afterburner mode for TJE and TFE).
more work by increasing the operating temperature, to balance the
increased drag. All these loci move downward (lower H) for increas-
ing signals, due to the Inverse Square Law behaviour of electromag- safe zone is also shifted upward, thereby making lower H detection
netic radiation. Any one of these loci could be the noise equivalent prone at higher M. As the technology improves, the NEFD reduces,
flux density (NEFD), which is the threshold value of the IR detector, hence the NEFD locus shifts upward on the flight envelope, since
depending upon the state of the detector's technology. For a given the detector can now capture lower IR signals. Hence, aircraft flying
state of IR detector technology, the NEFD value is fixed to at higher H and lower M may also be in the enlarged threat envelope.
50µW m– 2, and is shown by the hatched line from below, in Fig. 4(a). Figure 4(b) shows the fixed value, 50µWm– 2, NEFD loci, for two
For this technology level, it is safe to fly above the NEFD locus, in different engines, the turbojet engine, TJE, and the equivalent low
the hostile environment. Since the locus shifts upward with M, the bypass mixed flow turbofan engine, TFE, producing the same thrust;
M AHULIKAR ET AL NUMERICAL STUDIES OF INFRARED SIGNATURE
with and without plume radiation. The area enclosed between the
two engines is the extra threat envelope area, by changing the engine
from TFE to TJE. The TFE produces lower IR signature levels at the
same H and M, due to reduced temperature in the jet nozzle, which
is due to mixing of the hot and bypass streams prior to entering the
jet nozzle, for low bypass engines. The mixing also reduces the nozzle
exit temperature, thereby reducing the plume’s IR signature level.
Hence, the same value of IR signature level occurs at a lower alti-
tude for a TFE. With plume radiation, the loci move upward as com-
pared to the loci without plume, due to increase in total IR signature
level, thereby increasing the threat envelope area. Without plume,
the two loci converge at higher M, which implies that the
engine casing temperatures do not vary significantly for TJE and
TFE at higher M. This is because at higher M (subject to heat trans-
fer direction not reversed to inward due to kinetic heating), more
amount of heat is transferred to the ambient, due to efficient
freestream forced convection. However, with plume radiation
included, the two loci diverge, which implies that the difference be-
tween plume IR radiation intensities for TJE and TFE increase at
higher M, as the engine casing IR signature levels are nearly the
same.
3.2 Results on polar plot
The results presented in Fig. 4 are for a vertical line of sight between
the aircraft and the IR detector. Figure 5 shows a polar plot of the
variation of IR signature level as received by the detector versus the
line of sight angle with the vertical, β , for an aircraft approaching the
detector from right to left and then moving away, at a constant alti-
tude. The aircraft altitude is fixed at 1km, and its attitude if fixed
such that the normal to the aircraft plane makes an angle β with the
line of sight. The detector is assumed to change its orientation so that
it receives the maximum possible intensity for a fixed line of sight,
β , which is the case when the detector’s surface is normal to the line
of sight. The plane containing all the connecting lines of sight along
the aircraft motion is assumed fixed and vertical, which gives the
maximum possible IR signature level on the detector, as against an
inclined plane. It should be noted that the transmissivity of a slant
Figure 5. Polar plot of IR signature levels of low flying mission.
LEVELS OF COMPLETE AIRCRAFT number
line of sight beam is lower than for a vertical beam of the same
length, since the mean extinction coefficient, K, is higher for a slant
beam, as it covers lower altitude range, characterised by higher con-
centration of radiation participating gases. In this polar plot, the
NEFD locus of 50µWm– 2 technology level is an arc of a circle and is
hatched from outside, which implies that the region enclosed inside
the arc is the safe zone. As the IR detector technology state enhances
with time, this arc will shrink inward. As seen from Fig. 5, the IR
signature level of the aircraft lies inside the circle for absolute values
of β approaching 90°, which corresponds to large lengths of lines of
sight. For β decreasing from +70° to 0° (i.e. aircraft approaching the
detector), the IR signature level increases, mainly due to the Inverse
Square Law behaviour associated with decreasing line of sight
length. Also, during approach, the aircraft hides part of the plume,
and as the aircraft approaches, increasing portions of the plume are
exposed to the detector. It is interesting to note that maximum inten-
sity on the detector does not occur at β = 0° (the location at which
the aircraft is vertically above the detector and generally this is the
location where the objective of the mission is to be carried out). The
maximum intensity occurs at β = –2°, i.e., when the aircraft moves
away from the detector by about 35m. This is because for β < 0°, not
only is the entire plume exposed, but the detector also receives IR
signal from the internal hot surfaces of the engine (Ien,hp). Hence, the
polar plot is unsymmetrical about β = 0°, and the asymmetry is ex-
pected to increase with the engine operating temperature. The use of
a non-circular nozzle exit of the same area reduces the exposure of
internal hot surfaces of the engine, in addition to reducing the
plume’s IR signature due to efficient mixing of the hot core jet and
the cold freestream flow. At first thought it may seem that after β =
0°, the aircraft must fly at high speeds to move away from the detec-
tor as fast as possible, in order to reduce the IR signature levels
rapidly. However, increasing the speed implies a higher engine oper-
ating temperature, and hence may increase the IR signature levels af-
ter β = 0°, as demonstrated in Fig. 4, thereby leading to self-betrayal
to the enemy’s IR detector and guided missile. Hence, such deci-
sions have to be taken by assessing the gains achieved by increasing
the rate of IR signature level reduction due to high speeds leading to
lower tracking rates, as against the increased value of the IR signa-
ture levels themselves at a given aspect.
4.0 CONCLUSIONS
1. The IR detectors threshold is proposed as an operational constraint
on the flight envelope.
2. Improvement in the IR detector’s technology reduces the safe
zone in the flight envelope.
3. As the number of aircraft components emitting IR signature
increases or become visible, the NEFD loci on the flight envelope
shifts upward, increasing the unsafe flying zone.
4. The turbofan engine is safer to fly with than an equivalent turbojet
engine, since the engine casing’s contribution is reduced in a tur-
bofan engine particularly at low Mach numbers and the plume's
contribution is reduced particularly at high Mach numbers.
5. The IR signature levels for the same absolute value of β are higher
for the aircraft moving away from the IR detector (β < 0°), than
for the aircraft approaching the detector (β < 0°), leading to
unsymmetrical polar plot of IR signature levels.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors wish to express their gratitude to Mr Mayur G. Godbole
and Mr G. Arvind Rao, post-graduate students of the Aerospace En-
gineering Department of Indian Institute of Technology – Bombay,
for their assistance in typing the manuscript.
number THE A ERONAUTICAL JOURNAL APRIL 2001

REFERENCES
1. ATKINSON, D.B. Aircraft survivability, The Shock and Vibration
Bulletin, May 1983, 53, (1), pp 33-38.
2. ATKINSON, D.B. An analysis of current survivability policies and proce-
dures which impact the systems acquisition process, PMC 76-1, May
1976, Defense Systems Management School, Fort Belvoir, VA.
3. LEARY, F. Tactical aircraft survivability, Space/Aeronautics, June 1967,
4, (6), pp 68-81.
4. SAPP , C.N. Survivability – A science whose time has come, US Naval
Institute Proceedings, December 1978, US Naval Institute,
Annapolis, MD, pp 59-67.
5. PUTLEY, E.H. Solid state devices for infra-red detection, J Scientific
Instruments, December 1966, 43, pp 857-868.
6. PUTLEY, E.H. Modern infrared detectors, Physics in Technology,
December 1973, 4, pp 202-222.
7. BARTLETT, B.E., CHARLTON, D.E., DUNN, W.E., ELLEN, P.C., J ENNER,
M.D. and JERVIS , M.H. Background limited photoconductive HgCdTe
detectors for use in the 8-14 micron atmospheric window, Infrared
Phys, 1969, 9, (1) pp 35-36.
8. ROLLS, W.H. AND EDDOLLS , D.V. High detectivity PbxSn1-xTe photo-
voltaic diodes, Infrared Phys, 1973, 13, (2), pp 143-147.
9. LEVINSTEIN, H. Extrinsic detectors, Appl Optics, 1965, 4, (6), pp 639-
647.
10. BODE, D.E. and GRAHAM , H.A. Comparison of the performance of
copper-doped germanium and mercury-doped germanium detectors,
Infrared Phys, 1963, 3, (3), pp 129-137.
11. HOWE, D. Introduction to the basic technology of stealth aircraft: Part I
– Basic considerations and aircraft self-emitted signals (passive consid-
erations), January 1991, ASME J Engineering for Gas Turbines and
Power, 113, (1), pp 75-79.
12. LARMORE, L. Transmission of infrared radiation through the atmos-
phere, Office of Naval Research, Proc Infrared Inform Symposia, June
1956, 1, (1).
13. GONDA, T.G. and GERHART, G.R. High-resolution infrared signature
modeling: A US Army perspective, Proc of SPIE’s – Int Soc for Optical
Engg, Infrared Detectors and Focal Plane Arrays II Conference,
Orlando, FL, USA, 1992, 1685, pp 92-102.
14. KAUSHAL, T.P. Infrared signature visualisation, Proc. of SPIE’s – Int
Soc for Optical Engg, Infrared Technology XXI Conference, San
Diego, CA, USA, 1995, 2552, (1), pp 268-271.
15. DASH, S.M., PEARCE, B.E., PERGAMENT, H.S. and FISHBURNE, E.S. Pre-
diction of rocket plume flowfields for infrared signature studies, AIAA J
Spacecraft and Rockets, May-June 1980, 17, (3), pp 190-199.
16. DASH, S.M. and PERGAMENT, H.S. The analysis of low altitude rocket
and aircraft plume flowfields: modeling requirements and procedures,
Proc of JANNAF 10th Plume Technology Meeting, 1977, CPIA Pub
291, (I) pp 53-132.
17. ZHONG, F. and DAI , Y. Effects of scale factor on the aero-thermodynam-
ic and infrared radiation performance of naval gas turbine exhaust sys-
tem with infrared signature suppression device, Proc of International
Gas Turbine and Aeroengine Congress and Exposition, Cincinnati, OH,
USA, 1993, 93-GT-232, pp 1-23.
18. VAITEKUNAS , D.A., ALEXAN, K., LAWRENCE, O.E. and REID, F.
SHIPIR/NTCS: A naval ship infrared signature countermeasure and
threat engagement simulator, Proc of SPIE’s – Int Soc for Optical Engg,
Infrared Technology and Applications XXII Conference, Orlando, FL,
USA, 1996, 2744, pp 411-424.
19. SCHLEIJPEN, H.M. Evaluation of infrared-signature suppression of ships,
Proc of SPIE’s – Int Soc for Optical Engg, Targets and Background:
Characterisation and Representation II Conference, Orlando, FL, USA,
1996, 2742, pp 245-254.
20. CALEDONIA, G.E. Infrared signature modifications, 1976, Vol 1, Physi-
cal Sciences, Wakefield, MA, AD A024 653.
21. TRUITT, R.W. Fundamentals of Aerodynamic Heating, Ronald, New
York, 1960.
22. SIEGEL, R. and HOWELL, J.R. Thermal Radiation Heat Transfer,
McGraw-Hill Kogakusha, 1972.
23. SPALDING, D.B. Some Fundamentals of Combustion, Butterworths
Scientific Publications, London, 1955.
24. LEFEBVRE, A.H. Gas Turbine Combustion, McGraw-Hill Series in Energy,
Combustion and Environment, Hemisphere, Washington, 1983.

V i e w p u b l i c a t i o n s t a t s