Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-v5vhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-01T02:20:49.358Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Mixing enhancement of a compressible jet over a convex wall

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 September 2023

Qing Wang Open the ORCID record for Qing Wang [Opens in a new window] ,
Feng Qu Open the ORCID record for Feng Qu [Opens in a new window] ,
Tianyu Wang ,
Di Sun  and
Junqiang Bai
Qing Wang
Affiliation:
School of Aeronautics, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi'an 710072, PR China
Feng Qu*
Affiliation:
School of Aeronautics, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi'an 710072, PR China
Tianyu Wang
Affiliation:
School of Aeronautics, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi'an 710072, PR China
Di Sun
Affiliation:
School of Aeronautics, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi'an 710072, PR China
Junqiang Bai
Affiliation:
School of Aeronautics, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi'an 710072, PR China
*
†Email address for correspondence: qufeng@nwpu.edu.cn
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A highly compressive effect would suppress the mixing of the shear layer in a convex wall jet. The spanwise distributed protrusions at the nozzle lip are employed to achieve mixing enhancement in this study. The mixing characteristics and enhancement mechanisms are numerically investigated by the delayed detached-eddy simulation method based on the two-equation shear-stress transport model. A widely applicable flow spatiotemporal analysis method, called proper orthogonal decomposition (POD), is used to gain further insight into the dynamical behaviours of the flow instability mode. The results reveal that the centrifugal effect maintains and amplifies the initial perturbations induced by the spanwise distributed heterogeneities, resulting in forced streamwise vortices. The instabilities induced by the streamwise vortices significantly increase the growth rate of the jet half-width and the shear layer vorticity thickness. The spanwise wavelength of the streamwise vortices is consistent with the spanwise distributed forced excitation. In addition, the spanwise meandering motion of the streamwise vortices is observed, which is usually associated with the streamwise travelling wave. This is further confirmed by the POD analysis of the spanwise velocity fluctuation in both stream-radial and stream-span sections. Also, the spatial distributions of the POD modes with the highest energy provide information on the secondary instability modes. Both sinuous and varicose types of disturbances are observed in the unforced jet, whereas the forced jet seems to be dominated by the sinuous type instability, which is more easily excited than the varicose type instability. Moreover, the turbulence intensity in the forced jet is also significantly enhanced as expected due to the earlier and stronger streamwise vortices and associated instabilities. The enhanced turbulent characteristics of the highly compressible condition tend to be isotropic, whereas in the unforced jet, it is anisotropic due to the strong compressibility suppressing the spanwise turbulent fluctuations.

JFM classification

Aerodynamics: High-speed flow
Type
JFM Papers
Information
Journal of Fluid Mechanics , Volume 972 , 10 October 2023 , A2
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alexander, M.G., Anders, S.G., Johnson, S.K., Florance, J.P. & Keller, D.F. 2005 Trailing edge blowing on a two-dimensional six-percent thick elliptical circulation control airfoil up to transonic conditions. NASA Tech. Rep. TM-2005-213545, Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA, US.Google Scholar
Andersson, P., Brandt, L., Bottaro, A. & Henningson, D.S. 2001 On the breakdown of boundary layer streaks. J. Fluid Mech. 428, 29–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Behrouzi, P. & McGuirk, J.J. 2009 High speed jet plume experimental study: phase 2/part 1 – RRLU-1 nozzle, full experimental results. In Dept. of Aero. Auto. Eng. Report TT09R02-A.Google Scholar
Bevilaqua, P.M. & Lee, J.D. 1980 Development of a nozzle to improve the turning of supersonic Coanda jets. Tech. Rep. AFWAL-TR-80-3027. Flight Dynamics Laboratory, Air Force Wright Aeronautical Laboratories, Air Force Systems Command, United States Air Force.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bogdanoff, D.W. 1983 Compressibility effects in turbulent shear layers. AIAA J. 21 (6), 926–927.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carpenter, P.W. & Green, P.N. 1997 The aeroacoustics and aerodynamics of high-speed Coanda devices, part 1: conventional arrangement of exit nozzle and surface. J. Sound Vib. 208 (5), 777–801.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cornelius, K.C. & Lucius, G.A. 2012 Physics of Coanda jet detachment at high-pressure ratio. J. Aircraft 31 (3), 591–596.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crowther, W.J., Wilde, P.I.A., Gill, K. & Michie, S.M. 2009 Towards integrated design of fluidic flight controls for a flapless aircraft. Aeronaut. J. 113 (1149), 699–713.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cunff, C.L. & Zebib, A. 1996 Nonlinear spatially developing Görtler vortices in curved wall jet flow. Phys. Fluids 8 (9), 2375–2384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deane, A.E., Kevrekidis, I.G., Karniadakis, G.E. & Orszag, S.A. 1991 Low-dimensional models for complex geometry flows: application to grooved channels and circular cylinders. Phys. Fluids A 3 (10), 2337–2354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunaevich, L. & Greenblatt, D. 2020 Stability and transition on a Coanda cylinder. Phys. Fluids 32 (8), 084106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Englar, R.J., Hemmerly, R.A., Taylor, D.W., Moore, W.H., Seredinsky, V., Valckenaere, W. & Jackson, J.A. 1981 Design of the circulation control wing STOL demonstrator aircraft. J. Aircraft 18 (1), 51–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fan, C.C., Xiao, X., Edwards, J.R., Hassan, H.A. & Baurle, R.A. 2004 Hybrid large-eddy/Reynolds- averaged Navier–Stokes simulation of shock-separated flows. J. Spacecr. Rockets 41 (6), 897–906.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferlauto, M. & Marsilio, R. 2017 Numerical investigation of the dynamic characteristics of a dual-throat-nozzle for fluidic thrust-vectoring. AIAA J. 55 (1), 86–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forster, M., Biava, M. & Steijl, R. 2016 Multipoint optimisation of Coanda surfaces for transonic circulation control using the adjoint method. In 8th AIAA Flow Control Conference, p. 3773.Google Scholar
Forster, M. & Steijl, R. 2017 Design study of Coanda devices for transonic circulation control. Aeronaut. J. 121 (1243), 1368–1391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fujisawa, N. & Kobayashi, R. 1987 Turbulence characteristics of wall jets along strong convex surfaces. Intl J. Mech. Sci. 29 (5), 311–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gregory-Smith, D.G. & Gilchrist, A.R. 1987 The compressible Coanda wall jet—an experimental study of jet structure and breakaway. Intl J. Heat Fluid Flow 8 (2), 156–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gregory-Smith, D.G. & Senior, P. 1994 The effects of base steps and axisymmetry on supersonic jets over Coanda surfaces. Intl J. Heat Fluid Flow 15 (4), 291–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Görtler, H. 1941 Instabilitat laminarer grenzchichten an konkaven wanden gengenuber gewissen deeidimensionalen storungen. Z. Angew. Math. Mech. 21 (4), 250–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Han, G., De Zhou, M. & Wygnanski, I. 2006 On streamwise vortices and their role in the development of a curved wall jet. Phys. Fluids 18 (9), 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harley, C., Wilde, P. & Crowther, W. 2009 Application of circulation control manoeuvre effectors for three axis control of a tailless flight vehicle. In 47th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting including The New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition, p. 146.Google Scholar
Hoholis, G., Steijl, R. & Badcock, K. 2016 Circulation control as a roll effector for unmanned combat aerial vehicles. J. Aircraft 53 (6), 1875–1889.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hutchin, C. 2019 NATO AVT-239 task group: control effectiveness and system sizing requirements for integration of fluidic flight controls on the SACCON aircraft configuration. AIAA Scitech 2019 Forum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jiang, Y., Zhang, L., Huang, Y., Gao, L. & Chen, H. 2018 Lift response characteristics of a circulation control airfoil with internally blown flap. Acta Aeronaut. Astronaut. Sin. 39 (7), 121807.Google Scholar
Konishi, Y. & Asai, M. 2010 Development of subharmonic disturbance in spanwise-periodic low-speed streaks. Fluid Dyn. Res. 42 (3), 035504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, L., Hirota, M., Ouchi, K. & Saito, T. 2017 Evaluation of fluidic thrust vectoring nozzle via thrust pitching angle and thrust pitching moment. Shock Waves 27 (1), 53–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Likhachev, O., Neuendorf, R. & Wygnanski, I. 2001 On streamwise vortices in a turbulent wall jet that flows over a convex surface. Phys. Fluids 13 (6), 1822–1825.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, X.D., Osher, S. & Chan, T. 1994 Weighted essentially non-oscillatory schemes. J. Comput. Phys. 115 (1), 200–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Llopis-Pascual, A. 2017 Supercritical Coanda jets for flight control effectors. PhD thesis, Manchester University, Manchester.Google Scholar
Lumley, J.L. 1967 The structure of inhomogeneous turbulent flows. In Atmospheric Turbulence and Radio Wave Propagation, pp. 166–178. Nauka.Google Scholar
Matsson, O. & John, E. 1998 Görtler vortices in wall jet flow on a rotating cylinder. Phys. Fluids 10 (9), 2238–2248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Menter, F.R. 1994 Two-equation eddy-viscosity turbulence models for engineering applications. AIAA J. 32, 1598–1605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moin, P. & Mahesh, K. 1998 Direct numerical simulation: a tool in turbulence research. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 30 (1), 539–578.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Naqavi, I.Z., Tyacke, J.C. & Tucker, P.G. 2018 Direct numerical simulation of a wall jet: flow physics. J. Fluid Mech. 852, 507–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neuendorf, R., Lourenco, L. & Wygnanski, I. 2004 On large streamwise structures in a wall jet flowing over a circular cylinder. Phys. Fluids 16 (7), 2158–2169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neuendorf, R. & Wygnanski, I. 1999 On a turbulent wall jet flowing over a circular cylinder. J. Fluid Mech. 381, 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pandey, A. & Gregory, J.W. 2020 Instabilities and turbulence in a forced turbulent convex wall jet. Phys. Fluids 32 (9), 095111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pandey, A. & Gregory, J.W. 2021 Spanwise wavelength of streamwise vortices in a forced turbulent convex wall jet. AIAA J. 58 (1), 1–6.Google Scholar
Papamoschou, D. & Roshko, A. 1988 The compressible turbulent shear layer: an experimental study. J. Fluid Mech. 197, 453–477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Qu, F., Chen, J., Sun, D., Bai, J. & Zuo, G. 2019 a A grid strategy for predicting the space plane's hypersonic aerodynamic heating loads. Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 86, 659–670.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Qu, F. & Sun, D. 2017 Investigation into the influences of the low-speed flows’ accuracy on RANS simulations. Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 70, 578–589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Qu, F., Sun, D., Han, K., Bai, J., Zuo, G. & Yan, C. 2019 b Numerical investigation of the supersonic stabilizing parachute's heating loads. Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 87, 89–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sandham, N.D. 1991 Three-dimensional simulations of large-eddies in compressible mixing layer. J. Fluid Mech. 224 (2), 177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schlatter, P., Brandt, L., De Lange, H.C. & Henningson, D.S. 2008 On streak breakdown in bypass transition. Phys. Fluids 20 (10), 101505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, D.R. & Warsop, C. 2019 NATO AVT-239 task group: ‘innovative control effectors for manoeuvring of air vehicles’–introduction and overview. AIAA Scitech 2019 Forum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spalart, P.R., Deck, S., Shur, M.L., Squires, K.D., Strelets, M.K. & Travin, A. 2006 A new version of detached-eddy simulation, resistant to ambiguous grid densities. Theor. Comput. Fluid Dyn. 30 (3), 20.Google Scholar
Sun, D., Qu, F., Liu, C., Yao, F. & Bai, J. 2020 Numerical study of the suction flow control of the supersonic boundary layer transition in a framework of gas-kinetic scheme. Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 109 (2), 106397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sun, D., Qu, F. & Yan, C. 2018 An effective flux scheme for hypersonic heating prediction of re-entry vehicles. Comput. Fluids 176, 109–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sun, M., Sandham, N.D. & Hu, Z. 2019 Turbulence structures and statistics of a supersonic turbulent boundary layer subjected to concave surface curvature. J. Fluid Mech. 865, 60–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, P.C. & Mcguirk, J.J. 2013 Large Eddy Simulation of supersonic jet plumes from rectangular con-di nozzles. Intl J. Heat Fluid Flow 43, 62–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, Q., Qu, F., Sun, D. & Bai, J. 2023 Numerical study of instabilities and compressibility effects on supersonic jet over a convex wall. J. Fluid Mech. 954, A6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, Q., Qu, F., Zhao, Q. & Bai, J. 2022 Numerical study of the hysteresis effect on the supercritical airfoil for the transonic circulation control. Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 126, 107645.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, Q.C., Wang, Z.G., Sun, M.B., Yang, R., Zhao, Y.X. & Hu, Z. 2019 The amplification of large-scale motion in a supersonic concave turbulent boundary layer and its impact on the mean and statistical properties. J. Fluid Mech. 863, 454–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warsop, C., Crowther, W. & Forster, M. 2019 NATO AVT-239 task group: supercritical Coanda based circulation control and fluidic thrust vectoring. AIAA Scitech 2019 Forum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warsop, C. & Crowther, W.J. 2018 Fluidic flow control effectors for flight control. AIAA J. 56 (10), 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watanabe, T. & Nagata, K. 2021 Large-scale characteristics of a stably stratified turbulent shear layer. J. Fluid Mech. 927.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilde, P., Buonanno, A., Crowther, W. & Savvaris, A. 2008 Aircraft control using fluidic maneuver effectors. In 26th AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, D.R., Seidel, J., Osteroos, R. & McLaughlin, T.E. 2019 NATO AVT-239 task group: flight control derivatives using active flow control effectors on the ICE/SACCON UAS model. AIAA Scitech 2019 Forum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yoon, S. & Jameson, A. 1988 Lower-upper Symmetric-Gauss-Seidel method for the Euler and Navier–Stokes equations. AIAA J. 26 (9), 1025–1026.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, D., Tan, J. & Li, H. 2017 Structural characteristics of supersonic mixing enhanced by introducing streamwise vortices. Appl. Phys. Lett. 111 (11), 114103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar