Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-sh8wx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-20T16:10:00.976Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Transonic flow hysteresis in a twin intake model

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2018

A. Kuzmin Open the ORCID record for A. Kuzmin [Opens in a new window]
A. Kuzmin*
Affiliation:
Department of Fluid DynamicsSt. Petersburg State UniversitySt. PetersburgRussia
*
*a.kuzmin@spbu.ru
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Turbulent airflow in a supersonic intake model of rectangular cross-section is studied numerically. Instability of shock waves formed in the intake and ahead of the entrance is examined. Solutions of the Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes equations are obtained with a finite-volume solver of second-order accuracy. The expulsion and the swallowing of the shocks with a variation of free-stream parameters are studied at both subsonic and supersonic conditions prescribed at the outlet. Hysteresis in the dependence of 2D flow on the free-stream velocity and angle-of-attack is documented. An influence of 3D effects on the flow is examined.

Keywords

Supersonic intakeshock wavesinstabilityhysteresis
Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 122 , Issue 1256 , October 2018 , pp. 1557 - 1567
Copyright
© Royal Aeronautical Society 2018 

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

REFERENCES

1. Farokhi, S. Aircraft Propulsion. Wiley, Chichester, West Sussex, UK, 2014.Google Scholar
2. Kantrowitz, A. and Donaldson, C. Preliminary investigation of supersonic diffusers. National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, Advanced Confidential Report L5D20, 1945, pp 1-25. Langley Memorial Aeronautical Laboratory, Langley Field, VA, USA. http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/b184216.pdf.Google Scholar
3. Daneshyar, H. One-dimensional compressible flow: thermodynamics and fluid mechanics series. Pergamon, Oxford, 1976.Google Scholar
4. Kusunose, K., Matsushima, K. and Maruyama, D. Supersonic biplane – a review, Progress in Aerospace Sciences, 2011, 47, pp 53-87.Google Scholar
5. Hu, R., Jameson, A. and Wang, Q. Adjoint based aerodynamic optimization of supersonic biplane airfoils, 2011, AIAA Paper 2011-11248.Google Scholar
6. Yamashita, H., Kuratani, N., Yonezawa, M., Ogawa, T., Nagai, H., Asai, K. and Obayashi, S. Wind tunnel testing on start/unstart characteristics of finite supersonic biplane wing, International Journal of Aerospace Engineering, 2013. Article ID 231434.Google Scholar
7. Timofeev, E. and Mölder, S. Supplemental Notes to the Lecture “Theoretical Analysis of Flow Starting in Hypersonic Airntakes with CFD Illustrations”. RTO – Educational Notes Paper, 2011, doi: 10.14339/RTO-EN-AVT-195-07-Suppl-pdf.Google Scholar
8. Mölder, S. and Timofeev, E. Hypersonic Air Intake Design for High Performance and Starting. RTO – Educational Notes Paper, 2011, doi: 10.14339/RTO-EN-AVT-195-07-pdf.Google Scholar
9. Chang, J., Yu, D., Bao, W., Fan, Y. and Shen, Y. Effects of boundary-layers bleeding on unstart/restart characteristics of hypersonic inlets, Aeronautical J, 2009, 113, pp 319-327.Google Scholar
10. Li, Z., Huang, B. and Yang, J. A novel test of starting characteristics of hypersonic inlets in shock tunnel, 2011, AIAA Paper 2011-2308.Google Scholar
11. Ben-Dor, G. Hysteresis phenomena in reflection of shock waves. 29th International Symposium on Shock Waves, ISSW-29, 2015, 1, pp 3-11.Google Scholar
12. Ben-Dor, G. Shock Wave Reflection Phenomena. Springer, Berlin-Heidelberg, 2007.Google Scholar
13. Kotteda, V.M.K. and Mittal, S. Flow in a Y-intake at supersonic speeds, Journal Propulsion and Power, 2016, 32, (1), pp 171-187.Google Scholar
14. Kuzmin, A. Shock wave bifurcation in convergent–divergent channels of rectangular cross section, Shock Waves, 2016, 26, (6), pp 741-747.Google Scholar
15. Kuzmin, A. and Babarykin, K. Transonic flow bifurcation in symmetric channels with centerbodies. Estestvennye i matematicheskie nauki v sovremennom mire, 2016, no. 10 (45). Novosibirsk. SibAc Publishing House, pp 90-99 [in Russian], https://sibac.info/conf/naturscience/xlvii/61000.Google Scholar
16. XB-70 Valkyrie, http://www.flightsim.com/vbfs/showthread.php?258968-XB-70-Valkyrie.Google Scholar
17. TU-160, http://voicesevas.ru/img/ea7870738fe876c6618ce01c5a7c668a.jpg.Google Scholar
18. ANSYS CFX Theory Guide. Release 15.0, ANSYS, Inc., November 2013.Google Scholar
19. Menter, F.R. Review of the shear-stress transport turbulence model experience from an industrial perspective, International Journal of Computational Fluid Dynamics, 2009, 23, pp 305-316.Google Scholar
20. Kuzmin, A. On the lambda-shock formation on ONERA M6 wing, International Journal of Applied Engineering Research, 2014, 9, (20), pp 7029-7038.Google Scholar
21. Kuzmin, A. Shock wave bifurcation in channels with a bend, Archives Applied Mechanics, 2016, 86, (5), pp 787-795.Google Scholar
22. Nguyen, T., Behr, M., Reinartz, B. U., Hohn, O. and Gülhan, A. Numerical investigations of the effects of sidewall compression and relaminarization in 3D scramjet inlet, 2011, AIAA Paper 2011-2256.Google Scholar
23. Knight, D., Panaras, A.G. and Zheltovodov, A.A. Advances in CFD prediction of shock wave turbulent boundary layer interactions, Progress in Aerospace Sciences, 2003, 39, (2), pp 121-184.Google Scholar