Peculiarities of low-Reynolds-number supersonic flows in long microchannel

  • Taro HandaEmail author
  • Keiichiro Kitahara
  • Yu Matsuda
  • Yasuhiro Egami
Research Paper


The characteristics of low-Reynolds-number supersonic flows in a long microchannel having a rectangular cross section are investigated computationally. The channel is composed of a Laval nozzle and a straight duct. The design Mach number of the nozzle is 2.0 and the Reynolds number calculated at the nozzle exit is 3100. The length of the straight duct is changed from 2 to 18 h, where h is the duct height. In the computations, the Navier–Stokes equations are numerically solved. The computational code is validated using the experimental data measured by the laser-induced fluorescence (LIF) technique. The computational results demonstrate that neither a normal shock wave nor a pseudo-shock wave, which corresponds to the starting shock wave in a supersonic wind tunnel, appears in microchannel flows. Namely, a low-Reynolds-number supersonic flow is created in a channel without the starting shock wave passing along the duct, although it has been believed that a supersonic internal flow should have been formed through the starting shock wave. In addition, it is found that the microchannel flow changes gradually its supersonic state with the channel length under an underexpanded condition, although a starting shock wave for high-Reynolds-number flows suddenly appears in a channel just as its length exceeds a certain specific length. Such unexpected phenomena originate from the peculiarity that the low-Reynolds-number flows can expand (accelerate) along a straight duct at supersonic speeds, although the high-Reynolds-number flows cannot.



This study is supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number JP16H04269 and the grant of “Toyota Physical & Chemical Research Institute Scholars”.


  1. Anderson JD (1992) Computational fluid dynamics. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. Bruccoleri AR, Leiter R, Drela M, Lozano P (2012) Experimental effects of nozzle geometry on flow efficiency at low Reynolds numbers. J Propul Power 28:96–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Doms M, Müller J (2007) Design, fabrication, and characterization of a micro vapor-jet vacuum pump. J Fluids Eng 129:1339–1345CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Giordano J, Parisse JD, Perrier P (2008) Numerical study of an original device to generate compressible flow in microchannel. Phys Fluids 20:096101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Giordano J, Perrier P, Meister L, Brouillette M (2018) Shock wave attenuation in a micro-channel. Shock Waves 28:1251–1262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Han B, Matsuda Y, Egami Y, Handa T (2018) Investigation on choking behavior of gas flow in microducts. Microfluidic Nanofluidic 22:122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Handa T, Urita A (2018) Experimental study of small supersonic circular jets actuated by a cavity. Exp Therm Fluid Sci 96:419–429CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Handa T, Masuda M, Matsuo K (2003) Mechanism of shock wave oscillation in transonic diffuser. AIAA J. 41:64–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Handa T, Masuda M, Kashitani M, Yamaguchi Y (2011) Measurement of number densities in supersonic flows using a method based on laser-induced acetone fluorescence. Exp Fluids 50:1685–1694CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Handa T, Mii K, Sakurai T, Imamura K, Mizuta S, Ando Y (2014) Study on supersonic rectangular microjets using molecular tagging velocimetry. Exp Fluids 55:1725CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Handa T, Matsuda Y, Egami Y (2016) Phenomena peculiar to underexpanded flows in supersonic micronozzles. Microfluidic Nanofluidic 20:166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Huang C, Gregory JW, Sallivan JP (2007) Flow visualization and pressure measurement in micronozzles, 2007. J Visual 10:281–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hunt RL, Gamba M (2018) Shock train unsteadiness characteristics, oblique-to-normal transition, and three-dimensional leading shock structure. AIAA J 56:1569–1587CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kai Y, Garen W, Teubner U (2018) Experimental investigation on microshock waves and contact surfaces. Phys Rev Lett 120:064501CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kreth PA, Ali MY, Fernandez EJ, Alvi FS (2016) Velocity field measurements on high-frequency, supersonic microactuators. Exp Fluids 57:76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Matsuo K, Miyazato Y, Kim HD (1999) Shock train and pseudo-shock phenomena in internal gas flows. Progs Aerosp Sci 35:33–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mirshekari G, Brouillette M, Giordano J, Hébert C, Parisse J-D, Perrier P (2013) Shock waves in microchannels. J Fluid Mech 724:259–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Nagai H, Naraoka R, Sawada K, Asai K (2008) Pressure-sensitive paint measurement of pressure distribution in a supersonic micronozzle. AIAA J. 46:215–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Namura M, Toriyama T (2013) Experimental study on aerodynamics of microelectromechanical systems based single-crystal-silicon microscale supersonic nozzle. J Fluids Eng 135:081101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Phalnikar KA, Kumar R, Alvi FS (2008) Experiments on free and impinging supersonic microjets. Exp Fluids 44:819–830CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Satoh D, Tanaka S, Yoshida K, Esashi M (2005) Micro-ejector to supply fuel-air mixture to a micro-combustor. Sens Actuators A 119:528–536CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Scroggs SD, Settles GS (1996) An experimental study of microjets. Exp Fluids 21:401–409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Shapiro AH (1954) The dynamics and thermodynamics of compressible fluid flow. Ronald Press, New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. Takahashi Y, Okajima J, Iga Y, Komiya A, Fu W-S, Maruyama S (2013) Study of supersonic micro-channel for cooling electronic devices. In: Proceedings of ASME 11th International Conference Nanochannel Microchannel Minichannel, Paper No. ICNMM2013-73134Google Scholar
  25. Tamaki T, Tomita Y, Yamane R (1971) A study of pseudo-shock, 2nd report, X-type pseudo-shock. Bull JSME 14:807–817CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Torre FS, Kenjeres S, Kleijn CR, Moerel JLPA (2010) Effects of wavy surface roughness on the performance of micronozzles. J. Prop. Power 26:655–662CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Waltrup PJ, Billig FS (1973) Structure of shock waves in cylindrical ducts. AIAA J. 11:1404–1408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Wilcox DC (1992) Dilatation-dissipation corrections for advanced turbulence models. AIAA J. 30:2639–2646CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Yamamoto S, Daiguji H (1993) Higher-order-accurate upwind schemes for solving the compressible Euler and Navier-Stokes equations. Comput Fluids 22:259–270MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Yamane Y, Kondo E, Tomita Y, Sakae N (1984) Vibration of pseudo-shock in straight duct (1st report, fluctuation of static pressure). Bull JSME 27:1385–1392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Zaman KBM, Dahl MD, Bencic TJ, Loh CY (2002) Investigation of a ‘transonic resonance’ with convergent-divergent nozzle. J Fluid Mech 463:313–343MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Advanced Science and TechnologyToyota Technological InstituteNagoyaJapan
  2. 2.Department of Modern Mechanical EngineeringWaseda UniversityTokyoJapan
  3. 3.Department of Mechanical EngineeringAichi Institute of TechnologyToyotaJapan

Personalised recommendations