Mathematical Models and Computer Simulations

, Volume 10, Issue 2, pp 218–225 | Cite as

Numerical Simulation of a Hypersonic Flow over an Aircraft in a High-Altitude Active Movement Area

Article
  • 3 Downloads

Abstract

A hypersonic flow over an axisymmetric aircraft is numerically simulated in the case of a highly underexpanded exhaust plume (jet) of the main engine. The characteristics of the boundary layer separation occurring on the aircraft’s side surface are investigated for several successive points of its takeoff path. The Mach number at the nozzle exit is 6.5. The Mach number of the incoming flow varies from 4 to 7. In this case, the Reynolds number ranges from 2.5 × 105 to 3 × 103 and the ratio of the nozzle’s exit pressure to the ambient pressure, from 350 to 5 × 104. In the case of the Mach number of the incoming flow M = 4, the variation range of the pressure ratio extends to 106. Replacement of the exhaust plume with a rigid simulator is considered. Data are obtained on the pressure ratios for which a separation flow begins to form on the side surface, the recirculation zone length, and the level of pressure in it in comparison with the available empirical dependences. A significant increase of the recirculation zone in front of the exhaust plume is shown when it is replaced by a rigid simulator of the same dimensions.

Keywords

numerical simulation Navier-Stokes equations hypersonic flow underexpanded exhaust plume 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    P. Carriere and M. Serieix, “Effects aerodynamique de l’eclament d’un jet de fusee,” Rech. Aerosp., No. 89, 3–30 (1962).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    R. Adams, “Wind tunnel testing tecniques for gas-particle flows in rocket exhaust plumes,” AIAA Paper N66-767 (AIAA, 1966).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    L. Alpinieri and R. Adams, “Flow separation due to jet pluming,” AIAA J. 4, 1865–1866 (1966).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    W. F. Hinson and R. J. McGhee, “Effects of jet pluming on the static stability of five rocket models at Mach numbers of 4, 5, and 6 and static pressure rations up to 26000,” NASA TN D-4064 (1967).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    R. C. Boger, H. Rosenbaum, and B. L. Reeves, “Flow field interactions induced by underexpanded exhaust plumes,” AIAA J. 10, 300–306 (1972).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    A. N. Shliagun, “Interaction of strongly underexpanded supersonic jet with a hypersonic sputtered flow,” Uch. Zap. TsAGI 10 (3), 37–47 (1979).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    J. M. Klineberg, T. Kubota, and L. Lees, “Theory of exhaust-plumes/boundary-layer interactions at supersonic speeds,” AIAA J. 10, 581–588 (1972).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    P. K. Chang, Separation of Flow (Pergamon, Oxford, New York, 1970).MATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    J. Erdos and A. Pallone, “Shock-boundary layer interactoin and flow separation,” Proc. Heat Transfer Fluid Mech. Inst., 239–254 (1962).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    K. J. Plotkin and J. S. Draper, “Detachment of the outer shock from underexpanded rocket plumes,” AIAA J. 10, 1707–1709 (1972).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    E. V. Myshenkov and V. I. Myshrnkov, “Regimes of laminar flow separation due to jet exhaust,” Fluid Dyn. 29, 103–107 (1994).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    E. V. Myshenkov and V. I. Myshrnkov, “Formation of lateral separation caused by a sustainer engine jet,” Fluid Dyn. 30, 592–598 (1995).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    L. G. Loytsyansky, Mechanics of Liquids and Gases (Pergamon, Oxford, 1966; Nauka, Moscow, 1987).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    F. R. Menter, “Zonal two equation κ-ω turbulence models for aerodynamic flows,” AIAA Paper 93-2906 (AIAA, 1993).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    J. L. Steger, “Implicit finite-difference simulation of flow about arbitrary two-dimensional geometries,” AIAA J. 16, 679–686 (1978).CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    A. D. Savel’ev, “The use of high order composite compact schemes for computing supersonic jet interaction with a surface,” Comput. Math. Math. Phys. 53, 1558–1570 (2013).MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    M. N. Mikhailovskaya and B. V. Rogov, “Monotone compact running schemes for systems of hyperbolic equatins,” Comput. Math. Math. Phys. 52, 578–600 (2012).MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    S. K. Lele, “Compact finite difference schemes with spectral-like resolution,” J. Comput. Phys. 102, 16–42 (1992).MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    A. D. Savel’ev, “On the structure of internal dissipation of composite compact schemes for gasdynamic simulation,” Comput. Math. Math. Phys. 49, 2135–2148 (2009).MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Pleiades Publishing, Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Dorodnicyn Computing CentreRussian Academy of SciencesMoscowRussia

Personalised recommendations