Advertisement

Comparison of Hybrid RANS/LES Methods for Supersonic Combustion in a Model Scramjet Combustor

  • Junsu Shin
  • Hong-Gye SungEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Notes on Numerical Fluid Mechanics and Multidisciplinary Design book series (NNFM, volume 137)

Abstract

Numerical studies are carried out on the boundary layer behavior on a flat plate as well as on the non-reactive and reactive flows in a scramjet combustor to analyze the effects of various hybrid RANS/LES methods. Three hybrid RANS/LES methods are selected—an improved delayed detached eddy simulation, the l 2ω-detached eddy simulation, and the dynamic l 2ω-detached eddy simulation. The present method is based on the finite-volume approach on structured mesh, and the governing equations are treated using the Favre averaging approach. Inviscid fluxes are discretized using 5th order WENO schemes. Turbulent combustion is modeled as a level-set flamelet model. Based on the results from the flat plate and the non-reacting and reacting simulation, most of the hybrid RANS/LES methods show equivalent trends. However, dramatic differences are found in the calculations for the improved delayed detached eddy simulation and dynamic l 2ω-detached eddy simulation in terms of eddy capturing.

References

  1. 1.
    Coles, D.: Measurements in the Boundary Layer on a Smooth Flat Plate in Supersonic Flow: III. Measurements in a Flat-Plate Boundary Layer at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. Jet Propulsion Laboratory Report No. 20-71, June 1953Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gritskevich, M.S., Garbaruk, A.V., Schütze, J., Menter, F.R.: Development of DDES and IDDES formulations for the k-ω shear stress transport model. Flow Turbul. Combust. 88(3), 431–449 (2012)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Génin, F., Menon, S.: Simulation of turbulent mixing behind a strut injector in supersonic flow. AIAA J. 48(3), 526–539 (2010)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Oevermann, M.: Numerical investigation of turbulent hydrogen combustion in a SCRAMJET using flamelet modeling. Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 4, 463–480 (2000)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Park, C.H., Park, S.O.: On the limiters of two-equation turbulence models. Int. J. Comput. Fluid Dyn. 19(1), 79–86 (2005)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Potturi, A.S., Edwards, J.R.: Hybrid large-eddy/Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes simulations of flow through a model Scramjet. AIAA J. 52(7), 1417–1429 (2014)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Reddy, K.R., Ryon, J.A., Durbin, P.A.: A DDES model with a Smagorinsky-type eddy viscosity formulation and log-layer mismatch correction. Int. J. Heat Fluid Flow 50, 103–113 (2014)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Waidmann, W., Alff, F., Böhm, M., Brummund, U., Clauβ, W., Oschwald, M.: Supersonic combustion of hydrogen/air in a scramjet combustion chamber. Space Technol. 15(6), 427–430 (1995)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Yin, Z.: Development of the ℓ2ω delayed detached eddy simulation model with dynamically computed constant, Unpublished master’s thesis, Iowa State University, Ames, United States (2015)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Korea Aerospace UniversityGoyangRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations