Numerical Study of the Subsonic Base Flow with a Side Support

  • Yancheng YouEmail author
  • Kai Oßwald
  • Heinrich Lüdeke
  • Volker Hannemann
Conference paper
Part of the Notes on Numerical Fluid Mechanics and Multidisciplinary Design book series (NNFM, volume 117)


The base flow of a generic rocket configuration is investigated numerically with different levels of turbulence modeling. At the nominal flow conditions, the comparison of numerical results with the experiments shows significant deviations in the vertical plane where a side support stands. A simulation of the open test section indicates two necessities of correction. On the one hand, an C p increase of 0.015 is necessary to correlate the measured plenum pressure with the inflow location of the numerical simulation. On the other hand, a − 0.32° angle of attack modification should be accounted for a justified comparison between the DES results and the experiments. A strong sensitivity towards such small angles of attack has been observed later in the experiments but not in respective RANS solutions. The DES results agree well with the experiment based on the above-mentioned corrections.


Wind Tunnel Shear Layer Nominal Condition Effective Angle Planar Velocity 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Wolf, C.C., Hornschemeyer, R., Henke, R.: Investigation on Turbulence Structures in the Wake of a Generic Rocket Configuration. In: DGLR STAB-Symposium 2010. NNFM (2010)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wolf, C.C., You, Y., Hornschemeyer, R., Ludeke, H., Hannemann, V.: Base-flow sensitivity of a generic rocket forebody towards small freestream angles. In: Proceedings of the 4th EUCASS Conference, St. Petersburg (2011)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mack, A., Hannemann, V.: Validation of the unstructured DLR-TAU Code for Hypersonic Flows. AIAA 2002-3111 (2002)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Reimann, B., Johnston, I., Hannemann, V.: DLR-TAU Code for High Enthalpy Flows. NNFM, vol. 87, pp. 99–106. Springer DE (2004)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Spalart, P.R., Jou, W.H., Strelets, M., Allmaras, S.R.: Comments on the feasibility of LES for wings, and on a hybrid RANS/LES approach. In: Advances in DNS/LES, pp. 137–147. Greyden Press (1997)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Knopp, T., Zhang, X., Kessler, R., Lube, G.: Enhancement of an industrial finite volume code for large-eddy-type simulation of incompressible high Reynolds number flow using near-wall modeling. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Energ. (2010), doi:10.1016/j.cma.2009.01.005Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Haller, G.: An objective definition of a vortex. J. Fluid Mech. (2005), doi:10.1017/S0022112004002526Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yancheng You
    • 2
    Email author
  • Kai Oßwald
    • 1
  • Heinrich Lüdeke
    • 2
  • Volker Hannemann
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Aerodynamics and Flow TechnologyDLRGöttingenGermany
  2. 2.Institute of Aerodynamics and Flow TechnologyDLRBraunschweigGermany

Personalised recommendations