Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-19T09:21:25.251Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Numerical study of Transient Flow in a Full-Size Reflected Shock Tunnel

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 May 2011

Chang-Hsien Tai*
Affiliation:
Department of Vehicles Engineering, National Pingtung University of Science and Technology, Pingtung, Taiwan, R. O. C.
Jr-Ming Miao*
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Chung Cheng Institute of Technology, National Defense University, Taoyuan, Taiwan, R. O. C.
Chun-Chi Li*
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Chung Cheng Institute of Technology, National Defense University, Taoyuan, Taiwan, R. O. C.
*
*Professor
**Associate Professor
***Ph.D. student
Get access

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to develop a CFD solver that used to simulate the transient flow phenomena in a reflected shock tunnel. The transient flow phenomena in a shock tunnel include the reflected shock/boundary layer interaction and the starting process of nozzle flow that can affect the duration of test flow in actual conditions. To numerically simulate these transient flow features, a full-size, axisymmetric reflected shock tunnel model is used. The governing equations are a full Navier-Stokes equation, a species equation and a simplified polynomial correlation to simulate the real gas effects. The numerical code is developed based on the finite volume method coupled with the upwind Roe's scheme and the total variation diminishing (TVD) method. To increase the calculation efficiency, a multi-block and multi-mesh grid generation technique is employed in a huge computational domain. The present computational results have not only confirmed the theoretical characteristics of a shock tube, but have also qualitatively presented the phenomena of reflected shock/boundary layer interaction and the starting process of nozzle flow. This numerical code is a useful tool to demonstrate the actual flow phenomena and to assist the design of experiments.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © The Society of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics, R.O.C. 2001

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

1Bertin, J. J., Hypersonic Aerothermodynamics, Washington, DC, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astromautics, Inc., Chap. 4, pp. 157201 (1994).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2Anderson, J. D. Jr., Modern Compressible Flow, New York, MacGraw-Hill (1990).Google Scholar
3Lukasiewicz, J., Experimental Methods of Hypersonics, New York, Marcel Dekker, Inc., Chap. 13, 14, pp. 153184 (1973).Google Scholar
4Park, C., Nonequilibrium Hypersonic Aerothermo-dynamics, New York, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Chap. 7, pp. 233254 (1990).Google Scholar
5Wilson, G. J., Sussman, M. A. and Loomis, M. P., “The Use of Nitrous Oxide to Increase Test Time in High Enthalpy Reflected Shock Tunnels,” AIAA Paper 94-2597 (1994).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6Bogdanoff, D. W. and Cambier, J. L., “Increase of Stagnation Pressure and Enthalpy in Shock Tunnels,” AIAA Paper 93-0350 (1993).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7Lu, F. K., “Initial Operation of the UTK Shock Tunnel,” AIAA Paper 92-0331 (1992).Google Scholar
8Mark, H., “The Interaction of a Reflected Shock Wave with the Boundary Layer in a Shock Tube,” NACA TM 1418 (1958).Google Scholar
9Davis, L., “The Interaction of a Reflected Shock Wave with the Boundary Layer in a Shock Tube and Its Influence on the Duration of Hot Flow in the Reflected Shock Tunnel, Part I,” Aeronautical Research Council-Cp-880 (1966).Google Scholar
10Davis, L., “The Interaction of a Reflected Shock Wave with the Boundary Layer in a Shock Tube and Its Influence on the Duration of Hot Flow in the Reflected Shock Tunnel, Part II,” Aeronautical Research Council-Cp-881 (1967).Google Scholar
11Matsuo, K., Kawagoe, S. and Kage, K., “The Interaction of a Reflected Shock Wave with Boundary Layer in a Shock Tube,” Bulletin of the JSME, 17(110), pp. 10391046 (1974).Google Scholar
12Kleine, H., Laykhov, V. N., Gvozdeva, L. G. and Gronig, H., “Bifurcation of a Reflected Shock Wave in a Shock Tube,” Proc 18th International Symposium on Shock Waves and Shock Tubes, pp. 261266 (1992).Google Scholar
13Wilson, G. J., Sharma, S. P. and Gillespie, W. D., “Time-Dependent Simulation of Reflected-Shock/Boundary Layer Interaction,” AIAA 93-0480 (1993).Google Scholar
14Amann, H. O., “Experimental Study of a Starting Process in a Reflection Nozzle,” Physics of Fluids, 12(5), pp. 150153 (1969).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15Cambier, J. L., Tokarcik-Polsky, S. and Prabhu, D. K., “Numerical Simulation of Unsteady Flow in a Hypersonic Shock Tunnel Facility,” AIAA Paper 92-4029 (1992).Google Scholar
16Tokarcik-Polsky, S. and Cambier, J. L., “Numerical Study of Transient Flow Phenomena in Shock Tunnels,” AIAA Journal, 32(5), pp. 971978 (1994).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17Lee, M. G. and Nishida, M., “Numerical Analysis of Unsteady Nozzle Flow by Shock Wave,” JSME Journal, 60(575), pp. 22672272 (1994).Google Scholar
18Tai, C. H., “Development of Finite-Volume Code for Compressible Flow,” National Science Council of the Republic of China, NCHC-86-04-004 (1997).Google Scholar
19Wilke, C. R., “A Viscosity Equation for Gas Mixtures,” Journal of Chemical Physics, 18(4), pp. 517519 (1950).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20Tannehill, J. C. and Mugge, P. H., “Improved Curve Fits for the Thermodynamic Properties of Equilibrium Air Suitable for Numerical Computation Using Time-Dependent or Shock-Capturing Methods,” NASA CR-2470 (1974).Google Scholar
21Jameson, A., Schmidt, W. and Turkel, E., “Numerical Solutions of the Euler Equations by a Finite Volume Method Using Runge-Kutta Time-stepping Schemes,” AIAA Paper 81-1259 (1981).Google Scholar
22Roe, P. L., “Approximate Riemann Solvers, Parameter Vector, and Difference Schemes,” Journal of Computational Physics, 43, pp. 357372 (1981).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23van Leer, B., “Towards the Ultimate Conservative Difference Scheme, V. a Second Order Sequel to Godunov's Method,” Journal of Computation Physics, 32, pp. 101 (1979).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
24Hirsch, C., Numerical Computation of Internal and External flow, 1, New York, John Wiley & Sons, Chap. 6 (1990).Google Scholar
25Walters, R. W., Cinnella, P., Slack, D. C. and Halt, D., “Characteristic-Based Algorithms for Flows in Thermo-Chemical Nonequilibrium,” AIAA Paper 90-0933 (1990).Google Scholar
26Tai, C. H., Chiang, D. C. and Su, Y. P., “Explicit Time Marching Method for the Time-Dependent Euler Computations,” Journal of Computational Physics, 130, pp. 191202 (1997).Google Scholar
27Jacobs, P. A., “Numerical Simulation of Transient Hypervelocity Flow in an Expansion Tube,” NASA CR-189615 (1992).Google Scholar
28Schmidt, E. M. and Duffy, S., “Noise from Shock Tube Facilities,” AIAA paper 85-0046 (1985).Google Scholar
29Wang, J. C. H. and Widhopf, G. F., “Numerical Simulation of Blast Flow Fields Using a High Resolution TVD Finite Volume Scheme,” Computers & Fluids, 18(1), pp. 103137 (1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
30Tai, C. H., Miao, J. M., Lo, S. W. and Su, Y. K., “Numerical Study of Muzzle Transient Flow of Howitzer with Muzzle Brake,” The Chinese Journal of Mechanics, Series B, 15(2), pp. 111126 (1999).Google Scholar
31Tai, C. S. and Kao, A. F., “Navier-Stokes Solver for Hypersonic Flow over a Slender Cone,” Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, 31(2), pp. 215222 (1994).CrossRefGoogle Scholar