CHAPTER1 INTRODUCTION A Nozzle is a device designed to control the direction or characteristics of a fluid flow (especially to increase velocity) as it exits

(or enters) an enclosed chamber or pipe via an orifice. A nozzle is often a pipe or tube of varying cross sectional area and it can be used to direct or modify the flow of a fluid (liquid or gas). Nozzles are frequently used to control the rate of flow, speed, direction, mass, shape, and/or the pressure of the stream that emerges from the Frequently the goal is to increase the kinetic energy of the flowing medium at the expense of its pressure and internal energy. Nozzles can be described as convergent (narrowing down from a wide diameter to a smaller diameter in the direction of the flow) or divergent (expanding from a smaller diameter to a larger one). A de Laval nozzle has a convergent section followed by a divergent section and is often called a nozzle. Convergent nozzles accelerate subsonic fluids. If the nozzle pressure ratio is high enough the flow will reach sonic velocity at the narrowest point (i.e. the nozzle throat). In this situation, the nozzle is said to be choked. Increasing the nozzle pressure ratio further will not increase the throat Mach number beyond unity. Downstream (i.e. external to the nozzle) the flow is free to expand to supersonic velocities. Note that the Mach 1 can be a very high speed for a hot gas; since the speed of sound varies as the square root of absolute temperature. Thus the speed reached at a nozzle throat can be far higher than the speed of sound at
1

sea level. This fact is used extensively in rocketry where hypersonic flows are required, and where propellant mixtures are deliberately chosen to further increase the sonic speed. Divergent nozzles slow fluids, if the flow is subsonic, but accelerate sonic or supersonic fluids. Convergent can therefore accelerate fluids that have choked in the convergent section to supersonic speeds. This CD process is more efficient than allowing a convergent nozzle to expand supersonically externally. The shape of the divergent section also ensures that the direction of the escaping gases is directly backwards, as any sideways component would not contribute to thrust. Jet exhaust produces a net thrust from the energy obtained from combusting fuel which is added to the inducted air. This hot air is passed through a high speed nozzle, a propelling nozzle which enormously increases its kinetic energy. For a given mass flow, greater thrust is obtained with a higher exhaust velocity, but the best energy efficiency is obtained when the exhaust speed is well matched with the airspeed. However, no jet aircraft can maintain velocity while exceeding its exhaust jet speed, due to momentum considerations. Supersonic jet engines, like those employed in fighters and SST aircraft (e.g. Concorde), need high exhaust speeds. Therefore supersonic aircraft very typically use a CD nozzle despite weight and cost penalties. Subsonic jet engines employ relatively low, subsonic, exhaust velocities. They thus employ simple convergent nozzles. In addition, bypass nozzles are employed giving even lower speeds.

Rocket motors use convergent-divergent nozzles with very large area ratios so as to maximise thrust and exhaust velocity and thus extremely high nozzle pressure ratios are employed. Mass flow is at a premium since all the propulsive mass is carried with vehicle, and very high exhaust speeds are desirable. Most modern passenger and military aircraft are powered by gas turbine engines, which are also called jet engines. There are several different types of gas turbine engines, but all turbine engines have some parts in common. All gas turbine engines have a nozzle to produce thrust, to conduct the exhaust gases back to the free stream, and to set the mass flow rate through the engine. The nozzle sits downstream of the power turbine. A nozzle is a relatively simple device, just a specially shaped tube through which hot gases flow. However, the mathematics which describes the operation of the nozzle takes some careful thought. As shown above, nozzles come in a variety of shapes and sizes depending on the mission of the aircraft. Simple turbojets, and turboprops, often have a fixed geometry convergent nozzle. Turbofan engines often employ a co-annular nozzle as shown at the top left. The core flow exits the centre nozzle while the fan flow exits the annular nozzle. Mixing of the two flows provides some thrust enhancement and these nozzles also tend to be quieter than convergent nozzles. Afterburning turbojets and turbofans require a variable geometry convergentdivergent - CD nozzle. In this nozzle, the flow first converges down to the minimum area or throat, and then is expanded through the divergent section to the exit at the right. The variable geometry causes these nozzles to be heavier than a fixed geometry nozzle, but variable
3

geometry provides efficient engine operation over a wider airflow range than a simple fixed nozzle. Rocket engines also use nozzles to accelerate hot exhaust to produce thrust. Rocket engines usually have a fixed geometry CD nozzle with a much larger divergent section than is required for a gas turbine. All of the nozzles we have discussed thus far are round tubes. Recently, however, engineers have been experimenting with nozzles with rectangular exits. This allows the exhaust flow to be easily deflected, or vectored. Changing the direction of the thrust with the nozzle makes the aircraft much more manoeuvrable. Because the nozzle conducts the hot exhaust back to the free stream, there can be serious interactions between the engine exhaust flow and the airflow around the aircraft. On fighter aircraft, in particular, large drag penalties can occur near the nozzle exits. As with the inlet design, the external nozzle configuration is often designed by the airframes and subjected to wind tunnel testing to determine the performance effects on the airframe. The internal nozzle is usually the responsibility of the engine manufacturer. 1.1 INTRODUCTION TO JET Jet is a free shear flow driven by momentum introduced at the nozzle exit of, usually, a nozzle or am orifice which exhibits a characteristic that, the ratio of width to axial distance is a constant. The jet may also define as a continuous fluid flow issuing from an orifice into a medium of lower speed fluid. As the jet fluid travels further away from its origin, it slows down due to mixing with slower speed ambient fluid. This is due to boundary layer at the nozzle exit
4

which develops roll up structure, or ring vortices, which grow in size when they move downstream, due to the entrainment of ambient fluid into jet stream. Thus, mass flow at any cross-section of the jet progressively increases along the downstream direction. Hence, to converse momentum the centreline velocity decreases with

downstream distance. The resulting centreline velocity decay as proportional to gradient across the shear layer and is a strong function of distance downstream of the exit. The vast quanta of knowledge presently available and continuous research currently being carried out stand testimony to the importance associated with the jet flows. 1.1.1 CLASSIFICATION OF JETS Basically jets can be classified into two categories namely; incompressible and compressible jets Fig.1.1. The jets with Mach number less than 0.3, up to which the compressibility eects are negligible are called incompressible jets. Compressible jets can be again subdivided into subsonic, sonic and supersonic jets. Jets with Mach number 1.0 are called sonic jets, which can be correctly expanded or under expanded. Supersonic jets are the jets with Mach number more than one. These can be further classified into over expanded, correctly expanded and under expanded jets. 1.1.2REGIMES OF JETS A Schematic diagram of a typical subsonic jet and the different flow zones are shown in Fig. 1.2 the flow regimes in the subsonic jets are classified as follows:

JETS

INCOMPRESSIBLE 0<M<0.3

COMPRESSIBLE M0.3

SUBSONIC 0.3<M<1
CORRECTLY EXPANDED Pe = Pb

SONIC M=1
UNDER EXPANDED Pe > Pb

SUPERSONIC 1<M<4

OVER EXPANDED Pe < Pb

CORRECTLY EXPANDED Pe = Pb

UNDER EXPANDED Pe > Pb

Fig 1.1 Classification of jets.

a. Potential core region: This the region consists of a core constant axial velocity close to the jet exit velocity surrounded by a rapidly growing and strongly sheared annulus of mixing layer or shear layer with intense turbulence. Potential core region extends about 5 times the nozzle exit diameter (D) downstream from the nozzle exit. This is because, the mixing initiated at the jet boundaries has not yet permeated into the entire flow field, thus leaving a region that is characterized by a constant axial velocity. b. Transition region: This is the region where the centerline velocity begins to decay. This characteristic decay zone extends from about 5D to 10D downstream over which the turbulence
6

changes from its annular to a somewhat pseudo-cylindrical distribution. As a result, the velocity difference between the ambient fluid and the high speed core of the jet decrease and attenuates the shear that supports the vortical rings in the jet and thus the velocity profiles become smoother with jet propagation. c. Fully developed region: Beyond the transition region the jet becomes similar in appearance to a flow of fluid from a source of infinitely small thickness In reality the jet velocity becomes insignificant after about 30D

Fig.1.2 Schematic of different zones in a subsonic jet. 1.2 NEED OF JET CONTROL There are numerous system, especially in the aerospace, where the ability to enhance the mixing characteristics of a jet will greatly improve their performance. For example, by increasing the rate of mixing between air and fuel, the efficiency of a combustion cycle can be improved. Other examples of technological application requiring control of mixing in compressible flows include thrust augmenting
7

ejectors, thrust vector control, metal deposition, and gas dynamic lasers. 1.3 TYPES OF CONTROLS Control may be defined as the ability to modify the flow characteristics of jets. Jet controls can be broadly classified into active and passive controls. Both active and passive controls mainly aim at modifying the flow and noise characteristics. 1.3.1 ACTIVE CONTROL In active control, an auxiliary power source (like micro jets) is used to control the jet characteristics. Many active jet control methods use energized actuators to dynamically manipulate flow phenomena. Pulsed jets, piezoelectric actuators, micro jets and oscillating jets are among the most effective controls for active mixing enhancement. 1.3.2 PASSIVE CONTROL In passive control the controlling energy is drawn directly from the flow to be controlled. Passive controls are mostly desired because no external power source is required. Passive control methods use geometrical modifications which alter the flow structure. Some of the commonly used passive control methods are shown below.

Fig.1.3 Schematic of different type of passive controls.

1.4. CHEVRONS Chevrons are saw tooth-like patterns at the trailing edge of jet engine nozzles that help reduce noise from the ensuing jet. It has been known from past experimental studies with laboratory-scale jets that small protrusions at the nozzle lip, called tabs, would suppress screech tones. In the 1980s and 1990s the tabs were explored extensively for mixing enhancement in jets. These studies advanced the understanding of the flow mechanisms and suggested that the technique might have a potential for reduction of turbulent mixing noise that is the dominant component of jet noise for most aircraft. Driven by stringent noise regulations, such a potential first received serious attention on an application level in the mid 1990s. Engine companies expressed interest and some proposed their own concepts for tests. In 1996-97, concepts from General Electric Aircraft Engines (GEAE), Pratt &
9

Whitney (P&W) and others were combined into a test program under NASAs Advanced Subsonic Technology (AST) Program. Various tab/chevron configurations were evaluated for noise reduction with models of separate flow nozzles in free-jet tests and encouraging results were obtained. However, scepticism lingered and there was reluctance to embrace the technology primarily out of concerns about thrust penalty. In 1998 the impact on thrust was evaluated and found to be less than 0.25%. This was the turning point in the development of the technology when industry started to invest heavily with product development programs. The effort under AST culminated in flight tests in 2001 on NASAs Lear jet 25 and Honeywells Falcon 20 test aircraft proving the noise reduction. Today, chevrons are implemented on various engines, However, as stated, the evolution of the technology can be traced back to decades of fundamental studies with tabs and similar devices at universities, NASA as well as in industry. The concerted NASA / industry studies in the 1990s eventually led to designs that produced significant noise reduction while keeping the thrust loss within acceptable limits. The objective of this paper is to provide an account of this evolution, starting with a summary of the earlier fundamental studies. 1.4.1. EARLIER STUDIES ON THE EFFECT OF TABS It has been known for a long time that tabs, small protrusions placed near the nozzle exit, suppress screech noise. Screech is a phenomenon typical of small, clean, laboratory jets that, under imperfectly expanded supersonic condition, involve a feedback loop to produce a sharp tone. In laboratory experiments the curious suppression effect is readily demonstrated by inserting a small obstacle, such as the tip of a pencil, near the nozzle exit.
10

One of the earliest studies of noise suppression by such devices is that of Westley & Lilley . A picture of the teeth patterns used in their experiment, in the then newly established program of jet noise research at Cranfield, UK.

The authors observed large reduction of supersonic jet noise by these devices apparently in part due to suppression of screech. Later experiments usually deployed a single tab or two tabs that were sufficient to suppress screech. Suppression of screech was desired in order to allow a clearer study of other components of jet noise. With regards to the effect of tabs on the jet flow field, The authors of this work noted that the insertion of small rectangular tabs into the jet flow on the nozzle perimeter had a profound effect; the apparent potential core length was reduced to about two diameters followed by a rapid decay of the centerline mean velocity. With previous studies when compared with the rectangular protrusion at the nozzle exit, it was soon recognized that a triangular tab with same

base width worked just as well. Moreover, when the apex of the triangular tab was tilted downstream it appeared to work even better. Thats why here we have chosen the triangular protrusion in addition to that we have added 8 tabs for better reduction of noise.

11

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE SURVEY 2.1EFFECT OF CHEVRON COUNT AND PENETRATION Experimental investigations (1) have been carried out on chevron nozzles to assess the importance of chevron parameters such as the number of chevrons (chevron count) and chevron penetration. Acoustic measurements such as overall sound pressure level, spectra, directivity, acoustic power, and broadband shock .Noise has been made over a range of nozzle pressure ratio from sub-critical to under expansion levels. Shadowgraph images of the shock-cell structure of jets from various chevron nozzles have also been captured for different nozzle pressure ratios. The results indicate that a higher chevron count with a lower Level of penetration yields the maximum noise suppression for low and medium nozzle pressure ratios. Of all the geometries studied, chevron nozzle with eight lobes and 0degree penetration angle gives the maximum noise reduction. Chevron nozzles are found to be free from screech unlike regular nozzles. Acoustic Power index has been calculated to quantitatively evaluate the performance of the various chevron nozzles. Chevron count is the pertinent parameter for noise
12

reduction at low nozzle pressure ratios, whereas at high nozzle pressure ratios, chevron penetration is crucial. The results illustrate that by careful selection of chevron parameters substantial noise reduction can be achieved. 2.2 NUMERICAL PREDICTIONS OF NOISE IN NOZZLESWITH AND WITHOUT CHEVRONS Numerical simulations
(2)

of round, compressible, turbulent jets

using the Shear Stress Transport (SST kx)model have been carried out. The three-dimensional calculations have been done on a tetrahedral mesh with 0.9 million cells. Two jets, one cold and hot, have been simulated. The Mach number for both the Cases is 0.75. Overall sound pressure levels (SPL) at far-field observer locations have been calculated using fowcs WilliamsHawkins equation. The numerical predictions have been compared with experimental results available in the literature. Axial and radial variation of the mean axial velocity and overall SPL levels are compared. The potential core length is predicted well, but the predicted centreline velocity decay is faster than the measured value. The URANS calculations are not able to predict the absolute values for the overall SPL, but predict the trends reasonably well. The calculations predict the trends and absolute values of the variations of the spectral amplitude well for the aft receivers, but not for the forward receivers. Effect of chevrons on the noise from the jet is also investigated for cold and hot jets. In each case, two chevron taper angles, namely, 0degree and 5degree are considered. The latter nozzle produces the most significant modification to the baseline spectra and is less effective at high frequencies in abating the noise. The present calculations predict a reduction in the overall SPL for the
13

chevron nozzle with 0degree taper angle and a slight increase for chevron nozzle with 5degree taper angle, for both cold and hot jets. 2.3 LARGE-EDDY SIMULATION OF CHEVRON JET FLOW WITH NOISE PREDICTIONS Hybrid large-eddy(3) type simulations for chevron nozzle jet flows are performed at Mach 0.9 and Re = 1.03*10^6. Without using any sub grid scale model (SGS), the numerical approach applied in the Present study is essentially implicit large-eddy simulation (ILES). However, a Reynolds-averaged NavierStokes (RANS) solution is patched into the near wall region. This makes the overall solution strategy Hybrid RANSILES. The disparate turbulence length scales, implied by these different modelling Approaches are matched using a HamiltonJacobi equation. The complex geometry features of the chevron Nozzles are fully meshed. With numerical fidelity in mind, high quality, hexahedral multi-block Meshes of 12.5*10^6 cells are used. Despite the modest meshes, the novel RANSILES approach shows Encouraging performance. Computed mean and second-order fluctuating quantities of the turbulent near field compare favourably with measurements. The radiated far-field sound is predicted using the Ffowcs Williams and Hawkins (FWH) surface integral method. Encouraging agreement of the predicted far field sound directivity and spectra with measurements is obtained.

Key purpose of this study is to highlight the penetration effects of chevrons. Hence, the most severe 18.2bend SMC006 nozzle is chosen as our primary focus. For comparative purposes the 5SMC001 is also fully studied. To explore the altered chevron shear layer mixing
14

by the chevrons, the near nozzle instantaneous flow field is examined. Only the results for the much more strongly penetrating SMC006 are presented here gives computational snapshots of density Gradient magnitude or Numerical Schlieren on both cut planes In spite of some density variations within it, the potential core is clearly visible, its length being slightly shorter than 5D. Strong density Variations are located in the shear layer next to the potential Core. The outer edge of the shear layer can also be easily identified. The numerical simulation confirms the experiment with respect to the influence of chevron penetration. With a bend angle of 18.2,the potential core is shorter, downstream Reynolds stresses lower, but the sound source distribution wider in the side line direction. The characteristics of far-field sound for the 18.2 bend are therefore to the bend angle of 5. Namely, the more server bend has louder Side line but quieter downstream noise. It also increases the high-frequency sound intensity but decreases the low-frequency. This consistency of the current numerical study with measurements encouraging and suggesting a reliable numerical frame work has been developed.

2.4 AN EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION OF FLOW WITH A SINGLE DELTA TAB A single inverted(4) delta tab attached to the trailing edge of a splitter plate in a two-stream mixing layer has been examined experimentally using a three-component laser-Doppler anemometer. Detailed mean flow and turbulence measurements were obtained at a velocity ratio of 2:1 between the two co-flowing streams. The results
15

showed that, when the tab was tilted to the high-speed side, stream wise vortices generated and the subsequent mixing were stronger and more intense than when tilting it to the low-speed side. The strength of stream wise vorticity appeared to have a direct correlation with the level of turbulence generated in the cross-stream directions. Attempts were also made to quantify the effect of each (streamwise vorticity) production term in the streamwise vorticity transport equation. The effects of a single inverted delta tab in a two-stream mixing flow situation have been investigated using a three component laserDoppler anemometer. The distortion in the streamwise mean velocity flow fields and the generation of the streamwise vorticity that resulted from the introduction of tab. The tab has been established via measurements of three mean velocity components and six Reynolds stress components in the present investigation. The results have clearly shown that when the tab is tilted to the high-speed side, it enhances mixing between the two streams better than when tilted on the side of the low-speed flow. When the tab is placed on the high-speed side, both sources for stream wise vorticity generation are operative. When the tab is placed on the low-speed side, only source 2 is operative. This observation suggests that the production of turbulence in the lateral directions is strongly associated with stream wise vorticity and that the imbalance of production and dissipation leads to significant diffusion in the stations further downstream.

2.5 CHARACTERISTICS OF SONIC JETS WITH TABS

16

The result of an experimental investigation(5) on the effect of vortex generation in the form of a mechanical tab placed at the nozzle exit on the evolution of jet and its decay are reported in this paper. Jets from a sonic nozzle with and without tabs operated at nozzle pressure ratio from 2 to 7 were studied. Tabs with two combinations of length to-width ratio were investigated by keeping the blockage area constant. The tabs offered a blockage of 10.18% of the nozzle exit area. The centreline pitot pressure decay shows that for the tabbed jet a

maximum core reduction of about 75% can be achieved at a nozzle pressure ratio (NPR) 7 compared to an uncontrolled jet. So that the tabs drastically weaken the shock structure in the jet core and disperse the supersonic zone of the flow making them occupying a greater zone of the flow field compare to the plane nozzle. This causes the waves to become weaker and the jet to spread faster. The tabs are found to shed counter-rotating vortices all along the edges, resulting in enhanced mixing. Isobaric contours reveal that the streamwise vortices cause an inward indentation of the entrained mass into the jet core and an outward ejection of core flow. To understand the distortion introduced by tabs on the jet cross section and its growth leading to bifurcation of the jet, a surface coating visualization method was developed and employed.

Vortex generators in the form of tabs have been found to be quite effective in influencing jet evolution and mixing. The tabs are found to be effective in bringing down the centreline pitot pressure oscillations for all nozzle pressure ratios. Shadow graph pictures reveal that the tabs diffuse the shocks, resulting in weaker shocks in the core region. Further, it is found that the tabs disperse the supersonic zone of the
17

flow field compared to the plane nozzle. The tab is found to generate a pair of counter-rotating vortices, which result in enhanced mixing. Isobaric contours reveal that generated stream wise vortices cause an inward indentation of entrained mass into jet core and an outward ejection of core flow. Surface visualization explains the distortion introduced by the tabs on the jet cross section. The distortion produced by the two tabs grows which downstream distance and result essentially in bifurcation of the jet. The tab length is found to be more effective in mixing enhancement then the width for the same blockage area and the limit for tab length are the nozzle radius and not the boundary layer thickness.

2.6 EFFECT OF TAB ON MIXING CHARACTERISTICS OF SUBSONIC AND SONIC JETS

The effect of tabs placed

(6)

at the exit of a circular nozzle of

10mm diameter on the near flow field of the jet was investigated experimentally for subsonic mach numbers. The tab used was a hollow semi circular tube of diameter 1.5mm and length 2mm. The near jet flow field was studied for three configurations of the tab, namely, the concave surface facing the flow exiting nozzle (arc tab facing -in) and convex surface facing the flow (arc tab facing -out) for the blockage ratio of 7.64 %.the center line mach number decay shows that for the jet with arc tab facing in, a maximum reduction in core length of about 80% was achieved at all subsonic and sonic correctly expanded conditions of jet. Arc tab facing-out and rectangular tab configuration reduces the core length to about 50%. The decay of arc tab controlled jet was compared with that obtained for a plain rectangular tab of same
18

blockage and a plain circular nozzle. The jet was found to decay at a faster rate in the case of arc- tab facing in configuration as compared to the facing out and rectangular tab configurations. Mach number profiles show that the arc tab facing in distorts the jet efficiently by spreading the jet wider in the plane normal to the tab and the effect of spread is more pronounced in the jet with arc tab facing in as compared to the arc tab facing out. The effect of tab orientation and shape seem to have a profound influence on the development of the jet in the near field.

Among the three configurations arc tab facing in was found to be more efficient in reducing the potential core length and distorting three jet structure compared to the other two configurations in all subsonic and sonic correctly expanded mach numbers .arc tab facing in is showing consistently better performance for all the mach numbers compared to other two configurations. It may be due to the fact that the arc tab facing in creates stronger pressure gradient shedding stronger stream wise vortices causing reduction in potential core and enhanced mixing.

19

CHAPTER 3 COMPUTATIONAL WORK

3.1 MODELLING Designing three dimensional nozzle with different configurations at exit we used CATIA modelling software which is flexible one and user friendly.

3.1.1 THREE DIMENSIONALMODELLING For this project, the model of nozzle has been created by using modelling software CATIA. Initially the sketch has been created with the given dimension, and at the exit the domain for the visualization of the potential core region has been designed with the respective dimensions.

NOZZLE SPECIFICATIONS: Specifications Length Inlet diameter Exit diameter Chevron length Wedge Table 3.1 Nozzle specifications
20

Dimensions 30mm 30mm 16mm 5.44mm 3.08mm

Fig 3.1 Two dimensional free jet nozzle

21

Fig 3.2Three dimensional free jet nozzle

Fig 3.3 Drafted views of free jet nozzle

22

Fig 3.4 Chevron nozzle with 8 count

Fig 3.5 Drafted views of chevron nozzle Fig 3.3 is the three dimensional diagram of nozzle with chevron. To draw the nozzle with chevron follows the same as nozzle. After developing the free jet nozzle then draw chevron which seems like saw tooth. To draw chevron first choose the appropriate plane and go to sketcher. Then draw the chevron with correct dimensions for our specifications. After finishing sketch exit the sketcher. Then select the chevron and choose the pocket option to pocket the chevron. After pocketing the chevron choose the circular pattern in the transformation features. Thus the chevrons are created in the exit of nozzle with our dimensions and the chevron count is 8.

23

Fig 3.6 Chevron nozzle with wedge thickness 1mm

Fig 3.7 Drafted view

24

Fig 3.8 Chevron nozzle with wedge thickness 2mm

Fig 3.9 Drafted view

25

3.2PREPROCESSING ICEM CFX is the pre-processor tool used to mesh the model in order to get the accurate result. 3.2.2THREE DIMENSIONAL MESHING Import the Three dimensional iges file or step file into the ICEM CFX. Then do any clean up operations if necessary. Then create the domain according to requirement which may be rectangular brick or cylinder for our convenient. The zone height is to be 5D to 10D and length to be 30D to 40D range or to be greater than that too. After creating the zone we place the domain at the exit of the nozzle by using copy option. We should unite the two volumes as a single volume .Then the domain can be decomposed according to the requirement. Then the mesh has been made with the size of 1 which can be reduced according to our requirement for better results. MESH TYPE Combination of Quadra and Hexa mesh for nozzle and for boundary domain tetra mesh type. 3.2.3 CHEVRON NOZZLE WITH AND WITHOUT WEDGES In this follow the same as in above instead of uniting the volumes here subtract the volumes by using the subtract option i.e., subtracting the nozzle from domain. After subtracting there will be one volume only. Before subtracting place the nozzle inside the domain for the convenience. Then mesh the faces using the face mesh operation by tria elements under pave scheme. We can mesh the edges of the volume and then do face and volume mesh if needed. In the edge mesh
26

select each edge of the volume and to give number of nodes in each edge based on the need. After finishing edge mesh then select the face mesh. In the face mesh we have to select each face and mesh. In the face mesh we may select the elements as QUAD or TRIA.After finishing the face mesh then go for the zones operation. In the Zones we have to select the INLET, OUTLET,WALL, AXIS, PRESSURE INLET, PRESSURE OUTLET, etc,. After applying the zones we may check the quality of the mesh by using quality operation. After finishing all above steps have to save the mesh and to export the mesh. 3.2.4BOUNDARY CONDITIONS The below diagram illustrates the boundary conditions of 3dimensional models. In ICEM CFX select the pre-processor modules and feed the input for the respective Mach number.

Fig 3.10boundary conditions

27

Fig 3.11 Three Dimensional free jet Mesh Fig 3.11 is the meshing model of base line nozzle. The meshing process for this model follows the above procedure with little variation. In which nozzle volume and zone volume are united to a single volume. Then this volume is meshed by using volume mesh operation using tetra and hex elements scheme and it contains 835710 elements.

28

Fig 3.12Chevron nozzle mesh Fig 3.12 is the meshing model of chevron nozzle. The meshing process for this model follows the above procedure with little variation. In which nozzle volume and zone volume are subtracted to a single volume. Then this volume is meshed by using volume mesh operation using tetrahedral elements under and it contains 363094 elements.

29

Fig 3.13 Chevron nozzle with wedge thickness1mm mesh Fig 3.13 is the meshing model of base line nozzle. The meshing process for this model follows the above procedure with little variation. In which nozzle volume and zone volume are subtracted to a single volume. Then this volume is meshed by using volume mesh operation using tetrahedral (boundary) & hex(nozzle) elements under scheme and it contains 453731 elements.

Fig 3.14 Chevron nozzle with wedge thickness 2mm mesh The above meshing model contains 456208 tetrahedral elements and meshing under scheme. The procedure is same as for the previous one.

30

3.3SOLVER ICEM CFX has a post processor or analyzing software used to simulate the model for their application. 3.3.1STEPS TO SOLVE After finishing the pre-processor and then have to import our meshed model into the software by read the case file such as mesh file. After reading the case file have to check the grid and zones. Then go to define select the model and select the solver. Then click the viscous model and select the appropriate viscous model for your problem. Here we selected k-omega (used for turbulent analysis). Then click materials in define option and change the material to ideal gas and click ok. Then click operating condition and give the operating condition value in Pascal or any other unit. Then click Boundary conditions and give the pressure values for boundary conditions such as pressure inlet, pressure outlet, pressure far field, etc, Then go to solve select initialize and select initialize in which select the inlet condition and click apply. Then go to monitors in solve and select residual and click ok for print and plot. After finishing all above steps click iterate in solve and give value for number of iterations and start the iteration. After the solution is converged and iteration will stop and we see the results. Go to the display menu select the contours and select which one to display such as velocity, pressure, etc, and click display and the contour will display in different colours for variations of values. We can also see the XY plot for velocity, pressure, etc, by selecting plot menu and select XY

31

plane and select pressure ,velocity ,etc,. Thus the meshed model is analyzed using CFX following the above procedure.

3.3.2FORMULA TO FIND THE TOTAL PRESSURE PO/P M2)/-1

P= 101325 Pascal PO/P 0.42)1.4/1.4-1

PO= 113134.6279 Pascal 3.3.3 BOUNDARY CONDTION PRESSURE VALUES Mach number Total pressure (pascal) Gauge pressure (pascal) Operating pressure (pascal) 0.4 0.6 0.8 113134.6279 129240.4201 154453.7514 101325 101325 101325 0 0 0

Table 3.2 Boundary conditions pressure values

32

CHAPTER 4 RESULT AND DISCUSSION Potential core region in the subsonic flow is the region where the center line velocity is same as the velocity at the exit of the nozzle. The Mach number along the center line was calculated from the total pressure and static pressure. The static pressure across the jet is assumed to be the same as the surrounding ambient pressure. The assumption is perfectly valid for subsonic jets. In this chapter we are discussed about the centreline mach number decay for chevron, chevron with 1mm wedge and chevron with 2mm wedge. Here we plot dimensional and non-dimensional graphs for all subsonic mach number for all configuration. The plots are obtained from the post processor ICEM CFX. We discussed and compared the results of center line Mach number decay for all subsonic mach number to each configurations. Streamwise vortices are generated when wedges and chevron are introduced at the exit of the nozzle. They act as effective mixing promoters and enhance the jet mixing. These faster mixing results in rapid jet decay of chevron with wedge compared to a jet from a plane nozzle. The chevron increase vortices in the exit nozzle along with
33

wedges also induce vortices and increase the jet mixing and help to reduce the potential core. The contour plot obtained from the CFD is dimensional and convert it in to non dimensional by excel. The graph is plotted between X/Dj and M/Mj. The length of the potential core is divided by the exit diameter and Mach number is divided by the jet Mach number. Both in dimensional and non dimensional plot we can view the Mach number decay clearly.

4.1 EFFECT OF CENTER LINE MACH NUMBER FOR FREE JET

Fig 4.1Mach number plot for free jet M= 0.4

34

Fig 4.2Centerline Mach number decay of free jet The above graph shows the centerline Mach number decay for the Mach number 0.4 and is plotted between X/Dj and M/Mj. Here the potential core decays at 5.5D.

Fig 4.3Mach number plot for free jet M= 0.6

35

Fig4.4Centerline Mach number decay of free jet The above graph shows the centerline Mach number decay for the Mach number 0.6 and is plotted between X/Dj and M/Mj. Here the potential core decays at 5.81D. When comparing with 0.4 Mach number of free jet the potential core length is high.

Fig 4.5Mach number plot for free jet M= 0.8

Fig 4.6Centerline Mach number decay of free jet The above graph shows the center line Mach number decay for the Mach number 0.8 and is plotted between X/Dj and M/Mj. Here the potential core decays at 6.12D. When comparing with 0.4 and 0.6 Mach number of free jet the potential core length is high. 4.2 CENTER LINE MACH NUMBER DECAY OF CHEVRON

37

Fig 4.7Mach number plot for chevron M= 0.4

Fig 4.8Centerline Mach number decay of chevron The above centerline Mach number decay graph is plotted between M/Mj and X/Dj for the chevron nozzle for the Mach number 0.4. The potential core decay starts from 3.88D. When comparing with 0.4 Mach number of free jet the potential core length is 30 % reduced.

38

Fig 4.9Mach number plot for chevron M= 0.6

Fig 4.10Centerline Mach number decay of chevron The above centerline Mach number decay graph is plotted between M/Mj and X/Dj for the chevron nozzle for the Mach number 0.6. The potential core decay starts from 3.93D. When comparing with 0.6 Mach number of free jet the potential core length is 33 % reduced.

39

Fig 4.11Mach number plot for chevron M= 0.8

Fig 4.12Centerline Mach number decay of chevron The above centerline Mach number decay graph is plotted between M/Mj and X/Dj for the chevron nozzle for the Mach number 0.8. The potential core decay starts from 3.93D. When comparing with
40

0.8 Mach number of free jet the potential core length is 36 % reduced.

4.3 CENTER LINE MACH NUMBER DECAY OF CHEVRON WITH WEDGE

Fig 4.13Mach number plot for chevron with wedge thickness 1mm M= 0.4

Fig 4.14Centerline Mach number decay of chevron with wedge1mm The above centerline Mach number decay graph is plotted between M/Mj and X/Dj for the chevron nozzle with 1mm wedge
41

thickness for the Mach number 0.4. The potential core decay starts from 3.17D. When comparing with 0.4 Mach number of free jet and chevron the potential core length is reduced to 42 % and 18% respectively.

Fig 4.15Mach number plot for wedge thickness1mm M= 0.6

42

Fig 4.16Centerline Mach number decay of chevron with wedge 1mm The above graph is plotted between M/Mj and X/Dj for the chevron nozzle with 1mm Wedge thickness for the Mach number 0.6. The potential core decay starts from 3.05D. When comparing with 0.6 Mach number of free jet and chevron the potential core length is reduced to 47 % and 22% respectively.

Fig 4.17Mach number plot for wedge thickness1mm M= 0.8

43

Fig 4.18Centerline Mach number decay of chevron with wedge 1mm The above centerline Mach number decay graph is plotted between M/Mj and X/Dj for the chevron nozzle with 1mm Wedge thickness for the Mach number 0.8. The potential core decay starts from 3.05D. When comparing with 0.8 Mach number of free jet and chevron the potential core length is reduced to 50% and 22% respectively.

Fig 4.19Mach number plot for wedge thickness 2mm M= 0.4

Fig 4.20Centerline Mach number decay of chevron with wedge 2mm The above centerline Mach number decay graph is plotted between M/Mj and X/Dj for the chevron nozzle with 2mm Wedge thicknessfor the Mach number 0.4. The potential core decay starts from 2.0D. When comparing with 0.4 Mach number of free jet and chevron and Wedgewith 1mmthickness the potential core length is reduced to 63%, 48% and 40% respectively.

45

Fig 4.21Mach number plot for wedge thickness 2mm M= 0.6

Fig 4.22Centerline Mach number decay of chevron with wedge 2mm The above centerline Mach number decay graph is plotted between M/Mj and X/Dj for the chevron nozzle with 2mm Wedge thickness for the Mach number 0.6. The potential core decay starts from 2.0D. When comparing with 0.6 Mach number of free jet and chevron and Wedge with 1mmthickness the potential core length is reduced to 65%, 49% and 34% respectively.

Fig 4.23Mach number plot for wedge thickness 2mm M= 0.8

Fig 4.24Centerline Mach number decay of chevron with wedge 2mm The above centerline Mach number decay graph is plotted between M/Mj and X/Dj for the chevron nozzle with 2mm Wedge thickness for the Mach number 0.8. The potential core decay starts from 2.0D. When comparing with 0.8 Mach number of free jet and chevron and Wedge with 1mmthickness the potential core length is reduced to 67%, 49% and 34% respectively.

47

CHAPTER 5

CONSTRAINTS AND RECTIFICATION

The Wedges and chevrons were used in the presents study, namely chevron, chevron with 1mm wedge thickness, chevron with 2mm Wedge thickness were found to be effective in distorting the jet structure. From the figure 5.1, fig 5.2, fig 5.3 among the three configurations, chevron with 2mm Wedge was found to be more efficient in reducing the potential core length and distorting the jet structure compared to the other two configurations in all subsonic mach numbers. From the above figures, Nozzle with the chevron with 2mm Wedge , the maximum core length reduction achieved was 67 % of uncontrolled jet , followed by rapid decay of jet center line mach number, where the chevron with 1 mm Wedge reduce the core length to 50 % and chevron reduce the core length to 40 % at all subsonic mach numbers. Chevron with 2 mm Wedge is showing consistently better performance for all mach numbers compare to other two configurations. It may due to that fact the chevron with 2mm Wedge creates stronger pressure gradient shedding stronger streamwise
48

vortices causing reduction in potential core and enhanced mixing. Mach number profiles at different X/D locations shows the chevron with 2mm Wedge is more effective spreading of the jet normal to the wedge compare to other two configurations. Chevron technology has provided a modest relief. Unfortunately, a complete understanding of jet noise mechanisms is still not in our grasp. The insight of fundamental application experiments coupled with

of CFD allowed the development of the subject

technology with tools slightly better than cut-and-try. Hope for further control and reduction of jet noise hinges on advancement of our understanding of the relevant mechanisms.

Fig 5.1 Comparison of Centerline Mach number decay

49

Fig 5.2 Comparison of Centerline Mach number decay

Fig 5.3 Comparison of Centerline Mach number decay

COMPARISON OF POTENTIAL CORE LENGTH

50

MACH NO 0.4 0.6 0.8

FREE JET

CHEVRON

WEDGE 1mm

WEDGE 2mm

5.50D 5.81D 6.12D

3.88D 3.93D 3.93D

3.17D 3.05D 3.05D

2.00D 2.00D 2.00D

Table 5.1Comparison of potential core length

CHAPTER6 REFERENCES

1. D. Casalino, F. Diozzi, R. Sannino, A. Paonessa, Aircraft noise reduction technologies: A bibliographic review, Journal of aerospace science andtechnology. Aerospace Science and Technology Volume 12, Issue 1, January 2008, Pages 117 2. Hao Xia, Paul G. Tucker, Simon Eastwood, Large-eddy simulations of chevron jet flows with noise predictions, International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow. International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow,Volume 30,Issue6 December 2009, Pages 1067-1079

51

3. M.L. Shur, P.R. Spalart, M.Kh. Strelets, A.K. Travin, Towards the prediction of noise from jet engines,: International

Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow, Volume 24, Number 4, August 2003 , pp. 551-561(11) Publisher: Elsevier 4. P.S. Tide, K. Srinivasan, Effect of chevron count and penetration on the acoustic characteristics of chevron nozzles.2009.08.010. Applied Acoustics, Volume 71, Issue 3, March 2010, Pages 201220 5. P.S. Tide, V. Babu, Numerical predictions of noise due to subsonic jets from nozzles with and without

chevrons.j.apacoust.2008.03.006. Applied Acoustics, Volume 70, Issue 2, February 2009, Pages 321-332 6. S.C.M. Yu, P.K. Koh, L.P. Chua, An experimental investigation of two-stream mixing flow with a single delta tab. International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow. International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow, Volume 22, Issue 1, February 2001, Pages 62-71 7. Shibu Clement, E.Rathakrishnan, Characteristics of sonic jets with tabs. July 2006, Volume 15, Issue 3-4, pp 219-227 8. S.Thanigaiarasu, S. Elangovan, E.Rathakrishnan, Effect of tab on mixing characteristics of subsonic and sonic jets International Review of Aerospace Engineering;Feb2010, Vol. 3 Issue 1, p1 9. S. Lardeau, E. Collin, E. Lamballais, J.P. Bonnet, Analysis of a jet mixing layer interaction, International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow. International Conference on Engineering Turbulence Modelling and Measurements Volume 24, Issue 4, August 2003, Pages 520528
52

10. You-Hong Liu, Experimental and numerical investigation of circularly lobed nozzle with/without central plug, International journal of heat and mass transfer 45(2002) 2577-2585. Publisher: Elsevier

53