Numerical and Experimental Simulation of An Axisymmetric Supersonic Inlet
Numerical and Experimental Simulation of An Axisymmetric Supersonic Inlet
cle phenomena and the numerical oscillations of Qin, +j 1 = Qin, j − i , j [ ( Fc ) k ∆sk ]i , j − α∆ti , jVi , j +
Ai , j k =1
AUSM family schemes simultaneously, Kim et al. (3)
proposed AUSMPW scheme in 1998 that uses two ∆ti , j 4
[ ( Fv ) k ∆sk ]i , j + α∆ti , jVvi , j ,
pressure based weight functions [11]. AUSM+-up Ai , j k =1
1 ρ uv τ xx where
V= , Tv = , (2)
y ρv2 τ xy Λ cI = ( q I + c)∆s I ,
ρ vH uτ xx + vτ xy − qx
4 γ µ L µT (∆s I ) 2 (6)
0 0 Λ vI = max( , )( + ) .
3ρ ρ PrL PrT A
τ xy 1 τ xy
Uv = ,Vv = . In the above equation c is the speed of sound and
τ yy y τ yy − τ θθ
uτ xy + vτ yy − q y uτ xy + vτ yy − q y
for J direction similar equations are used. T is the
turbulent viscosity coefficient that is calculated by
If =0 the equations are 2D planar and for =1 they the Baldwin-Lomax algebraic model.
are 2D axisymmetric. By applying an explicit finite The MUSCL approach with the van Albada limiter
volume discretization and after a few manipula- is used to increase the accuracy of the spatial dis-
tions equation (1) becomes: cretization:
ε Kp PR − PL
Q iL+1/2 = Q i + s i (1 − s i k )∆i− + (1 + s i k )∆i+ , Mp =− max(1 − σ M 2 , 0) ,
4 fa ρ1/2ci2+1/2, j
ε
(7) (15)
Q iR+1/2 = Q i +1 − s i +1 (1 − s i +1k ) ∆i++1 + (1 + s i +1k )∆i−+1 , ρL + ρR
4 σ ≤ 1, ρ1/ 2 = , 0 ≤ K p ≤ 1,
where 2
2∆ i+ ∆ i− + η where
si = , f a ( M O ) = M O (2 − M O ),
(∆ i+ ) 2 + (∆ i− )2 + η
(8) M O2 = min(1, max( M 2 , M co2 )),
∆ i− = Qi − Qi −1 ,
1 (16)
∆ i+ = Qi +1 − Qi . M2 = ( M L2 + M R2 ),
-12 2
=1*10 to prevent the denominator to become
1
zero. If =0 the discretization is with the 1st order M co = min( M ∞ ,1).
2
2
accuracy and if =1 the discretization is with the
higher order accuracy. If k=-1 the discretization is fa is used to scale the pressure diffusion term for
2nd upwind and if k=1/3 the discretization is 3rd the low Mach number cases.
order. The pressure at the cell interface is defined as:
As a first step common to all AUSM schemes, the Pi +1/ 2, j = ( n+ ) ( M L )PL + ( n− ) (M R ) PR + Pu , (17)
inviscid flux is explicitly split into convective and where
pressure fluxes: Pu = − Ku (5)+ ( M L ) (5)− ( M R )( ρ L + ρ R ) ×
(F )
c
i +1/2, j
= m i +1/2, jψ L / R + p i +1/2, j , (9) ×ci +1/2, j ( qR − qL ), 0 ≤ K u ≤ 1.
(18)
where ±
are polynomial functions of degree n (= 1,3,
(n )
ψL if m i +1/2, j > 0 5). The fifth degree polynomials are preferred be-
ψ L /R = ,
ψR otherwise (10) cause they are found to give better accuracy:
1 ±
T if M ≥ 1
p i +1/2, j = Pi +1/2, j 0 n x ny 0 . ±
(M ) = M
(1)
. (19)
(5)
respectively that are defined differently in various Velocity diffusion term, Pu, also helps to introduce
versions of the AUSM schemes. a scheme for all speed and relate the pressure field
In the AUSM+-up for all speed scheme some modi- to the velocity field [13]. However, in this research
fications are applied to overcome the difficulties comparison of the results with the experimental
with the low Mach number flows and introduce a data show that Ku=0 is the best value.
scheme for all speed with an acceptable level of In the above equations =1/8 and for all speed cal-
accuracy and efficiency. In this scheme the mass culations:
flux at the cell interface has the form of [12]: 3
α= (−4 + 5 f a2 ) (20)
m i +1/2, j = q i +1/2, j ρ L / R = c i +1/ 2, j M i +1/ 2, j ρ L / R , (11) 16
Due to the entropy-satisfying property, the speed of
where sound at the cell interface is defined as:
ρL if q i +1/ 2, j > 0 ci +1/2, j = min(cˆL , cˆR ),
ρL / R = . (12) (21)
ρR otherwise where
The cell interface Mach number is defined as: cˆL = (c* ) 2 / max(c* , qL ),
M i +1/2, j = (+m ) ( M L ) + (−m ) ( M R ) + M p , (13) cˆR = (c* ) 2 / max(c* , − qR ),
± (22)
where (m) are polynomial functions of degree m 2(γ − 1)
(c ) = * 2
H.
(= 1,2, 4) defined as: γ +1
± 1 The main feature of the AUSMPW scheme is re-
(1)(M ) = (M ± M ),
2 moval of the oscillations of AUSM+ scheme near
1
±
(2) ( M ) = ± (M ± 1)2 , the wall or across a strong shock wave by introduc-
4 (14)
±
ing pressure-based weight functions. AUSMPW
if M ≥ 1
±
(4) (M ) =
(1)
. scheme uses the pressure-based weight function, f,
±
(2) (1 16β (2) ) otherwise to remove the oscillations near the wall and to
The pressure diffusion term Mp, introduced to en- remove the oscillation across a strong shock wave.
hance calculations of the low Mach number or The starting point of AUSMPW scheme is to ob-
multi-phase flow cases, is defined as: serve the fact that AUSM+ and AUSMD schemes
are complementary to each other. AUSM+ scheme we apply the all speed modifications of AUSM+-up
has no carbuncle phenomena but shows numerical for all speed scheme to improve the stability and
oscillations near a wall while AUSMD scheme has accuracy of the original AUSMPW scheme. The
no numerical oscillations near the wall but shows modifications that were applied to the original
carbuncle phenomena [14]. AUSMPW scheme were: 1) addition of the pres-
Combining the AUSM+ and AUSMD schemes the sure diffusion term, Mp, according to equation (15)
convective flux in the AUSMPW scheme is calcu- to the cell interface Mach number in the AUSMPW
lated as: scheme, m i +1/ 2, j , 2) calculating the as a function
( Fc )i +1/2, j = M L+ ci+1/ 2, j Φ L + of fa (according to equation (20)), it is not constant
(23) anymore, and 3) calculating the speed of sound
+ M R− ci +1/ 2, j Φ R + pi +1/2, j ,
according to equations (21) and (22). The effect
where and role of these modifications will be discussed
ρ 0 later.
ρu nx
Φ= , pi +1/2, j = PS , 3. EXPERIMENTAL SIMULATION
ρv ny To increase the reliability of the numerical code it
ρH 0 must be examined in different flow patterns. Three
+ − different mass flow ratio ( : the ratio of the mass
PS = ( M L ) PL + ( M R ) PR ,
(5) (5)
flow in the inlet to the mass flow of the free stream
M L+ = +
(4) (M L ) + −
(4) (M R ) − entering the inlet allowing some spillages) are
tested. In all tests M=2 and the angle of attack was
−
(4) ( M R ) × ω × (1 + f R ) + zero. In each test four series of experimental data
mi +1/2, j ≥ 0 : (24)
(
+ fL +
(4) (M L ) + f R −
(4) (M R ) ) were obtained (Fig. 3).
M R− = −
(4) ( M R ) × ω × (1 + f R )
M L+ = +
(4) ( M L ) × ω × (1 + f L )
M R− = +
(4) (M L ) + −
(4) (M R ) −
mi +1/2, j < 0 : +
(4) ( M L ) × ω × (1 + f L ) +
Figure 3: the locations of pressure measurement
+ fL ( +
(4) (M L ) + f R −
(4) (M R ) . )
4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The speed of sound is calculated as: One goal of this research was to validate the nu-
ci +1/2, j = min(cˆL , cˆR ), merical code results. In this regard Fig’s 4-7
(25)
cˆ = (c* ) 2 / max(c* , q ). compare the code results with the experimental
data. As seen from those Fig’s, acceptable level of
Other quantities in equation (24) are:
+ − accuracy has been obtained. For other flow patterns
mi +1/2, j = (M L ) + ( M R ),
(4) (4)
and schemes similar results has been obtained.
PL PR 3 The Schlieren pictures confirm the code results too,
ω ( PL , PR ) = 1 − min( , ),
PR PL Fig. 8.
PL , R ±
( − 1) pl ( PL, R , PR , L ) (4) β = 0
PS
vL , R
f L , R = × min(1, ( )3 ) ; M L , R ≤ 1 ,
ci +1/ 2, j (26)
0 ; M L, R > 1
x y 3 x y
4 min( , ) − 3; ≤ min( , ) < 1
y x 4 y x
pl ( x, y ) = .
x y 3
0 ; 0 ≤ min( , ) < Figure 4: total pressure distribution in the outer rake
y x 4 for =0.9021and AUSMPW scheme
In this scheme: =3/16, =1/8
It is found in this research that the AUSMPW
scheme has stability problem even with very small
CFL numbers. So, for the first time in this research
function of fa have stabilized the scheme and calcu-
lating the speed of sound according to equations
(21) and (22) has increased the accuracy. The ef-
fect of changing the speed of sound is presented in
Fig's 9-10.