Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-m9pkr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-11T09:22:34.775Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Numerical investigation of staged transverse sonic injection in Mach 2 stream in confined environment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 July 2016

D. Chakraborty ,
A. P Roychowdhury ,
V. Ashok  and
P. Kumar
D. Chakraborty
Affiliation:
Defence Research and Development Laboratory, Hyderabad, India
A. P Roychowdhury
Affiliation:
Aerodynamics Division, Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre, Thiruvanathapuram, India
V. Ashok
Affiliation:
Aerodynamics Division, Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre, Thiruvanathapuram, India
P. Kumar
Affiliation:
Aerodynamics Division, Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre, Thiruvanathapuram, India
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Transverse sonic injection, usually in a staged manner, in a confined environment is a necessity in the design of an efficient combustion chamber. The design requires an analysis of the mixing of the injectant with incoming stream as efficient combustion depends upon good mixing. This kind of analysis needs numerical model/simulation to assess the mixing of the two streams. To determine the suitability of an existing software package for such a study, staged transverse sonic injection into a Mach 2 stream in a confined environment is taken as a test case. The experimental conditions of McDaniel et al are reproduced for this simulation. In this experiment, staged transverse injection of sonic jet behind the backward facing step in Mach 2 stream was carried out and profiles of various flow parameters were measured. The numerical simulation solves the 3D Navier-Stokes equations with a k – ε turbulence model using the PARallel Aerodynamic Simulator PARAS3D. Computed results show a good match for injectant penetration profile although the computations predict slightly higher penetration near the orifice location. Detailed comparison of flow parameter profiles between computed and experimental data reveal that in the zone away from the injection orifice, computations predict the flow field reasonable well. However, in the vicinity of the orifice, there are some differences between experimental data and computed results. These differences could be due to non-uniform inlet profile in the experiment and/or inadequacy of the turbulence model considered in the study.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 107 , Issue 1078 , December 2003 , pp. 719 - 729
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2003 

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

1. Zukoski, E.E. and Spaid, F.W., Secondary injection of gases into a supersonic flow, AIAA J, 1964, 2, (10), pp 1689–1696.Google Scholar
2. Schetz, J. A and Billig, F.S., Penetration of gaseous jets injected into a supersonic stream, J Spacecraft and Rockets, 1966, 3, (11), pp 1658–1665.Google Scholar
3. Papamoschou, D., Hubbard, D.G. and Lin, M., Observations of supersonic transverse jets, 1991, AIAA Paper 91-1723.Google Scholar
4. Rothstein, A.D., A study of the normal injection of hydrogen into a heated supersonic flow using planar laser-induced fluorescence, 1992, Los Alamos Report LA-12287-T, Los Alamos National Laboratory.Google Scholar
5. Mcdaniel, J.C. and Graves, J., Laser-induced-fluorescence visualization of transverse gaseous injection in a nonreacting supersonic combustor, J Propulsion and Power, 1988, 4, (6), pp 591–597.Google Scholar
6. Mcdaniel, J.C., Fletcher, D., Hartfield, R. and Hollo, S., Staged transverse injection into Mach 2 flow behind rearwardfacing step: a 3D compressible test case for hypersonic combustor code validation, 1991, AIAA paper No 91-5071.Google Scholar
7. Rizzetta, D.P., Numerical simulation of slot injection into a turbulent supersonic stream, 1992, AIAA paper 92-0827.Google Scholar
8. Clark, S.W. and Chan, S.C., Numerical investigation of a transverse jet for supersonic aerodynamic control, 1992, AIAA Paper 92-0639.Google Scholar
9. Aso, S., Tannou, M., Maekawa, S., Okuyama, S., Ando, Y., Yamane, Y. and Fukuda, M., A study of mixing phenomena in three dimensional supersonic flow with circular injection, 1994, AIAA Paper No 94 – 0707.Google Scholar
10. Lee, J., Numerical study of mixing in supersonic combustors with hyper-mixing injectors, J Propulsion and Power, 1994, 10, (3), pp 297–304.Google Scholar
11. Uenishi, K, Rogers, R.C. and Northam, G.B., Numerical prediction of a rearward-facing step flow in a supersonic combustor, J Propulsion and Power, 1989, 5, (2), pp 158–164.Google Scholar
12. Ashok, V. et al User manual for PARAS 3D, 2000, Report No VSSC/ARD/TR-033/2000.Google Scholar
13. Gavriliouk, V.N., Krulle, G. and Schley, C.A., Numerical simulation of combustion process in rocket combustion chambers with coaxial injection, 1994, AIAA Paper No 94-3329.Google Scholar
14. Gavriliouk, V.N., Krulle, G., Schley, C.A. and Sobatchkine, A., Numerical simulation technology of aerodynamic process and its application in rocket engine problems, 1994, IAF Paper No S2.414.Google Scholar
15. Hagemann, G., Schley, C.A., Odintsov, E. and Sobatchkine, A., Nozzle flowfield analysis with particular regard to 3D-plug cluster configurations, 1996, AIAA Paper No 96-2954.Google Scholar