Testing of numerical methods, convective schemes, algorithms for approximation of flows, and grid structures by the example of a supersonic flow in a step-shaped channel with the use of the CFX and fluent packages

Article
First Online:
Received:

An unsteady supersonic flow of a nonviscous gas with a Mach number M = 3 in a step-shaped channel has been calculated. The accuracy of the forecasts made has been analyzed on the basis of the Roe dissipation model and the advective upwind splitting method with the use of convective schemes of the second and third orders of accuracy and algorithms for approximation of flows. Triangular and polyhedral grids have been tested. The mechanism of formation of an artificial physical instability on grid structures with a local-gradient adaptation has been considered. It is shown that the existence of a singular point — a right corner — in the computational region causes a large phase change in the evolution of the flow.

Keywords

supersonic flow shock wave step-shaped channel ideal gas calculation FLUENT and CFX packages 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    S. A. Isaev and D. A. Lysenko, Testing of the FLUENT package by the example of a supersonic flow in a step-shaped channel, Inzh.-Fiz. Zh., 77, No. 4, 164–167 (2004).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    P. L. Roe, Characteristic based schemes for the Euler equations, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech., 18, 337–365 (1986).CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    M. S. Liou and C. J. Stefen, A new flux splitting scheme, J. Comput. Phys., 107, 23–39 (1993).MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    M. S. Liou, A sequel to AUSM: AUSM+, J. Comput. Phys., 129, 364–382 (1996).MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    B. Van Leer, Toward the ultimate conservative difference scheme. IV. A second order sequel to Godunov’s method, J. Comput. Phys., 32, 101–136 (1979).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    A. E. Emery, An evaluation of several differencing methods for inviscid fluid flow problems, J. Comput. Phys., 2, 306–331 (1968).MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    P. Woodward and P. Colella, The numerical simulation of two-dimensional fluid flow with strong shocks, J. Comput. Phys., 54, 115–173 (1984).MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    J. M. Weiss and W. A. Smith, Preconditioning applied to variable and constant density flows, AIAA J., 33, No. 11, 2050–2057 (1995).MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fluent Inc. Fluent 6.3 Users Guide, Lebanon (2006).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    S. A. Pandya, S. Venkateswaran, and T. H. Pulliam, Implementation of Dual-Time Procedures in Overflow, Technical Report AIAA-2003-0072, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (2003).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    P. A. Voinovich and D. M. Sharov, Nonstructured Grids in the Finite-Volumes Method of Calculating Discontinuous Gas Flows. 1. Nonstationary Grids [in Russian], Preprint No. 1534 of the A. F. Ioffe Physicotechnical Institute, Leningrad (1991).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    P. A. Voinovich and D. M. Sharov, Nonstructured Grids in the Finite-Volumes Method of Calculating Discontinuous Gas Flows. 2. Nonstationary Local Adaptation [in Russian], Preprint No. 1534 of the A. F. Ioffe Physicotechnical Institute, Leningrad (1991).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    ANSYS, Inc. Ansys CFX-Solver Modeling Guide, Canonsburg (2006).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.St. Petersburg State University of Civil AviationSt. PetersburgRussia

Personalised recommendations