Starting nozzle flow simulation using K-G two-equation turbulence model
The starting process of two-dimensional nozzle flows has been simulated with Euler, laminar and k − g two-equation turbulence Navier-Stokes equations. The flow solver is based on a combination of LUSGS subiteration implicit method and five spatial discretized schemes, which are Roe, HLLE, MHLLE upwind schemes and AUSM+, AUSMPW schemes. In the paper, special attention is for the flow differences of the nozzle starting process obtained from different governing equations and different schemes. Two nozzle flows, previously investigated experimentally and numerically by other researchers, are chosen as our examples. The calculated results indicate the carbuncle phenomenon and unphysical oscillations appear more or less near a wall or behind strong shock wave except using HLLE scheme, and these unphysical phenomena be- come more seriously with the increase of Mach number. Comparing the turbulence calculation, inviscid solution cannot simulate the wall flow separation and the laminar solution shows some different flow characteristics in the regions of flow separation and near wall.
KeywordsShock Wave Mach Number Contact Discontinuity Nozzle Flow High Mach Number
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.C.E. Smith: J. Fluid Mech. 24, 625 (1966)Google Scholar
- 2.H.O. Amann: Phys. Fluids Supplement 12, 150 (1969)Google Scholar
- 3.P.A. Jacobs: Simulation of transient flow in a shock tunnel and a high Mach number nozzle. NASA CR 187606 (1991)Google Scholar
- 4.C.L. Chen, S.L. Chakravarthy, C.M. Hung: AIAA Journal. 32, 1836 (1994)Google Scholar
- 5.O. Igra, L. Wang, J. Falcovitz, H.O. Amann: Shock Waves 8, 235 (1998)Google Scholar
- 6.T. Saito, K. Takayama: Shock Waves 9, 73 (1999)Google Scholar
- 7.A.S. Mouronval, A. Hadjadj, A.N. Kudryavtsev, D. Vandromme: Shock Waves 12, 403 (2002)Google Scholar
- 8.M.S. Liou: J. Comput. Phys. 129, 364 (1996)Google Scholar
- 9.K.H. Kim and O.H. Rho: Comput. Fluids 27, 311 (1998)Google Scholar