Direct numerical simulations of turbulent supersonic axisymmetric wakes

Part of the ERCOFTAC Series book series (ERCO, volume 15)

Abstract

Over the last decades, there has been considerable interest in supersonic axisymmetric wakes, or base flows. Initially, the motivation of the research was to gain a better understanding of the dynamics of supersonic turbulent flows, and to devise methods for drag reduction. Later, base flows were frequently chosen as a challenging test case for numerical simulations, mainly due to the availability of reliable data from carefully conducted base flow experiments (e.g. Herrin & Dutton, (1989)), and the fact that a complex flow is generated by a relatively simple geometry, facilitating grid generation. Furthermore, the failure of early RANS calculations to capture some of the characteristic properties of the flow, e.g. a flat base pressure distribution (Sahu et al., 1985), motivated studies employing various RANS and hybrid RANS/LES turbulence models.

Keywords

Direct Numerical Simulation Drag Reduction Approach Boundary Layer Base Corner Initial Shear Layer 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Herrin, J. L. and Dutton, J. C. (1989). Supersonic base flow experiments in the near wake of a cylindrical afterbody. J. Fluid Mech., 199, 55–88. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sahu, J., Nietubicz, C., and Steger, J. (1985). Navier–Stokes computations of projectile base flow with and without mass injection. AIAA J., 23 (9), 1348–1355. MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sandberg, R. D. and Fasel, H. F. (2006). Numerical investigation of transitional supersonic axisymmetric wakes. J. Fluid Mech., 563, 1–41. MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sandberg, R. D. and Fasel, H. F. (2006). Direct numerical simulations of transitional supersonic base flows. AIAA J., 44 (4), 848–858. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kennedy, C., Carpenter, M., and Lewis, R. (2000). Low-storage, explicit Runge–Kutta schemes for the compressible Navier–Stokes equations. Applied Numerical Mathematics, 35, 177–219. MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kennedy, C., and Gruber, A. (2008). Reduced aliasing formulations of the convective terms within the Navier–Stokes equations for a compressible fluid. J. Comp. Phys., 227, 1676–1700. MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bogey, C., de Cacqueray, N., and Bailly, C. (2009). A shock-capturing methodology based on adaptative spatial filtering for high-order non-linear computations. J. Comp. Phys., 228, 1447–1465. MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Touber, E. and Sandham, N. (2009). Large-eddy simulation of low-frequency unsteadiness in a turbulent shock-induced separation bubble. Theoretical and Computational Fluid Dynamics, 23 (2), 79–107. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sandberg, R. D., Suponitsky, V., and Sandham, N. D. (2010). DNS of a canonical nozzle flow. ERCOFTAC WORKSHOP Direct and Large-Eddy Simulation 8. Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Spalart, P. R. (1988). Direct simulation of a turbulent boundary layer up to Re θ=1410. J. Fluid Mech., 187, 61–98. MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Coleman, G. N., Kim, J., and Moser, R. D. (1995). A numerical study of turbulent supersonic isothermal-wall channel flow. J. Fluid Mech., 305, 159–183. MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Aerodynamics and Flight Mechanics Research Group, School of Engineering SciencesUniversity of SouthamptonSouthamptonUK

Personalised recommendations