VMFL018

VMFL018
Shock Reflection in Supersonic Flow

Overview

ReferenceH.B. Hopkins, W. Konopka, J. Leng, “Validation of scramjet exhaust simulation technique at Mach 6”, NASA Contractor Report 3003, 1979.
SolverAnsys Fluent, Ansys CFX
Physics/ModelsReflecting shocks in supersonic flow; Compressible turbulent flow
Input File
scram-nozzle-flow.cas for Ansys Fluent
VMFL018_VV018.def for Ansys CFX
Project FilesLink to Project Files Download Page

Test Case

Supersonic flow from a nozzle that represents the exhaust nozzle of a supersonic combustion ramjet (SCRAMJET) is modeled. Jet from the nozzle is issued into a domain which is bounded on one side by an afterbody wall which is parallel to the centerline of the nozzle. Shocks propagating from the nozzle exit reflect from the afterbody. Measured values of (i) the distribution of wall pressure and (ii) heat transfer rate along the afterbody are used to validate the CFD simulation.

Figure 43: Flow Domain

Flow Domain

Material PropertiesGeometry Boundary Conditions

Density: Ideal Gas

Molecular Weight: 113.2

Viscosity: 1.7894 X 10-5 kg/m-s

Thermal Conductivity: 0.0242 w/m-K

Specific Heat: Temperature Dependent

D = 1.524 cm

Length of cowl = 3.5 D

Inlet Total Pressure (gauge) = 551600 Pa

Inlet Static Pressure (gauge) = 127100 Pa

Inlet Total Temperature = 477.8 K

Inlet Turbulent Intensity = 2 %

Wall temperature = 328 K

Outlet Pressure (gauge) = 2780 Pa

Analysis Assumptions and Modeling Notes

The flow is steady. Specific heat is defined as a linear function of temperature. Density based solver is used. Under the given pressure conditions, the inlet Mach number is about 1.66.

Results Comparison for Ansys Fluent

Figure 44: Comparison of Predicted Static Pressure Distribution on the Afterbody with Experimental Data

Comparison of Predicted Static Pressure Distribution on the Afterbody with Experimental Data


Figure 45: Comparison of Predicted Total Heat Flux Along the Afterbody with Experimental Data

Comparison of Predicted Total Heat Flux Along the Afterbody with Experimental Data


Results Comparison for Ansys CFX

Figure 46: Comparison of Predicted Static Pressure Distribution on the Afterbody with Experimental Data

Comparison of Predicted Static Pressure Distribution on the Afterbody with Experimental Data

Figure 47: Comparison of Predicted Total Heat Flux Along the Afterbody with Experimental Data

Comparison of Predicted Total Heat Flux Along the Afterbody with Experimental Data