0
Research Papers: Fundamental Issues and Canonical Flows

Transverse Injection Into a Supersonic Cross Flow Through a Circular Injector With Chevrons

[+] Author and Article Information
Anand Raj Hariharan

Research Scholar

V. Babu

Professor
e-mail: vbabu@iitm.ac.in
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Indian Institute of Technology,
Madras 600 036, India

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Fluids Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF FLUIDS ENGINEERING. Manuscript received May 13, 2013; final manuscript received November 7, 2013; published online December 12, 2013. Assoc. Editor: Sharath S. Girimaji.

J. Fluids Eng 136(2), 021204 (Dec 12, 2013) (8 pages) Paper No: FE-13-1309; doi: 10.1115/1.4026018 History: Received May 13, 2013; Revised November 07, 2013

Results from 3D, compressible, unsteady Favre-averaged calculations of transverse injection into a supersonic cross flow are reported. Four injector geometries, namely, circular, wedge, diamond, and chevron, have been investigated. The effectiveness of the chevron injector is demonstrated by comparing performance metrics, such as degree of mixing and total pressure loss, against those of the other injectors. The results show that the chevron injector provides better mixing and spreading compared to other injectors, with almost the same total pressure loss. Furthermore, for the operating conditions studied, the chevron-penetration angle is shown to have a minimal impact on the mixing and the total pressure loss.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2014 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Heiser, W., and Pratt, D., 1994, Hypersonic Airbreathing Propulsion ( AIAA Education Series), AIAA, Washington, D.C.
Tam, C. J., Baurle, R., and Gruber, M. R., 1999, “Numerical Study of Jet Interaction Into a Supersonic Flow,” Paper No. AIAA-99-2254.
Gruber, M. R., Nejad, A. S., Chen, T. H., and Dutton, J. C., 2000, “Transverse Injection From Circular and Elliptical Nozzles Into Supersonic Crossflow,” J. Propul. Power, 16(3), pp. 449–457. [CrossRef]
Barber, M. J., Schetz, J. A., and Roe, L. A., 1997, “Normal Sonic Helium Injection Through a Wedge-Shaped Orifice Into Supersonic Flow,” J. Propul. Power, 13(2), pp. 257–263. [CrossRef]
Tomioka, S., Jacobsen, L. S., and Schetz, J. A., 2003, “Sonic Injection From Diamond-Shaped Orifices Into Supersonic Crossflow,” J. Propul. Power, 19(1), pp. 104–115. [CrossRef]
Kawai, S., and Lele, S. K., 2010, “Large-Eddy Simulation of Jet Mixing in Supersonic Crossflows,” AIAA J., 48(9), pp. 2063–2083. [CrossRef]
Bridges, J., and Brown, C. A., 2004, “Parametric Testing of Chevrons on Single Flow Hot Jets,” Paper No. AIAA-2004-2824.
Tide, P. S., and Babu, V., 2010, “Numerical Investigation of the Effect of Chevrons in Subsonic Jets Using URANS,” Prog. Comput. Fluid Dyn., 10(2), pp. 65–79. [CrossRef]
Wilcox, D. C., 1994, Turbulence Modeling for CFD, 2nd ed., DCW Industries, La Canada, California.
Menter, F. R., 1993, “Zonal Two Equation k-ω Turbulence Models for Aerodynamic Flows,” Paper No. AIAA-93-2906.
Fuller, E. J., Mays, R. B., Thomas, R. H., and Schetz, J. A., 1991, “Mixing Studies of Helium and Air at Mach 6,” Paper No. AIAA-91-2268.
Hirschfelder, J. O., Curtiss, C. F., and Bird, R. B., 1954, Molecular Theory of Gases and Liquids, Wiley, New York.
Celik, I. B., Cehreli, Z. N., and Yavuz, I., 2005, “Index of Resolution Quality for Large Eddy Simulations,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 127(5), pp. 949–959. [CrossRef]
Celik, I. B., Ghia, U., Roache, P. J., Freitas, C. J., Coleman, H., and Raad, P. E., 2008, “Procedure for Estimation and Reporting of Uncertainity Due to Discretization in CFD Applications,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 130(7), p. 078001. [CrossRef]
Bowersox, R. D., Tucker, K. C., and Whitcomb, C. B., 2000, “Two-Dimensional Nonadiabatic Injection Into Supersonic Freestream,” J. Propul. Power, 16(2), pp. 234–242. [CrossRef]
Rajasekaran, A., and Babu, V., 2006, “On the Effect of Schimidt and Prandtl Numbers in the Numerical Predictions of Supersonic Combustion,” Paper No. AIAA 2006-5037.
Kumaran, K., Behera, P. R., and Babu, V., 2010, “Numerical Investigation of the Supersonic Combustion of Kerosene in a Strut-Based Combustor,” J. Propul. Power, 26(5), pp. 1084–1091. [CrossRef]
Baurle, R. A., and Eklund, D. R., 2002, “Analysis of Dual-Mode Hydrocarbon Scramjet Operation at Mach 4-6.5,” J. Propul. Power, 18(5), pp. 990–1002. [CrossRef]
Rajasekaran, A., and Babu, V., 2006, “Numerical Simulation of Three-Dimensional Reacting Flow in a Model Supersonic Combustor,” J. Propul. Power, 22(4), pp. 820–827. [CrossRef]
Viti, V., Neel, R., and Schetz, J. A., 2009, “Detailed Physics of the Supersonic Jet Interaction Flow Field,” Phys. Fluids, 21(4), p. 046101. [CrossRef]
Srinivasan, R., and Bowersox, R. D., 2007, “Simulation of Transverse Gaseous Injection Through Diamond Ports Into Supersonic Freestream,” J. Propul. Power, 23(4), pp. 772–782. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Sectional view of the computational domain

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Cross section of the injectors used in the present study. From left, circular, wedge [4], diamond [5], and chevron injectors. The main flow is from bottom to top. Diagram is not to scale. The vertices of noncircular injectors are marked.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Variation of the mean mass fraction of injectant along the centerline of the bottom wall for circular and wedge-shaped injector

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Comparison of the injectant plume cross section for the circular, wedge, diamond, and chevron injectors. The contours represent the outer edge of the injectant plume, taken to be 1% of the maximum mean mass fraction of the injectant in that plane [17].

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Mean mass fraction contours of injectant overlaid on contours (filled) of x-vorticity for the chevron injector

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Variation of the degree of mixing along the test section

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Variation of the total pressure loss (ηt) along the test section

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Oil-flow visualization on the bottom wall of the test section for the circular injector. The main flow is from left to right. A: gradual deviation of flow approaching the injector, B: the circular injector, C: first recirculation that leads to horseshoe vortex, D: horseshoe vortex, E: second recirculation that leads to the formation of trailing-edge vortices, F: lateral spreading of flow, G: wake vortex–reattachment line, H: third recirculation (x/Rb = −1.08).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Oil-flow pathlines on the bottom wall of the test section for the wedge injector. The main flow is from left to right. A: gradual deviation of pathlines, B: the wedge injector, C: footprint of leading-edge vortex, D: mixing region, E: trailing-edge vortex, F: wake vortex–separation line.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Oil-flow pathlines on the bottom wall of the test section for the diamond injector. The main flow is from left to right. A: gradual deviation of pathline, B: the diamond injector, C: footprint of leading-edge vortex, D: mixing region, E: wake, F: wake-reattachment line, G: trailing-edge vortex.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Oil-flow pathlines on the bottom wall of the test section for the chevron injector. The main flow is from left to right. A: gradual deviation of pathline, B: first recirculation (x/Rb = −4.23), C: horseshoe vortex, D: chevron injector, E: footprint of leading-edge vortex, F: vortices from corner, H: trailing-edge vortex, I: wake vortex–attachment line.

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In