Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-8r8nv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-08T04:14:32.196Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Investigation of rarefied flow over backward-facing step in different rarefaction regimes using direct simulation Monte Carlo

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 October 2021

D. Nabapure*
Affiliation:
High-Performance Computing (HPC) Lab, Department of Mechanical Engineering, BITS-Pilani, Hyderabad Campus, 500078, India
A. Singh
Affiliation:
High-Performance Computing (HPC) Lab, Department of Mechanical Engineering, BITS-Pilani, Hyderabad Campus, 500078, India
R.C.M. Kalluri
Affiliation:
High-Performance Computing (HPC) Lab, Department of Mechanical Engineering, BITS-Pilani, Hyderabad Campus, 500078, India
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Hypersonic aerothermodynamics for a re-entry vehicle approaching the earth’s atmosphere is critical in the exploration of space. These vehicles often encounter various flow regimes due to the density variations and have surface abnormalities. The backward-facing step (BFS) is one such simplified configuration for modeling anomalies around such space vehicles. The present work examines rarefied hypersonic flow over a BFS using the direct simulation Monte Carlo (DSMC) method. The purpose of this research is focused on exploring the various loads encountered by a re-entry vehicle passing through different altitudes covering different rarefaction regimes. The fluid considered was non-reacting air, with the free-stream Mach number as 25, and the Knudsen number considered ranged from 0.05-21.10. The influence of the Knudsen number on flow characteristics has been elucidated graphically in various streamwise directions. The normalised flow properties such as velocity, pressure, temperature and density showed an increasing trend with the Knudsen number due to compressibility and viscous heating effects. In all flow regimes, there was an appearance of flow recirculation. With rarefaction, the recirculation lengths decreased, whereas the boundary layer thickness showed an increase. The aerodynamic surface properties such as pressure coefficient, skin friction, and heat transfer coefficient, by and large, showed an increase with the Knudsen number. When the chemical reactions were accounted for and compared against the non-reacting flows, the velocity, pressure, and density field showed no marked variation; however, considerable variations were observed in the temperature field. Furthermore, the present study also depicts the compressibility factor contour, showing the flow regions that diverge from the ideal gas behaviour.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Royal Aeronautical Society
Figure 0

Figure 1. Schematic of the 2D BFS.

Figure 1

Figure 2. Meshed domain.

Figure 2

Table 1. Gas properties [39]

Figure 3

Table 2. Flow and simulation parameters [38]

Figure 4

Table 3. List of chemical reactions employed

Figure 5

Table 4. Computational details of Guo et al. [23]

Figure 6

Figure 3. Comparison of velocity contour for the case of $H = 30{\rm{Km}}$ (a) published results [23] (b) simulation results.

Figure 7

Table 5. Computational details of Scanlon et al. [52]

Figure 8

Figure 4. Comparison of (a) streamwise velocity and (b) pressure along the vertical line of $X/h = 5$ for the case of $H = 30{\rm{Km}}$.

Figure 9

Figure 5. (a) Comparison of overall Mach number contour between published Q–K results by Scanlon et al. [52] (lower half) and present simulation results (upper half), (b) Comparison of number density along the stagnation line.

Figure 10

Figure 6. Variation of the non-dimensional (a) overall temperature, (b) density, (c) velocity and (d) pressure in the transverse direction of BFS at $X = 120{\rm{mm}}$ for $H = 60{\rm{mm}}$, $Kn = 0.05.$

Figure 11

Figure 7. Contours of non-dimensional (a) velocity, (b) density, (c) pressure and (d) overall temperature for $H = 60{\rm{mm}}$, ${\rm{M}} = 25$ and $Kn = 1.06$.

Figure 12

Figure 8. Compressibility (${\rm{Z}}$) contour for $H = 60{\rm{mm}}$, ${\rm{M}} = 25$ and $Kn = 1.06$.

Figure 13

Table 6. Thickness of the boundary layer ($\delta $) for various $Kn$ at $X = 59{\rm{mm}}$

Figure 14

Figure 9. Non-dimensional velocity variation for various $Kn$ at (a) $X = 30{\rm{mm}}$, (b) $X = 59{\rm{mm}}$, (c) $X = 61{\rm{mm}}$ and (d) $X = 120{\rm{mm}}$.

Figure 15

Table 7. Recirculation lengths for different $Kn$

Figure 16

Figure 10. Velocity streamlines for (a) $Kn = 0.05$, (b) $Kn = 0.1$, (c) $Kn = 1.06$, (d) $Kn = 10.33$ and (e) $Kn = 21.10$.

Figure 17

Figure 11. Non-dimensional velocity slip on the upper and lower surfaces for various $Kn$.

Figure 18

Figure 12. Non-dimensional pressure variation for various $Kn$ at (a) $X = 30{\rm{mm}}$, (b) $X = 59{\rm{mm}}$, (c) $X = 61{\rm{mm}}$, and (d) $X = 120{\rm{mm}}$.

Figure 19

Figure 13. Non-dimensional overall temperature variation for various $Kn$ at (a) $X = 30{\rm{mm}}$, (b) $X = 59{\rm{mm}}$, (c) $X = 61{\rm{mm}}$, and (d) $X = 120{\rm{mm}}$.

Figure 20

Figure 14. Variation of the non-dimensional rotational, overall, and translational temperature for $Kn = 0.05,21.10$ at (a) $X = 30{\rm{mm}}$, (b) $X = 59{\rm{mm}}$, (c) $X = 61{\rm{mm}}$ and (d) $X = 120{\rm{mm}}$.

Figure 21

Figure 15. Non-dimensional temperature jump on the upper and lower surfaces for various $Kn$.

Figure 22

Figure 16. Non-dimensional density variation for various $Kn$ at (a) $X = 30{\rm{mm}}$, (b) $X = 59{\rm{mm}}$, (c) $X = 61{\rm{mm}}$ and (d) $X = 120{\rm{mm}}$.

Figure 23

Figure 17. Variation of pressure coefficient ${C_p}$ on the upper and lower surfaces for various $Kn$.

Figure 24

Figure 18. Variation of skin friction coefficient ${C_f}$ on the upper and lower surfaces for various $Kn$.

Figure 25

Figure 19. Variation of heat transfer coefficient ${C_h}$ on the upper and lower surfaces for various $Kn$.

Figure 26

Figure 20. Contours of non-dimensional (a) vibrational, (b) rotational, (c) overall and (d) translational temperature for $M = 25$ and $Kn = 1.06$.

Figure 27

Figure 21. Comparison of the non-dimensional overall temperature for various $Kn$ at (a) $X = 30{\rm{mm}}$, (b) $X = 59{\rm{mm}}$,(c) $X = 61{\rm{mm}}$ and (d) $X = 120{\rm{mm}}$ for reacting and non-reacting cases.