Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-rdgjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T08:42:00.689Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Influence of a recessed step at the throat section of a supersonic nozzle

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 February 2018

M. Zocca*
Affiliation:
Politecnico di Milano, Department of Aerospace Science and Technology, Milan, Italy
A. Spinelli
Affiliation:
Politecnico di Milano, Energy Department, Milan, Italy
F. Cozzi
Affiliation:
Politecnico di Milano, Energy Department, Milan, Italy
A. Guardone*
Affiliation:
Politecnico di Milano, Department of Aerospace Science and Technology, Milan, Italy
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The geometry of a planar converging-diverging nozzle operating with dry air in dilute gas conditions is modified by the introduction of a small recessed step at the throat section. Pressure measurements along the nozzle axis, schlieren visualisations and numerical simulations are performed to investigate the influence of the recessed step on the supersonic flow-field. In the experiments, the height of the recessed step is 0.1 mm and the nozzle height at the throat is 10 mm. Numerical simulations examine also 0.05 mm and 0.2 mm step heights. From the numerical simulations, the flow Mach number at the step location is 1.04 and the Reynolds number computed using the sonic conditions and the throat half-height is Re = 3.73 × 105. A perturbation wave pattern originates from the step, which results in a perturbation of the measured pressure profile close to the throat section. In the diverging portion, sufficiently far from the throat section, the pressure profile of the recessed-step nozzle matches the one measured in the clean configuration.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2018 
Figure 0

Figure 1. Overview of the TROVA test section (a) and details of the nozzle within the test section (b). Flow direction is from left to right.

Figure 1

Figure 2. Functioning scheme of the double-passage schlieren set-up.

Figure 2

Figure 3. Non-dimensional geometry of the converging-diverging nozzle. (a) Complete geometry. (b) Detailed view of the throat section and of the recessed step.

Figure 3

Figure 4. Schlieren visualisation of the adapted nozzle flow, β = 20. (a) Recessed-step configuration. (b) Clean configuration.

Figure 4

Figure 5. Grid convergence evaluated on the pressure profile along the nozzle axis. (a) Recessed-step configuration. (b) Clean configuration.

Figure 5

Table 1 Computational grids for the simulation of the clean and recessed-step configurations

Figure 6

Figure 6. Grid convergence results for the recessed-step configuration. (a) Pressure profile along the step vertical wall (x/H = 0, −1.02 < y/H < −0.98). (b) Velocity profiles along y/H and at one step height downstream of the throat. (x/H = h, −1.02 < y/H < −0.98).

Figure 7

Figure 7. Static to total pressure ratio in adapted conditions for the recessed-step (upper portion) and the clean (lower portion) configuration.

Figure 8

Figure 8. (a), (b) P/Pt along the nozzle axis in adapted and under-expanded conditions for the clean and the recessed-step configurations. (b) Detailed view of the throat region.

Figure 9

Figure 9. (a) Schlieren visualisation of the throat region. (b) Isolines of the density gradient in streamwise direction (from CFD simulation) superimposed to the schlieren visualisation.

Figure 10

Figure 10. Qualitative representation of the supersonic flow at the recessed step location, according to Ref. 22.

Figure 11

Figure 11. Computational domain for the simulation of uniform supersonic flows past recessed-step obstacles. The geometry of the domain is taken from Ref. 6.

Figure 12

Figure 12. SU2 results for Test case 1 compared to CFD results reported in Ref. 6. (a) Normalised pressure profile along the bottom wall behind the step. (b) Normalised pressure profile along the vertical wall of the step.

Figure 13

Table 2 Simulation data for supersonic channel flow test cases. Test case 1 and Test case 2 reproduce test case 22 and 5 reported in Ref. 6, respectively

Figure 14

Figure 13. SU2 results for Test case 2 compared to the CFD results reported in Ref. 6 and the PLIIF measurements of Ref. 8. (a) Pressure and (b) streamwise velocity profiles in a direction parallel to the vertical wall of the step and 10 mm downstream of the step base.

Figure 15

Figure 14. Qualitative representation of the supersonic flow at the recessed step location according to the schematisation proposed in Ref. 7.

Figure 16

Figure 15. P/PT in adapted conditions in the throat region, close to the recessed step location. (a) 2h (top) and h (bottom) configurations. (b) h/2 (top) and h (bottom) configurations.

Figure 17

Figure 16 (a), (b) P/PT along a horizontal axis placed at 95% of the throat half-height (y/H = 0.95, i.e. 0.025 mm from the step corner) in adapted conditions for three recessed-step configurations: h/2, h and 2h. (b) Detailed view of the throat region.

Figure 18

Figure 17. Momentum density in streamwise direction at three different stations: x/H = 0 (throat), x/H = 2 (10 mm downstream of the throat), x/H = 14.035 (exhaust).

Figure 19

Figure 18. Sonic lines for four configurations: clean configuration and h, h/2 and 2h recessed-step configurations.