4.1 Article

Perforated Wall in Controlling the Separation Bubble Due to Shock Wave -Boundary Layer Interaction

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TURBO & JET-ENGINES
Volume 39, Issue 2, Pages 223-231

Publisher

WALTER DE GRUYTER GMBH
DOI: 10.1515/tjj-2018-0048

Keywords

shock wave; boundary layer; separation bubble; SST k-omega; perforated wall

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study numerically investigates the formation and control of separation bubble induced by shock wave boundary layer interaction in a mixed compression intake. The results show that establishing perforation on the entire forebody wall can effectively reduce the size of the separation bubble.
The shock wave boundary layer interaction (SWBLI) induced separation bubble formation (SB) and its control has been investigated numerically in the mixed compression type of intake in the scramjet engine. The external compression has occurred due to the three successive oblique shocks formed from the three successive ramps of the forebody with the semi-wedge angle of 7.6, 7.0, and 9.4 respectively. The intake is designed in such a way that all three shocks converge and impinge on the leading edge of the cowl lip for the operating Mach number of 5.0. The numerical simulation is carried out by solving steady, compressible 2-D RANS equations using transitional SST k-omega turbulence model to capture the influence of SWBLI in the performance of supersonic intake. The formation of SB and its control by establishing the perforated wall in its proximity are investigated for three different cases based on the perforation with respect to SSB. Findings of the numerical simulation have concluded that the size of the SB decreases to an acceptable level while establishing the perforation in the entire fore-body wall in the isolator region. The feedback loop established between the upstream and downstream of SB could be a possible reason for reducing its size.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available