Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-mnl9s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-08-09T20:00:47.623Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Numerical investigation of flow structures resulting from the interaction between an oblique detonation wave and an upper expansion corner

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 September 2020

Kuanliang Wang ,
Honghui Teng Open the ORCID record for Honghui Teng [Opens in a new window] ,
Pengfei Yang Open the ORCID record for Pengfei Yang [Opens in a new window]  and
Hoi Dick Ng Open the ORCID record for Hoi Dick Ng [Opens in a new window]
Kuanliang Wang
Affiliation:
School of Aerospace Engineering, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing100081, PR China
Honghui Teng*
Affiliation:
School of Aerospace Engineering, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing100081, PR China
Pengfei Yang
Affiliation:
State Key Laboratory of High Temperature Gas Dynamics, Institute of Mechanics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing100190, PR China School of Engineering Sciences, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing100049, PR China
Hoi Dick Ng
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical, Industrial and Aerospace Engineering, Concordia University, Montréal, QCH3G 1M8, Canada
*
†Email address for correspondence: hhteng@bit.edu.cn
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Wedge-induced oblique detonation waves (ODWs) have been studied widely, but their interactions with complicated geometries have not been fully addressed. In this study, we investigate ODW interaction with a deflected upper corner due to confinement change upstream of the ODW. Numerical simulations are conducted using the reactive Euler equations with a two-step induction–reaction kinetic model. Two ODWs without the upper wall deflection are first simulated to resolve the basic structures with inflow Mach numbers $M_0 = 6$ and 7. Thereafter, we introduce a deflected upper confinement, resulting in a new wave configuration. This wave is characterized by a post-turning, triangular recirculation zone coupled with a gaseous wedge connecting the deflection point and ODW surface. A parametric study is performed to analyse the effects of the deflection location, deflection angle and activation energy of the heat release reaction. The results reveal that the wave configuration is due to the evolution of ODW decoupling in an expanded supersonic flow. We further study the surface stability and structural unsteadiness arising for $M_0 = 6$. Upstream-travelling transverse waves are observed for the first time, and effects of different parameters on the surface instability are analysed via fast Fourier transforms. Two destabilizing mechanisms of ODW structures are proposed, one from the post-surface thermal choking and the other from the enhanced surface instability.

JFM classification

Compressible Flows: Detonation waves

Information

Type
JFM Papers
Information
Journal of Fluid Mechanics , Volume 903 , 25 November 2020 , A28
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Bhattrai, S. & Tang, H. 2017 Formation of near Chapman–Jouguet oblique detonation wave over a dual-angle ramp. Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 63, 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Choi, J. Y., Kim, D. W., Jeung, I. S., Ma, F. & Yang, V. 2007 Cell-like structure of unstable oblique detonation wave from high-resolution numerical simulation. Proc. Combust. Inst. 31, 2473–2480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fang, Y., Hu, Z. & Teng, H. 2018 Numerical investigation of oblique detonations induced by a finite wedge in a stoichiometric hydrogen-air mixture. Fuel 234, 502–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fang, Y., Hu, Z., Teng, H., Jiang, Z. & Ng, H. D. 2017 Numerical study of inflow equivalence ratio inhomogeneity on oblique detonation formation in hydrogen-air mixtures. Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 24, 256–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fickett, W. 1985 Introduction to Detonation Theory. University of California Press.Google Scholar
Figueira da Silva, L. F. & Deshaies, B. 2000 Stabilization of an oblique detonation wave by a wedge: a parametric numerical study. Combust. Flame 121, 152–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fusina, G., Sislian, J. P. & Parent, B. 2005 Formation and stability of near Chapman–Jouguet standing oblique detonation waves. AIAA J. 43, 1591–1604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Higgins, A. J. 2006 Ram accelerators: outstanding issues and new directions. J. Propul. Power 22, 1170–1187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iwata, K., Nakaya, S. & Tsue, M. 2017 Wedge-stabilized oblique detonation in an inhomogeneous hydrogen–air mixture. Proc. Combust. Inst. 36, 2761–2769.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kailasanath, K. 2000 Review of propulsion applications of detonation waves. AIAA J. 38, 1698–1708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, K. H., Kim, C. & Rho, O. 2001 Methods for the accurate computations of hypersonic flows: I. AUSMPW+ scheme. J. Comput. Phys. 174, 38–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, J. H. S. 2008 The Detonation Phenomenon, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, C., Kailasanath, K. & Oran, E. S. 1994 Detonation structures behind oblique shocks. Phys. Fluids 6, 1600–1611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, Y., Han, X., Yao, S. & Wang, J. P. 2016 A numerical investigation of the prompt oblique detonation wave sustained by a finite-length wedge. Shock Waves 26, 729–739.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, Y., Wang, L., Xiao, B., Yan, Z. & Wang, C. 2018 Hysteresis phenomenon of the oblique detonation wave. Combust. Flame 192, 170–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ng, H. D., Radulescu, M. I., Higgins, A. J., Nikiforakis, N. & Lee, J. H. S. 2005 Numerical investigation of the instability for one-dimensional Chapman–Jouguet detonations with chain-branching kinetics. Combust. Theor. Model. 9, 385–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Papalexandris, M. V. 2000 A numerical study of wedge-induced detonations. Combust. Flame 120, 526–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sislian, J. P., Dudebout, R., Schirmer, H. & Schumacher, J. 2001 Propulsive performance of hypersonic oblique detonation wave and shock-induced combustion ramjets. J. Propul. Power 17, 599–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sislian, J. P., Dudebout, R., Schumacher, J., Islam, M. & Redford, T. 2000 Incomplete mixing and off-design effects on shock-induced combustion ramjet performance. J. Propul. Power 16, 41–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teng, H., Ng, H. D. & Jiang, Z. 2017 Initiation characteristics of wedge-induced oblique detonation waves in a stoichiometric hydrogen-air mixture. Proc. Combust. Inst. 36, 2735–2742.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teng, H., Ng, H. D., Li, K., Luo, C. & Jiang, Z. 2015 Evolution of cellular structures on oblique detonation surfaces. Combust. Flame 162, 470–477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teng, H. H., Jiang, Z. L. & Ng, H. D. 2014 Numerical study on unstable surfaces of oblique detonations. J. Fluid Mech. 744, 111–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Viguier, C., Figueira da Silva, L. F., Desbordes, D. & Deshaies, B. 1996 Onset of oblique detonation waves: comparison between experimental and numerical results for hydrogen-air mixtures. Symp. (Int.) Combust. 26, 3023–3031.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, P., Ng, H. D. & Teng, H. H. 2019 a Numerical study of wedge-induced oblique detonations in unsteady flow. J. Fluid Mech. 876, 264–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, P., Teng, H., Jiang, Z. & Ng, H. D. 2018 Effects of inflow mach number on oblique detonation initiation with a two-step induction-reaction kinetic model. Combust. Flame 193, 246–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, P., Teng, H., Ng, H. D. & Jiang, Z. 2019 b A numerical study on the instability of oblique detonation waves with a two-step induction–reaction kinetic model. Proc. Combust. Inst. 37, 3537–3544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, Y., Zhou, L., Gong, J., Ng, H. D. & Teng, H. 2018 Effects of activation energy on the instability of oblique detonation surfaces with a one-step chemistry model. Phys. Fluids 30, 106–110.Google Scholar