-
The transition from laminar to turbulent flow is one of the main aerodynamic challenges in aircraft design and development. When the flight Mach number is sufficiently high, the aircraft surface experiences micropore effects and high-temperature gas thermochemical reactions. At present, boundary layer instability has become a more complex problem, and its mechanism is still unclear. In this study, a linear stability analysis method is developed which takes into consideration high-temperature chemical non-equilibrium process and surface micropore effect. For flight conditions at high altitude (H = 25 km) with Mach numbers 10, 15, and 20, the effects of micropore effects, chemical non-equilibrium effects, and their joint effect on flow stability are contrasted and investigated. The results show that the chemical non-equilibrium effect can contribute to the boundary layer's mode instability, while the micropore effect can restrain the second mode instability. The coexistence of the two often contributes to the instability of the second mode, because the former is heavier than the latter. The chemical non-equilibrium effect can reduce the frequency range corresponding to the second mode of pore effect inhibition, which results in the chemical non-equilibrium effect enhancing the inhibition effect of the micropore effect in the local low-frequency range and weakening its inhibition effect in the high-frequency range. This, in turn, causes a decrease in the corresponding N value variation by pore effect. Furthermore, when both effects are present, the micropore effect's capacity to inhibit the second mode is not significantly affected by change in Mach number.
-
Keywords:
- boundary layer /
- stability /
- chemical non-equilibrium /
- micropore effect
-
图 1 简单截面示意
Figure 1. Schematic diagram of a simple cross-section.
图 2 CPG工况流向x/Lref = 600处温度剖面对比
Figure 2. Temperature profile comparison under CPG circumstance at x/Lref = 600.
图 3 CNE工况流向x/Lref = 600处基本流对比 (a)流向速度; (b)温度; (c)组分浓度
Figure 3. Baisc flow profiles at x/Lref = 600 under CNE circumstance: (a) Streamwise velocity; (b) temperature; (c) species concentration.
图 4 稳定性分析结果与文献对比 (a)特征函数; (b)模态增长率
Figure 4. Comparison of literature and present results: (a) Eigenfunction; (b) growth rate.
图 5 网格无关性验证 (a)流向速度; (b)模态增长率
Figure 5. Verification of grid independence: (a) Streamwise velocity; (b) growth rate.
图 6 CPG下Ma10工况在位置x/Lref = 400模态增长率对比
Figure 6. Comparison of growth rate at position x/Lref = 400 for Ma10 condition under CPG.
图 7 微槽和圆孔的对比 (a) N值曲线; (b) 模态增长率变化率
Figure 7. Comparison of results between microgrooves and micropores: (a) N-value curves; (b) relative change of growth rate.
图 8 不同截面参数下在位置x/Lref = 600的模态增长率变化
Figure 8. Changes in growth rate under different cross-sectional parameters at x/Lref = 600.
图 9 Ma10工况不同气体模型边界层基本流剖面 (a)速度; (b)温度
Figure 9. Basic flow profiles of boundary layer for different gas models under Ma10 condition: (a) Streamwise velocity; (b) temperature.
图 10 Ma10工况不同气体模型模态增长率和相速度对比 (a) x/Lref = 600; (b)沿流向F = 124 kHz
Figure 10. Comparison of growth rate and phase velocity of different gas models under Ma10: (a) x/Lref = 600; (b) modal frequency F = 124 kHz along the streamwise direction.
图 11 Ma10工况不同气体模型对比 (a)中性曲线; (b)N值包络
Figure 11. Comparison of different gas model under Ma10: (a) Neutral curve; (b) N-value envelope.
图 12 不同气体模型光滑和多孔壁增长率及其相对变化率对比 (a) x/Lref = 400; (b) x/Lref = 600; (c) x/Lref = 800
Figure 12. Comparing the growth rates of smooth and porous walls and their relative change for different gas models: (a) x/Lref = 400; (b) x/Lref = 600; (c) x/Lref = 800.
图 13 光滑和多孔壁在x/Lref = 600处压力特征函数对比
Figure 13. Comparison of the pressure eigenfunctions at x/Lref = 600 for smooth and porous walls.
图 14 不同气体模型光滑与多孔壁的N值包络线对比
Figure 14. Comparison of N-value envelope for smooth and porous walls of different gas models.
图 15 CNE工况不同马赫数的模态增长率对比 (a) x/Lref = 600; (b) 沿流向F = 130 kHz
Figure 15. Comparison of growth rates at different Mach numbers under CNE condition: (a) x/Lref = 600; (b) modal frequency F = 130 kHz along the streamwise direction
图 16 不同马赫数中性曲线对比 (a) CPG; (b) CNE
Figure 16. Comparison of neutral curves at different Mach numbers: (a) CPG; (b) CNE.
图 17 CNE工况不同马赫数N值包络对比
Figure 17. Comparison of N-value envelopes at different Mach numbers under CNE condition.
图 18 不同马赫数光滑和多孔壁增长率及相对变化率对比 (a) x/Lref = 400; (b) x/Lref = 600
Figure 18. Comparison of growth rates and relative change of smooth and porous walls at different Mach numbers: (a) x/Lref = 400; (b) x/Lref = 600.
图 19 不同马赫数下光滑与多孔壁的N值包络
Figure 19. N-value envelopes of smooth and porous walls at different Mach numbers.
表 1 不同马赫数对应来流参数
Table 1. Flow characteristics for various Mach numbers.
Ma Te/K ρe/(kg·m–3) Ue/(m·s–1) Re/m–1 10 221.55 0.040085 2983.6 8.26×106 15 221.55 0.040085 4475.4 1.24×107 20 221.55 0.040085 5967.2 1.65×107 
DownLoad: CSV
表 3 不同马赫数下x/Lref=900位置的N值相对变化率
Table 3. Relative change of N-values at x/Lref=900 under different Mach numbers.
Ma (ΔN/Nmax, smooth) CPG (ΔN/Nmax, smooth) CNE 10 26.8% 18.2% 15 22.1% 19.8% 20 27.2% 15.5%
DownLoad: CSV
-
[1] 陈坚强, 涂国华, 张毅锋, 徐国亮, 袁先旭, 陈诚 2017 空气动力学报 35 311
Chen J Q, Tu G H, Zhang Y F, Xu G L, Yuan X X, Chen C 2017 Acta Aerodyn. Sin. 35 311
[2] Currie J G, Dickason A M 1988 VA: Defense Technical Information Center
[3] Candler G V 2019 Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech 51 379
Google Scholar
[4] Bitter N P 2015 Ph. D. Dissertation (Pasadena: California Institute of Technology
[5] Malik M R 1991 Phys. Fluids 3 803
Google Scholar
[6] Stuckert G, Reed H L 1994 AIAA J. 32 1384
Google Scholar
[7] Hudson M L, Chokani N, Candler G V 1997 AIAA J. 35 958
Google Scholar
[8] Franko K, Maccormack R, Lele S 2010 40th Fluid Dynamics Conference and Exhibit Chicago, June 28–July 1, 2010
[9] Chen X L, Wang L, Fu S 2021 Phys. Fluids 33 034132
Google Scholar
[10] 赵洲源, 陈贤亮, 王亮, 符松 2023 气体物理 8 35
Zhao Z Y, Chen X L, Wang L, Fu S 2023 Phys. Gases 8 35
[11] 李晨辉, 万兵兵, 涂国华, 胡伟波, 陈坚强, 蒋崇文 2024 空气动力学报 42 12
Li C H, Wan B B, Tu G H, Hu W B, Chen J Q, Jiang C W 2024 Acta Aerodyn. Sin. 42 12
[12] Fernando M M, Beyak E S, Pinna F, Reed H L, Brussels B 2019 Phys. Fluids 31 044101
Google Scholar
[13] Mcbride B J, Zehe M J, Sanford G 2002 NASA/TP 211556
[14] Magin T, Degrez G 2005 J. Comput. Phys. 198 424
[15] Yos J M 1963 Research & Advanced Development Division Avco Corporation Technical Memorandum
[16] Ramshaw J D 1993 J. Non-Equilibrium Thermodyn. 18 12
[17] Chapman S, Cowling T G 1952 Math. Gaz. 38 323
[18] Blottner F G, Johnson M, Ellis M 1971 Sandia Laboratory
[19] Brokaw R S 1965 J. Chem. Phys. 42 1140
Google Scholar
[20] Gupta R N, Yos J M, Thompson R A 1990 NASA Sti/recon Technical Report N
[21] 万兵兵, 韩宇峰, 樊宇, 罗纪生 2017 航空动力学报 32 188
Wan B B, Han Y F, Fan Y, Luo J S 2017 J. Aerosp. Power 32 188
[22] Park C, Jaffe R L, Partridge H 2001 J. Thermophys. Heat Transfer 15 76
Google Scholar
[23] Park C 1985 AIAA 23rd Aerospace Sciences Meeting, Reno, Nevada, January 14-17, 1985 p85-0247
[24] PARK C 1993 J. Thermophys. Heat Transfer 7 385
Google Scholar
[25] Li C H, Wan B B, Chen J Q, Tu G H, Hu W B, Jiang C W 2024 Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 233 126018
Google Scholar
[26] Al-Jothery H K M, Albarody T M B, Yusoff P S M, Abdullah M A, Hussein A R 2020 IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering 863 012003
Google Scholar
[27] Malmuth N, Fedorov A, Shalaev V, Cole J, Khokhlov A, Hites M, Williams D 1998 2nd AIAA Theoretical Fluid Mechanics Meeting, Albuquerque, New Mexico, June 15-18, 1998
[28] Fedorov A, Malmuth N 2001 AIAA J. 39 605
Google Scholar
[29] Zhao R, Liu T, Wen C Y, Zhu J, Cheng L 2018 AIAA J. 56 2942
Google Scholar
[30] Wartemann V, Heinrich L, Sandham N D 2009 16th AIAA/DLR/DGLR International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference, Bremen, Germany, October 19-22, 2009 Session: HYTASP-1: Aerodynamics I
[31] Xu J K, Liu J X, Mughal S, Yu P X, Bai J Q 2020 Phys. Fluids 32 044105
Google Scholar
[32] Wang X Q, Zhong X L 2012 Phys. Fluids 24 034105
Google Scholar
[33] Rasheed A, Hornung H G, Fedorov A, Malmuth N D 2002 AIAA J. 40 481
Google Scholar
[34] Lukashevich S V, Morozov S O, Shiplyuk A N 2016 J. Appl. Mech. Tech. Phys. 57 873
Google Scholar
[35] 郭启龙, 涂国华, 陈坚强, 袁先旭, 万兵兵 2020 航空动力学报 35 135
Guo Q L, Tu G H, Chen J Q, Yuan X X, Wan B B 2020 J. Aerosp. Power 35 135
[36] 刘勇, 涂国华, 向星皓, 李晓虎, 郭启龙, 万兵兵 2022 71 1947011
Google Scholar
Liu Y, Tu G H, Xiang X H, Li X H, Guo Q L, Wan B B 2022 Acta Phys. Sin. 71 194701
Google Scholar
[37] Gui Y T, Wang W Z, Zhao R, Zhao J Q, Wu J 2022 AIAA J. 60 4453
Google Scholar
[38] Liu X, Zhao R, Wen C Y, Yuan W 2024 Acta Mech. 235 1109
Google Scholar
[39] Wang X W, Zhong X L 2013 51st AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition Grapevine, Texas, January 07-10, 2013 p827
[40] Wang X W 2018 AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting Kissimmee, Florida, January 08-12, 2018 2088
[41] Ken C K U, Hao J, Zhao R, Wen C Y 2023 Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 141 108520
[42] Walter G V, Charles H K, Teichmann T 1966 Phys. Today 19 95
[43] Bird R B, Stewart W E, Lightfoot E N 2002 2nd Wiley international ed. (New York: J. Wiley
[44] Wilke C R 1950 J. Chem. Phys. 18 517
Google Scholar
[45] Wan B B, Su C H, Chen J Q 2020 AIAA J. 58 4047
Google Scholar
[46] Zhao R, Wen C Y, Tian X D, Long T H, Yuan W 2018 Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 121 986
Google Scholar
[47] Brès G A, Inkman M, Colonius T, Fedorov A 2013 J. Fluid Mech 726 312
Google Scholar
[48] Luedeke H, Sandham N D, Wartemann V 2012 AIAA J. 50 1281
Google Scholar
[49] 2021-10-29] [赵瑞, 张新昕, 魏昊功, 温志涌 中国专利 CN110135062B [2021-10-29]
Zhao R, Zhang X X, Wei H G, Wen C Y China Patent CN110135062B
[50] Kline H L , Chang C L , Li F 2018 Fluid Dynamics Conference Atlanta, Georgia, June 25-29, 2018 p3699
[51] Miró M Fernando, Pinna F, Beyak E S, Barbante P, Reed H L 2018 AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting Kissimmee, Florida, January 08-12, 2018 1824
[52] 赵瑞, 严昊, 席柯, 温志涌 航空科学技术 31 104
Zhao R, Yan H, Xi K, Wen C Y 2020 Aeronaut. Sci. Technol. 31 104
DownLoad:
Metrics
- Abstract views: 225
- PDF Downloads: 3
- Cited By: 0
