- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine
Access Provided by Xinjiang University

Physical Review Fluids

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Access by Xinjiang University

Internal energy balance and aerodynamic heating predictions for hypersonic turbulent boundary layers

Matthew Barone*

Gary L. Nicholson and Lian Duan

  • Aerosciences Department, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87185, USA

  • Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 43210, USA

  • *mbarone@sandia.gov
PDF

Phys. Rev. Fluids 7, 084604 – Published 19 August, 2022

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevFluids.7.084604

Abstract

The elemental equation governing heat transfer in aerodynamic flows is the internal energy equation. For a boundary layer flow, a double integration of the Reynolds-averaged form of this equation provides an expression of the wall heat flux in terms of the integrated effects, over the boundary layer, of various physical processes: turbulent dissipation, mean dissipation, turbulent heat flux, etc. Recently available direct numerical simulation data for a Mach 11 cold-wall turbulent boundary layer allows a comparison of the exact contributions of these terms in the energy equation to the wall heat flux with their counterparts modeled in the Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) framework. Various approximations involved in RANS, both closure models as well as approximations involved in adapting incompressible RANS models to a compressible form, are assessed through examination of the internal energy balance. There are a number of potentially problematic assumptions and terms identified through this analysis. The effect of compressibility corrections of the dilatational dissipation type is explored, as is the role of the modeled turbulent dissipation, in the context of wall heat flux predictions. The results indicate several potential avenues for RANS model improvement for hypersonic cold-wall boundary-layer flows.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (51)

  1. O. J. H. Williams, D. Sahoo, M. L. Baumgartner, and A. J. Smits, Experiments on the structure and scaling of hypersonic turbulent boundary layers, J. Fluid Mech. 834, 237 (2018).
  2. M. MacLean, T. Wadhams, and M. Holden, Ground test studies of the HIFiRE-1 transition experiment. Part 2: Computational analysis, J. Spacecr. Rockets 45, 1149 (2008).
  3. R. J. Yentsch, D. V. Gaitonde, and R. Kimmel, Performance of turbulence modeling in simulation of the HIFiRE-1 flight test, J. Spacecr. Rockets 51, 117 (2014).
  4. P. A. Gnoffo, S. A. Berry, and J. W. V. Norman, Uncertainty assessments of hypersonic shock wave-turbulent boundary-layer interactions at compression corners, J. Spacecr. Rockets 50, 69 (2013).
  5. J. Huang, G. L. Nicholson, L. Duan, M. M. Choudhari, and R. D. W. Bowersox, Simulation and modeling of cold-wall hypersonic turbulent boundary layers on flat plate, AIAA Scitech 2020 Forum, Orlando, FL (AIAA, 2020), Paper No. 2020-0571,
  6. T. T. Aiken, I. D. Boyd, J. Huang, and L. Duan, Assessment of Reynolds averaged Navier-Stokes models for a hypersonic cold-wall turbulent boundary layer, AIAA Scitech 2022 Forumm, San Diego, CA (AIAA, 2022), Paper No. 2022-0586.
  7. Z. Zhu, X. Zhang, X. Wang, and L. Zhang, Analysis of compressibility corrections for turbulence models in hypersonic boundary-layer applications, J. Spacecr. Rockets 57, 364 (2020).
  8. B. A. Bhutta and C. H. Lewis, Comparison of hypersonic experiments and PNS predictions. Part I: Aerothermodynamics, J. Spacecr. Rockets 28, 376 (1991).
  9. A. D. Dilley, Evaluation of CFD turbulent heating prediction techniques and comparison with hypersonic experimental data, Tech. Rep. NASA/CR-2001-210837, NASA, 2001.
  10. C. L. Rumsey, Compressibility considerations for k−ω turbulence models in hypersonic boundary-layer applications, J. Spacecr. Rockets 47, 11 (2010).
  11. J. Huang, J.-V. Bretzke, and L. Duan, Assessment of turbulence models in a hypersonic cold-wall turbulent boundary layer, Fluids 4, 37 (2019).
  12. K. Fukagata, K. Iwamoto, and N. Kasagi, Contribution of Reynolds stress distribution to the skin friction in wall-bounded flows, Phys. Fluids 14, L73 (2002).
  13. W. H. Matthaeus, S. Oughton, and Y. Zhou, Contribution of Reynolds stress distribution to the skin friction in compressible turbulent channel flows, Phys. Rev. E 79, 035401(R) (2009).
  14. M. Yu, C.-X. Xu, and S. Pirozzoli, Genuine compressibility effects in wall-bounded turbulence, Phys. Rev. Fluids 4, 123402 (2019).
  15. K. Fukagata, K. Iwamoto, and N. Kasagi, Novel turbulence control stratagy for simultaneously achieving friction drag reduction and heat transfer augmentation, in Fourth International Symposium on Turbulence and Shear Flow Phenomena (Begell House, New York, 2005), pp. 307–312.
  16. A. Ebadi, F. Mehdi, and C. M. White, An exact integral method to evaluate wall heat flux in spatially developing two-dimensional wall-bounded flows, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 84, 856 (2015).
  17. P. Zhang and Z. Xia, Contribution of viscous stress work to wall heat flux in compressible turbulent channel flows, Phys. Rev. E 102, 043107 (2020).
  18. C. Wenzel, T. Gibis, and M. Kloker, About the influences of compressibility, heat transfer, and pressure gradients in compressible turbulent boundary layers, J. Fluid Mech. 930, A1 (2022).
  19. J. Huang, L. Duan, and M. M. Choudhari, Direct numerical simulation of hypersonic turbulent boundary layers: Effect of spatial evolution and Reynolds number, J. Fluid Mech. 937 A3 (2022).
  20. I. Pond, A. Ebadi, Y. Dubief, and C. M. White, An integral validation technique of RANS turbulence models, Comput. Fluids 149, 150 (2017).
  21. S. K. Lele, Compressibility effects on turbulence, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 26, 211 (1994).
  22. D. C. Wilcox, Turbulence Modeling for CFD, 2nd ed. (DCW Industries, La Cañada, CA, 2002), p. 235.
  23. E. R. van Driest, Turbulent boundary layer in compressible fluids, J. Aeronaut. Sci. 18, 145 (1951).
  24. R. D. W. Bowersox, Extension of equilibrium turbulent heat flux models to high-speed shear flows, J. Fluid Mech. 633, 61 (2009).
  25. R. D. W. Bowersox and S. W. North, Algebraic turbulent energy flux models for hypersonic shear flows, Progr. Aerospace Sci, 46, 49 (2010).
  26. N. Renard and S. Deck, A theoretical decomposition of mean skin friction generation into physical phenomena across the boundary layer, J. Fluid Mech. 790, 339 (2016).
  27. B. S. Baldwin and H. Lomax, Thin-layer approximation and algebraic model for separated turbulent flows, 16th Aerospace Sciences Meeting, Hunstville, AL (AIAA, 1978), Paper No. 78-257.
  28. P. R. Spalart and S. R. Allmaras, A one-equation turbulence model for aerodynamic flows, Recherche Aerospatiale, 5 (1994).
  29. S. R. Allmaras, F. T. Johnson, and P. R. Spalart, Modifications and clarifications for the implementation of the Spalart-Allmaras turbulence model, Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Computational Fluid Dynamics (ICCFD7), Big Island, Hawaii (2012).
  30. F. R. Menter, M. Kuntz, and R. Langtry, Ten years of industrial experience with the SST turbulence model, in Fourth International Symposium on Turbulence, Heat and Mass Transfer, edited by K. Janjalic, Y. Nagano, and M. Tummers (Begell House, New York, 2003), pp. 625–632.
  31. M. Howard, T. Fisher, M. Hoemmen, D. Dinzl, J. Overfelt, A. Bradley, K. Kim, and S. Rajamanickam, Employing multiple levels of parallelism for CFD at large scales on next generation high-performance computing platforms, Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Computational Fluid Dynamics (ICCFD10), Barcelona, Spain (2018).
  32. S. L. Krist, R. T. Biedron, and C. L. Rumsey, CFL3D User's Manual (ver. 5), NASA Technical Memorandum NASA TM-1998-208444, NASA (1998).
  33. W. W. Liou and T.-H. Shih, On the basic equations for the second-order modeling of compressible turbulence, NASA Technical Memorandum NASA-TM-105277, NASA (1991).
  34. O. Zeman, A new model for supersonic/hypersonic turbulent boundary layers, 31st Aerospace Sciences Meeting, Reno, NV (AIAA, 1993), Paper No. 93-0897.
  35. P. Gnoffo, S. Berry, and J. Van Norman, Uncertainty assessments of 2D and axisymmetric hypersonic shock wave-turbulent boundary layer interaction simulations at compression corners, 42nd AIAA Thermophysics Conference, Honolulu, Hawaii (AIAA, 2011), Paper No. 2011-3142.
  36. E. M. Taylor, M. Wu, and M. P. Martín, Optimization of nonlinear error for weighted essentially non-oscillatory methods in direct numerical simulations of compressible turbulence, J. Comput. Phys. 223, 384 (2007).
  37. M. Wu and M. P. Martin, Direct numerical simulation of supersonic turbulent boundary layer over a compression ramp, AIAA J. 45, 879 (2007).
  38. G.-S. Jiang and C.-W. Shu, Efficient implementation of weighted ENO schemes, J. Comput. Phys. 126, 202 (1996).
  39. J. Williamson, Low-storage Runge-Kutta schemes, J. Comput. Phys. 35, 48 (1980).
  40. L. Duan, I. Beekman, and M. Martin, Direct numerical simulation of hypersonic turbulent boundary layers. Part 2. Effect of wall temperature, J. Fluid Mech. 655, 419 (2010).
  41. L. Duan, I. Beekman, and M. Martin, Direct numerical simulation of hypersonic turbulent boundary layers. Part 3. Effect of Mach number, J. Fluid Mech. 672, 245 (2011).
  42. L. Duan, M. M. Choudhari, and M. Wu, Numerical study of acoustic radiation due to a supersonic turbulent boundary layer, J. Fluid Mech. 746, 165 (2014).
  43. L. Duan, M. M. Choudhari, and C. Zhang, Pressure fluctuations induced by a hypersonic turbulent boundary layer, J. Fluid Mech. 804, 578 (2016).
  44. C. Zhang, L. Duan, and M. M. Choudhari, Direct numerical simulation database for supersonic and hypersonic turbulent boundary layers, AIAA J. 56, 4297 (2018).
  45. M. A. Vyas, D. A. Yoder, and D. V. Gaitonde, Reynolds-stress budgets in an impinging shock-wave/boundary-layer interaction, AIAA J. 57, 4698 (2019).
  46. P. G. Huang, G. N. Coleman, and P. Bradshaw, Compressible turbulent channel flows: DNS results and modelling, J. Fluid Mech. 305, 185 (1995).
  47. P. J. Roache, Verification and Validation in Computational Science and Engineering (Hermosa, Socorro, New Mexico, 1998).
  48. K. P. Griffin, L. Fu, and P. Moin, Velocity transformation for compressible wall-bounded turbulent flows with and without heat transfer, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 118, e2111144118 (2021).
  49. R. B. Langtry and S. A. Sjolander, Prediction of transition for attached and separated shear layers in turbomachinery, 38th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference & Exhibit, Indianapolis, IN (AIAA, 2002), Paper No. 2002-3641.
  50. C. Prasad, M. Schwartz, and D. V. Gaitonde, A methodical assessment of two-equation turbulence models for high-speed flows, AIAA Aviation 2021 Forum, Virtual Event (AIAA, 2021), Paper No. 2021-2881.
  51. P. G. Huang, P. Bradshaw, and T. J. Coakley, Assessment of closure coefficients for compressible-flow turbulence models, NASA Technical Memorandum NASA-TM-103682, NASA (1992).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Fluids 7, 084604– Published 19 August, 2022
  • Received 10 May 2022
  • Accepted 22 July 2022
Article part of CHORUS
Crossmark - Check for updates button

©2022 American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation