翼型跨声速气动特性的不确定性及全局灵敏度分析

针对马赫数和仰角的随机不确定性会导致气动性能波动的现象, 采用非嵌入式的混沌多项式方法对绕NACA0012 翼型跨声速随机气动特性进行不确定性及全局灵敏度分析. 具体分析了飞行状态的不确定性对气动载荷分布、流场及气动力系数的影响并通过全局灵敏度分析找出重要因素. 不确定性分析结果表明翼型上表面的激波以及激波后分离泡是造成气动性能剧烈波动的主要原因. 灵敏度分析结果表明在跨声速区域马赫数对激波处气动性能影响最大, 此外, 虽然马赫数和仰角相互耦合作用对气动力系数贡献比较小, 但对于激波位置处的流场, 这种互耦合作用不可忽略.      

圆球诱发斜爆轰波的数值研究

斜爆轰发动机是飞行器在高马赫数飞行条件下的一种新型发动机,具有结构简单、成本低和比冲高等优点.但是斜爆轰发动机的来流马赫数范围广,来流条件复杂,为实现斜爆轰波的迅速、可靠引发,采用钝头体来诱发.利用Euler方程和氢氧基元反应模型,对超声速氢气/空气混合气体中圆球诱导的斜爆轰流场进行了数值研究.不同于楔面诱发的斜爆轰波,球体首先会在驻点附近诱发正激波/爆轰波,然后在稀疏波作用下发展为斜激波/爆轰波.模拟结果显示,经过钝头体压缩的预混气体达到自燃温度后,会出现两种流场:当马赫数较低时,由于稀疏波的影响,燃烧熄灭,钝头体下游不会出现燃烧情况;而当马赫数较高时,燃烧阵面能传到下游.分析表明,当钝头体的尺度较小时,驻点附近的能量不足以诱发爆轰波,只会形成明显的燃烧带与激波非耦合结构;当钝头体的尺度较大时,流场中不会出现燃烧带与激波的非耦合现象,且这一特征与马赫数无关.通过调整球体直径,获得了激波和燃烧带部分耦合的燃烧流场结构,这一流场结构在楔面诱发的斜爆轰波中并不存在,说明稀疏波与爆轰波面的相互作用是决定圆球诱发斜爆轰波的关键.     

一个高分辨率的矢通量分裂—TVD杂交新格式

本文提出了一个新的杂交格式,它将Steger-Warming的矢通量分裂与Harten的TVD格式紧密结合在一起,构造了一个高分辨率的新格式,用于计算跨声速流场和捕获激波。典型的定常跨声速叶栅流算例表明:当Courant数取6～100时,一般在90步内残差的二范数下降三个数量级,这样的收敛率要比Beam-Warming格式快得多;观察残差的收敛历史发现:收敛曲线并无大的波动;分析激波附近的数值结果,没出现“低亏,过跳”、伪振荡现象,叶盆和叶背面上激波前或激波后的参数无波动;在60×15网格下捕获的激波过渡区不超过2个网格,表明了该格式具有较高的分辨率,能在不人为附加耗散项的条件下给出高质量无数值波动的激波流场解。     

计算气动弹性若干研究进展

郭永怀和钱学森先生早在1946年提出了上临界马赫数的概念,即对于亚声速的二维无旋流 动,当来流速度达到下临界马赫数时开始出现声速. 稍增加来流速度,光滑无旋的亚、超声 速混合流动可以继续存在,理论上只有当来流速度达到上临界马赫数出现激波后, 光滑无旋流动才被破坏. 随后, 航空工程界先驱们为提高阻力发散马赫数,降低马赫数1附近的飞机 阻力, 为突破声障, 提出了超临界翼型设计技术,引进了后掠翼设计概念, 提出了跨声速面 积律理论,导致了20世纪军民用航空飞行器的大规模发展.随着计算机技术和计算方法的 进步,不同程度地简化流体控制方程的求解方法得到大发展.基于雷诺平均Navier-Stokes方程的计算流体力学已广泛应用于飞机性能评估、复杂流动机理分析.目前, 气动外形优化设计、气动/结构耦合干扰、气动噪声等多学科问题成为空气动力学的研究热点.该文介绍作者的团队近年来在计算气动弹性研究方面的若干进展,作为对郭永怀先生诞辰100周年的怀 念.      

高压捕获翼位置设计方法研究

高压捕获翼构型是一种合理利用机体/上置翼(简称捕获翼)间的耦合关系提高飞行器升力,进而大幅提高升阻比的高速飞行器新概念构型.基于其设计原理,捕获翼的位置与机体压缩激波和自身二次压缩激波的位置均直接相关,一般难以利用理论方法直接获得.针对这一问题,本文运用均匀实验设计方法在设计空间内获取样本点并利用计算流体力学分析和迭代获得其设计位置,之后通过构造代理模型建立捕获翼位置与设计参数间的模拟映射关系,进而发展了一种捕获翼位置设计的有效方法.在方法研究基础上以锥体-捕获翼组合构型作为实例对其进行验证.结果表明,该方法可在较大设计空间范围内准确判定捕获翼的设计位置.此外,针对这一构型还开展了基于代理模型的设计参数单因素分析.发现在设计空间内,前缘压缩角、来流马赫数、和捕获翼钝化半径等3个关键参数均与捕获翼位置呈单调正比例关系.      

低超声速圆球绕流后体流场的数值模拟

本文根据圆球跨声速自由飞行实验的流谱结构,建立了低超声速圆球分离流动的流动模型,它成功地计算了考虑粘性分离影响的圆球绕流的后体流场。在计算得到的后体流场中,反映流谱特征的分离激波、尾激波、分离界面等,其位置和形状与实验结果吻合很好,因此本文给出了一种能反映真实流动情况的圆球后体流场介。     

HLLE++格式在高马赫数空腔流动模拟中的应用

空腔流动存在剪切层运动、涡脱落与破裂,以及激波与激波、激波与剪切层、激波与膨胀波和激波/涡/剪切层相互干扰等现象,流动非常复杂,特别是高马赫数(M>2)时,剪切层和激波更强,激波与激波干扰更严重,对数值格式的要求更高,既需要格式耗散小,对分离涡等有很高的模拟精度,又需要格式在激波附近具有较大的耗散,可以很好地捕捉激波,防止非物理解的出现。Roe和HLLC等近似Riemann解格式在高马赫数强激波处可能会出现红玉现象,而HLLE++格式大大改善了这种缺陷,在捕捉高超声速激波时避免了红玉现象的发生,同时还保持在光滑区域的低数值耗散特性。本文在结构网格下HLLE++格式的基础上,通过改进激波探测的求解,建立了基于非结构混合网格的HLLE++计算方法,通过无粘斜坡算例,验证了HLLE++格式模拟高马赫数流动的能力,并应用于高马赫数空腔流动的数值模拟,开展了网格和湍流模型影响研究,验证了方法模拟高马赫数空腔流动的可靠性和有效性。     

翼身融合布局鼓包激波减阻技术研究

为应对未来航空领域经济性和环保性要求的不断提高,本文以减小翼身融合布局(BWB)激波阻力为目标,采用计算流体力学(CFD)方法,开展了基于鼓包的弱化激波、减小激波阻力的流动控制技术研究。分析了翼身融合布局的空气动力学特点,指出了鼓包应置于相对厚度较大的中央机体和易于产生激波诱导流动分离的过渡段区域。给出了基于等熵压缩弱化激波原理的"凹-凸-凹"型非对称鼓包构造方法,设计了针对三种来流状态的三种鼓包。研究表明,三种鼓包在其设计状态下的减阻效果明显,减阻量分别为7.1counts、10.4counts和16.6counts,可消除由激波诱导的弱分离,但对强分离控制有限。非设计状态下三种鼓包均具有较好的鲁棒性,在所研究的速度范围(Ma:0.8～0.85,CL=0.286)及升力范围(CL:0.14～0.5,Ma=0.82;CL:0.12～0.5,Ma=0.83;CL:0.05～0.5,Ma=0.85)内仍可减阻。     

前体涡发生器对轴对称高超声速进气道激波振荡流动的影响实验

激波振荡是高超声速进气道不起动过程中常见的流动现象,会显著降低进气道气流捕获与压缩效率、产生剧烈的非定常气动力载荷而危害飞行器安全. 从激波振荡的控制出发,实验研究了前体转捩带位置的涡发生器对轴对称高超声速进气道激波振荡流动的影响. 分别在起动和激波振荡两种进气道流态下,选择无、0.5 mm与1 mm高度涡发生器工况进行对比研究. 并采用高速纹影与壁面动态测压同步记录非定常流动特征. 结果表明,1 mm高度内的涡发生器对起动状态的进气道主流流场结构、壁面压强分布影响不显著. 但对于激波振荡流动,涡发生器会明显缩小外压缩面分离区运动范围,缩短振荡周期,提升振荡周期内壁面压强的时均值. 涡发生器的影响程度随其高度的增大而增强,其中振荡周期从无涡发生器的4 ms缩短到1 mm高度涡发生器的3.13 ms. 此外,0.5 mm高度涡发生器会使得进气道内部测点的压强振荡幅值整体下降,相比无涡发生器工况的下降幅度可达23%. 流场结构与壁面压强信号的分析表明,涡流发生器主要通过其产生的流向涡影响激波振荡流动,包含流向涡对下游边界层的扰动以及流向涡与分离区的相互干扰.      

激波风洞内超燃冲压发动机三面压缩进气道流场实验观测

主要进行了超燃冲压发动机三面压缩进气道的实验观测。利用来流马赫数4.5的直通式激波风洞,考察了三组具有不同压缩角度的进气道模型内部的流场情况。实验观测手段为油流法、丝线法和高速纹影,同时,辅以数值模拟以有助于流场细节分析。纹影照片展示了进气道内部以激波边界层相互作用为主要影响因素的流场复杂结构,数值模拟也显示了相近的结果。油流技术与丝线法显示了近壁面处的流动图像,照片中可见激波、分离线、再附线等分界线位置。根据实验结果,可以推测唇口激波与进气道内边界层的相互作用及其引起的壁面分离是影响进气道内流动的主要因素。同时,尝试了利用抽吸方法减弱激波与边界层相互作用诱发的壁面流动分离,并取得一定结果。     

超临界翼型跨音速特性实验研究

针对新设计的超临界翼型,采用风洞实验方法验证和评估了其气动特性。在增压连续式跨音速风洞(NF-6风洞)开展了超临界翼型跨音速特性的实验研究,验证了该翼型设计的压力分布曲线特点。激波位置和波后压力平台区长度表明设计结果和实验结果基本一致,揭示了超临界翼型跨音速的气动特性;阻力发散马赫数达到期望的设计指标,探讨了雷诺数对该翼型气动特性的影响。最后采用升华法实现了翼型表面流动特性的显示。结果表明转捩点约在16%弦长位置。     

The influence of acceleration and deceleration on shock wave movement on and around aerofoils in transonic flight

This paper examines the shock wave dynamics of a biconvex aerofoil in transonic flight during acceleration and retardation. The aerofoil has a cord length of 1 m and air at infinity is at 101.325 kPa and 300 K. Using Fluent as the CFD software, constant velocity (steady state) simulations were conducted at transonic Mach numbers. The aerofoil was then accelerated at 1041m/s² (106 g), starting at Mach 0.1, and decelerated at −1041m/s², starting at Mach 1.6, through the same range of Mach numbers using time-dependent (unsteady) simulations. Significant differences were found in the transonic region between the steady and the unsteady aerodynamic forces. Analysis of the flow field in this region showed that acceleration-dependent variations in the position of the shock wave on the surfaces of the aerofoil were the main reason for this. As very high accelerations were used in order to emphasize differences, which do not have many practical applications, simulations using accelerations lower than 9 g were also conducted in order to confirm the results. The acceleration-dependent behaviour of other shock waves around the aerofoil, such as the bow shock in front of the aerofoil and the trailing wave were also examined. The trailing wave followed behind the aerofoil changing position with different accelerations at the same Mach number.      

Time-resolved stereo PIV measurements of shock–boundary layer interaction on a supercritical airfoil

Time-resolved stereo particle-image velocimetry (TR-SPIV) and unsteady pressure measurements are used to analyze the unsteady flow over a supercritical DRA-2303 airfoil in transonic flow. The dynamic shock wave–boundary layer interaction is one of the most essential features of this unsteady flow causing a distinct oscillation of the flow field. Results from wind-tunnel experiments with a variation of the freestream Mach number at Reynolds numbers ranging from 2.55 to 2.79 × 10⁶ are analyzed regarding the origin and nature of the unsteady shock–boundary layer interaction. Therefore, the TR-SPIV results are analyzed for three buffet flows. One flow exhibits a sinusoidal streamwise oscillation of the shock wave only due to an acoustic feedback loop formed by the shock wave and the trailing-edge noise. The other two buffet flows have been intentionally influenced by an artificial acoustic source installed downstream of the test section to investigate the behavior of the interaction to upstream-propagating disturbances generated by a defined source of noise. The results show that such upstream-propagating disturbances could be identified to be responsible for the upstream displacement of the shock wave and that the feedback loop is formed by a pulsating separation of the boundary layer dependent on the shock position and the sound pressure level at the shock position. Thereby, the pulsation of the separation could be determined to be a reaction to the shock motion and not vice versa.     

Effects of Compressibility and Shock-Wave Interactions on Turbulent Shear Flows

Compressibility effects are present in many practical turbulent flows, ranging from shock-wave/boundary-layer interactions on the wings of aircraft operating in the transonic flight regime to supersonic and hypersonic engine intake flows. Besides shock wave interactions, compressible flows have additional dilatational effects and, due to the finite sound speed, pressure fluctuations are localized and modified relative to incompressible turbulent flows. Such changes can be highly significant, for example the growth rates of mixing layers and turbulent spots are reduced by factors of more than three at high Mach number. The present contribution contains a combination of review and original material. We first review some of the basic effects of compressibility on canonical turbulent flows and attempt to rationalise the differing effects of Mach number in different flows using a flow instability concept. We then turn our attention to shock-wave/boundary-layer interactions, reviewing recent progress for cases where strong interactions lead to separated flow zones and where a simplified spanwise-homogeneous problem is amenable to numerical simulation. This has led to improved understanding, in particular of the origin of low-frequency behaviour of the shock wave and shown how this is coupled to the separation bubble. Finally, we consider a class of problems including side walls that is becoming amenable to simulation. Direct effects of shock waves, due to their penetration into the outer part of the boundary layer, are observed, as well as indirect effects due to the high convective Mach number of the shock-induced separation zone. It is noted in particular how shock-induced turning of the detached shear layer results in strong localized damping of turbulence kinetic energy.     

The Multi-point Optimization of Shock Control Bump with Constant-Lift Constraint Enhanced with Suction and Blowing for a Supercritical Airfoil

Both shock control bump (SCB) and suction and blowing are flow control methods used to control the shock wave/boundary layer interaction (SWBLI) in order to reduce the resulting wave drag in transonic flows. A SCB uses a small local surface deformation to reduce the shock-wave strength, while suction decreases the boundary-layer thickness and blowing delays the flow separation. Here a multi-point optimization method under a constant-lift-coefficient constraint is used to find the optimum design of SCB and suction and blowing. These flow control methods are used separately or together on a RAE-2822 supercritical airfoil for a wide range of off-design transonic Mach numbers. The RANS flow equations are solved using Roe’s averages scheme and a gradient-based adjoint algorithm is used to find the optimum location and shape of all devices. It is shown that the simultaneous application of blowing and SCB (hybrid blowing/SCB) improves the average aerodynamic efficiency at off-design conditions by 18.2 % in comparison with the clean airfoil, while this increase is only 16.9 % for the hybrid suction/SCB. We have also studied the SWBLI and how the optimization algorithm makes the flow wave structure and interactions of the shock wave with the boundary layer favorable.     

Amplification and amplitude limitation of heave/pitch limit-cycle oscillations close to the transonic dip

Recent results from flutter experiments of the supercritical airfoil NLR 7301 at flow conditions close to the transonic dip are presented. The airfoil was mounted with two degrees-of-freedom in an adaptive solid-wall wind tunnel, and boundary-layer transition was tripped. Flutter boundaries exhibiting a transonic dip were determined and limit-cycle oscillations (LCOs) were measured. The local energy exchange between the fluid and the structure during LCOs is examined and leads to the following findings: at supercritical Mach numbers below that of the transonic-dip minimum the presence of a shock-wave and its dynamics destabilizes the aeroelastic system such that the decreasing branch of the transonic dip develops. At higher Mach numbers the shock-wave motion has a stabilizing effect such that the flutter boundary increases to higher flutter-speed indices with increasing Mach number. Amplified oscillations near this branch of the flutter boundary obtain energy from the flow mainly due to the dynamics of a trailing-edge flow separation. A slight nonlinear amplitude dependency of the shock motion and a possibly occurring boundary-layer separation cause the amplitude limitation of the observed LCOs. The impact of the findings on the numerical simulation of these phenomena is discussed.     

等压比热在基于壁面放电的激波控制中的影响

放电等离子体对流动的控制机理可按热效应和非热效应分为两大类,其中放电等离子体的热效应对流场中激波结构有着明显的控制作用. 目前在放电等离子体热激励对激波控制的数值模拟过程中,通常采用等效热源的方式来实现放电的热效应,数值模拟和实验的结果显示放电产生的局部温度可达到上万度. 如果数值模拟的过程中没有考虑到气体等压比热随温度的非线性变化,计算得到的结果是有失真实性的. 本文以5 马赫的超音速进气道为平台,对基于壁面放电的激波控制过程进行了数值模拟. 选取了随温度非线性变化的等压比热,并且将其结果与定等压比热的计算结果进行了对比. 结果发现:(1) 两种等压比热下,计算结果显示放电热激励在激波控制上都有着显著的效果;(2) 两种计算结果在模拟与温度相关的参数(温度、马赫数和总压恢复系数)上的差别非常明显. 因此,为了获得壁面放电对激波控制更真实的计算结果,必须考虑到等压比热随温度发生非线性变化效应的影响.      

Performance Improvement of a Supercritical Airfoil by a Multi-point Optimized Shock Control Channel

A shock control channel (SCC) is a flow control method introduced here to control the shock wave/boundarylayer interaction (SWBLI) in order to reduce the resulting wave drag in transonic flows. An SCC transfers an appropriate amount of mass and momentum from downstream of the shock wave location to its upstream to decrease the pressure gradient across the shock wave and as a result the shock-wave strength is reduced. Here, a multi-point optimization method under a constant-lift-coefficient constraint is used to find the optimum design of the SCC. This flow control method is implemented on a RAE-2822 supercritical airfoil for a wide range of off-design transonic Mach numbers. The RANS flow equations are solved using Roe’s averages scheme and a gradient-based adjoint algorithm is used to find the optimum location and shape of the SCC. The solver is validated against experimental works studying effect of cavities in transonic airfoils. It is shown that the application of an SCC improves the average aerodynamic efficiency in a range of off-design conditions by 13.2% in comparison with the original airfoil. The SCC is shown to be an effective tool also for higher angle of attack at transonic flows. We have also studied the SWBLI and how the optimization algorithm makes the flow wave structure and interactions of the shock wave with the boundary layer favorable.     

Coupled fluid structure analysis for wing 445.6 flutter using a fast dynamic mesh technology

The flow around wing 445.6 was modelled using Navier–Stokes equations and S-A model. The wing vibration and flow mesh deformation were computed using a fast dynamic mesh technology proposed by our own group. Wing 445.6 flutter was analysed through a strong coupling between the wing vibration and flow. The reduced flutter velocity was predicted and results are in good agreement with the experimental data. It is found that the subsonic flutter is mainly induced by the flow separation and the transonic and supersonic flutter are mainly caused by the oscillating shock wave and its induced flow separation. The positive aerodynamic work increases due to the oscillating shock wave when the subsonic flow becomes transonic reducing the flutter velocity. While the positive aerodynamic work induced by the oscillating shock wave decreases when the transonic flow becomes supersonic increasing the flutter velocity. That is why the transonic dip exists.