CFD Online Logo CFD Online URL
www.cfd-online.com
[Sponsors]
Home > Forums > CFX

supersonic (Laval) nozzle, unphysical Mach number

Register Blogs Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   August 13, 2014, 04:27
Default supersonic (Laval) nozzle, unphysical Mach number
  #1
New Member
 
Judith Richter
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 8
Rep Power: 4
Judith is on a distinguished road
Hello,

I am fairly new to ANSYS CFX and am struggling with the simulation of a Ma = 1,7 covergent-divergent nozzle.

My area ratio is 1.337 which leads to an isentropic exit Mach number of 1,7. From my understanding the exit Mach number is indepent of the pressure ratio (as long as sonic condition is reached at the nozzle throat). However, my simulation obviously depends on the exit pressure: If I decrease the exit pressure, the Mach number increses (over 1.7). It looks like the nozzle flow is even over-expanded (see the shock waves in the picture).

I tried many boundary conditions (subsonic, supersonic, opening) but only the subsonic BC converges:

IN subsonic
total pressure = 2 bar
turbulence: medium
static temperature = 380 K

OUT subsonic
average static pressure: 0.3 bar

WALL free slip

Does anybody have an idea, what my mistake could be?
Attached Images
File Type: jpg nozzle_pressure.jpg (16.2 KB, 42 views)
Judith is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 13, 2014, 12:48
Default
  #2
New Member
 
Judith Richter
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 8
Rep Power: 4
Judith is on a distinguished road
Here is the Mach number plot of the nozzle: The red color indicates the areas where the Mach number exceeds 1.7. Hope that helps understanding my problem.

Thank you!
Attached Images
File Type: jpg nozzle_machnumber.jpg (19.9 KB, 39 views)
Judith is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 13, 2014, 18:53
Default
  #3
Super Moderator
 
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 12,638
Rep Power: 98
ghorrocks is a jewel in the roughghorrocks is a jewel in the roughghorrocks is a jewel in the rough
I do not understand your problem. Your results look believeable to me - you are close to your expected Mach 1.7 and superimposed on that you have some Mach wave reflections. This is all as expected.
ghorrocks is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 14, 2014, 03:31
Default
  #4
New Member
 
Judith Richter
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 8
Rep Power: 4
Judith is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by ghorrocks View Post
I do not understand your problem. Your results look believeable to me - you are close to your expected Mach 1.7 and superimposed on that you have some Mach wave reflections. This is all as expected.
That's true, but I don't understand where the Mach waves come from. The nozzle contour comes from the method of characteristics and the simulation is inviscid...
Judith is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 14, 2014, 06:43
Default
  #5
Super Moderator
 
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 12,638
Rep Power: 98
ghorrocks is a jewel in the roughghorrocks is a jewel in the roughghorrocks is a jewel in the rough
You have a sharp transition from the expansion section to the straight duct. This will create a Mach wave - and that is what you see. This is not a viscous effect, it is a compressibility effect. So no surprises there.

I assume you are comparing the simulation to a 1D model or an analytical solution of supersonic flow. These approaches ignore flow details and assume there are no sharp transition.
ghorrocks is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 14, 2014, 08:54
Default
  #6
New Member
 
Judith Richter
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 8
Rep Power: 4
Judith is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by ghorrocks View Post
You have a sharp transition from the expansion section to the straight duct. This will create a Mach wave - and that is what you see. This is not a viscous effect, it is a compressibility effect. So no surprises there.
That was also my first thought, but my transition is smooth (see picture). I said I used the method of characteristics to calculate an ideal inviscid nozzle contour, as far as I know the flow should be parallel after the nozzle exit.

I discussed this topic with my colleague and he suggested that the disturbance comes from the grid. However, my grid is very fine (>500.000 nodes) and I cannot imagine that this would have just a big influence...
Attached Images
File Type: jpg transition_nozzle-channel.jpg (25.6 KB, 25 views)
Judith is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 14, 2014, 17:15
Default
  #7
Senior Member
 
Edmund Singer P.E.
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 512
Rep Power: 12
singer1812 is on a distinguished road
You are below nozzle design pressure on your outlet. You should expect to see what that series of mach waves.

If you dont want to see those, increase your back pressure.
singer1812 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 14, 2014, 18:28
Default
  #8
Super Moderator
 
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 12,638
Rep Power: 98
ghorrocks is a jewel in the roughghorrocks is a jewel in the roughghorrocks is a jewel in the rough
If you think the Mach wave artefact is from your grid then simply changing the grid (significantly finer preferably, but coarser will probably work too) will show whether you are right. If the pattern changes then yes, it is a grid artefact.
ghorrocks is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply

Tags
cfx, laval, mach number, nozzle, supersonic

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
snappyHexMesh sticking point natty_king OpenFOAM Native Meshers: snappyHexMesh and Others 2 April 17, 2014 01:24
--> foam fatal error: lillo763 OpenFOAM Native Meshers: blockMesh 0 March 5, 2014 11:27
AMI speed performance danny123 OpenFOAM 19 October 24, 2012 07:44
How obtain a Mach number value from a case run with Xifoam solver?? lfgmarc OpenFOAM Programming & Development 0 June 15, 2011 03:00
Laval Nozzle Mach Contours Sohail Ahmed Main CFD Forum 0 May 19, 2004 05:42


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 21:10.