Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T06:02:19.938Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Prediction of acoustic resonance phenomena for weapon bays using detached eddy simulation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 February 2016

R. M. Ashworth
R. M. Ashworth*
Affiliation:
QinetiQ, Farnborough, UK
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

It is argued that acoustic resonance phenomena in open cavities such as weapons bays cannot be adequately predicted through numerical solution of Reynolds averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) equations. The requirement to resolve the growth of the shear layer instability from the lip of the cavity inevitably implies that turbulence further downstream is resolved while also being modelled thus making RANS over dissipative. Large eddy simulation (LES) models only unresolved scales and a hybrid method combining RANS near walls with LES in the cavity appears a practical alternative to pure RANS. This paper compares computations of the M219 cavity configuration made with unsteady RANS and with the hybrid method known as detached eddy simulation (DES). It is shown that whilst unsteady RANS and DES give very similar predictions for the 1st and 3rd modes of the acoustic resonance the 2nd mode (which is dominant near the centre of the cavity) is absent in the RANS results but well predicted by DES. The 2nd mode is thought to arise from an interaction with vortical structures in the shear layer which are suppressed in the highly dissipative RANS method. The 4th mode, which is much weaker than the other three modes, is over-predicted by DES and under-predicted by a smaller amount in RANS.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 109 , Issue 1102 , December 2005 , pp. 631 - 638
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2005 

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.)

References

1. Forestier, N., Jacquin, L. and Geffroy, P.. The mixing layer over a deep cavity at high subsonic speed, J Fluid Mech, 2003, 475, pp 101–145.Google Scholar
2. Rossiter, J.E.. Wind tunnel experiments on the flow over rectangular cavities at subsonic and transonic speeds, 1964, Aeronautical Research Council Reports and Memoranda 3438, London.Google Scholar
3. Sinha, D., Dash, S.M., Chidambaram, N. and Findlay, D.. A perspective on the simulation of cavity aeroacoustics, AIAA-98-0286.Google Scholar
4. Larcheveque, L., Sagaut, P. and Lê, T-H, Large-eddy simulations of flows in weapon bays, AIAA 2003-0778.Google Scholar
5. Larcheveque, L., Sagaut, P., Lê, T-H and Comte, P.. Large-Eddy Simulation of a compressible flow in a three-dimensional open cavity at high Reynolds number, under considerations for publication in J Fluid Mech.Google Scholar
6. Strelets, M.. Detached eddy simulation of massively separated flows, 2001, AIAA paper, 2001-0879.Google Scholar
7. Stanek, M.J., Raman, G., Kibens, V., Ross, J.A., Odedra, J. and Peto, J.W.. Control of cavity resonance through very high frequency forcing, 2000, AIAA paper, 2000-1905.Google Scholar
8. Stanek, M.J., Raman, G., Kibens, V., Ross, J.A., Odedra, J. and Peto, J.W.. Suppression of cavity resonance using high frequency forcing — the characteristic signature of effective devices, 2001, AIAA paper, 2001-2128.Google Scholar
9. Henshaw, M.J., De, C., ‘M219 cavity case’ in ‘Verification and validation data for computational unsteady aerodynamics’, Tech Rep RTO-TR-26, AC/323(AVT)TP/19, pp 453–472.Google Scholar
10. Cokljat, D. and Liu, F.. Des of turbulent flow over an airfoil at high incidence, 2002, AIAA paper, 2002-0590.Google Scholar
11. Mendonça, F., Allen, R., Charentenay, J. and Kirkham, D., CFD prediction of narrowband and broadband cavity acoustics at M = 0·85, 2003, AIAA paper, 2003-3303.Google Scholar
12. Spalart, P.R., Jou, W.H., Strelets, M. and Allmaras, S.R.. Comments on the feasibility of LES for wings and on a hybrid RANS/LES approach, Proceedings of the first AFOSR conference on DES/LES, edited by Liu, C. and Liu, Z. (Eds), Greyden Press.Google Scholar
13. Spalart, P.R. and Allmaras, S.R.. A one-equation turbulence model for aerodynamic flows, 1992, AIAA paper 92-0439.Google Scholar
14. Menter, F.R.. Zonal two-equation k-ω turbulence models for aerodynamic flows, 1993, AIAA paper 93-2906.Google Scholar
15. Wilcox, D.C., Reassessment of the scale determining equation for advanced turbulence models, AIAA J, 1988, 26, pp 1299–1310.Google Scholar
16. Jones, W.P. and Launder, B.E., The calculation of low Reynolds number phenomena with a two equation model of turbulence, Int J Heat Mass Transf, 1973, 16, pp 1119–1130.Google Scholar
17. Welch, P.D.. The use of fast Fourier transform for the estimation of power spectra, June 1970, IEEE Trans Audio Electroacoustics, AU-15, pp 70–73.Google Scholar