Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T22:51:47.663Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Assessment of Heat Flux Prediction Capabilities of Residual Distribution Method: Application to Atmospheric Entry Problems

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 March 2015

Jesús Garicano Mena ,
Raffaele Pepe ,
Andrea Lani  and
Herman Deconinck
Jesús Garicano Mena*
Affiliation:
von Karman Institute for Fluid Dynamics, Sint-Genesius-Rhode, Belgium Université Libre de Bruxelles, Bruxelles, Belgium
Raffaele Pepe
Affiliation:
von Karman Institute for Fluid Dynamics, Sint-Genesius-Rhode, Belgium Scuola di Ingegneria, Universitá degli Studi della Basilicata, Potenza, Italy
Andrea Lani
Affiliation:
von Karman Institute for Fluid Dynamics, Sint-Genesius-Rhode, Belgium
Herman Deconinck
Affiliation:
von Karman Institute for Fluid Dynamics, Sint-Genesius-Rhode, Belgium Université Libre de Bruxelles, Bruxelles, Belgium
*
*Corresponding author. Email addresses:jesus.garicano.mena@vki.ac.be (J. Garicano Mena), raffaele.pepe@unibas.it (R. Pepe), lani@vki.ac.be (A. Lani), deconinck@vki.ac.be (H. Deconinck)
Get access

Abstract

In the present contribution we evaluate the heat flux prediction capabilities of second-order accurate Residual Distribution (RD) methods in the context of atmospheric (re-)entry problems around blunt bodies. Our departing point is the computation of subsonic air flows (with air modeled either as an inert ideal gas or as chemically reacting and possibly out of thermal equilibrium gas mixture) around probe-like geometries, as those typically employed into high enthalpy wind tunnels. We confirm the agreement between the solutions obtained with the RD method and the solutions computed with other Finite Volume (FV) based codes.

However, a straightforward application of the same numerical technique to hypersonic cases involving strong shocks exhibits severe deficiencies even on a geometry as simple as a 2D cylinder. In an attempt to mitigate this problem, we derive new variants of RD schemes. A comparison of these alternative strategies against established ones allows us to derive a diagnose for the shortcomings observed in the traditional RD schemes.

Keywords

47.40.Ki47.70.Nd47.11.-j47.11.FgUnstructured meshhypersonic flowsthermo-chemical nonequilibriumresidual distribution schemes
Type
Research Article
Information
Communications in Computational Physics , Volume 17 , Issue 3 , March 2015 , pp. 682 - 702
Copyright
Copyright © Global-Science Press 2015 

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]Gnoffo, P. A., White, J. A., Computational aerothermodynamic simulation issues on unstructured grids, in: Proceedings of the 37th AIAA Aerospace Science Meeting and Exhibit, (Portland(OR)), AIAA, 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[2]Gnoffo, P. A., Updates to multi-dimensional flux reconstruction for hypersonic simulations on tetrahedral grids, in: Proceedings of the 48th AIAA Aerospace Science Meeting and Exhibit, (Orlando(FL)), AIAA, 2010.Google Scholar
[3]Anderson, J. D., Hypersonic and High Temperature Gas Dynamics. New York: McGraw Hill, 1989.Google Scholar
[4]Garicano Mena, J., Lani, A., Degrez, G. and Deconinck, H., A symmetrizing variables formulation for hypersonic thermo-chemical non-equilibrium flow, with application to residual distribution schemes, in: V European Conference on Computational Fluid Dynamics, 2010.Google Scholar
[5]Lani, A., Garicano Mena, J. and Deconick, H., A residual distribution method for symmetrized systems in thermochemical nonequilibrium, in: Proceedings of the 20th AIAA Computational Fluid Dynamics Conference, (Honolulu (Hawaii)), AIAA, 2011.Google Scholar
[6]Lani, A., Panesi, M. and Deconinck, H., Conservative residual distribution method for viscous double cone flows in thermochemical nonequilibrium, Communications in Computational Physics, vol. 13, pp. 479–501, 2013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[7]Sermeus, K. and Deconinck, H., Solution of steady euler and navier-stokes equations using residual distribution schemes, LS 2003–05, VKI, 2003.Google Scholar
[8]Garicano Mena, J., Lani, A., Sermeus, K. and Deconinck, H., An effective treatment of numerical shock wave instabilities with residual distribution schemes: Application to hypersonic nonequilibrium flows around blunt bodies, in: 7th European Symposium on Aerothermodynamics for Space Vehicles, (Brugge, Belgium), 2011.Google Scholar
[9]Kitamura, K., Shima, E., Nakamura, Y. and Roe, P.L., Evaluation of Euler fluxes for hypersonic flow computations, AIAA Journal, vol. 48, no. 4, pp. 763–776, 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[10]Barbante, P.F., Accurate and efficient modelling of high temperature nonequilibrium air flows. PhD thesis, Universite Libre de Bruxelles, 2001.Google Scholar
[11]Gnoffo, P., Gupta, R. and Shinn, J., Conservation equations and physical models for hypersonic air flows in thermal and chemical non-equilibrium, TP 2867, NASA, 1989.Google Scholar
[12]van der Weide, E., Compressible flow simulation on unstructured grids using multi-dimensiona upwind schemes. PhD thesis, Technische Universitet Delft, 1998.Google Scholar
[13]Ricchiuto, M., Construction and analysis of compact residual distribution discretizations for conservation laws on unstructured meshes. PhD thesis, Université Libre de Bruxelles, 2005.Google Scholar
[14]Sermeus, K., Multi-Dimensional Upwind Discretization and Application to Compressible Flows. PhD thesis, Université Libre de Bruxelles, 2013.Google Scholar
[15]Dobes, J., Numerical Algorithms for the Computation of Steady and Unsteady Compressible Flow over Moving Geometries : Application to Fluid-Structure Interaction. PhD thesis, Université Libre de Bruxelles, 2007.Google Scholar
[16]Lani, A. and Deconick, H., Conservative residual distribution method for hypersonic flows in thermochemical nonequilibrium, in: Proceedings of the 47th AIAA Aerospace Science Meeting and Exhibit, (Orlando(FL)), AIAA, 2009.Google Scholar
[17]Lani, A., An object oriented and high-performance platform for aerothermodynamic simulations. PhD thesis, Université Libre de Bruxelles, 2008.Google Scholar
[18]Balay, S., Brown, J., Buschelman, K., Eijkhout, V., Gropp, W. D., Kaushik, D., Knepley, M. G., McInnes, L. C., Smith, B. F., and Zhang, H., PETSc users manual, Tech. Rep. ANL-95/11 – Revision 3.4, Argonne National Laboratory, 2013.Google Scholar
[19]Panesi, M., Physical models for nonequilibrium plasma flow. PhD thesis, Universit degli studi di Pisa, 2009.Google Scholar
[20]Paris, S., Bottin, B., Van Der Haegen, V., and Carbonaro, M., Determination of temperature profiles in plasma jets with a crossflow tube probe, in: Proceedings of the AIAA 34th Thermophysics Conference, Denver, 2000, AIAA, 2000.Google Scholar
[21]Villedieu, N., High order discretisation by residual distribution schemes. PhD thesis, Université Libre de Bruxelles, 2009.Google Scholar
[22]Abgrall, R. and Mezine, M., Construction of 2nd-order accurate monotone and stable RDS for steady flow problems, Journal of Computational Physics, vol. 195, pp. 474–507, 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[23]Abgrall, R., Toward the Ultimate Conservative Scheme: Following the Quest, International Journal for Numerical Methods in Fluids, vol. 167, pp. 277315, 2001.Google Scholar
[24]Harten, A., Lax, P.D. and van Leer, B., On Upstream Differencing and Godunov-Type Schemes for Hyperbolic Conservation Laws, SIAM Review, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 35–61, 1983.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[25]Wood, W. A., Multi-dimensional Upwind Fluctuation Splitting Scheme with Mesh Adaption for Hypersonic Viscous Flow. PhD thesis, Virginia Polytechnic Institute, 2001.Google Scholar
[26]Paciorri, R and Bonfiglioli, A., A Shock-fitting technique for 2D unstructured grids, Computers and Fluids, vol. 38, pp. 715–726, 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[27]Kirk, B. S., Adiabatic shock capturing in perfect gas hypersonic flows, International Journal for Numerical Methods in Fluids, vol. 64, pp. 1041–1062, 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar