In this study, unsteady wave drag reduction in hypersonic flowfield using pulsed energy addition is numerically investigated. A single energy pulse is considered to analyze the time-averaged drag reduction/pulse. The blast wave creation, translation and its interaction with shock layer are studied. As the wave drag depends only on the inviscid aspects of the flowfield, Euler part of a well-established compressible flow Navier-Stokes solver USHAS (Unstructured Solver for Hypersonic Aerothermodynamics) is employed for the present study. To explore the feasibility of pulsed energy addition in reducing the wave drag at different flight conditions, flight Mach numbers of 5.75, 6.9 and 8.0 are chosen for the study. An apex angle blunt cone model is considered to be placed in such hypersonic streams, and steady-state drag and unsteady drag reductions are computed. The simulation results indicate that drag of the blunt-body can be reduced below the steady-state drag for a significant period of energy bubble-shock layer interaction, and the corresponding propulsive energy savings can be up to 9%. For energy pulse of magnitude 100mJ deposited to a spherical region of 2 mm radius, located 50 mm upstream of the blunt-body offered a maximum percentage of wave drag reduction in the case of Mach 8.0 flowfield. Two different flow features are found to be responsible for the drag reduction, one is the low-density core of the blast wave and the second one is the baroclinic vortex created due to the plasma energy bubble-shock layer interaction. For the same freestream stagnation conditions, these two flow features are noted to be very predominant in the case of high Mach number flow in comparison to Mach 5.75 and 6.9 cases. However, the ratio of energy saved to the energy consumed is noted as a maximum for the lower Mach number case.
AndersonJr JD.2006. Hypersonic and high-temperature gas dynamics. New York: AIAA Education Series, AIAA, 2006, pp. 13–16.
2.
IntrieriPFKirkDB.High-speed aerodynamics of several blunt-cone configurations. J Spacecr Rockets1987; 24: 127–132.
3.
CrawfordD. Investigations of the flow over a spiked-nose hemisphere-cylinder. NASA, TN D-118,1959.
4.
MenezesVSaravananSJagadeeshG, et al. Aerodynamic drag reduction using aerospikes for large angle blunt cone flying at hypersonic Mach number. In: AIAA aerodynamic measurement technology and ground testing conference, St. Louis, Missouri, USA, 24–26 June 2002.
5.
KalimuthuRMehtaRCRathakrishnanE.Experimental investigation on spiked body in hypersonic flow. Aeronaut J2008; 112: 593–598.
6.
PishFMoradiREdalatpourA, et al. The effect of coolant injection from the tip of spike on aerodynamic heating of nose cone at supersonic flow. Acta Astronautica2019; 154: 52–60.
7.
GerdroodbaryMBFallahKPourmirzaaghaH.Characteristics of transverse hydrogen jet in presence of multi air jets within scramjet combustor. Acta Astronaut2017; 132: 25–32.
8.
MoradiRMosavatMGerdroodbaryMB, et al. The influence of coolant jet direction on heat reduction on the nose cone with aerodome at supersonic flow. Acta Astronaut2018; 151: 487–493.
9.
FallahKGerdroodbaryMBGhaderiA, et al. The influence of micro air jets on mixing augmentation of fuel in cavity flameholder at supersonic flow. Aerosp Sci Technol2018; 76: 187–193.
10.
KuoSP.Shock wave modification by a plasma spike: experiment and theory. Phys Scripta2005; 71: 535–539.
11.
ZhouCJiW.A three-dimensional numerical investigation on drag reduction of a supersonic spherical body with an opposing jet. Proc IMechE, Part G: J Aerospace Engineering2014; 228: 163–177.
12.
SpaidFWZukoskiE.Secondary injection of gases into a supersonic flow. AIAA J1964; 2: 1689–1696.
13.
ExtonRJBallaRJShirinzadehB, et al. On-board projection of a microwave plasma upstream of a Mach 6 bow shock. Phys Plasmas2001; 8: 5013–5017.
14.
YanHGaitondeD. Control of Edney IV interaction by energy pulse. In: AIAA aerospace sciences meeting and exhibit, Reno, Nevada, USA, 9–12 January 2006.
15.
KimJHMatsudaASakaiT, et al. Wave drag reduction with acting spike induced by laser-pulse energy depositions. AIAA J2011; 49: 2076–2078.
16.
Tret'yakovPK.Control of supersonic flow around bodies by means of high-power recurrent optical breakdown. Physics-Doklady1996; 41: 566–567.
17.
ZudovVNTret'yakovPKTupikinAV, et al. Supersonic flow past a thermal source. Fluid Dyn2003; 38: 782–793.
18.
YurievAPirogovSSavischenkoN, et al. Investigation of pulse-repetitive energy release upstream body under supersonic airflow. In: Flow control conference, St. Louis, Missouri, USA, 24–26 June 2002.
19.
ZaidiSHShneiderMNMansfieldDK, et al. Influence of upstream pulsed energy deposition on a shockwave structure in supersonic flow. In: AIAA aerodynamic measurement technology and ground testing conference, St. Louis, MO, USA, 24–26 June 2002.
20.
OhnishiNTateMOginoY.Computational study of shock wave control by pulse energy deposition. Shock Waves2012; 22: 521–531.
21.
GuvernyukSVSamoilovAB.Control of supersonic flow around bodies by means of a pulsed heat source. Tech Phys Lett1997; 23: 333–336.
22.
ErdemEKontisKYangL.Steady energy deposition at Mach 5 for drag reduction. Shock Waves2013; 23: 285–298.
23.
ShneiderMNMacheretSOZaidiSH, et al. Virtual shapes in supersonic flow control with energy addition. J Propuls Power2008; 24: 900–915.
24.
SchüleinEZheltovodovA.Effects of steady flow heating by arc discharge upstream of non-slender bodies. Shock Waves2011; 21: 383–396.
25.
MyraboLNRaizerYPShneiderMN, et al. Reduction of drag and energy consumption during energy release preceding a blunt body in supersonic flow. High Temp2004; 42: 901–910.
26.
DulikravichGShefferS. Aerodynamic shape optimization of hypersonic configurations including viscous effects. In: Applied aerodynamics conference, Palo Alto, CA, USA, 22–24 June 1992.
ShneiderM. Energy addition into hypersonic flow for drag reduction and steering. In: Atmospheric pressure weakly ionized plasmas for energy technologies, flow control and materials processing, Princeton, NJ, USA, 22–24 August 2011.
29.
YuFMLinMS. Investigation of a planar shock on a body loaded with low temperature plasmas. In: Shock waves. Berlin: Springer, 2009, pp. 1425–1430.
30.
RigginsDNelsonHFJohnsonE.Blunt-body wave drag reduction using focused energy deposition. AIAA J1999; 37: 460–467.
31.
KremeyerKSebastianKAShuCW.Computational study of shock mitigation and drag reduction by pulsed energy lines. AIAA J2006; 44: 1720–1731.
32.
BergerSBen-DorGSadotO.Experimental and numerical investigations of shock-wave attenuation by geometrical means: a single barrier configuration. Eur J Mech B/Fluids2015; 50: 60–70.
33.
SinghAPPadhiUPTummalapalliH, et al. Investigations on ignition of atomized fuel-air mixtures and liquid fuel column-air combinations by low energy laser pulses. In: Asia-Pacific conference on combustion, Sydney, NSW, Australia, 10–14 December 2017.
34.
DamonEKTomlinsonRG.Observation of ionization of gases by a ruby laser. Appl Optics1963; 2: 546–547.
35.
JohnBSarathGKulkarniV, et al. Performance comparison of flux schemes for numerical simulation of high-speed inviscid flows. Prog Comput Fluid Dyn2014; 14: 83–96.
36.
JohnBKulkarniVNNatarajanG.Shock wave boundary layer interactions in hypersonic flows. Int J Heat Mass Transf2014; 70: 81–90.
37.
GerdroodbaryMBAminiYGanjiDD, et al. The flow feature of transverse hydrogen jet in presence of micro air jets in supersonic flow. Adv Space Res2017; 59: 1330–1340.
38.
AnazadehsayedAGerdroodbaryMBAminiY, et al. Mixing augmentation of transverse hydrogen jet by injection of micro air jets in supersonic crossflow. Acta Astronaut2017; 137: 403–414.
39.
BarthTJespersenD. The design and application of upwind schemes on unstructured meshes. In: 27th Aerospace sciences meeting, Reno, NV, USA, 9–12 January 1989.
40.
VenkatakrishnanV.Convergence to steady state solutions of the Euler equations on unstructured grids with limiters. J Comput Phys1995; 118: 120–130.
41.
JamesonASchmidtWTurkelE. Numerical solution of the Euler equations by finite volume methods using Runge Kutta time stepping schemes. In: 14th fluid and plasma dynamics conference, Palo Alto, CA, USA, 23–25 June 1981.
42.
SahooNSaravananSJagadeeshG, et al. Simultaneous measurement of aerodynamic and heat transfer data for large angle blunt cones in hypersonic shock tunnel. Sadhana2006; 31: 557–581.
43.
HongYWangDLiQ, et al. Interaction of single-pulse laser energy with bow shock in hypersonic flow. Chin J Aeronaut2014; 27: 241–247.
44.
HassanvandAGerdroodbaryMBFallahK, et al. Effect of dual micro fuel jets on mixing performance of hydrogen in cavity flameholder at supersonic flow. Int J Hydrog Energy2018; 43: 9829–9837.
45.
MoradiRMahyariAGerdroodbaryMB, et al. Shape effect of cavity flameholder on mixing zone of hydrogen jet at supersonic flow. Int J Hydrog Energy2018; 43: 16364–16372.
46.
GerdroodbaryMBMokhtariMFallahK, et al. The influence of micro air jets on mixing augmentation of transverse hydrogen jet in supersonic flow. Int J Hydrog Energy2016; 41: 22497–22508.
47.
Golbabaei-AslMKnightDD.Numerical characterization of high-temperature filament interaction with blunt cylinder at Mach 3. Shock Waves2014; 24: 123–138.
48.
AdelgrenRGYanHElliottGS, et al. Control of Edney IV interaction by pulsed laser energy deposition. AIAA J2005; 43: 256–269.
49.
ZheltovodovAPimonovEKnightD. Energy deposition influence on supersonic flow over axisymmetric bodies. In: 45th AIAA aerospace sciences meeting and exhibit, Reno, Nevada, 8–11 January 2007.
50.
AzarovaOAKnightDD. Numerical prediction of dynamics of interaction of laser discharge plasma with a hemisphere-cylinder in a supersonic flow. In: 53rd AIAA aerospace sciences meeting, Kissimmee, Florida, 5–9 January 2015.
51.
GeorgievskiiPYLevinVA.Unsteady interaction of a sphere with atmospheric temperature inhomogeneity at supersonic speed. Fluid Dyn1993; 28: 568–574.
52.
DanailaIJolyPKaberSM, et al. Gas dynamics: The Riemann problem and discontinuous solutions: application to the shock tube problem. An introduction to scientific computing. Twelve computational projects solved with MATLAB. Berlin: Springer, 2007, pp. 213–233.
53.
RichtmyerRD.Taylor instability in shock acceleration of compressible fluids. Commun Pure Appl Math1960; 13: 297–319.
54.
MeshkovEE.Instability of the interface of two gases accelerated by a shock wave. Fluid Dyn1972; 4: 101–104.
