Effects of wall cavity and fuel injection pressure on the performance of a non-reacting supersonic combustor

Abstract

This study numerically investigates the flow field of a non-reacting cavity-configured scramjet (Supersonic Combustion Ramjet) combustor at various fuel injection pressures by solving the 2D Reynolds-Averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) equations, species transport equations, and Menter SST k-ω model. The aim of this research is to reveal the effects of wall cavity insertion and fuel injection pressure (FIP) on the crucial performance parameters i.e., fuel-air mixing efficiency (MxE), total pressure recovery (TPR), and mass-averaged Mach number (MAMN). Accordingly, two trapezoidal cavities of aspect ratio 7 are introduced on the opposite walls of a rectangular combustor. The combustor entrance is configured with rearward-facing steps and it intakes finite parallel air streams through finite-width inlets. Gaseous hydrogen jets are injected 30 mm downstream from the combustor entrance and 10 mm upstream from the cavity leading edge. FIP is varied according to the fuel-to-freestream pressure ratios (FFPR) of 4.5, 9.0, 13.5, and 18.0. The results of the cavity-configured combustor are then compared with the performance of the combustor in the absence of the wall cavities. The results delineate the change in flow structures with the inclusion of wall cavities and variation in FIP. Insight physics of mixing, total pressure loss, and MAMN in different regions of the combustor are studied and the results are quantified for comparison. MxE in a cavity-configured combustor does not monotonically increase with decreasing FFPR as found in the combustor without wall cavities. The shock-shear layer interactions (SSLIs) play a dominant role in mixing inside the cavity-configured combustor. The results also demonstrate that the insertion of wall cavities can increase fuel-air MxE through the formation of cavity recirculation zones. In the cavity-configured combustor, a maximum of 45% MxE is achieved for FFPR 4.5, which is 4% higher than the value obtained from the combustor without the cavities with an expense of 3% greater total pressure loss.

Keywords

Scramjet wall cavity shock-shear layer interaction mixing efficiency total pressure recovery

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Curran

. Scramjet engines: the first forty years. J Propulsion Power 2001; 17: 1138–1148.

Tishkoff

Philip Drumraond

Edwards

Nejad

. Future directions of supersonic combustion research: air force/NASA workshop on supersonic combustion. In: 35th Aerosp. Sci. Meet. Exhib., 1997.

Huang

Pourkashanian

, et al. Investigation on the flameholding mechanisms in supersonic flows: backward-facing step and cavity flameholder. J Vis 2011; 14: 63–74.

Gugulothu

. A systematic literature review based on different fuel injection strategies used in scramjet combustors. Heat Transf Asian Res 2019; 48: 3657–3681.

Sarathkumar Sebastin

Jeyakumar

Karthik

. The non-reacting flow characteristics of pylon and wall injections in a dual combustion ramjet engine. Int J Engine Res 2022; 23: 1495–1502.

Athithan

Jeyakumar

. Numerical investigations on the influence of double ramps in a strut based scramjet combustor. Int J Engine Res 2023; 24: 2025–2038.

Ogawa

. Effects of injection angle and pressure on mixing performance of fuel injection via various geometries for upstream-fuel-injected scramjets. Acta Astronaut 2016; 128: 485–498.

Rogers

. Model of transverse fuel injection in supersonic combustors. AIAA J 1980; 18: 294–301.

Drummond

Langley

. Numerical investigation of the perpendicular injector flow field in a hydrogen fueled scramjet. In: AIAA 12th Fluid Plasma Dyn. Conf., Williamsburg, VA, 1979.

10.

Yang

Sun

. Trajectory analysis of fuel injection into supersonic cross flow based on schlieren method. Chin J Aeronaut 2012; 25: 42–50.

11.

Kang

Lee

Yang

Michael

Milinda

. Cowl and cavity effects on mixing and combustion in scramjet engines. J Propulsion Power 2011; 27: 1169–1177.

12.

Gruber

Nejad

Chen

Dutton

. Mixing and penetration studies of sonic jets in a mach 2 freestream. J Propulsion Power 1995; 11: 315–323.

13.

Kim

Baek

Han

. Numerical study on supersonic combustion with cavity-based fuel injection. Int J Heat Mass Transf 2004; 47: 271–286.

14.

Aso

Kawai

Ando

. Experimental study on mixing phenomena in supersonic flows with slot injection. In: 29th Aerosp. Sci. Meet., Reno, Nevada, 1991.

15.

Ogawa

Boyce

. Computational investigation of fuel injection with various injector geometries and mixing into hypersonic crossflow in scramjet engines. In: 51st AIAA Aerosp. Sci. Meet. Incl. New Horizons Forum Aerosp. Expo. 2013, 2013, pp.1–21.

16.

Ali

Fujiwara

Leblanc

. Influence of main flow inlet configuration on mixing and flameholding in transverse injection into supersonic airstream. Int J Eng Sci 2000; 38: 1161–1180.

17.

Haas

Sturtevant

. Interaction of weak shock waves with cylindrical and spherical gas inhomogeneities. J Fluid Mech 1987; 181: 41–76.

18.

Marble

Zukoski

Jacobs

Hendricks

. Shock enhancement and control of hypersonic mixing and combustion. In: AIAAlSAE/ASME/ASEE 26th Jt. Propuls. Conf., Orlando, FL, 1990.

19.

Campioli

Maddalena

Schetz

. Studies of shock wave/transverse injection interaction on supersonic mixing processes. In: 14th AIAA/AHI Int. Sp. Planes Hypersonic Syst. Technol. Conf., 2006, pp.2270–2294.

20.

Relangi

Ingenito

Jeyakumar

. The investigation of inclined AFT wall cavities in a circular scramjet combustor. Int J Engine Res 2023; 24: 1300–1311.

21.

Schadow

. Cavity-actuated supersonic mixing and combustion control. Combust Flame 1994; 99: 295–301.

22.

Ben-Yakar

. Experimental investigation of mixing and ignition of transverse jets in supersonic crossflows. Thesis (PhD). Stanford University, 2001.

23.

Moradi

Mahyari

Barzegar Gerdroodbary

Abdollahi

Amini

. Shape effect of cavity flameholder on mixing zone of hydrogen jet at supersonic flow. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2018; 43: 16364–16372.

24.

Yang

Wang

Sun

Wang

. Numerical and experimental study on flame structure characteristics in a supersonic combustor with dual-cavity. Acta Astronaut 2015; 117: 376–389.

25.

Zhang

Rona

Edwards

. The effect of trailing edge geometry on cavity flow oscillation driven by a supersonic shear layer. Aeronaut J 1998; 102: 129–136.

26.

White

. Viscous fluid flow. Vol. 3. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2006.

27.

Reid

Sherwood

Street

. The properties of gases and liquids. Phys Today 1959; 12: 38–40.

28.

Menter

. Two-equation eddy-viscosity turbulence models for engineering applications. AIAA J 1994; 32: 1598–1605.

29.

Chowdhury

Sarfaraz

Shingh

Ali

Amin

M, R

, Effects of turbulence modeling and turbulent Schmidt number on supersonic mixing simulations. In: ASME Int. Mech. Eng. Congr. Expo., 2021, pp.1–10.

30.

Zhang

Choi

Yang

Lin

. Ignition transients in a scramjet engine with air throttling part 1: nonreacting flow. J Propulsion Power 2014; 30: 438–448.

31.

Mao

Riggins

McClinton

. Numerical simulation of transverse fuel injection. In: NASA Lewis Res. Cent. Comput. Fluid Dyn. Symp. Aeropropulsion, 1991, pp.635–667.

32.

Drozda

Lampenfield

Deshmukh

Baurle

Drummond

. The effect of turbulence modeling on the mixing characteristics of several fuel injectors at hypervelocity flow conditions. In: AIAA Scitech Forum, 2019, pp.1–23.

33.

Weidner

Drummond

. A parametric study of staged fuel injector configurations for scramjet applications. In: AIAA/SAE/ASME 17th Jt. Propuls. Conf., 1981.

34.

Aziz

Chowdhury

Shingh

Ali

. Influence of jet-to-crossflow pressure ratio and combustor width on performance of a hydrogen fueled scramjet. Int J Engine Res 2023; 24: 1744–1759.

35.

Campioli

Schetz

. Assesment of reacting and non-reacting supersonic mixing. In: Proc. FEDSM2007 5th Jt. ASME/JSME Fluids Eng. Conf., 2007, pp.1–7.