Effects of the angle of impact on the aeroacoustic feedback mechanism in supersonic impinging planar jets

Abstract

Three planar impinging supersonic jets of infinite extent are simulated using compressible large eddy simulations in order to study the effects of the angle of impact on the flow and acoustic fields of the jet. At the exit of a nozzle of height h, they are ideally expanded and have an exit velocity u_j, yielding a Mach number of 1.28 and a Reynolds number of 5 × 10⁴. They impinge on a flat plate at a distance 5.5h from the nozzle lips with angles of 60°, 75°, and 90° between the jet direction and the plate. Mean velocity flows and snapshots of density, pressure, and vorticity are first shown. The mean convection velocity of the turbulent structures in the jet shear layers is then determined. The sound pressure levels are computed, and several tones due to the presence of a feedback mechanism are found to establish between the nozzle lips and the flat plate. They agree well with the corresponding measurements and with the classical model of the feedback mechanism. Moreover, when the angle of impact deviates from 90° to 75°, a jump from the third to the fourth mode of the feedback mechanism and a reduction in intensity are noted. By applying a Fourier decomposition to the near pressure fields, hydrodynamic–acoustic standing waves are found for each dominant tone frequency. Moreover, as suggested by amplitude fields and velocity spectra in the jet shear layers, the feedback mechanism seems to establish mainly along the lip that is farther away from the plate when the impact angle is not normal. This jump from the third to the fourth mode is similar to the jump observed experimentally for an angle of impact of 90° when the nozzle-to-plate distance increases from 5.5h to 5.85h. Finally, for an angle of impact of 60°, it is seen that none of the modes of the feedback persists in time, but that several modes randomly establish during short periods of time. These rapid switches between different modes lead to several tones that are less energetic on average and centered on St = 0.25.

Keywords

Impingement tones large eddy simulation supersonic flow

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Powell

On edge tones and associated phenomena. Acta Acust United Acust 1953; 3: 233–243.

Nosseir

Dynamics of an impinging jet. Part 1. The feedback phenomenon. J Fluid Mech 1981; 105: 119–142.

Nosseir

Dynamics of an impinging jet. Part 2. The noise generation. J Fluid Mech 1982; 116: 379–391.

Henderson

Powell

Experiments concerning tones produced by an axisymmetric choked jet impinging on flat plates. J Sound Vib 1993; 168: 307–326.

Krothapalli

Rajkuperan

Alvi

et al . Flow field and noise characteristics of a supersonic impinging jet. J Fluid Mech 1999; 392: 155–181.

Risborg

Soria

High-speed optical measurements of an underexpanded supersonic jet impinging on an inclined plate. In: 28th international congress on high-speed imaging and photonics, Canberra, Australia, 10 February 2009, paper no. 7126(F).

Buchmann

Mitchell

Ingvorsen

et al . High spatial resolution imaging of a supersonic underexpanded jet impinging on a flat plate. In: Abstract from 6th Australian conference on laser diagnostics in fluid mechanics and combustion, Canberra, Australia, 5–7 December 2011.

Weightman

Amili

Honnery

et al . An explanation for the phase lag in supersonic jet impingement. J Fluid Mech 2017; 815: R11–R111.

Henderson

Bridges

Wernet

An experimental study of the oscillatory flow structure of tone-producing supersonic impinging jets. J Fluid Mech 2005; 542: 115–137.

10.

Gojon

Bogey

Flow structure oscillations and tone production in underexpanded impinging round jets. AIAA J 2017; 55: 1792–1805.

11.

Bogey

Gojon

Feedback loop and upwind-propagating waves in ideally-expanded supersonic impinging round jets. J Fluid Mech 2017; 823: 562–591.

12.

Gojon

Bogey

Flow features near plate impinged by ideally expanded and underexpanded round jets. AIAA J 2018; 56: 445–457.

13.

Arthurs

Ziada

Self-excited oscillations of a high-speed impinging planar jet. J Fluids Struct 2012; 34: 236–258.

14.

Norum

Supersonic rectangular jet impingement noise experiments. AIAA J 1991; 29: 1051–1057.

15.

Tam

Norum

Impingement tones of large aspect ratio supersonic rectangular jets. AIAA J 1992; 30: 304–311.

16.

Hourigan

Rudman

Brocher

The feedback loop in impinging two-dimensional high-subsonic and supersonic jets. Exp Therm Fluid Sci 1996; 12: 265–270.

17.

Gojon

Bogey

Marsden

Investigation of tone generation in ideally expanded supersonic planar impinging jets using large-eddy simulation. J Fluid Mech 2016; 808: 90–115.

18.

Gojon

Bogey

Mihaescu

Oscillation modes in screeching jets. AIAA J 2018; 56: 2918–2924.

19.

Nonomura

Tsutsumi

Takaki

et al . Impact of spatial and temporal resolution on the aeroacoustic wave from a two-dimensional impinging jet. In: 7th international conference on computational fluid dynamics, Big Island, Hawaii, 9–13 July 2012, paper no. ICCFD7-3103.

20.

Nonomura

Goto

Fujii

Aeroacoustic waves generated from a supersonic jet impinging on an inclined flat plate. Int J Aeroacoust 2011; 10: 401–425.

21.

Tsutsumi

Nonomura

Fujii

et al . Analysis of acoustic wave from supersonic jets impinging to an inclined flat plate. In: 7th international conference on computational fluid dynamics, Big Island, Hawaii, 9–13 July 2012, paper no. ICCFD7-3104.

22.

Thurow

Samimy

Lempert

Structure of a supersonic impinging rectangular jet via real-time optical diagnostics. In: 32nd AIAA fluid dynamics conference, St. Louis, MO, 24–26 June 2002, AIAA paper no. 2002-2865.

23.

Bogey

Bailly

A family of low dispersive and low dissipative explicit schemes for flow and noise computations. J Comput Phys 2004; 194: 194–214.

24.

Berland

Bogey

Marsden

et al . High-order, low dispersive and low dissipative explicit schemes for multiple-scale and boundary problems. J Comput Phys 2007; 224: 637–662.

25.

Tam

Dong

Wall boundary conditions for high-order finite-difference schemes in computational aeroacoustics. Theor Comput Fluid Dyn 1994; 6: 303–322.

26.

Bogey

Marsden

Bailly

Large-eddy simulation of the flow and acoustic fields of a Reynolds number 10⁵ subsonic jet with tripped exit boundary layers. Phys Fluids 2011; 23: 035104.

27.

Bogey

Marsden

Bailly

Influence of initial turbulence level on the flow and sound fields of a subsonic jet at a diameter-based Reynolds number of 10⁵. J Fluid Mech 2012; 701: 352–385.

28.

Bogey

de Cacqueray

Bailly

A shock-capturing methodology based on adaptative spatial filtering for high-order non-linear computations. J Comput Phys 2009; 228: 1447–1465.

29.

de Cacqueray

Bogey

Bailly

Investigation of a high-Mach-number overexpanded jet using large-eddy simulation. AIAA J 2011; 49: 2171–2182.

30.

Gojon

Bogey

Numerical study of the flow and the near acoustic fields of an underexpanded round free jet generating two screech tones. Int J Aeroacoust 2017; 16: 603–625.

31.

Tam

An optimized multi-dimensional interpolation scheme for computational aeroacoustics applications using overset grids. In: 10th AIAA/CEAS aeroacoustics conference, 10 – 12 May 2004, Manchester, UK; AIAA paper no. 2004-2812.

32.

Chicheportiche

Gloerfelt

Techniques de recouvrement de maillages pour le calcul direct en aéroacoustique, 2011.

33.

Marsden

Bogey

Bailly

High-order curvilinear simulations of flows around non-Cartesian bodies. J Comp Acoust 2005; 13: 731–748.

34.

Kremer

Bogey

Large-eddy simulation of turbulent channel flow using relaxation filtering: resolution requirement and Reynolds number effects. Comput Fluids 2015; 116: 17–28.

35.

Viazzo

Dejoan

Schiestel

Spectral features of the wall-pressure fluctuations in turbulent wall flows with and without perturbations using les. Int J Heat Fluid Flow 2001; 22: 39–52.

36.

Gloerfelt

Berland

Direct computation of turbulent boundary layer noise. In: 15th AIAA/CEAS aeroacoustics conference, Miami, FL, 11–13 May 2009, AIAA paper no. 2009-3401.

37.

Schlatter

Brethouwer

et al . Simulations of spatially evolving turbulent boundary layers up to Re

_{θ}

= 4300. Int J Heat Fluid Flow 2010; 31: 251–261.

38.

Irwin

Measurements in a self-preserving plane wall jet in a positive pressure gradient. J Fluid Mech 1973; 61: 33–63.

39.

George

Abrahamsson

Eriksson

et al . A similarity theory for the turbulent plane wall jet without external stream. J Fluid Mech 2000; 425: 367–411.

40.

Panda

Raman

Zaman

Underexpanded screeching jets from circular, rectangular and elliptic nozzles. In: 3th AIAA/CEAS aeroacoustics conference, Atlanta, GA, 12 – 14 May 1997, AIAA paper no. 97-1623.

41.

Papamoschou

Roshko

The compressible turbulent shear layer: an experimental study. J Fluid Mech 1988; 197: 453–477.

42.

de Cacqueray

Bogey

Noise of an overexpanded Mach 3.3 jet: non-linear propagation effects and correlations with flow. Int J Aeroacoust 2014; 13: 607–632.

43.

Ffowcs-Williams

Simson

Virchis

‘ Crackle’: an annoying component of jet noise. J Fluid Mech 1975; 71: 251–271.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

24.17 MB