2011
DOI: 10.2514/1.56509
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Dual-Mode Scramjet Combustor: Numerical Analysis of Two Flowpaths

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

1
6
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2014
2014

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(7 citation statements)
references
References 1 publication
1
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In addition, the calibrated Schmidt number of 0.7 was acceptable for the case in which a divergent combustor was tested. 11 In conclusion, the turbulent Schmidt number yielded predicted peak pressure values that agreed within 1% of the experimental data and proved to be acceptable for two different tested equivalence ratios (0.5 and 1.0) and two different combustor configurations (step combustor and divergent combustor). 11 Other work investigating turbulence modeling is that of Ghodke et al 13 who investigated LES of supersonic combustion in a cavity-based flameholder.…”
Section: Reviewmentioning
confidence: 55%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…In addition, the calibrated Schmidt number of 0.7 was acceptable for the case in which a divergent combustor was tested. 11 In conclusion, the turbulent Schmidt number yielded predicted peak pressure values that agreed within 1% of the experimental data and proved to be acceptable for two different tested equivalence ratios (0.5 and 1.0) and two different combustor configurations (step combustor and divergent combustor). 11 Other work investigating turbulence modeling is that of Ghodke et al 13 who investigated LES of supersonic combustion in a cavity-based flameholder.…”
Section: Reviewmentioning
confidence: 55%
“…Milligan et al utilized a constant, calibrated turbulent Schmidt number in order to establish a baseline numerical approach for examining the efforts in RC22. 11,12 A calibrated turbulent Schmidt number equal to 0.7 predicted the peak pressure within 1% of the experimentally measured pressure for two different testing conditions. 11 The first condition had an equivalence ratio of 0.5 and the second had an equivalence ratio of 1.0.…”
Section: Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations