Effects of Magnetohydrodynamic Interaction-Zone Position on Shock-Wave/Boundary-Layer Interaction

Su, Weiyi; Chang, Xinyu; Kun-yuan, Zhang

doi:10.2514/1.49838

Cited by 7 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Also the wall pressure downstream of the interaction zone for Ha beyond 6000 is significantly higher than that of the Ha = 0 case as can be observed from figure 11. The trend of pressure distribution for the SBLI problem with various imposed magnetic fields is observed to be comparable to that of Su et al [11] for an analogous problem.…”

Section: Wall Pressure Distributionsupporting

confidence: 83%

Mitigation of shock-induced flow separation using magnetohydrodynamic flow control

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A numerical investigation is carried out to demonstrate a proof of concept, magnetohydrodynamicsbased active flow control, for mitigation of laminar flow separation over a flat plate due to shock wave-boundary layer interaction. The CERANS-MHD code has been used to solve the governing resistive magnetohydrodynamic equations discretized in finite-volume framework. The AUSM-PW? flux function is used in modelling the advection terms and central differencing is used in modelling the resistive terms. Powell's source term method is used for divergence cleaning of the magnetic field. The Hartmann number is varied from 0 to 12,000 to effectuate mitigation of flow separation, with the magnetic field applied at the wall and oriented transverse to the flat plate flow direction. Due to the Hartmann effect, flow separation is observed to be suppressed with increase in Hartmann number beyond 6000. However, the overall magnitude of skin friction distribution increases drastically, resulting in large increase in skin friction drag as compared with the non-magnetic case, and is a cause of concern.

show abstract

Section: Wall Pressure Distributionsupporting

confidence: 83%

Mitigation of shock-induced flow separation using magnetohydrodynamic flow control

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We also compared our conclusions about the best MHD control streamwise position (best 'MHD control type' proposed in this paper) with the numerical results of Su et al (2010). As flow conditions and size of the MHD zone are different in the two cases, short descriptions are listed in Table 2 to clarify the differences in supersonic/hypersonic and turbulent/laminar MHD control.…”

Section: Fig 9 Force Balance Of Stbli With Mhd Control In the X Dirementioning

confidence: 99%

“…As flow conditions and size of the MHD zone are different in the two cases, short descriptions are listed in Table 2 to clarify the differences in supersonic/hypersonic and turbulent/laminar MHD control. It is noteworthy that Su et al (2010) carried out a 2D supersonic simulation of MHD control on the oblique shock/laminar boundary layer interaction. Although the overall physics and topology of the two flows (oblique shock/laminar boundary layer interaction and oblique shock/turbulent boundary layer interaction) are the same, dramatic differences between laminar and turbulent flows render the nature of the incoming boundary layer an essential parameter.…”

Section: Fig 9 Force Balance Of Stbli With Mhd Control In the X Dirementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The length of the separation bubble in a laminar interaction is con-siderably larger than that in a turbulent interaction (Babinsky and Harvey, 2011). Therefore, the ratio of MHD length to bubble length (L MHD /L Bubble ) might differ by an order of magnitude although the length of the MHD zone we selected is almost the same as in (Su et al, 2010). The position of the MHD zone has to be selected precisely in the condition of a larger separation length.…”

Section: Fig 9 Force Balance Of Stbli With Mhd Control In the X Dirementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Subsequent experiments were then performed to investigate the effects of a magnetized plasma column on supersonic boundary layer separation; acetone planar laser scattering images show that separation can be fully suppressed when magnetic field strengths and current intensities exceeded 3 T and 80 mA, respectively (Kalra et al, 2011). Similarly, Su et al (2010) carried out laminar and k-ω shear stress transport (SST)-based turbulence numerical simulations on the MHD control of shock wave/boundary layer interaction separated flow, while used the large-eddy simulation method to study the STBLI of incoming flow at the Mach 2.25 and 24° compression corner. These results reveal that the thermal effects of plasma had little effect on control of the separation bubble at the compression corner, while Lorentz force reduced both the size of the separation zone and the turbulent kinetic energy.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Hypersonic flow control of shock wave/turbulent boundary layer interactions using magnetohydrodynamic plasma actuators

Jiang

Liu

Luo

et al. 2020

J. Zhejiang Univ. Sci. A

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effect of magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) plasma actuators on the control of hypersonic shock wave/turbulent boundary layer interactions is investigated here using Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes calculations with low magnetic Reynolds number approximation. A Mach 5 oblique shock/turbulent boundary layer interaction was adopted as the basic configuration in this numerical study in order to assess the effects of flow control using different combinations of magnetic field and plasma. Results show that just the thermal effect of plasma under experimental actuator parameters has no significant impact on the flow field and can therefore be neglected. On the basis of the relative position of control area and separation point, MHD control can be divided into four types and so effects and mechanisms might be different. Amongst these, D-type control leads to the largest reduction in separation length using magnetically-accelerated plasma inside an isobaric dead-air region. A novel parameter for predicting the shock wave/turbulent boundary layer interaction control based on Lorentz force acceleration is then proposed and the controllability of MHD plasma actuators under different MHD interaction parameters is studied. The results of this study will be insightful for the further design of MHD control in hypersonic vehicle inlets.

show abstract

Investigation of pressure feedback technique to control ramp based SWBLI

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Effects of Magnetohydrodynamic Interaction-Zone Position on Shock-Wave/Boundary-Layer Interaction

Cited by 7 publications

References 12 publications

Mitigation of shock-induced flow separation using magnetohydrodynamic flow control

Mitigation of shock-induced flow separation using magnetohydrodynamic flow control

Hypersonic flow control of shock wave/turbulent boundary layer interactions using magnetohydrodynamic plasma actuators

Investigation of pressure feedback technique to control ramp based SWBLI

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About