42nd AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit 2004
DOI: 10.2514/6.2004-525
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Wind-US Flow Calculations for the M2129 S-duct Using Structured and Unstructured Grids

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
23
0

Year Published

2005
2005
2012
2012

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 24 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
0
23
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The different throat Mach numbers were a result of the set value of the outflow static pressure, and the downstream pressure ratios p=p 0 1 were those used by [14] Local time-stepping was used to integrate to a steady-state flowfield. The default second-order upwind-biased Roe scheme with modifications for stretched grids was used for the explicit right-hand side terms, and the default full block implicit scheme was used to compute the viscous terms.…”
Section: Computational Strategymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The different throat Mach numbers were a result of the set value of the outflow static pressure, and the downstream pressure ratios p=p 0 1 were those used by [14] Local time-stepping was used to integrate to a steady-state flowfield. The default second-order upwind-biased Roe scheme with modifications for stretched grids was used for the explicit right-hand side terms, and the default full block implicit scheme was used to compute the viscous terms.…”
Section: Computational Strategymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…13. Note that the unstructured solutions were computed with the Spalart-Allmaras turbulence model on an unstructured grid with prismatic cells near solid surfaces and tetrahedral cells in the isotropic region, whereas the structured solutions were computed with the SST turbulence model.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The initial conditions for each case were the corresponding converged Wind-US baseline (i.e., no VGs) case at the same throat Mach number. The different throat Mach numbers were a result of the value of the outflow static pressure, and the downstream pressures were those used by Mohler 13 for the baseline case. For these simulations with the VGs specified, the following outflow pressures, 13.76, 12.86, 12.63, 12.34, and 12.11 psi, produced the respective corresponding throat Mach numbers, 0.4004, 0.6182, 0.6755, 0.7573, 0.8322.…”
Section: Computational Strategymentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The experimental analyses for the performance of only a baseline (clean) M2129 inlet were available; however, no validation data has been found for the icing cases. Also, the computational data for the baseline M2129 inlet using WIND-US code from [25] were provided for the comparison. For this validation, the size of the duct inlet was set based on the geometrical data from [20] and [25].…”
Section: Validation Of Numerical Solution 41 Baseline M2129 S-duct Imentioning
confidence: 99%