Scramjet test flow reconstruction for a large-scale expansion tube, Part 1: quasi-one-dimensional modelling

Large-scale free-piston driven expansion tubes have uniquely high total pressure capabilities which make them an important resource for development of access-to-space scramjet engine technology. However, many aspects of their operation are complex, and their test flows are fundamentally unsteady and difficult to measure. While computational fluid dynamics methods provide an important tool for quantifying these flows, these calculations become very expensive with increasing facility size and therefore have to be carefully constructed to ensure sufficient accuracy is achieved within feasible computational times. This study examines modelling strategies for a Mach 10 scramjet test condition developed for The University of Queensland’s X3 facility. The present paper outlines the challenges associated with test flow reconstruction, describes the experimental set-up for the X3 experiments, and then details the development of an experimentally tuned quasi-one-dimensional CFD model of the full facility. The 1-D model, which accurately captures longitudinal wave processes, is used to calculate the transient flow history in the shock tube. This becomes the inflow to a higher-fidelity 2-D axisymmetric simulation of the downstream facility, detailed in the Part 2 companion paper, leading to a validated, fully defined nozzle exit test flow.

[1]  Harold Mirels,et al.  TEST TIME IN LOW PRESSURE SHOCK TUBES , 1963 .

[2]  Allan Paull,et al.  Test flow disturbances in an expansion tube , 1992, Journal of Fluid Mechanics.

[3]  Johan Steelant,et al.  Methodology of a combined ground based testing and numerical modelling analysis of supersonic combustion flow paths , 2010 .

[4]  R. G. Morgan,et al.  The Superorbital Expansion Tube concept, experiment and analysis , 1994, Aeronautical Journal.

[5]  Richard G. Morgan,et al.  Double diaphragm driven free piston expansion tube , 1992 .

[6]  Peter A. Jacobs,et al.  About the formulation, verification and validation of the hypersonic flow solver Eilmer , 2013 .

[7]  H. Mirels Shock Tube Test Time Limitation Due to Turbulent-Wall Boundary Layer , 1964 .

[8]  Peter A. Jacobs,et al.  Rarefied, superorbital flows in an expansion tube , 2004 .

[9]  Richard G. Morgan,et al.  Free-piston driver performance characterisation using experimental shock speeds through helium , 2015 .

[10]  Peter A. Jacobs,et al.  Numerical simulation of transient hypervelocity flow in an expansion tube , 1994 .

[11]  Richard G. Morgan,et al.  Performance considerations for expansion tube operation with a shock-heated secondary driver , 2015, Journal of Fluid Mechanics.

[12]  Richard G. Morgan,et al.  Design and Commissioning of a New Lightweight Piston for the X3 Expansion Tube , 2015 .

[13]  Richard G. Morgan,et al.  High Mach Number Scramjet Test Flows in the X3 Expansion Tube , 2015 .

[14]  Richard G. Morgan,et al.  Current progress of the development of a Mach 12 scramjet operating condition in the X3 expansion tube , 2016 .

[15]  Peter A. Jacobs,et al.  Simulation of CO2-N2 Expansion Tunnel Flows for the Study of Radiating Shock Layers , 2008 .

[16]  Peter A. Jacobs,et al.  Production of high-Mach-number scramjet flow conditions in an expansion tube , 2014 .

[17]  David Gildfind,et al.  X3 expansion tube driver gas spectroscopy and temperature measurements , 2018 .

[18]  Richard G. Morgan Development of X3, A superorbital expansion tube , 2000 .

[19]  Peter A. Jacobs,et al.  Superorbital expansion tube operation: Estimates of flow conditions via numerical simulation , 2005 .

[20]  Peter A. Jacobs,et al.  Experimental validation of the T4 Mach 7.0 nozzle , 2014 .

[21]  Peter A. Jacobs,et al.  Expansion tubes in Australia , 2016 .

[22]  Peter A. Jacobs,et al.  Pilot study for a rarefied hypervelocity test facility , 1998 .

[23]  Peter A. Jacobs Quasi-one-dimensional modeling of a free-piston shock tunnel , 1994 .

[24]  Richard G. Morgan,et al.  Free piston-Driven expansion tubes , 2001 .

[25]  Peter A. Jacobs,et al.  Scramjet test flow reconstruction for a large-scale expansion tube, Part 2: axisymmetric CFD analysis , 2018 .

[26]  Peter A. Jacobs,et al.  Validation study of numerical simulations by comparison to measurements in piston-driven shock-tunnels , 2007 .

[27]  Peter A. Jacobs,et al.  Free-piston driver optimisation for simulation of high Mach number scramjet flow conditions , 2011 .

[28]  Peter A. Jacobs Approximate Riemann solver for hypervelocity flows , 1991 .

[29]  Bianca R. Capra,et al.  Impulse facility simulation of hypervelocity radiating flows , 2006 .

[30]  Peter A. Jacobs,et al.  Simulation of High Mach Number Scramjet Flow Conditions using the X2 Expansion Tube , 2012 .

[31]  Peter A. Jacobs,et al.  Diagnostic modelling of an expansion tube operating condition , 2009 .

[32]  Jorge Sancho Ponce Scramjet testing at high total pressure , 2016 .

[33]  Richard G. Morgan,et al.  Chapter 4.3 - Shock Tubes and Tunnels: Facilities, Instrumentation, and Techniques , 2001 .