{"title":"边界层进气口的吸力控制","authors":"Lei Liu, Guozhan Li, Ban Wang, Shaofeng Wu","doi":"10.3390/aerospace10120989","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study presents a numerical investigation of suction control in an aggressive S-shaped air intake with large boundary ingestion. The results show that the variation of suction control parameters such as suction location, suction pipe diameter, and suction angle all have an impact on the effectiveness of the flow control. In general, further upstream suction, such as near the throat, is favorable for the decrease of the second flow intensity and the area of the low-energy fluid region at the exit of the S-shaped inlet. However, it is bad for the total pressure recovery and the circumferential total pressure uniform distribution. From the perspective of the uniformity of the total pressure distribution at the air intake exit, there is an optimal location for suction between the throat and the separation start point. A bigger suction pipe diameter brings better effects as the suction location and suction angle keep constant, due to more low-energy fluid being sucked out. But this doesn’t mean the largest mass flow suction results in the biggest improvement. Overall, sucking at the 1st bend, with suction angle and suction pipe diameter equaling 15 degrees and 12 mm, respectively, is the optimal suction scheme here. Since the change rule of the cross-section area along the centerline has not changed during suction control, the second flow and complex surface streamline at the air intake exit cannot be eliminated, though they can be decreased a lot with reasonable suction control. Similarly, owing to large boundary ingestion, the remarkable low-energy fluid region always exists despite the significant reduction of the separation and second flow, which is very different from the results of this kind of micro-suction executed in the non-BLI S-duct. To pursue a higher improvement, suction combined with vortex generator vanes has been further studied. Corresponding results analysis shows that the hybrid flow control method has great potential and should be investigated in detail in the future.","PeriodicalId":48525,"journal":{"name":"Aerospace","volume":"31 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Suction Control of a Boundary Layer Ingestion Inlet\",\"authors\":\"Lei Liu, Guozhan Li, Ban Wang, Shaofeng Wu\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/aerospace10120989\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study presents a numerical investigation of suction control in an aggressive S-shaped air intake with large boundary ingestion. The results show that the variation of suction control parameters such as suction location, suction pipe diameter, and suction angle all have an impact on the effectiveness of the flow control. In general, further upstream suction, such as near the throat, is favorable for the decrease of the second flow intensity and the area of the low-energy fluid region at the exit of the S-shaped inlet. However, it is bad for the total pressure recovery and the circumferential total pressure uniform distribution. From the perspective of the uniformity of the total pressure distribution at the air intake exit, there is an optimal location for suction between the throat and the separation start point. A bigger suction pipe diameter brings better effects as the suction location and suction angle keep constant, due to more low-energy fluid being sucked out. But this doesn’t mean the largest mass flow suction results in the biggest improvement. Overall, sucking at the 1st bend, with suction angle and suction pipe diameter equaling 15 degrees and 12 mm, respectively, is the optimal suction scheme here. Since the change rule of the cross-section area along the centerline has not changed during suction control, the second flow and complex surface streamline at the air intake exit cannot be eliminated, though they can be decreased a lot with reasonable suction control. Similarly, owing to large boundary ingestion, the remarkable low-energy fluid region always exists despite the significant reduction of the separation and second flow, which is very different from the results of this kind of micro-suction executed in the non-BLI S-duct. To pursue a higher improvement, suction combined with vortex generator vanes has been further studied. Corresponding results analysis shows that the hybrid flow control method has great potential and should be investigated in detail in the future.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48525,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Aerospace\",\"volume\":\"31 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Aerospace\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/aerospace10120989\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, AEROSPACE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Aerospace","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/aerospace10120989","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, AEROSPACE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
本研究对具有大边界摄入的侵蚀性 S 形进气口的吸力控制进行了数值研究。结果表明,吸气位置、吸气管直径和吸气角度等吸气控制参数的变化都会影响流量控制的效果。一般来说,进一步向上游吸气(如靠近喉管处)有利于降低 S 形入口出口处的二次流强度和低能流体区域的面积。但对总压恢复和圆周总压均匀分布不利。从进气口出口处总压分布均匀性的角度来看,喉管和分离起始点之间有一个最佳的吸气位置。由于吸入的低能流体较多,吸入位置和吸入角度保持不变,因此吸入管直径越大,效果越好。但这并不意味着质量流量越大的吸气效果就越好。总体而言,在第 1 个弯道处吸入,吸入角和吸入管直径分别等于 15 度和 12 毫米,是此处的最佳吸入方案。由于在吸气控制过程中,沿中心线截面积的变化规律没有改变,因此进气口的二次流和复杂的表面流线无法消除,但通过合理的吸气控制可以大大减少。同样,由于边界摄入量大,尽管分离流和二次流显著减少,但显著的低能流体区域始终存在,这与在非BLI S 型管道中执行这种微抽吸的结果大相径庭。为了追求更大的改进,我们进一步研究了与涡流发生器叶片相结合的吸力。相应的结果分析表明,混合流量控制方法具有很大的潜力,应在未来进行详细研究。
Suction Control of a Boundary Layer Ingestion Inlet
This study presents a numerical investigation of suction control in an aggressive S-shaped air intake with large boundary ingestion. The results show that the variation of suction control parameters such as suction location, suction pipe diameter, and suction angle all have an impact on the effectiveness of the flow control. In general, further upstream suction, such as near the throat, is favorable for the decrease of the second flow intensity and the area of the low-energy fluid region at the exit of the S-shaped inlet. However, it is bad for the total pressure recovery and the circumferential total pressure uniform distribution. From the perspective of the uniformity of the total pressure distribution at the air intake exit, there is an optimal location for suction between the throat and the separation start point. A bigger suction pipe diameter brings better effects as the suction location and suction angle keep constant, due to more low-energy fluid being sucked out. But this doesn’t mean the largest mass flow suction results in the biggest improvement. Overall, sucking at the 1st bend, with suction angle and suction pipe diameter equaling 15 degrees and 12 mm, respectively, is the optimal suction scheme here. Since the change rule of the cross-section area along the centerline has not changed during suction control, the second flow and complex surface streamline at the air intake exit cannot be eliminated, though they can be decreased a lot with reasonable suction control. Similarly, owing to large boundary ingestion, the remarkable low-energy fluid region always exists despite the significant reduction of the separation and second flow, which is very different from the results of this kind of micro-suction executed in the non-BLI S-duct. To pursue a higher improvement, suction combined with vortex generator vanes has been further studied. Corresponding results analysis shows that the hybrid flow control method has great potential and should be investigated in detail in the future.
期刊介绍:
Aerospace is a multidisciplinary science inviting submissions on, but not limited to, the following subject areas: aerodynamics computational fluid dynamics fluid-structure interaction flight mechanics plasmas research instrumentation test facilities environment material science structural analysis thermophysics and heat transfer thermal-structure interaction aeroacoustics optics electromagnetism and radar propulsion power generation and conversion fuels and propellants combustion multidisciplinary design optimization software engineering data analysis signal and image processing artificial intelligence aerospace vehicles'' operation, control and maintenance risk and reliability human factors human-automation interaction airline operations and management air traffic management airport design meteorology space exploration multi-physics interaction.