The issue of growth rate reduction of high speed mixing layer with convective Mach number is examined for similar and dissimilar gases using Reynolds averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) methodology with k–ɛ turbulence model. It is observed that the growth rate predicted using RANS simulations closely matches with that predicted using model free simulations. Velocity profiles do not depend on the modelled value of Prt and Sct; while the temperature and species mass fraction distributions depend heavily on them. Although basic k–ɛ turbulence model could not capture the reduced growth rate for the mixing layer formed between similar gases, it predicts very well the reduced growth rate for the mixing layer for the dissimilar gases. It appears that density ratio changes caused by temperature changes for the dissimilar gases have profound effect on the growth rate reduction.
DimotakisPETurbulent free shear layer mixing and combustion. In: MurthySNBCurranET (eds). High speed flight propulsion system 1991, 137, progress in astronautics and aeronautics. Reston: AIAA Publication.265–340.
VremanBGeurtsBKuertenH. Large eddy simulation of the turbulent mixing layer. J Fluid Mech1997; 339: 357–390.
15.
FoysiHSarkarS. The compressible mixing layer: an LES study. Theor Comput Fluid Dyn2010; 24: 565–588.
16.
Launder BE, Morse A, Rodi W, et al. Prediction of free shear flows – a comparison of the performance of six turbulence models. Free Turbulent Shear Flows 1972; 1, NASA SP-321.
17.
ZemanO. Dilatational dissipation – the concept and application in modelling compressible mixing layer. Phys Fluids A21990; 2: 178–188.
18.
SarkarSErlebacherGHussainiMY. The analysis and modelling of dilatational terms in compressible turbulence. J Fluid Mech1991; 227: 473–493.
19.
BaroneMFOberkampfWLBlottnerFG. Validation case study: prediction of compressible turbulent mixing layer growth rate. AIAA J2006; 44(7): 1488–1497.
AupoixB. Modelling of compressibility effects in mixing layers. J Turbulence2004; 5(No. N7).
22.
HeinzS. A model for the reduction of the turbulent energy redistribution by compressibility. Phys Fluids2003; 15(11): 3580–3583.
23.
SarkarS. The stabilising effect of compressibility in turbulent shear flow. J Fluid Mech1995; 282: 163–186.
24.
Wantuck PJ, Tennant RA, Rothstein AD, et al. An experimental investigation of the properties of a non-reacting, supersonic shear layer, 1991, AIAA Paper No. 91-0628.
25.
Hall JL, Dimotakis PE and Rosemann H. Experiments in non-reacting compressible shear layers, 1991, AIAA Paper No. 91-0629.
26.
PapamoschouDRoshkoA. The compressible turbulent shear layer: an experimental study. J Fluid Mech1988; 197: 453–477.
27.
Rossmann T, Mungal MG and Hanson RK. An experimental investigation of high compressibility non-reacting mixing layers, 2000, AIAA Paper No. 2000-0663.
28.
Urban WD, Watanbe S and Mungal MG. Velocity fields of the planar shear layer: compressibility effects, 1998, AIAA Paper No. 98-0697.
29.
AGARD-AR-345-A selection of test cases for the validation of large-eddy simulations of turbulent flows. January 1998, NASA-19980201044.
30.
Erdos J, Tamagno J, Bakos R, et al. Experiments on shear layer mixing at hypervelocity conditions. 1992, AIAA Paper 92-0628.
LaunderBEHeat and mass transport. In: BradshawP (ed.). Turbulence 1976, vol. 12 of Topics in Applied Physics, Berlin Heidelberg: Springer, pp. 232–287.
35.
ReynoldsAJ. The variation of turbulent Prandtl and Schmidt numbers in wakes and jets. Int J Heat Mass Transfer1976; 19: 757–764.
36.
KaysWM. Turbulent Prandtl number – where are we?ASME J Heat Transfer1994; 116: 284–295.
37.
Baurle RA. Modelling of high speed reacting flows: established practices and future challenges, 2004, AIAA paper No. 2004-0267.
38.
Baurle RA and Eklund DR. Analysis of dual-mode hydrocarbon scramjet operation at Mach 4-6.5, 2001, AIAA paper No. 2001-3299.
39.
GiviP. Model Free Simulations of turbulent reactive flows. Prog Energy Combust Sci1989; 15: 1–107.
40.
Oh CK and Loth E. A numerical investigation of supersonic turbulent shear layers: compressibility effects, 1994, AIAA Paper No. 94-2244.
41.
Goebel SG and Dutton JC. Velocity measurement of compressible, turbulent mixing layers, 1990, AIAA paper 90-0709.
42.
OhCKLothE. Effects of initial conditions on spatially evolving compressible shear layer simulations. Comput Fluid Dyn1996; 6: 307–319.
43.
Risha DJ. Analysis of growth rates in three-dimensional air-to-air, supersonic shear layers using direct numerical simulation, 1995, AIAA paper No. 95-0523.
44.
Risha DJ. Analysis of turbulence statistics in three-dimensional, air-to-air supersonic shear layers using direct numerical simulation, 1995, AIAA paper No. 95-6072.
45.
ChakrabortyDMukundaHSPaulPJ. Two dimensional direct numerical simulation of nonreacting confined supersonic mixing layer. Aeronaut J2000June291–296.
46.
DrummondJPSupersonic reacting internal flow field, in numerical approaches in combustion modeling. In: OranESBorrisJP (eds). Progress in Aeronautics and Astronautics1991; vol. 135: 365–420. AIAA.
47.
Carpenter MH. A generalized chemistry version of SPARK, 1998, NASA-CR-4196.
48.
Carpenter MH and Kamath H. Three dimensional extension to the SPARK combustion code NASA-Langley, 1988, NASA-CP-5029: 107–137.
49.
JavedAPaulPJRajanNKS. Exploration of supersonic confined mixing layer: effect of dissimilar gases at different temperatures. Proc IMechE Part G: J Aerospace Engineering 2014; 228: 2255–2265.
50.
JavedARajanNKSChakrabortyD. Effect of side confining walls on the growth rate of compressible mixing layers. Comput Fluids2013; 86: 500–509.
51.
KralLD. Recent experience with different turbulence models applied to the calculation of flow over aircraft components. Prog Aerospace Sci1998; 34: 481–541.
52.
Viegas JR and Rubesin MW. A comparative study of several compressibility corrections to turbulence models applied to high speed shear layers, 1991, AIAA paper No. 91-1783.
53.
MahleIFoysiHSarkarS. On the turbulence structure in inert and reacting compressible mixing layers. J Fluid Mech2007; 593: 171–180.
