影响振荡射流分离控制效果的关键因素

孙启翔; 王万波; 黄勇; 王勋年; 潘家鑫

doi:10.7638/kqdlxxb-2023.0024

欢迎来到能源电力期刊网！

English Version 期刊登录

您当前的位置：

首页 >

文章列表页 >

影响振荡射流分离控制效果的关键因素

研究论文 | 更新时间：2026-05-28

- 影响振荡射流分离控制效果的关键因素
- Key factors affecting the separation control effect of oscillating jets
- 空气动力学学报 2024年42卷第2期页码：56-67
- 作者机构：
  
  1. 空天飞行空气动力科学与技术全国重点实验室,绵阳,621000
  2. 中国空气动力研究与发展中心低速空气动力研究所,绵阳,621000
  3. 中国空气动力研究与发展中心计算空气动力研究所,绵阳,621000
- 作者简介：
  
  孙启翔（1998—），男，河南郑州人，博士研究生，研究方向：流动控制. E-mail：3506620976@qq.com
  王万波*，副研究员，研究方向：流动控制. E-mail：bowanw@163.com
- 基金信息：
- DOI：10.7638/kqdlxxb-2023.0024
  中图分类号： V211.3
- 纸质出版：2024
- 稿件说明：
移动端阅览
孙启翔, 王万波, 黄勇, 等. 影响振荡射流分离控制效果的关键因素[J]. 空气动力学学报, 2024, 42(2): 56−67.

SUN Qixiang, WANG Wanbo, HUANG Yong, et al. Key factors affecting the separation control effect of oscillating jets[J]. 2024, 42(2): 56-67.
孙启翔, 王万波, 黄勇, 等. 影响振荡射流分离控制效果的关键因素[J]. 空气动力学学报, 2024, 42(2): 56−67. DOI： 10.7638/kqdlxxb-2023.0024

SUN Qixiang, WANG Wanbo, HUANG Yong, et al. Key factors affecting the separation control effect of oscillating jets[J]. 2024, 42(2): 56-67. DOI： 10.7638/kqdlxxb-2023.0024.

摘要

为找出影响振荡射流对流场分离控制效果的关键因素，采用典型振荡射流激励器对偏转襟翼流场施加控制，通过数值模拟分析施加控制后的流场特点，总结了射流停滞的原因和影响；并对比不同扩张段、脉冲式和扫掠式振荡射流的控制效果，总结了射流扫掠范围对控制效果的影响。结果表明：射流向流场中传递动量的均匀程度和扫掠范围是影响控制效果的关键因素。射流向流场中传递动量越均匀，扫掠范围越大，则控制效果越好。激励器喉道过小会抑制射流偏转，使射流在出口两侧停滞，导致射流向流场中传递动量不均匀，因此偏转襟翼两侧的控制效果好于中部；增大扩张段会增大射流扫掠范围从而改善控制效果；脉冲式激励器内的尖劈会阻挡射流扫掠至其后方，导致射流扫掠范围小，偏转襟翼中部控制效果差。

Abstract

Even though the oscillating jet actuator has been widely utilized in flow control

its control mechanism still requires substantial fundamental research. This paper conducted numerical simulations on controlling separated flow fields around a deflection flap using several oscillating jet actuators to identify the key factors affecting the control effect. By studying the control effect of different expansion sections and comparing the control characteristics of pulse and sweep oscillating jets

the causes and effects of jet stagnation and the influence of the jet's sweeping extent on the control effect are summarized. The results show that the uniformity of the momentum transferred by the jet into the flow field and the sweeping extent are the key factors affecting the control effect. A more uniform momentum transferred by the jet into the flow field and a larger sweeping extent yield a better control effect. If the actuator throat is too small

the jet will stagnate on both sides of the outlet due to a restrained deflection. This results in the uneven momentum transfer from the jet into the flow field and a better control effect on both sides of the deflected flap than that in the middle. Increasing the expansion section will increase the sweeping extent of the jet and improve the control effect. The wedge in the pulse exciter prevents the jet from sweeping to its rear

yielding a small sweeping extent of the jet and a worse control effect in the middle of the deflected flap.

关键词

Keywords

references

LIU Y, LI C P, ZHANG T J, et al. Numerical simulation of oscillating jet control for trailing edge continuous deflection wing[J]. Aeronautical Science Technology, 2020, 31(5): 36−43 (in Chinese). doi: 10.19452/j.issn1007-5453.2020.05.005

CHENG Y Z, LI Y H, HUO F P, et al. Numerical simulation of oscillating excitation separation flow control over airfoils[J]. Journal of Tsinghua University (Science and Technology), 2002, 42(12): 1644−1646,1666 (in Chinese). doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-0054.2002.12.022

WU S Y, ZENG D L, LI Y R. Performance evaluation and experiment for self-oscillation pulsating flow in forced convection heat transfer[J]. Petro-Chemical Equipment, 2005, 34(6): 4−8 (in Chinese). doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-7466.2005.06.001

SEELE R, GRAFF E, LIN J, et al. Performance enhancement of a vertical tail model with sweeping jet actuators[C]// 51st AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition, Grapevine (Dallas/Ft. Worth Region), Texas. Reston, Virginia: AIAA, 2013: 0411. doi: 10.2514/6.2013-411

WHALEN E A, LACY D S, LIN J C, et al. Performance enhancement of a full-scale vertical tail model equipped with active flow control[C]// 53rd AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, Kissimmee, Florida. Reston, Virginia: AIAA, 2015: 0784. doi: 10.2514/6.2015-0784

ANDINO M Y, LIN J C, WASHBURN A E, et al. Flow separation control on a full-scale vertical tail model using sweeping jet actuators[C]// 53rd AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, Kissimmee, Florida. Reston, Virginia: AIAA, 2015: 0785. doi: 10.2514/6.2015-0785

VATSA V N, DUDA B M, LIN J C, et al. Numerical simulation of a simplified high-lift CRM configuration embedded with fluidic actuators[C]// 2018 Applied Aerodynamics Conference, Atlanta, Georgia. Reston, Virginia: AIAA, 2018: 3063. doi: 10.2514/6.2018-3063

LIN J C, PACK MELTON L G, HANNON J, et al. Wind tunnel testing of active flow control on the high lift common research model[C]// AIAA Aviation 2019 Forum, Dallas, Texas. Reston, Virginia: AIAA, 2019: 3723. doi: 10.2514/6.2019-3723

PACK MELTON L G, LIN J C, HANNON J, et al. Sweeping jet flow control on the simplified high-lift version of the common research model[C]// AIAA Aviation 2019 Forum, Dallas, Texas. Reston, Virginia: AIAA, 2019: 3726. doi: 10.2514/6.2019-3726

VATSA V N, LIN J C, PACK MELTON L G, et al. CFD and experimental data comparisons for conventional and AFC-enabled CRM high-lift configurations (invited)[C]// AIAA AVIATION 2020 FORUM, VIRTUAL EVENT. Reston, Virginia: AIAA, 2020: 2939. doi: 10.2514/6.2020-2939

PACK MELTON L G, KOKLU M. Active flow control using sweeping jet actuators on a semi-span wing model[C]// 54th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, San Diego, California, USA. Reston, Virginia: AIAA, 2016: 1817. doi: 10.2514/6.2016-1817

SLUPSKI B J, KARA K. Separated flow control over NACA 0015 airfoil using sweeping jet actuator[C ] // 35th AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference, Denver, Colorado. Reston, Virginia: AIAA, 2017: 3043. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2017-3043

TEWES P, TAUBERT L, WYGNANSKI I. On the use of sweeping jets to augment the lift of a λ-wing[C ] // 28th AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference, Chicago, Illinois. Reston, Virginia: AIAA, 2010: 4689. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2010-4689

JONES G S, MILHOLEN W E, CHAN D T, et al. A sweeping jet application on a high Reynolds number semispan supercritical wing configuration[C]// 35th AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference, Denver, Colorado. Reston, Virginia: AIAA, 2017: 3044. doi: 10.2514/6.2017-3044

SCHLOESSER P, MEYER M, SCHUELLER M, et al. Fluidic actuators for separation control at the engine/wing junction[J]. Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology, 2017, 89(5): 709−718. doi: 10.1108/AEAT-01-2017-0013

SHAY M, POSTI M, MIZRAHI B, et al. Suction and pulsed blowing for control of local wing-engine-slat-cut out flow separation: The INAFLOWT project[C]// AIAA Aviation 2020 Forum, Virtual Event. Reston, Virginia: AIAA, 2020: 2953. doi: 10.2514/6.2020-2953

WILSON J, SCHATZMAN D, ARAD E, et al. Suction and pulsed-blowing flow control applied to an axisymmetric body[J]. AIAA Journal, 2013, 51(10): 2432−2446. doi: 10.2514/1.J052333

BAUER M, LOHSE J, HAUCKE F, et al. High-lift performance investigation of a two-element configuration with a two-stage actuator system[J]. AIAA Journal, 2014, 52(6): 1307−1313. doi: 10.2514/1.J052639

BAUER M, GRUND T, NITSCHE W. Experiments on active drag reduction on a complex outer wing model[J]. AIAA Journal, 2015, 53(7): 1774−1783. doi: 10.2514/1.J053515

DOLGOPYAT D, SEIFERT A. Active flow control virtual maneuvering system applied to conventional airfoil[J]. AIAA Journal, 2019, 57(1): 72−89. doi: 10.2514/1.J056258

BOBUSCH B C, WOSZIDLO R, KRÜGER O, et al. Numerical investigations on geometric parameters affecting the oscillation properties of a fluidic oscillator[C]// 21st AIAA Computational Fluid Dynamics Conference, San Diego, CA. Reston, Virginia: AIAA, 2013: 2709. doi: 10.2514/6.2013-2709

SUN Q X, WANG W B, HUANG Y. Oscillation characteristics of suction and oscillatory blowing actuator[J]. Acta Aeronautica et Astronautica Sinica, 2022, 43(8): 125627 (in Chinese). doi: 10.7527/S1000-6893.2021.25627

ZHOU L L, WANG S Q, WEN X. Working characteristics of a fluidic oscillator with high frequency and high speed[J]. Journal of Aerospace Power, 2022, 37(4): 877−885 (in Chinese). doi: 10.13224/j.cnki.jasp.20210099

GAERTLEIN S, WOSZIDLO R, OSTERMANN F, et al. The time-resolved internal and external flow field properties of a fluidic oscillator[C]// 52nd Aerospace Sciences Meeting, National Harbor, Maryland. Reston, Virginia: AIAA, 2014: 1143. doi: 10.2514/6.2014-1143

ARAM S, SHAN H. Computational analysis of interaction of a sweeping jet with an attached crossflow[J]. AIAA Journal, 2019, 57(2): 682−695. doi: 10.2514/1.J057191

MELTON L P, KOKLU M, ANDINO M, et al. Sweeping jet optimization studies[C]// 8th AIAA Flow Control Conference, Washington, D. C. Reston, Virginia: AIAA, 2016: 4233. doi: 10.2514/6.2016-4233

KOKLU M. Effect of a coanda extension on the performance of a sweeping-jet actuator[J]. AIAA Journal, 2016, 54(3): 1125. doi: 10.2514/1.J054448

GOKOGLU S, KUCZMARSKI M, CULLEY D, et al. Numerical studies of a fluidic diverter for flow control[C]// 39th AIAA Fluid Dynamics Conference, San Antonio, Texas. Reston, Virginia: AIAA, 2009: 4012. doi: 10.2514/6.2009-4012

浏览量

下载量

CSCD

文章被引用时，请邮件提醒。

提交

工具集

关联资源

一种单反馈通道振荡射流激励器设计

合成双射流控制水下圆柱绕流流动分离数值模拟研究

关键区域优化对高速列车横风气动特性影响

考虑近距离海洋下垫面影响的对称风机翼型静气动特性

高速斜板液膜冷却的数值模拟研究