In this study, the interaction of a longitudinal vortex with an oblique shock was studied numerically. A global stability approach was used to investigate the onset of unsteadiness due to vortex breakdown. For this purpose, steady and unsteady laminar flow simulations were performed. A longitudinal vortex with an exponentially decaying tangential velocity profile, a so-called Erlebacher vortex, was introduced into the flow field by a modification of the inflow boundary, while the oblique shock was created by a ramp in supersonic flow. Parametric studies concerning the influence of the axial velocity deficit and the tangential velocity component on the stability of the vortex were performed. Several amplified global eigenmodes could be identified and it could be shown that the frequencies predicted by the global stability analysis were in reasonable agreement with dominant frequencies observed in the unsteady simulations.

Acknowledgments

The authors gratefully acknowledge the Gauss Centre for Supercomputing e.V. ( www.gauss-centre.eu ) for helping to fund this project by providing computing time on the GCS Supercomputer SuperMUC-NG at Leibniz Supercomputing Centre ( www.lrz.de ). Open access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL.

References

1 S. Balay, W. D. Gropp, L. C. McInnes, B. F. Smith, Modern Software Tools for Scientific Computing, pp. 163–202 (1997).
Google Scholar
2 CentaurSoft, Online User's Manual - CENTAUR V15.0. URL: https://www.centaursoft.com (2021).
Google Scholar
3 J. D. Crouch, A. Garbaruk, D. Magidov, J. Comput. Phys.224, pp. 924–940 (2007).
Google Scholar
4 R. P. Dwight, Efficiency Improvements of RANS-Based Analysis and Optimization Using Implicit and Adjoint Methods on Unstructured Grids, PhD thesis, University of Manchester (2005).
Google Scholar
5 G. Erlebacher, M. Y. Hussaini, C.-W. Shu, J. Fluid Mech. 337, pp. 129–153 (1997).
Google Scholar
6 T. Gerhold, MEGAFLOW - Numerical Flow Simulation for Aircraft Design, pp. 81–92 (2005).
Google Scholar
7 V. Hernandez, J. E. Roman, V. Vidal, ACM Trans. Math. Software 31, pp. 351–362 (2005).
Google Scholar
8 M. C. Iorio, L. M. Gonzalez, E. Ferrer, Int. J. Numer. Methods Fluids 76, p. 22 (2014).
Google Scholar
9 P. Jolivet, P.-H. Tournier, SC16: International Conference for High Performance Computing, Networking, Storage and Analysis, Salt Lake City, Utah (2016).
Google Scholar
10 I. M. Kalkhoran, M. K. Smart, Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 36, pp. 63–95 (2000).
Google Scholar
11 S. Leibovich, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 10, pp. 221–246 (1978).
Google Scholar
12 M. Lessen, P. J. Singh, F. Paillet, J. Fluid Mech. 63, pp. 753–763 (1974).
Google Scholar
13 O. Lucca-Negro, T. O'Doherty, Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 27, pp. 431–481 (2001).
Google Scholar
14 V. Magri, I. M. Kalkhoran, Comput. Fluids 86, pp. 343–356 (2013).
Google Scholar
15 M. Meinel, PARA 2010, Reykjavik, Island (2010).
Google Scholar
16 P. Meliga, F. Gallaire, 6th AIAA Theoretical Fluid Mechanics Conference, Honolulu, Hawaii, AIAA 2011-3604 (2011).
Google Scholar
17 R. T. Pierrehumbert, S. E. Widnall, J. Fluid Mech. 114, p. 59 (1982).
Google Scholar
18 U. A. Qadri, D. Mistry, M. P. Juniper, J. Fluid Mech. 720, pp. 558–581 (2013).
Google Scholar
19 R. Spall, AIAA 24th Fluid Dynamics, Plasmadynamics, and Lasers Conference, Orlando, Florida, AIAA 93-3034 (1993).
Google Scholar
20 V. Theofilis, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 43, pp. 319–352 (2011).
Google Scholar
21 O. Thomer, W. Schröder, E. Krause, Proceedings of International Conference RDAMM, Novosibirsk, Russia, pp. 737–749 (2001).
Google Scholar
22 O. Thomer, M. Klaas, W. Schröder, E. Krause, Computational Fluid and Solid Mechanics, pp. 1156–1159 (2003)
Google Scholar