Solutions of the time-dependent, mass-averaged Navier-Stokes equations are compared In detail with experimental results obtained on an axisymmetric model at a transonic Mach number that produced an extensive separated now region. In addition, an inverse boundary method is evaluated for this type of flow. The Cebeci-Smith algebraic and the Wilcox-Rubesin two-equation turbulence models used in the Navier-Stokes calculations both predict the maximum boundary-layer displacement thickness generated by the interaction reasonably well, with the details of the now best described with the two-equation formulation. However, both models predict a shock location substantially farther aft on the bump than observed experimentally. This error in shock location was slightly less with the two-equation model (0.12 chord compared with 0.16 chord). In the vicinity of the shock, the calculations predict a more rapid increase in turbulent shear stress than observed in the experimental results; this more rapid increase is believed to be the cause or the poor predictions in shock position.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Johnson et al. (1982) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: