WORK 2: NUMERICAL SIMULATION OF THE SUPERSONIC DIFFUSER AND NOZZLE

(DEADLINE: 1 week before end of the course)

Study viscous and non-viscous 2D planar flows in the supersonic diffuser and nozzles by ANSYS Fluent.
Initial data: WORK 2 is based on the results obtained in WORK 1: geometry, initial and boundary conditions.

General rules for the report:

1. Make a report using ABNT format;

2. Keep the same text size all over the work, including figures;
3. Do rounding of the numbers to 4-digits or less (examples 1.234, 12.34, 123.4, 1234, 1.234e5,
1.234e-5 etc.);
4. Put report filename: “WORK Number – Group.PDF,” where Number =1 for Work1, 2 for
Work2, etc., Group – Students’ group number;
5. Use just good or excellent-quality images with a white background. All pictures should be of
the same format, size, and quality;
6. The graphs should have square or close to Golden Ratio proportions;
7. Use just high-quality, reliable references (books, articles, reports, etc.);
8. Will not be accepted:
- pictures and tables with a colorful or black background;
- pictures of tables (except the references), text, or formulas;
- reports with very little text, which does not allow evaluation of the work;
- figures showing particle ID;
- works with more than four significant digit numbers;
- archives (*.zip, *.rar, etc.).

PART 1
Goal: Simulate the flow in the supersonic diffuser (Fig. 1) using ANSYS Fluent, compare the results
with the analytical solution, and prove the optimal design of the diffuser.

Fig. 1 Supersonic diffuser

Report structure:

1. Build and show a 2D model in the ANSYS Design Modeler (SpaceClaim) or export one from the
external CAD software (the optimal diffuser geometry, obtained previously in WORK 1);
2. Make preliminary meshes for the non-viscous and viscous flow models, specify cell size and
number of elements in each zone (main flow, boundary layer), and show the mesh in figures;
3. Make a simulation of the non-viscous (Case 1) and viscous (Case 2) stationary flows and compare
data with the analytical calculations. Prove the existence and types of the shockwaves (flow parameters
change on the shock wave should correspond to the theoretical calculations from WORK 1). Make
modifications of geometry/meshing/boundary conditions/initial conditions/method of solution/etc.,
when needed, in order to receive high-quality solution: thin shockwaves, boundary layer (for Case 2),
stabilized normal shockwave;
4. Prepare visualization of the flow structure (flow lines, vectors) and properties (P, T, M), forces, and
losses of pressure in the diffuser. Compare viscous and pressure forces on the walls (for Case 2). Show the
boundary layer profile evolution. Show the convergence history (residuals). Results should be clear for
understanding and compact.
5. Compare the final results (Case 1 and Case 2) with the analytical results from WORK 1 in tabular
and graphical forms;
6. Prove the optimal geometry numerically. Variation of the angles of the diffuser from its optimal
values should result in a decrease in the diffuser efficiency.

PART 2

Goal: Simulate the flow in the sub-, and supersonic nozzles (Fig. 1) using ANSYS Fluent, compare
the results with the analytical solution, and improve the nozzle geometry.

Fig. 1 The Nozzles: conical and bell-shaped (preliminary sizes)

Initial data: From WORK 1.

Report structure:

1. Build a 2D model in the ANSYS Design Modeler (SpaceClaim) or export one from the external CAD
software (the conical and bell-shaped nozzle, obtained previously in WORK 1);
 2. Make preliminary meshes for the non-viscous and viscous flow models;

3. Make a simulation of each nozzle's non-viscous and viscous stationary flows.

4. Compare data with the analytical calculations (use the area-averaged instrument to extract the
data). Make modifications of geometry/meshing/boundary conditions/initial conditions/method of
solution/etc., when needed, in order to receive the high-quality solution and minimize the pressure losses,
keeping constant boundary conditions.

5. Prepare visualization of the flow structure (flow lines, vectors) and properties (P, T, M). Compare
viscous and pressure forces on the walls (for Case 2). Results should be clear for understanding and
compact.

6. Show the convergence history (residuals).

7. Compare the efficiency of conical and bell-shaped nozzles by the average stagnation pressure ratio
between the exit and entrance of the nozzle;

Obs:
- The shockwave structure (number and type of the shockwaves) should be the same as in WORK1;
- Stabilization of the normal shockwave could be done by the geometry change at the subsonic part of
the diffuser (after the normal shockwave);
- A free student version of ANSYS for self-study can be downloaded from the official ANSYS website.
- Prepare the Ansys project for evaluation (end of the semester).

Evaluation: max 10 points, a submission with delay – maximum 10…8 points, depending on the delay
time.

References:

1. ANDERSON, John David. Modern compressible flow: with historical perspective. 3rd ed. New
York: McGraw-Hill, 2003. xvi, 760 p. ISBN 9780072424430.
2. Anderson, J. Fundamentals of Aerodynamics, McGraw-Hill, 6th edition, 2016, 1152p. ISBN:
9781259129919.
3. Tutorials from UnB CPL channel:
https://www.youtube.com/c/ChemicalPropulsionLaboratoryUnB