论文部分内容阅读
介绍了多种平均方法,包括常用的流量或面积加权平均方法,以及CMME(流量/动量/能量守恒)方法和CMES(动量/能量/熵守恒)方法。以超燃冲压发动机进气道-燃烧室构型为对象,研究了不同平均方法得到的等效一维结果差异,以及不同平均方法的入口参数对超燃燃烧室一维计算结果的影响。结果表明:在超燃燃烧室多维热态仿真数据分析时,推荐使用通量守恒方法;CMES方法能准确的保留总压信息,CMME方法得到的总压损失会大于实际,在处理总压恢复性能时,CMES方法更优;亚燃模态时,CMME方法和CMES方法均不能反映隔离段激波串的渐变压缩;超燃模态时,CMES方法能较好地保持动量的近似守恒,在亚燃模态则较差;不同平均方法得到燃烧室入口参数的一维计算结果与三维流场等效一维沿程静压分布均存在一定偏差,Case1流量加权平均解误差高达27.8%,通量守恒解误差仅约13%,Case2流量加权平均解误差为14.9%,通量守恒解误差仅约5%,说明CMME方法与CMES方法符合程度更高,推力计算结果更为可信。
A variety of averaging methods are introduced, including common flow or area weighted averaging methods, as well as the CMME (flow / momentum / energy conservation) method and the CMES (momentum / energy / entropy conservation) method. In this paper, the difference of equivalent one-dimensional results obtained by different averaging methods and the influence of inlet parameters of different averaging methods on the one-dimensional calculation results of the super-combustion combustor were studied. The results show that the flux conservation method is recommended for the multi-dimensional thermal simulation data analysis in the super-combustion chamber. The CMES method can keep the total pressure accurately. The total pressure loss obtained by the CMME method is larger than the actual value. , The CMES method is better. In the sub-combustion mode, neither the CMME method nor the CMES method can reflect the gradual compression of the shock wave in the isolation section. In the superconducting mode, the CMES method can well maintain the approximate conservation of the momentum, The one-dimensional calculation results obtained by different averaging methods to the combustion chamber inlet parameters have some deviation from the one-dimensional equivalent static pressure distribution in the three-dimensional flow field. The error of the weighted average of Case1 flow rate is as high as 27.8%, and the flux conservation solution The error is only about 13%, the weighted mean solution error of Case2 flow is 14.9% and the error of flux conservation solution is only about 5%, which shows that the CMME method is more consistent with the CMES method and the thrust calculation result is more credible.