Acta Meehanica 32, 141--151 (1979)

ACTA MECHANICA
| by Springer-Verlag 1979

The Transonic Integral Equation Method With Curved Shock Waves

By D. Nixon*, London, England With 2 Figures

(Received September 1, 1977)

Summary m Zusammenfassung The Transonic Integral Equation Method With Curved Shock Waves. In the existing solutions of the extended integral equation method for transonic flows the shock wave has been assumed normal to the freestream. In this paper the effect of removing this assumption is investigated and flows with curved shock waves are examined. Die transonische Integralgleichungsmethode bei gekriimmten Stoflwellen. In den bisher verSffentlichten LSsungen der erweiterten Integralgleichung fiir transonische StrSmungen wurde ein gerader Stol3 senkrecht zur AnstrSmung angenommen. In der vorliegenden Arbeit wird diese Annahme fallengelassen, und StrSmungen mit gekrfimmten StSI3en werden betrachtet. Introduction

An alternative to the commonly used finite difference methods [1] for calculating transonic flows, namely the extended integral equation method, has recently appeared in the literature [2]. I n this approach the basic non-linear potential equation ;[or transonic flow is written in integral form using Green's theorem and the resulting non-linear integral equation is then solved numerically. If shock waves are present in the flow then the integral equation must be solved subject to certain regularity conditions which ensure that the acceleration everywhere except across the shock wave is finite and continuous; this effectively excludes "expansion shocks". Because of the use of a particular method of satisfying these regularity conditions during the numerical solution of the integral equation it is possible to make the simplifying assumption that any shock waves in the flow are normal to the ffeestream. In Ref. [2] the pressure distribution around a parabolic arc aerofoil is calculated using the extended integral equation method and is compared to a result computed by the accurate "conservative" finite difference method of Murman [1]. I n this comparison the basic potential equation and the boundary conditions are identical in both methods but in the integral equation method the simplifying assumption of a normal (to the ffeestream) shock * Senior Research Fellow. Presently at Computational Fluid Dynamics Branch NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA 94035, U.S.A.

0001-5970/79/0032/0141/$02.20

142

D. Nixon:

wave is made; a further simplification is t h a t the velocity ahead of and behind the aerofoil can be neglected in the computation. The pressure distribution calculated by the integral equation method agrees fairly well with the result computed b y Murman [1] but there are discrepancies at the leading edge of the aerofoil and in the region of the shock wave. I t is the aim of the present exercise to investigate the effect of removing the two simplifying assumptions made in Ref. [2] particularly the assumption of a normal shock wave. The method presented in this paper is only valid when the shock geometry does not deviate substantially from being normal to the freestream. This assumption is true for most transonic flows. Although the extended integral equation method has been applied to lifting flows [3], only the flow around a non-lifting parabolic arc aerofoil is examined in this note, mainly to simplify the presentation although an additional reason is that for this particular problem the basic potential equation and treatment of the boundary conditions are identical to that solved b y Murman [1], and thus an exact comparison is available. I t is found that the inclusion of a curved shock wave in the analysis and the consideration of velocities ahead of and behind the aerofoil in the computation lead to results t h a t are in excellent agreement with the result of Murman [1]. The effect of introducing a curved shock wave is only significant in the local region close to the shock wave; a local effect is also exibited b y the inclusion of the additional velocities ahead of and behind the aerofoil. Basic Equations The basic integral equation for the transonic flow around a parabolic arc aerofoil is given in Ref. [2]. For a freestream Mach number M ~ and a transonic p a r a m e t e r k the integral equation is
~2(~,/~

~(x, z)

~--'

~ L ( ~ , ~) + IT(~, 5, ~ )

(1)

where (t(2, 2) is related to the streamwise perturbation velocity u(x, z) b y ~(~, ~) = and
1

(7 + 1) ~ u(x, z)
(1 Ms

(2)

(3)
o

where (y~- 1) k ZT(X) - - (1 -- M s 3/~ ZT(X);

Z = ZT(X)

denotes the thickness distribution of the aerofoil. The cartesian co-ordinate system (2, 5) is related to the physical system (x, z) b y the relation ~-- x, ~ -----(1
-

M 2 ) 112 2~

The Transonic Integral Equation Method With Cm~ed Shock Waves and the field integral IT('2 , ~, "2,s) is defined b y

143

It(e, ~, ~s)

1 lira = -4-~ ~-.0

6--+0

~,~(~, 2; ~, $) ~2(~, ~)d$

d~

2;~,

a~(;:,

d$ d~

where 2r = 2%(~.) is the shock location and T(2, ~; ~, $) = 1 in [ ( 2 - - ~)e ~_ (~ _ $)2]. 2 The shock j u m p relation for Eq. (1) can be written as [~--~]+~-[~]+tan20s=0 (5)

where [ ]+_ denotes a j u m p across the shock wave which locally has an inclination 0~ to the ~-axis. I n the derivation of Eq. (5) the relation [e] +_ = tan

Os

is used where N(2, 2) is related to the p e r t u r b a t i o n velocity normal to the freestream, w(x, z), b y

~(2, ~) --

(~ + 1) k (1--- :M~-s w(~, z).

If Eq. (1) is rearranged such t h a t ~(~, ~) see ~ 0~ ~ ( ~ ' ~) -- ~TL(~, ~) + {IT(2 ~, ~, 2~s) + t a n 2 0~ ~(~, ~)}
2

(6)

then the right h a n d side of Eq. (6) is continuous through a shock a n d a discontinuous j u m p between the two roots of the second order equation, Eq. (6), automatieally satisfy the shock relation Eq. (5). The correct shock location is determined b y ensuring t h a t there is a finite continuous acceleration everywhere except at the shock wave, a requirement which leads to the regularity conditions,
1

ex {ar~(2, ~) + ~7v(2 ~, 2, 2%)}~=~o(~ )= 0

(7b)

144

D. Nixon:

where f - - ~ 0 ( ~ ) represents the line (~(f, 3 ) = 1). Eq. (1, 7) then completely determine the flow. For ease of numerical computation however, the problem is modified slightly by the introduction of a parameter e(~) such that Eq. (1, 7) are replaced by the equations

~(f, 5)
and

~(~'~) 2 - ~TL(~, 5) + 4~) I~(f, Z, ~ )

1

(S)

{~rL(~, 5) + ~(3) IT(f, ~, ~)}~=~,(~) = y

(9a)
(9b)

~--- {~TZ(f, ~) @ ~(~,) IT(f. , 3, Xs)}]~=~(~) = 0 aT

respectively. Before the problem defined by Eq. (8, 9) can be solved the field integral IT(f, 5, f~) must be evaluated. In Ref. [2] this integral is evaluated by dividing the flow field into strips parallel to the f-axis and approximating the distribution of the squares of the velocity in each strip in terms of values on each strip edge b y linear interpolation. Since the value of ~rL(Y, S) on each strip edge is easily obtained, Eq. (1, 7) reduce to a set of equations for the velocity on the strip edges. It is suggested in l~ef. [2] that the effect of the velocity in the outer strips on the value of 4(f, 5) on the aerofoil surface is small and consequently the velocities in the outer strips are estimated in terms of values on the inner strip edges. The part of the flow field so estimated is chosen so that the surface values of are not significantly affected b y the approximation. The solution procedure given in Ref. [2] is as follows: First a normal shock location is assumed, together with an initial guess for the field velocity. The field integral IT(Z,, S, xs) can then be evaluated and, keeping the shock location constant, Eq. (8, 9) are solved for new values of g(f, 5); the parameter s(S) is chosen so thgg Eq. (9) are satisfied. This iterative procedure is repeated until the s(~) are converged. The normal shock location is then moved u n t i l the e(S) are close to unity (and de ~ 0). Since a normal shock wave is dS assumed it is impossible to get s(~) exactly unity (or de = 0). It is the principle aim of the present analysis to study the effect of fitting a curved shock wave into this solution. A second objective is to include the velocity ahead of and behind the aerofoil in the computation of IT(S:, 5, ~) which are neglected in I~ef. [2].
Analysis for a Curved Shock W a v e

The effect of an alteration from normal in the shock wave geometry is transmitted through the change in the value of the field integral IT(Z, 5, f~) and is principally due to a significant jump in velocity because of the altered shock location. The consequent changes in velocity outside of the envelope of the initial and final shock locations will also have an effect on the solution. The most important effect, that is the change in I~(f, 2, 28) due t o changes in the velocity resulting directly from the different location of the shock jump, is considered first.

The Transonic Integral Equation Method With Curved Shock Waves

145

Referring to Fig. 1, the main change of the contribution to the field integral in the strip ~1 ~ ~ ~ ~1+1 is due to the jump in velocity in the region B from a pre-shock value to a post-shock value.

r.~...--NORMAL~ H O C K

x~.

z, (-el

Fig. L Sketch of shoe~ geometry in the J~ strip

Let the value of the elementary field integral in the region A + B be denoted b y Ij and I~ = I ~ ( ~ ~) + I ~ ( ~ ) , where 00)

G (~ 2) = -4-~
A

(11)

and the " ~ - " and " - - " superscripts denote Values of 4(~, B) which exist in A and B if the point in question is ahead of or behind the shock respectively. As in the normal shock analysis the squares of the velocity in the ~th strip are estimated b y linear interpolation in terms of values on the strip edges and, additionally in this case, of values at the curved shock wave. I n order to simplify the analysis it is assumed t h a t in the evaluation of the elementary field integrals over A and B the velocity in A or B does not v a r y significantly in the 5-direction. This implies t h a t the shock geometry does not differ substantially from t h a t of a normal shock wave; which shoulff be true for most transonic flows. This means t h a t the elements A and B are relatively small. If the velocity on the upstream side of the shock wave is denoted b y u+(G, ~) and the velocity on the down-stream side of the shock wave is denoted us G) then the velocity variation in A is given b y

~(~, C) = ~+~(~, Cj) + [uW(G q~) - u+'~(~,Ci)] (C _ Ci) G ( ~ ) - C~)

10 Acta Mecb. 32/1--3

(12a)

146 and in B by
9

D. Nixon:

(~+,

~(~))

where (}s, -~) are the co-ordinates of the shock wave in the element (A B). If, in the ?'*~ strip, the shock wave can be approximated by a straight line of slope cot O~then q, = ~. + (~e 2,) cot 0~, (13)
_

where 0s is the angle the shock makes with the 2-axis and ~,i is the location o~ the shock on the ~'~ustrip edge. Since it is assumed that u ( ~ , ~) does not vary with ~ in A or B then referring to Fig. 1 W(~, ~) = ~+(~.~, r ~ ( ~ , r = a (~~ ~) where xs0 is the location of the normal shock wave. Using linear interpolation for z~z(~, ~) in the ~ strip
~22(~,, ~) : a+"(x.,,+,, ~) +

(~4)

,~+= ~
[

~, (r _ - r (%+" r
-

~+2

(~(~)

(15a)

and

(15b)
Substitution of Eq. (12, 13) into Eq. (11) gives, after some manipulation,

(16a)
-- ~+~(~*+,,~)] (r - r _ ~)} d ~ d }

+ [g+~(~+*, r (r IB(~2/~+~)47z/f
B

gt (g., }; ~, ~-){~2_~(g.,o,~) (16b)

Using Eq. (16) then, Eq. (10) can be written as

I i -A+B
, ~ ~ ~.1,

~)
(17)

(r
B

ej)

The Transonic Integral Equation Method With Curved Shock W~ves

147

where [~i2]+ - is the shock jump on the jt~ strip edge which is given b y Eq. (5) as
[~j2]_+ = 4 see 2 0 ~ [ ~ 2 ( ~ , ~j) sec ~ 0~]. (18)

Since it has been assumed that in the evaluation of the integral over the element A + B the velocity does not vary significantly with Z" then, to a first approximation
~+(z",.., ~j+l) = ~-(z"~0, r

where u-(z"s0, ~j+l), u+(x~o, ~i) are known from the normal shock solution and it can then be seen from Eq. (17) that the perturbation to Ii, I~ due to a change in shock geometry is given b y

//
B

([uj+~]_- [~]2) (~

de d~

(19)

The evaluation of the elementary integral I ~ in Eq. (19) is simplifed considerably if the shock in the ]th strip is approximated b y a straight line as in Eq. (13). The total perturbation, I~ due to a change in shock geometry is obtained by summing the contribution of each strip; thus
N

b = 2: ~,~,
i=~

(20)

where 2V is the number of strips and I ~ is given by Eq. (19). The governing equation for a curved shock wave is then
~(z", 2) ~ ( ~2' ~) - - 7s
, 2) - ~ IT(Z" , z, Z"s.) +

I~,

(21)

where IT(Z", 2, Z"8o)is evaluated assuming a normal shock at Z"SoThus the immediate change in the flow due to a change in the shock geometry is transnfitted through the additive term Ip given by Eq. (19, 20). Apart from this immediate change due to Ip it should be remembered that there is a secondary change due to the alteration of the velocities outside the envelope of the initial and final shock locations. Estimation of the Shock Change In the preceding analysis it is assumed that the necessary change.in the shock geometry from a converged normal shock location to make s(~) equal to unity is known. In this section it is suggested how these changes can be estimated. In general the field integral IT(Z", 2, Z"8) and the parameter e(2) are dependent on the shock location x~(2) ; the ~(~) are fixed by the regularity conditions, Eq. (9). If there is an arbitrary change in Eq. (9a) due to a change of shock geometry then

DS--~{s(2) IT(Z", 2, Z"~)}[s 10"

= 0

(22)

148

D. Nixon:

where (~Xo(2) and (~x~(2) are the perturbations of the line (fi@, ~) = 1) and the shock location respectively. Using Eq. (9), Eq. (22) reduces to give

(~xs(2) {e(~)IT~s @, ~, Y~s) @ SZ~ (Z) IT(Y, 2, x~)}IZ=~0(~)= 0

or

(23) The function ITS,(2 , Z, Xs) is evaluated for the initial normal shock location. 5s, and is found to give
oo

-rr~. (~, e, :%) =

~
o
0

[a~(e~~ r

~r~ (~, ~~ ~, ~) d~
(24)

--oo

In a solution for a normal shock wave s(~) is coi~verged but not necessarily to unity. If e0(2) denotes the converged value of e(2) for a normal shock then the necessary change in the shock geometry to give e(2) = 0 (and d~e _. 0) can he found as follows, d~ Expansion of e(~) in a Tayl0r's series about ~ , gives 4~) = ~0(~) + ~ x ~ ( ~ ) ( ~ M ) ) ~ . ~ ~ + (25)

where (~xs(2) is a 6hange:in shock location and (e,~(2))~,=~so is given by Eq. (23, 24). Differentiation of Eq. (25) with respect to 2 gives

where 0~ = arctan ( ~ ) g i v e s putting

the angle of the shock relative to the 2-axis. On

as(~) og
_

and on using Eq. (25), Eq. (26) gives

tan 0~=

~a~0(~) (i - ~ o ( ~ ) _ _ _ ~ )a 1 (-~-~+ (~(~))~=~'~ (~(~)!~=~'"

(27)

that is, the shock slope relative to the ~-axis. The movement of the ~oot of the

shock, ~x~o(0 ), is found from Eq. (25) by putting e(0) equal to unity; thus

~z~0(0) _ (~(~))~o=~0.

(1 - ~o(O))

(28)

The Transonic Integral Equation Method With Curved Shock Waves

149

Eq. (27, 28) then give the appropriate perturbation of the shock wave to obtain a proper solution to the transonic problem, when (e(~) = 1). As noted earlier the velocity on the outer strip edges can be estimated in terms of the values on the outer strip edges without significantly affecting the value on the aerofoil surface. However this approximation can lead to significant errors in ~ (2) and in practice the shock wave geometry is represented by a second or third order curve with the coefficients determined by Eq. (26, 27) using 0%(~) 3~ on the inner strip edges only, which are known to be accurate. Provided the shock curvature is not too great a discrepancy in the shock location in the far field does not significantly affect the solution on the aerofoil surface. This is consistent with the ideas of the overall theory in which i~ is found that the surface velocity is not sensitive to minor changes in the outer flow field. Solution Procedure The basic equation for a flow with a curved shock is Eq. (21). In order to give a smooth flow upstream of the shock when the final shock geometry is unknown, i.e. in an iteration process, Eq. (21) is written as

4('2, Z)

~2('~,~) CtL(X, 2) -]- e(2) {IT(X Z, Xs,) @ Iv} 2

(29)

with the regularity conditions

1

(30a)

-~ {~L(~, ~)+ ~(~) [zT(~, ~, ~0) + 4]}1~=~.(~) = 0

(30b)

The solution to the problem with a curved shock is found as follows. a) First a converged solution to Eq. (8, 9) with a normal Shock wave is obtained, including velocities ahead of and behind the aerofoil in the evaluation of Ir(~, 2, ~0). b) From this converged solution the values of IT~(X, 2, ~2So ) and (e~(2))~=~0 are calculated from Eq. (23, 24). c) An estimate of the revised shock geometry is then obtained from Eq. (27, 28) with the approximation that in each strip the shock can be represented by a straight line segment, Eq. (13). d) The field integral for a normal shock, It(X, 2, 2~o) is assumed known from the normal shock solution. e) The perturbation integral I v defined by Eq. (19, 20) for a curved shock is calculated using the previously computed velocities at the pre-shock location. New velocities over the flow field are then computed using Eq. (29, 30). The new pre-shock velocities are then used to evaluate a new value of Ip and the procedure repeated until the convergence of the parameters s(~). f) Using the new values of 4(~, 2) the normal shock integral IT(Z, ~, Z,o) is evaluated. The pre-shock velocities in the 'shock envelope', region B in Fig. 1,

150

D. Nixon:

are obtained b y extrapolation. Using this new value of It(2, 2, ~ ) step (e) is repeated. g) Steps (e--f) are repeated until convergence of the ~(~). h) I f necessary steps (b--g) arc repeated until the v(5) are unity on a specified number of strip edges. This step is usually not necessary. Results The pressure distribution around a 6 o parabolic arc aerofoil at M ~ = 0.8765 is computed with and without a curved shock wave and is shown in Fig. 2. The results calculated b y Murman [1] using a conservative finite difference method are shown for comparison. The effect of including the curvature of the shock wave

Cl) i
-0'6-4

MURMAN (,7 ---e----INTEGRAL METHOD (NORMALSHOCK) ---+----INTEGRALMETHOD (CURVED SHOCK} i

~
Fig. 2. Pressure distribution around a 60/o biconvex aerofoil. M~ = 0.8715 in the analysis is to produce a local variation in the velocity near the shock giving close agreement with Murman's result. The better agreement near the leading edge is due to the consideration of velocities ahead of and behind the aerofoil 'in the evaluation of the field integral I~@, 2, Y~,). The reason for the discrepancy between the results just behind the shock wave is not apparent. The introduction of shock curvature into the extended integral equation method removes a n y theoretical difference between the present method and Murman's [1] conservative finite difference method other t h a n numerical inaccuracy and this illustrated b y the considerably improved agreement between the results calculated b y both methods.

The Transonic Integral Equation Method With Curved Shock Waves

References

]51

[1] Murman, E. : Analysis of Embedded Shock Waves calculated by R Relaxation ~Iethods. A I A A Journal 12, 626--633 (1974). [2] Nixon, D. : Extended Integral Equation Method for Transonic Flows. AIAA Journal 18, 934--935 (1975). [3] Nixon, D. : Calculation of Transonic Flows using an Extended Integral Equation Method. A L ~ Journal 15, 295--296 (1977).

D. Nixon Department o/Aeronautical Engineering Queen Mary College University o/London London, U.K.