One note: I can't see final results at the end of the video because of thumbnails of recommended videos. I don't know if I can turn them off. Maybe you should add some ending screen with for example black background where you will leave these recommended videos.
Brother, ur videos are really informative and step by step easy to follow up, thanks for that. keep up the good work. But all of ur videos are of 2D geometry only, can u please upload some 3D flows as well say supersonic flow on a cone or some 3D body.
one thing im really struggling with is coming up with my own aerospike nozzle and changing the operational altitude of the nozzle to model under expansion
Your results are likely garbage. You gloss over several of the details that make reacting flows / rocket design hard. - What fuel are you simulating? Several common fuels for launch vehicles such as RP1/LOX and H2/LOX burn much more energetically and produce much higher chamber temperatures than your design problem indicates. Further, the combustion products tend to be much more complicated with triatomic species being fairly common. This will substantially lower the specific heat ratio. - I can see the cells next to the wall. Unless you're using a wall model, that region should look completely black until you zoom in at least an order of magnitude or two. Your simulation is missing half the important physics by not resolving the boundary layer.
You have a valid point however: 1) I am performing a simulation of air flow, not combustion. My video demonstrates the flow physics of an aerospike nozzle and the basics of expansion - not reacting flow 2) Considering point 1, air has a very low viscosity and can also be considered pretty much inviscid at high speeds. Most NASA simulations of external aerodynamics of supersonic aircraft are done using inviscid solvers, it speeds up the process tremendously. ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20160004986.pdf
Thank you very much !! could you simulate this model as 3D Rotation model - toroidal aerospike or explain whether there will be differences in the setup - or is this except of geometry the same method ?
Hi I am new in ansys, it's been 1 month I learn about it, honestly I don't get the point how do we know that our simulation accurate I am worry that I miss select the turbulence mode or something else, where do you get the Design Data to compare for your simulation thank you so much
Hey VDEngineering. Thanks for the video. Do you still have the files for this simulation? I can't for the life of me figure out what I'm doing wrong. I've followed your exact steps, and I can't get convergence.
Что тут непонятного, сопло нужно для преобразования давления рабочего тела в скорость. Максимальная скорость газа должна быть в момент отрыва от пережвигаемого объекта.
@@VDEngineering для расширения нужно время рабочее тело должно двигаться в одном направлении, и нн площадь нужно а длина контакта для полного расширения.
Bro If You are making videos than make proper video here the Video Is in Hypersonic speed what you're explaining Is not at all clear it creates lot of confusion to viewers hope you get my point
One note: I can't see final results at the end of the video because of thumbnails of recommended videos. I don't know if I can turn them off. Maybe you should add some ending screen with for example black background where you will leave these recommended videos.
It's fixed, thank you
Brother, ur videos are really informative and step by step easy to follow up, thanks for that. keep up the good work. But all of ur videos are of 2D geometry only, can u please upload some 3D flows as well say supersonic flow on a cone or some 3D body.
My computer can't handle 3D geometry.
Informative 🤩.
Hi, could you please show how you obtained the coordinates for the aerospike geometry? Cheers!
your basically single hand idly saving my degree
I want to know the steps in geometry to draw the structure
one thing im really struggling with is coming up with my own aerospike nozzle and changing the operational altitude of the nozzle to model under expansion
Your results are likely garbage. You gloss over several of the details that make reacting flows / rocket design hard.
- What fuel are you simulating? Several common fuels for launch vehicles such as RP1/LOX and H2/LOX burn much more energetically and produce much higher chamber temperatures than your design problem indicates. Further, the combustion products tend to be much more complicated with triatomic species being fairly common. This will substantially lower the specific heat ratio.
- I can see the cells next to the wall. Unless you're using a wall model, that region should look completely black until you zoom in at least an order of magnitude or two. Your simulation is missing half the important physics by not resolving the boundary layer.
You have a valid point however:
1) I am performing a simulation of air flow, not combustion. My video demonstrates the flow physics of an aerospike nozzle and the basics of expansion - not reacting flow
2) Considering point 1, air has a very low viscosity and can also be considered pretty much inviscid at high speeds. Most NASA simulations of external aerodynamics of supersonic aircraft are done using inviscid solvers, it speeds up the process tremendously.
ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20160004986.pdf
Congratulations! :D I have a questiom, In which mathematical model you based for simulation?
Thank you very much !!
could you simulate this model as 3D Rotation model - toroidal aerospike
or explain whether there will be differences in the setup - or is this except of geometry the same method ?
Hi I am new in ansys, it's been 1 month I learn about it, honestly I don't get the point how do we know that our simulation accurate I am worry that I miss select the turbulence mode or something else, where do you get the Design Data to compare for your simulation
thank you so much
From which reasearch paper you have taken this geometry refrence ?
Is there any literature to design aerospike nozzle geometry for a particular pressure and temperature??
Fortan program for plug nozzle by C.C Lee
@@MrPetisebok great resource, thanks!
How can I design aerospike nozzle for my hybrid rocket motor from scratch?
Hey.. Can i know what are your boundary conditions? It's not clear in the video😅😭😭
Hey VDEngineering. Thanks for the video. Do you still have the files for this simulation? I can't for the life of me figure out what I'm doing wrong. I've followed your exact steps, and I can't get convergence.
Sir, what is the design calculation for aerospike nozzle ?
Hi mate what would be the best way to compare the cfd results from an aerospike to a bell-shaped nozzle?
So is this residual iteration curve normal?Does that mean it converges?
Please lower the volume of music in your future videos, it gets noisy
Could you show how to get the thrust force from the simulation of the aerospike nozzle in fluent? Thanks in advance
Hi, Mr. Vin is there any design standard for aerospike nozzle and can i have your email ?
Do you use method of characteristics to design this too?
No, it's only for the nozzle - not the additional expansion.
Can I get access to the geometry ? Or how do I build one?
Did you figure it out? I really need it
@@khalidnazzal782 blender, autocad, freecad, solidworks and even ansys have in itself a drawing program
What is your ansys version ?
15.0
Что тут непонятного, сопло нужно для преобразования давления рабочего тела в скорость. Максимальная скорость газа должна быть в момент отрыва от пережвигаемого объекта.
да, это соотношение площади
@@VDEngineering для расширения нужно время рабочее тело должно двигаться в одном направлении, и нн площадь нужно а длина контакта для полного расширения.
@@VDEngineering
Эти сопловые аппараты давно изучены, и стоят они на газовых турбинах, причем там их очень много, даже есть с гнутым профилем.
you speak like a robot buddy.....with eyes fixed and no lateral movement....try to relax and make it even more lively...
Says the guy with no videos of himself
this is a humble comment from a humble viewer of your videos... it's up to you to take what's required from the comments section
Yes I understand, however to give criticism you need a base case
Bro If You are making videos than make proper video here the Video Is in Hypersonic speed what you're explaining Is not at all clear it creates lot of confusion to viewers hope you get my point
Badly explained, but ok. Anyway, your physics is wrong.