发表机构
Hangzhou International Innovation Institute, Beihang University; School of Aeronautic Science and Engineering, Beihang University（北京航空航天大学杭州创新研究院; 北京航空航天大学航空科学与工程学院）
机构由 AI 辅助整理，请以论文原文为准。AI 中文总结
本研究通过公共因子改变反应速率，评估高超声速有限速率化学壁面模型，提出基于冻结解的判据，发现热流非单调变化，并给出误差量化与保留建议。
AI 中文摘要
本研究探讨了化学反应时间尺度如何改变高超声速壁面模型对热量和动量传递的预测。针对高焓空气的一维有限速率化学反应壁面模型，在3≤Ma_e≤25、2≤p_e≤100 kPa以及广泛的边界层边缘和壁面温度范围内进行了评估。所有正向和逆向反应速率均乘以一个公共因子Γ，该因子改变化学时间尺度，同时保持平衡常数不变，从而在相同的控制方程中连接冻结和快速化学反应极限。以冻结解与有限速率解之间壁面热流1%的差异作为保留有限速率化学反应的阈值，从冻结解中获得的两个量提供了实用的选择标准：Da_fr = t_shear / t_ch ≥ 1.93×10^3 和 T_max ≥ 3760 K。壁面热流通常不随反应速率单调变化；相反，它可能先降至低于冻结和快速化学反应预测值，然后在更高速率下恢复。因此，两种极限化学解通常并不界定有限速率热流响应的边界，在它们之间进行插值可能产生误导。在Ma_e≥20时，冻结和快速化学反应极限的壁面热流中值误差分别为7.1%和27.6%。化学反应还会导致壁面热流和剪切应力发生显著变化，而雷诺类比因子响应则小得多，因为动量侧和焓侧壁面律的偏移几乎相互抵消。这些结果表明，有限速率壁面传递通常不能从其冻结和快速化学反应极限推断出来，并提供了冻结状态指标，用于确定在高超声速壁面建模中何时应保留有限速率化学反应。
英文摘要
This study examines how the chemical-reaction timescale alters hypersonic wall-model predictions of heat and momentum transfer. A one-dimensional finite-rate-chemistry wall model for high-enthalpy air is evaluated over 3 <= Ma_e <= 25, 2 <= p_e <= 100 kPa, and a broad range of edge and wall temperatures. All forward and reverse reaction rates are multiplied by a common factor Gamma, which changes the chemical timescale while preserving the equilibrium constants and thereby connects the frozen and fast-chemistry limits within the same governing equations. Taking a 1 percent difference in wall heat flux between the frozen and finite-rate solutions as the threshold for retaining finite-rate chemistry, two quantities obtained from the frozen solution provide practical selection criteria: Da_fr = t_shear / t_ch >= 1.93 x 10^3 and T_max >= 3760 K. The wall heat flux does not generally vary monotonically with reaction rate; instead, it can decrease below both the frozen and fast-chemistry predictions before recovering at higher rates. The two limiting chemistry solutions therefore do not generally bound the finite-rate heat-flux response, and interpolation between them can be misleading. At Ma_e >= 20, the median wall-heat-flux errors of the frozen and fast-chemistry limits are 7.1 percent and 27.6 percent, respectively. Chemistry also produces substantial changes in wall heat flux and shear stress, whereas the Reynolds analogy factor responds much less because the momentum- and enthalpy-side wall-law shifts nearly cancel. These results show that finite-rate wall transfer cannot in general be inferred from its frozen and fast-chemistry limits and provide frozen-state indicators for determining when finite-rate chemistry should be retained in hypersonic wall modelling.
