JID: PROCI

ARTICLE IN PRESS [m;July 10, 2018;23:58]

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

Proceedings of the Combustion Institute 000 (2018) 1–9

www.elsevier.com/locate/proci

Local supersonic and subsonic combustion mode

transition in a supersonic jet flame
Donggang Cao a,b, Guoqiang He a, Fei Qin a,∗, Dan Michaels b
a Science and Technology on Combustion, Internal Flow and Thermal-structure Laboratory, Northwestern Polytechnical
University, Xi’an, Shaanxi 710072, PR China
b Faculty of Aerospace Engineering, Technion – Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa 3200002, Israel

Received 1 December 2017; accepted 26 June 2018

Available online xxx

Abstract

An experimental and computational study has been carried out for a supersonic jet flame by using OH
chemiluminescence imaging, shadowgraph visualization, temperature measurement by TDLAS, pressure
measurement by transducers, and large eddy simulation (LES) together with a skeletal reaction mechanism
involving 13 species and 41 steps. Agreements have been found between experimental data and LES results,
which are subsequently used to analyze the flow, mixing, combustion, and heat release processes involved. A
systematic method is adopted to qualitatively as well as quantitatively investigate different combustion modes
and their contributions to heat release in the combustor. Influences of airstream temperature and pressure
on combustion mode and heat release are also discussed by comparing four different cases. Results show that
the heat is released from a combination of supersonic combustion mode and subsonic combustion mode
even when the main flow is at supersonic speed. Local mode transition occurs as the jet flame propagates and
interacts with shocks that enhance mixing because of baroclinic effects and induce subsonic combustion due
to deceleration effects. It is also observed that subsonic combustion releases more than 50% of heat at the
base of the jet flame because of recirculation zones behind the strut. Supersonic combustion mode gradually
becomes prominent in the turbulent far field with small values of heat release rate. The overall dominant
combustion mode is dependent on not only inflow conditions but also combustion intensity.
© 2018 The Combustion Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Supersonic jet flame; Combustion mode; Heat release; Large eddy simulation

1. Introduction and rocket-based combined cycle (RBCC) engines

The interest in hypersonic flight motivates
the development of dual-mode scramjet engines
∗
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: qinfei@nwpu.edu.cn (F. Qin).
[1–3]. In such engines the aerodynamics are quite
complex, permitting different flow conditions for
the ramjet and scramjet operation modes. These en-
gines operate in the thermal-choked ramjet-mode
at flight Mach numbers of 3–6. A shock train in
the isolator slows the flow to subsonic speeds before

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proci.2018.06.213
1540-7489 © 2018 The Combustion Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Please cite this article as: D. Cao et al., Local supersonic and subsonic combustion mode
transition in a supersonic jet flame, Proceedings of the Combustion Institute (2018),
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proci.2018.06.213
JID: PROCI
ARTICLE IN PRESS
2 D. Cao et al. / Proceedings of the Combustion Institute 000 (2018) 1–9
the fuel is burned in the combustor. When the flight
Mach number is over 6, the pre-combustion shock
train becomes weak until the flow remains super-
sonic in the combustor and scramjet-mode opera-
tion is consequently achieved [4].
As the vehicle accelerates with increasing flight
Mach number, the well-known process of the
ramjet-to-scramjet transition would occur, which
is characterized by the weakening of the pre-
combustion shock train [5]. If the heat addition
to the supersonic airstream exceeds a critical value
during the flight, the flow would be thermally
choked. As a consequence, the reverse scramjet-
to-ramjet transition would be triggered by the
pressure-rise due to significant heat release [6]. Un-
derstanding the complex transition process is im-
portant for the design of practical engines, and has
been the focus of several experimental [7] and nu-
merical [8] investigations.
In the ramjet-mode subsonic combustion takes
place as the flow remains subsonic in the cham-
ber. In the scramjet-mode, however, flame stabiliza-
tion is typically achieved by using struts and cav-
ities [9]. Thus heat release can occur in both the
subsonic and supersonic flows. Moreover, vigor-
ous chemical reactions in the combustor would re-
lease a large amount of heat leading to situations
in which the Mach number locally falls below 1 [8].
Recently a study on the hydrogen-fueled M12-02
engine developed by JAXA has demonstrated that
local subsonic combustion still exists in the com-
bustor at flight Mach number of 12 [10]. Previous
studies have shown that the true heat release picture
of the scramjet-mode engine consists of not only
the supersonic combustion mode but also the sub-
sonic combustion mode. However, the local transi-
tion between supersonic and subsonic combustion,
which is an underlying physics for the overall mode
transition of the engine, has received limited atten-
tion in previous studies. The contributions to the
heat release by different combustion modes haven’t
been fully understood. Therefore, it is important to
find out the distributions of different combustion
modes and their contributions to heat release in the
combustor not only qualitatively but also quantita-
tively, by which the dynamic process of mode tran-
sition in the engine can be parameterized.
In the present study, a supersonic jet flame in a
model RBCC combustor is investigated experimen-
tally and numerically using static pressure distribu-
tions, shadow-graph visualization, OH chemilumi-
nescence images, temperature measurements, and
Large Eddy Simulations. Comparison is made be-
tween measurements and calculations to validate
the accuracy of the LES results. LES is further
used to identify the flame structure and combustion
characteristics over a wide range of air inlet condi-
tions. The focus of the study is on qualitative and
quantitative assessment of combustion modes and
heat release by employing filter functions.
Please cite this article as: D. Cao et al., Local supersonic and subsonic combustion mode
transition in a supersonic jet flame, Proceedings of the Combustion Institute (2018),
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proci.2018.06.213
[m;July 10, 2018;23:58]
2. Experimental setup and numerical method
The present study is based on a model RBCC
combustor shown in Fig. 1. The flow path consists
of a rectangular combustor, an isolator, and a strut
in which a rocket is placed. The strut is designed
with a convergent–divergent profile and it serves as
a Laval nozzle to accelerate the pressurized gas to a
supersonic flow. The airstream is expanded through
the Laval nozzle and flows into the combustor at
Mach number of 2.2. The rocket acts as a gas gen-
erator and produces fuel-rich hot exhaust that is
injected into the combustor at Mach number of
2.1. Thus a supersonic jet flame is formed in the
combustor as the rocket exhaust gases mix and re-
act with the surrounding air. Various experimen-
tal methods such as OH chemiluminescence imag-
ing, shadowgraph visualization, temperature mea-
surement by TDLAS (Tunable Diode Laser Ab-
sorption Spectroscopy) at 6 different locations, and
static pressure measurement by transducers along
the channel length have been used to characterize
the reacting flow in the model RBCC combustor
shown in Fig. 2. Table 1 lists the inflow conditions
of the airstream and rocket jet.
In LES all variables are decomposed into re-
solved and unresolved (subgrid) components by fil-
tering reactive Navier–Stokes equations [11]. The
one-eddy-equation model is used to calculate the
subgrid stress tensor [12–14]. An optimized 13-
species 41-steps chemical mechanism is employed
for CO/H2 /Air reaction, which has been tested
against by a wide range of experimental data
[15]. The PaSR model is adopted to close the
LES governing equations for reactive flows [16–
17]. The LES model equations are solved using a
density-based compressible code based on Open-
FOAM (rhoReactingFoam) with the second-order
Total Variation Diminishing (TVD) scheme and
the Crank–Nicholson scheme. The CFL number
is less than 0.3, corresponding to a physical time
step at the order of 1 × 10−8 s. All variables are pre-
scribed at inflow boundaries. Neumann boundary
conditions are used at the outflow boundary where
all variables are extrapolated from the interior ones.
The nonslip conditions are used for the strut walls
while slip conditions are applied for the chamber
walls. Three grids with 6 million (Grid_1), 12 mil-
lion (Grid_2), and 20 million (Grid_3) cells are used
for the simulation.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Validation with experimental data
The calculated pressure profiles with different
grids are presented in Fig. 3(a) to assess the over-
all simulation accuracy. The simulation results from
all the grids show reasonable agreements with the
JID: PROCI
ARTICLE IN PRESS
D. Cao et al. / Proceedings of the Combustion Institute 000 (2018) 1–9
Fig. 1. Computational configuration of the model RBCC combustor (mm).
Table 1
Inflow conditions of airstream and rocket exhaust.
Inlet T (K) p (MPa) m (g/s)
Air 300 0.99 780
Rocket 2070 0.71 14.9
Fig. 2. The model RBCC combustor and TDLAS mea-
surement locations.
experimental data. With the increasing number
of the grid points, the simulation accuracy is im-
proved. Thus following discussions are based on
the calculation results with 20 million grid cells
(Grid_3). A significant pressure drop is observed
when the pressurized air passes through the Laval
nozzle. Further pressure decrease is found in the re-
gion where expansion fans appear. Pressure rises
in the combustor due to heat release from chemi-
cal reactions. Because of the superimposed shock
train, pressure presents a wave-like pattern along
the channel.
Figure 3(b) presents the experimental and nu-
merical distributions of OH, which is an important
flame marker since high concentration of OH indi-
cates vigorous combustion and significant heat re-
lease. When the rocket exhaust is injected into the
combustor, it mixes and reacts with the incoming
Please cite this article as: D. Cao et al., Local supersonic and subsonic combustion mode
transition in a supersonic jet flame, Proceedings of the Combustion Institute (2018),
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proci.2018.06.213
[m;July 10, 2018;23:58]
3
YCO YCO2 YH2 YH2 O YO2 YN2
0 0 0 0 0.233 0.767
0.355 0.053 0.018 0.091 0 0.483
airstream. Both experimental measurements and
LES suggest that a strong exothermic region is dis-
tributed in the middle of the duct. Experimental
and numerical shadowgraphs of the flow field are
presented in Fig. 3(c). As indicated before, at the en-
trance of the combustor (x = 240.4 mm) the Mach
numbers of airstream and rocket exhaust are 2.2
and 2.1, respectively. A shear layer is formed at
the interface between the two streams. Expansion
fans as well as following shocks are observed at
the end of the strut due to the sudden change of
flow area. The flow field becomes complex with
multiple shocks that interact with the flame. In-
stantaneous as well as time-averaged temperature
contours are shown in Fig. 3(d–e). The structure
of the supersonic jet flame is quite complex, con-
sisting of a leading flame base, an intensive mix-
ing region with combustion, and a turbulent far
field with weaker combustion. In the intensive mix-
ing region, the flame surface is corrugated as the
shear layer becomes distorted due to the Kelvin–
Helmholtz [18] and Richtmyer–Meshkov [19] insta-
bilities. Significant amount of heat is released in
this region as indicated by OH distributions in Fig.
3(b). In the far field turbulent combustion becomes
weak. The jet flame spreads slowly in vertical di-
rections due to the compressibility of supersonic
flows. Figure 3(f) shows time-averaged temperature
contours at x = 243.4, 270.4, 282.4, 300.4, 330.4,
350.4 mm with the laser beams involved in the TD-
LAS measurements. The variation of line-averaged
temperature during the experiment is presented in
JID: PROCI
ARTICLE IN PRESS [m;July 10, 2018;23:58]

4 D. Cao et al. / Proceedings of the Combustion Institute 000 (2018) 1–9

Fig. 3. (a) Pressure contours and experimental as well as numerical wall pressure profiles; (b) Experimental and numer-
ical OH distributions; (c) Experimental shadowgraph and numerical grad(ρ) contours; (d) Instantaneous temperature
contours; (e) Time-averaged temperature contours; (f) Time-averaged temperature contours with laser beams used for
TDLAS; (g) Measured temperature along with time; (h) Measured and calculated temperature.

Fig. 3(g). The measured and calculated values of 3.2. Combustion mode and heat release
temperature at 6 different locations are presented
in Fig. 3(h). It shows that the averaged LES re- The instantaneous contours of Mach number
sults follow the trend of experimental data. At with sonic lines (white) and heat release rate (HRR)
x = 243.4 mm, the calculated value is a little higher using the logarithm function are shown in Fig. 4(a
than the experimental data with a relative error of and b). It is obvious that local subsonic pockets do
9.7% because there are very large temperature gra- exit in the jet flame and heat is released by super-
dients between rocket exhaust and airstream, which sonic combustion mode as well as subsonic com-
leads to lower measured temperature. With increas- bustion mode.
ing downstream distance, the flow field becomes In order to evaluate the heat release rates of su-
more uniform and good agreement between the cal- personic and subsonic combustion modes, HRRsup
culations and the measurements is found. Over- and HRRsub are defined as:
all, these comparisons indicate that qualitative and ⎧
⎪ 1 + sign(Ma − 1 )
quantitative agreements have been found between ⎨H RRsup = H RR
experimental data and LES results, which could be 2 (1)
further used to study the supersonic jet flame. ⎩H RR = 1 − sign(Ma − 1 ) H RR
⎪
sub
2

Please cite this article as: D. Cao et al., Local supersonic and subsonic combustion mode
transition in a supersonic jet flame, Proceedings of the Combustion Institute (2018),
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proci.2018.06.213
JID: PROCI
ARTICLE IN PRESS [m;July 10, 2018;23:58]

D. Cao et al. / Proceedings of the Combustion Institute 000 (2018) 1–9 5

Fig. 4. Instantaneous contours of (a) Mach number with sonic lines (white); (b) HRR using the logarithm function;
(c) the logarithmic HRRsup ; (d) the logarithmic HRRsub ; (e)∇p × ∇ρ; and (f) magnitude of vorticity.

The contours of logarithmic HRRsup and
HRRsub are presented in Fig. 4(c and d). Appar-
ently, the supersonic combustion mode is domi-
nant but subsonic combustion also occurs locally
in the combustor. The subsonic combustion zones
take the forms of thin ribbons and pockets. Specif-
ically, a subsonic flame is observed in the recir-
culation bubble at the strut base and it spreads
downstream within the shear layer. As intensive
mixing with combustion gradually occurs between
the airstream and fuel, a large amount of heat is
released in the duct, which may slow down the
supersonic flow speed. Figure 4(e) plots contours
of ∇p × ∇ρ that is associated with the baro-
clinic torque effect and Fig. 4(f) presents vortic-
ity magnitude. It shows that shocks are closely
related to baroclinic effects. The misalignment be-
tween the pressure gradient of the shock and the
local density gradient across the shear layer re-
sults in the baroclinic vorticity source that ampli-
fies perturbations and enhances mixing. Moreover,
shock waves would lead to deceleration of the flow
speed and increase of temperature due to compres-
sion effects. Thus shocks would induce subsonic
combustion to some extent as they pass through the
flame.
Figure 5(a) presents the time-averaged scat-
ter plots of HRR versus Mach number at
different cross sections, which is colored by
temperature. Near the entrance of the combustor
(x = 250 mm), HRR is small due to limited mixing.
Both supersonic combustion and subsonic com-
bustion take place with weak intensity. HRR rises
significantly at x = 300 mm and it peaks at Mach
number of 1.5 due to intensive mixing and com-
bustion. It indicates that supersonic combustion
releases more heat than subsonic combustion does
at this cross section. Although supersonic com-
bustion still dominates at x = 350 mm, subsonic
combustion also plays an important role to HRR
peaking around Mach number of 1. Downstream
of the intensive mixing region, combustion be-
comes weaker and HRR decreases correspondingly.
At the cross section of x = 450 mm, HRR occurs
only in the supersonic flow with very small values.
The latter shows that supersonic mixing between
combustion products and surrounding airstream
dominates the downstream section of the channel.

Please cite this article as: D. Cao et al., Local supersonic and subsonic combustion mode
transition in a supersonic jet flame, Proceedings of the Combustion Institute (2018),
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proci.2018.06.213
JID: PROCI
ARTICLE IN PRESS
6 D. Cao et al. / Proceedings of the Combustion Institute 000 (2018) 1–9
Fig. 5. Time-averaged (a) scatter plots of HRR (colored by temperature) versus Mach number; (b) profiles of Qsup and
Qsub ; (g) profiles of ηsup and ηsub .
In order to quantitatively assess the combustion
mode and heat release, HRR flux (Q) and contribu-
tion coefficient (η) of different combustion modes
at a certain cross section are defined:
 
Qsup =  H RRsup dA
(2)
Qsub = H RRsub dA
⎧ 
⎨ηsup = QQsup = HRRsup dA
HRRdA
 (3)
⎩η = Qsub = HRRsub dA
sub Q HRRdA
The time-averaged profiles of Q and η for
different combustion modes are plotted in
Fig. 5(b and c) and three developing regions
are observed accordingly. In the initial region
(243.4 mm < x < 247.8 mm), chemical reactions
are quite weak and more than 50% of heat is
released from subsonic combustion mode due
to the recirculation zone. In the second region
(247.8 mm < x < 406.7 mm) where intensive mix-
ing and combustion take place, a large amount
of heat is released. Although both Qsup and Qsub
increase first and then decrease gradually, Qsup is
much larger than Qsub . From Fig. 5(c), it can be
seen that more than 50% of heat is released by
supersonic combustion mode in the second region.
It is notable that subsonic combustion is enhanced
in the regions of 332.4 mm < x < 352.7 mm
and 388.4 mm < x < 411.9 mm. Comparing
Fig. 5(c) with Fig. 3(c), one can see that these
regions are located behind the shock/flame in-
teraction zones and subsonic combustion is
Please cite this article as: D. Cao et al., Local supersonic and subsonic combustion mode
transition in a supersonic jet flame, Proceedings of the Combustion Institute (2018),
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proci.2018.06.213
[m;July 10, 2018;23:58]
promoted due to compression and deceleration
effects associated with shocks. In the third re-
gion (406.7 mm < x < 550 mm) HRR flux is very
small because of the consumption of reactants
and low temperature of airstream. Figure 5(c)
demonstrates that the small amount of heat is
released by weak supersonic combustion. Thus
we can draw the conclusions that both supersonic
combustion and subsonic combustion occur in
the combustor due to recirculation zones, shock
waves, and local thermal choking. Local mode
transition between supersonic and subsonic com-
bustion takes place as the jet flame propagates
downstream. For the whole combustor, the overall
contribution coefficient to heat release by the
supersonic combustion mode can be calculated as
sup = ∫HHRsup dV/∫HRRdV = 89%, and similarly
sub = ∫HHRsub dV/∫HRRdV = 11%. Thus the
supersonic combustion mode is more prominent
in terms of contributions to heat release in the
combustor.
3.3. Influences of airstream temperature and
pressure
In this section, four cases are investigated to
identify the influences of airstream temperature
and pressure on combustion mode and heat release
in the model RBCC combustor. In all cases, the in-
flow conditions of the rocket are the same, which
are listed in Table 1. As for the air inlet, the mass
flow rate and components of the airstream keep
JID: PROCI
ARTICLE IN PRESS [m;July 10, 2018;23:58]

D. Cao et al. / Proceedings of the Combustion Institute 000 (2018) 1–9 7

Fig. 6. Instantaneous contours of temperature, pressure, Mach number, and logarithmic HRR in different cases.

Table 2 thermal choking. Although the jet flame is formed

Combustion mode and heat release in different cases. by two supersonic streams, both supersonic com-
Case 1 (Test) 2 3 4 bustion mode and subsonic combustion mode re-
lease heat simultaneously in all cases.
T air inlet (K) 300 600 900 1200 The time-averaged heat release rate flux (Q) and
p air inlet (MPa) 0.99 1.41 1.74 2.02
m (g/s) 780 780 780 780
contribution coefficient (η) for supersonic as well as
∫HHRdV (kJ/s) 2.5 73.6 87.1 87.5 subsonic combustion modes are plotted in Fig. 7.
∫HHRsup dV/∫HRRdV 89% 28% 55% 68% Table 2 lists the integral of HRR in the combustor
∫HHRsub dV/∫HRRdV 11% 72% 45% 32% and overall contribution coefficients of supersonic
and subsonic combustion modes in different cases.
However, the dominant mode depends on combus-
tion intensity and inflow conditions. In case 1 al-
constant values as presented in Table 1, whereas though ηsup is 89%, it should be stressed that only
temperature rises from 300 K to 1200 K with steps a very small amount of heat is released and com-
of 300 K as shown in Table 2. The airstream pres- bustion is very weak. Combustion becomes inten-
sure also increases to obtain the same mass flow sive in case 2, which leads to strong heat release and
rate. Besides, at the entrance of the combustor the significant pressure-rise. A distinct subsonic zone
airstream is 2.2 Ma and the rocket jet is 2.1 Ma for is found in the intensive mixing and combustion
all cases. region as the incoming airstream pressure is rela-
Figure 6 shows the instantaneous contours of tively low. Through the integral operation, it sug-
temperature, pressure, Mach number, and logarith- gests 72% of heat is released by subsonic combus-
mic HRR. In all cases one can observe a lead- tion, which becomes the dominant mode in case 2.
ing flame base, an intensive mixing region with The jet flame becomes longer and thinner when the
combustion, and a turbulent far field with weaker airstream’s temperature and pressure are further in-
combustion. With increasing temperature of the creased in case 3 and case 4. The supersonic com-
airstream, more and more heat is released in the bustion mode dominates in these two cases with
combustor since the chemical reaction rate is en- contribution coefficients of 55% and 68%, respec-
hanced. Meanwhile, heat release results in pressure- tively. It is also clear from Fig. 7 that subsonic com-
rise in the combustion chamber and leads to local bustion mode is always prominent at the base of the

Please cite this article as: D. Cao et al., Local supersonic and subsonic combustion mode
transition in a supersonic jet flame, Proceedings of the Combustion Institute (2018),
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proci.2018.06.213
JID: PROCI
ARTICLE IN PRESS
8 D. Cao et al. / Proceedings of the Combustion Institute 000 (2018) 1–9
Fig. 7. Time-averaged plots of Q and η of supersonic and subsonic combustion modes in different cases.
jet flame because of recirculating flows in all cases.
In the turbulent far field with weaker combustion,
supersonic combustion mode becomes dominant
with small values of HRR. Another notable phe-
nomenon is that subsonic combustion pockets are
located behind the shock/flame interaction zones,
suggesting that these shocks induce subsonic com-
bustion regions. Therefore it is not the fact that
supersonic combustion is always dominant in the
combustor when the main flow is at supersonic
speed because local mode transition between sub-
sonic and supersonic combustion would take place
as the jet-flame propagates downstream.
4. Conclusion
In the current study, a jet flame formed by the
2.2 Ma airstream and 2.1 Ma rocket exhaust, has
been experimentally and numerically investigated
in a model RBCC combustor. A filter method is
introduced to quantitatively analyze subsonic and
supersonic combustion mode and their contribu-
tions to heat release. Results show that although
the two streams are supersonic, both supersonic
combustion and subsonic combustion occur and
release heat in the combustor. Local mode tran-
sition takes place as the flame propagates down-
stream. The subsonic combustion mode is always
prominent at the base of the jet flame because of
recirculation bubble, and supersonic combustion
mode becomes dominant in the turbulent down-
stream field with small heat release rate. In the pres-
ence of shock waves, mixing and combustion are
enhanced by inducing vorticity because of baro-
clinic effects. Subsonic combustion pockets are ob-
served closely behind the shocks due to the as-
sociated deceleration effects. The dominant mode
in the model RBCC combustor is dependent on
temperature and pressure of the airstream when
the rocket’s conditions and air mass flow rate are
fixed. When the chemical reactions are weak due
to low-temperature (Tairinlet = 300 K) airstream,
Please cite this article as: D. Cao et al., Local supersonic and subsonic combustion mode
transition in a supersonic jet flame, Proceedings of the Combustion Institute (2018),
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proci.2018.06.213
[m;July 10, 2018;23:58]
supersonic combustion dominates but releases only
a small amount of heat. When intensive combus-
tion occurs with high-temperature (Tairinlet = 600,
900, 1200 K), the dominant mode varies from sub-
sonic combustion to supersonic combustion be-
cause of interaction between the shock train and
the flame.
Acknowledgments
This work is supported by the National Natu-
ral Science Foundation of China through grants
51376152 and in part by a Technion fellowship.
Supplementary materials
Supplementary material associated with this ar-
ticle can be found, in the online version, at doi:
10.1016/j.proci.2018.06.213.
References
[1] R.J. Yentsch, D.V. Gaitonde, J. Propul. Power 30 (2)
(2014) 474–489.
[2] J.E. Quinn, AIAA Paper 2003-5235.
[3] L. Shi, G. He, P. Liu, et al., Acta Astronaut. 128
(2016) 350–362.
[4] D.J. Micka, J.F. Driscoll, Pro. Combust. Inst. 32
(2009) 2397–2404.
[5] G.A. Sullins, J. Propul. Power 9 (4) (1993) 515–520.
[6] E.T. Curran, W.H. Heiser, D.T. Pratt, Annu. Rev.
Fluid Mech. 28 (1996) 323–360.
[7] C. Aguilera, K.H. Yu, Pro. Combust. Inst. 36 (2017)
2911–2918.
[8] J. Larsson, S. Laurence, I. Bermejo-Moreno, et al.,
Combust. Flame 162 (2015) 907–920.
[9] H. Wang, Z. Wang, M. Sun, et al., Pro. Combust.
Inst. 34 (2013) 2073–2082.
[10] S. Zhang, J. Li, F. Qin, et al., Acta Astronaut. 129
(2016) 357–366.
[11] Z. Wang, M. Sun, Supersonic Turbulent Flow, Com-
bustion Modeling and Large Eddy Simulation, Science
Press, Beijing, China, 2013.
JID: PROCI
ARTICLE IN PRESS [m;July 10, 2018;23:58]

D. Cao et al. / Proceedings of the Combustion Institute 000 (2018) 1–9 9

[12] A. Yoshizawa, K. Horiuti, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 54 (8) [17] F. Qin, Z. Huang, G. He, et al., Int. J. Hydrogen En-
(1985) 2834–2839. ergy 42 (2017) 21360–21370.
[13] S. Menon, P.K. Yeung, W.W. Kim, Comput. Fluids 25 [18] S.R. Choudhury, J. Plasma Phys. 35 (1986) 375–392.
(2) (1996) 165–180. [19] M. Brouillette, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 34 (2002)
[14] A. Nakayama, S. Vengadesan, Int. J. Numer. Meth- 445–468.
ods Fluids 38 (3) (2002) 227–253.
[15] S.G. Davis, A.V. Joshi, H. Wang, et al., Proc. Com-
bust. Inst. 30 (2005) 1283–1292.
[16] A.H. Kadar, Modelling Turbulent Non-Premixed
Combustion in Industrial Furnaces Using the Open
Source Toolbox OpenFOAM Thesis, Delft University
of Technology, 2015.

Please cite this article as: D. Cao et al., Local supersonic and subsonic combustion mode
transition in a supersonic jet flame, Proceedings of the Combustion Institute (2018),
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proci.2018.06.213