转捩对压缩拐角激波/边界层干扰分离泡的影响

doi:10.7527/S1000-6893.2015.0355

Abstract

Abstract:

Direct numerical simulations (DNS) of shock wave and transitional boundary layer interaction for a 24°compression corner at Mach number 2.9 are performed to study the effect of transition on the separation bubble at the ramp corner. At upstream, the flat-plate transition is triggered by the periodic blow and suction disturbance. The interaction of shock wave and transitional boundary layer is then simulated by setting the length of upstream flat-plate. The extent of separation agrees well with those of the experimental and direct numerical simulation data, which validate the results. Transition effect on the separation bubble in the interaction region is researched and the turbulent kinetic energy budget in the bubble is analyzed. Results indicate that the coherent structures at the early stage of transition have a serious influence on the separation bubble, in which the turbulent spots are formed by the hairpin vortices. Then the scale of separation bubble is the smallest and the shape is spike-type in the spanwise direction. With the evolution of transition, the turbulent production and dissipation term in the separation bubble gradually reduce by four times, while the turbulent transport term contributes to the balance of the turbulent production and dissipation.

Key words: transition, compression ramp, shock wave/boundary layer interaction, separation bubble, direct numerical simulation

CLC Number:

TONG Fulin, LI Xinliang, TANG Zhigong, ZHU Xingkun, HUANG Jiangtao. Transition effect on separation bubble of shock wave/boundary layer interaction in a compression ramp[J]. ACTA AERONAUTICAET ASTRONAUTICA SINICA, 2016, 37(10): 2909-2921.

References

[1] PLOTKIN K J. Shock wave oscillation driven by turbulent boundary layer fluctuations[J]. AIAA Journal, 1975, 13(8):1036-1040.
[2] POGGIE J, SMITS A J. Experimental evidence for plotkin model of shock unsteadiness in separated flow[J]. Physics of Fluids, 2005, 17(1):018107.
[3] TOUBER E, SANDHAM N D. Low order stochastic modeling of low-frequency motions in reflected shock-wave boundary layer interactions[J]. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 2011, 671(3):417-465.
[4] DOLLING D S, MURPHY M T. Unsteadiness of the separation shock wave structure in a supersonic compression ramp flowfield[J]. AIAA Journal, 1983, 21(12):628-634.
[5] ADAMS N A. Direct simulation of the turbulent boundary layer along a compression ramp at M=3 and Re_θ=1685[J]. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 2000, 420(3):47-83.
[6] LOGINOV M S, ADAMS N A, ZHELTOVODOV A A. Large eddy simulation of shock wave and turbulent boundary layer interaction[J]. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 2006, 565(1):135-169.
[7] DOLLING D S. Fifty years of shock-wave/boundary-layer interaction research:what next?[J]. AIAA Journal, 2001, 39(8):1517-1530.
[8] CHAPMAN D R, KUEHN D M, LARRSON H K. Investigation of separated flows in supersonic and subsonic streams with emphasis on the effect of transitions:NACA Report 1356[R]. Washington, D.C.:NASA, 1958.
[9] MURPHREE Z R, YUCEIL K B, CLEMENS N T, et al. Experimental studies of transitional boundary layer shock wave interactions:AIAA-2007-1139[R]. Reston:AIAA, 2007.
[10] VANSTONE L, SAMPER D E, HILLIER R. Shock-induced separation of transitional hypersonic boundary layers:AIAA-2015-2736[R]. Reston:AIAA, 2015.
[11] GIEPMAN R H M, SCHRIJER F F J, OUDHEUSDEN B W V. High-resolution PIV measurements of a transitional shock wave-boundary layer interaction[J]. Experiments in Fluids, 2015, 56(6):1-20.
[12] POLIVANOV P A, SIDORENKO A A, MASLOV A A. Transition effect on shock wave/boundary layer interaction at M=1.47:AIAA-2015-1974[R]. Reston:AIAA, 2015.
[13] PRIEBE S, MARTIN M P. Low frequency unsteadiness in shock wave-turbulent boundary layer interaction[J]. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 2012, 699(5):1-49.
[14] LI X L, FU D X, MA Y W, et al. Direct numerical simulation of shock wave/turbulent boundary layer interaction in a supersonic compression ramp[J]. Science China:Physics, Mechanics & Astronomy, 2010, 53(9):1651-1658.
[15] GAO H, FU D X, MA Y W, et al. Direct numerical simulation of supersonic turbulent boundary layer flow[J]. Chinese Physics Letters, 2005, 22(7):1709-1712.
[16] LI X L, FU D X, MA Y W, et al, Acoustic calculation for supersonic turbulent boundary flow[J]. Chinese Physics Letters, 2009, 26(9):094701.
[17] RINGUETTE M J, BOOKEY P, WYCKHAM C, et al. Experimental study of a mach 3 compression ramp interaction at Re_θ=2400[J]. AIAA Journal, 2009, 47(2):373-385.
[18] BOOKEY P, WYCKHAM C. SMITS A J, et al. New experimental data of STBLI at DNS/LES accessible Reynolds numbers:AIAA-2005-0309[R]. Reston:AIAA, 2005.
[19] WU M, MARTIN M P. Direct numerical simulation of supersonic turbulent boundary layer over a compression ramp[J]. AIAA Journal, 2007, 45(4):879-889.
[20] MARTIN M P, TAYLOR E M, WU M, et al. A bandwidth-optimized WENO scheme for the effective direct numerical simulation of compressible turbulence[J]. Journal of Computational Physics, 2006, 220(1):270-289.
[21] PIROZZOLI S, GRASSO F, GATSKI T B. Direct numerical simulation and analysis of a spatially evolving supersonic turbulent boundary layer at M=2.25[J]. Physics of Fluids, 2004, 16(3):530-545.
[22] PIROZZOLI S, BERNARDINI M. Direct numerical simulation database for impinging shock wave/turbulent boundary layer interaction[J]. AIAA Journal, 2011, 49(6):1307-1312.
[23] JEONG J, HUSSAIN F. On the identification of a vortex[J]. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 1995, 285(1):69-94.
[24] HEAD M R, BANDYOPADHYAY P R. New aspects of turbulent boundary layer structure[J]. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 1981, 107:297-338.
[25] LEE C B, WU J Z. Transition in wall-bounded flows[J]. Applied Mechanics Reviews, 2008, 61(3):0802.
[26] LEE C B. Possible universal transitional scenario in a flat plate boundary layer:measurement and visualization[J]. Physical Review E, 2000, 62(3):297-338.

Transition effect on separation bubble of shock wave/boundary layer interaction in a compression ramp

PDF (PC)

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

References

Related Articles 15

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments

[1]	Heng ZHANG, Jie LI, Binbin ZHAO. Improvement mechanism of ice-tolerance capacity for iced airfoil with variable camber of drooping leading edge [J]. ACTA AERONAUTICAET ASTRONAUTICA SINICA, 2023, 44(1): 627114-627114.
[2]	CHENG Jianrui, SHI Chongguang, QU Lixia, XU Yue, YOU Yancheng, ZHU Chengxiang. Theoretical model of 2D curved shock wave/turbulent boundary layer interaction [J]. ACTA AERONAUTICAET ASTRONAUTICA SINICA, 2022, 43(9): 125993-125993.
[3]	LIU Qingyang, LEI Juanmian, LIU Zhou, SHI Lei, ZHOU Weijiang. γ-Re_θt-f_Re transition model for compressible flow [J]. ACTA AERONAUTICAET ASTRONAUTICA SINICA, 2022, 43(8): 125794-125794.
[4]	LUO Jiaqi, FU Wenhao, ZENG Xian, XIA Zhiheng. Uncertainty impact of Reynolds number on flow losses of high-lift low-pressure turbine cascade [J]. ACTA AERONAUTICAET ASTRONAUTICA SINICA, 2022, 43(7): 125427-125427.
[5]	LIU Qiang, TU Guohua, LUO Zhenbing, CHEN Jianqiang, ZHAO Rui, YUAN Xianxu. Progress in hypersonic boundary layer transition delay control [J]. ACTA AERONAUTICAET ASTRONAUTICA SINICA, 2022, 43(7): 25357-025357.
[6]	TONG Fulin, DONG Siwei, DUAN Junyi, LI Xinliang. Direct numerical simulation of separation bubble in shock wave/turbulent boundary layer interaction [J]. ACTA AERONAUTICAET ASTRONAUTICA SINICA, 2022, 43(7): 125437-125437.
[7]	ZHANG Haoyuan, SUN Dong, QIU Bo, ZHU Yandan, WANG Anling. Influence of turbulent kinetic energy on shock wave/boundary layer interaction [J]. ACTA AERONAUTICAET ASTRONAUTICA SINICA, 2022, 43(7): 125504-125504.
[8]	ZHU Zhibin, SHANG Qing, SHEN Qing. Crossflow modification of transition model for hypersonic boundary layer and its application [J]. ACTA AERONAUTICAET ASTRONAUTICA SINICA, 2022, 43(7): 125685-125685.
[9]	LI Qiang, WAN Bingbing, YANG Kai, ZHU Tao. Experimental research on characteristics of pressure and heat flux fluctuation in hypersonic cone boundary layer [J]. ACTA AERONAUTICAET ASTRONAUTICA SINICA, 2022, 43(2): 124956-124956.
[10]	YANG Tihao, WANG Yiwen, WANG Yutong, SHI Yayun, ZHOU Zhu. Discrete adjoint-based optimization approach for laminar flow wings [J]. ACTA AERONAUTICAET ASTRONAUTICA SINICA, 2022, 43(12): 126132-126132.
[11]	NIE Han, SONG Wenping, HAN Zhonghua, CHEN Jianqiang, DUAN Maochang, WAN Bingbing. Automatic transition prediction for natural-laminar-flow wing design of supersonic transports [J]. ACTA AERONAUTICAET ASTRONAUTICA SINICA, 2022, 43(11): 526342-526342.
[12]	XU Jiakuan, WANG Yuxuan, ZHANG Yang, QIAO Lei, LIU Jianxin, BAI Junqiang. Progress in amplification factor transport models in subsonic and transonic boundary layers [J]. ACTA AERONAUTICAET ASTRONAUTICA SINICA, 2022, 43(11): 526734-526734.
[13]	WANG Meng, LI Yujun, ZHAO Ronghuan, ZHONG Hongjie. Transition detection technique for wide speed range by means of on-line heating coating [J]. ACTA AERONAUTICAET ASTRONAUTICA SINICA, 2022, 43(11): 526820-526820.
[14]	NIU Xiaotian, LI Jie, ZHOU Zhipeng, YANG Zhao, CHANG Mochen. Sensitivity analysis of transonic laminar flow characteristics of an aircraft with laminar wing section [J]. ACTA AERONAUTICAET ASTRONAUTICA SINICA, 2022, 43(11): 526771-526771.
[15]	TANG Songxiang, LI Jie, ZHANG Heng, NIU Xiaotian. Aerodynamic performance optimization design of middle wing section of a special laminar unmanned flight in high-speed cruise [J]. ACTA AERONAUTICAET ASTRONAUTICA SINICA, 2022, 43(11): 526766-526766.