激波/湍流边界层干扰分离泡直接数值模拟

doi:10.7527/S1000-6893.2021.25437

Abstract

Abstract: Characteristics of separation bubbles in the interaction of a supersonic turbulent boundary layer at Mach number 2.25 with an impinging shock wave of 33.2° are investigated by means of Direct Numerical Simulation (DNS). After verifying the reliability of the numerical results, fundamental mechanisms associated with separation bubbles, including unsteadiness, separation micro-clusters geometries features and coherent structures, at three different spanwise locations are quantitatively compared to analyze the influence of the three-dimensionality in the spanwise direction. It is found that the separation bubble is highly three-dimensional, with the streamwise extent significantly larger than the wall-normal height and spanwise width. In the spanwise direction, the bubble height is generally large in the middle and small on both sides, exhibiting a single flat peak behavior. The pre-multiplied power spectrum density of the fluctuating separation bubble area suggests that the separation bubble unsteadiness is characterized by large-scale low-frequency contraction and dilation, which is less affected by the spanwise three-dimensionality. The bubbles on both sides lag slightly behind that in the middle. Conditional analysis based on Empirical Mode Decomposition (EMD) is performed to analyze the influence of the bubble dilation and contraction on geometries features of the separation micro-clusters. The statistical results indicate no essential changes in both motions, where the probability peak of the aspect ratio appears around 0.1, and the area and the normal height of the micro-clusters approximately satisfy the quadratic distribution. In addition, the Proper Orthogonal Decomposition (POD) analysis of the fluctuating streamwise velocity indicates that the unsteady motion of the separation bubble is strongly related to the low-order modes, whereas the contribution from the high-order modes is rather small. With the first ten low-order modes, the low-frequency dilation and contraction process of separation bubbles is accurately reconstructed.

Key words: shock wave/turbulent boundary layer interaction, separation bubbles, low-frequency dilation and contraction, empirical mode decomposition, proper orthogonal decompositionhttp

CLC Number:

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.

References

[1] DOLLING D S. Fifty years of shock-wave/boundary-layer interaction research:what next?[J]. AIAA Journal, 2001, 39(8):1517-1531.
[2] GAITONDE D V. Progress in shock wave/boundary layer interactions[J]. Progress in Aerospace Sciences, 2015, 72:80-99.
[3] ROSHKO A, THOMKE G J. Flare-induced interaction lengths in supersonic, turbulent boundary layers[J]. AIAA Journal, 1976, 14(7):873-879.
[4] SETTLES G S, BOGDONOFF S M, VAS I E. Incipient separation of a supersonic turbulent boundary layer at high Reynolds numbers[J]. AIAA Journal, 1976, 14(1):50-56.
[5] ZHELTOVODOV A A, SHILEIN é K, HORSTMAN C C. Development of separation in the region where a shock interacts with a turbulent boundary layer perturbed by rarefaction waves[J]. Journal of Applied Mechanics and Technical Physics, 1993, 34(3):346-354.
[6] JAUNET V, DEBIèVE J F, DUPONT P. Length scales and time scales of a heated shock-wave/boundary-layer interaction[J]. AIAA Journal, 2014, 52(11):2524-2532.
[7] ZHU X K, YU C P, TONG F L, et al. Numerical study on wall temperature effects on shock wave/turbulent boundary-layer interaction[J]. AIAA Journal, 2017, 55(1):131-140.
[8] TONG F L, LI X L, YUAN X X, et al. Incident shock wave and supersonic turbulent boundarylayer interactions near an expansion corner[J]. Computers&Fluids, 2020, 198:104385.
[9] 童福林,孙东,袁先旭,等.超声速膨胀角入射激波/湍流边界层干扰直接数值模拟[J].航空学报, 2020, 41(3):123328. TONG F L, SUN D, YUAN X X, et al. Direct numerical simulation of impinging shock wave/turbulent boundary layer interactions in a supersonic expansion corner[J]. Acta Aeronautica et Astronautica Sinica, 2020, 41(3):123328(in Chinese).
[10] 童福林,周桂宇,孙东,等.膨胀效应对激波/湍流边界层干扰的影响[J].航空学报, 2020, 41(9):123731. TONG F L, ZHOU G Y, SUN D, et al. Expansion effect on shock wave and turbulent boundary layer interactions[J]. Acta Aeronautica et Astronautica Sinica, 2020, 41(9):123731(in Chinese).
[11] GRILLI M, SCHMID P J, HICKEL S, et al. Analysis of unsteady behaviour in shockwave turbulent boundary layer interaction[J]. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 2012, 700:16-28.
[12] PRIEBE S, MARTÍN M P. Low-frequency unsteadiness in shock wave-turbulent boundary layer interaction[J]. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 2012, 699:1-49.
[13] LOGINOV M S, ADAMS N A, ZHELTOVODOV A A. Large-eddy simulation of shock-wave/turbulent-boundary-layer interaction[J]. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 2006, 565:135-169.
[14] PIROZZOLI S, GRASSO F. Direct numerical simulation of impinging shock wave/turbulent boundary layer interaction at M=2.25[J]. Physics of Fluids, 2006, 18(6):065113.
[15] BOOKEY P B, WYCKHAM C, SMITS A J. Experimental investigations of Mach 3 shock-wave turbulent boundary layer interactions:AIAA-2005-4899[R]. Reston:AIAA, 2005.
[16] DUPONT P, HADDAD C, DEBIèVE J F. Space and time organization in a shock-induced separated boundary layer[J]. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 2006, 559:255-277.
[17] FANG J, ZHELTOVODOV A A, YAO Y F, et al. On the turbulence amplification in shock-wave/turbulent boundary layer interaction[J]. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 2020, 897:A32.
[18] TONG F L, LI X L, DUAN Y H, et al. Direct numerical simulation of supersonic turbulent boundary layer subjected to a curved compression ramp[J]. Physics of Fluids, 2017, 29(12):125101.
[19] TONG F L, YU C P, TANG Z G, et al. Numerical studies of shock wave interactions with a supersonic turbulent boundary layer in compression corner:turning angle effects[J]. Computers&Fluids, 2017, 149:56-69.
[20] 童福林,周桂宇,周浩,等.激波/湍流边界层干扰物面剪切应力统计特性[J].航空学报, 2019, 40(5):122504. TONG F L, ZHOU G Y, ZHOU H, et al. Statistical characteristics of wall shear stress in shock wave and turbulent boundary layer interactions[J]. Acta Aeronautica et Astronautica Sinica, 2019, 40(5):122504(in Chinese).
[21] TONG F L, CHEN J Q, SUN D, et al. Wall-shear stress fluctuations in a supersonic turbulent boundary layer over an expansion corner[J]. Journal of Turbulence, 2020, 21(7):355-374.
[22] 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.
[23] PIROZZOLI S, BERNARDINI M, GRASSO F. Characterization of coherent vortical structures in a supersonic turbulent boundary layer[J]. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 2008, 613:205-231.
[24] CLEMENS N T, NARAYANASWAMY V. Low-frequency unsteadiness of shock wave/turbulent boundary layer interactions[J]. Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics, 2014, 46:469-492.
[25] WAINDIM M, AGOSTINI L, LARCHVEQUE L, et al. Dynamics of separation bubble dilation and collapse in shock wave/turbulent boundary layer interactions[J]. Shock Waves, 2020, 30(1):63-75.
[26] FLANDRIN P, RILLING G, GONCALVES P. Empirical mode decomposition as a filter bank[J]. IEEE Signal Processing Letters, 2004, 11(2):112-114.
[27] TAIRA K, BRUNTON S L, DAWSON S T M, et al. Modal analysis of fluid flows:an overview[J]. AIAA Journal, 2017, 55(12):4013-4041.
[28] MUSTAFA M A, PARZIALE N J, SMITH M S, et al. Amplification and structure of streamwise-velocity fluctuations in compression-corner shock-wave/turbulent boundary-layer interactions[J]. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 2019, 863:1091-1122.
[29] PASQUARIELLO V, HICKEL S, ADAMS N A. Unsteady effects of strong shock-wave/boundary-layer interaction at high Reynolds number[J]. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 2017, 823:617-657.
[30] BERESH S J, CLEMENS N T, DOLLING D S. Relationship between upstream turbulent boundary-layer velocity fluctuations and separation shock unsteadiness[J]. AIAA Journal, 2002, 40(12):2412-2422.
[31] ERENGIL M E, DOLLING D S. Correlation of separation shock motion with pressure fluctuations inthe incoming boundary layer[J]. AIAA Journal, 1991, 29(11):1868-1877.
[32] GANAPATHISUBRAMANI B, CLEMENS N T, DOLLING D S. Low-frequency dynamics of shock-induced separation in a compression ramp interaction[J]. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 2009, 636:397-425.
[33] HUMBLE R A, SCARANO F, VAN OUDHEUSDEN B W. Unsteady aspects of an incident shock wave/turbulent boundary layer interaction[J]. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 2009, 635:47-74.
[34] PIPONNIAU S, DUSSAUGE J P, DEBIōVE J F, et al. A simple model for low-frequency unsteadiness in shock-induced separation[J]. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 2009, 629:87-108.

Direct numerical simulation of separation bubble in shock wave/turbulent boundary layer interaction

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

References

Related Articles 15

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments

[1]	QU Bingnan, JIANG Ping, ZHAO Luyang, LI Fengrong, WANG Yingguan. Passive direction finding algorithm of projectile based on short baseline sensor array [J]. ACTA AERONAUTICAET ASTRONAUTICA SINICA, 2022, 43(3): 325139-325139.
[2]	SHI Xiaotian, LYU Meng, ZHAO Yuan, TAO Shancong, HAO Le, YUAN Xiangjiang. Flow control technique for shock wave/turbulent boundary layer interactions [J]. ACTA AERONAUTICAET ASTRONAUTICA SINICA, 2022, 43(1): 625929-625929.
[3]	DUAN Junyi, TONG Fulin, LI Xinliang, LIU Hongwei. Decomposition of mean friction drag in compression-expansion turbulent boundary layer [J]. ACTA AERONAUTICAET ASTRONAUTICA SINICA, 2022, 43(1): 625915-625915.
[4]	TONG Fulin, ZHOU Guiyu, SUN Dong, LI Xinliang. Expansion effect on shock wave and turbulent boundary layer interactions [J]. ACTA AERONAUTICAET ASTRONAUTICA SINICA, 2020, 41(9): 123731-123731.
[5]	TONG Fulin, SUN Dong, YUAN Xianxu, LI Xinliang. Direct numerical simulation of impinging shock wave/turbulent boundary layer interactions in a supersonic expansion corner [J]. ACTA AERONAUTICAET ASTRONAUTICA SINICA, 2020, 41(3): 123328-123328.
[6]	SUN Dong, LIU Pengxin, TONG Fulin. Effect of spanwise oscillation on interaction of shock wave and turbulent boundary layer [J]. ACTA AERONAUTICAET ASTRONAUTICA SINICA, 2020, 41(12): 124054-124054.
[7]	TONG Fulin, ZHOU Guiyu, ZHOU Hao, ZHANG Peihong, LI Xinliang. Statistical characteristics of wall shear stress in shock wave and turbulent boundary layer interactions [J]. ACTA AERONAUTICAET ASTRONAUTICA SINICA, 2019, 40(5): 122504-122504.
[8]	LU Yao, LI Dongsheng, GAO Yang. Measurement of UAV situation similarity based on sequence trend and set distance [J]. ACTA AERONAUTICAET ASTRONAUTICA SINICA, 2019, 40(3): 322453-322453.
[9]	XIA Saiqiang, XIANG Hu, CHEN Wenfeng, YANG Jun, CHEN Yichang. Clutter suppression method for rotor micro-motion target based on CEMD [J]. ACTA AERONAUTICAET ASTRONAUTICA SINICA, 2018, 39(9): 322082-322091.
[10]	SU Donglin, ZHENG Haopeng. A boundary extension method for empirical mode decomposition end effect [J]. ACTA AERONAUTICAET ASTRONAUTICA SINICA, 2016, 37(3): 960-969.
[11]	ZHANG Xian, WANG Hongli. Failure Rate Time Series Prediction Based on Support Vector Empirical Mode Decomposition [J]. ACTA AERONAUTICAET ASTRONAUTICA SINICA, 2011, 32(3): 480-487.
[12]	PAN Honglu;MA Handong;SHEN Qing. LES Application to Unsteady Flat Plate Shock Wave/Turbulent Boundary Layer Interaction [J]. ACTA AERONAUTICAET ASTRONAUTICA SINICA, 2011, 32(2): 242-248.
[13]	WANG Dong-ping;ZHAO Wen-zhong;SUGIYAMA Hiromu;TOJO Akira. Numerical and Experimental Investigations of Mach 4 Pseudo-Shock Waves in a Two-dimensional Square Duct [J]. ACTA AERONAUTICAET ASTRONAUTICA SINICA, 2005, 26(4): 392-396.
[14]	SHEN Guo-ji;TAO Li-min;CHEN Zhong-sheng. Research on Empirical Mode Decomposition of Gearbox Vibration Signal [J]. ACTA AERONAUTICAET ASTRONAUTICA SINICA, 2005, 26(1): 62-65.
[15]	Ma Handong;Li Suxun;Wu Liyi. NUMERICAL SIMULATION OF SUPERSONIC FLOW ABOUT BLUNT FIN WITH DIFFERENT HIGH RESOLUTION SCHEMES [J]. ACTA AERONAUTICAET ASTRONAUTICA SINICA, 1997, 18(4): 390-394.