Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-ttngx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-13T23:56:10.447Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Experimental study of unsteadiness in supersonic shock-wave/turbulent boundary-layer interactions with separation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 February 2016

D. Estruch ,
D. G. MacManus ,
D. P. Richardson ,
N. J. Lawson ,
K. P. Garry  and
J. L. Stollery
D. Estruch
Affiliation:
Department of Aerospace Sciences, Cranfield University, Cranfield, UK
D. G. MacManus
Affiliation:
Department of Aerospace Sciences, Cranfield University, Cranfield, UK
D. P. Richardson
Affiliation:
Department of Aerospace Sciences, Cranfield University, Cranfield, UK
N. J. Lawson
Affiliation:
Department of Aerospace Sciences, Cranfield University, Cranfield, UK
K. P. Garry
Affiliation:
Department of Aerospace Sciences, Cranfield University, Cranfield, UK
J. L. Stollery
Affiliation:
Department of Aerospace Sciences, Cranfield University, Cranfield, UK
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Shock-wave/turbulent boundary-layer interactions (SWTBLIs) with separation are known to be inherently unsteady but their physical mechanisms are still not totally understood. An experimental investigation has been performed in a supersonic wind tunnel at a freestream flow Mach number of 2·42. The interaction between a shock wave created by a shock generator (α = 3°, α = 9°, α = 13° and α = 15° deflection angles) and a turbulent boundary layer with thickness δ = 5mm has been studied. High-speed Schlieren visualisations have been obtained and used to measure shock wave unsteadiness by means of digital image processing. In the interactions with separation, the reflected shock’s unsteadiness has been in the order of 102Hz. High-speed wall pressure measurements have also been obtained with fast-response micro-transducers along the interactions. Most of the energy of the incoming turbulent boundary layer is broadband and at high frequencies (>104Hz). An addition of low-frequency (<104Hz) fluctuation energy is found at separation. Along the interaction region, the shock impingement results in an amplification of fluctuation energy due to the increase in pressure. Under the main recirculation region core there is only an increase in high frequency energy (>104Hz). Amplification of lower frequency fluctuation energy (>103Hz) is also observed close to the separation and reattachment regions.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 114 , Issue 1155 , May 2010 , pp. 299 - 308
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2010 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Delery, J.M., Shock wave/turbulent boundary layer interaction and its control, Prog Aerospace Sci, 1985, 22, (4), pp 209–280.Google Scholar
2. Knight, D. and Degrez, G., Shock wave boundary layer interactions in high Mach number flows – a critical survey of current CFD prediction capabilities, AGARD Report 2, 1998, 319, pp 1–35.Google Scholar
3. Delery, J., Shock phenomena in high speed aerodynamics: still a source of major concern, Aeronaut J, 1999, 103, (1019), pp 19–34.Google Scholar
4. Knight, D., Yan, H., Panaras, A. and Zheltovodov, A., RTO WG 10: CFD validation for shock wave turbulent boundary layer interactions, AIAA Paper 2002-0437, 2002.Google Scholar
5. Zheltovodov, A., Some advances in research of shock wave turbulent boundary layer interactions, AIAA Paper 2006-496, 2006.Google Scholar
6. Dussauge, J.P., Dupont, P. and Debieve, J.F., Unsteadiness in shock wave boundary layer interactions with separation, Aerospace Sci Technol, 2006, 10, (2), pp 85–91.Google Scholar
7. Adamson, T.C. Jr., and Messiter, A.F., Analysis of two-dimensional interactions between shock waves and boundary layers, Annual Rev Fluid Mech, 1980, 12, pp 103–138.Google Scholar
8. Wang, H.J., Yu, S. and Cai, K.J., Unsteadiness of shock wave/boundary layer interaction in supersonic cascade, Phys Astron, 1996, 5, (4), pp 243–247.Google Scholar
9. Delery, J. and Marvin, J.G., Turbulent shock wave/boundary-layer interaction, AGARDograph 280, February 1986.Google Scholar
10. Dolling, D.S., Fluctuating loads in shock-wave/turbulent boundary-layer interaction: tutorial and update, 1993, AIAA Paper 93-0284.Google Scholar
11. Hemsch, M.J. and Nielsen, J.N., Tactical Missile Aerodynamics: General Topics, 1986, AIAA, New York, USA.Google Scholar
12. Dolling, D.S., Unsteadiness of shock-induced turbulent separated flows – some key questions, 2001, AIAA Paper 2001-2708.Google Scholar
13. Dolling, D.S., Fifty years of shock-wave/boundary-layer interaction research: what next?, AIAA J, 2001, 39, (8), pp 1517–1531.Google Scholar
14. Dussauge, J.P. and Piponniau, S., Shock/boundary-layer interactions: Possible sources of unsteadiness, J Fluids Struct, 2008, 24, (8), pp 1166–1175.Google Scholar
15. Kistler, A.L., Fluctuating wall pressure under a separated supersonic flow, J Acoust Soc, 1964, 36, (3), pp 543–550.Google Scholar
16. Chapman, D.R., Kuehn, M.D. and Larson, K.H., Investigation of separated flows in supersonic and subsonic streams with emphasis on the effect of transition, 1958, NACA Report 1356.Google Scholar
17. Tran, T.T. and Bogdonoff, S.M., A study of unsteadiness of shock wave/turbulent boundary layer interactions from fluctuating wall pressure measurements, 1987, AIAA Paper 87-0552.Google Scholar
18. Erengil, M.E. and Dolling, D.S., Correlation of separation shock motion with pressure fluctuations in the incoming boundary layer, AIAA J, 1991, 29, (11), pp 1868–1877.Google Scholar
19. Thomas, F.O., Putnam, C.M. and Chu, H.C., On the mechanism of unsteady shock oscillation in shock wave/turbulent boundary layer interactions, Exp Fluids, 1994, 18, (1-2), pp 69–81.Google Scholar
20. Plotkin, K.J., Shock wave oscillation driven by turbulent boundary-layer fluctuations, AIAA J, 1975, 13, (8), pp 1036–1040.Google Scholar
21. Beresh, S.J., Clemens, N.T. and Dolling, D.S., Relationship between upstream turbulent boundary-layer velocity fluctuations and separation shock unsteadiness, AIAA J, 2002, 40, (12), pp 2412–2422.Google Scholar
22. Bueno, P.C., Ganapathisubramani, B., Clemens, N.T. and Dolling, D.S., Cinematographic planar imaging of a Mach 2 shock wave/turbulent boundary layer interaction, 2005, AIAA Paper 2005-0441.Google Scholar
23. Dolling, D.S. and Erengil, M.E., Unsteadiness of shock-induced turbulent boundary layer separation – An inherent feature of turbulent flow or solely a wind tunnel phenomenon, August 1994, Final Rpt Texas Uni.Google Scholar
24. Ganapathisubramani, B., Clemens, N.T. and Dolling, D.S., Effects of upstream boundary layer on the unsteadiness of shock-induced separation, J Fluid Mech, 2007, 585, pp 369–394.Google Scholar
25. Dupont, P., Haddad, C., Ardissone, J.P. and Debieve, J.F., Space and time organization of a shock wave/turbulent boundary layer interaction, Aerospace Sci Technol, 2005, 9, (7), pp 561–572.Google Scholar
26. Estruch, D., Lawson, N.J., MacManus, D.G., Garry, K.P. and Stollery, J.L., Schlieren visualization of high-speed flows using a continuous LED light source, J Vis, 2009, 12, (4), pp 289–290.Google Scholar
27. Estruch, D., Stollery, J.L., MacManus, D.G., Lawson, N.J. and Garry, K.P., Hypersonic interference heating: a semi-empirical hot spot predictive approach, 2009, AIAA Paper 2009-7444.Google Scholar
28. Estruch, D., Lawson, N.J. and Garry, K.P., Application of optical measurement techniques to supersonic and hypersonic aerospace flows, ASCE J Aero Eng, 2009, 22, (4), pp 383–395.Google Scholar
29. Estruch, D., Lawson, N.J., MacManus, D.G., Garry, K.P. and Stollery, J.L., Measurement of shock wave unsteadiness using a high-speed Schlieren system and digital image processing, Rev Sci Instrum, 2008, 79, (12), 126108.Google Scholar
30. Ogawa, H. and Babinsky, H., Wind-tunnel set up for investigations of normal shock wave/boundary layer interaction control, AIAA J, 2006, 44, (11), pp 2803–2805.Google Scholar
31. Kiya, M. and Sasaki, K., Structure of a turbulent separation bubble, J Fluid Mech, 1983, 137, pp 83–113.Google Scholar
32. Dolling, D.S. and Or, C.T., Unsteadiness of the shock wave structure in attached and separated compression ramp flows, Exp Fluids, 1985, 3, (1), pp 24–32.Google Scholar
33. Bies, D.A., A review of flight and wind tunnel measurements of boundary layer pressure fluctuations and induced structural response, NASA CR-626, 1966.Google Scholar
34. Laganelli, A.L., Martelluci, A. and Shaw, L.L., Wall pressure fluctuations in attached boundary layer flow, AIAA J, 1983, 21, pp 495–502.Google Scholar
35. Kuehn, D.M., Experimental investigation of the pressure rise required for the incipient separation of the turbulent boundary layers in two-dimensional supersonic flow, 1959, NASA Mem 1-21-59A.Google Scholar
36. Thomas, F.O., Putnam, C.M. and Chu, H.C., Measurement of the nonlinear spectral dynamics characterizing a shock wave/turbulent boundary layer interaction, 1991, AIAA Paper 91-0653.Google Scholar
37. Muck, K.C., Dussauge, J.P. and Bogdonoff, S.M., Structure of the wall pressure fluctuations in a shock-induced separated turbulent flow, 1985, AIAA Paper 85-0179.Google Scholar
38. Andreopoulos, J. and Muck, K.C., Some new aspects of the shock-wave/boundary-layer interaction in compression-ramp flows, J Fluid Mech, 1987, 180, pp 405–428.Google Scholar