Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Supersonic boundary-layer interactions with various micro-vortex generator geometries

  • S. Lee (a1) and E. Loth (a2)

Abstract

Various types of micro-vortex generators (μVGs) are investigated for control of a supersonic turbulent boundary layer subject to an oblique shock impingement, which causes flow separation. The micro-vortex generators are embedded in the boundary layer to avoid excessive wave drag while still creating strong streamwise vortices to energise the boundary layer. Several different types of µVGs were considered including micro-ramps and micro-vanes. These were investigated computationally in a supersonic boundary layer at Mach 3 using monotone integrated large eddy simulations (MILES). The results showed that vortices generated from μVGs can partially eliminate shock induced flow separation and can continue to entrain high momentum flux for boundary-layer recovery downstream. The micro-ramps resulted in thinner downstream displacement thickness in comparison to the micro-vanes. However, the strength of the streamwise vorticity for the micro-ramps decayed faster due to dissipation especially after the shock interaction. In addition, the close spanwise distance between each vortex for the ramp geometry causes the vortex cores to move upwards from the wall due to induced upwash effects. Micro-vanes, on the other hand, yielded an increased spanwise spacing of the streamwise vortices at the point of formation. This resulted in streamwise vortices staying closer to the floor with less circulation decay, and the reduction in overall flow separation is attributed to these effects. Two hybrid concepts, named ‘thick-vane’ and ‘split-ramp’, were also studied where the former is a vane with side supports and the latter has a uniform spacing along the centreline of the baseline ramp. These geometries behaved similar to the micro-vanes in terms of the streamwise vorticity and the ability to reduce flow separation, but are more physically robust than the thin vanes.

Copyright

References

Hide All
1. Loth, E., Smart mesoflaps for control of shock boundary layer interactions, AIAA 2000-2476.
2. McCormick, D.C., Shock/boundary-layer interaction control with vortex generators and passive cavity, AIAA J, 31, (1), pp 9196.
3. Holmes, A.E., Hickey, P.K., Murphy, W.R., Hilton, D.A., The application of sub-boundary layer vortex generators to reduce canopy Mach rumble interior noise on the Gulfstream III, AIAA 87-0084.
4. Anderson, B., Tinapple, J. and Surber, L., Optimal control of shock wave turbulent boundary layer interactions using micro-array actuation, AIAA 2006-3197.
5. Ghosh, S., Choi, J. and Edwards, J., Rans and hybrid LES/RANS simulations of the effects of micro vortex generators using immersed boundary methods, AIAA 2008-3728.
6. Lee, S., Loth, E., Wang, C. and Kim, S., LES of supersonic boundary layers μVGs, AIAA 2007-3916.
7. Ashill, P.R., Fulker, J.L. and Hackett, K.C., Studies of flows induced by sub boundary layer vortex generators (SBVGs), AIAA 2002-0968.
8. Urbin, G., Knight, D. and Zheltovodov, A.A., Compressible large-eddy simulation using unstructured grid: supersonic turbulent boundary layer and compression corner, AIAA 99-0427.
9. Holst, T.L., On approximate factorization scheme for solving the full potential equation, NASA TM 110435.
10. Urbin, G., Knight, D. and Zheltovodov, A.A., Large-eddy simulation of a supersonic compression corner, Part I, AIAA 2000-0398.
11. Lund, T., Wu, X. and Squires, K., Generation of turbulent inflow data for spatially-developing boundary layer simulations, J Computational Physics, 140, (2), pp 233258.
12. Cantwell, B., Organized motion in turbulent flow, Annual Review of Fluid Dynamics, 1981, 13, pp 457515.
13. Pirozzoli, S. and Grasso, F., Direct numerical simulation of impinging shock wave/turbulent boundary layer interaction at M = 2.25, Physics of Fluids, 2006, 18, (6), Article 065113.
14. Wu, M. and Martin, P., Direct numerical simulation of supersonic turbulent boundary layer over a compression ramp, AIAA J, 2007, 45, (4), pp 879889.
15. Babinsky, H., Li, Y. and Pitt Ford, C., Microramp control of supersonic oblique shock wave/boundary layer interactions, AIAA J, 47, (3), pp 668675.
16. Ashill, P.R., Fulker, J.L. and Hackett, K.C., A review of recent developments in flow control, Aeronaut J, 2005, 109, (1095), pp 205232.
17. Delery, J.M., Aspects of vortex breakdown, Progress in Aerospace Sciences, 1994, 30, pp 159.
18. Smart, M.K., Kalkhoran, I.M. and Popovic, S., Some aspects of streamwise vortex behavior during oblique shock wave/vortex interaction, Shock Waves, 1998, 8, p 243255.

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed