Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Confinement effects on regular–irregular transition in shock-wave–boundary-layer interactions

  • Ilan J. Grossman (a1) and Paul J. K. Bruce (a1)

Abstract

An oblique shock wave is generated in a Mach 2 flow at a flow deflection angle of $12^{\circ }$ . The resulting shock-wave–boundary-layer interaction (SWBLI) at the tunnel wall is observed. A novel traversable shock generator allows the position of the SWBLI to be varied relative to a downstream expansion fan. The relationship between the SWBLI, the expansion fan and the wind tunnel arrangement is studied. Schlieren photography, surface oil flow visualisation, particle image velocimetry and high-spatial-resolution wall pressure measurements are used to investigate the flow. It is observed that stream-normal movement of the shock generator downwards (towards the floor and hence the point of shock reflection) is accompanied by (1) growth in the streamwise extent of the shock-induced boundary layer separation, (2) upstream movement of the shock-induced separation point while the reattachment point remains nearly fixed, (3) an increase in separation shock strength and (4) transition between regular and irregular (Mach) reflection without an increase in incident shock strength. The role of free interaction theory in defining the separation shock angle is considered and shown to be consistent with the present measurements over a short streamwise extent. An SWBLI representation is proposed and reasoned which explains the apparent increase in separation shock strength that occurs without an increase in incident shock strength.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Confinement effects on regular–irregular transition in shock-wave–boundary-layer interactions
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Confinement effects on regular–irregular transition in shock-wave–boundary-layer interactions
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Confinement effects on regular–irregular transition in shock-wave–boundary-layer interactions
      Available formats
      ×

Copyright

This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Corresponding author

Email address for correspondence: ilan@caltech.edu

References

Hide All
Agostini, L., Larcheveque, L. & Dupont, P. 2015 Mechanism of shock unsteadiness in separated shock/boundary-layer interactions. Phys. Fluids 27, 126103.
Babinsky, H. & Ogawa, H. 2008 SBLI control for wings and inlets. Shock Waves 18 (2), 8996.
Babinsky, H., Oorebeek, J. & Cottingham, T. G. 2013 Corner effects in reflecting oblique shock-wave/boundary-layer interactions. In 51st AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition 07–10 January 2013, Grapevine, Texas, pp. 110. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
Ben-Dor, G. 2007 Shock Wave Reflection Phenomena, 2nd edn. Springer.
Benek, J. A., Suchyta, C. J. III & Babinsky, H. 2013 The effect of wind tunnel size on incident shock boundary layer interaction experiments. In 51st AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition 07–10 January 2013, Grapevine, Texas, pp. 124. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
Bruce, P. J. K., Burton, D. M. F., Titchener, N. A. & Babinsky, H. 2011 Corner effect and separation in transonic channel flows. J. Fluid Mech. 679, 247262.
Burton, D. M. F. & Babinsky, H. 2012 Corner separation effects for normal shock wave/turbulent boundary layer interactions in rectangular channels. J. Fluid Mech. 707, 287306.
Chapman, D. R., Kuehn, D. M. & Larson, H. K.1958 Investigation of separated flows in supersonic and subsonic streams with emphasis on the effect of transition. NACA Tech. Rep. 1356.
Chpoun, A., Passerel, D., Li, H. & Ben-Dor, G. 1995 Reconsideration of oblique shock wave reflections in steady flows. Part 1. Experimental investigation. J. Fluid Mech. 301, 1935.
Délery, J. 2011 Physical introduction. In Shock Wave–Boundary-Layer Interactions, Ist edn. (ed. Babinsky, H. & Harvey, J. K.). Cambridge University Press.
Délery, J. M., Marvin, J. G. & Reshotko, E.1986 Shock-wave boundary layer interactions. Tech. Rep. AGARD-AG-280. North Atlantic Treaty Organization Advisory Group for Aerospace Research and Development. National Technical Information Services.
Edney, B.1968 Anomalous heat transfer and pressure distributions on blunt bodies at hypersonic speeds in the presence of an impinging shock. Tech. Rep. FFA Report 115. Aeronautical Research Institute of Sweden, Stockholm.
Erdos, J. & Pallone, A. 1962 Shock–boundary layer interaction and flow separation. In Proceedings of the 1962 Heat Transfer and Fluid Mechanics Institute, vol. 15, pp. 239254. Stanford University Press.
Galbraith, D. S., Turner, M. G., Orkwisr, P. D. & Weil, S. P. 2013 The effect of aspect ratio on a Mach 2.75 shock boundary layer interaction configuration. In 51st AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition 07–10 January 2013, Grapevine, Texas, pp. 112. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
Ganapathisubramani, B., Clemens, N. T. & Dolling, D. S. 2009 Low-frequency dynamics of shock-induced separation in a compression ramp interaction. J. Fluid Mech. 636, 397425.
Henderson, L. F. 1967 The reflexion of a shock wave at a rigid wall in the presence of a boundary layer. J. Fluid Mech. 30 (4), 699722.
Henderson, L. F. & Lozzi, A. 1975 Experiments on transition of Mach reflection. J. Fluid Mech. 68 (1), 139155.
Hornung, H. G., Oertel, H. & Sandeman, R. J. 1979 Transition to Mach reflexion of shock waves in steady and pseudosteady flow with and without relaxation. J. Fluid Mech. 90 (3), 541560.
Hornung, H. G. & Robinson, M. L. 1982 Transition from regular to Mach reflection of shock waves. Part 2. The steady-flow criterion. J. Fluid Mech. 123, 155164.
Li, H. & Ben-Dor, G. 1997 A parametric study of Mach reflection in steady flows. J. Fluid Mech. 341, 101125.
Li, H., Chpoun, A. & Ben-Dor, G. 1999 Analytical and experimental investigations of the reflection of asymmetric shock waves in steady flows. J. Fluid Mech. 390, 2543.
Lock, G. & Dewey, J. 1989 An experimental investigation of the sonic criterion for transition from regular to Mach reflection of weak shock waves. Exp. Fluids 7 (5), 289292.
Longley, J. P. & Greitzer, E. M. 1992 Inlet distortion effects in aircraft propulsion system integration. In AGARD, Steady and Transient Performance Prediction of Gas Turbine Engines; 18 p, pp. 118. National Technical Information Services.
Loth, E., Titchener, N., Babinsky, H. & Povinelli, L. 2013 Canonical normal shock wave/boundary-layer interaction flows relevant to external compression inlets. AIAA J. 51 (9), 22082217.
Matheis, J. & Hickel, S. 2015 On the transition between regular and irregular shock patterns of shock-wave/boundary-layer interactions. J. Fluid Mech. 776, 200234.
von Neumann, J.1943a Oblique reflection of shocks. Explosive Research Rep. 12. Navy Department, Bureau of Ordnance.
von Neumann, J.1943b Refraction, intersection and reflection of shock waves. NAVORD Rep. 203-45. Navy Department, Bureau of Ordnance.
Ogawa, H. & Babinsky, H. 2006 Wind-tunnel setup for investigations of normal shock wave/boundary layer interaction control. AIAA J. 44 (11), 28032805.
Perry, A. E. & Chong, M. S. 1987 A description of eddying motions and flow patterns using critical-point concepts. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 19 (1), 125155.
Piponniau, S., Dussauge, J. P., Debieve, J. F. & Dupont, P. 2009 A simple model for low-frequency unsteadiness in shock-induced separation. J. Fluid Mech. 629, 87108.
Rabey, P. K. & Bruce, P. J. K. 2017 Experimental study exploring unsteadiness length scales in a reflected shock–boundary layer interaction. In 55th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, AIAA SciTech Forum, Grapevine, Texas, pp. 114. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
Smart, M. K. 2001 Experimental testing of a hypersonic inlet with rectangular-to-elliptical shape transition. J. Propul. Power 17 (2), 276283.
Souverein, L. J., Bakker, P. G. & Dupont, P. 2013 A scaling analysis for turbulent shock-wave/boundary-layer interactions. J. Fluid Mech. 714, 505535.
Threadgill, J. A. S. & Bruce, P. J. K. 2016 Shock wave boundary layer interaction unsteadiness: the effects of configuration and strength. In 54th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, AIAA SciTech Forum, San Diego, CA, pp. 119. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
Threadgill, J. A. S. & Bruce, P. J. K. 2017 Comparison of unsteady flow similarities in various shock/boundary-layer interaction configurations. In 55th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, AIAA SciTech Forum, Grapevine, Texas, pp. 117. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
Touber, E. & Sandham, N. D. 2008 Oblique shock impinging on a turbulent boundary layer: low-frequency mechanisms. In 38th Fluid Dynamics Conference and Exhibit, Seattle, Washington, pp. 127. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
Touber, E. & Sandham, N. D. 2009 Large-eddy simulation of low-frequency unsteadiness in a turbulent shock-induced separation bubble. Theor. Comput. Fluid Dyn. 23 (2), 79107.
Touber, E. & Sandham, N. D. 2011 Low-order stochastic modelling of low-frequency motions in reflected shock-wave/boundary-layer interactions. J. Fluid Mech. 671, 417465.
Vuillon, J., Zeitoun, D. & Ben-Dor, G. 1995 Reconsideration of oblique shock wave reflections in steady flows. Part 2. Numerical investigation. J. Fluid Mech. 301, 3750.
Wang, B., Sandham, N. D., Hu, Z. & Liu, W. 2015 Numerical study of oblique shock-wave/boundary-layer interaction considering sidewall effects. J. Fluid Mech. 767, 526561.
MathJax
MathJax is a JavaScript display engine for mathematics. For more information see http://www.mathjax.org.

JFM classification

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