Hostname: page-component-7c8c6479df-p566r Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-28T23:35:45.387Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Numerical analysis of high speed wind tunnel flow disturbance measurements using stagnation point probes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 November 2017

Thomas Schilden
Affiliation:
Institute of Aerodynamics, RWTH Aachen University, 52062 Aachen, Germany
Wolfgang Schröder
Affiliation:
Institute of Aerodynamics, RWTH Aachen University, 52062 Aachen, Germany JARA High-Performance Computing, Forschungszentrum Jülich, 52425 Jülich, Germany

Abstract

Since supersonic test facilities have tunnel noise that strongly influences boundary layer transition experiments, the determination of tunnel noise is of great significance to properly evaluate and interpret experimental results. The composition of tunnel noise, which consists of acoustic, entropy and vorticity modes, highly influences the boundary layer receptivity. The measurement of the separate modes is a major goal of ongoing research. In this study, the properties of stagnation point probes for a newly developed modal decomposition method for tunnel noise are investigated by direct numerical simulation. Pressure and heat flux responses of a stagnation point probe to various entropy and acoustic mode input functions are analysed to investigate how tunnel noise is perceived by corresponding sensor types. The interaction of the incident mode and the shock wave upstream of the probe is analysed and the resulting wave pattern in the subsonic region between shock wave and probe is evidenced. It is found that pure incident acoustic or entropy modes cause acoustic and entropy waves downstream of the shock wave whose strengths differ depending on the incident mode. The resulting wave pattern downstream of the shock wave is determined by postshock acoustic waves propagating bidirectionally between shock wave and probe. Formulating a model equation linking pressure and heat flux fluctuations to the initially caused postshock acoustic and entropy wave, a criterion for the applicability of stagnation point probes measuring pressure and heat flux fluctuations in the new modal decomposition method can be deduced: to distinguish between the incident mode types based on their pressure and heat flux signal the perception of initially generated entropy waves downstream of the shock wave by the heat flux sensor is crucial. The transfer function between entropy waves and heat flux is shown to have low pass filter characteristics and the cutoff Strouhal number could be estimated by control theory. The analysis of the frequency response to continuous incident waves corroborated this cutoff Strouhal number.

Type
Papers
Copyright
© 2017 Cambridge University Press 

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

Ali, S. R. C., Zárate Cárdenas, R., Radespiel, R., Schilden, T. & Schröder, W. 2018 Stagnation point probe in hypersonic flow. In New Results in Numerical and Experimental Fluid Mechanics XI, Notes on Numerical Fluid Mechanics and Multidisciplinary Design, vol. 136. Springer.Google Scholar
Anyiwo, J. C. & Bushnell, D. M. 1982 Turbulence amplification in shock-wave bounday-layer interaction. AIAA J. 20, 893899.Google Scholar
Bouslog, S. A., An, M. Y., Hartmann, L. N. & Derry, S. M.1991 Review of boundary layer transition flight data on the space shuttle orbiter. AIAA Paper 91-0741.Google Scholar
Chaudhry, R. S. & Candler, G. V.2016 Recovery of freestream disturbance spectrum from stagnation pressure spectrum for hypersonic pitot probes. AIAA Paper 2016-2059.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fedorov, A. V. 2003 Receptivity of a high-speed boundary layer to acoustic disturbances. J. Fluid Mech. 491, 101129.Google Scholar
Fedorov, A. V. 2011 Transition and stability of high-speed boundary layers. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 43, 7995.Google Scholar
Fedorov, A. V., Ryzhov, A. A., Soudakov, V. G. & Utyuzhnikov, S. V. 2013 Receptivity of a high-speed boundary layer to temperature spottiness. J. Fluid Mech. 722, 533553.Google Scholar
Grossir, G., Masutti, D. & Chazot, O.2015 Flow characterization and boundary layer transition studies in VKI hypersonic facilities. AIAA Paper 2015-0578.Google Scholar
Hartmann, D., Meinke, M. & Schröder, W. 2008 An adaptive multilevel multigrid formulation for Cartesian hierarchical grid methods. Comput. Fluids 37, 11031125.Google Scholar
Heitmann, D., Rödiger, T., Kähler, C., Knauss, H., Radespiel, R. & Krämer, E.2008 Disturbance-level and transition measurements in a conical boundary layer at mach 6. AIAA Paper 2008-3951.Google Scholar
Kegerise, M. A. & Rufer, S. J. 2016 Unsteady heat-flux measurements of second-mode instability waves in a hypersonic flat-plate boundary layer. Exp. Fluids 57 (8), 130.Google Scholar
Khan, M. M. S. & Reshotko, E. 1980 Stability of the laminar boundary layer on a blunted plate in supersonic flow. In Symposium on Laminar-Turbulent Transition (ed. Eppler, R. & Fasel, H.), pp. 186200. Springer.Google Scholar
Knauss, H., Roediger, T., Bountin, D. A., Smorodsky, B. V., Maslov, A. A. & Srulijes, J. 2009 Novel sensor for fast heat-flux measurements. J. Spacecr. Rockets 46 (2), 255265.Google Scholar
Kovasznay, L. S. G.1953 Turbulence in supersonic flow. AIAA Paper 53-682.Google Scholar
Laderman, A. J. & Demetriades, A. 1974 Mean and fluctuating flow measurements in the hypersonic boundary layer over a cooled wall. J. Fluid Mech. 63, 121144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laufer, J. 1961 Aerodynamic noise in supersonic wind tunnels. J. Aero. Sci. 28 (9), 658692.Google Scholar
Lin, T. C., Grabowsky, W. R. & Yelmgren, K. E. 1984 The search for optimum configurations for re-entry vehicles. J. Spacecr. Rockets 21 (2), 142149.Google Scholar
Lintermann, A., Schlimpert, S., Grimmen, J. H., Günther, C., Meinke, M. & Schröder, W. 2014 Massively parallel grid generation on hpc systems. Comput. Meth. Appl. Mech. Engng 277, 131153.Google Scholar
Logan, P.1988 Modal analysis of hot-wire measurements in supersonic turbulence. AIAA Paper 88-0423.Google Scholar
Ma, Y. & Zhong, X. 2003a Receptivity of a supersonic boundary layer over a flat plate. Part 1. Wave structures and interactions. J. Fluid Mech. 488, 3178.Google Scholar
Ma, Y. & Zhong, X. 2003b Receptivity of a supersonic boundary layer over a flat plate. Part 2. Receptivity to free-stream sound. J. Fluid Mech. 488, 79121.Google Scholar
Ma, Y. & Zhong, X. 2005 Receptivity of a supersonic boundary layer over a flat plate. Part 3. Effects of different ttype of free-stream disturbances. J. Fluid Mech. 532, 63109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Masutti, D., Spinosa, E., Chazot, O. & Carbonaro, M.2012 Disturbance level characterization of a hypersonic blowdown facility. AIAA Paper 2011-3887.Google Scholar
McKenzie, J. F. & Westphal, K. O. 1968 Interaction of linear waves with oblique shock waves. Phys. Fluids 11, 23502362.Google Scholar
Morkovin, M. V.1956 Fluctuations and hot-wire anemometry in compressible flows. RTO/STO Tech. Rep. AGARD-AG-24.Google Scholar
Morkovin, M. V. 1960 Note on the assesment of flow disturbances at a blunt body traveling at supersonic speeds owing to flow disturbances in free stream. Trans. ASME J. Appl. Mech. 27 (2), 223229.Google Scholar
Pate, S. R.1977 Dominance of radiated aerodynamic noise on boundary-layer transition in supersonic-hypersonic wind tunnels. PhD thesis, Tennessee University.Google Scholar
Pogorelov, A., Meinke, M. & Schröder, W. 2015 Cut-cell method based large-eddy simulation of tip-leakage flow. Phys. Fluids 27, 075106.Google Scholar
Reshotko, E.1994 Boundary layer instability, transition and control. AIAA Paper 94-0001.Google Scholar
Schilden, T., Schröder, W., Ali, S. R. C., Wu, J., Schreyer, A.-M. & Radespiel, R. 2016 Analysis of acoustic and entropy disturbances in a hypersonic wind tunnel. Phys. Fluids 28, 056104.Google Scholar
Schneider, S. P. 2001 Effects of high-speed tunnel noise on laminar-turbulent transition. J. Spacecr. Rockets 38 (3), 323333.Google Scholar
Schneider, S. P. 2008a Effects of roughness on hypersonic bounday-layer transition. J. Spacecr. Rockets 45, 193209.Google Scholar
Schneider, S. P. 2008b Summary of hypersonic boundary-layer transition experiments on blunt bodies with roughness. J. Spacecr. Rockets 6, 10901105.Google Scholar
Schneiders, L., Hartmann, D., Meinke, M. & Schröder, W. 2013 An accurate moving boundary formulation in cut-cell methods. J. Comput. Phys. 235 (0), 786809.Google Scholar
Wu, J., Zamre, P. & Radespiel, R. 2015 Flow quality experiment in a tandem nozzle wind tunnel at mach 3. Exp. Fluids 56 (1), 20.Google Scholar
Wurster, K. E.1981 An assessment of the impact of transition on advanced winged entry vehicle thermal protection system mass. AIAA Paper 81-1090.Google Scholar
Zhong, X. & Wang, X. 2012 Direct numerical simulation on the receptivity, instability, and transition of hypersonic boundary layers. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 44, 527561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar