Calculation of Turbulent Boundary Layers with Separation and Viscous-Inviscid Interaction

Whitfield, David L.; Swafford, T. W.; Jacocks, J L

doi:10.2514/3.60066

Cited by 47 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Other skin friction coefficients Cf calculated by using Felsch (1968) and Whitfield's (1981) relationship are also shown in Fig. Other skin friction coefficients Cf calculated by using Felsch (1968) and Whitfield's (1981) relationship are also shown in Fig.…”

Section: Mean-flow Resultsmentioning

confidence: 83%

Application of LDV to Investigation of Turbulent Scparation-Reattachment Flow in a Curved-Wall Diffuser

Yin¹,

Shao-Zhi²

1994

International Journal of Turbo and Jet Engines

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A 2-D laser velocimeter was employed to study the turbulent separation-reattachment flow field in a 2-D diffuser which is a lower curved wall and upper flat plate. There is a parallel channel connected with the exit of the diffuser. In the inlet of the diffuser, the Reynolds number is 5,000 based on the momentum thickness and the inlet velocity is 25.2 m/s. Mean velocity and Reynolds stresses were measured from upstream of the separation to the downstream of the reattachment. The minimum distance from the surface is 0.3 mm. The significant factors were that after TD, within the reversing flow, there exists the second extreme of u 2 and minus of -ιΓν. Normal stresses and cross-stream pressure gradient are important immediately in the separating flow and associated with strong streamline curvature. The maximum of the displacement thickness curvature K*,^ corresponds to the intermittency transitory detachment. Several velocity profiles and Cebeci & Smith algebraic eddy-viscosity are compared with the experiment. A new approximate correction of the effect of normal stress is supposed and could be in agreement with the experiment before the transitory detachment. Key WordsSubscripts e = edge of boundary layer, w = lower wall.

show abstract

Section: Mean-flow Resultsmentioning

confidence: 83%

Application of LDV to Investigation of Turbulent Scparation-Reattachment Flow in a Curved-Wall Diffuser

Yin¹,

Shao-Zhi²

1994

International Journal of Turbo and Jet Engines

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, due to wind tunnel wall effects, correction is necessary for the angle of attack. The numerical angles of attack were taken to be ccg=2.54 for Case 6) and (Xg=2.78 for Case 9) which were the same as that of Whitfield 12 . The boundary layer transition point was forced at the 3% chord location on both airfoil surfaces as in the experiment of Cook 11 .…”

Section: The Tangential Plane Airfoil Flow Solvermentioning

confidence: 99%

Airfoil analysis for horizontal axis wind turbines

Akmandor¹,

Ekici²

1998

1998 ASME Wind Energy Symposium

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A numerical algorithm has been developed for two dimensional rotating and non-rotating airfoil cross-sections. The steady Euler equations in the rotational plane with viscous boundary layer correction have been used for the analysis. The effects of boundary layers and wakes on the inviscid main stream flow are modeled by the displacement thickness concept. Both laminar and turbulent boundary layer thickness growth over the airfoil can be modeled. The transition point is input to the solution. The non-linear Euler-boundary layer system of equation is in integral conservative form and allows for the correct treatment of shock waves. The system is first linearized and then solved implicitly by a Newton-Raphson technique. The RAE 2822 airfoil has been used as a test case and good agreement have been obtained for the pressure coefficient and the boundary layer thickness distributions. The solver has also been successfully used in calculating the flow around a FFA-W1-242 horizontal axis wind turbine airfoil.

show abstract

“…Euler methods are capable of resolving strong shocks and with the boundary layer coupling they are a good balance between the flow model and the computational efficiency [12]. The viscous-inviscid interaction methods give results comparable to the RANS solvers, but the computer time is several times shorter and this gives a considerable advantage to the fast flutter analysis in the design process [13].…”

Section: Fig 1 Transonic Dipmentioning

confidence: 99%