Fifty Years of Shock-Wave/Boundary-Layer Interaction Research: What Next?

Dolling, D. S.

doi:10.2514/2.1476

Cited by 866 publications

(212 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

205

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As a result, the separated region "breathes" and during one half of pulse, mass is injected into it while during the other half it is ejected out resulting into an unsteady mass exchange [9]. This sets the shock system into low-frequency oscillations causing detrimental unsteady fluctuations which exhibit a wide range of spatial and temporal scales [10].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Control of shock unsteadiness in shock boundary-layer interaction on a compression corner using mechanical vortex generators

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An experimental study was conducted to control the unsteadiness of separation shock in a Mach 2 24 • compression ramp-induced interaction using mechanical vortex generators (VG). Control devices in the form of an array of single-row delta-ramps were placed upstream of the interaction region and tested for two streamwise locations with respect to the boundary layer thickness (δ) at the interaction location and height 'h' of the delta-ramps, i.e., at 27.5δ or h/δ = 0.65 and at 12.5δ or h/δ = 0.26, respectively. Surface oil study revealed traces of streamwise counter-rotating vortex pairs generated downstream of these devices. Measurements using pressure-sensitive paint also showed a spanwise sinusoidal pattern of wall pressure variation indicating generation of streamwise vortices from these control devices. These vortices, on interaction with the reverse flow in the separation bubble, replaced a well-defined separation line (for no control) by a highly corrugated separation line. In the region of separation, the mean pressure distribution gets modified while the peak rms value in the intermittent region of separation showed significant changes. Additionally, the spanwise spacing 's' of the vertex of the delta ramps seemed to be an important parameter in controlling the peak rms value. A decrease in this spacing, i.e., VG1 with s = 0, Communicated by A. Hadjadj. significantly reduced the peak rms value (by 50 and 35 %) while an increase in the spacing, i.e., VG2 with s = 1 mm, consistently showed an increase (by 12 and 30 %) in the separation shock unsteadiness relative to no control, irrespective of their placement location (of h/δ = 0.65 and 0.26, respectively).

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Control of shock unsteadiness in shock boundary-layer interaction on a compression corner using mechanical vortex generators

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This was very different from what they termed 'the laminar case' when the transition was downstream of the reattachment point, and in which the pressure rise was not as marked as in the transitional case. Interaction between a shock wave and a turbulent boundary layer has also received a great deal of attention, see for example the review by Dolling [2]. In [3], it is suggested that the characteristic low-frequency oscillations found in turbulent shock-wave boundary layer interactions is not caused by upstream turbulence, but by the instability of the separation bubble.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Instability of supersonic compression ramp flow

Logue

Gajjar

Ruban

2014

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The instability of supersonic compression ramp flow is investigated. It is assumed that the Reynolds number is large and that the governing equations are the unsteady triple-deck equations. The mean flow is first calculated by solving the steady equations for various scaled ramp angles α , and the numerical results suggest that there is no singularity for increasing ramp angles. The stability of the flow is investigated using two approaches, first by solving the linearized unsteady equations and looking for global modes proportional to e λ t . In the second approach, the linearized unsteady equations are solved numerically with various initial conditions. Whereas no globally unsteady modes could be found for the range of ramp angles studied, the numerical simulations show the formation of wavepacket type disturbances which grow and convect and reach large amplitudes. However, the numerical results show large variations with grid size even on very fine grids.

show abstract

“…SBLI has been studied experimentally, theoretically, and numerically for more than 60 years. But it is still far from being solved and still needs more research work [1][2][3][4][5].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Numerical Study on Wall Temperature Effects on Shock Wave/Turbulent Boundary-Layer Interaction

Zhu¹,

Yu²,

Tong

et al. 2017

AIAA Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effect of wall temperature on the size of the separation bubble in the shock wave/turbulent boundary-layer interaction of a 24 deg compression ramp with Mach 2.9 is numerically investigated. The ratios of wall temperature to recovery temperature T w ∕T r are 0.6, 1.14, 1.4, and 2.0, respectively. To validate the simulation, the statistical results with T w ∕T r 1.14 are tested and the results show a good agreement with theoretical and experimental results. It is shown that wall temperature has a remarkable effect on the size of the separation bubble and the size increases significantly with the increase of wall temperature. Through theoretical analysis, combined with numerical results, we get a semitheoretical formula L∕δ ∝ T w ∕T r 0.85 , in which L and δ are the length of the separation bubble and the thickness of upstream boundary layer, respectively. The turbulent kinetic energy budgets are also analyzed based on the numerical data, and results show that turbulence kinetic energy is chiefly produced both in the buffer layer and near the shock wave, and turbulent dissipation is mainly in the center of the separation bubble as well as in the nearwall region. It is also shown that the intrinsic compressibility effect is not significant in all these cases. = separation point δ = upstream boundary-layer thickness μ = viscosity coefficient ρ = density

show abstract

Fifty Years of Shock-Wave/Boundary-Layer Interaction Research: What Next?

Cited by 866 publications

References 35 publications

Control of shock unsteadiness in shock boundary-layer interaction on a compression corner using mechanical vortex generators

Control of shock unsteadiness in shock boundary-layer interaction on a compression corner using mechanical vortex generators

Instability of supersonic compression ramp flow

Numerical Study on Wall Temperature Effects on Shock Wave/Turbulent Boundary-Layer Interaction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About