Incipient separation over wall irregularities in transonic flow

Türkyılmaz, İbrahim

doi:10.1016/j.apm.2009.09.003

Cited by 1 publication

(5 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As with previous work supersonic zones embedded in a predominantly subsonic flow have been realised. Our results for the unheated hump-shaped elements compare well with those of Turkyilmaz (2010) as well as with those presented by Diesperov & Korolev (2003) as far as the pressure and wall shear are concerned, although there are slight differences in the shape of the displacement function with Diesperov & Korolev (2003).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

“…They selected the hump shape to be 2010) is presented in figure 4 for two different values of χ. Our results agree well on most of the hump except towards the rear of the hump where we have a lower minimum value as compared to the results shown in Turkyilmaz (2010). With the numerical method used by Turkyilmaz (2010) the maximum height of a hump that he could compute with for separated flow was h = 3.6 with χ = 2.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 84%

“…Our results agree well on most of the hump except towards the rear of the hump where we have a lower minimum value as compared to the results shown in Turkyilmaz (2010). With the numerical method used by Turkyilmaz (2010) the maximum height of a hump that he could compute with for separated flow was h = 3.6 with χ = 2. This may account for the differences as Turkyilmaz (2010) was unable to cope with mixed-type flow occuring in the upper-deck.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 84%

“…With the numerical method used by Turkyilmaz (2010) the maximum height of a hump that he could compute with for separated flow was h = 3.6 with χ = 2. This may account for the differences as Turkyilmaz (2010) was unable to cope with mixed-type flow occuring in the upper-deck. Using our numerical method we were able to compute larger separated regions up to h = 4.6 as shown in figure 5(a) and figure 5(b).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This extends the Koroteev and Lipatov work to transonic flow with hump-shaped elements, as well as the Turkyilmaz (2010) work to heated humps. Turkyilmaz (2010) studied the transonic interaction provoked by small surface irregularities such as humps on an otherwise flat surface. The transonic flow problem over localised heated elements has not been studied before.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Transonic flow over localised heating elements in boundary layers

Aljohani

Gajjar

2018

J. Fluid Mech.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The problem of transonic flow past an array of micro-electro-mechanical-type (MEMS-type) heating elements placed on a flat surface is investigated using the triple-deck theory. The compressible Navier–Stokes equations supplemented by the energy equation are considered for large Reynolds numbers. The triple-deck problem is formulated with the aid of the method of matched expansions. The resulting nonlinear viscous lower deck problem, coupled with the upper deck problem governed by the nonlinear Kármán–Guderley equation, is solved using a numerical method based on Chebyshev collocation and finite differences. Our results show the differences in subsonic and supersonic flow behaviour over heated elements. The results indicate the possibility of using the elements to favourably control the transonic flow field.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 84%