The flowfield structure of the 3-D shock wave - Boundary layer interaction generated by a 20 deg sharp fin at Mach 3

Knight, Doyle; Horstman, C. C.; Bogdonoff, S. M.; Shapey, B.

doi:10.2514/6.1986-343

Cited by 23 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Computational simulations have been carried out by Knight et al 21 for swept, fin-generated interactions with essentially the same boundary conditions as in the present experiments.…”

Section: Comparison With Navier-stokes Computationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Skin friction measurements by laser interferometry in swept shock/boundary-layer interactions

Kim

Settles

1990

AIAA Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Measurements have been made of wall shear stresses in swept interactions of planar shock waves generated by a sharp fin and the two-dimensional turbulent boundary layer on a flat plate. Test conditions were Mach number 3.03, Reynolds number Re e -1.5 X 10 4 , wall temperature near adiabatic, and fin angles of 10 and 16 deg. Measurements were made using the Laser Interferometer Skin Friction (LISF) meter, which optically detects the thickness of an oil film on the test surface. The results show that such measurements are practical in high-speed interacting flows with a repeatability of ± 12% or better. Further, with proper data handling, LISF measurements appear feasible at very high shear levels, which were previously considered unobtainable. Dramatic increases in wall shear were observed in both swept interactions tested. These data are compared with computational Navier-Stokes solutions by Horstman and Knight wherein k-e and algebraic turbulence models were used. Both computations predict the overall measured c/ levels at a = 10 deg but fail to predict some features of the Cf distributions properly. Nomenclature c f = skin friction coefficient based on incoming freestream conditions MO, = incoming freestream Mach number N = number of fringes Po = stagnation pressure of incoming stream, MPa (psia) p w = wall static pressure on flat plate, MPa (psia) /?oo = incoming freestream static pressure, MPa (psia) R = radial distance measured from the fin leading-edge, cm (in.) ReQ= Reynolds number based on the local, undisturbed boundary-layer momentum thickness 5 = distance measured along surface streamline, mm T aw = adiabatic wall temperature, K T 0 = freestream stagnation temperature, K T w = wall temperature, K u + ,y + = dimensionless wall-wake velocity and height coordinates x,y,z = orthogonal stream wise, normal, and span wise coordinates, respectively, cm a.= angle made by fin with respect to the incoming freestream direction, deg /3 = angle with respect to freestream direction, measured from fin leading edge, deg As = distance from oil-film leading edge to laser spot along surface streamline, mm 5 = local, undisturbed boundary-layer thickness, mm v = oil viscosity, cs II = boundary-layer, wake-strength parameter T W = wall shear stress, N/m 2 Subscripts is = incident shock wave location ps = primary separation line location r = reattachment line location 5-5 = secondary separation line location ui = upstream influence line location

show abstract

“…Computational simulations have been carried out by Knight et al 21 for swept, fin-generated interactions with essentially the same boundary conditions as in the present experiments.…”

Section: Comparison With Navier-stokes Computationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A detailed description of these computations is omitted here due to space limitations but is thoroughly documented elsewhere (e.g., Ref. 21).…”

Section: Comparison With Navier-stokes Computationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Skin friction measurements by laser interferometry in swept shock/boundary-layer interactions

Kim

Settles

1990

AIAA Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Figure 5 shows particle traces of Horstman's result, based on a two-equation turbulence model as described in Ref. 6, for the first mesh points above the sidewall (K = 2). This particle trace is constructed by a time integration of velocity components restricted to the plane of K = 2.…”

Section: Origin Of the Line Of Separationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Computation of Navier-Stokes equations for three-dimensional flow separation

Hung

1991

AIAA Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…1). This configuration has been investigated experimentally [1][2][3][4][5][6][7] and computationally [2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9] for a wide range of test conditions. Computations have been successful in predicting the essential features of these flow fields, as well as helping to provide a model for the flow field…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Turbulence Modeling for Sharpfin-Induced Shock Wave/Turbulent Boundary-Layer Interactions

Horstman

1991

Separated Flows and Jets

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The flowfield structure of the 3-D shock wave - Boundary layer interaction generated by a 20 deg sharp fin at Mach 3

Cited by 23 publications

References 5 publications

Skin friction measurements by laser interferometry in swept shock/boundary-layer interactions

Skin friction measurements by laser interferometry in swept shock/boundary-layer interactions

Computation of Navier-Stokes equations for three-dimensional flow separation

Turbulence Modeling for Sharpfin-Induced Shock Wave/Turbulent Boundary-Layer Interactions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About