Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T19:20:30.089Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Characterization of the shear layer in separated shock/turbulent boundary layer interactions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 February 2021

Clara M. Helm Open the ORCID record for Clara M. Helm [Opens in a new window] ,
M. Pino Martín Open the ORCID record for M. Pino Martín [Opens in a new window]  and
Owen J.H. Williams Open the ORCID record for Owen J.H. Williams [Opens in a new window]
Clara M. Helm
Affiliation:
Department of Aerospace Engineering, University of Maryland, College Park, MD20742, USA
M. Pino Martín*
Affiliation:
Department of Aerospace Engineering, University of Maryland, College Park, MD20742, USA
Owen J.H. Williams
Affiliation:
William E. Boeing Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA98195, USA
*
†Email address for correspondence: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A thorough characterization of the shear layer that exists in large eddy simulation data of three separated, compression ramp-generated shock/turbulent boundary layer interactions is presented. Free stream Mach numbers ahead of the separation shock are 2.9, 7.2 and 9.1. The shear layers produced by the separation in these flows have convective Mach numbers of 1.0, 1.9 and 2.0, respectively. It is found that the separation shear layers share many properties associated with canonical compressible mixing layers. A region of approximate similarity is found in each where it is possible to collapse the mean flow profiles into nearly a single similarity profile. Large mixing-layer-like vortical rollers are found in the shear layers and these are shown to become increasingly three-dimensional with increasing convective Mach number. The relation between the peak turbulence stress and the spreading rate was found to be consistent with mixing layer data and mixing layer theory derived from dimensional analysis. Turbulent kinetic energy and Reynolds stress budget analysis revealed that, although the streamwise turbulence production is greater than the canonical mixing layer, the transfer of turbulence energy by the pressure–strain terms and the energy drain by viscosity terms both show similar behaviour to mixing layer data at matching convective Mach number. As a result, the spreading rate and turbulence anisotropy decrease with increasing $M_c$. These conclusions are aided by an accurate and direct measurement of the vortex convection velocity determined from enhanced two-point correlations in the shear flow. The usefulness of studying the shock/turbulent boundary layer flow in this manner is emphasized.

JFM classification

Turbulent Flows: Compressible turbulence Turbulent Flows: Shear layer turbulence Compressible Flows: Shock waves
Type
JFM Papers
Information
Journal of Fluid Mechanics , Volume 912 , 10 April 2021 , A7
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by 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

REFERENCES

Aupoix, B. 2004 Modeling of compressibility effects in mixing layers. J. Turbul. 5, N7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aupoix, B. & Bézard, H. 2006 Compressible mixing layers: data analysis and modeling. ERCOFTAC Bull. 70, 13–17.Google Scholar
Bardina, J., Ferziger, J.H. & Reynolds, W.C. 1980 Improved subgrid-scale models for large eddy simulation. AIAA Paper 1980-1357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barone, M.F., Oberkampf, W.L. & Blottner, F.G. 2006 Validation case study: prediction of compressible turbulent mixing layer growth rate. AIAA J. 44 (7), 1488–1497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barre, S. & Bonnet, J.-P. 2015 Detailed experimental study of a highly compressible supersonic turbulent plane mixing layer and comparison with most recent dns results: ‘towards an accurate description of compressibility effects in supersonic free shear flows’. Intl J. Heat Fluid Flow 51, 324–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barre, S., Quine, C. & Dussauge, J.P. 1994 Compressibility effects on the structure of supersonic mixing layers: experimental results. J. Fluid Mech. 259, 47–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birch, S.F. & Eggers, J.M. 1972 Free turbulent shear flows. NASA Tech. Rep. SP-321. National Aeronautics and Space Administration.Google Scholar
Bogdanoff, D.W. 1983 Compressibility effects in turbulent shear layers. AIAA J. 21 (6), 926–927.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Breidenthal, R.E. 1992 Sonic eddy–a model for compressible turbulence. AIAA J. 30 (1), 101–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, G.L. & Roshko, A. 1974 On the density effects and large structures in turbulent mixing layers. J. Fluid Mech. 64, 775–781.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, G.L. & Thomas, A.S.W. 1977 Large structure in a turbulent boundary layer. Phys. Fluids 20 (10), S243–S252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Channapragada, R.S. 1963 Compressible jet spread parameter for mixing zone analyses. AIAA J. 1 (9), 2188–2190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cherry, N.J., Hillier, R. & Latour, M.E.M.P. 1984 Unsteady measurements in a separated and reattaching flow. J. Fluid Mech. 144, 13–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chinzei, N., Masuya, G., Komuro, T., Murakami, A. & Kudou, K. 1986 Spreading of two-stream supersonic turbulent mixing layers. Phys. Fluids 29, 1345–1347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clemens, N.T. & Mungal, M.G. 1992 Two- and three-dimensional effects in the supersonic mixing layer. AIAA J. 30 (4), 973–981.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clemens, N.T. & Mungal, M.G. 1995 Large-scale structure and entrainment in the supersonic mixing layer. J. Fluid Mech. 284, 171–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Day, M.J., Reynolds, W.C. & Mansour, N.N. 1998 The structure of the compressible reacting mixing layer: insights from linear stability analysis. Phys. Fluids 10 (4), 993–1007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Debisschop, J.-R., Chambres, O. & Bonnet, J.-P. 1994 Velocity field characteristics in supersonic mixing layers. J. Expl Therm. Fluid Sci. 9, 147–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dimotakis, P.E. 1991 Turbulent free shear layer mixing and combustion. In High-Speed Flight Propulsion Systems (ed. E.T. Curran & S.N.B Murthy), vol. 137, chap. 5, pp. 265–340. AIAA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dupont, P., Haddad, C. & Debiève, J.F. 2006 Space and time organization in a shock-induced separated boundary layer. J. Fluid Mech. 559, 255–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dupont, P., Muscat, P. & Dussauge, J.-P. 1999 Localisation of large scale structures in a supersonic mixing layer: a new method and first analysis. Flow Turbul. Combust. 62, 335–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dupont, P., Piponniau, S. & Dussauge, J.P. 2019 Compressible mixing layer in shock-induced separation. J. Fluid Mech. 863, 620–643.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dupont, P., Piponniau, S., Sidorenko, A. & Debiève, J.F. 2008 Investigation by particle image velocimetry measurements of oblique shock reflection with separation. AIAA J. 46 (6), 1365– 1370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dussauge, J.P., Dupont, P. & Debiève, J.F. 2006 Unsteadiness in shock wave boundary layer interaction with separation. Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 10, 85–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elliott, G.S. & Samimy, M. 1990 Compressibility effects in free shear layers. Phys. Fluids A 2, 1231–1240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forliti, D.J., Tang, A.B. & Strykowski, P.J. 2005 An experimental investigation of planar countercurrent turbulent shear layers. J. Fluid Mech. 530, 479–486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freund, J.B., Lele, S.K. & Moin, P. 2000 Compressibility effects in a turbulent annular mixing layer. Part 1. Turbulence and growth rate. J. Fluid Mech. 421, 229–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gatski, T.B. & Bonnet, J.-P. 2013 Compressibility, Turbulence and High Speed Flow, pp. 169–229. Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goebel, S.G. & Dutton, J.C. 1991 Experimental study of compressible turbulent mixing layers. AIAA J. 29 (4), 538–546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graftieaux, L., Michard, M. & Grosjean, N. 2001 Combining PIV, POD and vortex identification algorithms for the study of unsteady turbulent swirling flows. Meas. Sci. Technol. 12, 1422–1429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gruber, M.R., Messersmith, N.L. & Dutton, J.C. 1993 Three-dimensional velocity field in a compressible mixing layer. AIAA J. 31 (11), 2061–2067.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Helm, C. & Martin, M.P. 2015 Preliminary LES of hypersonic shock/turbulent boundary layer interactions. AIAA Paper 2015-1064.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Helm, C. & Martin, M.P. 2016 New LES of a hypersonic shock/turbulent boundary layer interaction. AIAA Paper 2016-0346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Helm, C.M. & Martín, M.P. 2020 Large eddy simulation of two separated hypersonic shock/turbulent boundary layer interactions. Phys. Rev. Fluids (in preparation for submission).Google Scholar
Huerre, P. & Monkewitz, P.A. 1985 Absolute and convective instabilities in free shear layers. J. Fluid Mech. 159, 151–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ikawa, H. & Kubota, T. 1975 Investigation of supersonic turbulent mixing layer with zero pressure gradient. AIAA J. 13 (5), 566–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, T.L. & Grosch, C.E. 1990 Absolute/convective instabilities and the convective mach number in a compressible mixing layer. Phys. Fluids A 2, 949.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kiya, M. & Sasaki, K. 1983 Structure of a turbulent separation bubble. J. Fluid Mech. 137, 83–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kline, S.J., Cantwell, B.J. & Lilley, G.M. 1980 In Proceedings 1980 Conference on Complex Turbulent Flows, Vol. I, pp. 364–366. Stanford University.Google Scholar
König, O., Schulülter, J. & Fiedler, H.E. 1998 Turbulent mixing layer in adverse pressure gradient. Progress in Fluid Flow Research: Turbulence and Applied MHD, pp. 15–29.Google Scholar
Korst, H.H. & Tripp, W. 1957 The pressure on a blunt trailing edge separating two-supersonic two-dimensional air streams of different mach numbers and stagnation pressures but identical stagnation temperatures. In Fifth Midwestern Conference on Fluid Mechanics, Ann Arbor, Michigan. University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Kourta, A. & Sauvage, R. 2002 Computaion of supersonic mixing layers. Phys. Fluids 14 (11), 3790–3797.Google Scholar
Lele, S.K. 1989 Direct numerical simulation of compressible free shear flows. AIAA Paper 89-0374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lele, S.K. 1994 Compressibility effects on turbulence. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 26, 211–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lesieur, M. 1987 In Turbulence in Fluids, Dordrecht, The Netherlands. Marinus Nijhoff Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lin, C.C. 1953 NACA Tech. Note 2887.Google Scholar
Martín, M.P. 2000 Shock capturing and the LES of high-speed flows. In Annual Research Briefs. Center for Turbulence Research, NASA Ames/Stanford University.Google Scholar
Martín, M.P., Piomelli, U. & Candler, G.V. 2000 Subgrid-scale models for compressible large-eddy simulations. Theor. Comput. Fluid Dyn. 13 (3), 361–376.Google Scholar
Martín, M.P., Taylor, E.M., Wu, M. & Weirs, V.G. 2006 A bandwidth-optimized weno scheme for the direct numerical simulation of compressible turbulence. J. Comput. Phys. 220 (1), 270–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mehta, R.D. & Westphal, R.V. 1984 Near-field turbulence properties of single- and two-stream plane mixing layers. AIAA Paper 1984-0426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miles, J.W. 1959 The stability of a shear layer in an unbounded heterogenous inviscid fluid. J. Fluid Mech. 6, 538–522.Google Scholar
Pai, S.I. 1955 On turbulent jet mixing of two gases at constant temperature. J. Appl. Mech. 22, 41–47.Google Scholar
Pantano, C. & Sarkar, S. 2002 A study of compressibility effects in the high-speed turbulent shear layer using direct numerical simulation. J. Fluid Mech. 451, 329–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Papamoscho, D. & Roshko, A. 1988 The compressible turbulent shear layer: an experimental study. J. Fluid Mech. 197, 453–477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Papamoschou, D. 1995 Evidence of shocklets in a counterflow supersonic shear layer. Phys. Fluids 7, 233–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pavithran, S. & Redekopp, L.G. 1989 The absolute-convective transition in subsonic mixing layers. Phys. Fluids A 1, 1736–1739.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Piponniau, S., Dussauge, J.P., Debiève, J.F & Dupont, P. 2009 A simple model for low-frequency unsteadiness in shock-induced separation. J. Fluid Mech. 629, 87–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Priebe, S. & Martín, M.P. 2012 Low-frequency unsteadiness in shock wave-turbulent boundary layer interaction. J. Fluid Mech. 699, 1–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Priebe, S. & Martín, M.P. 2020 Turbulence in a hypersonic ramp flow. Phys. Rev. Fluids (accepted for publication).Google Scholar
Rossmann, T., Mungal, M.G. & Hanson, R.K. 2002 Evolution and growth of large-scale structures in high compressibility mixing layers. J. Turbul. 3, N9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samimy, M. & Elliott, G.S. 1990 Effects of compressibility on the characteristics of free shear flow. AIAA J. 28 (3), 439–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samimy, M., Reeder, M.F. & Elliott, G.S. 1992 Compressibility effects on large structures in free shear flows. Phys. Fluids A 4 (6), 1251–1258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sandham, N.D. & Reynolds, W.C. 1990 Compressible mixing layer: linear theory and direct simulation. AIAA J. 28 (4), 618–624.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sandham, N.D. & Reynolds, W.C. 1991 Thee-dimensional simulation of large eddies in the compressible mixing layer. J. Fluid Mech. 224, 133–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slessor, M.D., Zhuang, M. & Dimotakis, P.E. 2000 Turbulent shear-layer mixing; growth-rate compressibility scaling. J. Fluid Mech. 414, 35–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smits, A.J. & Dussauge, J.P. 2006 Turbulent Shear Layers in Supersonic Flow, 2nd edn. Springer.Google Scholar
Strykowski, P.J., Krothapalli, A. & Jendoubi, S. 1996 The effect of counterflow on the development of compressible shear layers. J. Fluid Mech. 308, 63–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, E.M. & Martín, M.P. 2007 Stencil adaption properties of a weno scheme in direct numerical simulations of compressible turbulence. J. Sci. Comput. 30, 533–554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, E.M. & Martín, M.P. 2008 Synchronization of weighted essentially non-oscillatory methods. Communications in Comp. Phy. 4 (1), 56–71.Google Scholar
Taylor, E.M., Wu, M. & Martín, M.P. 2007 Optimization of nonlinear error for weighted non-oscillatory methods in direct numerical simulations of compressible turbulence. J. Comput. Phys. 22, 384–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tennekes, H. & Lumley, J.L. 1972 A First Course in Turbulence. The MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thurow, B.S., Jiang, N., Kim, J.-W., Lempert, W. & Samimy, M. 2008 Issues with measurements of convective velocity of large-scale structures in the compressible shear layer of a free jet. Phys. Fluids 20, 066101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trichilo, J., Helm, C. & Martin, M.P. 2019 Persistence of a centrifugal instability in shock-separated flows at Mach 3 through 10. AIAA Paper 2019-1130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vreman, A.W., Sandham, N.D. & Luo, K.H. 1996 Compressible mixing layer growth rate and turbulence characteristics. J. Fluid Mech. 320, 235–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, F.M. 1974 Viscous Fluid Flow. McGraw–Hill.Google Scholar
Wu, M. & Martín, M.P. 2007 Direct numerical simulation of supersonic turbulent boundary layer over a compression ramp. AIAA J. 45 (4), 879–889.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wu, M. & Martín, M.P 2008 Analysis of shock motion in shockwave and turbulent boundary layer interaction using direct numerical simulation data. J. Fluid Mech. 594, 71–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar