Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T11:09:31.758Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Experimental study of three shock wave/turbulent boundary layer interactions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 April 2006

Alexander J. Smits  and
Kin-Choong Muck
Alexander J. Smits
Affiliation:
Gas Dynamics Laboratory, Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544, USA
Kin-Choong Muck
Affiliation:
Gas Dynamics Laboratory, Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544, USA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Experiments were performed to investigate the supersonic flow of a turbulent boundary layer over a number of compression-corner models. Upstream of each corner, the free-stream Mach number was 2.9 and the incoming boundary layer was typical of a two-dimensional, zero-pressure-gradient, high-Reynolds-number flow. Three different corner angles were used, namely 8°, 16° and 20°, and at the highest angle the interaction was strong enough to cause separation. Each flow was investigated using normal and inclined hot wires, and measurements of the longitudinal mass-flux fluctuations and the mass-weighted turbulent shear stress are presented. The behaviour of the kinematic and Reynolds stresses, deduced from the mass-weighted quantities by applying Morkovin's ‘strong Reynolds analogy’, is also considered. In all three flow cases, the interaction dramatically amplifies the turbulent stresses, and the amplification increases with increasing turning angle. Different stress components are amplified by different amounts, however, and the structure parameter $-\overline{u^{\prime}v^{\prime}}/\overline{u^{\prime 2}}$ changes significantly through the interaction. Perhaps more importantly, the nature of these changes depends on the strength of the interaction. This result is rather unexpected, and it is believed to be due mainly to the unsteadiness of the shock system. It is suggested that the apparently random motion of the shock system affects the normal stresses more than the shearing stresses, and, since the unsteadiness increases with corner angle, the effect on the turbulence structure also becomes more pronounced.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Fluid Mechanics , Volume 182 , September 1987 , pp. 291 - 314
Copyright
© 1987 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

Adamson, T. C. & Messiter, A. F. 1980 Analysis of two dimensional interactions between shock waves and boundary layers. Ann. Rev. Fluid Mech. 12, 103–138.Google Scholar
Agrawal, S. & Messiter, A. F. 1984 Turbulent boundary layer interaction with a shock wave at a compression corner. J. Fluid Mech. 143, 23–46.Google Scholar
Andreopoulos, J. & Muck, K. C. 1987 Some new aspects of the shock wave boundary layer interaction in compression ramp flows. J. Fluid Mech. 180, 405–428.Google Scholar
Anyiwo, J. C. & Bushnell, D. M. 1982 Turbulence amplification in shock wave/boundary layer interaction. AIAA J. 20, 893–899.Google Scholar
Ardonceau, P., Lee, D. H., Alziary de Roquefort, T. & Goethals, R. 1979 Turbulence behavior in shock wave/boundary layer interaction. AGARD CP-271, Paper 8.
Bradshaw, P. 1967 ‘Inactive’ motion and pressure fluctuation in turbulent boundary layers. J. Fluid Mech. 30, 241–258.
Bradshaw, P. 1973 Streamline curvature effects in turbulent flow. AGAR Dograph 169.
Bradshaw, P. 1974 The effect of mean compression or dilatation on the turbulence structure of supersonic boundary layers. J. Fluid Mech. 63, 449–464.Google Scholar
Coakley, T. J., Viegas, J. R. & Horstman, C. C. 1977 Evaluation of turbulence models for three primary types of shock-wave turbulence boundary layer interactions. AIAA Paper 77–692.
Debieve, J. F., Gouin, H. & Gaviglio, J. 1982 Evolution of the Reynolds stress tensor in a shock-turbulence interaction. Indian J. Technol. 20, 90–97.Google Scholar
Dolling, D. S. & Murphy, M. 1982 Wall pressure in a supersonic separated compression ramp flow field. AIAA Paper 82–0986.
Dolling, D. S. & Or, C. T. 1983 Unsteadiness of the shock wave structure in attached and separated compression ramp flow fields. AIAA Paper 83–1715.
Dussauge, J. P. & Gaviglio, J. 1981 Bulk dilatation effects on Reynolds stress in the rapid expansion of a turbulent boundary layer at supersonic speed. In Proc. Symp. Turbul. Shear Flows, Davis, CA, vol. 2, pp. 33–38.
Fernholz, H. H. & Finley, P. J. 1981 A further compilation of compressible boundary layer data with a survey of turbulence data. AGARDograph 263.
Green, J. E. 1970 Interactions between shock waves and turbulent boundary layers. Prog. Aero. Sci. 11, 235–340.Google Scholar
Hayakawa, K., Muck, K. C., Smits, A. J. & Bogdonoff, S. M. 1983 The evolution of turbulence in shock/wave boundary layer interactions. In Proc. Eighth Australasian Fluid Mech. Conf. Newcastle, Australia, pp. 9B7-9.
Hayakawa, K., Smits, A. J. & Bogdonoff, S. M. 1984a Hot-wire investigation of an unseparated shock wave/boundary layer interaction. AIAA J. 22, 579–585.Google Scholar
Hayakawa, K., Smits, A. J. & Bogdonoff, S. M. 1984b Turbulence measurements in a compressible reattaching shear layer. AIAA J. 22, 889–895.Google Scholar
Horstman, C. C. & Rose, W. C. 1975 Hot-wire anemometry in transonic flow. NASATMX-62495.
Horstman, C. C., Settles, G. S., Vas, I. E., Bogdonoff, S. M. & Hung, C. M. 1977 Reynolds number effects on shock-wave turbulent boundary layer interactions. AIAA J. 15, 1152–1158.Google Scholar
Hussaini, M. Y., Collier, F. & Bushnell, D. M. 1985 Turbulence alteration due to shock motion. In Proc. IUTAM Symp. Turbulent Shear-Layer/Shock-Wave Interactions, Palaiseau, France (ed. J. Delery), pp. 371–382. Springer.
Jayaram, M. & Smits, A. J. 1985 The distortion of a supersonic turbulent boundary layer by bulk compression and streamline curvature. AIAA Paper 85–0299.
Jayaram, M., Taylor, M. W. & Smits, A. J. 1987 The response of a compressible turbulent boundary layer to short regions of concave surface curvature. J. Fluid Mech. 175, 343–362.Google Scholar
Kline, S. J., Cantwell, B. J. & Lilley, G. M. (eds) 1981 Proc. 1980-81 AFOSR-HTTM Stanford Conf. Complex Turbul. Flow: Comparison of Computation and Experiment, Vol. 1, Thermosci. Div., Stanford Univ., CA.
Kovasznay, L. S. G. 1980 The hot-wire anemometer in supersonic flow. J. Aero. Sci. 17, 565–573.Google Scholar
Kussoy, M. I. & Horstman, C. C. 1975 An experimental documentation of a hypersonic shock-wave turbulent boundary layer interaction flow - with and without separation. NASA TMX-62412.
Morkovin, M. V. 1962 Effects of compressibility on turbulent flows. In Mecanique de la Turbulence (ed. A. Favre), pp. 367–380. Paris: CNRS.
Muck, K. C., Dussauge, J.-P. & Bogdonoff, S. M. 1985 Structure of the wall pressure fluctuations in a shock-induced separated turbulent flow. AIAA Paper 85–0179.
Muck, K. C., Hayakawa, K. & Smits, A. J. 1983a Compilation of turbulence data for a 16 degree compression corner at Mach 2.9. Princeton Univ., Dept of Mech. and Aero. Engng Rep. 1619.Google Scholar
Muck, K. C., Hayakawa, K. & Smits, A. J. 1983b Compilation of turbulence data for a 20 degree compression corner at Mach 2.9. Princeton Univ., Dept of Mech. and Aero. Engng Rep. 1620.Google Scholar
Muck, K. C. & Smits, A. J. 1984a Behavior of a turbulent boundary layer subjected to a shock-induced separation. AIAA Paper 84–0097.
Muck, K. C. & Smits, A. J. 1984b The behavior of a compressible turbulent boundary layer under incipient separation conditions. In Turbulent Shear Flows, IV, pp. 235–45. Springer.
Muck, K. C., Spina, E. & Smits, A. J. 1984 Compilation of turbulence data for an 8 degree compression corner at Mach 2.9. Normal and inclined wire data. Princeton Univ., Dept of Mech and Aero. Engng Rep. 1642.Google Scholar
Narlo, J. C. 1986 Experimental investigation of the driving mechanisms of separation shock wave motion in interactive flows. Ph.D. thesis, University of Texas, Austin, Texas, USA.
Rong, B. S., Tan, D. K. M. & Smits, A. J. 1985 Calibration of the constant-temperature normal hot-wire anemometer in transonic flow. Princeton Univ. Dept of Mech. and Aero. Engng Rep. 1696.Google Scholar
Rose, W. C. 1973 The behavior of a compressible turbulent boundary layer in a shock wave induced adverse pressure gradient. NASA TN D-7092.
Rose, W. C. & McDaid, E. P. 1977 Turbulence measurement in transonic flow. AIAA J. 15, 1368.Google Scholar
Roshko, A. & Thomke, G. J. 1966 Observations of turbulent reattachment behind an axisymmetric downstream-facing step in supersonic flow. AIAA J. 4, 975–980.Google Scholar
Settles, G. S., Fitzpatrick, T. J. & Bogdonoff, S. M. 1979 Detailed study of attached and separated compression corner flowfields in high Reynolds number supersonic flow. AIAA J. 17, 579–585.Google Scholar
Shamroth, S. J. & MacDonald, H. 1970 A new solution of the turbulent near wake recompression problem. AIAA Paper 70–0228.
Smits, A. J., Eaton, J. A. & Bradshaw, P. 1979a The response of a turbulent boundary layer to lateral divergence. J. Fluid Mech. 94, 243–268.Google Scholar
Smits, A. J. & Muck, K. C. 1984 Constant-temperature hot-wire anemometer practice in supersonic flows. Part II. The inclined wire. Exp. Fluids 2, 33–41.Google Scholar
Smits, A. J., Muck, K. C. & Hayakawa, K. 1983 Constant-temperature hot-wire anemometer practice in supersonic flows. Part I. The normal wire. Exp. Fluids 1, 83–92.Google Scholar
Smits, A. J. & Wood, D. H. 1985 The response of turbulent boundary layers to sudden perturbations. Ann. Rev. Fluid Mech. 17, 321–358.Google Scholar
Smits, A. J., Young, S. T. B. & Bradshaw, P. 1979b The effect of short regions of high surface curvature on turbulent boundary layers. J. Fluid Mech. 94, 209–242.Google Scholar
Taylor, M. W. & Smits, A. J. 1984 The effect of a short region of concave curvature on a supersonic turbulent boundary layer. AIAA Paper 84–0169.
Townsend, A. A. 1976 The Structure of Turbulent Shear Flow, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press.
Visbal, M. & Knight, D. D. 1983 Evaluation of the Baldwin-Lomax turbulence model for two-dimensional shock wave boundary layer interactions. AIAA Paper 84–1697.
Zang, T. A., Hussaini, M. Y. & Bushnell, D. M. 1982 Numerical computations of turbulence amplification in shock wave interactions. AIAA Paper 82–0293.