Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T06:54:07.407Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Experimental investigation of coherent structures of a three-dimensional separated turbulent boundary layer

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 November 2018

Mohammad Elyasi  and
Sina Ghaemi Open the ORCID record for Sina Ghaemi [Opens in a new window]
Mohammad Elyasi
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta T6G 1H9, Canada
Sina Ghaemi*
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta T6G 1H9, Canada
*
†Email address for correspondence: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Coherent structures of a three-dimensional (3D) separation due to an adverse pressure gradient are investigated experimentally. The flow set-up consists of a flat plate to develop a turbulent boundary layer upstream of an asymmetric two-dimensional diffuser with one diverging surface. The diffuser surface has an initial mild curvature followed by a flat section where flow separation occurs. The top and the two sidewalls of the diffuser are not equipped with any flow control mechanism to form a 3D separation. Planar particle image velocimetry (PIV) using four side-by-side cameras is applied to characterize the flow with high spatial resolution over a large streamwise-wall-normal field of view (FOV). Tomographic PIV (tomo-PIV) is also applied for volumetric measurement in a domain flush with the flat surface of the diffuser. The mean flow obtained from averaging instantaneous velocity fields of this intermittent unsteady flow appears as a vortex with an elliptical cross-section. The major axis of the ellipse is tilted with respect to the streamwise direction. As a result, the average velocity in the mid-span of the diffuser has an upstream forward flow and a downstream backward flow, separated by a point of zero wall shear stress. Sweep motions mainly carry out transport of turbulent kinetic energy upstream of this point, while ejections dominate at the downstream region. In the instantaneous flow fields, forward and backward flows have equivalent strength, and the separation front is extended in the spanwise direction. The conditional average of the separation instants forms a saddle-point structure with streamlines converging in the spanwise direction. Proper orthogonal decomposition (POD) of the tomo-PIV data demonstrates that about 42 % of the turbulent kinetic energy is present in the first pair of modes, with a strong spanwise component. The spatial modes of POD also show focus, node and saddle-point structures. The average of the coefficients of the dominant POD modes during the separation events is used to develop a reduced-order model (ROM). Based on the ROM, the instantaneous 3D separation over the diffuser is a saddle-point structure interacting with focus-type structures.

JFM classification

Boundary Layers: Boundary layer separation Turbulent Flows: Turbulent Flows Vortex Flows: Vortex Flows
Type
JFM Papers
Information
Journal of Fluid Mechanics , Volume 859 , 25 January 2019 , pp. 1 - 32
Copyright
© 2018 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

Agarwal, N. K. & Simpson, R. L. 1990 Backflow structure of steady and unsteady separating turbulent boundary layer. AIAA J. 28 (10), 1764–1771.Google Scholar
Alving, A. E. & Fernholz, H. H. 1996 Turbulence measurements around a mild separation bubble and downstream of reattachment. J. Fluid Mech. 322, 297–328.Google Scholar
Ashjaee, J. & Johnston, J. P. 1980 Straight-walled, two-dimensional diffusers—transitory stall and peak pressure recovery. J. Fluids Engng 102 (3), 275–282.Google Scholar
Atkinson, C., Coudert, S., Foucaut, J. M., Stanislas, M. & Soria, J. 2011 The accuracy of tomographic particle image velocimetry for measurements of a turbulent boundary layer. Exp. Fluids 50 (4), 1031–1056.Google Scholar
Broeren, A. P. & Bragg, M. B. 2001 Spanwise variation in the unsteady stalling flowfields of two-dimensional airfoil models. AIAA J. 39 (9), 1641–1651.Google Scholar
Cherry, E. M., Elkins, C. J. & Eaton, J. K. 2008 Geometric sensitivity of three-dimensional separated flows. Intl J. Heat Fluid Flow 29 (3), 803–811.Google Scholar
Cherry, N. J., Hillier, R. & Latour, M. E. M. 1984 Unsteady measurements in a separated and reattaching flow. J. Fluid Mech. 144 (1), 13–46.Google Scholar
Coles, D. 1956 The law of the wake in the turbulent boundary layer. J. Fluid Mech. 1 (2), 191–226.Google Scholar
Cuvier, C., Foucaut, J. M., Braud, C. & Stanislas, M. 2014 Characterisation of a high Reynolds number boundary layer subject to pressure gradient and separation. J. Turbul. 15 (8), 473–515.Google Scholar
Délery, J. 2013 Three-Dimensional Separated Flows Topology: Critical Points, Separation Lines and Vortical Structures, pp. 56–67. John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Délery, J. M. 2001 Robert Legendre and Henri Werlé: toward the elucidation of three-dimensional separation. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 33 (1), 129–154.Google Scholar
Dengel, P. & Fernholz, H. H. 1990 An experimental investigation of an incompressible turbulent boundary layer in the vicinity of separation. J. Fluid Mech. 212, 615–636.Google Scholar
Dianat, M. & Castro, I. P. 1991 Turbulence in a separated boundary layer. J. Fluid Mech. 226, 91–123.Google Scholar
Duquesne, P., Maciel, Y. & Deschênes, C. 2015 Unsteady flow separation in a turbine diffuser. Exp. Fluids 56 (8), 156.Google Scholar
Elsinga, G. E., Scarano, F., Wieneke, B. & van Oudheusden, B. W. 2006 Tomographic particle image velocimetry. Exp. Fluids 41 (6), 933–947.Google Scholar
Gad-el-Hak, M. 2000 Flow Control: Passive, Active, and Reactive Flow Management, pp. 150–151. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Herman, G. T. & Lent, A. 1976 Iterative reconstruction algorithms. Comput. Biol. Med. 6 (4), 273–294.Google Scholar
Haller, G. 2004 Exact theory of unsteady separation for two-dimensional flows. J. Fluid Mech. 512, 257–311.Google Scholar
Humble, R. A., Scarano, F. & Van Oudheusden, B. W. 2009 Unsteady aspects of an incident shock wave/turbulent boundary layer interaction. J. Fluid Mech. 635, 47–74.Google Scholar
Kim, H., Westerweel, J. & Elsinga, G. E. 2012 Comparison of tomo-PIV and 3D-PTV for microfluidic flows. Meas. Sci. Technol. 24 (2), 024007.Google Scholar
Kiya, M. & Sasaki, K. 1983 Structure of a turbulent separation bubble. J. Fluid Mech. 137, 83–113.Google Scholar
Kline, S. J., Strawn, R. C. & Bardina, J. G. 1983 Correlation of the detachment of two-dimensional turbulent boundary layers. AIAA J. 21 (1), 68–73.Google Scholar
Krogstad, P. Å. & Skåre, P. E. 1995 Influence of a strong adverse pressure gradient on the turbulent structure in a boundary layer. Phys. Fluids 7 (8), 2014–2024.Google Scholar
Le, H., Moin, P. & Kim, J. 1997 Direct numerical simulation of turbulent flow over a backward-facing step. J. Fluid Mech. 330, 349–374.Google Scholar
Lee, J. H. & Sung, H. J. 2008 Effects of an adverse pressure gradient on a turbulent boundary layer. Intl J. Heat Fluid Flow 29 (3), 568–578.Google Scholar
Lee, J. H. & Sung, H. J. 2009 Structures in turbulent boundary layers subjected to adverse pressure gradients. J. Fluid Mech. 639, 101–131.Google Scholar
Ling, H., Srinivasan, S., Golovin, K., McKinley, G. H., Tuteja, A. & Katz, J. 2016 High-resolution velocity measurement in the inner part of turbulent boundary layers over super-hydrophobic surfaces. J. Fluid Mech. 801, 670–703.Google Scholar
Lumley, J. L. 1967 The structure of inhomogeneous turbulence. In Atmospheric Turbulence and Wave Propagation (ed. Yaglom, A. M. & Tatarski, V. I.), pp. 166–178. Nauka.Google Scholar
Malm, J., Schlatter, P. & Henningson, D. S. 2012 Coherent structures and dominant frequencies in a turbulent three-dimensional diffuser. J. Fluid Mech. 699, 320–351.Google Scholar
Marquillie, M., Laval, J. P. & Dolganov, R. 2008 Direct numerical simulation of a separated channel flow with a smooth profile. J. Turbul. (9), N1.Google Scholar
Moss, G. F. & Murdin, P. M.1968 Two dimensional low-speed tunnel tests on the NACA 0012 section including measurements made during pitching oscillations at the stall. RAE Tech. Rep. 68104. Royal Aircraft Establishment.Google Scholar
Mohammed-Taifour, A. & Weiss, J. 2016 Unsteadiness in a large turbulent separation bubble. J. Fluid Mech. 799, 383–412.Google Scholar
Na, Y. & Moin, P. 1998 Direct numerical simulation of a separated turbulent boundary layer. J. Fluid Mech. 370, 175–201.Google Scholar
Ohlsson, J., Schlatter, P., Fischer, P. F. & Henningson, D. S. 2010 Direct numerical simulation of separated flow in a three-dimensional diffuser. J. Fluid Mech. 650, 307–318.Google Scholar
Perry, A. E. & Fairlie, B. D. 1975 Critical points in flow patterns. Adv. Geophys. 18, 299–315.Google Scholar
Perry, A. E. & Schofield, W. H. 1973 Mean velocity and shear stress distributions in turbulent boundary layers. Phys. Fluids 16 (12), 2068–2074.Google Scholar
Sears, W. R. & Telionis, D. P. 1975 Boundary-layer separation in unsteady flow. SIAM J. Appl. Maths 28 (1), 215–235.Google Scholar
Scarano, F. & Poelma, C. 2009 Three-dimensional vorticity patterns of cylinder wakes. Exp. Fluids 47 (1), 69.Google Scholar
Scarano, F. & Riethmuller, M. L. 1999 Iterative multigrid approach in PIV image processing with discrete window offset. Exp. Fluids 26 (6), 513–523.Google Scholar
Schlichting, H. 1979 Boundary Layer Theory, 7th edn. pp. 638–640. McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Simpson, R. L. 1983 A model for the backflow mean velocity profile. AIAA J. 21 (1), 142–143.Google Scholar
Simpson, R. L. 1989 Turbulent boundary-layer separation. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 21 (1), 205–232.Google Scholar
Simpson, R. L. 1996 Aspects of turbulent boundary-layer separation. Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 32 (5), 457–521.Google Scholar
Simpson, R. L., Chew, Y. T. & Shivaprasad, B. G. 1981 The structure of a separating turbulent boundary layer. Part 1. Mean flow and Reynolds stresses. J. Fluid Mech. 113, 23–51.Google Scholar
Simpson, R. L., Strickland, J. H. & Barr, P. W. 1977 Features of a separating turbulent boundary layer in the vicinity of separation. J. Fluid Mech. 79 (03), 553–594.Google Scholar
Sirovich, L. 1987 Turbulence and the dynamics of coherent structures. Part I. Coherent structures. Q. Appl. Maths 45 (3), 561–571.Google Scholar
Skote, M. & Henningson, D. S. 2002 Direct numerical simulation of a separated turbulent boundary layer. J. Fluid Mech. 471, 107–136.Google Scholar
Song, S. & Eaton, J. K. 2002 The effects of wall roughness on the separated flow over a smoothly contoured ramp. Exp. Fluids 33 (1), 38–46.Google Scholar
Song, S. & Eaton, J. K. 2004 Flow structures of a separating, reattaching, and recovering boundary layer for a large range of Reynolds number. Exp. Fluids 36 (4), 642–653.Google Scholar
Surana, A., Grunberg, O. & Haller, G. 2006 Exact theory of three-dimensional flow separation. Part 1. Steady separation.. J. Fluid Mech. 564, 57–103.Google Scholar
Surana, A., Jacobs, G. B., Grunberg, O. & Haller, G. 2008 An exact theory of three-dimensional fixed separation in unsteady flows. Phys. Fluids 20 (10), 107101.Google Scholar
Talapatra, S. & Katz, J. 2012 Coherent structures in the inner part of a rough-wall channel flow resolved using holographic PIV. J. Fluid Mech. 711, 161–170.Google Scholar
Thacker, A., Aubrun, S., Leroy, A. & Devinant, P. 2013 Experimental characterization of flow unsteadiness in the centerline plane of an Ahmed body rear slant. Exp. Fluids 54 (3), 1479.Google Scholar
Thompson, B. E. & Whitelaw, J. H. 1985 Characteristics of a trailing-edge flow with turbulent boundary-layer separation. J. Fluid Mech. 157, 305–326.Google Scholar
Troutt, T. R., Scheelke, B. & Norman, T. R. 1984 Organized structures in a reattaching separated flow field. J. Fluid Mech. 143, 413–427.Google Scholar
Weiss, J., Mohammed-Taifour, A. & Schwaab, Q. 2015 Unsteady behavior of a pressure-induced turbulent separation bubble. AIAA J. 53 (9), 2634–2645.Google Scholar
Werle, H. 1973 Hydrodynamic flow visualization. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 5 (1), 361–386.Google Scholar
Westerweel, J. & Scarano, F. 2005 Universal outlier detection for PIV data. Exp. Fluids 39 (6), 1096–1100.Google Scholar
Wieneke, B. 2008 Volume self-calibration for 3D particle image velocimetry. Exp. Fluids 45 (4), 549–556.Google Scholar
Wieneke, B. 2015 PIV uncertainty quantification from correlation statistics. Meas. Sci. Technol. 26 (7), 074002.Google Scholar