2017
DOI: 10.1017/jfm.2017.522
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Highly separated axisymmetric step shock-wave/turbulent-boundary-layer interaction

Abstract: The unsteadiness of a shock-wave/turbulent-boundary-layer interaction induced by an axisymmetric step (cylinder/$90^{\circ }$-disk) is investigated experimentally at Mach 3.9. A large-scale separation of the order of previously reported incoming turbulent superstructures is induced ahead of the step ${\sim}30\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}_{o}$ and followed by a downstream separation of ${\sim}10\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}_{o}$ behind it, where $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}_{o}$ is the incoming boundary-layer thickness. Narrowba… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

4
2
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
4
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…A very similar correlation magnitude was also observed in earlier studies with similar separation scales (e.g. Chandola, Huang & Estruch-Samper (2017) in forward-facing step, Priebe & Martín (2012) in compression ramp and Brusniak & Dolling (1994) in blunt fin interactions). Furthermore, Poggie & Porter (2019) demonstrated that the peak correlation between the incoming boundary layer velocity fluctuation and separation shock location occurs several characteristic boundary layer convection times earlier, consistent with the present measurement.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 88%
“…A very similar correlation magnitude was also observed in earlier studies with similar separation scales (e.g. Chandola, Huang & Estruch-Samper (2017) in forward-facing step, Priebe & Martín (2012) in compression ramp and Brusniak & Dolling (1994) in blunt fin interactions). Furthermore, Poggie & Porter (2019) demonstrated that the peak correlation between the incoming boundary layer velocity fluctuation and separation shock location occurs several characteristic boundary layer convection times earlier, consistent with the present measurement.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 88%
“…Our present LES results for the turbulent case agree well with the experiments of Chandola et al. (2017) conducted in a turbulent flow at and (see figure 7).
Figure 7.Streamwise distribution of the mean wall pressure.
…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 91%
“…It then drops drastically by approximately 75 % of the maximum at the step corner due to the expansion, and then rises again to its initial (freestream) value as the flow reattaches on the upper wall. Our present LES results for the turbulent case agree well with the experiments of Chandola et al (2017) conducted in a turbulent flow at Ma = 2.2 and Re ∞ = 6.5 × 10 7 m −1 (see figure 7).…”
Section: Mean Flow Organisationsupporting
confidence: 88%
“…Contours of pressure PSD in the ( f,x)-plane over axisymmetric step at Mach 3.9 (FFS as per figure 9), together with cross-correlation at selected locations and with respect to separation ρ ox (near plateau start X * U = 0.2, just ahead of step X * U ≈ 0.98 and at downstream reattachment X * D = 1). Detailed cross-correlations may be found in Chandola et al (2017) for the reference large-scale interaction, L/δ o = 30.2.…”
Section: Unsteadiness Of Step-induced Separationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It however remains unclear how strong an impact these different factors may bear on the low-frequency unsteadiness and to what extent their influence may vary amongst cases. The present research follows from our recent experimental studies on a highly separated axisymmetric Mach 3.9 STBLI, at high Reynolds number Re e = 6.1 × 10 7 m −1 (Re δ = 2.3 × 10 5 ), where we looked at the unsteady nature of a step-induced separation of length ∼30δ o upstream of the step and extending ∼10δ o behind it (Chandola, Huang & Estruch-Samper 2017). The characteristic flow organisation may be seen in the schlieren image in figure 1.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%