Aiaa Aviation 2020 Forum 2020
DOI: 10.2514/6.2020-3011
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Three-dimensionality in shock/boundary layer interactions: a numerical and experimental investigation

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

1
2
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
1

Relationship

1
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
1
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The spanwise perturbation velocity component, ũy , which was zero at the beginning of the simulation, attains a sinusoidally varying amplitude not only inside the separation bubble, as known from earlier work (e.g. Ginoux 1958;Theofilis et al 2000;Shvedchenko 2009;Dwivedi et al 2020), but also inside the separation and detached shock layers and the shear layers formed downstream of triple points. This result extends the findings of Tumuklu et al (2018aTumuklu et al ( ,b, 2019 in the two-dimensional counterpart of this configuration but, contrary to the two-dimensional limit, in the present three-dimensional environment the observed global instability is unstable with synchronised spanwise-periodic small-amplitude perturbations amplifying exponentially within both the LSB and shock layer.…”
Section: Analysis Of the Three-dimensional Dsmc Signalsupporting
confidence: 59%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The spanwise perturbation velocity component, ũy , which was zero at the beginning of the simulation, attains a sinusoidally varying amplitude not only inside the separation bubble, as known from earlier work (e.g. Ginoux 1958;Theofilis et al 2000;Shvedchenko 2009;Dwivedi et al 2020), but also inside the separation and detached shock layers and the shear layers formed downstream of triple points. This result extends the findings of Tumuklu et al (2018aTumuklu et al ( ,b, 2019 in the two-dimensional counterpart of this configuration but, contrary to the two-dimensional limit, in the present three-dimensional environment the observed global instability is unstable with synchronised spanwise-periodic small-amplitude perturbations amplifying exponentially within both the LSB and shock layer.…”
Section: Analysis Of the Three-dimensional Dsmc Signalsupporting
confidence: 59%
“…Compressibility may alter the relative significance of the two scenarios quantitatively, but not qualitatively. In this context, the interpretation of the experiments of Simeonides (1992) and the direct numerical simulations (DNS) work of Navarro-Martinez & Tutty (2005) would fall in the first category of a bubble acting as an amplifier, while the DNS of Shvedchenko (2009) and Egorov et al (2011), the global instability analysis of Dwivedi et al (2019) as well as the combined analysis and experiments of Dwivedi et al (2020) and Hao et al (2021) on the compression corner and the global instability analyses of Robinet (2007), Nichols et al (2017) and Hildebrand et al (2018) in the related problem of shock-generated laminar separation on a flat plate would be examples of the oscillator scenario.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The resulting flow is characterized by separation-reattachment shocks as well as a recirculation zone and it provides a canonical set-up for studying shock-wave-boundary-layer interaction (SWBLI) (Simeonides & Haase 1995). In spite of spanwise homogeneity of laminar base flows over compression corners, both experiments Roghelia et al 2017;Dwivedi et al 2020a) and numerical simulations (Navarro-Martinez & Tutty 2005;Dwivedi et al 2017;Cao et al 2021b) identify three-dimensional (3-D) features in time-averaged separated flows. In particular, streamwise streaks associated with persistent local peaks of heat flux or wall temperature, that appear near reattachment, can trigger transition to turbulence downstream (Simeonides & Haase 1995;Roghelia et al 2017).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%