Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

WP-5 External Flows—Wing

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Transition Location Effect on Shock Wave Boundary Layer Interaction

Part of the book series: Notes on Numerical Fluid Mechanics and Multidisciplinary Design ((NNFM,volume 144))

  • 457 Accesses

Abstract

Study of transition location effect (from natural transition to fully turbulent) on separation size, shock structure and unsteadiness was the focus of this WP. Boundary layer tripping (by wire or roughness) and flow control devices (VG) were used for boundary layer transition induction. Although this type of flow field had been studied widely in the past, there remains considerable uncertainty on the effects of transition on transonic aerofoil performance. In particular it is not known how close to the shock location transition has to occur to avoid detrimental effects associated with laminar shock-induced separation. Furthermore, it was unclear how best to provoke transition on an airfoil featuring significant laminar flow and how close to the shock this needs to be performed. Finally, current CFD methods are particularly challenged by such transitional flows. In this work package some of the findings from the basic research performed in other WPs was applied. Specialized large-scale transonic wind tunnels running cost is very high therefore using such facilities is not appropriate for upstream research programs such as TFAST. Therefore we have used existing wind tunnels within our consortium. One of these is a transonic test section at UCAM where laminar and transitional profiles were studied previously at Reynolds numbers up to 2 million (based on chord length). This wind tunnel allowed basic investigations of the transition location effects on a shock induced separation and unsteadiness for a relatively large number of parameters. A larger wind tunnel at Institute of Aviation in Warsaw was used, which enabled the investigation of a much larger aspect ratio profile. In this facility it was possible to measure a whole force polar up to and including the buffet boundary. The research was carried out for the natural b/l transition location as well as different methods of tripping.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Zero incidence buffet has been observed by previous investigators both experimentally and numerically, predominantly in research on thick biconvex aerofoils in small wind tunnels. Lee [28], Mabey [29] in particular came to the same conclusion as here that for thickness-to-chord ratios greater than 12% the buffet boundary at Rec = 0.6 × 106 (as detected by a wall-mounted pressure transducer) had little dependence on transition (though at very low Reynolds numbers the untripped flow began buffeting at a lower Mach number, with higher pressure fluctuations). No buffet was observed when the aerofoil was given an angle of attack, due to increased confinement effects.

  2. 2.

    Unsteady Effects of Shock Wave Induced Separation: Specific Targeted Research Projects AST4-CT-2005-012226.

References

  1. F. Chalot, M. Mallet, M. Ravachol, A comprehensive finite element Navier-Stokes solver for low- and high-speed air-craft design (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  2. D. Arnal, Boundary layer transition: prediction, application to drag reduction. In Skin Friction Drag Reduction. AGARD Rep. 786 (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  3. B.C.A.D. Courty, J.-C., Laminar flow investigation: computations and flight tests at Dassault Aviation (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  4. T.S.C. Davidson, H. Babinsky, An investigation of interactions between normal shocks and transitional boundary layers—Control ID 1889354, in 44th AIAA Fluid Dynamics Conference (2014), pp. 1–16

    Google Scholar 

  5. S.P. Colliss, Vortical structures on three-dimensional shock control bumps. AIAA J. (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  6. N. Titchener, S. Colliss, H. Babinsky, On the calculation of boundary-layer parameters from discrete data. Exp. Fluids 56(8), 1–18 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  7. H. Babinsky, J.K. Harvey, Shock Wave-Boundary-Layer Interactions (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  8. D. Hue, O. Vermeersch, D. Bailly, V. Brunet, M. Forte, Experimental and numerical methods for transition and drag predictions of laminar airfoils. AIAA J. 53(9), 2694–2712 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  9. W. Stryczniewicz, R. Placek, R. Szczepaniak, PIV measurements of flow separation over laminar airfoil at transonic speeds. J. KONES (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  10. W. Stryczniewicz, R. Placek, P. Ruchała, Investigation of unsteady transonic flow field above laminar airfoil by PIV method (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  11. R. Placek, W. Stryczniewicz, Identification of the boundary layer shock wave interaction type in transonic flow regime. J. KONES. Powertrain Transp. 23, 285–290 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  12. R. Placek, M. Miller, P. Ruchala, The roughness position influence on laminar aerofoil aerodynamic characteristics in transonic flow regime (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  13. J. Perraud, D. Arnal, G. Casalis, J.-P. Archambaud, R. Donelli, Automatic transition predictions using simplified methods. AIAA J. 47(11), 2676–2684 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  14. R.E. Mayle, The 1991 IGTI scholar lecture: the role of laminar-turbulent transition in gas turbine engines. J. Turbomach. 113(4), 509 (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  15. S. Dhawan, R. Narasimha, Some properties of boundary-layer flow during the transition from laminar to turbulent motion. J. Fluid Mech. 3(1951), 418–453 (1958)

    Google Scholar 

  16. A. Probst, R. Radespiel, U. Rist, Linear-stability-based transition modeling for aerodynamic flow simulations with a near-wall Reynolds-stress model. AIAA J. 50(2), 416–428 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  17. G.A. Gerolymos, I. Vallet, Wall-normal-free Reynolds-stress closure for three-dimensional compressible separated flows. AIAA J. 39(10), 1833–1842 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  18. M. Ol, B. McCauliffe, E. Hanff, U. Scholz, C. Kaehler, Comparison of laminar separation bubble measurements on a low Reynolds number airfoil in three facilities, in 35th AIAA Fluid Dynamics Conference and Exhibit, June, 2005

    Google Scholar 

  19. M.C. Galbraith, M.R. Visbal, Implicit large Eddy simulation of low-Reynolds-number transitional flow past the SD7003 airfoil. AIAA J. 225 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  20. S. Deck, Numerical simulation of transonic buffet over a supercritical airfoil. AIAA J. 43(7), 1556–1566 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  21. J. Crouch, A. Garbaruk, D. Magidov, L. Jacquin, Global Structure of Buffeting Flow on Transonic Airfoils (2009), pp. 297–306

    Google Scholar 

  22. F.R. Menter, Zonal two equation k-w, turbulence models for aerodynamic flows, in 24th Fluid Dynamics Conference July 6–9, 1993 (Orlando, Florida, 1993)

    Google Scholar 

  23. R.B. Langtry, F.R. Menter, Correlation-based transition modeling for unstructured parallelized computational fluid dynamics codes. AIAA J. 47(12), 2894–2906 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  24. F.R. Menter, Y. Egorov, The scale-adaptive simulation method for unsteady turbulent flow predictions. Part 1: Theory and model description. Flow, Turbul. Combust. 85(1), 113–138 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  25. J. Dudek, Modeling vortex generators in the wind-US code, in 48th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting Including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition. (American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2010)

    Google Scholar 

  26. G. Berkooz, P. Holmes, J. L. Lumley, The proper orthogonal decomposition in the analysis of turbulent flows. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 25(1), 539–575 (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  27. D. Szubert, F. Grossi, A. Jimenez Garcia, Y. Hoarau, J.C.R. Hunt, M. Braza, Shock-vortex shear-layer interaction in the transonic flow around a supercritical airfoil at high Reynolds number in buffet conditions. J. Fluids Struct. 55, 276–302 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  28. B.H.K. Lee, Self-sustained shock oscillations on airfoils at transonic speeds. Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 37(2), 147–196 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  29. D.G. Mabey, Oscillatory flows from shock-induced separations on biconvex aerofoils, in AGARD Conferences Proceedings (Vol. 296, No. 11, 1980)

    Google Scholar 

  30. R.B. Langtry, A correlation-based transition model using local variables for unstructured parallelized. CFD codes (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  31. B.J. Abu-Ghannam, R. Shaw, Natural transition of boundary layers—the effects of turbulence, pressure gradient, and flow history. J. Mech. Eng. Sci. 22(5), 213–228 (1980)

    Google Scholar 

  32. P. Malan, K. Suluksna, E. Juntasaro, Calibrating the gamma-Re_theta transition model for commercial CFD, in 47th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting Including The New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition (2019). p. 1142

    Google Scholar 

  33. N.N. Sorensen, CFD modelling of laminar‐turbulent transition for airfoils and rotors using the γ−model. Wind Energy: Int. J. Prog. Appl. Wind Power Convers. Technol. 12(8), 715–733 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  34. J-B. Tô, et al, Effects of vibrating and deformed trailing edge of a morphing supercritical airfoil in transonic regime by numerical simulation at high Reynolds number. J. Fluids Struct. 91(2019), 102595 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  35. M.E. Kelterer, R. Pecnik, W. Sanz, Computation of laminar-turbulent transition in turbumachinery using the correlation based γ-Reθ transition model. ASME Turbo Expo 2010: Power for Land, Sea, and Air (American Society of Mechanical Engineers Digital Collection, 2010)

    Google Scholar 

  36. A. Toyoda, T. Misaka, S. Obayashi, An application of local correlation-based transition model to JAXA high-lift configuration model, in 25th AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference (2007). p. 4286

    Google Scholar 

  37. F.R. Menter, Review of the shear-stress transport turbulence model experience from an industrial perspective. Int. J. Comput. Fluid Dyn. 23(4), 305–316 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  38. F.R. Menter, Two-equation eddy-viscosity turbulence models for engineering applications. AIAA J. 32(8), 1598–1605 (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  39. O.Z. Mehdizadeh, L. Temmerman, B. Tartinville, C. Hirsch, Applications of earsm turbulence models to internal flows, in ASME Turbo Expo 2012: Turbine Technical Conference and Exposition (American Society of Mechanical Engineers Digital Collection, 2012). pp. 2079–2086

    Google Scholar 

  40. Y. Hoarau, D. Pena, J.B. Vos, D. Charbonier, A. Gehri, M. Braza, …E. Laurendeau, Recent developments of the navier stokes multi block (nsmb) cfd solver, in 54th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting (2016). p. 2056

    Google Scholar 

  41. J. Vos, A. Rizzi, A. Corjon, E. Chaput, E. Soinne, Recent advances in aerodynamics inside the NSMB (Navier Stokes multi block) consortium, in 36th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit (1998). p. 225

    Google Scholar 

  42. P.L. Roe, Approximate Riemann solvers, parameter vectors, and difference schemes. J. Comput. Phys. 43(2), 357–372 (1981)

    Google Scholar 

  43. B. Van Leer, Towards the ultimate conservative difference scheme. V. A second-order sequel to Godunov's method. J. Comput. Phys. 32(1), 101–136 (1979)

    Google Scholar 

  44. F. Grossi, Physics and modeling of unsteady shock wave/boundary layer interactions over transonic airfoils by numerical simulation (Doctoral dissertation, 2014)

    Google Scholar 

  45. D. Szubert, Physics and modelling of unsteady turbulent flows around aerodynamic and hydrodynamic structures at high Reynold number by numerical simulation (Doctoral dissertation, 2015)

    Google Scholar 

  46. R. Bourguet, M. Braza, G. Harran, R. El Akoury, Anisotropic Organised Eddy Simulation for the prediction of non-equilibrium turbulent flows around bodies. J. Fluids Struct. 24(8), 1240–1251 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  47. P.R. Spalart, S. Deck, M.L. Shur, K.D. Squires, M.K. Strelets, A. Travin, A new version of detached-eddy simulation, resistant to ambiguous grid densities. Theor. Comput. Fluid Dyn. 20(3), 181 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  48. P.R. Spalart, C.L. Rumsey, Effective inflow conditions for turbulence models in aerodynamic calculations. AIAA J. 45(10), 2544–2553 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  49. H. Persillon, M. Braza, Physical analysis of the transition to turbulence in the wake of a circular cylinder by three-dimensional Navier–Stokes simulation. J. Fluid Mech. 365, 23–88 (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  50. M. Braza, D. Faghani, H. Persillon, Successive stages and the role of natural vortex dislocations in three-dimensional wake transition. J. Fluid Mech. 439, 1–41 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  51. M. Braza, R. Perrin, Y. Hoarau, Turbulence properties in the cylinder wake at high Reynolds numbers. J. Fluids Struct. 22(6–7), 757–771 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Aircraft Engineering and Loads Division, Dassault-Aviation, 78, quai Marcel Dassault, 92512, Saint-Cloud, France

    Flavien Billard

  2. Department of Engineering, University of Cambridge, Trumpington Street, Cambridge, CB2 1PZ, UK

    Todd Davidson & Holger Babinsky

  3. Aerodynamic Department, Institute of Aviation, Al. Krakowska 110/114, Warsaw, Poland

    Robert Placek, Marek Miller, Paweł Ruchała, Wit Stryczniewicz, Tomasz Kwiatkowski, Wieńczysław Stalewski, Janusz Sznajder & Sara Kuprianowicz

  4. Dept. of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Sapienza University of Rome, Via Eudossiana 18, 00184, Roma, Italy

    Matteo Bernardini & Sergio Pirozzoli

  5. School of Engineering, University of Glasgow, University Avenue, Glasgow, G128QQ, UK

    George Barakos & George Zografakis

  6. NUMECA, Chaussée de la Hulpe 187-189, 1170, Bruxelles, Belgium

    Benoit Tartinville & Charles Hirsch

  7. UMR CNRS/INPT N° 5502, Institut de Mécanique des Fluides de Toulouse (IMFT), Av. du prof. Camille Soula, 31400, Toulouse, France

    Damien Szubert, Marianna Braza, Ioannis Asproulias, Nikos Simiriotis & Jean-Baptiste Tô

  8. Département de mécanique ICUBE Laboratory, Université de Strasbourg, 2 Rue Boussingault, 67000, Strasbourg, France

    Yannick Hoarau

Authors
  1. Flavien Billard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Todd Davidson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Holger Babinsky
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Robert Placek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Marek Miller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Paweł Ruchała
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Wit Stryczniewicz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Tomasz Kwiatkowski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Wieńczysław Stalewski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Janusz Sznajder
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Sara Kuprianowicz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Matteo Bernardini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Sergio Pirozzoli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. George Barakos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  15. George Zografakis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  16. Benoit Tartinville
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  17. Charles Hirsch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  18. Damien Szubert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  19. Marianna Braza
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  20. Ioannis Asproulias
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  21. Nikos Simiriotis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  22. Jean-Baptiste Tô
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  23. Yannick Hoarau
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Flavien Billard .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Fluid Flow Machinery, Polish Academy of Sciences, IMP PAN, Gdansk, Poland

    Piotr Doerffer

  2. Institute of Fluid Flow Machinery, Polish Academy of Sciences, IMP PAN, Gdansk, Poland

    Pawel Flaszynski

  3. Supersonic Group, IUSTI, Marseille, France

    Jean-Paul Dussauge

  4. Department of Engineering, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK

    Holger Babinsky

  5. Rolls-Royce Deutschland Ltd, Blankenfelde-Mahlow, Germany

    Patrick Grothe

  6. German Aerospace Center (DLR), Institute of Propulsion Technology, Göttingen, Niedersachsen, Germany

    Anna Petersen

  7. Aircraft Engineering and Loads Division, Dassault Aviation, Saint-Cloud, France

    Flavien Billard

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Billard, F. et al. (2021). WP-5 External Flows—Wing. In: Doerffer, P., et al. Transition Location Effect on Shock Wave Boundary Layer Interaction. Notes on Numerical Fluid Mechanics and Multidisciplinary Design, vol 144. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-47461-4_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-47461-4_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-47460-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-47461-4

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation