Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-01T04:10:45.689Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Wave processes in a viscous shock layer and control of fluctuations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 March 2010

A. A. MASLOV ,
S. G. MIRONOV ,
A. N. KUDRYAVTSEV ,
T. V. POPLAVSKAYA  and
I. S. TSYRYULNIKOV
A. A. MASLOV
Affiliation:
Khristianovich Institute of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics, Novosibirsk 630090, Russia Department of Physics, Novosibirsk State University, Novosibirsk 630090, Russia
S. G. MIRONOV
Affiliation:
Khristianovich Institute of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics, Novosibirsk 630090, Russia Department of Physics, Novosibirsk State University, Novosibirsk 630090, Russia
A. N. KUDRYAVTSEV
Affiliation:
Khristianovich Institute of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics, Novosibirsk 630090, Russia Department of Physics, Novosibirsk State University, Novosibirsk 630090, Russia
T. V. POPLAVSKAYA*
Affiliation:
Khristianovich Institute of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics, Novosibirsk 630090, Russia Department of Physics, Novosibirsk State University, Novosibirsk 630090, Russia
I. S. TSYRYULNIKOV
Affiliation:
Khristianovich Institute of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics, Novosibirsk 630090, Russia Department of Physics, Novosibirsk State University, Novosibirsk 630090, Russia
*
†Email address for correspondence: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Generation and development of disturbances in a hypersonic viscous shock layer on a flat plate is studied both experimentally and numerically. The study is performed at the Mach number M∞ = 21 and the Reynolds number ReL = 1.44 × 105 and is aimed at elucidating the physical mechanisms that govern the receptivity and instability of the shock layer at extremely high hypersonic velocities. The experiments are conducted in a hypersonic nitrogen-driven wind tunnel. An electron-beam fluorescence technique, a Pitot probe and a piezoceramic transducer are used to measure the mean density and Mach number contours, as well as density and pressure fluctuations, their spectra and spatial distributions in the shock layer. Direct numerical simulations are performed by solving the Navier–Stokes equations with a high-order shock-capturing scheme in a computational domain including the leading and trailing edges of the plate, so that the bow shock wave and the wake behind the plate are also simulated. It is demonstrated that computational and experimental data characterizing the mean flow field, intensity of density fluctuations and their spatial distributions in the shock layer are in close agreement. It is found that excitation of the shock layer by external acoustic waves leads to generation of entropy–vortex disturbances with two maxima of density fluctuations: directly behind the shock wave and on the external edge of the boundary layer. At the same time, the pressure fluctuations decay inward into the shock layer, away from the shock, which agrees with the linear theory of interaction of shock waves with small perturbations. Thus, the entropy–vortex disturbances are shown to dominate in the hypersonic shock layer at very high Mach numbers, in contrast with the boundary layers at moderate hypersonic velocities where acoustic modes are most important. A parametric numerical study of wave processes in the shock layer induced by external acoustic waves is performed with variations of frequency, amplitude and angle of propagation of external disturbances. The amplitude of generated disturbances is observed to grow and decay periodically along the streamwise coordinate, and the characteristics of these variations depend on the frequency and direction of incident acoustic waves. The hypersonic shock layer excited by periodic blowing and suction near the leading edge is also investigated; in the experiments, this type of excitation is obtained by using an oblique-cut whistle. It is shown that blowing/suction generates disturbances resembling those generated by external acoustic waves, with similar spatial distributions and phase velocities. This result paves the way for active control of instability development in the shock layer by means of destructive interference of two types of disturbances. Numerical simulations are performed to show that instability waves can be significantly amplified or almost entirely suppressed, depending on the relative phase of blowing/suction and acoustic disturbances. Wind-tunnel experiments completely confirm this numerical prediction. Thus, the feasibility of delaying instability development in the hypersonic shock layer has been demonstrated for the first time.

Type
Papers
Information
Journal of Fluid Mechanics , Volume 650 , 10 May 2010 , pp. 81 - 118
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

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

REFERENCES

Aniskin, V. M. & Mironov, S. G. 2000 Experimental study of density fluctuations in a hypersonic jet in the wake behind a cone. J. Appl. Mech. Tech. Phys. 41 (3), 479–484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beckwith, I. E., Harvey, W. D. & Clark, F. L. 1971 Comparison of turbulent boundary layer measurements at Mach number 19.5 with theory and an assessment of probe errors. Tech Note TN-D 6192. NASA.Google Scholar
Bertolotti, F. P. & Herbert, Th. 1991 Analysis of the linear stability of compressible boundary layers using the PSE. Theoret. Comput. Fluid Dyn. 3, 117–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biringen, S. 1984 Active control of transition by periodic suction-blowing. Phys. Fluids 27, 1345–1355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boiko, A. V., Grek, G. R., Dovgal, A. V. & Kozlov, V. V. 2002 The Origin of Turbulence in Near-Wall Flows. Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Born, M. & Wolf, E. 1968 Principles of Optics. Pergamon.Google Scholar
Chang, C. L., Malik, M. R., Erlebacher, G. & Hussaini, M. Y. 1991 Compressible stability of growing boundary layers using parabolized stability equations. Paper 91-1636. AIAA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chang, C. L., Malik, M. R. & Hussaini, M. Y. 1990 Effects of shock on the stability of hypersonic boundary layers. Paper 1990-1448. AIAA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Egorov, I. V., Fedorov, A. V. & Sudakov, V. G. 2008 Receptivity of a hypersonic boundary layer over a flat plate with a porous coating. J. Fluid Mech. 601, 165–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Egorov, I. V., Sudakov, V. G. & Fedorov, A. V. 2004 Numerical modelling of perturbation propagation in a supersonic boundary layer. Fluid Dyn. 39 (6), 874–884.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Egorov, I. V., Sudakov, V. G. & Fedorov, A. V. 2006 a Numerical modelling of the receptivity of a supersonic boundary layer to acoustic disturbances. Fluid Dyn. 41 (1), 37–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Egorov, I. V., Sudakov, V. G. & Fedorov, A. V. 2006 b Numerical modelling of the stabilization of a supersonic flat-plate boundary layer by porous coating. Fluid Dyn. 41 (3), 356–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fedorov, A., Shiplyuk, A., Maslov, A., Burov, E. & Malmuth, N. 2003 Stabilization of a hypersonic boundary layer using an ultrasonic absorptive coating. J. Fluid Mech. 479, 99–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fedorov, A. V., Malmuth, N. D., Rasheed, A. & Hornung, H. G. 2001 Stabilization of hypersonic boundary layers by porous coatings. AIAA J. 39 (4), 605–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fedorov, A. V. & Tumin, A. 2004. Evolution of disturbances in entropy layer on blunted plate in supersonic flow. AIAA J. 42 (1), 89–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisher, M. C., Maddalon, D. V., Weinstein, L. M. & Wagner, R. D. Jr 1971 Boundary – layer Pitot and hot-wire surveys at M ∞ ≅ 20. AIAA J. 9 (5), 826–834.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fomin, V. M., Kudryavtsev, A. N., Maslov, A. A., Mironov, S. G., Poplavskaya, T. V. & Tsyryul'nikov, I. S. 2007 Active control of disturbances in a hypersonic shock layer. Dokl. Phys. 52 (5), 274–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gad-El-Hak, M. 1996 Modern development in flow control. Appl. Mech. Rev. 49, 365–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaponov, S. A. & Maslov, A. A. 1980 Evolution of Disturbances in Compressible Flows (in Russian). Nauka.Google Scholar
Gaster, M. 2000 Active control of boundary layer instabilities using MEMS. Curr. Sci. 79 (6), 774–780.Google Scholar
Harwey, W. D. & Bushnell, D. M. 1969 Velocity fluctuations intensities in a hypersonic turbulent boundary layer. AIAA J. 7 (4), 760–762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kemp, J. H. & Owen, F. K. 1972 Nozzle wall boundary layer at Mach numbers 20 to 47. AIAA J. 10 (7), 872–879.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kimmel, R. L. 2003 Aspects of boundary layer transition control. Paper 2003-0772. AIAA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kogan, M. N. 1969 Rarefied Gas Dynamics. Plenum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kontorovich, V. M. 1959 Sound reflection and refraction on shock waves (in Russian). Akust. Zh. 5, 314–323.Google Scholar
Kosinov, A. D., Maslov, A. A. & Shevelkov, S. G. 1990 Experiments on the stability of supersonic laminar boundary layers. J. Fluid Mech. 219, 621–633.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kudryavtsev, A. N. & Khotyanovsky, D. V. 2005 Numerical investigation of high speed free shear flow instability and Mach wave radiation. Intl J. Aeroacous. 4 (3 & 4), 267–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kudryavtsev, A. N., Mironov, S. G., Poplavskaya, T. V. & Tsyryul'nikov, I. S. 2006 Experimental study and direct numerical simulation of the evolution of disturbances in a viscous shock layer on a flat plate. J. Appl. Mech. Tech. Phys. 47 (5), 617–627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laufer, J. 1964 Some statistical properties of the pressure field radiated by a turbulent boundary layer. Phys. Fluids 7 (8), 1191–1197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ma, Y. & Zhong, X. 2003 a Receptivity of a supersonic boundary layer over a flat plate. Part 1. Wave structures and interactions. J. Fluid Mech. 488, 31–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ma, Y. & Zhong, X. 2003 b Receptivity of a supersonic boundary layer over a flat plate. Part 2. Receptivity to free-stream sound. J. Fluid Mech. 488, 79–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ma, Y. & Zhong, X. 2004 Linear stability and receptivity to free-stream disturbances of a Mach 10. Nonequilibrium reactivity oxygen flow over a flat plate. Paper 2004-0256. AIAA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ma, Y. & Zhong, X. 2005 Receptivity of a supersonic boundary layer over a flat plate. Part 3. Effects of different types of free-stream disturbances. J. Fluid Mech. 532, 63–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mack, L. M. 1975 Linear stability theory and the problem of supersonic boundary-layer transition. AIAA J. 13 (3), 278–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manesh, K., Lee, S., Lele, S. K. & Moin, P. 1995 The interaction of an isotropic field of acoustic waves with a shock wave. J. Fluid Mech. 300, 383–407.Google Scholar
Maslov, A. A., Kudryavtsev, A. N., Mironov, S. G., Poplavskaya, T. V. & Tsyryul'nikov, I. S. 2007 Numerical simulation of receptivity of a hypersonic boundary layer to acoustic disturbances. J. Appl. Mech. Tech. Phys. 48 (3), 368–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maslov, A. A. & Mironov, S. G. 1996 Experimental investigation of the hypersonic low-density flow past a half-closed cylindrical cavity. Fluid Dyn. 31, 928–932.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maslov, A. A. & Mironov, S. G. 1999 Effect of flow nonparallelism in the shock layer on a flat plate and the angle of on characteristics of density fluctuations (in Russian). Izv. Ross. Akad. Nauk Mekh. Zhidk. Gaza 2, 50–55.Google Scholar
Maslov, A. A., Mironov, S. G. & Aniskin, V. M. 2005 Hypersonic shear layer stability experiments. J. Spacecraft Rockets 42 (6), 999–1004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maslov, A. A., Mironov, S. G., Kudryavtsev, A. N., Poplavskaya, T. V. & Tsyryul'nikov, I. S. 2008 Controlling the disturbances in a hypersonic flat-plate shock layer by unsteady action from the surface. Fluid Dyn. 43 (3), 471–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maslov, A. A., Mironov, S. G., Poplavskaya, T. V. & Smorodsky, B. V. 2004 a Stability of the hypersonic shock layer on a flat plate. Fluid Dyn. 39 (2), 181–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maslov, A. A., Poplavskaya, T. V. & Smorodsky, B. V. 2004 b Stability of a hypersonic shock layer on a flat plate. Compt. Rendus Mec. 332 (11), 875–880.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mckenzie, J. F. & Westphal, K. O. 1968 Interaction of linear waves with oblique shock waves. Phys. Fluids 11, 2350–2362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mironov, S. G. & Aniskin, V. M. 2004 Experimental study of hypersonic shock layer stability on a circular surface of compression. Compt. Rendus Mec. 332 (9), 701–708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mironov, S. G. & Maslov, A. A. 2000 a An experimental study of density waves in hypersonic shock layer on a flat plate. Phys. Fluids 12 (6), 1544–1553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mironov, S. G. & Maslov, A. A. 2000 b Experimental study of secondary instability in a hypersonic shock layer on a flat plate. J. Fluid Mech. 412, 259–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moreau, E. 2007 Airflow control by non-thermal plasma. J. Phys. D 40, 605–636.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morkovin, M. V. 1968 Critical evaluation of transition from laminar to turbulent shear layers with emphasis of hypersonically travelling bodies. Tech Rep. 68-149. Air Force Flight Dynamics Laboratory.Google Scholar
Nosenchuck, D. M. 1988 Passive and active control of boundary layer transition. PhD thesis, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA.Google Scholar
Pack, L. G. & Joslin, R. D. 1998 Overview of active control at NASA Langley Research Center. Tech Rep. 20040110283. NASA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rist, U. & Gmelin, C. 2006 Active control of laminar-turbulent transition using instantaneous wall vorticity. In Fifth ERCOFTAC SIG33 Workshop on ‘Laminar-Turbulent Transition Mechanisms: Prediction and Control’, Nasslingen, Stockholm.Google Scholar
Roger, K. W., Wainright, G. B. & Touryan, K. J. 1966 Impact and static pressure measurements in high speed flows with transitional Knudsen numbers. In Rarefied Gas Dynamics (ed. deLeeuw, J. H.) vol. 2, pp. 151–174. Academic.Google Scholar
Shu, C.-W. & Osher, S. 1988 Efficient implementation of essentially non-oscillatory shock-capturing schemes. Part I. J. Comput. Phys. 77, 439–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shu, C.-W. & Osher, S. 1989 Efficient implementation of essentially non-oscillatory shock-capturing schemes. Part II. J. Comput. Phys. 83, 32–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, J. A. & Driscoll, J. F. 1975 The electron-beam fluorescence technique for measurements in hypersonic turbulent flows. J. Fluid Mech. 72 (4), 695–719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suresh, A. & Huynh, H. T. 1997 Accurate monotonicity-preserving schemes with Runge–Kutta stepping. J. Comput. Phys. 136 (Pt 1), 83–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsyryul'nikov, I. S. & Mironov, S. G. 2005 Wave field of controllable periodic disturbances generated by two sources (in Russian). Thermophys. Aeromech. 12 (3), 353–360.Google Scholar
Tumin, A. 2006 Receptivity of compressible boundary layers to three-dimensional wall perturbations. Paper 2006-1110. AIAA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tumin, A. 2007 Three-dimensional spatial normal modes in compressible boundary layers. J. Fluid Mech. 586, 295–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tumin, A., Wang, X., Zhong, X. 2007 Direct numerical simulation and the theory of receptivity in a hypersonic boundary layer. Phys. Fluids 19 (1), 014101. AIAA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallace, J. E. 1969 Hypersonic turbulent boundary layer measurements using an electron-beam. AIAA J. 7 (4), 757–759.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, X. & Zhong, X. 2005 Receptivity of a Mach 8. 0 flow over a sharp wedge with half-angle 5.3° to wall blowing-suction. Paper 2005-5025. AIAA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, X. & Zhong, X. 2007 Numerical simulation of hypersonic boundary-layer receptivity to two and three-dimensional wall perturbations. Paper 2007-946. AIAA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zang, T. A., Hussaini, M. Y. & Bushnell, D. M. 1984 Numerical computations of turbulence amplification in shock-wave interactions. AIAA J. 22 (1), 13–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhong, X. 2000 Receptivity of hypersonic boundary layers to free stream disturbances. Paper 2000-0531. AIAA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhong, X. 2001 Leading-edge receptivity to free stream disturbance waves for hypersonic flow over a parabola. J. Fluid Mech. 441, 315–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar