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

Physical Review Fluids

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Editors' Suggestion
  • Access by Xinjiang University

Resolvent analysis of separated and attached flows around an airfoil at transitional Reynolds number

Nikitas Thomareis* and George Papadakis†

  • Department of Aeronautics, Imperial College, London SW7 2AZ, United Kingdom

  • *nikitas.thomareis12@imperial.ac.uk
  • †g.papadakis@imperial.ac.uk
PDF

Phys. Rev. Fluids 3, 073901 – Published 11 July, 2018

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevFluids.3.073901

Abstract

We analyze the resolvent operator in three flows around a nominal NACA-0012 airfoil at ReC=50,000 and 5∘ angle of attack. In particular, we study two naturally developing flows (around the airfoil with straight and blunt trailing edges) and one tripped flow. The naturally developing flows exhibit laminar separation, transition and turbulent reattachment, while the tripped flow remains attached in the suction side. For all cases, the time-averaged flow fields are computed from separate DNS simulations. The resolvent analysis can identify the areas of maximum receptivity of the flow field as well as the most amplified modes (optimal response). The former was located close to the leading edge, and in the case of naturally developing flows, also in the free-stream. The spatial distribution of optimal forcing was dominated by structures tilted against the mean flow, in agreement with other studies of boundary layer flows. The optimal response of the two naturally developing flows were different. For the NACA-0012 airfoil with straight trailing edge, the response was maximized at the natural frequency of the separating shear layer, and the shape matched closely with the corresponding DMD mode obtained from processing the DNS results. For the blunt airfoil, the receptivity of the separating shear layer was suppressed in the region of natural frequency, while it was maximized at the frequency of vortex shedding from the trailing edge. This is attributed to the lock-in mechanism between the shedding and the separating shear layer observed in the DNS simulations; the lock-in makes the separating shear layer less sensitive to forcing. In the tripped flow, the amplification of the perturbations is significantly diminished, and only by restricting the resolvent analysis to a region close to the suction side can we get a dominant frequency that matches with DNS at that region. The dominant resolvent modes were used to get estimations of the velocity spectra based only on the mean flow and the signal of one velocity component at discrete calibration points. Very good approximation is observed with only one or two points (depending on the flow examined), provided that they are located in energetic regions of the flow that contain sufficient spectral content at the relevant frequencies.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (42)

  1. M. Gaster, On the Stability of Parallel Flows and the Behaviour of Separation Bubbles, Ph.D. thesis, Queen Mary, University of London, 1963.
  2. M. Gaster, Growth of disturbances in both space and time, Phys. Fluids 11, 723 (1968).
  3. P. J. Schmid and D. S. Henningson, Stability and Transition in Shear Flows, Vol. 142 (Springer Science & Business Media, Berlin, 2012).
  4. J. L. Lumley, Stochastic Tools in Turbulence, 1st ed. (Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1970).
  5. Lawrence Sirovich, Turbulence and the dynamics of coherent structures. I. Coherent structures, Q. Appl. Math. 45, 561 (1987).
  6. P. J. Schmid, Dynamic mode decomposition of numerical and experimental data, J. Fluid Mech. 656, 5 (2010).
  7. B. J. McKeon and A. S. Sharma, A critical-layer framework for turbulent pipe flow, J. Fluid Mech. 658, 336 (2010).
  8. Tosio Kato, Perturbation Theory for Linear Operators, Vol. 132 (Springer Science & Business Media, Berlin, 2013).
  9. A. S. Sharma, I. Mezić, and B. J. McKeon, Correspondence between Koopman mode decomposition, resolvent mode decomposition, and invariant solutions of the Navier-Stokes equations, Phys. Rev. Fluids 1, 032402 (2016).
  10. R. Moarref, A. S. Sharma, J. A. Tropp, and B. J. McKeon, Model-based scaling of the streamwise energy density in high-Reynolds-number turbulent channels, J. Fluid Mech. 734, 275 (2013).
  11. S. Beneddine, D. Sipp, A. Arnault, J. Dandois, and L. Lesshafft, Conditions for validity of mean flow stability analysis, J. Fluid Mech. 798, 485 (2016).
  12. D. Sipp, O. Marquet, P. Meliga, and A. Barbagallo, Dynamics and control of global instabilities in open-flows: A linearized approach, Appl. Mech. Rev. 63, 030801 (2010).
  13. E. Åkervik, U. Ehrenstein, F. Gallaire, and D. S. Henningson, Global two-dimensional stability measures of the flat plate boundary-layer flow, Eur. J. Mech.-B/Fluids 27, 501 (2008).
  14. F. Alizard, S. Cherubini, and J. C. Robinet, Sensitivity and optimal forcing response in separated boundary layer flows, Phys. Fluids 21, 064108 (2009).
  15. D. Sipp and O. Marquet, Characterization of noise amplifiers with global singular modes: The case of the leading-edge flat-plate boundary layer, Theor. Comput. Fluid Dyn. 27, 617 (2013).
  16. A. Monokroussos, E. Åkervik, L. Brandt, and D. S. Henningson, Global three-dimensional optimal disturbances in the Blasius boundary-layer flow using time-steppers, J. Fluid Mech. 650, 181 (2010).
  17. F. Sartor, C. Mettot, and D. Sipp, Stability, receptivity, and sensitivity analyses of buffeting transonic flow over a profile, AIAA J. 53, 1980 (2015).
  18. F. Gómez, H. M. Blackburn, M. Rudman, A. S. Sharma, and B. J. McKeon, A reduced-order model of three-dimensional unsteady flow in a cavity based on the resolvent operator, J. Fluid Mech. 798, R2 (2016).
  19. F. Gómez, A. S. Sharma, and H. M. Blackburn, Estimation of unsteady aerodynamic forces using pointwise velocity data, J. Fluid Mech. 804, R4 (2016).
  20. N. Thomareis and G. Papadakis, Effect of trailing edge shape on the separated flow characteristics around an airfoil at low Reynolds number: A numerical study, Phys. Fluids 29, 014101 (2017).
  21. S. Balay, S. Abhyankar, M. Adams, J. Brown, P. Brune, K. Buschelman, V. Eijkhout, W. Gropp, D. Kaushik, M. Knepley et al., Petsc Users Manual Revision 3.5, Tech. Rep. Technical report, Argonne National Laboratory (2014).
  22. R. D. Falgout, J. E. Jones, and U. M. Yang, The design and implementation of hypre, a library of parallel high performance preconditioners, in Numerical Solution of Partial Differential Equations on Parallel Computers (Springer, Berlin, 2006), pp. 267–294.
  23. P. Schlatter and R. Örlü, Turbulent boundary layers at moderate Reynolds numbers: Inflow length and tripping effects, J. Fluid Mech. 710, 5 (2012).
  24. Stephen B. Pope, Turbulent Flows (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2001).
  25. S. M. Hosseini, R. Vinuesa, P. Schlatter, A. Hanifi, and D. S. Henningson, Direct numerical simulation of the flow around a wing section at moderate Reynolds number, Int. J. Heat Fluid Flow 61, 117 (2016).
  26. P. J. Schmid and L. Brandt, Analysis of fluid systems: Stability, receptivity, sensitivity. lecture notes from the flow-nordita summer school on advanced instability methods for complex flows, Stockholm, Sweden, 2013, Appl. Mech. Rev. 66, 024803 (2014).
  27. L. Lu and G. Papadakis, An iterative method for the computation of the response of linearised Navier-Stokes equations to harmonic forcing and application to forced cylinder wakes, Int. J. Numer. Methods Fluids 74, 794 (2014).
  28. C.-M. Ho and P. Huerre, Perturbed free shear layers, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 16, 365 (1984).
  29. F. Hecht, New development in freefem++, J. Numer. Math. 20, 251 (2012).
  30. I. T. Jolliffe, Principal Component Analysis, 2nd edition (Springer-Verlag, New York, 2002).
  31. R. B. Lehoucq, D. C. Sorensen, and C. Yang, ARPACK Users' Guide: Solution of Large-scale Eigenvalue Problems with Implicitly Restarted Arnoldi Methods (SIAM, Philadelphia, 1998).
  32. P. R. Amestoy, I. S. Duff, J. Y. L'Excellent, and J. Koster, A fully asynchronous multifrontal solver using distributed dynamic scheduling, SIAM J. Matrix Anal. Appl. 23, 15 (2001).
  33. X. Garnaud, L. Lesshafft, P. J. Schmid, and P. Huerre, The preferred mode of incompressible jets: Linear frequency response analysis, J. Fluid Mech. 716, 189 (2013).
  34. L. E. Jones, R. D. Sandberg, and N. D. Sandham, Stability and receptivity characteristics of a laminar separation bubble on an aerofoil, J. Fluid Mech. 648, 257 (2010).
  35. G. Desquesnes, M. Terracol, and P. Sagaut, Numerical investigation of the tone noise mechanism over laminar airfoils, J. Fluid Mech. 591, 155 (2007).
  36. D. Rodriguez and V. Theofilis, Structural changes of laminar separation bubbles induced by global linear instability, J. Fluid Mech. 655, 280 (2010).
  37. K. M. Butler and B. F. Farrell, Three-dimensional optimal perturbations in viscous shear flow, Phys. Fluids A: Fluid Dynamics 4, 1637 (1992).
  38. A. V. Dovgal, V. V. Kozlov, and A. Michalke, Laminar boundary layer separation: Instability and associated phenomena, Progress in Aerospace Sciences 30, 61 (1994).
  39. P. J. Strykowski and D. L. Niccum, The influence of velocity and density ratio on the dynamics of spatially developing mixing layers, Phys. Fluids A: Fluid Dynamics 4, 770 (1992).
  40. L. E. Jones, Numerical Studies of the Flow Around an Airfoil at Low Reynolds Number, Ph.D. thesis, University of Southampton, 2008.
  41. S. Beneddine, R. Yegavian, D. Sipp, and B. Leclaire, Unsteady flow dynamics reconstruction from mean and point sensors: An experimental study, J. Fluid Mech. 824, 174 (2017).
  42. W. Zhang and R. Samtaney, Biglobal linear stability analysis on low-Re flow past an airfoil at high angle of attack, Phys. Fluids 28, 044105 (2016).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Fluids 3, 073901– Published 11 July, 2018
  • Received 5 January 2018
Crossmark - Check for updates button

©2018 American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation