- 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

Response of a turbulent separation bubble to zero-net-mass-flux jet perturbations

Wen Wu*

Charles Meneveau and Rajat Mittal

Alberto Padovan and Clarence W. Rowley

Louis Cattafesta†

  • Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Mississippi, Oxford, Mississippi 38677, USA

  • Department of Mechanical Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland 21218, USA

  • Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey 08544, USA

  • Department of Mechanical Engineering, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida 32310, USA

  • *wu@olemiss.edu
  • †Present address: Department of Mechanical, Materials, and Aerospace Engineering, Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago, Illinois 60616, USA.
PDF

Phys. Rev. Fluids 7, 084601 – Published 3 August, 2022

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevFluids.7.084601

Abstract

The response of a turbulent separation bubble (TSB) to zero-net-mass-flux actuation is investigated via direct numerical simulations. Rectangular jets with their long axis oriented in the streamwise direction are used to generate unsteady streamwise vortices that mimic the streamwise elongated Görtler vortices found to be associated with the low-frequency unsteadiness of the TSB [Wu et al., J. Fluid Mech., 883, A45 (2019)]. Three sinusoidal actuation frequencies are investigated, corresponding to the two natural frequencies of the undisturbed separation bubble (fl and fh with a ratio of fh/fl=2.5) and a high frequency at 10fl motivated by a harmonic resolvent analysis. The results are compared to the baseline uncontrolled flow. Very-large scale (VLS), spanwise-rotating vortices are formed at fl and fh, causing a 50% reduction in the mean TSB length. A counter-rotating secondary vortex is induced locally by the VLS vortex in the fl case and forms a vortex pair with the VLS vortex as they move downstream together. The interaction of the vortex pair facilitates their decay. The VLS vortex generated by the forcing at fh is not strong enough to produce such a secondary vortex. Spectral analysis of the harmonic resolvent operator is used to quantify the receptivity of the flow to actuation at different frequencies. The perturbations that excite the most energetic response in the flow are indeed in the form of streamwise-elongated structures in the separation region at fl and fh. Energetic structures corresponding to the temporal mean obtained from the analysis are found to extend to distances far downstream of the separation bubble confirming the great sensitivity of the entire flow to such forcing.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (78)

  1. M. Gad-el-Hak and D. M. Bushnell, Separation control: Review, J. Fluids Eng. 113, 5 (1991).
  2. H. E. Monir, M. Tadjfar, and A. Bakhtian, Tangential synthetic jets for separation control, J. Fluids Struct. 45, 50 (2014).
  3. D. Williams and D. MacMynowski, Fundamentals and Applications of Modern Flow Control, edited by R. D. Joslin and D. N. Miller (AIAA, Reston, VA, 2009), pp. 1–20
  4. L. N. Cattafesta and M. Sheplak, Actuators for active flow control, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 43, 247 (2011).
  5. M. Amitay, D. Smith, V. Kibens, D. E. Parekh, and A. Glezer, Aerodynamic flow control using synthetic jet actuators, AIAA J. 39, 361 (2001).
  6. S. D. Goodfellow, S. Yarusevych, and P. E. Sullivan, Momentum coefficient as a parameter for aerodynamic flow control with synthetic jets, AIAA J. 51, 623 (2013).
  7. H. Shan, L. Jiang, and C. Liu, Direct numerical simulation of flow separation around a NACA 0012 airfoil, Comput. Fluids 34, 1096 (2005).
  8. E. A. Deem, L. N. Cattafesta, M. S. Hemati, H. Zhang, C. Rowley, and R. Mittal, Adaptive separation control of a laminar boundary layer using online dynamic mode decomposition, J. Fluid Mech. 903, A21 (2020).
  9. J. H. Seo, F. Cadieux, R. Mittal, E. Deem, and L. N. Cattafesta, Effect of synthetic jet modulation schemes on the reduction of a laminar separation bubble, Phys. Rev. Fluids 3, 033901 (2018).
  10. H. Jiang and L. Cheng, Flow separation around a square cylinder at low to moderate Reynolds numbers, Phys. Fluids 32, 044103 (2020).
  11. R. L. Simpson, Aspects of turbulent boundary-layer separation, Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 32, 457 (1996).
  12. J.-C. Béra, M. Michard, M. Sunyach, and G. Comte-Bellot, Changing lift and drag by jet oscillation: Experiments on a circular cylinder with turbulent separation, Eur. J. Mech. B Fluids 19, 575 (2000).
  13. S. Chun and H. J. Sung, Large-scale vortical structure of turbulent separation bubble affected by unsteady wake, Exp. Fluids 34, 572 (2003).
  14. D. Pearson, P. Goulart, and B. Ganapathisubramani, Turbulent separation upstream of a forward-facing step, J. Fluid Mech. 724, 284 (2013).
  15. G. N. Coleman, C. L. Rumsey, and P. R. Spalart, Numerical study of turbulent separation bubbles with varying pressure gradient and Reynolds number, J. Fluid Mech. 847, 28 (2018).
  16. A. T. Mohammed-Taifour and J. Weiss, Periodic forcing of a large turbulent separation bubble, J. Fluid Mech. 915, A24 (2021).
  17. M. Sato, K. Asada, T. Nonomura, H. Aono, A. Yakeno, and K. Fujii, Mechanisms for turbulent separation control using plasma actuator at Reynolds number of 1.6 ×106, Phys. Fluids 31, 095107 (2019).
  18. M. J. Cho, S. Choi, and H. Choi, Control of flow separation in a turbulent boundary layer using time-periodic forcing, J. Fluid Engr. 138, 101204 (2016).
  19. S. Song and J. K. Eaton, The effects of wall roughness on the separated flow over a smoothly contoured ramp, Exp. Fluids 33, 38 (2002).
  20. C. D. Aubertine, J. K. Eaton, and S. Song, Parameters controlling roughness effects in a separating boundary layer, Int. J. Heat Fluid Flow 25, 444 (2004).
  21. W. Wu, R. Banyassady, and U. Piomelli, Large-eddy simulation of impinging jets on smooth and rough surfaces, J. Turbul. 17, 847 (2016).
  22. W. Wu and U. Piomelli, Effects of surface roughness on a separating turbulent boundary layer, J. Fluid Mech. 841, 552 (2018).
  23. P.-A. Krogstad and P. E. Skare, Influence of a strong adverse pressure gradient on the turbulent structure in a boundary layer, Phys. Fluids 7, 2014 (1995).
  24. H. S. Shafi and R. A. Antonia, Anisotropy of the Reynolds stress in a turbulent boundary layer on a rough wall, Exp. Fluids 18, 213 (1995).
  25. J. Yuan and U. Piomelli, Roughness effects on the Reynolds stress budgets in near-wall turbulence, J. Fluid Mech. 760, R1 (2014).
  26. W. Wu, U. Piomelli, and J. Yuan, Turbulence statistics in rotating channel flows with rough walls, Int. J. Heat Fluid Flow 80, 108467 (2019).
  27. A. Seifert, A. Darabi, and I. Wygnanski, Delay of airfoil stall by periodic excitation, J. Aircraft 33, 691 (1996).
  28. R. Mittal and R. Kotapati, Resonant mode interaction in a canonical separated flow, in Proceedings of the 6th IUTAM Symposium on Laminar-Turbulent Transitions (Springer, Berlin, 2006), pp. 341–348.
  29. M. A. Leschziner and S. Lardeau, Simulation of slot and round synthetic jets in the context of boundary-layer separation control, Philos. Trans. R. Soc. A 369, 1495 (2011).
  30. T. T. Rice, K. Taylor, and M. Amitay, Pulse modulation of synthetic jet actuators for control of separation, Phys. Rev. Fluids 6, 093902 (2021).
  31. L. W. Sigurdson, The structure and control of a turbulent reattaching flow, J. Fluid Mech. 298, 139 (1995).
  32. M. Amitay and A. Glezer, Role of actuation frequency in controlled flow reattachment over a stalled airfoil, AIAA J. 40, 209 (2002).
  33. A. Glezer, M. Amitay, and A. M. Honohan, Aspects of low- and high-frequency aerodynamic flow control, AIAA J. 43, 1501 (2005).
  34. A. Esfahani, N. Webb, and M. Samimy, Flow separation control over a thin post-stall airfoil: Effects of excitation frequency, AIAA J. 57, 1826 (2019).
  35. J. Dandois, E. Garnier, and P. Sagaut, Numerical simulation of active separation control by a synthetic jet, J. Fluid Mech. 574, 25 (2007).
  36. J. A. Franck and T. Colonius, Effects of actuation frequency on flow control applied to a wall-mounted hump, AIAA J. 50, 1631 (2012).
  37. Y. Na and P. Moin, Direct numerical simulation of a separated turbulent boundary layer, J. Fluid Mech. 374, 379 (1998).
  38. A. Mohammed-Taifour and J. Weiss, Unsteadiness in a large turbulent separation bubble, J. Fluid Mech. 799, 383 (2016).
  39. W. Wu, C. Meneveau, and R. Mittal, Spatio-temporal dynamics of turbulent separation bubbles, J. Fluid Mech. 883, A45 (2019).
  40. R. A. Humble, F. Scarano, and B. W. V. Oudheusden, Unsteady aspects of an incident shock wave/turbulent boundary layer interaction, J. Fluid Mech. 635, 47 (2009).
  41. A. Thacker, S. Aubrun, A. Leroy, and P. Devinant, Experimental characterization of flow unsteadiness in the centerline plane of an Ahmed body rear slant, Exp. Fluids 54, 1479 (2013).
  42. N. Gautier, J. L. Aider, T. Duriez, B. R. Noack, M. Segond, and M. W. Abel, Closed-loop separation control using machine learning, J. Fluid Mech. 770, 442 (2015).
  43. A. Debien, S. Aubrun, N. Mazellier, and A. Kourta, Active separation control process over a sharp edge ramp, in Proceedings of the 9th International Symposium on Turbulence and Shear Flow Phenomena (TSFP 9) (Melbourne, Australia, 2015), pp. 311–322.
  44. A. Debien, K. A. F. F. von Krbek, N. Mazellier, T. Duriez, L. Cordier, B. R. Noack, M. W. Abel, and A. Kourta, Closed-loop separation control over a sharp edge ramp using genetic programming, Exp. Fluids 57, 40 (2016).
  45. F. H. Clauser, Turbulent boundary layers in adverse pressure gradient, J. Aeronaut. Sci. 21, 91 (1954).
  46. T. Lund, X. Wu, and K. Squires, Generation of turbulent inflow data for spatially developing boundary layer simulations, J. Comput. Phys. 140, 233 (1998).
  47. I. Orlanski, A simple boundary condition for unbounded hyperbolic flows, J. Comput. Phys. 21, 251 (1976).
  48. G. S. Settles, T. J. Fitzpatrick, and S. M. Bogdonoff, Detailed study of attached and separated compression corner flowfields in high Reynolds number supersonic flow, AIAA J. 17, 579 (1979).
  49. M. S. Loginov, N. A. Adams, and A. A. Zheltovodov, Large-eddy simulation of shock-wave/turbulent-boundary-layer interaction, J. Fluid Mech. 565, 135 (2006).
  50. S. Priebe, J. H. Tu, C. W. Rowley, and M. P. Martín, Low-frequency dynamics in a shock-induced separated flow, J. Fluid Mech. 807, 441 (2016).
  51. R. Petz and W. Nitsche, Active separation control on the flap of a two-dimensional generic high-lift configuration, J. Aircraft 44, 865 (2007).
  52. J. Dandois, E. Garnier, and P. Sagaut, Unsteady simulation of a synthetic jet in a crossflow, AIAA J. 44, 225 (2006).
  53. D. K. L. Wu and M. A. Leschziner, Large-eddy simulations of circular synthetic jets in quiescent surroundings and in turbulent cross-flow, Int. J. Heat Fluid Flow 30, 421 (2009).
  54. D. R. Smith, Interaction of a synthetic jet with a crossflow boundary layer, AIAA J. 40, 2277 (2002).
  55. T. V. Buren, C. M. Leong, E. Whalen, and M. Amitay, Impact of orifice orientation on a finite-span synthetic jet interaction with a crossflow, Phys. Fluids 28, 037106 (2016).
  56. S. Aram and R. Mittal, Computational study of the effect of slot orientation on synthetic jet-based separation control, Int. J. Flow Control 3, 87 (2011).
  57. R. Raju, R. Mittal, and L. Cattafesta, Dynamics of airfoil separation control using zero-net mass-flux forcing, AIAA J. 46, 3103 (2008).
  58. W. Wu, J.-H. Seo, C. Meneveau, and R. Mittal, Response of a laminar separation bubble to forcing with zero-net mass flux jets, in Proceedings of the Flow Control Conference, AIAA AVIATION Forum (AIAA, 2018).
  59. R. J. Goldstein, Flim cooling, Adv. Heat Transfer 7, 321 (1971).
  60. T. V. Buren, E. Whalen, and M. Amitay, Interaction between a vortex generator and a synthetic jet in a crossflow, Phys. Fluids 27, 107101 (2015).
  61. H. Abe, Reynolds-number dependence of wall-pressure fluctuations in a pressure-induced turbulent separation bubble, J. Fluid Mech. 833, 563 (2017).
  62. L. G. Pack, N. W. Schaeffler, C.-S. Yao, and A. Seifert, Active control of flow separation from the slat shoulder of a supercritical airfoil, in AIAA Paper (AIAA AVIATION Forum, 2002), pp. 2002–3156.
  63. W. Wu, C. Meneveau, and R. Mittal, Dynamics of natural and perturbed turbulent separation bubbles, in Proceedings of the 11th International Symposium on Turbulence and Shear Flow Phenomena (TSFP 11) (Southampton, UK, 2019).
  64. R. Mittal, H. Dong, M. Bozkurttas, F. Najjar, A. Vargas, and A. von Loebbecke, A versatile sharp interface immersed boundary method for incompressible flows with complex boundaries, J. Comput. Phys. 227, 4825 (2008).
  65. W. Wu, J. Seo, C. Meneveau, and R. Mittal, Response of a laminar separation bubble to forcing with zero-net mass flux jets, in Proceedings of the Flow Control Conference, AIAA AVIATION Forum (AIAA, 2018).
  66. D. R. Smith, M. Amitay, K. Kibens, D. E. Parekh, and A. Glezer, Modification of lifting body aerodynamics using synthetic jet actuators, in AIAA Paper (AIAA AVIATION Forum, 1998).
  67. D. Greenblatt and I. J. Wygnanski, The control of flow separation by periodic excitation, Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 36, 487 (2000).
  68. T. E. Lee, J. G. Leishman, and M. Ramasamy, Fluid dynamics of interacting blade tip vortices with a ground plane, J. Am. Helicopter Soc. 55, 22005 (2010).
  69. J. Geiser and K. T. Kiger, Vortex ring breakdown induced by topographic forcing, J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 318, 062013 (2011).
  70. W. Wu and U. Piomelli, Large-eddy simulation of impinging jets with embedded azimuthal vortices, J. Turbul. 16, 44 (2015).
  71. J. Otsuka, A. Saruwatari, and Y. Watanabe, Vortex-induced suspension of sediment in the surf zone, Adv. Water Resour. 110, 59 (2017).
  72. D. Liepmann and M. Gharib, The role of streamwise vorticity in the near field entrainment of round jets, J. Fluid Mech. 245, 643 (1992).
  73. R. Suprayan and H. E. Fiedler, On streamwise vortical structures in the near-field of axisymmetric shear layers, Meccanica 29, 403 (1994).
  74. P. E. Skare and P.-A. Krogstad, A turbulent equilibrium boundary layer near separation, J. Fluid Mech. 272, 319 (1994).
  75. A. Padovan, S. E. Otto, and C. W. Rowley, Analysis of amplification mechanisms and cross-frequency interactions in nonlinear flows via the harmonic resolvent, J. Fluid Mech. 900, A14 (2020).
  76. M. R. Jovanović and B. Bamieh, Componentwise energy amplification in channel flows, J. Fluid Mech. 534, 145 (2005).
  77. B. J. McKeon and A. S. Sharma, A critical-layer framework for turbulent pipe flow, J. Fluid Mech. 658, 336 (2010).
  78. N. Halko, P. G. Martinsson, and J. A. Tropp, Finding structure with randomness: Probabilistic algorithms for constructing approximate matrix decompositions, SIAM Rev. 53, 217 (2011).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Fluids 7, 084601– Published 3 August, 2022
  • Received 7 December 2021
  • Accepted 11 July 2022
Article part of CHORUS
Crossmark - Check for updates button

©2022 American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation