Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access
  • Access by Xinjiang University

Bursting of a laminar separation bubble subject to periodic forcing on a pitching airfoil

Connor Toppings, Theodoros Michelis, and Marios Kotsonis

Serhiy Yarusevych*

  • Department of Mechanical and Mechatronics Engineering, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada N2L 3G1

  • *Contact author: syarus@uwaterloo.ca

Phys. Rev. Fluids 11, 073901 – Published 14 July, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/zh15-87h3

Abstract

The bursting of a laminar separation bubble subject to periodic forcing is studied experimentally on a NACA0018 airfoil at a chord Reynolds number of 7×104. Bursting of the bubble is initiated by a dynamic ramp increase in angle of attack past the static stall angle with a nondimensional pitch rate of 0.008. The initial and final effective angles of attack are 4.9 and 7.2. Periodic forcing is continuously applied to the boundary layer by a spanwise-uniform alternating current dielectric-barrier-discharge plasma actuator at the leading edge of the airfoil. The forcing frequency was chosen to match the unforced vortex shedding frequency of the separated shear layer at the initial angle of attack. Surface pressure and particle image velocimetry measurements were obtained during the airfoil motion to investigate the boundary layer development on the suction surface. In the unforced flow, bursting of the laminar separation bubble begins before the maximum angle of attack is reached. The results show that periodic forcing can either delay or prevent the onset of bursting past the end of the pitching motion. With increasing forcing amplitude, the laminar separation bubble may persist at the maximum angle of attack for on the order of 100 convective time units before bursting. Although periodic forcing can delay bursting, the dynamics of the bursting process are largely unchanged once the bursting process initiates, requiring a period of approximately 30 convective time units for the flow to settle to a massively separated state. The delay in the onset of bursting increases and becomes less deterministic as the forcing amplitude increases, until the forcing amplitude is sufficient to prevent bursting entirely.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (74)

  1. P. B. S. Lissaman, Low-Reynolds-number airfoils, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 15, 223 (1983).
  2. A. R. Jones, O. Cetiner, and M. J. Smith, Physics and modeling of large flow disturbances: Discrete gust encounters for modern air vehicles, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 54, 469 (2022).
  3. D. H. Wood, in Advances in Wind Energy Conversion Technology (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2011), pp. 195–211.
  4. I. Tani, Low-speed flows involving bubble separations, Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 5, 70 (1964).
  5. S. S. Diwan and O. N. Ramesh, On the origin of the inflectional instability of a laminar separation bubble, J. Fluid Mech. 629, 263 (2009).
  6. S. Hosseinverdi and H. F. Fasel, Numerical investigation of laminar-turbulent transition in laminar separation bubbles: The effect of free-stream turbulence, J. Fluid Mech. 858, 714 (2019).
  7. H. P. Horton, Laminar separation bubbles in two and three dimensional incompressible flow, Ph.D. thesis, University of London, London, UK, 1968.
  8. M. Gaster, The structure and behaviour of laminar separation bubbles, Technical Report, Reports and Memoranda 3595, Aeronautical Research Council, London, UK, 1967.
  9. S. Yarusevych and M. Kotsonis, Steady and transient response of a laminar separation bubble to controlled disturbances, J. Fluid Mech. 813, 955 (2017).
  10. O. Marxen and D. S. Henningson, The effect of small-amplitude convective disturbances on the size and bursting of a laminar separation bubble, J. Fluid Mech. 671, 1 (2011).
  11. M. R. Visbal and S. I. Benton, Exploration of high-frequency control of dynamic stall using large-eddy simulations, AIAA J. 56, 2974 (2018).
  12. S. I. Benton and M. R. Visbal, The onset of dynamic stall at a high, transitional Reynolds number, J. Fluid Mech. 861, 860 (2019).
  13. L. Damiola, M. F. Siddiqui, M. C. Runacres, and T. De Troyer, Influence of free-stream turbulence intensity on static and dynamic stall of a NACA 0018 aerofoil, J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 232, 105270 (2023).
  14. J. Kern, D. Blanco, A. Cavalieri, P. Negi, A. Hanifi, and D. Henningson, Direct numerical simulations of an airfoil undergoing dynamic stall at different background disturbance levels, J. Fluid Mech. 986, A3 (2024).
  15. L. E. Ericsson and J. P. Reding, Fluid mechanics of dynamic stall part I. Unsteady flow concepts, J. Fluids Struct. 2, 1 (1988).
  16. A. Nati, R. de Kat, F. Scarano, and B. W. van Oudheusden, Dynamic pitching effect on a laminar separation bubble, Exp. Fluids 56, 172 (2015).
  17. N. Alferez, I. Mary, and E. Lamballais, Study of stall development around an airfoil by means of high fidelity large eddy simulation, Flow, Turbul. Combust. 91, 623 (2013).
  18. M. L. Post and T. C. Corke, Separation control using plasma actuators: Dynamic stall vortex control on oscillating airfoil, AIAA J. 44, 3125 (2006).
  19. T. C. Corke, P. O. Bowles, C. He, and E. H. Matlis, Sensing and control of flow separation using plasma actuators, Philos. Trans. R. Soc. A 369, 1459 (2011).
  20. N. Benard, L. N. Cattafesta, E. Moreau, J. Griffin, and J. P. Bonnet, On the benefits of hysteresis effects for closed-loop separation control using plasma actuation, Phys. Fluids 23, 083601 (2011).
  21. M. Sato, T. Nonomura, K. Okada, K. Asada, H. Aono, A. Yakeno, Y. Abe, and K. Fujii, Mechanisms for laminar separated-flow control using dielectric-barrier-discharge plasma actuator at low Reynolds number, Phys. Fluids 27, 117101 (2015).
  22. 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).
  23. M. Karp and M. J. Hack, Optimal suppression of a separation bubble in a laminar boundary layer, J. Fluid Mech. 892, A23 (2020).
  24. S. Yarusevych and M. Kotsonis, Effect of local DBD plasma actuation on transition in a laminar separation bubble, Flow Turbul. Combust. 98, 195 (2017).
  25. D. Borgmann, J. Little, and H. Fasel, Active control of transition to turbulence in laminar separation bubbles, J. Fluid Mech. 1016, A59 (2025).
  26. D. Greenblatt and I. J. Wygnanski, The control of flow separation by periodic excitation, Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 36, 487 (2000).
  27. T. Michelis, S. Yarusevych, and M. Kotsonis, On the origin of spanwise vortex deformations in laminar separation bubbles, J. Fluid Mech. 841, 81 (2018).
  28. B. L. Ramos, W. R. Wolf, C. A. Yeh, and K. Taira, Active flow control for drag reduction of a plunging airfoil under deep dynamic stall, Phys. Rev. Fluids 4, 074603 (2019).
  29. O. Marxen, M. Lang, and U. Rist, Vortex formation and vortex breakup in a laminar separation bubble, J. Fluid Mech. 728, 58 (2013).
  30. C. E. Toppings and S. Yarusevych, Transient dynamics of laminar separation bubble formation and bursting, Exp. Fluids 64, 57 (2023).
  31. J. J. Wang, K. S. Choi, L. H. Feng, T. N. Jukes, and R. D. Whalley, Recent developments in DBD plasma flow control, Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 62, 52 (2013).
  32. R. Merino-Martínez, A. Rubio Carpio, L. T. Lima Pereira, S. van Herk, F. Avallone, D. Ragni, and M. Kotsonis, Aeroacoustic design and characterization of the 3D-printed, open-jet, anechoic wind tunnel of Delft University of Technology, Appl. Acoust. 170, 107504 (2020).
  33. M. S. H. Boutilier and S. Yarusevych, Effects of end plates and blockage on low-Reynolds-number flows over airfoils, AIAA J. 50, 1547 (2012).
  34. T. A. Fox and G. S. West, On the use of end plates with circular cylinders, Exp. Fluids 9, 237 (1990).
  35. Y. Zhang, F. Avallone, and S. Watson, Wind turbine blade trailing edge crack detection based on airfoil aerodynamic noise: An experimental study, Appl. Acoust. 191, 108668 (2022).
  36. W. H. Rae and A. Pope, Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing, 1st ed (John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, 1966).
  37. M. Drela, in XFOIL: An analysis and design system for low Reynolds number airfoils, in Low Reynolds Number Aerodynamics, edited by T. J. Mueller (Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1989), pp. 1–12.
  38. S. A. Whitmore and M. D. Wilson, Wiener deconvolution for reconstruction of pneumatically attenuated pressure signals, AIAA J. 49, 890 (2011).
  39. B. Wieneke, PIV uncertainty quantification from correlation statistics, Meas. Sci. Technol. 26, 074002 (2015).
  40. A. Sciacchitano and B. Wieneke, PIV uncertainty propagation, Meas. Sci. Technol. 27, 084006 (2016).
  41. R. J. Moffat, Describing the uncertainties in experimental results, Exp. Therm Fluid Sci. 1, 3 (1988).
  42. C. D. Meinhart, S. T. Wereley, and J. G. Santiago, A PIV algorithm for estimating time-averaged velocity fields, J. Fluids Eng. 122, 285 (2000).
  43. D. E. Ashpis and M. C. Laun, Dielectric barrier discharge (DBD) plasma actuators thrust - measurement methodology incorporating new anti-thrust hypothesis, in Proceedings of the 52nd Aerospace Sciences Meeting (American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reston, VA, 2014), pp. 1–16.
  44. A. V. Boiko, G. R. Grek, A. V. Dovgal, and V. V. Kozlov, The Origin of Turbulence in Near-Wall Flows (Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2002), Vol. 7.
  45. M. Ol, B. McCauliffe, E. Hanff, U. Scholz, and C. J. Kähler, Comparison of laminar separation bubble measurements on a low Reynolds number airfoil in three facilities, in Proceedings of the 35th AIAA Fluid Dynamics Conference and Exhibit (American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reston, Virigina, 2005).
  46. R. Hain, C. J. Kähler, and R. Radespiel, Dynamics of laminar separation bubbles at low-Reynolds-number aerofoils, J. Fluid Mech. 630, 129 (2009).
  47. J. M. Lilly and S. C. Olhede, Generalized morse wavelets as a superfamily of analytic wavelets IEEE Trans. Signal Process. 60, 6036 (2012).
  48. J. M. Lilly, Element analysis: A wavelet-based method for analysing time-localized events in noisy time series, Proc. R. Soc. A 473, 20160776 (2017).
  49. A. Grille Guerra, C. Mertens, J. Little, and B. van Oudheusden, Experimental characterization of an unsteady laminar separation bubble on a pitching wing, Exp. Fluids 64, 16 (2023).
  50. S. S. Diwan and O. N. Ramesh, Relevance of local parallel theory to the linear stability of laminar separation bubbles, J. Fluid Mech. 698, 468 (2012).
  51. R. Gerakopulos and S. Yarusevych, Novel time-resolved pressure measurements on an airfoil at a low Reynolds number, AIAA J. 50, 1189 (2012).
  52. A. Dovgal, V. Kozlov, and A. Michalke, Laminar boundary layer separation: Instability and associated phenomena, Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 30, 61 (1994).
  53. M. S. H. Boutilier and S. Yarusevych, Parametric study of separation and transition characteristics over an airfoil at low Reynolds numbers, Exp. Fluids 52, 1491 (2012).
  54. D. Lengani, D. Simoni, M. Ubaldi, and P. Zunino, POD analysis of the unsteady behavior of a laminar separation bubble, Exp. Therm Fluid Sci. 58, 70 (2014).
  55. P. Welch, The use of fast Fourier transform for the estimation of power spectra: A method based on time averaging over short, modified periodograms, IEEE Trans. Audio Electroacoust. 15, 70 (1967).
  56. J. W. Kurelek, S. Yarusevych, and M. Kotsonis, Vortex merging in a laminar separation bubble under natural and forced conditions, Phys. Rev. Fluids 4, 063903 (2019).
  57. O. Marxen and U. Rist, Mean flow deformation in a laminar separation bubble: Separation and stability characteristics, J. Fluid Mech. 660, 37 (2010).
  58. S. Pröbsting and S. Yarusevych, Laminar separation bubble development on an airfoil emitting tonal noise, J. Fluid Mech. 780, 167 (2015).
  59. C. E. Toppings and S. Yarusevych, Laminar separation bubble formation and bursting on a finite wing, J. Fluid Mech. 986, A26 (2024).
  60. W. J. McCroskey, The phenomenon of dynamic stall, Technical Report NASA-TM-81264, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffat Field, CA, 1981.
  61. K. Mulleners and M. Raffel, Dynamic stall development, Exp. Fluids 54, 1469 (2013).
  62. R. Gupta and P. J. Ansell, Unsteady flow physics of airfoil dynamic stall, AIAA J. 57, 165 (2019).
  63. R. B. Green, R. A. M. Galbraith, and A. Niven, The convection speed of the dynamic stall vortex, Technical Report TR920166, United States Air Force Office of Scientific Research, 1992.
  64. F. Malmir, G. Di Labbio, A. Le Floc'H, L. Dufresne, J. Weiss, and J. Vétel, Low-frequency unsteadiness in laminar separation bubbles, J. Fluid Mech. 999, A99 (2024).
  65. C. Cura, A. Hanifi, A. V. Cavalieri, and J. Weiss, On the low-frequency dynamics of turbulent separation bubbles, J. Fluid Mech. 991, A11 (2024).
  66. J. Jeong and F. Hussain, On the identification of a vortex, J. Fluid Mech. 285, 69 (1995).
  67. C. E. Toppings and S. Yarusevych, Transient dynamics of stall and reattachment at low Reynolds number, J. Fluid Mech. 1011, A38 (2025).
  68. M. S. H. Boutilier and S. Yarusevych, Separated shear layer transition over an airfoil at a low Reynolds number, Phys. Fluids 24, 084105 (2012).
  69. B. J. Abu-Ghannam and R. Shaw, Natural transition of boundary layers—The effects of turbulence, pressure gradient, and flow history, J. Mech. Eng. Sci. 22, 213 (1980).
  70. B. Thwaites, Approximate calculation of the laminar boundary layer, Aeronaut. Q. 1, 245 (1949).
  71. M. Aniffa and A. C. Mandal, Experiments on the low-frequency oscillation of a separated shear layer, Phys. Rev. Fluids 8, 023902 (2023).
  72. J. H. Almutairi, L. E. Jones, and N. D. Sandham, Intermittent bursting of a laminar separation bubble on an airfoil, AIAA J. 48, 414 (2010).
  73. F. Crameri, Scientific colour maps (2018), https://www.fabiocrameri.ch/colourmaps/.
  74. F. Crameri, G. E. Shephard, and P. J. Heron, The misuse of colour in science communication Nat. Commun. 11, 5444 (2020).

Outline

Information

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation