Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-mp689 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T09:03:11.172Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Experimental investigation of the shock-induced flow over a wall-mounted cylinder

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 June 2018

H. Ozawa Open the ORCID record for H. Ozawa [Opens in a new window]  and
S. J. Laurence
H. Ozawa*
Affiliation:
Department of Aerospace Engineering, Tokyo Metropolitan University, Hino-City, 191-0065, Japan
S. J. Laurence
Affiliation:
Department of Aerospace Engineering, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742, USA
*
†Email address for correspondence: hozawa@tmu.ac.jp
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The unsteady aerodynamic and aerothermal phenomena resulting from the interaction between a shock-induced supersonic boundary-layer flow and a wall-mounted cylinder are investigated. Experiments were conducted in a shock tube at three different post-shock unit Reynolds numbers and a single Mach number to investigate the effects of differing ratios of inviscid and viscous temporal scales on the flow development. Two cylinder heights were studied: ‘large’ and ‘small’ protuberances based on calculated boundary-layer thicknesses. Heat-flux measurements on the shock-tube wall were performed using an ultra-fast-response temperature sensitive paint and verified by independent thermocouple measurements. High-speed schlieren provided visualizations of the inviscid flow phenomena. The unsteady shock-wave/boundary-layer interaction ahead of the cylinder resulted in high transient heat loading on the wall and caused transition to turbulence of the incoming laminar boundary layer. Once this incoming boundary layer had naturally transitioned, the region of enhanced heat flux collapsed back towards the cylinder; during this process, heat transfer in the immediate wake increased significantly. The overall heat flux upstream of the cylinder was higher for the large protuberance, whereas the downstream heat flux was generally higher for the small protuberance. In the case of the large protuberance, the viscous scaling appeared to best collapse the upstream heat-flux development for the three different unit Reynolds numbers, though the agreement downstream was less satisfactory. Neither the viscous nor the inviscid scaling appeared to adequately collapse the development for the small protuberance.

JFM classification

Compressible Flows: Compressible boundary layers Aerodynamics: High-speed flow Instability: Transition to turbulence
Type
JFM Papers
Information
Journal of Fluid Mechanics , Volume 849 , 25 August 2018 , pp. 1009 - 1042
Check for updates
Copyright
© 2018 Cambridge University Press 

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

Abe, A., Takayama, K. & Itoh, K. 1997 Experimental and numerical study of shock wave propagation over cylinders and spheres. Trans. Model. Simul. 30, 209–218.Google Scholar
Alpher, R. A. & White, D. R. 1958 Flow in shock tubes with area change at the diaphragm section. J. Fluid Mech. 3, 457–470.Google Scholar
Brun, R. 1985 Comment on ‘Further experiments on shock-tube wall boundary-layer transition’. AIAA J. 23, 1297–1298.Google Scholar
Chabai, A. J. & Emrich, R. J. 1955 Measurement of wall temperature and heat flow in the shock tube. J. Appl. Phys. 26, 779–780.Google Scholar
Cook, W. J. & Felderman, E. J. 1966 Reduction of data from thin-film heat-transfer gages: a concise numerical technique. AIAA J. 4 (3), 561–562.Google Scholar
Dolling, D. S. & Bogdonoff, S. M. 1981 Scaling of interactions of cylinders with supersonic turbulent boundary layers. AIAA J. 19 (5), 655–657.Google Scholar
Dolling, D. S. & Smiths, D. R. 1989 Separation shock dynamics in Mach 5 turbulent interactions induced by cylinders. AIAA J. 27 (12), 1698–1706.Google Scholar
Edney, B. E.1968 Anomalous heat transfer and pressure distributions on blunt bodies at hypersonic speeds in the presence of an impinging shock. FFA Report No. 115.Google Scholar
Estruch, D. 2016 Reattachment heating upstream of short compression ramps in hypersonic flow. Exp. Fluids 57, 92.Google Scholar
Gamezo, V. N., Ogawa, T. & Oran, E. S. 2007 Numerical simulations of flame propagation and ddt in obstructed channels filled with hydrogen–air mixture. Proc. Combust. Inst. 31 (2), 2463–2471.Google Scholar
Gregory, N. & Walker, W. S.1955 The effect on transition of isolated surface excrescences in the boundary layer. R&M 2779. Aeronaut. Res. Council.Google Scholar
Hartunian, R. A., Russo, A. L. & Marrone, P. V. 1960 Boundary-layer transition and heat transfer in shock tubes. J. Aero. Sci. 27 (2), 587–594.Google Scholar
Holden, M. S. 1971 Establishment time of laminar separated flows. AIAA J. 9, 2296–2298.Google Scholar
Hubner, J. P., Carroll, B. F. & Schanze, K. S. 2002 Heat-transfer measurements in hypersonic flow using luminescent coating techniques. J. Thermophys. Heat Transfer 16 (4), 516–522.Google Scholar
Hung, F. T. & Clauss, J. M. 1981 Three-dimensional protuberance interference heating in high speed flow. Prog. Aeronaut. Astronaut. 77, 109–136.Google Scholar
Kameda, M., Seki, H., Makoshi, T., Amao, Y. & Nakakita, K. 2012 A fast-response pressure sensor based on a dye-adsorbed silica nanoparticle film. Sensors Actuators B 171–172, 343–349.Google Scholar
Korkegi, R. H. 1971 Survey of viscous interactions associated with high Mach number flight. AIAA J. 9 (5), 771–784.Google Scholar
Lakshmanan, B. & Tiwari, S. N. 1994 Investigation of three-dimensional separation at wing/body junctions in supersonic flows. AIAA J. 31, 64–71.Google Scholar
Laurence, S. J., Ozawa, H., Lieber, D., Martinez Schramm, J. & Hannemann, K.2012 Investigation of unsteady/quasi-steady scramjet behavior using high-speed visualization techniques. AIAA Paper 2012-5913.Google Scholar
Liu, T., Cai, Z., Lai, J., Rubal, J. & Sullivan, J. P. 2010 Analytical method for determining heat flux from temperature-sensitive-paint measurements in hypersonic tunnels. J. Thermophys. Heat Transfer 24 (1), 85–94.Google Scholar
Liu, T. & Sullivan, J. P. 2007 Pressure and Temperature Sensitive Paints. Springer.Google Scholar
Mark, H.1958 The interaction of a reflected shock wave with the boundary layer in a shock tube. NACA-TM-1418.Google Scholar
Martin, W. A. 1958 An experimental study of the turbulent boundary layer behind the initial shock wave in a shock tube. J. Aero. Sci. 25, 644–652.Google Scholar
Martinez Schramm, J., Hannemann, K., Ozawa, H., Beck, W. & Klein, C. 2015 Development of temperature sensitive paints for the High Enthalpy Shock Tunnel Göttingen, HEG. In Proceedings of the 8th European Symposium on Aerothermodynamics for Space Vehicles.Google Scholar
Mills, A. 1997 Optical oxygen sensors utilising the luminescence of platinum metal complexes. Platinum Met. Rev. 41, 115–127.Google Scholar
Mirels, H.1955 Laminar boundary layer behind shock advancing into stationary fluid. NACA Report 3401.Google Scholar
Mirels, H.1957 Attenuation in a shock tube due to unsteady-boundary-layer action. NACA Report 1333.Google Scholar
North, R. J. & Stuart, C. M.1962 Flow visualization and high-speed photography in hypersonic aerodynamics. NPL Aero Report 1029.Google Scholar
Numata, D., Fujii, S., Nagai, H. & Asai, K. 2017 Ultrafast-response anodized-aluminum pressure-sensitive paints for unsteady flow measurement. AIAA J. 55, 1118–1125.Google Scholar
Ofengeim, D. Kh. & Drikakis, D. 1997 Simulation of blast wave propagation over a cylinder. Shock Waves 7 (5), 305–317.Google Scholar
Ozawa, H. 2016 Experimental study of unsteady aerothermodynamic phenomena on shock-tube wall using fast-response temperature-sensitive-paints. Phys. Fluids 28 (4), 046103.Google Scholar
Ozawa, H., Laurence, S. J., Martinez Schramm, J., Wagner, A. & Hannemann, K. 2015 Fast-response temperature-sensitive-paint measurements on a hypersonic transition cone. Exp. Fluids 56 (1), 1853.Google Scholar
Özkan, O. & Holt, M. 1984 Supersonic separated flow past a cylindrical obstacle on a flat plate. AIAA J. 22, 611–617.Google Scholar
Özkan, O. & Yüceil, B. K. 1992 Cylinder-induced shock-wave boundary-layer interaction. AIAA J. 30, 1130–1132.Google Scholar
Resler, E. L., Lin, S. C. & Kantrowitz, A. 1952 The production of high temperature gases in shock tubes. J. Appl. Phys. 23, 1390–1399.Google Scholar
Schultz, D. L. & Jones, T. V.1973 Heat-transfer measurements in short-duration hypersonic facilities. AGARDograph No. 165.Google Scholar
Sedney, R. 1972 Visualization of boundary layer flow patterns around protuberances using an optical-surface indicator technique. Phys. Fluids 15, 2439–2441.Google Scholar
Sedney, R. 1973 A survey of the effects of small protuberances on boundary layer flows. AIAA J. 11, 782–792.Google Scholar
Sedney, R. & Kitchens, C. W.1975 The structure of three dimensional separated flows in obstacle-boundary layer interaction. BRL Report 1791. USA Ballistic Research Laboratories.Google Scholar
Sedney, R. & Kitchens, C. W. 1977 Separation ahead of protuberances in supersonic turbulent boundary layers. AIAA J. 15, 546–552.Google Scholar
Sykes, D. M. 1961 The supersonic and low-speed flows past circular cylinders of finite length supported at one end. J. Fluid Mech. 28, 367–387.Google Scholar
Thomas, G. O., Ward, S. M., Williams, R. Ll. & Bambrey, R. J. 2002 On critical conditions for detonation initiation by shock reflection from obstacles. Shock Waves 12 (2), 111–119.Google Scholar
Thompson, W. P. & Emrich, R. J. 1967 Turbulent spots and wall roughness effects in shock tube boundary layer transition. Phys. Fluids 10, 17–20.Google Scholar
Tutty, O. R., Roberts, G. T. & Schuricht, P. H. 2013 High-speed laminar flow past a fin–body junction. J. Fluid Mech. 737, 19–55.Google Scholar
Vidal, R. J.1956 Model instrumentation techniques for heat transfer and force measurements in a hypersonic shock tunnel. Report AD-917-A-1. Cornell Aeronautical Laboratory.Google Scholar
White, F. 1991 Viscous Fluid Flow, 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar

Ozawa and Laurence supplementary movie 1

A movie version of figure 8

Download Ozawa and Laurence supplementary movie 1(Video)
Video 17.2 MB

Ozawa and Laurence supplementary movie 2

A movie version of figure 17

Download Ozawa and Laurence supplementary movie 2(Video)
Video 17 MB

Ozawa and Laurence supplementary movie 3

Comparison of cylinder heights of h/r=3.7(above) and h/r=10 (below) in Condition A

Download Ozawa and Laurence supplementary movie 3(Video)
Video 29 MB

Ozawa and Laurence supplementary movie 4

Comparison of cylinder heights of h/r=3.7(above) and h/r=10 (below) in Condition B

Download Ozawa and Laurence supplementary movie 4(Video)
Video 35.5 MB

Ozawa and Laurence supplementary movie 5

Comparison of cylinder heights of h/r=3.7(above) and h/r=10 (below) in Condition C

Download Ozawa and Laurence supplementary movie 5(Video)
Video 44 MB