Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-767nl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-12T05:21:37.687Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Transitional and Turbulent Boundary Layers on a Cold Flat Plate in Hypersonic Flow

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 June 2016

Bryan E. Richards
Bryan E. Richards*
Affiliation:
Department of Aeronautics, Imperial College of Science and Technology
Get access

Summary

An experimental investigation of natural transition and turbulent boundary layers on a cold flat plate in hypersonic flow was carried out in the Imperial College Gun Tunnel. Studies were also made of the effects of both two- and three-dimensional roughness elements including vortex generators.

Results indicate that the Reynolds number based on the end of transition consists of two separate parts. These are the Reynolds numbers based respectively on the position of the apparent origin of the transition region behaviour, Ri, and on the length of the transition region measured from this origin. Ri is shown to be independent of unit Reynolds number for a sharp leading-edge model, and by correlations of other published data to vary little with Mach number. This origin is perhaps the most relevant point when comparisons are made between experiment and classical stability theory. The variation of the heat transfer rate during the transition region is compared with findings at low speed and shown to be similar to that expected from the turbulent spot concept of Emmons. The measured variation of the length of the transition region (x) from this origin gives an explanation for the unit Reynolds number effect on transition, and the rapid increase of transition Reynolds number with Mach number in hypersonic flow. The effect of bluntness on these factors is discussed.

The virtual origin of the turbulent boundary layer is shown to lie close to the measured beginning of transition. At these high Mach number and low wall temperature conditions experimental values of heat transfer and values of skin friction coefficient derived from the estimated momentum thickness growth in the turbulent region are found to be appreciably higher than predictions by present theories.

Roughness trips were found to bring the whole transition region forward. Only small differences in the measured boundary layer thickness, shape and heat transfer rates in the turbulent region (referenced to the estimated virtual origin in each case) were found after natural and forced transition. The transition point locations on a flat plate with either spherical roughness elements or vortex generators were found to agree with values predicted by the method of Potter and Whitfield as modified by Luxton to account for the effects of heat transfer.

Type
Research Article
Information
Aeronautical Quarterly , Volume 18 , Issue 3 , August 1967 , pp. 237 - 258
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society. 1967

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

1. Emmons, H. W. The laminar-turbulent transition in a boundary layer. Journal of the Aeronautical Sciences, Vol. 18 p. 490, 1951.Google Scholar
2. Potter, J. L. and Whitfield, J. D. Effects of slight nose blunting and roughness on boundary layer transition in supersonic flows. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 12 p. 501, 1962.Google Scholar
3. Luxton, R. E. Transition in the compressible boundary layer. Australian Mechanical and Chemical Engineering Transactions, Vol. MCI, No. 1, 1965.Google Scholar
4. Rubesin, M. W., Maydew, R. C. and Varga, S. A. An analytical and experimental investigation of the skin friction of the turbulent boundary layer on a flat plate at supersonic speeds. NACA TN 2305, 1951.Google Scholar
5. Spalding, D. B. and Chi, S. W. The drag of a compressible turbulent boundary layer on a smooth flat plate with and without heat transfer. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 18 p. 117,1964.Google Scholar
6. Mack, L. M. The stability of the compressible laminar boundary layer according to a direct numerical solution. AGARDograph 97 p. 329,1965.Google Scholar
7. Schubauer, G. B. and Klebanoff, P. S. Contributions on the mechanics of boundary layer transition. NACA Report 1289, 1955.Google Scholar
8. Dhawan, S. and Narasimha, R. Some properties of boundary layer flow during transition from laminar to turbulent motion. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 3 p. 418, 1958.Google Scholar
9. Elder, J. An experimental investigation of turbulent spots and breakdown to turbulence. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 9 p. 235, 1960.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Coles, D. E. Interfaces and intermittency in turbulent shear flow. Mécanique de la Turbulence, p. 229. (Proceedings of Marseille meeting, 1961.) CNRS Paris, 1962.Google Scholar
11. Klebanoff, P. S., Tidstrom, K. D. and Sargent, L. M. The three dimensional nature of boundary layer instability. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 12 p. 1, 1962.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Kovasznay, L. S. G., Komoda, H. and Vasudeva, B. R. Detailed flow field in transition. Proceedings 1962 Heat Transfer Fluid Mechanics Institute, p. 1. Stanford University Press, 1962.Google Scholar
13. Stuart, J. T. Hydrodynamic Stability. Applied Mechanics Reviews, Vol. 18 p. 523, 1965.Google Scholar
14. Potter, J. L. and Whitfield, J. D. Boundary layer transition under hypersonic conditions. AGARDograph 97, Part 3, 1965.Google Scholar
15. Stollery, J. L., Maull, D. J. and Belcher, B. J. The Imperial College gun tunnel. Journal of the Royal Aeronautical Society, Vol. 64 p. 24, 1960.Google Scholar
16. Needham, D. A. Progress report on the Imperial College hypersonic gun tunnel. Imperial College Aero. Report 118, 1963.Google Scholar
17. Meyer, R. F. A heat-flux-meter for use with thin film surface thermometers. National Research Council of Canada, Aeronautical Report LR-279, 1960.Google Scholar
18. Walz, A. Compressible turbulent boundary layers. Mécanique de la Turbulence p. 299. (Proceedings of Marseille meeting, 1961.) CNRS Paris, 1962.Google Scholar
19. Bertram, M. H. and Neal, L. Recent experiments in hypersonic turbulent boundary layers. AGARDograph 97, Part 5, 1965.Google Scholar
20. Holloway, P. F. and Sterrett, J. R. Effect of controlled surface roughness on boundary layer transition and heat transfer at Mach numbers of 4-8 and 60. NASA TN D-2054, 1964.Google Scholar
21. Needham, D. A. Privaie communication, 1966.Google Scholar
22. Van Driest, E. R. Investigation of laminar boundary layers in compressible fluids using the Crocco method. NACA TN 2597, 1952.Google Scholar
23. Coles, D. E. Measurements of turbulent friction on a smooth flat plate in supersonic flow. Journal of the Aeronautical Sciences, Vol. 21 p. 433, 1954.Google Scholar
24. Diessler, R. G. and Loeffler, A. L. Analysis of turbulent flow and heat transfer on a flat plate at high Mach numbers with variable fluid properties. NACA TN 4262, 1958.Google Scholar
25. Sommer, S. C. and Short, B. J. Free flight measurements of turbulent boundary layer skin friction in the presence of severe aerodynamic heating at Mach numbers from 2-8 to 7-0. NACA TN 3391, 1955.Google Scholar
26. Peterson, J. B. A comparison of experimental and theoretical results for the compressible turbulent boundary layer skin friction with zero pressure gradient. NASA TN D-1795, 1963.Google Scholar
27. Deem, R. E. and Murphy, J. S. Flat plate boundary layer transition at hypersonic speeds. AIAA Preprint 65-128, 1965.Google Scholar
28. Brinich, P. F. Recovery temperature, transition and heat transfer measurements at Mach 5. NASA TN D-1047, 1961.Google Scholar
29. Richards, B. E. and Stollery, J. L. Further experiments on transition reversal at hypersonic speeds. ARC 27 772, 1966.Google Scholar
30. Moeckel, W. E. Some effects of bluntness on boundary layer transition and heat transfer at supersonic speeds. NACA Report 1312, 1957.Google Scholar
31. Potter, J. L. and Whitfield, J. D. Effects of unit Reynolds number, nose bluntness and roughness on boundary layer transition. Arnold Engineering Development Center, AEDC-TR-60-5, 1960.Google Scholar
32. Brinich, P. F. and Diaconis, N. S. Boundary layer development and skin friction at Mach number 3-05. NACA TN 2742, 1952.Google Scholar
33. Schueler, C. J. A comparison of transition Reynolds number from the 12 inch and 40 inch supersonic tunnels. Arnold Engineering Development Center, AEDC-TDR-63-57, 1963.Google Scholar
34. Richards, B. E. and Stollery, J. L. Transition reversal on a flat plate at hypersonic speeds. AGARDograph 97 p. 447, 1965.Google Scholar
35. Jillie, D. W. and Hopkins, E. J. Effects of Mach number, leading edge bluntness, and sweep on boundary layer transition on a flat plate. NASA TN D-1071,1961.Google Scholar
36. Eckert, E. R. G. Engineering relations for skin friction and heat transfer to surfaces in high velocity flow. Journal of the Aeronautical Sciences, Vol. 22 p. 585, 1955.Google Scholar
37. Whitfield, J. D. and Potter, J. L. The influence of slight leading edge bluntness on boundary layer transition at a Mach number of eight. Arnold Engineering Development Center, AEDC TDR-64-18,1964.Google Scholar
38. Holden, M. S. Heat transfer in separated flow. PhD thesis, University of London, 1963.Google Scholar