Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-pkt8n Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-16T19:48:43.005Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Experimental investigation of three-dimensional turbulent boundary layers on ‘infinite’ swept curved wings

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 April 2006

V. Baskaran ,
Y. G. Pontikis  and
P. Bradshaw
V. Baskaran
Affiliation:
Department of Aeronautics, Imperial College of Science & Technology, London SW7 2BY, UK Present address: Aeronautical Research Laboratories, DSTO Salisbury, Australia.
Y. G. Pontikis
Affiliation:
Department of Aeronautics, Imperial College of Science & Technology, London SW7 2BY, UK British Aerospace Dynamics, Hatfield, Herts, UK.
P. Bradshaw
Affiliation:
Department of Aeronautics, Imperial College of Science & Technology, London SW7 2BY, UK Thermosciences Division, Mechanical Engineering Dept, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Mean flow and turbulence measurements have been made in three-dimensional turbulent boundary layers in curved ducts, simulating adverse pressure gradients on two ‘infinite’ swept curved wing surfaces with concave and convex curvature respectively. The ratio of the initial boundary-layer thickness to the surface radius of curvature in both cases is approximately 0.01, the value used in the earlier two-dimensional turbulent boundary-layer studies on the effects of concave and convex curvature by Hoffmann, Muck & Bradshaw (1985) and Muck, Hoffmann & Bradshaw (1985) respectively. The pressure-driven crossflow has nearly the same streamwise distribution as in the ‘infinite’ swept flat-surface experiment of Bradshaw & Pontikos (1985), which used a similar duct. The results of the present study show that the coupled effects of mean flow three-dimensionality and prolonged mild surface curvature of either sign have rather a weak influence on the turbulence structure, unlike the significant influence of the above extra strain rates when applied individually. In the concave case, the effect of the crossflow appears to oppose the destabilizing effect of curvature in addition to suppressing spanwise wavy inhomogeneities In contrast, the weak combined influence of convex curvature and crossflow, both of which, separately, tend to attenuate turbulence, implies that the interaction between the two effects is grossly nonlinear. Implications of the present results for turbulence modelling are briefly discussed.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Fluid Mechanics , Volume 211 , February 1990 , pp. 95 - 122
Copyright
© 1990 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

Anderson, S. D. & Eaton, J. K. 1987 An experimental investigation of pressure driven three-dimensional turbulent boundary layers. Stanford Univ. Thermosci. Divn Rep. MD-49.Google Scholar
Barlow, R. S. & Johnston, J. P. 1988 Structure of a turbulent boundary layer on a concave surface. J. Fluid Mech. 191, 137.Google Scholar
Baskaran, V. & Bradshaw, P. 1987 Experimental investigation of a three-dimensional turbulent boundary layer on an ‘infinite’ swept concave wing. Imperial College of Sci. & Tech., Dept of Aeronautics. Final Contract Rep. MoD(PE) Agreement AT/2037/0243.
Baskaran, V. & Bradshaw, P. 1988 Decay of spanwise wavy inhomogeneities in a three-dimensional boundary layer over an ‘infinite’ swept concave wing. Expt. Fluids 6, 487.Google Scholar
Baskaran, V., Pontikis, Y. M. & Bradshaw, P. 1987 Experimental investigation of a three-dimensional boundary layer over an ‘infinite’ swept convex wing. Imperial College of Sci. & Tech., Dept of Aeronautics, Final Contract Rep. MoD(PE) Agreement AT/2037/0243.
Baskaran, V., Smits, A. J. & Joubert, P. N. 1987 Turbulent flow over a curved hill. Part 1. Growth of an internal boundary layer. J. Fluid Mech. 182, 47.Google Scholar
Berg, B. Van Den, Elsenaar, A., Lindhout, J. P. F. & Wesseling, P. 1975 Measurements in an incompressible three-dimensional turbulent boundary layer under infinite swept conditions, and comparison with theory. J. Fluid Mech. 70, 127.Google Scholar
Bradshaw, P. 1971a Calculation of three-dimensional boundary layers. J. Fluid Mech. 46, 417.Google Scholar
Bradshaw, P. 1971b An Introduction to Turbulence and its Measurement. Pergamon.
Bradshaw, P. 1987 Turbulent secondary flows. Ann. Rev. Fluid Mech. 19, 53.Google Scholar
Bradshaw, P., Ferriss, D. H. & Atwell, N. P. 1967 Calculation of boundary layer development using the turbulent energy equation. J. Fluid Mech. 28, 593.Google Scholar
Bradshaw, P., Mizner, G. A. & Unsworth, K. 1976 Calculation of compressible turbulent boundary layers on straight-tapered swept wings. AIAA J. 14, 399.Google Scholar
Bradshaw, P. & Pontikos N, S. 1985 Measurements in the turbulent boundary layer on an ‘infinite’ swept wing. J. Fluid Mech. 159, 105.Google Scholar
Brederode, V. De & Bradshaw, P. 1976 A note on the empirical constants appearing in the logarithmic law for turbulent wall flows. Imperial College Aero Rep. 74–03.Google Scholar
Bryer, D. W. & Pankhurst, R. C. 1971 Pressure Probe Methods for Determining Wind Speed and Flow Direction. National Physical Laboratory, HMSO, London.
Bushnell, D. M. & McGinley, C. B. 1989 Turbulence control in wall flows. Ann. Rev. Fluid Mech. 21, 1.Google Scholar
Cooke, J. C. & Hall, M. G. 1962 Boundary layers in three-dimensions. Prog. Aero. Sci. 2, 221.Google Scholar
Elsenaar, A. & Boelsma, S. H. 1974 Measurements of the Reynolds stress tensor in a three-dimensional turbulent boundary layer under infinite swept wing conditions. NLRTR 74095U.Google Scholar
East, L. F. 1975 Computation of three-dimensional boundary layers. FFA TN AE 1211.Google Scholar
East, L. F., Sawyer, W. G. & Nash, C. R. 1979 An investigation of the structure of equilibrium turbulent boundary layers. Royal Aircraft Establishment, RAE TR 79040.Google Scholar
Fernholz, H. H. & Vagt, J.-D. 1981 Turbulence measurements in an adverse-pressure-gradient three-dimensional boundary layer along a circular cylinder. J. Fluid Mech. 111, 233.Google Scholar
Gillis, J. C. & Johnston, J. P. 1983 Turbulent boundary-layer flow and structure on a convex wall and its redevelopment on a flat plate. J. Fluid Mech. 135, 123.Google Scholar
Hall, P. 1984 The Görtler vortex instability mechanism in three-dimensional boundary layers. NASA CR 172370.Google Scholar
Hoffmann, P. H., Muck, K. C. & Bradshaw, P. 1985 The effect of concave surface curvature on turbulent boundary layers. J. Fluid Mech. 161, 371.Google Scholar
Johnston, J. P. 1970 Measurements in a three-dimensional boundary layer induced by a swept forward facing step. J. Fluid Mech. 42, 823.Google Scholar
Johnston, J. P. 1976 Experimental studies in three-dimensional turbulent boundary layers. Stanford Univ. Thermosci. Divn Rep. MD-34.
Muck, K. C., Hoffmann, P. H. & Bradshaw, P. 1985 The effect of convex surface curvature on turbulent boundary layers. J. Fluid Mech. 161, 347.Google Scholar
Patel, V. C. 1965 Calibration of the Preston tube and limitations on its use in pressure gradients. J. Fluid Mech. 23, 185.Google Scholar
Pierce, F. J. & Zimmerman, B. B. 1973 Wall shear stress inference from two- and three-dimensional boundary layer velocity profiles. Trans. ASME I: J. Fluids Engng. 95, 61.Google Scholar
Smits, A. J. & Wood, D. H. 1985 Perturbed turbulent boundary layers. Ann. Rev. Fluid Mech. 17, 321.Google Scholar
Tani, I. 1962 Production of longitudinal vortices in the boundary layer along a concave wall. J. Geophys. Res. 67, 3075.Google Scholar