Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-rnpqb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-27T18:02:18.890Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cross-flow-type breakdown induced by distributed roughness in the boundary layer of a hypersonic capsule configuration

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 October 2018

Antonio Di Giovanni Open the ORCID record for Antonio Di Giovanni [Opens in a new window]  and
Christian Stemmer Open the ORCID record for Christian Stemmer [Opens in a new window]
Antonio Di Giovanni
Affiliation:
Chair for Aerodynamics and Fluid Mechanics, Boltzmannstr. 15, Technical University of Munich, 85748 Garching, Germany
Christian Stemmer*
Affiliation:
Chair for Aerodynamics and Fluid Mechanics, Boltzmannstr. 15, Technical University of Munich, 85748 Garching, Germany
*
†Email address for correspondence: christian.stemmer@aer.mw.tum.de
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Direct numerical simulations are undertaken to investigate the nature of instability mechanisms induced by singular and distributed roughnesses on a blunt-capsule configuration. On the base of a capsule-like hemispherical forebody at wind-tunnel conditions ($M=5.9$), we analyse the development of unsteady disturbances behind a patch of two different roughness geometries. First, spanwise periodic roughness elements are considered and cross-validation with other methods of the stability analysis is achieved. Two main unstable modes are found in the roughness wake, corresponding to the symmetric and antisymmetric modes already known for single roughness elements. Second, the case of a patch of (pseudo-)randomly distributed roughness is presented. A new type of roughness-induced cross-flow-like instability is observed for the blunt-capsule configuration. The rapid growth of primary and secondary instabilities in the cross-flow-type vortex is analysed and quantified in both the linear and nonlinear stages up to the laminar–turbulent breakdown. Spatio-temporal Fourier analysis is performed to track the onset of secondary instabilities, whereas laminar–turbulent transition is identified by the steep increase of the wall heat flux.

JFM classification

Boundary Layers: Boundary layer stability Aerodynamics: High-speed flow Instability: Transition to turbulence
Type
JFM Papers
Information
Journal of Fluid Mechanics , Volume 856 , 10 December 2018 , pp. 470 - 503
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

Ali, S. R., Radespiel, R. & Theiss, A.2014 Transition experiment with a blunt Apollo shape like capsule in hypersonic Ludwieg tube. 63. Deutscher Luft-und Raumfahrtkongress 2014, Paper 2014-340270.Google Scholar
Berger, K. T. 2009 Aerothermodynamic testing of the crew exploration vehicle at Mach 6 and Mach 10. J. Spacecr. Rockets 46 (4), 758–765.Google Scholar
Brehm, C., Dackermann, T., Grygier, F. & Fasel, H.2011 Numerical investigations of the influence of distributed roughness on Blasius boundary layer stability. AIAA Paper 2011-0563.Google Scholar
Chang, C.-L., Choudhari, M., Venkatachari, B. S. & Li, F.2011 Effects of cavities and protuberances on transition over hypersonic vehicles. AIAA Paper 2011-3245.Google Scholar
Choudhari, M., Li, F., Bynum, M., Kegerise, M. & King, R.2015 Computations of disturbance amplification behind isolated roughness elements and comparison with measurements. AIAA Paper 2015-2625.Google Scholar
De Tullio, N., Paredes, P., Sandham, N. & Theofilis, V. 2013 Laminar–turbulent transition induced by a discrete roughness element in a supersonic boundary layer. J. Fluid Mech. 735, 613–646.Google Scholar
Di Giovanni, A. & Stemmer, C. 2017 Numerical simulations of the high-enthalpy boundary layer on a generic capsule geometry with roughness. In New Results in Numerical and Experimental Fluid Mechanics XI, STAB/DGLR Symposium (ed. Dillmann, A. et al. ), pp. 189–198. Springer.Google Scholar
Downs, R. S., White, E. B. & Denissen, N. A. 2008 Transient growth and transition induced by random distributed roughness. AIAA J. 46 (2), 451–462.Google Scholar
Drews, S., Downs, R., Doolittle, C., Goldstein, D. & White, E.2011 Direct numerical simulations of flow past random distributed roughness. AIAA Paper 2011-0564.Google Scholar
Goebel, F., Vos, J. & Mundt, C.2012 CFD simulation of the FIRE II flight experiment. AIAA Paper 2012-3350.Google Scholar
Grabow, R. M. & White, C. O. 1974 Surface roughness effects on nosetip ablation characteristics. In 7th Fluid and Plasma Dynamics Conference, Fluid Dynamics and Co-located Conferences, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.Google Scholar
Groskopf, G. & Kloker, M. J. 2016 Instability and transition mechanisms induced by skewed roughness elements in a high-speed laminar boundary layer. J. Fluid Mech. 805, 262–302.Google Scholar
Hein, S., Theiss, A., Di Giovanni, A., Stemmer, C., Schilden, T., Schröder, W., Paredes, P., Choudhari, M. M., Li, F. & Reshotko, E.2018 Numerical investigation of roughness effects on transition on spherical capsules. AIAA Paper 2018-0058.Google Scholar
Hoarau, Y., Pena, D., Vos, J. B., Charbonier, D., Gehri, A., Braza, M., Deloze, T. & Laurendeau, E.2016 Recent developments of the Navier–Stokes Multi Block (NSMB) CFD solver. AIAA Paper 2016-2056.Google Scholar
Hollis, B. R.2014 Distributed roughness effects on blunt-body transition and turbulent heating. AIAA Paper 2014-0238.Google Scholar
Hollis, B. R.2017 Experimental investigation of roughness effects on transition onset and turbulent heating augmentation on a hemisphere at Mach 6 and Mach 10. NASA Tech. Rep. NASA/TM-2017-219613.Google Scholar
von Kaenel, R., Sanchi, S., Vos, J., Gaffuri, M., Leyland, P., Walloschek, T. & Binetti, P. 2009 IXV CFD simulations for wind tunnel rebuilding and extrapolation to flight. In Proceedings of the 6th European Symposium on Aerothermodynamics for Space Vehicles, ESA SP-659. ESTEC.Google Scholar
Kegerise, M. A., King, R. A., Choudhari, M., Li, F. & Norris, A.2014 An experimental study of roughness-induced instabilities in a supersonic boundary layer. AIAA Paper 2014-2501.Google Scholar
Landahl, M. T. 1980 A note on algebraic instability of inviscid parallel shear flows. Part 2. J. Fluid Mech. 98, 243–251.Google Scholar
Leidy, A. N., Reshotko, E., Siddiqui, F. & Bowersox, R. D. W. 2018 Transition due to roughness on blunt capsule: comparison with transient growth correlation. J. Spacecr. Rockets 55 (1), 167–180.Google Scholar
Levy, Y., Degani, D. & Seginer, A. 1990 Graphical visualization of vortical flows by means of helicity. AIAA J. 28 (8), 1347–1352.Google Scholar
Mack, L. M.1969 Boundary layer stability theory. JPL Rep. 900-277. Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA, USA.Google Scholar
Malik, M. R., Li, F. & Chang, C.-L. 1994 Crossflow disturbances in three-dimensional boundary layers: nonlinear development, wave interaction and secondary instability. J. Fluid Mech. 268, 1–36.Google Scholar
Malik, M. R., Li, F., Choudhari, M. M. & Chang, C.-L. 1999 Secondary instability of crossflow vortices and swept-wing boundary-layer transition. J. Fluid Mech. 399, 85–115.Google Scholar
Morkovin, M. V. 1984 Bypass transition to turbulence and research desiderata. Transition in Turbines NASA CP‐2386, 161–199.Google Scholar
Muppidi, S. & Mahesh, K. 2012 Direct numerical simulations of roughness-induced transition in supersonic boundary layers. J. Fluid Mech. 693, 28–56.Google Scholar
Paredes, P., Choudhari, M. M. & Li, F. 2017 Blunt-body paradox and transient growth on a hypersonic spherical forebody. Phys. Rev. Fluids 2, 053903.Google Scholar
Radespiel, R., Ali, S. R., Bowersox, R. D., Leidy, A., Tanno, H., Kirk, L. C. & Reshotko, E.2018 Experimental investigations of roughness effects on transition on blunt spherical capsule shapes. AIAA Paper 2018-0059.Google Scholar
Reda, D. C. 2002 Review and synthesis of roughness-dominated transition correlations for reentry applications. J. Spacecr. Rockets 39 (2), 161–167.Google Scholar
Reda, D. C., Wilder, M. C., Bogdanoff, D. W. & Prabhu, D. K. 2008 Transition experiments on blunt bodies with distributed roughness in hypersonic free flight. J. Spacecr. Rockets 45 (2), 210–215.Google Scholar
Reshotko, E. & Tumin, A. 2000 The blunt body paradox: a case for transient growth. In Laminar–Turbulent Transition: IUTAM Symposium (ed. Fasel, H. & Saric, W.), pp. 403–408. Springer.Google Scholar
Reshotko, E. & Tumin, A. 2004 Role of transient growth in roughness-induced transition. AIAA J. 42 (4), 766–770.Google Scholar
Schneider, S. P. 2008a Effects of roughness on hypersonic boundary-layer transition. J. Spacecr. Rockets 45 (2), 193–209.Google Scholar
Schneider, S. P. 2008b Summary of hypersonic boundary-layer transition experiments on blunt bodies with roughness. J. Spacecr. Rockets 45 (6), 1090–1105.Google Scholar
Stemmer, C., Birrer, M. & Adams, N. A. 2017a Disturbance development in an obstacle wake in a reacting hypersonic boundary layer. J. Spacecr. Rockets 54 (4), 945–960.Google Scholar
Stemmer, C., Birrer, M. & Adams, N. A. 2017b Hypersonic boundary-layer flow with an obstacle in thermochemical equilibrium and nonequilibrium. J. Spacecr. Rockets 54 (4), 899–915.Google Scholar
Stemmer, C. & Fehn, J.2014 High-temperature gas effects at a capsule under re-entry and wind-tunnel conditions. AIAA Paper 2014-2645.Google Scholar
Theiss, A., Ali, S. R., Hein, S., Heitmann, D. & Radespiel, R.2014 Numerical and experimental investigation of laminar–turbulent boundary layer transition on a blunt generic re-entry capsule. AIAA Paper 2014-2353.Google Scholar
Theiss, A., Hein, S., Ali, S. R. C. & Radespiel, R.2016 Wake flow instability studies behind discrete roughness elements on a generic re-entry capsule. AIAA Paper 2016-4382.Google Scholar
Theiss, A., Leyh, S. & Hein, S. 2017 Pressure gradient effects on wake flow instabilities behind isolated roughness elements on re-entry capsules. In 7th European Conference for Aeronautics and Aerospace Sciences. EUCASS.Google Scholar
Van den Eynde, J. P. J. P. & Sandham, N. D. 2016 Numerical simulations of transition due to isolated roughness elements at Mach 6. AIAA J. 54, 53–65.Google Scholar
Vos, J., Duquesne, N. & Lee, H. 1999 Shock wave boundary layer interaction studies using the NSMB flow solver. In Proceedings of the 3rd European Symposium on Aerothermodynamics for Space and Vehicles, ESA SP-426, pp. 229–236. ESTEC.Google Scholar
Wassermann, P. & Kloker, M. 2002 Mechanisms and passive control of crossflow-vortex-induced transition in a three-dimensional boundary layer. J. Fluid Mech. 456, 49–84.Google Scholar
Wilder, M. C., Reda, D. & Prabhu, D. K.2015 Transition experiments on blunt bodies with distributed roughness in hypersonic free flight in carbon dioxide. AIAA Paper 2015-1738.Google Scholar