Hostname: page-component-5db58dd55d-8lnk4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-06-07T21:56:14.678Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Drag reduction in wall-bounded turbulence by synthetic jet sheets

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 May 2022

Feng Xie Open the ORCID record for Feng Xie [Opens in a new window] ,
Jose D. Pérez-Muñoz ,
Ning Qin Open the ORCID record for Ning Qin [Opens in a new window]  and
Pierre Ricco Open the ORCID record for Pierre Ricco [Opens in a new window]
Feng Xie
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, The University of Sheffield, Mappin Street, S1 3JD Sheffield, UK
Jose D. Pérez-Muñoz
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, The University of Sheffield, Mappin Street, S1 3JD Sheffield, UK
Ning Qin*
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, The University of Sheffield, Mappin Street, S1 3JD Sheffield, UK
Pierre Ricco
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, The University of Sheffield, Mappin Street, S1 3JD Sheffield, UK
*
†Email address for correspondence: n.qin@sheffield.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A turbulent drag-reduction method employing synthetic jet sheets in a turbulent channel flow is investigated by direct numerical simulations. The jet sheets are wall-parallel and produced by periodic blowing and suction from pairs of thin slots aligned with the main streamwise flow. By varying the slot height and the jet-sheet angle with respect to the spanwise direction, drag-reduction margins between $10\,\%$ and $30\,\%$ are obtained for jet-sheet angles between $45 ^{\circ }$ and $75 ^{\circ }$, while a drag increase of almost 100 % is computed when the jet sheets are spanwise-oriented. When global skin-friction drag reduction occurs, the wall-shear stress near the jet-sheet exits increases during suction and decreases during blowing, while the velocity fluctuations weaken during suction and intensify during blowing. The global drag-reduction effect is produced by a finite counter flow induced by the nonlinear interaction between the jet-sheet flow and the main flow, although the turbulent intensity and Reynolds shear stresses increase. The power spent to generate the jet sheets is computed by modelling numerically the actuator underneath the channel flow as a piston oscillating sinusoidally along the spanwise direction in a round-shaped cavity from which the fluid is released into the channel through the cavity exits. A power balance leads to the computation of the efficiency of the actuator system, quantifying the portion of the piston power that is lost as internal power fluxes and heat transfer through the cavity walls. For the tested configurations, the power consumed by the piston to generate the jet sheets is larger than the power saved thanks to the drag reduction.

JFM classification

Flow Control: Drag reduction Turbulent Flows: Turbulence control

Information

Type
JFM Papers
Information
Journal of Fluid Mechanics , Volume 941 , 25 June 2022 , A63
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by 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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Baron, A. & Quadrio, M. 1996 Turbulent drag reduction by spanwise wall oscillations. Appl. Sci. Res. 55, 311–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bewley, T.R., Moin, P. & Temam, R. 2001 DNS-based predictive control of turbulence: an optimal benchmark for feedback algorithms. J. Fluid Mech. 447, 179–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cannata, M., Cafiero, G. & Iuso, G. 2020 Large-scale forcing of a turbulent channel flow through spanwise synthetic jets. AIAA J. 58 (5), 2042–2052.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cannata, M. & Iuso, G. 2008 Spanwise directed synthetic jets for wall turbulence control. In 4th Flow Control Conference, AIAA Paper 2008-4205.Google Scholar
Choi, K.-S., DeBisschop, J.R. & Clayton, B.R. 1998 Turbulent boundary-layer control by means of spanwise-wall oscillation. AIAA J. 36 (7), 1157–1162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chung, Y.M. & Talha, T. 2011 Effectiveness of active flow control for turbulent skin friction drag reduction. Phys. Fluids 23 (2), 025102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corke, T.C. & Thomas, F.O. 2018 Active and passive turbulent boundary-layer drag reduction. AIAA J. 56 (10), 3835–3847.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glezer, A. & Amitay, M. 2002 Synthetic jets. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 34 (1), 503–529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hehner, M.T., Gatti, D. & Kriegseis, J. 2019 Stokes-layer formation under absence of moving parts – a novel oscillatory plasma actuator design for turbulent drag reduction. Phys. Fluids 31 (5), 051701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hehner, M.T., Gatti, D., Mattern, P., Kotsonis, M. & Kriegseis, J. 2020 Virtual wall oscillations forced by a DBD plasma actuator operating under beat frequency – a concept for turbulent drag reduction. In AIAA Aviation 2020 Forum, AIAA Paper 2020-2956.Google Scholar
Hwang, H.G. & Lee, J.H. 2018 Secondary flows in turbulent boundary layers over longitudinal surface roughness. Phys. Rev. Fluids 3 (1), 014608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iuso, G. & Di Cicca, G.M. 2007 Interaction of synthetic jets with a fully developed turbulent channel flow. J. Turbul. 8, N11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iuso, G., Onorato, M., Spazzini, P.G. & di Cicca, G.M. 2002 Wall turbulence manipulation by large-scale streamwise vortices. J. Fluid Mech. 473, 23–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iwamoto, K., Kasagi, N. & Suzuki, Y. 2004 Dynamical roles of large-scale structures in turbulent channel flow. Comput. Mech. 4, 5–10.Google Scholar
Jeong, J. & Hussain, F. 1995 On the identification of a vortex. J. Fluid Mech. 285, 69–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jung, W.J., Mangiavacchi, N. & Akhavan, R. 1992 Suppression of turbulence in wall-bounded flows by high-frequency spanwise oscillations. Phys. Fluids A 4 (8), 1605–1607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, J., Moin, P. & Moser, R. 1987 Turbulence statistics in fully developed channel flow at low Reynolds number. J. Fluid Mech. 177, 133–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, K.H. & Kim, C. 2005 Accurate, efficient and monotonic numerical methods for multi-dimensional compressible flows. Part 1. Spatial discretization. J. Comput. Phys. 208 (2), 527–569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindgren, B., Österlund, J. & Johansson, A.V. 1998 Measurement and calculation of guide vane performance in expanding bends for wind-tunnels. Exp. Fluids 24 (3), 265–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Panton, R. 2013 Incompressible Flow, 4th edn. Wiley-Interscience.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Qin, N. & Xia, H. 2008 Detached eddy simulation of a synthetic jet for flow control. Proc. Inst. Mech. Engrs. 222 (5), 373–380.Google Scholar
Quadrio, M. & Ricco, P. 2004 Critical assessment of turbulent drag reduction through spanwise wall oscillations. J. Fluid Mech. 521, 251–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quadrio, M. & Ricco, P. 2011 The laminar generalized Stokes layer and turbulent drag reduction. J. Fluid Mech. 667, 135–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quadrio, M., Ricco, P. & Viotti, C. 2009 Streamwise-travelling waves of spanwise wall velocity for turbulent drag reduction. J. Fluid Mech. 627, 161–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ricco, P., Skote, M. & Leschziner, M.A. 2021 A review of turbulent skin-friction drag reduction by near-wall transverse forcing. Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 123, 100713.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sahlin, A. & Johansson, A.V. 1991 Design of guide vanes for minimizing the pressure loss in sharp bends. Phys. Fluids 3 (8), 1934–1940.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stroh, A., Frohnapfel, B., Schlatter, P. & Hasegawa, Y. 2015 A comparison of opposition control in turbulent boundary layer and turbulent channel flow. Phys. Fluids 27 (7), 075101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tay, C.M.J., Herberg, M., Onorato, M. & Tsai, H.M. 2007 Effect of traversal jet injections on skin friction in a turbulent channel. In 45th AIAA Aero. Sc. Meeting and Exhibit, AIAA Paper 2007-323.Google Scholar
Thomas, F.O., Corke, T.C., Duong, A., Midya, S. & Yates, K. 2019 Turbulent drag reduction using pulsed-DC plasma actuation. J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 52 (43), 434001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vanderwel, C. & Ganapathisubramani, B. 2015 Effects of spanwise spacing on large-scale secondary flows in rough-wall turbulent boundary layers. J. Fluid Mech. 774, R2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vanderwel, C., Stroh, A., Kriegseis, J., Frohnapfel, B. & Ganapathisubramani, B. 2019 The instantaneous structure of secondary flows in turbulent boundary layers. J. Fluid Mech. 862, 845–870.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weiss, J.M. & Smith, W.A. 1995 Preconditioning applied to variable and constant density flows. AIAA J. 33 (11), 2050–2057.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yao, J., Chen, X. & Hussain, F. 2018 Drag control in wall-bounded turbulent flows via spanwise opposed wall-jet forcing. J. Fluid Mech. 852, 678–709.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
You, D., Wang, M. & Moin, P. 2006 Large-eddy simulation of flow over a wall-mounted hump with separation control. AIAA J. 44 (11), 2571–2577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhou, D. & Ball, K.S. 2008 Turbulent drag reduction by spanwise wall oscillations. Intl J. Engng 21 (1), 85–104.Google Scholar