Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-n8gtw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-10T08:41:44.048Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Unsteady interaction of crossflow instability with a forward-facing step

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 March 2022

Alberto F. Rius-Vidales*
Affiliation:
AWEP Department, Section Aerodynamics, Delft University of Technology, Kluyverweg 1, 2629HS Delft, The Netherlands
Marios Kotsonis
Affiliation:
AWEP Department, Section Aerodynamics, Delft University of Technology, Kluyverweg 1, 2629HS Delft, The Netherlands
*
Email address for correspondence: a.f.riusvidales@tudelft.nl

Abstract

Experiments have been conducted on a swept wing model in a low-turbulence wind tunnel at chord Reynolds number of $2.17 \times 10^{6}$ to investigate the unsteady interaction of a forward-facing step (FFS) with incoming stationary crossflow (CF) vortices. The impact of varying the FFS height on the development and growth of primary and secondary CF disturbances and the ensuing laminar–turbulent transition is quantified through detailed hot-wire anemometry and infrared thermography measurements. The presence of the FFS results in either a critical (i.e. moderate transition advancement) or a supercritical behaviour (i.e. transition advancing abruptly to the FFS location). The arrival of the forced stationary CF vortices at the step is accompanied by their amplification. Unsteady analysis for the critical cases indicates temporal velocity fluctuations following closely the development of the baseline configuration (i.e. agreeing with the development of secondary instabilities). Consequently, laminar breakdown originates from the outer side of the upwelling region of the CF vortices. In contrast, for the supercritical FFS, the laminar breakdown unexpectedly originates from the inner side of the upwelling region. Evidence points to an unsteady mechanism possibly supported by locally enhanced spanwise-modulated shears and the recirculation region downstream of the FFS edge. This mechanism appears to govern the abrupt tripping of the flow in supercritical step cases. The findings in this work provide insight into the unsteady FFS–CF vortex interaction, which is pivotal to understanding the influence of an FFS on the laminar–turbulent boundary-layer transition in swept aerodynamic surfaces.

Information

Type
JFM Papers
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press.
Figure 0

Figure 1. Experimental set-up. (a) Streamwise (i.e. along the $X$ coordinate) pressure coefficient distribution on the pressure side of the model at $\alpha = 3^\circ$ and $Re_{c_X} = 2.17 \times 10^6$. (b) General schematic (flow direction left to right, $b = 1.25\,{\rm m}$$c_X = 1.27\,{\rm m}$) showing the FFS (grey area), the HWA system, IR measurement domains (IR-A, IR-B) and discrete roughness elements (DRE). (c) Orientation of the HWA probe.

Figure 1

Table 1. Geometrical parameters of tested configurations. For all cases nominal DREs settings are $\lambda _{z,D} = 8\,{\rm mm}$, $d_D = 2\,{\rm mm}$, $k_{D} = 200\,{\rm \mu} {\rm m}$, $x_{D}/c_x = 0.02$.

Figure 2

Figure 2. Thermal maps from camera IR-B (I and II, flow from left to right) and transition location (III) at $Re_{c_X} = 2.17 \times 10^6$ and $\alpha = 3^{\circ }$ for three different FFS (A, B and C) at fixed streamwise location (orange line denotes step location, $x_h/c_x$ = 0.25). Markers ($\bullet$) in I and II indicate the projection of the transition linear fit (dashed white line) to centre of the domain: (Ia) clean; (Ib) A; (IIa) B; and (IIb) C.

Figure 3

Figure 3. Thermal maps from camera IR-A (top, flow from left to right) and spectral analysis (bottom, 10 levels of $\ln (P/\bar {P}_{max_z})$ from $-3$ to 1): (Ia,IIIb) clean; (Ib-IIIb) A; (IIa,IVa) B; and (IIb,IVb) C. ($\lambda _{z,D} = 8\,{\rm mm}$.)

Figure 4

Figure 4. Selected boundary-layer profiles (I) of spanwise averaged mean flow velocity $\bar {Q}_z$ and difference (II) between these velocity profiles for the FFS cases ($\bar {Q}_{z,SI}$) and the clean configuration ($\bar {Q}_{z,C}$) upstream and downstream of the step location. Note that for visualization purposes the profiles magnitude is shifted by 1 in (I) and 0.5 in (II).

Figure 5

Figure 5. Contours of time-average velocity ($z$ positive direction outboard): (a) clean; (b) A; (c) B, (d) C. ($\delta ^*_Q = 620\,{\mathrm {\mu }}{\rm m}$ and $\lambda _{z,D} = 8\,{\rm mm}$.)

Figure 6

Figure 6. Selected steady disturbance $\langle \hat {q}\rangle _z$ profiles upstream and downstream of the FFS location ($\delta ^*_Q = 620\,{\mathrm {\mu }}{\rm m}$). (a,b) Steady disturbance profiles and (c) streamwise evolution of the non-dimensional maximum amplitude ($A_M$) ($x_{t,C}$ transition location for case C).

Figure 7

Figure 7. Contours of time-average wall-normal (I,II) and spanwise (III-V) velocity gradients and time-average velocity (grey solid lines 10 levels $\bar {Q}/\overline {Q_e}$ from 0 to 1 same contours as in figure 5): (a) clean; (b) A; (c) B; (d) C and (VI) streamwise evolution of the average spanwise gradient calculated inside the dashed line regions ($x_{t,C}$ transition location for case C, $\delta ^*_Q = 620\, {\mathrm {\mu }}{\rm m}$ and $\lambda _{z,D} = 8\,{\rm mm}$).

Figure 8

Figure 8. Contours of temporal velocity fluctuations ($z$ positive direction outboard) and time-average velocity (grey solid lines 10 levels $\bar {Q}/\overline {Q_e}$ from 0 to 1 same contours as in figure 5): (a) clean; (b) A; (c) B; (d) C (VI); streamwise evolution of unsteady disturbance amplitude ($x_{t,C}$ transition location for case C, $\delta ^*_Q = 620\, {\mathrm {\mu }}{\rm m}$ and $\lambda _{z,D} = 8\,{\rm mm}$).

Figure 9

Figure 9. Spectral analysis at the inner side of the upwelling region, probe $P_3$ ($\bullet$ in figure 8) at measurement planes downstream of the step location: (Ia) $x/c_x = 0.253$; (Ib) $x/c_x = 0.256$; (IIa) $x/c_x = 0.260$; and (IIb) $x/c_x = 0.270$. Shaded grey and blue regions indicate different frequency bands.

Figure 10

Figure 10. Bandpass filtered ($B_{L},450\,{\rm Hz} \leqslant f \leqslant 3 \,{\rm kHz}$) contours of temporal velocity fluctuations (dashed lines indicate the limit between the inner/outer side used for the calculation of $a^*$) and time-average velocity (grey solid lines 10 levels $\bar {Q}/\overline {Q_e}$ from 0 to 1 same contours as in figure 5): (a) clean, (b) A; (c) B; (d) C ($\delta ^*_Q = 620\,{\mathrm {\mu }}{\rm m}$ and $\lambda _{z,D} = 8\,{\rm mm}$).

Figure 11

Figure 11. Spectral analysis for probe on the outer side of the upwelling region $P_1$ ($\blacksquare$ in figure 8) at measurement planes downstream of the step location: (Ia) $x/c_x = 0.253$; (Ib) $x/c_x = 0.256$; (IIa) $x/c_x = 0.260$; and (IIb) $x/c_x = 0.270$. Shaded grey regions indicate different frequency bands.

Figure 12

Figure 12. Spectral analysis for probe on the cusp of the CF vortex $P_2$ ($\blacktriangle$ in figure 8) at measurement planes downstream of the step location: (Ia) $x/c_x = 0.253$; (Ib) $x/c_x = 0.256$; (IIa) $x/c_x = 0.260$; and (IIb) $x/c_x = 0.270$. Shaded grey regions indicate different frequency bands.

Figure 13

Figure 13. Bandpass filtered ($B_{H},3.5\,{\rm kHz} \leqslant f \leqslant 9 \,{\rm kHz}$) contours of temporal velocity fluctuations (dashed lines indicate the limit between the inner/outer side used for the calculation of $a^*$) and time-average velocity (grey solid lines 10 levels $\bar {Q}/\overline {Q_e}$ from 0 to 1 same contours as in figure 5): (a) clean; (b) A; (c) B; (d) C ($\delta ^*_Q = 620\,{\mathrm {\mu }}{\rm m}$; and $\lambda _{z,D} = 8\,{\rm mm}$).

Figure 14

Figure 14. Bandpass filtered $B_{L1}$(I) ($450\,{\rm Hz} \leqslant f \leqslant 1050\,{\rm Hz}$) and $B_{L2}$(II) ($1700\,{\rm Hz} \leqslant f \leqslant 2300 \,{\rm Hz}$) contours of temporal velocity fluctuations (solid contour lines indicate the positive and dashed ones negative spanwise (I) and wall-normal (II) velocity gradients, the contours corresponds to values in figure 7): (a) clean; (b) A; (c) B; (d) C ($\delta ^*_Q = 620\,{\mathrm {\mu }}{\rm m}$ and $\lambda _{z,D} = 8\,{\rm mm}$).

Figure 15

Figure 15. Unsteady disturbance amplitude $a^*$ calculated for the inner (a) and outer side (b) of the upwelling region based on regions defined by the dashed lines for different frequency bands in figures 10 and 13: (Ia) $B_L$; (Ib) $B_H$ ($x_{t,C}$ transition location for case C).

Figure 16

Figure 16. High-pass filtered ($f_c = 12\,{\rm kHz}$) contours of temporal velocity fluctuations and time-average velocity (black solid lines 10 levels from 0 to 1): (a) clean; (b) A; (c) B; (d) C ($\delta ^*_Q = 620\,{\mathrm {\mu }}{\rm m}$ and $\lambda _{z,D} = 8\,{\rm mm}$).