Hostname: page-component-76d6cb85b7-2r2wp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-07-18T23:44:49.876Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Role of nonlinearities induced by deterministic forcing in the low-frequency dynamics of transitional shock wave/boundary layer interaction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 July 2025

Mariadebora Mauriello*
Affiliation:
Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics, University of Southampton, Boldrewood Innovation Campus, Southampton S016 7QF, UK
Pushpender K. Sharma
Affiliation:
Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics, University of Southampton, Boldrewood Innovation Campus, Southampton S016 7QF, UK
Lionel Larchevêque
Affiliation:
Aix-Marseille Univ., CNRS, IUSTI, Marseille, France
Neil Sandham
Affiliation:
Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics, University of Southampton, Boldrewood Innovation Campus, Southampton S016 7QF, UK
*
Corresponding author: Mariadebora Mauriello, mariadebora.mauriello@soton.ac.uk

Abstract

Direct numerical simulations are carried out to investigate the underlying mechanism of the low-frequency unsteadiness of a transitional shock reflection with separation at $M=1.5$. To clarify the nonlinear mechanisms, the incoming laminar boundary layer is forced with two different arrangements of oblique unstable modes. Each wave arrangement is given by a combination of two unstable waves such that their difference in frequency falls in a low-frequency range corresponding to a Strouhal number (based on the length of interaction) of 0.04. This deterministic forcing allows the introduction of nonlinearities, and high-order statistical tools are used to identify the properties of quadratic couplings. It is found that the low-frequency unsteadiness and the transition to turbulence are decoupled problems. On the one hand, the unstable modes of the boundary layer interact nonlinearly such that energy cascades to higher frequencies, initiating the turbulent cascade process, and to lower frequencies. On the other hand, the low-frequency quadratic coupling of the oblique modes is found to be responsible for low-frequency unsteadiness affecting the separation point. The direction of the quadratic interactions is extracted and it is shown that, in the presence of low-frequency unsteadiness, these interactions enter the separated zone just before reattachment and travel both downstream and upstream, extending beyond the separation point, hence feeding the low-frequency bubble response. In addition to the two main arrangements of oblique modes, two other combinations are analysed, including multiple oblique waves and streaks. Interestingly, their inclusion did not alter the low-frequency unsteadiness phenomenon. Furthermore, the effect of the forcing difference frequency is examined and it is shown that the breathing phenomenon is sensitive to the range of frequencies present in the system due to a low-pass filter effect.

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, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press
Figure 0

Figure 1. Two-dimensional schematic of the numerical set-up, where the computational domain is demarcated with a red dashed line.

Figure 1

Table 1. Aerodynamic flow conditions.

Figure 2

Figure 2. Streamwise evolution of the friction coefficient $C_f$ (a) and of the pressure at the wall normalised with the reference pressure $P_{\textit{wall}}/P_{\infty }$ (b).

Figure 3

Figure 3. Three-dimensional view showing slices of $\rho u$. The initial symmetry and its breakdown due to transition at downstream locations is shown.

Figure 4

Figure 4. Power spectrum of the wall pressure fluctuations for the case with a pair of monochromatic oblique unstable modes.

Figure 5

Table 2. Unstable boundary layer waves characterisation.

Figure 6

Figure 5. Modal forcing combinations. Panel (a) is representative of the crossing waves family and panel (b) is representative of the parallel beating waves family.

Figure 7

Figure 6. Three-dimensional views of the flow field. Panel (a) is for crossing waves and panel (b) is for parallel waves.

Figure 8

Figure 7. Streamwise evolution of the friction coefficient for each oblique waves combination. The black dashed horizontal line indicates $C_{f}=0$.

Figure 9

Table 3. Length (normalised by inlet displacement thickness) of the separated region for each combination of oblique mode waves. The maximum perturbation amplitude $A_{0}$ that is injected in each combination is shown.

Figure 10

Figure 8. Power spectra of the wall pressure fluctuations for crossing waves (a) and parallel beating waves (b) families. In each spectra, the white solid vertical lines indicate the separation points, while the white dashed vertical lines indicate the reattachment points.

Figure 11

Figure 9. Power spectra of the wall pressure fluctuations for the crossing wave (red line) and parallel beating wave (blue line) families extracted at the respective separation points. The light blue line uses detrended data for the parallel beating wave family.

Figure 12

Table 4. Interaction and separation lengths (normalised by inlet boundary layer thickness) and the corresponding Strouhal number for both families of crossing and parallel beating waves.

Figure 13

Table 5. Frequency--wavenumber combinations of Fourier modes for the crossing wave case. The $^{*}$ symbol indicates the complex conjugate. The first column shows the possible combinations in compact notation, the second column shows the resulting combinations after multiplication.

Figure 14

Table 6. Summary of the quadratic couplings for the modal forcing combinations. The subscripts ‘$_{\textit{LF}}$’ and ‘$_{HF}$’ in $k$ indicate the low-frequency dynamics $(\omega _{2}-\omega _{1})$ and the high-frequency dynamics $(\omega _{2}+\omega _{1})$, respectively.

Figure 15

Figure 10. Streamwise distribution of the power spectra for each normalised wavenumber at selected frequencies: the left column indicates low frequency $(f_{2}-f_{1})$ and the right column indicates high frequency $(f_{2}+f_{1})$. The white vertical lines indicate the position of the separation point (solid pattern) and the reattachment point (dashed pattern). (a,b) Crossing waves, (c,d) parallel beating waves.

Figure 16

Figure 11. Modal forcing: maps of the norm of the optimal wavenumber bispectrum, with pairs resulting in a bicoherence value higher than 0.25 encircled in black. Left column: the target sensor $G_{3}$ is located at the separation point; right column: the target sensor $G_{3}$ is located at the reattachment point. (a,b) Crossing waves; (c,d) parallel beating waves. All maps show quadratic interactions with the two source sensors $G_{1} = G_{2}$ located at $x = 45$.

Figure 17

Figure 12. Norm of the optimal wavenumber bispectrum for both crossing ($\times$) and parallel beating ($\big/\big/$) waves extracted for the resulting 2-D ($k_3=0$) and 3-D ($k_3= 2$) flow characteristics. The vertical black lines indicate the separation (solid) and reattachment (dashed) points.

Figure 18

Figure 13. Norm of the time-filtered wavenumber bispectrum. The filter is applied to the target sensor $G_{3}$, which spans all $x$ locations. It retains either the frequencies associated with the low-frequency dynamics $(f_{2}\,{-}\,f_{1})$ (indicated in the legend with $G_{3} (f_{2} - f_{1})$) or those associated with the high-frequency dynamics $(f_{2} + f_{1})$ (indicated in the legend with $G_{3} (f_{2} + f_{1})$). Symbols are used when the lines overlap perfectly. The green diamond symbols indicate the presence of self-quadratic couplings, i.e. $f_{1}+f_{1} = 2 f_{1}$ and $f_{2}+f_{2} = 2 f_{2}$. The vertical black lines indicate the separation (solid) and reattachment (dashed) locations.

Figure 19

Figure 14. Time-delay map extracted from the real part of the wavenumber bispectrum. The first row shows the crossing waves and the second row shows the parallel beating waves. The vertical black lines indicate the separation (solid) and reattachment (dashed) points.

Figure 20

Table 7. Value of the propagation velocity of the bispectral content normalised by the external velocity, i.e. $U_{B}/U_{\infty }$, for each region of the flow: from the forcing location to the separation point, within the recirculating region and downstream of the reattachment point.

Figure 21

Figure 15. Streamwise-frequency distribution of the norm of the frequency-transformed wavenumber bispectrum for selected wavenumber pairs. (a,b) Crossing waves; (c,d) parallel beating waves. The white vertical lines indicate the separation (solid) and reattachment (dashed) points.

Figure 22

Figure 16. Panel (a) shows the streamwise evolution of the skin friction coefficient $C_{f}$ for all combinations of waves. The black dashed horizontal lines indicates $C_{f} = 0$. Panel (b) plots the spectral decomposition of the wall pressure fluctuation for the sole beating crossing waves case. The white vertical lines indicate the separation (solid) and reattachment (dashed) points.

Figure 23

Figure 17. Streaky wave family: power spectra of the wall pressure fluctuations (a) and wavenumber bispectrum (b) for sensor $G_3$ located at the separation point, denoted by the white solid vertical lines on plot (a).

Figure 24

Table 8. Summary of the couplings for all modal forcing combinations. The subscript ‘$_{\textit{LF}}$’ and ‘$_{HF}$’ in $k$ indicate the low-frequency dynamics $(\omega _{2}-\omega _{1})$ and the high-frequency dynamics $(\omega _{2}+\omega _{1})$, respectively.

Figure 25

Figure 18. Power spectrum of the wall pressure fluctuations for the parallel beating waves family with forcing frequency difference $\Delta S_{L_{\textit{int}}} \simeq 0.4$. The white vertical lines indicate the separation (solid) and reattachment (dashed) points.

Figure 26

Figure 19. Wavenumber bispectra of the parallel beating waves family with forcing frequency difference $\Delta S_{L_{\textit{int}}}\simeq 0.4$ for the 2-D ($k_{z_{3}}=0$) coupling: time-delay map of the real part (a) and norm of the time-Fourier transform (b) for the streamwise coordinate. The vertical lines indicate the separation (solid) and reattachment (dashed) points. The horizontal dashed lines in panel (a) denote the time boundary of a single period since data have been duplicated through time periodicity for better visualisation.