0
TECHNICAL PAPERS

A New Model for Boundary Layer Transition Using a Single-Point RANS Approach

[+] Author and Article Information
D. Keith Walters, James H. Leylek

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Clemson University, Clemson, SC 29634

J. Turbomach 126(1), 193-202 (Mar 26, 2004) (10 pages) doi:10.1115/1.1622709 History: Received March 01, 2002; Revised July 01, 2002; Online March 26, 2004
Copyright © 2004 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Illustration of wall-limiting concept leading to “splat mechanism” for production of kL
Grahic Jump Location
Profiles of mean velocity (a) and total fluctuation kinetic energy (b) for fully developed turbulent channel flow
Grahic Jump Location
Distribution of turbulent (kT) and nonturbulent (kL) fluctuations in fully developed turbulent channel flow
Grahic Jump Location
Illustration of flat-plate boundary layer test case
Grahic Jump Location
Stanton number versus downstream Reynolds number for each of the three flat plate cases: Tu=0.2% (a), Tu=2.6% (b), and Tu=6.2% (c)
Grahic Jump Location
Profiles of laminar kinetic energy kL in the pre-transitional region of the boundary layer Tu=2.6%. The peak value of kL increases approximately linearly with downstream Reynolds number.
Grahic Jump Location
Profiles of total fluctuation intensity in the pre-transitional region for Tu=2.6% (a) and Tu=6.2% (b). The model predicts fluctuation levels comparable to experimental data documented in Ref. 15.
Grahic Jump Location
Illustration of computational domain for nozzle guide vane test case, indicating high turning and acceleration of passage flow
Grahic Jump Location
Closeup of 2D grid near the leading edge on the suction surface, highlighting the multitopology mesh used to accurately resolve boundary-layer region
Grahic Jump Location
Stanton number versus downstream distance for each of three airfoil cases considered in the present study: Tu=0.6% (a), Tu=10% (b), and Tu=19.5% (c)
Grahic Jump Location
Predicted Stanton number distribution for the three airfoil test cases, using the new model. The figure highlights the influence of freestream turbulence on the simulations.

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In