0
Article

Modeling Transition in Separated and Attached Boundary Layers

[+] Author and Article Information
Stephen K. Roberts

 Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Carleton University, 3135 Mackenzie Building, 1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa, ON K1S 5B6, Canadaskrobert@connect.carleton.ca

Metin I. Yaras

 Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Carleton University, 3135 Mackenzie Building, 1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa, ON K1S 5B6, Canadametin_yaras@carleton.ca

J. Turbomach 127(2), 402-411 (Mar 01, 2004) (10 pages) doi:10.1115/1.1860570 History: Received October 01, 2003; Revised March 01, 2004

This paper presents a mathematical model for predicting the rate of turbulent spot production. In this model, attached- and separated-flow transition are treated in a unified manner, and the boundary layer shape factor is identified as the parameter with which the spot production rate correlates. The model is supplemented by several correlations to allow for its practical use in the prediction of the length of the transition zone. Second, the paper presents a model for the prediction of the location of transition inception in separation bubbles. The model improves on the accuracy of existing alternatives, and is the first to account for the effects of surface roughness.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2005 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Representative distributions of the acceleration parameter η for the test cases of Roberts and Yaras (13,54,63-64): (a) Cp1 and Cp2 pressure distributions, (b) Cp3 pressure distribution

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Comparison of present experimental results (filled symbols) to the experimental data (hollow symbols) and correlation (lines) of Abu-Ghannam and Shaw (3). (The present rough-surface test cases are shown in grey.)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Sensitivity of the transition inception location in the separation bubble to freestream turbulence (smooth surfaces)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Sensitivity of the transition inception location to surface roughness and freestream turbulence

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Variation of the spot inception parameter with λθts and Taylor’s turbulence factor. (Rough surface measurements (63-64) are shown in grey.)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Variation of the spot production parameter with the shape factor at transition inception. (Symbols filled in grey indicate measurements over a rough surface.)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Variation of Hts with turbulence level and Reθs for separation-bubble transition (smooth surfaces)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Intermittency distributions for two separated-flow transition cases (as labeled in Fig. 6)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Intermittency distributions for two attached-flow transition cases (as labeled in Fig. 6)

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