a Three-Dimensional Turbulent Boundary Layer Turbulence Structure of Heat Transfer Through

1998 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 248-255 ◽  
Author(s):  
Douglas J. Lewis ◽  
Roger L. Simpson
1975 ◽  
Vol 97 (2) ◽  
pp. 214-224 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. J. Herring

A method is proposed for predicting the behavior of a turbulent boundary layer with heat transfer under the influence of transpiration with discrete jets. The boundary layer is treated as a laterally averaged flow and the effects of nonuniformity are introduced through additional momentum and energy source terms in the equations of motion. These nonuniformity interaction terms are obtained using solutions of a set of ordinary differential equations governing the trajectory of jets. The effects of interaction between the jet and boundary layer turbulence structure are also treated. The predictions of the theory are shown to compare well with available discrete jet-boundary layer data.


2000 ◽  
Vol 409 ◽  
pp. 121-147 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. KNIGHT ◽  
M. GNEDIN ◽  
R. BECHT ◽  
A. ZHELTOVODOV

A crossing-shock-wave/turbulent-boundary-layer interaction is investigated using the k–ε turbulence model with a new low-Reynolds-number model based on the approach of Saffman (1970) and Speziale et al. (1990). The crossing shocks are generated by two wedge-shaped fins with wedge angles α1 and α2 attached normal to a flat plate on which an equilibrium supersonic turbulent boundary layer has developed. Two configurations, corresponding to the experiments of Zheltovodov et al. (1994, 1998a, b), are considered. The free-stream Mach number is 3.9, and the fin angles are (α1, α2) = (7°, 7°) and (7°, 11°). The computed surface pressure displays very good agreement with experiment. The computed surface skin friction lines are in close agreement with experiment for the initial separation, and are in qualitative agreement within the crossing shock interaction region. The computed heat transfer is in good agreement with experiment for the (α1, α2) = (7°, 7°) configuration. For the (α1, α2) = (7°, 11°) configuration, the heat transfer is significantly overpredicted within the three-dimensional interaction. The adiabatic wall temperature is accurately predicted for both configurations.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document