RANS feasibility study of using roughness to mimic transition strip effect on the crossflow separation over a 6:1 prolate-spheroid
- 10 Downloads
An axisymmetric body at incidence experiences the three-dimensional crossflow separation. This separation is attributed to the adverse circumferential pressure gradient. However, the separation pattern is also dependent upon the structure of the boundary layer. In this regard, utilization of transition strip devices in experiments on axisymmetric bodies may modify this structure, and consequently the crossflow separation pattern. The main objective of the present research is to mimic numerically the transition strip effect on the crossflow separation over a 6:1 prolate-spheroid up to α = 30° incidence and ReL = 4.2×106. However, to avoid direct modeling of the strip, which would increase the computational cost, an attempt was made to add roughness over the body surface. To estimate the roughness that simulates closely the transition strip effect, three different roughness values were considered. The numerical model is based on RANS and a Reynolds stress turbulence model implemented in STARCCM+. The simulations have been evaluated based on the local and global variables and validated against the available experimental data. The results demonstrate the effectiveness of using a proper roughness value to mimic the transition strip effect. They also show the importance of modeling the transition strip effect, which is normally not considered, to capture the crossflow separation pattern.
Key wordsAxisymmetric body crossflow separation transition strip device CFD RANS equations
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
The authors would like to thank the Brazilian National Council for Scientific and Technological Development –CNPq and the Brazilian funding agency ANP-PRH3 for their support.
- Simpson R. Three–dimensional turbulent boundary layers and separation [J[. 33rd Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, 1995, 226.Google Scholar
- Ahn S. An experimental study of flow over a 6 to 1 prolate–spheroid at incidence [J]. Doctoral Thesis, Virginia Tech, 1992.Google Scholar
- Wetzel T., Simpson R. Unsteady three–dimensional crossflow separation measurements on a prolate–spheroid undergoing time–dependent maneuvers [C]. 35th Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, 1996, 618.Google Scholar
- Chesnakas C., Simpson R. A detailed investigation of the 3–d separation about a 6: 1 prolate–spheroid at angle of attack [C]. 34th Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, 1997, 320.Google Scholar
- Kim S., Rhee S., Cokljat D. Application of modern turbulence models to vortical flow around a prolate–spheroid [J]. 41st Aerospace Sciences, AIAA, 2003, 429.Google Scholar
- Versteeg H., Malalasekera W. An introduction into computational fluid dynamics: The finite volume method [M]. Pearson Education, 2007.Google Scholar
- Fureby C., Karlsson A. Les of the flow past a 6: 1 prolate–spheroid [C]. 47th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting including The New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition, 2009, 1616.Google Scholar
- Allan J., Conn J. Effect of laminar flow on ship models [J]. Trans. INA, 1950, 92: 107.Google Scholar
- Dawson E. An investigation into the effects of submergence depth, speed and hull length–to–diameter ratio on the near surface operation of conventional submarines [D]. Doctoral Thesis, University of Tasmania, 2014.Google Scholar
- Iyer P. Discrete roughness effects on high–speed boundary layers [D]. Doctoral Thesis, University of Minnesota, 2015.Google Scholar
- Cebeci T., Bradshaw P. Momentum transfer in boundary layers [M]. Washington DC: Hemisphere Publishing Corp., New York: McGraw–Hill Book Co., 1977, 407.Google Scholar
- STARCCM+. Version, 9.04. 009 user guide [M]. New York, USA: CD–adapco Inc., 2014Google Scholar
- White F., Corfield I. Viscous fluid flow [M]. Vol. 3, New York: McGraw–Hill, 2006.Google Scholar
- White F. Viscous fluid flow. 2nd edition New York: McGraw–Hill, 1991.Google Scholar