The Effect of Isolated Roughness Elements on Transition in Attachment-Line Flows

  • D. I. A. Poll
Part of the International Union of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics book series (IUTAM)


Current knowledge concerning the tripping to turbulence of an attachment-line boundary-layer flow under low-speed conditions is summarised and compared with criteria for tripping in the incompressible, zero pressure — gradient, flat-plate flow. Important similarities and significant differences are illustrated and discussed.


Roughness Element Transition Onset Favourable Pressure Gradient Attachment Line Trip Wire 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Poll, D.I.A.: Transition in the infinite-swept attachment-line boundary-layer. The Aeronautical Quarterly, Vol.XXX, November 1979, pp 607–629.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Poll, D.I.A. and Paisley, D.J.: On the effect of wing taper and sweep direction on leading—edge transition. The Aeronautical Journal, Vol. 89, No. 883, March 1985.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Poll, D.I.A.: A new hypothesis for transition on the windward face of the Space Shuttle. Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, Vol. 23, No. 6, November 1986, pp 605–611.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hall, P.; Malik, M.R. and Poll, D.I.A.: On the stability of an infinite—swept attachment—line boundary—layer. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series A, Vol. 395, October 1984.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rosenhead, L. (ed.): Laminar Boundary—Layers. Oxford University Press, 1963.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Klebanoff, P.S.; Schubauer, G.B. and Tidstrom, K.D.: Measurements of the effect of two—dimensional and three—dimensional roughness elements on boundary—layer transition. Journal of the Aeronautical Sciences, Vol. 22, No. 11, November 1955, pp 803–804.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gregory, N. and Love, E.M.: Laminar flow on a swept leading edge — final progress report. National Physical Laboratory, (Teddington, England), Aero. Memo 26, 1965.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Firmin, M.C.P. and Cook, P.H.: On the flow along swept leading edges. Unpublished Report, Aerodynamics Department, RAE Farnborough, 1965.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gibbings, J.C.; Goksel, O.T. and Hall, D.J.: The influence of roughness trips upon boundary—layer transition — Part I Characteristics of trip wires. The Aeronautical Journal, Vol. 90, No. 898, October 1986, pp 289–301.ADSGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gibbings, J.C.; Goksel, O.T. and Hall, D.J.: The influence of roughness trips upon boundary—layer transition — Part II Characteristics of single spherical trips. The Aeronautical Journal, Vol. 90, No. 899, November 1986, pp 357–367.ADSGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gaster, M.: On the flow along swept leading—edges. The Aeronautical Quarterly, Vol.XVIII, May 1967, pp 165–184.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cumpsty, N.A. and Head, M.R.: The calculation of three—dimensional turbulent boundary—layers. Part III Comparison of attachment—line calculations with experiment. The Aeronautical Quarterly, Vol.XX, May 1969, pp 99–113.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Launder, B.E. and Jones, W.P.: On the prediction of laminarisation. Aeronautical Research Council, CP 1036, 1969Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • D. I. A. Poll
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of EngineeringUniversity of ManchesterManchesterEngland, UK

Personalised recommendations