The control of flow separation by periodic excitation
Introduction
Flow separation is generally accepted to be the breakaway or detachment of fluid from a solid surface (e.g. [1], [2], [3], [4]). Whether caused by a severe adverse pressure gradient (e.g. [5], [6]), a geometrical aberration (e.g. [7], [8]) or by any other means, separation is generally accompanied by significant thickening of the rotational flow region adjacent to the surface with a marked increase in the velocity component that is normal to the surface. Thus our traditional means for analysis, namely the boundary layer equations, are summarily invalidated. Separation is almost always associated with losses of some kind, including loss of lift, drag increase, pressure recovery losses, etc. Consequently, engineers have been preoccupied, for almost a century, with altering its location or avoiding it entirely. The multitude and variety of hydro and aerodynamic vehicles and devices, taken for granted today, bear testimony to the tremendous advances that have been made in the development of means that avoid or modify separation.
Notwithstanding these advances, the development of commercial and military vehicle aerodynamics has been severely stunted in recent decades. The underlying problem is a design philosophy which is steeped in a century old tradition: the steady-flow assumption. Conventional wisdom tells us that so-called steady two-dimensional separation is well understood, with a satisfactory analytical foundation (e.g. [4]). Experimental data reveals, however, that separation is only steady in a time-averaged sense, while the rich time-dependent coherence is acknowledged, but it is certainly not exploited. For highly turbulent flows which are on the verge of separation (e.g. [5], [9]), or known to have an underlying deterministic structure (e.g. turbo-machinery), the Reynolds-averaged equations have limited the designer to basic assumptions which, by their very definition, negate the phenomenon of time dependence.
Apart from the need to delay transition and control mixing, the familiar shapes of products which move through fluids or determine fluid motion are a direct consequence of the need to avoid separation. For example, the maximum thickness or camber of wings, and the length and shape of diffusers and inlets, evolved from this constraint whose norms are still dictated by the steady-flow assumption. For the better part of this century, methods for aircraft control have been rooted in the limiting steady-flow assumptions. A classical example is wing warping initiated by the Wright brothers (see, e.g. [10]), which evolved into ailerons, flaps and slats prominently displayed on today's aircraft (e.g. observe the multitude of moving surfaces on a Boeing 747 prior to landing). They are effective, but they are also complex, costly, cumbersome and heavy. Consider a maneuverable aircraft with no large moving parts or control surfaces, or a single-rotor helicopter with no tail rotor or no heavy NOTAR-type cylinder and compressor. Consider a conical diffuser whose divergence angle exceeds 45°, or thrust vectored jet without vectoring nozzles. All of these are possible, by adding periodic motion to the flow rather than traditional boundary layer control (BLC) methods, discussed below, which involve injecting or removing large amounts of momentum and mass in a steady fashion. In fact, periodic addition of momentum can attain the same degree of control authority as is achieved by traditional BLC, with one important difference: the cost, in terms of momentum input, is less by anything from factors to orders of magnitude [11].
One year after the first powered flight, Prandtl [12] introduced the concept of the boundary layer and proposed a means (i.e. suction through a slot) to control its attachment to a solid surface. The next ten years saw little progress in boundary layer research [13], but the race for air superiority, spawned universal research and development efforts in which BLC studies were given high a priority. The depth and breadth of international research up to the early 1960s is apparent from the two volumes edited by Lachmann [14], [15], which provided exhaustive treatment of theoretical, experimental as well as applied BLC methods. The contributions indicated that steady blowing or suction from various locations on the wing surface, and on various configurations, could produce significant increases in lift as well as reductions in drag. In fact, a large number of experimental aircraft were built, which convincingly demonstrated the effectiveness of BLC. Some of these aircraft reached mass production (for example Lockheed's F-104, which remained in production from 1955 to 1983 and the MIG-21 of which thousands still fly in the former Eastern Bloc and in “Non-Aligned” countries), but BLC fell far short of the high expectations of the 1960s. There were two main reasons for this: firstly, the plumbing systems required for BLC introduced excessive technical complexity and weight, and secondly, the systems were not efficient, requiring auxiliary compressors or excessive compressor bleed in order to obtain meaningful lift enhancements (see, e.g. [16]). Some BLC systems, such as that used on the MIG-21, utilize engine combustion gases and rely on the thermal inertia of the plumbing to withstand the heat for the short duration of application prior to landing.
The seeds for flow control by excitation were sewn by Schubauer and Skramstad [17] who introduced periodic perturbations in a laminar boundary layer to trigger a known instability, i.e. to initiate Tollmien-Schlichting (TS) waves. This breakthrough technique became a major diagnostic aid for studying flow stability but it was also considered a tool for controlling laminar separation and transition (e.g. [18], [19]). Since periodic perturbations trigger a premature transition to turbulence and a turbulent flow is less susceptible to separation, flow separation could be delayed by initiating transition. Sound was initially used to demonstrate these ideas on airfoils at low Reynolds numbers (see [20]). Although laminar–turbulent transition could be effected, the manipulation of turbulent shear flows was traditionally considered to be unattainable because of the belief that turbulence is a random process, determined largely by local flow conditions. However, experiments such as those of Brown and Roshko [21] and Winant and Browand [22] in the mixing layer demonstrated that large coherent structures (LCSs) are primarily responsible for the transport of momentum across the flow domain. Moreover, the introduction of periodic mechanical excitation at the flow origin was shown to be an efficient and convenient method for the control of mixing (e.g. [23], [24], [25]). Excitation accelerates and regulates the generation of large coherent structures, particularly when the mean flow is unstable, thereby transferring high momentum fluid across the mixing layer.
The last decade has witnessed progress in flow control where the fundamental studies of the 1970s and 1980s, such as those in free shear layers (see [26], [27]), set the scene for effective, efficient and practical separation control. Specifically, it was shown that a turbulent mixing layer could be attached to a deflected surface [28], [29] and the ensuing attached flow separation could be delayed [30], [31] by periodic addition of momentum with or without the concomitant addition of mass flux. The same concept was also applied to airfoils (e.g. [32], [34]) and was further extended to other applications. This method was shown to be much more effective than the traditional steady blowing and at times attained a saving of two orders of magnitude in the momentum coefficient required to achieve a prescribed improvement in performance. The actuators required may thus be autonomous, small, light, energy efficient and decoupled from the main propulsive systems – thereby overcoming all of the deficiencies of traditional BLC.
To date, separation control (acoustic or hydrodynamic) has been demonstrated in a wide variety of relatively simple configurations, such as flow over backward-facing steps and ramps (e.g. [35], [36]), on sharp leading-edge wedges [37], on bluff bodies (e.g. [38], [39]), on various airfoils (e.g. [40], [41], [42]), delta wings [43], circular cylinders (see e.g. [44]) and behind two-dimensional fences (e.g. [45]). These studies laid the groundwork for an extremely wide variety of potential future applications to both fixed wing (e.g. [46]) as well as rotary wing (e.g. [47]) aircraft.
The emphasis of this paper is on experimental data which either isolate parameters governing separation control or elucidate underlying physical mechanisms. This paper does not cover other issues related to separation control, including theoretical (e.g. [48], [49]) or computational prediction methods (e.g. [50], [51], [52], [216], [217]), energy-efficient micro-elecromechanical systems (MEMS – e.g. [53]) for actuation, “smart” or adaptive structures (e.g. [54]), separation detection methods (e.g. [55]) and control theory/neural-nets (e.g. [56], [57]). This paper also does not cover passive methods of separation control, even those which may exploit flow instabilities (see e.g. [4]). As the title suggests, the content of this paper is limited to flows where separation is controlled by excitation, i.e. an inherent instability is exploited to achieve the desired results. Consequently, separation control by blowing and suction or actuation which does not clearly exploit flow instability (e.g. [58], [59]), or similar methods which create pseudo-surfaces (e.g. [47]), are not considered to be within the scope of this paper.
In writing this article, the authors have endeavored to incorporate enough background material for the non-expert, while still maintaining adequate scope and depth for practitioners of the art. The authors also wish to point out that this review is unavoidably biased in favor of their own work as well as that of their colleagues. As such, important studies pertaining to separation control may have been unintentionally omitted. One positive aspect of this, however, is that relevant data, hitherto languishing in Hebrew-language graduate theses, is now available to the general reader.
Section snippets
Objectives, scope and layout
The global objective of this paper is to review separation control by periodic excitation. The emphasis of the review is placed on hydrodynamic, as opposed to acoustic, excitation methods since these have become dominant in recent years. However, acoustic excitation as well as traditional active BLC methods, such as steady blowing and suction, are initially discussed in order to provide an appropriate historical background and isolate those aspects that are important in the context of this
Boundary layer control (BLC)
Boundary layer (or flow) control, as a means of preventing separation, has traditionally been associated with the injection of fluid to, or the removal of a fluid from, a boundary layer; or the motion of a surface in the general direction of the stream (e.g. [60], [61]). Excitation can often be regarded as oscillatory addition of momentum as opposed to steady addition of momentum. Moreover, steady momentum or mass (blowing or suction) may be superimposed on excitation and therefore a brief
The excited mixing-layer—basis for separation control
The previous section indicated that excitation of the separated shear layer was an important factor affecting separation control. In this connection, two important questions arise: Firstly, why should excitation of the shear layer be important for understanding separation control? Secondly, what are the reasons for the large range of effective excitation frequencies? To begin answering these questions, consider the statistical, time-mean, description of the shear layer – where, in general, two
Actuators and actuation
This paper is concerned primarily with the effects of actuation and does not consider the specific characteristics of individual actuators or actuation techniques. However, some techniques are considered in as much as they apply to the objectives of this paper. In this context, actuators are considered to be devices that interact with the flow hydrodynamically to produce oscillatory addition of momentum, with or without superimposed mass flux. Thus, externally mounted acoustic drivers, used for
Fundamentals of separation control — the deflected flap
When considering the basic principles of separation control, a question bound to arise is: Why use a straight deflected flap as the quintessential model for demonstrating separation control? There are other important general aerodynamic shapes, which have been extensively studied, such as certain airfoils or cylinders, which would appear to take precedence. There are a number of compelling reasons for this: Firstly, the deflected flap is the ubiquitous time-honored high-lift device of choice.
Airfoil studies
It was pointed out in Section 4.2 that, historically, acoustic excitation set the precedent for latter demonstrations of airfoil separation delay by employing hydrodynamic excitation. Problems such as facility dependence, high acoustic excitation levels, and a bewilderingly large effective reduced frequency range (i.e. from O(1) to O(100), see Section 3.2) added impetus to seek a different approach to excitation. The method employing hydrodynamic disturbances, or oscillatory addition of
Diffuser studies
Tollmien apparently related (see [14], [15]) that Prandtl's interest in hydrodynamics was initiated when he failed to achieve the expected recovery in a diffuser. Since Prandtl went on to invent boundary layer control (BLC), a review of separation control in diffusers is, at the very least, of historical significance. Possibly the simplest diffuser-type configuration is a two-dimensional backward-facing ramp within a wind tunnel. Viets et al. [36] examined such a configuration, where
Excitation of reattaching flows
In many instances of practical importance, a separated flow reattaches downstream of the separation point, without active excitation. Thus there is no breakaway or detachment of the flow and a natural recirculating region or separation bubble is formed. Due to the prevalence of these flows, for example on wings (e.g. [123], [124]), many investigations have been conducted which seek to understand their mean structure (e.g. [125]) and time-dependent features (e.g. [126]). Separation bubbles, at
Effects of curvature
The effect of excitation on flows over curved surfaces is important since curvature is known to have a profound effect on the development of turbulent boundary layers (see e.g. [137]). For example concave curvature is known to initiate the generation of streamwise vortices through a centrifugal instability of the flow. This instability mechanism may compete with the inflectional instability exploited by excitation and limit the spanwise coherence of the eddies. Consequently, this may have a
Three-dimensional effects
In 1987, Gad-el-Hak and Blackwelder observed that excitation along the leading edge of a 60° delta wing significantly affected the evolution of the bound shear layer originating from the leading edge. They ascertained that the maximum changes to the vortices occurred when the excitation frequency was a subharmonic of the natural shedding frequency corresponding to F2D+≡fec/U∞=5.5 and Cμ=0.42% (c is the root chord). This was the first demonstration of the potential for periodic excitation in the
Engineering implementation
Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) present a logical starting point for the application of separation control concepts. This is primarily due to cost considerations as well as the elimination of exposing a pilot and passengers to danger. Moreover, in recent years, the use of UAVs has increased substantially and unmanned combat aerial vehicles (UCAVs) are gaining ground as alternatives to conventional combat aircraft [161]. Recently attention has focussed on Micro Aerial Vehicles (MAVs), which are
Unsteady separation
Historically, the notion of unsteady separation has confounded traditional notions of so-called steady separation. The reasons is that for steady, two-dimensional, separation the point of zero skin friction is coincidental with the point of separation, while in unsteady flows skin friction can be zero, or even negative, with no apparent breakaway of flow from the surface (e.g. [4]). Due to the complexity of unsteady separation, some controversy still exists over its precise definition. While
Control of airfoil dynamic stall
Dynamic stall is often the primary factor limiting helicopter (e.g. [178], [207]), fighter aircraft (e.g. [183]) and wind turbine [184] performance and as a consequence much basic research has focussed on controlling (managing) or eliminating the phenomenon. BLC (see [185]) has been proposed for rotorcraft applications and includes methods such as steady blowing [178], [186] suction [187], [188] and pulsed blowing [189], [190], [212] as well as control of boundary layer transition [191], [192],
Conclusions and future research
The review presented in this paper outlined some of the recent developments in separation control by periodic excitation, which is generated by hydrodynamic means. As a basis for the paper, the authors endeavoured to illustrate the importance of the excited mixing layer for understanding separation control, by showing how it attaches to a deflected flap. An attempt was also made to illustrate important differences, as well as similarities, between both BLC and acoustic excitation, and
Acknowledgements
The authors are deeply indebted to Dr. A. Seifert for critically reviewing the draft and providing numerous insightful suggestions. The authors also wish to thank Dr. B. Nishri, Messrs. A. Darabi, D. Neuburger and T. Naveh for actively assisting in the preparation of much of the material presented here.
References (217)
Aspects of turbulent boundary layer separation
Prog Aerospace Sci
(1996)- et al.
Neural networks: applications and opportunities in aeronautics
Prog Aerospace Sci
(1996) - et al.
Drag reduction of trucks through boundary-layer control
J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn
(1995) - et al.
MEMS applications in turbulence and flow control
Prog Aerospace Sci
(1999) - Maskell EC. Flow separation in three dimensions. RAE Report Aero 2565,...
Control of separation
(1976)Review – Unsteady boundary layers, separated and attached
ASME J Fluids Eng
(1979)- Gad-el-Hak M, Bushnell DM. Separation control: review. J Fluid Engng...
Turbulent boundary layer separation
Annu Rev Fluid Mech
(1989)- et al.
The reattachment and relaxation of a turbulent shear layer
J Fluid Mech Part 1
(1972)
The prediction of separation of the turbulent boundary layer
J Fluid Mech
Introduction to flight, 3rd ed
Fifty years of boundary layer theory and experiment
Sciences
Boundary layer and flow control. Its principles and application, vol. 1
Boundary layer and flow control. Its principles and application, vol. 2
Influence of sound upon separated flow over wings
AIAA J
On density effects and large structure in turbulent mixing layers
J Fluid Mech
Vortex pairing: the mechanism of turbulent mixing layer growth at moderate Reynolds number
J Fluid Mech Part 2
Subharmonics and vortex merging in mixing layers
J Fluid Mech
Perturbed free shear layers
Annu Rev Fluid Mech
Coherent motion in excited free shear flows
AIAA J
The delay of turbulent boundary layer separation by oscillatory active control
Phys Fluids
Effects of periodic excitation on turbulent separation from a flap
AIAA J
Control of coherent structures in reattaching laminar and turbulent shear layers
AIAA J
Boundary layer control by unsteady vortex generation
J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn
Oscillatory blowing, a tool to delay boundary layer separation
AIAA J
Cited by (974)
Computational and experimental study of the synchronization strategies of two pulsing jet fluidic oscillators
2024, Sensors and Actuators A: PhysicalAerodynamics of finite wings with leading-edge flags
2024, Journal of Fluids and StructuresData-driven inference of low order representations of observable dynamics for an airfoil model
2024, Physica D: Nonlinear PhenomenaWind tunnel experimental study of aerodynamic characteristics of co-flow jet wing with built-in air source
2023, Aerospace Science and TechnologySynthetic jet actuators: Overview and applications
2023, International Journal of Thermofluids