Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Methodology to image the panel surface pressure power spectra in weakly coupled fluid/structure interactions

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Experiments in Fluids Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Flow over thin elastic panels that undergo small amplitude vibrations has a common occurrence in supersonic and hypersonic platforms. The resulting fluid–structure interactions (FSI) are shown to excite the panel oscillation over different elastic modes. The consequent pressure field over the panel poses a stiff measurement challenge because of the fundamental limitations with using pressure transducers. Fast response pressure-sensitive paints make a viable alternative to unravel the pressure dynamics over the panel surface. However, the dominant contribution from the camera noise and the finite number of images acquired introduce broadband fluctuations in the pressure fluctuation power spectral density (PSD) over the panel surface that mask the elastic mode contributions to the PSD in weakly coupled FSI. In this work, an approach is introduced to unearth the elastic mode contributions in the PSD of the panel surface pressure. This approach involves averaging multiple power spectra over a representative region to subdue the broadband fluctuations while retaining the elastic mode contributions. The number of samples to be averaged is determined from the theoretical scaling of the r.m.s. of the broadband spectral fluctuations with averaging. This approach is demonstrated in an impinging shock boundary layer interaction (SBLI) unit generated over an elastic panel at a Mach number of 2.5. The PSD within the incoming boundary layer revealed an elastic mode contribution in the (2,1) mode with spectral sample averaging that was otherwise submerged within the broadband noise. Similarly, the contributions from the different elastic modes were revealed within the intermittent region and the relaxing boundary layer with spectral sample averaging. Whereas the Welch’s algorithm to compute the PSD retained the noise floor, the use of cross-spectral density significantly mitigated the noise floor and provided a more accurate determination of the PSD.

Graphic abstract

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Blevins R, Holehouse I, Wentz K (1993) Thermoacoustic loads and fatigue of hypersonic vehicle skin panels. J Aircr 30(6):971–978

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brouwer K, Perez R, Beberniss T, Spottswood S, Ehrhardt D (2021a) Experiments on a thin panel excited by turbulent flow and shock/boundary-layer interactions. AIAA J 59(7):2737–2752

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Casper K, Beresh S, Henfling J, Spillers R, Hunter P, Spitzer S (2019) Hypersonic fluid-structure interactions due to intermittent turbulent spots on a slender cone. AIAA J 57(2):749–759

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Culler A, McNamara J (2010) Studies on fluid–thermal–structural coupling for aerothermoelasticity in hypersonic flow. AIAA J 48(8):1721–1738

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Currao G, Neely A, Kennell C, Gai S, Buttsworth D (2019) Hypersonic fluid–structure interaction on a cantilevered plate with shock impingement. AIAA J 57(11):4819–4834

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daub D, Willems S, Gülhan A (2016) Experiments on the interaction of a fast-moving shock with an elastic panel. AIAA J 54(2):670–678

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dowell E (1966) Nonlinear oscillations of a fluttering plate. AIAA J 4(7):1267–1275

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dowell EH (1989) A modern course in aeroelasticity, vol 3. Kluwer academic publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Egami Y, Sato Y, Konishi S (2019) Development of sprayable pressure-sensitive paint with a response time of less than 10 μ s. AIAA J 57(5):2198–2203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frank J, Kaiser S (2008) High-resolution imaging of dissipative structures in a turbulent jet flame with laser Rayleigh scattering. Exp Fluids 44(2):221–233

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freydin M, Levin D, Dowell E, Varigonda S, Narayanaswamy V (2020) Natural frequencies of a heated plate: Theory and experiment. AIAA J 58(11):4969–4973

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Funderburk M, Narayanaswamy V (2019a) Spectral signal quality of fast pressure sensitive paint measurements in turbulent shock-wave/boundary layer interactions. Exp Fluids 60(10):1–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ganapathisubramani B, Clemens N, Dolling D (2006) Large-scale motions in a supersonic turbulent boundary layer., 556, p. 271. J Fluid Mech 556:271–282

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goller T, Musta M, Uehara D, Sirohi J, Clemens N (2018) Experimental study of a compliant panel under a Mach 2 compression ramp interaction.

  • Gomez-Vega N, Gramola M, Bruce P (2020) Oblique shock control with steady flexible panels. AIAA J 58(5):2109–2121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gregory J (2004) Porous pressure-sensitive paint for measurement of unsteady pressures in turbomachinery. AIAA. 0294.

  • Gregory J, Sakaue H, Liu T, Sullivan J (2014) Fast pressure-sensitive paint for flow and acoustic diagnostics. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 46:303–330

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Jiao L, Liu X, Shi Z, Zhang W, Liang L, Chen X, Zhao Q, Peng D, Liu Y (2020) A two-dimensional temperature correction method for pressure-sensitive paint measurement on helicopter rotor blades. Exp Fluids 61(4):1–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • M. Funderburk and V. Narayanaswamy (2019b) Investigation of negative surface curvature effects in axisymmetric shock/boundary-layer interaction. AIAA J 57(4):1594–1607

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McMullen R, Huynh DP, Gregory J (2013) Dynamic Calibrations for Fast-Response Porous Polymer/Ceramic Pressure-Sensitive Paint. AIAA. 3123

  • McNamara J, Friedmann P (2011) Aeroelastic and aerothermoelastic analysis in hypersonic flow: past, present, and future. AIAA J 49(6):1089–1122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mendoza D (1997) An analysis of CCD camera noise and its effect on pressure sensitive paint instrumentation system signal-to-noise ratio.

  • Mitsuo K, Asai K, Hayasaka M, Kameda M (2003) Temperature correction of PSP measurement using dual-luminophor coating. J Visualization 6(3):213–223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Musta M, Vanstone L, Eitner M, Sirohi J, Clemens N (2019) A compression-ramp shock/boundary-layer interaction over a compliant panel at Mach 5.

  • Neet M, Austin J (2020) Effects of surface compliance on shock boundary layer interaction in the caltech Mach 4 ludwieg tube. AIAA. 0816

  • Noda T, Nakakita K, Wakahara M, Kameda M (2018) Detection of small-amplitude periodic surface pressure fluctuation by pressure-sensitive paint measurements using frequency-domain methods. Exp Fluids 59(6):1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ozawa Y, Nonomura T, Mercier B, Castelain T, Bailly C, Asai K (2019) Cross-spectral analysis of PSP images for estimation of surface pressure spectra corrupted by the shot noise. Exp Fluids 60(8):1–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pandey A, Casper K, Soehnel M, Spillers R, Bhakta R, Beresh S (2021) Hypersonic fluid-structure interaction on the control surface of a slender cone. AIAA. 0909

  • Peltier S, Rice B, Szmodis J, Ogg D, Hofferth J, Sellers M, Harris A (2019) Aerodynamic response to a compliant panel in mach 4 flow. AIAA. 3541

  • Peng D, Jensen C, Juliano T, Gregory J, Crafton J, Palluconi S, Liu T (2013) Temperature-compensated fast pressure-sensitive paint. AIAA J 51(10):2420–2431

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pickles J, Narayanaswamy V (2020) Control of fin shock induced flow separation using vortex generators. AIAA J 58(11):4794–4806

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pickles J, Mettu B, Subbareddy P, Narayanaswamy V (2019) On the mean structure of sharp-fin-induced shock wave/turbulent boundary layer interactions over a cylindrical surface. J Fluid Mech 865:212–246

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Running C, Juliano T (2021a) Global measurements of hypersonic shock-wave/boundary-layer interactions with pressure-sensitive paint. Exp Fluids 62(5):1–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Running C, Juliano T (2021b) Global skewness and coherence for hypersonic shock-wave/boundary-layer interactions with pressure-sensitive paint. Aerospace 8(5):123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoneich A, Whalen T, Laurence S, Sullivan B, Bodony D, Freydin M, Dowell E, Stacey L, Buck G (2021) Fluid-thermal-structural interactions in ramp-induced shock-wave/boundary-layer interactions at Mach 6. AIAA. 0912.

  • Spottswood SM (2018) Exploring the response of a thin, flexible panel to supersonic turbulent flow and shock boundary-layer interactions (sbli). J Sound Vib 443:74–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spottswood S, Beberniss T, Eason T, Perez R, Donbar J, Ehrhardt D, Riley Z (2019) Exploring the response of a thin, flexible panel to shock-turbulent boundary-layer interactions. J Sound Vib 443:74–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tripathi AGJ, Shoele K, Kumar R (2021) Response of a compliant panel to shock boundary layer interaction at Mach 2. AIAA. 0489.

  • Varigonda S, Narayanaswamy V (2019) Investigation of shock wave oscillations over a flexible panel in supersonic flows. AIAA. 3543.

  • Varigonda S, Narayanaswamy V, Boxx I, Simultaneous measurement of pressure and velocity fields of an oblique SBLI on a flexible panel using PIV and PSP. AIAA. 3001

  • Varigonda S, Jenquin C, Narayanaswamy V (2021) Impact of Panel Vibrations on the Dynamic Field Properties in Supersonic flow. AIAA AVIATION 2021 FORUM, p. 2926

  • Wang G, Clemens N (2004) Effects of imaging system blur on measurements of flow scalars and scalar gradients. Exp Fluids 37(2):194–205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whalen T, Schöneich A, Laurence S, Sullivan B, Bodony D, Freydin M, Dowell E, Buck G (2020) Hypersonic fluid–structure interactions in compression corner shock-wave/boundary-layer interaction. AIAA J 58(9):4090–4105

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was sponsored by a grant sponsored by Air Force Office of Scientific Research with Dr. Sarah Popkin as the Program Manager (Grant No. FA9550-19-1-0313).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, 27695, USA

    S. V. Varigonda & V. Narayanaswamy

Authors
  1. S. V. Varigonda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. V. Narayanaswamy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to V. Narayanaswamy.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Varigonda, S.V., Narayanaswamy, V. Methodology to image the panel surface pressure power spectra in weakly coupled fluid/structure interactions. Exp Fluids 62, 237 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00348-021-03314-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00348-021-03314-4

Search

Navigation