Abstract
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.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Simpson R. Three–dimensional turbulent boundary layers and separation [J[. 33rd Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, 1995, 226.
Tobak M., Peake D. J. Topology of three–dimensional separated flows [J]. Annual review of fluid mechanics, 1982, 14 (1): 61–85.
Jeans T., Holloway A. L. Flow–separation lines on axisymmetric bodies with tapered tails [J]. Journal of Aircraft, 2010, 47 (6): 2177–2183.
Ahn S. An experimental study of flow over a 6 to 1 prolate–spheroid at incidence [J]. Doctoral Thesis, Virginia Tech, 1992.
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.
Wetzel T., Simpson R., Chesnakas C. Measurement of three–dimensional crossflow separation [J]. AIAA Journal, 1998, 36 (4): 557–564.
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.
Chesnakas C., Simpson R. Full three–dimensional measurements of the cross–flow separation region of a 6: 1 prolate–spheroid [J]. Experiments in Fluids, 1994, 17(1): 68–74.
Gee K., Cummings R., Schiff B. Turbulence model effects on separated flow about a prolate–spheroid [J]. AIAA Journal, 1992, 30(3): 655–664.
Rhee S., Hino T. Numerical simulation of unsteady turbulent flow around maneuvering prolate–spheroid [J]. AIAA Journal, 2002, 40 (10): 2017–2026.
Piquet J., Queutey P. Navier–Stokes computations past a prolate–spheroid at incidence. low incidence case [J]. Computers and Fluids, 1992, 21(4): 599–625.
Piquet J., Queutey P. Navier–stokes computations past a prolate–spheroid at incidence. ii: High incidence case [J]. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Fluids, 1993, 16(1): 1–27.
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.
Phillips A., Turnock S., Furlong M. Influence of turbulence closure models on the vortical flow field around a submarine body undergoing steady drift [J]. Journal of Marine Science and Technology, 2010, 15(3): 201–217.
Holloway A., Jeans T., Watt G. Flow separation from submarine shaped bodies of revolution in steady turning [J]. Ocean Engineering, 2015, 108: 426–438.
Constantinescu G., Pasinato H., Wang Y. et al. Numerical investigation of flow past a prolate spheroid [J]. Journal of Fluids Engineering, 2002, 124(4): 904–910.
Xiao Z., Zhang Y., Huang J. et al. Prediction of separation flows around a 6: 1 prolate–spheroid using rans/les hybrid approaches [J]. Acta Mechanica Sinica, 2007, 23(4): 369–382.
Versteeg H., Malalasekera W. An introduction into computational fluid dynamics: The finite volume method [M]. Pearson Education, 2007.
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.
Allan J., Conn J. Effect of laminar flow on ship models [J]. Trans. INA, 1950, 92: 107.
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.
Flack K., Schultz M. Roughness effects on wall–bounded turbulent flows [J]. Physics of Fluids, 2014, 26(10): 101305.
Iyer P. Discrete roughness effects on high–speed boundary layers [D]. Doctoral Thesis, University of Minnesota, 2015.
Speziale G., Sarkar S., Gatski T. Modelling the pressure–strain correlation of turbulence: an invariant dynamical systems approach [J]. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 1991, 227: 245–272.
Launder B., Spalding D. The numerical computation of turbulent flows [J]. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 1974, 3(2): 269–289.
Cebeci T., Bradshaw P. Momentum transfer in boundary layers [M]. Washington DC: Hemisphere Publishing Corp., New York: McGraw–Hill Book Co., 1977, 407.
STARCCM+. Version, 9.04. 009 user guide [M]. New York, USA: CD–adapco Inc., 2014
White F., Corfield I. Viscous fluid flow [M]. Vol. 3, New York: McGraw–Hill, 2006.
White F. Viscous fluid flow. 2nd edition New York: McGraw–Hill, 1991.
West G., Apelt C. The effects of tunnel blockage and aspect ratio on the mean flow past a circular cylinder with Reynolds numbers between 104 and 105 [J]. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 1982, 114: 361–377
Acknowledgement
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.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Biography: Mojtaba M. Amiri (1989-), Male, D. Sc., Naval Architect
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Amiri, M.M., Vitola, M.A., Sphaier, S.H. et al. RANS feasibility study of using roughness to mimic transition strip effect on the crossflowseparation over a 6:1 prolate-spheroid. J Hydrodyn 31, 570–581 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42241-019-0005-5
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42241-019-0005-5