Research Papers: Flows in Complex Systems

Identification of Bypass Transition Onset Markers Using Direct Numerical Simulation

[+] Author and Article Information
Shanti Bhushan, S. Muthu

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Mississippi State University,
Starkville, MS 39762

D. Keith Walters

School of Aerospace and
Mechanical Engineering,
University of Oklahoma,
Norman, OK 73019

Crystal L. Pasiliao

Air Force Research Lab (AFRL),
Eglin Air Force Base, FL 32542

1Only key references are cited due to space limitations.

Contributed by the Fluids Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF FLUIDS ENGINEERING. Manuscript received March 16, 2017; final manuscript received May 9, 2018; published online June 13, 2018. Assoc. Editor: Elias Balaras.This work is in part a work of the U.S. Government. ASME disclaims all interest in the U.S. Government's contributions.

J. Fluids Eng 140(11), 111107 (Jun 13, 2018) (9 pages) Paper No: FE-17-1164; doi: 10.1115/1.4040299 History: Received March 16, 2017; Revised May 09, 2018

Efficacy of several large-scale flow parameters as transition onset markers are evaluated using direct numerical simulation (DNS) of boundary layer bypass transition. Preliminary results identify parameters (k2D/ν) and u/U to be a potentially reliable transition onset marker, and their critical values show less than 15% variation in the range of Re and turbulence intensity (TI). These parameters can be implemented into general-purpose physics-based Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes (RANS) models for engineering applications.

Copyright © 2018 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


Morkovin, M. V. , 1969, “ The Many Faces of Transition,” Viscous Drag Reduction, C.S . Wells , ed., Springer, Boston, MA. [CrossRef]
Luchini, P. , 2000, “ Reynolds-Number Independent Instability of the Boundary Layer Over a Flat Surface: Optimal Perturbation,” J. Fluid Mech., 404, pp. 289–309. [CrossRef]
Kubacki, S. , Lodefier, K. , Zarzycki, R. , Elsner, W. , and Dick, E. , 2009, “ Further Development of a Dynamic Intermittency Model for Wake Induced Transition,” Flow Turbul. Combust., 83(4), pp. 539–568. [CrossRef]
Walters, D. K. , and Cokljat, D. , 2008, “ A Three-Equation Eddy-Viscosity Model for Reynolds-Averaged Navier-Stokes Simulations of Transitional Flow,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 130(12), p. 121401. [CrossRef]
Praisner, T. , and Clark, J. , 2007, “ Predicting Transition in Turbomachinery‚ Part I: A Review and New Model Development,” ASME J. Turbomach., 129(1), pp. 1–3. [CrossRef]
Singer, B. A. , and Joslin, R. D. , 1994, “ Metamorphosis of a Hairpin Vortex Into a Young Turbulent Spot,” Phys. Fluids, 6(11), pp. 3724–3736. [CrossRef]
Zaki, T. A. , and Durbin, P. A. , 2005, “ Mode Interaction and the Bypass Route to Transition,” J. Fluid Mech., 531, pp. 85–111. [CrossRef]
Schlatter, P. , Brandt, L. , deLange, H. C. , and Henningson, D. S. , 2008, “ On Streak Breakdown in Bypass Transition,” Phys. Fluids, 20(10), p. 101505. [CrossRef]
Mayle, R. E. , and Schulz, A. , 1997, “ The Path to Predicting Bypass Transition,” ASME J. Turbomach., 119(3), pp. 405–411. [CrossRef]
Lardeau, S. , Li, N. , and Leschziner, M. , 2007, “ Large Eddy Simulation of Transitional Boundary Layers at High Free-Stream Turbulence Intensity and Implications for RANS Modeling,” ASME J. Turbomach., 129(2), pp. 311–317. [CrossRef]
Walters, D. K. , 2009, “ Physical Interpretation of Transition-Sensitive RANS Models Employing the Laminar Kinetic Energy,” ERCOFTAC Bull., 80, pp. 67–71.
Jacobs, R. G. , and Durbin, P. A. , 2001, “ Simulation of Bypass Transition,” J. Fluid Mech., 428, pp. 185–212. [CrossRef]
Mandal, A. C. , Venkatakrishnan, L. , and Dey, J. , 2010, “ A Study of Boundary Layer Transition Induced by Freestream Turbulence,” J. Fluid Mech., 660, pp. 114–146. [CrossRef]
He, S. , and Seddighi, M. , 2013, “ Turbulence in Transient Channel Flow,” J. Fluid Mech., 715, pp. 60–102. [CrossRef]
Vaughan, N. J. , and Zaki, T. A. , 2011, “ Stability of Zero-Pressure-Gradient Boundary Layer Distorted by Unsteady Klebanoff Streaks,” J. Fluid Mech., 681, pp. 116–153. [CrossRef]
Sharma, O. P. , Wells, R. A. , Schlinker, R. H. , and Bailey, D. A. , 1982, “ Boundary Layer Development on Airfoil Suction Surfaces,” ASME J. Eng. Power, 104(3), pp. 698–706. [CrossRef]
Bhushan, S. , and Walters, D. K. , 2014, “ Development of a Parallel Pseudo-Spectral Solver Using the Influence Matrix Method and Application to Boundary Layer Transition,” Eng. Appl. Comput. Fluid Mech., 8(1), pp. 158–177.
Moser, R. D. , Kim, J. , and Mansour, N. N. , 1999, “ Direct Numerical Simulation of Turbulent Channel Flow Up to Reτ=590,” Phys. Fluids, 11(4), pp. 943–945. [CrossRef]
Rai, M. M. , and Moin, P. , 1993, “ Direct Numerical Simulation of Transition and Turbulence in a Spatially Evolving Boundary Layer,” J. Comput. Phys., 109(2), pp. 169–192. [CrossRef]
Muthu, S. , and Bhushan, S. , 2017, “ Temporal Direct Numerical Simulations for Flat-Plate Boundary Layer,” Early Career Technical J., 16, pp. 87–91.
Choi, H. , and Moin, P. , 1994, “ Effects of the Computational Time Step on Numerical Simulation of Turbulent Flow,” J. Comput. Phys., 113(1), pp. 1–4. [CrossRef]
Rogallo, R. S. , 1981, “ Numerical Experiments in Homogeneous Turbulence,” NASA Ames Research Center Moffett Field, CA, Technical Memorandum No. 81315.
Bhushan, S. , Borse, M. , Walters, D. K. , and Pasiliao, C. , 2016, “ Analysis of Turbulence Generation and Energy Transfer Mechanism in Boundary Layer Transition Using Direct Numerical Simulation,” ASME Paper No. FEDSM2016-7795.
Roach, P. E. , and Brierley, D. H. , 1992, “ The Influence of a Turbulent Free Stream on Zero Pressure Gradient Transitional Boundary Layer Development—Part I: Test Cases T3A and T3B,” Numerical Simulation of Unsteady Flows and Transition to Turbulence, O. Pironneau , W. Rodi , A. M. Rhyming , L. Savill and T. V. Truong , eds., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp. 319–347.
Voke, P. R. , and Yang, Z. , 1995, “ Numerical Study of Bypass Transition,” Phys. Fluids, 7(9), pp. 2256–2264. [CrossRef]


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Initial turbulence for Reτ = 590, TI = 2% simulation is shown using: (a) isosurface of Q = 0.3, colored using streamwise velocity fluctuation (u') and (b) variation of planar-averaged TI with wall distance

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Temporal evolution of wall shear stress, τw, for (a) Reτ = 590, TI = 1% (case #4) with respect to nondimensional flow time, and (b) FP, TI = 3.5% (case #11) with respect to nondimensional flow time. (c) Evolution of Cf with respect to spatial coordinates, Rex for both channel flows (Re180, Re590) and FP simulations. The skin friction growth is compared with analytic profiles in laminar (Cf=0.664/Rex) and turbulent (Cf=0.131Rex−1/6) regions, and with flat-plate experimental data T3A for TI = 3% [24]. (d) Growth of momentum thickness in the transition region for Reτ = 590, TIs = 2% and 3%, and FP, TI = 2.8% simulations are compared with flat-plate boundary layer experimental data T3A corresponding to TI = 3% and case T3B corresponding to TI = 6%.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Profiles of (a) mean velocity and (b) streamwise velocity fluctuations in pretransition, transition, and turbulent regions predicted for Reτ = 590, TI = 2% (C-Re590), and FP, TI = 2.8% are compared with flat-plate DNS results for TI = 3% [12] (JD), and Moser et al. [18] (Moser) plane channel DNS at Reτ = 590 results in the fully developed turbulent region. For channel flow case, Rex = 1.7 × 105 (Re1.7e5) and Rex = 1.9 × 105 (Re1.9e5) are in the pretransition region; Rex = 2.1 × 105 (Re2.1e5) to 2.4 × 105 (Re2.4e5) are in the transition region; and Rex = 2.9 × 105 (Re2.1e5) is in the fully developed turbulent region. For FP simulations and Jacob and Durbin [12] DNS, Reθ = 177 (Re177) is in the pretransition region; Reθ = 323 (Re323) to 456 (Re456) are in the transition region; and Reθ = 897 (Re897) to 980 (Re980) are in the fully developed turbulent region.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Vortical structures are shown using isosurface of Q, colored using streamwise vorticity ωx for Reτ = 590, TI = 2% (case #5). Structures predicted in the pretransition region at Rex = 1.61 × 105 obtained in (a) small domain (case #5) and (b) large domain (case #8). Structures predicted on small domain (case #5) in the (b) early transition region at Rex = 2 × 105 and (c) fully developed turbulent region at Rex = 2.8 × 105.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

(a) Growth of peak velocity fluctuations u′2,v′2,andw′2. The vertical dotted line shows the transition onset location. The thick broken line shows that u′2 grows linearly with Rex in the transition region. Budget for (b) u′, (c) v′, and (d) w′ for Reτ =590, TI =2% (case #5). Plots on the left panel show the variation of the integral values of the budget terms against Rex. The plots on the right show the profiles of the budget terms in the boundary layer during transition (Rex = 2.3 × 105). The stresses are normalized uτ02, the integral budget terms are normalized using uτ04/ν, and the budget profiles are normalized using local uτ4/ν.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Evolution of parameters k/νω, k2D/νω, and ky/ν during transition (leftmost panel) and their near-wall profiles in pretransition, transition onset, and turbulent regions. Results are presented for (a) Reτ = 590, TI = 1% (case #4); (b) Reτ = 590, TI = 2% (case #5); and (c) flat-plate boundary layer, TI = 2.8% (case #10) simulations.



Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In