Receptivity of boundary layers with distributed roughness to vortical and acoustic disturbances: a second-order asymptotic theory and comparison withexperiments

Authors
Citation
Xs. Wu, Receptivity of boundary layers with distributed roughness to vortical and acoustic disturbances: a second-order asymptotic theory and comparison withexperiments, J FLUID MEC, 431, 2001, pp. 91-133
Citations number
38
Categorie Soggetti
Physics,"Mechanical Engineering
Journal title
JOURNAL OF FLUID MECHANICS
ISSN journal
00221120 → ACNP
Volume
431
Year of publication
2001
Pages
91 - 133
Database
ISI
SICI code
0022-1120(20010325)431:<91:ROBLWD>2.0.ZU;2-3
Abstract
This paper investigates the receptivity of boundary layers due to distribut ed roughness interacting with free-stream disturbances. Both acoustic and v ortical perturbations are considered. An asymptotic approach based on the t riple-deck formulation has been developed to determine the initial amplitud e of the Tollmien-Schlichting wave to the O(R-1/8) accuracy, where R is the global Reynolds number. In the case of vortical disturbances, we show that the dominant contribution to the receptivity comes from the upper deck as well as from the so-called edge layer centred at the outer reach of the bou ndary layer. It is found that for certain forms of disturbances, the recept ivity is independent of their vertical structure and can be fully character ized by their slip velocity at the edge of the boundary layer. A typical ca se is the vortical disturbance in the form of a convecting wake, for which the same conclusion as above has been reached by Dietz (1999) on the basis of measurements. Our theoretical predictions are compared with the experime ntal data of Dietz (1999), and a good quantitative agreement has been found . Such a comparison is the first to be made for distributed vortical recept ivity. Further calculations indicate that the vortical receptivity in gener al is much stronger than was suggested previously. In the case of acoustic disturbances, it is found that our first-order theory is in good agreement with experiments as well as with previous theoretical results. But the seco nd-order theory over-predicts, and the possible reasons for this are discus sed.