The unsteady structure of twodimensional steady laminar separation

Matthew D. Ripley and Laura L. Pauley

Citation: Phys. Fluids A 5, 3099 (1993); doi: 10.1063/1.858719

View online: http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.858719
View Table of Contents: http://pof.aip.org/resource/1/PFADEB/v5/i12
Published by the American Institute of Physics.

Additional information on Phys. Fluids A

Journal Homepage: http://pof.aip.org/
Journal Information: http://pof.aip.org/about/about_the_journal
Top downloads: http://pof.aip.org/features/most_downloaded
Information for Authors: http://pof.aip.org/authors

Downloaded 01 Apr 2013 to 128.206.9.138. This article is copyrighted as indicated in the abstract. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://pof.aip.org/about/rights_and_permissions
 The unsteady structure of two-dimensional steady laminar separation
Matthew D. Ripleya) and Laura L. Pauleyb)
Departmentof Mechanical Engineering, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park,
Pennsylvania 16802
(Received 10 August 1992; accepted 12 August 1993)
The two-dimensional unsteady incompressible Navier-Stokes equations, solved by a fractional
time-step method, were used to investigate separation due to the application of an adverse
pressure gradient to a low-Reynolds number boundary layer flow. The inviscid pressure
distribution of Gaster [AGARD CP 4, 813 (1966)] was applied in the present computations to
study the development of a laminar separation bubble. In all cases studied, periodic vortex
shedding occurred from the primary separation region. The shed vortices initially lifted from the
boundary layer and then returned towards the surface downstream. The shedding frequency
nondimensionalized by the momentum thickness was found to be independent of Reynolds
number. The value of the nondimensional Strouhal number, however, was found to differ from
the results of Pauley et aL [J. Fluid Mech. 220, 397 (1990)], indicating that the shedding
frequency varies with the nondimensional pressure distribution, Cp. The computational results
were time averaged over several shedding cycles and the results were compared with Gaster. The
numerical study accurately reproduced the major characteristics of the separation found in
Gaster's study such as the separation point, the pressure plateau within the upstream portion of
the separation bubble, and the reattachment point. The similarity between the experimental
results and the time-averaged two-dimensional computational results indicates that the-
low-frequency velocity fluctuations detected by Gaster are primarily due to the motion of large
vortex structures. This suggests that large-scale two-dimensional structures control bubble
reattachment and small-scale turbulence contributes a secondary role.

1.INTRODUCTION high recirculating velocities and an abrupt reattachment of

Low-Reynolds number flow over an airfoil often dis-
plays a region of recirculating fluid within the boundary
layer. The size of this recirculation region can vary signif-
icantly depending on several variables including the sur-
face pressure gradient, the chord Reynolds number, and
the free-stream turbulence level. The relationship between
these variables and the structure of the separated region is
not fully understood at this time. The vortical structure of
the separation can be steady or unsteady. A steady sepa-
ration bubble contains a stationary recirculation while pe-
riodic vortex shedding is the dominant feature of an un-
steady separation structure.
The present study is a numerical investigation of these
low-Reynolds number separation bubbles. The separation
produced by three different Reynolds number and pressure
gradient conditions will be investigated. Of specific interest
is the mechanism of shear layer reattachment and the un-
steady nature of large-scale vortices.
The classical view of a two-dimensional laminar sepa-
ration bubble, as sketched by Horton,' is shown in Fig. 1.
Near the separation point, the recirculating velocity is sig-
nificantly less than the velocity of the inviscid flow and is
viewed as a region of nearly static fluid. This "dead air"
zone is distinguishable from surface measurements as a
region of approximately constant pressure or as a pressure
plateau. The latter part of the bubble is characterized by
a)Research Assistant.
b)Assistant Professor.
the shear layer. The abrupt reattachment corresponds to a
rapid increase in surface pressure.
Extensive experimental work has been carried out to
investigate separation bubbles. A majority of these studies
have been limited to the examination of steady large-scale
structures, that is, results which have been inherently time
averaged. An extensive review is given by Tani.2 More
recent investigations include those of Brendel and Mueller3
and McGhee et aL.4 These studies have distinguished sev-
eral of the aforementioned separation bubble characteris-
tics on a wide range of airfoil types, Reynolds numbers,
and incident angles.
Investigators have also measured the degree of flow
unsteadiness about the laminar separation bubble. In the
upstream portion of the bubble where the shear layer
moves away from the wall, the lifted shear layer is steady.
In the region where the time-averaged shear layer quickly
returns to the wall, the shear layer is unsteady. The bound-
ary layer downstream of the reattachment point is also
unsteady. The unsteady flow is often described as turbulent
although experimental studies 5 7- have measured a low-
frequency velocity oscillation in the unsteady boundary
layer region.
Mabey8 summarized those experiments that gathered
low-frequency surface pressure measurements and found
that the amplitude of the fluctuations in a separation bub-
ble increased gradually from the separation line, reached a
maximum near reattachment, and then slowly decreased
downstream of reattachment; but offered no hypothesis to
describe the underlying structure that caused these fluctu-

3099 Phys. Fluids A 5 (12), December 1993 0899-8213/93/5(12)/3099/8/$6.00 1993 American Institute of Physics 3099

Downloaded 01 Apr 2013 to 128.206.9.138. This article is copyrighted as indicated in the abstract. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://pof.aip.org/about/rights_and_permissions

FIG. 1. Classical sketch of the separation bubble (see Ref. 1).
ations. McCroskey 9 summarized studies which investigate
unsteady boundary layer behavior including unsteady sep-
arated flows.
Flow visualization has shown that the separated shear
layer rolls up and periodic vortex shedding occurs. Several
investigators including Brendel and Mueller3 and Zaman
et aL7 have reported that the vortex shedding occurs across
the span of the channel and produces a two-dimensional
unsteady separation. Flow visualization of Werle (as re-
ported by McCroskey 9 ) and Koromilas and Telionislo also
show large-scale vortex shedding from the primary (fixed)
separation. The large-scale laminar vortex shedding ap-
pears as the dominant mechanism causing the unsteadiness
of the separated region. Of course, small-scale turbulence is
also present and causes three-dimensionality. The large-
scale unsteady vortex structures, however, are observed as
two dimensional.
The unsteady vortex shedding observed experimentally
may produce the time-averaged streamlines and wall pres-
sure distribution attributed to laminar separation bubbles,
and therefore be the cause of the detrimental effects of
separation bubbles on airfoil performance. The objective of
the present study is to determine the importance of large-
scale unsteady vortices in the formation of the observed
separation bubble. This is accomplished by time-accurate
Navier-Stokes computations. The time-averaged separa-
tion bubble can be determined from the unsteady compu-
tational results and be directly compared to experimental
measurements of low-Reynolds number separation bub-
bles. The separation structure will be quantified by the
separation point, reattachment point, boundary layer
thickness at separation, and surface pressure distribution.
I1. BACKGROUND
A. Gaster's experimental study
Three cases from the Series I geometry of Gaster's
investigation 5 were studied in the present investigation.
The inviscid surface pressure distribution of Gaster's study
was imposed within the computational domain, and the
subsequent separation structure was compared to his ex-
perimental findings.
3100 Phys. Fluids A, Vol. 5, No. 12, December 1993
Downloaded 01 Apr 2013 to 128.206.9.138. This article is copyrighted as indicated in the abstract. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://pof.aip.org/about/rights_and_permissions
Free *strm Uc0 Auxiliary aerofoil
Flat plate
FIG. 2. Experimental configuration of Gaster (Ref. 5).
Gaster's experiment considered the structure of a lam-
inar separation bubble produced on a flat surface. An ad-
verse pressure gradient was created by placing an airfoil in
the free stream above the plate surface (Fig. 2). The mod-
ified free-stream velocity formed a pressure gradient on the
flat surface which was similar to the pressure distribution
found on an airfoil. Boundary layer separation was studied
for two different airfoil configurations. For each geometry,
the free-stream velocity was varied to produce different
Reynolds number conditions.
At each free-stream velocity, two boundary layer con-
ditions on the plate were examined. The first condition
involved purposely tripping the boundary layer to cause a
turbulent transition inhibiting the development of separa-
tion. The resulting turbulent boundary layer produced a
negligible influence on the inviscid flow field and the ex-
perimental flow field approximated a potential flow for the
same geometry. The resulting nondimensional surface-
pressure distribution, C., was thereby independent of the
Reynolds number. The second condition allowed the up-
stream flow to remain laminar such that separation was not
inhibited. Because the length of the laminar separation
bubble was a function of the free-stream velocity, the CP
distribution of the laminar boundary layer varied with
Reynolds number. For all cases, the surface pressure up-
stream of the separation point was increased due to the
presence of the separation bubble. The large separation
bubble that developed at the lowest free-stream velocity
altered the inviscid pressure distribution most significantly.
For each airfoil geometry and free-stream velocity consid-
ered, Gaster measured the surface pressure distribution
and velocity field of the separation bubble. Gaster defined a
pressure parameter
O2 (dU\,g
(1)
Pav= avgWX
where (dU/dx)avg is the slip velocity gradient as deter-
mined analytically from the potential flow field averaged
over the length of the separation bubble. Also, 0S is the
boundary layer momentum thickness at the separation
point. Table I summarizes Gaster's experimental results
for the three cases considered in the present study.
B. Previous numerical studies
Numerical studies can provide details of the unsteady
separation structure. Prior to the most recent generation of
computers, studies were limited to steady Navier-Stokes
computations or unsteady boundary layer computations.
M. D. Ripley and L. L. Pauley 3100
 TABLE 1. Separation characteristics from Gaster's experiment.
Case 1 4
U,, (m/sec) 20.79 12.19
U, (m/sec) 28.44 16.52
6, (mm) 0.224 0.264
R0, 432 298
Pavg -0.280 -0.228
1, (cm) 3.02 4.07
1, (cm) 3.56 5.72
Recently, full unsteady Navier-Stokes schemes have been
used to resolve the entire flow field, including the vortical
structure of the separated region.
Unsteady Navier-Stokes computations have found un-
steady vortex shedding to occur in many separated bound-
ary layer flows. Zaman et aL8 found that airfoil stall at
low-Reynolds number produced an unsteady vortex struc-
ture which developed on the leading edge of the airfoil,
broke away, and traveled the length of the airfoil. Rohlings
et a I l have also found vortex shedding to occur from the
leading and trailing edge of a stalled airfoil. Bestek et aL 12
observed vortex shedding to occur from a separation bub-
ble produced on a flat plate by a relatively strong adverse
pressure gradient.
Pauley et aL 13 used the unsteady Navier-Stokes equa-
tions to investigate the laminar boundary layer develop-
ment on the lower test surface of a rectangular channel. An
adverse pressure gradient was created by removing fluid at
a suction port on the upper boundary, causing separation
on the test surface. The importance of large-scale unsteady
structures was studied without the implementation of a
turbulence model. It was found that periodic vortex shed-
ding developed from the separation when a strong adverse
pressure gradient was applied. The time-averaged stream-
lines and wall pressure distribution were similar to typical
experimental results for laminar separation bubbles. The
prediction of the experimental measurements without the
resolution of the turbulent behavior suggests that the reat-
tachment of the separation bubble may be due primarily to
large-scale vortical structures rather than the turbulent
transfer of momentum.
Pauley et al. considered separation conditions pro-
duced at three Reynolds numbers. At each Reynolds num-
ber, the pressure gradient was varied in a series of compu-
tations. For weakly adverse pressure gradients, a steady
separation structure resulted. At stronger adverse pressure
gradient conditions, vortex shedding from the separation
was produced. The frequency of vortex shedding was de-
scribed by the nondimensional Strouhal number
Sto= U.y,
where 0, and Us are the boundary layer momentum thick-
ness and boundary layer edge velocity, respectively; both
are evaluated at the separation point. For all cases, the
Strouhal number was approximately 0.006 86. Time aver-
aging the computational results produced a region of
3101 Phys. Fluids A, Vol. 5, No. 12, December 1993
Downloaded 01 Apr 2013 to 128.206.9.138. This article is copyrighted as indicated in the abstract. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://pof.aip.org/about/rights_and_permissions
6
6.64
8.66
0.368
218
-0.199 y 1.2 a- +C-=0
5.34
9.40
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
6 8 10 12 14 16 18
X
FIG. 3. Computational domain and vortex trajectory for case 6.
nearly constant surface pressure followed by a strong pres-
sure gradient near the reattachment point. A similar wall
pressure distribution was observed for short separation
bubbles in the studies of Tani 2 and Gaster.5
111. PRESENT INVESTIGATION
The results of Pauley et al 13 suggest that vortex shed-
ding may be the controlling factor which leads to the re-
attachment of a separation bubble. This hypothesis was not
verified due to the limited geometry used in their compu-
tations; the pressure gradient applied in the study did not
represent a physical situation usually associated with the
occurrence of separation bubbles. The primary objective of
the present study is to investigate the universality of their
conclusions by producing computational results which can
be compared directly with previous experiments. Of par-
ticular interest within the present investigation is the ex-
amination of the unsteady nature of the separation.
A fractional timestep method developed by Kim and
Moin14 was used to solve the unsteady incompressible
Navier-Stokes equations for a fluid with constant viscosity.
This method solved the momentum equations as the pre-
dictor step and a pressure Poisson equation as the correc-
tor step to produce a divergence-free velocity field. Spatial
derivatives were central differenced. The convective terms
were temporally differenced using a second-order accurate
Adams-Bashforth method and the implicit Crank-
Nicolson method was used to temporally difference the
viscous term. The resulting scheme was second-order ac-
(2) curate in space and time.
A rectangular geometry was defined in the present in-
vestigation (Fig. 3). The streamwise extent of the compu-
tational domain was specified such that the inlet and outlet
potential velocities varied by less than 2% across the
height of the channel. The computational domain was non-
dimensionalized by the half-channel height. The nondi-
M. D. Ripley and L. L. Pauley 3101
 mensional domain was 2.0 high by 14.0 long and corre- au~
sponded to a dimensional size of 5.08 by 35.56 cm (2.0 (4)
X 14.0 in.).
The upper (control) surface transpiration was set to
Both boundary conditions correctly represent the behavior
duplicate the pressure distribution of Gaster. 5 The transpi-
of the potential flow field; theoretically either condition is
ration distribution was defined by linear segments, allow-
correct. When either boundary condition was applied [Eq.
ing an analytical calculation of the inviscid pressure distri-
(3) or (4)], the resulting irrotational velocity near the
bution produced on the lower (test) surface. The
regions of highest transpiration did not accurately match
transpiration velocity was matched at adjoining segments
the potential velocity. This discrepancy is due to the inabil-
to avoid discontinuities that would create numerical oscil-
ity of the computational mesh to adequately resolve the
lations in the solution field.
rapid changes in the potential flow field as the line sink of
Gaster measured the wall pressure distribution in the
the upper boundary is approached. In order to accurately
presence of a laminar and turbulent boundary layer devel-
resolve the velocity field at the upper surface, the grid spac-
opment. Since the turbulent boundary layer did not sepa-
ing in the normal direction would require two orders of
rate, it produced a wall pressure distribution which closely
magnitude refinement. This would greatly increase the
approximated the distribution produced by an inviscid
computational effort of the study. Instead, the effective
flow. Upstream of the separation bubble, the laminar and
streamwise velocity at the boundary was determined using
turbulent boundary layer measurements of Gaster showed
a linear extrapolation of the potential velocity at the loca-
up to 10% difference in the value of Cp. Although the
tions of the two nodes adjacent to the boundary. When the
placement of the airfoil was not described in Gaster's
effective slip velocity was applied at the control boundary,
study, it is thought that the passage between the flat plate
the potential flow field was closely matched.
and the airfoil was narrow compared to the present com-
Two distinct streamwise velocity profiles are applied at
putational geometry and that the displacement thickness of
the inlet: a thin Blasius boundary layer profile near the
the separated boundary layer caused significant flow block-
lower surface and the potential profile above the boundary
age. In addition, the alteration of the effective passage ge-
layer region. A discontinuity at the junction of these two
ometry by the separation bubble probably moved the loca-
regions is avoided by slightly scaling the Blasius profile to
tion of the stagnation point on the airfoil and changed the
match the potential velocity at the edge of the boundary
flow rate through the passage. These effects would modify
layer. This scaling never changed the boundary layer ve-
the surface pressure distribution upstream of the separa-
locities by more than 0.6%. The normal velocity deter-
tion.
mined from a potential flow analysis was applied across the
In the present study, the displacement thickness effect
entire inlet of the domain.
was minimal since the channel height was specified to be an
order of magnitude larger than the displacement thickness Various exit boundary conditions were tested, 15 and it
was found that the convective boundary conditions
of the separation structure. Upstream of the separation, an
inviscid analysis accurately predicted the test surface pres-
sure distribution which was computed in the Navier-
au au av av
at +Cax= _+ -= (5)
Stokes computation. The transpiration conditions along
the control surface of the computational domain were
allowed a propagating vortex structure to exit the domain
therefore specified such that an inviscid analysis duplicated
Gaster's laminar boundary layer pressure distribution up- with minimum distortion. The propagation speed of the
vortices within the computational domain gave the value
stream of the separation structure. Within the separated
for c. To within 0.2% relative error, the same instanta-
region, an inviscid and Navier-Stokes computation re-
neous velocity fields were obtained when the average
sulted in different surface pressure distributions. To de-
streamwise velocity at the exit was used for c, and hence
scribe the externally induced pressure gradient driving the
the value of c was not critical to the numerical solution.
separation, the transpiration distribution was specified to
Other investigators16' 17 have also found the convective
produce a linear inviscid pressure variation across the sep-
boundary condition to describe most accurately a vortex
aration bubble. The specified transpiration conditions re-
propagation from the computational domain.
sulted in a viscous surface pressure distribution that was
The computations used 512 points in the streamwise
similar to the measurements of Gaster.
In addition to prescribing the normal velocity at the direction and 192 points in the normal direction. Uniform
grid spacing was applied in the streamwise direction. Half
transpiration boundary, a boundary condition for the
of the grid points were clustered in the bdundary layer on
streamwise velocity must also be specified. A slip boundary
condition was used along the control surface since a no-slip the test wall using a hyperbolic tangent distribution in the
normal direction. Some grid clustering was also required at
boundary condition would have allowed a boundary layer
the control surface to resolve the high velocity gradients
to develop along the upper surface, thereby requiring ad-
near the strong transpiration regions. T~ e grid indepen-
ditional grid resolution. Two boundary conditions were
dence of the solution was tested by doubling the number of
tested:
points in the streamwise and normal directions separately;
for both cases, the relative error in the instantaneous ve-
Ubc= Upotential, (3) locity fields and shedding frequency was less than 0.5%.

3102 Phys. Fluids A, Vol. 5, No. 12, December 1993 M. D. Ripley and L. L. Pauley 3102

Downloaded 01 Apr 2013 to 128.206.9.138. This article is copyrighted as indicated in the abstract. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://pof.aip.org/about/rights_and_permissions
 The maximum deviation in the time-averaged velocity 0.4
L = 47.16

fields, time-averaged separation bubble length, and separa- Y

0.2
tion angle were also less than 0.5%. 2
To test the influence of the exit boundary location, a
computational domain was used which was 50% larger
and contained 50% more grid points in the streamwise t . 47.56

direction to retain the same grid spacing. Near the exit of Y 0.2
the shorter domain, the instantaneous velocity fields of the U7 " zpg
two computations differed by up to 3% relative error, but
the results more than one channel height upstream of the
exit plane differed by less than 0.2%. Thus the main results 01. t =47S9
of interest were independent of the domain truncation. 0.2
_.A AX i AA
A converged solution was first obtained when no tran-
spiration is present. At t=0, the transpiration along the
6 5VMI - N t
4 i
upper wall suction was slowly ramped to full strength. This
0.4 t =48.35
ramping avoided numerical instabilities observed when the
Y
transpiration was impulsively applied and allowed a 0.2
smooth development of the separation region. ib_
"W
The time step used for the computations was At
-0.0015, corresponding to a maximum Courant number
of 0.418. To check the time step independence of the solu- 0.4 t - 48.75
tion, a calculation was run at half the time step. The in- By
0.2w
stantaneous velocity fields and shedding frequency for the e!* hl~~
Nog /
FJOP---
two different time steps agreed to within 0.5% relative 6 8 10 12 ' 14 16 18
error. X

IV. ANALYSIS OF SEPARATED STRUCTURE

The inviscid pressure distribution for cases 1, 4, and 6
from the Series I experiments reported by Gaster5 was ap-
plied using a transpiration velocity distribution at the con-
trol surface of the computational domain. Details of the
experimental flow conditions for these cases are given in
Table I. In each case studied computationally, a separation
structure developed and large-scale vortex shedding was
observed. The boundary layer separation altered the sur-
face pressure distribution and caused it to be time depen-
dent. After time averaging the computational results, the
separation results were quantitatively compared to the in-
herently time-averaged separation measurements of
Gaster. The present computational study provides insight
into the low-frequency oscillation of the separation ob-
served in the experimental velocity measurements of
Gaster. Since flow visualization was not used by Gaster, he
could not identify the cause of the low-frequency velocity
oscillations.
A. Unsteady separation structure
For each case of Gaster that was studied computation-
ally, the control surface transpiration was applied at t=0
and the boundary layer separated soon after. For all three
cases, vortex shedding was initiated as the separation de-
veloped. The computations were continued until a limit
cycle shedding was obtained. The typical vortex shedding
process is shown in Fig. 4 for Gaster's case 4. The stream-
lines within the boundary layer region are shown at five
equally spaced time intervals within the vortex shedding
cycle. For each shedding cycle, the separation structure
grows until a small counter-rotating vortex develops at the
test surface and within the primary vortex structure. This
FIG. 4. Streamlines at five equal time intervals in the limit cycle vortex
shedding.
counter-rotating vortex expands until it divides the main
vortex into two distinct structures. The downstream struc-
ture is carried away from the main separation region by the
free-stream flow, and travels the length of the computa-
tional domain. The upstream structure remains in position,
but continues to grow until another small counter-rotating
vortex develops, thus repeating the cycle. The upstream
portion of the separation region remains largely unaffected
by the downstream unsteady behavior. Throughout the cy-
cle, the flow near the separation point remains steady.
The development of the shed vortex structure can be
tracked from its inception to where it passes out of the
computational domain. Vortex pairing occurs from X= 15
to 16. The streamlines suggest that the shed vortex initially
has a rapid decay in strength, followed by a resurgence
slightly downstream of the main separation region. When
the vorticity contours in Fig. 3 are examined, however, it is
seen that this apparent rapid decay is due to the initial
vortex motion away from the test surface rather than an
actual deterioration of the vortex strength. The trajectory
of the shed vortex is seen to lift away from the test surface,
and then return toward the test surface shortly down-
stream at the location where vortex pairing is observed.
B. Shedding frequency
The unsteady behavior of the separation structure is
tracked by velocity histories at different positions within
the computational domain. Velocity histories taken within

3103 Phys. Fluids A, Vol. 5, No. 12, December 1993 M. D. Ripley and L. L. Pauley 3103

Downloaded 01 Apr 2013 to 128.206.9.138. This article is copyrighted as indicated in the abstract. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://pof.aip.org/about/rights_and_permissions
the primary separation and near the separation point show 0.5-

an initial transient behavior which decays to a constant

negative recirculation velocity. Throughout the shedding Q 0.4
process, the upstream portion of the separation is steady.
The downstream velocity histories show substantial fluctu-
ations which indicate the passing of large vortex structures
at these locations. At lower Reynolds numbers, the veloc-
ity fluctuations are periodic. For higher Reynolds num- 0.1

bers, however, the downstream velocity histories do not

maintain a regular frequency. Gaster found the lifted shear
layer to be steady near the separation point. Gaster's ve-
locity measurements also revealed a low-frequency oscilla-
tion near the reattachment point which can be attributed to 0.0- nqr.&j'~ J |W|AI0

the vortex shedding process observed in the present com-

putations. 0.5
To evaluate the dominant frequencies of the shedding
process, a Fourier analysis is performed using the velocity
0.4
histories produced in the unsteady flow region. Figure 5
shows the fast Fourier transform for the three cases stud- 0.4--

ied. At the lowest flow speed (case 6), the vortex shedding
process is described by a single dominant shedding fre-
quency and its harmonics. As the Reynolds number is in-
creased (cases 4 and 1), the shedding becomes less regular
0
due to the interaction of multiple frequencies.
The nonlinear growth of disturbance waves in sepa- 0.2
021
rated flows, such as Tollmien-Schlichting waves, is well
documented by the study of Gruber et aL 18 In the present 0.0
study, the irregular behavior of the shedding process at 0 1 2 3 4 5

higher Reynolds number may be due to the undamped

growth of multiple frequency disturbances within the flow
field and the interactions between these disturbances as
they become nonlinear. The existence of multiple-
frequency nonlinear disturbances will lead to a broadband S 0.65

frequency spectrum produced by disturbance interactions. U

For all cases studied, it was possible to distinguish the
E 0.4_
most dominant frequency of vortex shedding. Although
multiple frequencies appeared at higher Reynolds num-
bers, a dominant shedding frequency could still be distin-
guished. The shedding frequency was nondimensionalized 0.2-

by the boundary layer momentum thickness at separation

and the local free-stream velocity to create a Strouhal num-
ber [Eq. (2)]. It was found in the current study that the
Strouhal number collapses to a relatively constant value
between 0.0055 to 0.0057 (see Table II), indicating that
the Strouhal number is independent of Reynolds number.
Pauley et aL3 also found the Strouhal number to remain
constant through a range of Reynolds numbers. The Strou-
hal number found in the present investigation, however,
differs from that which was found by Pauley et aL This
indicates that the shedding frequency is a function of the
nondimensional pressure distribution, CP,, and therefore
the shedding frequency is geometry dependent.
C. Time-averaged separation structure
The results of the current study are time-averaged over
multiple cycles for comparison to the inherently time-
averaged experimental results of Gaster.5 Figure 6 shows
the time-averaged streamlines for the three cases investi-
gated. At the separation point, the dividing streamline lifts
0 0
. -X S 1.I 1-I
0 1 2 3 4 5
FIG. 5. Frequency distribution from Fourier analysis of the velocity
history. (a) Case 1; (b) case 4; (c) case 6.
gradually from the wall. The shear layer rapidly returns to
the wall at the reattachment point. Near the reattachment
point, a strong vortex can be seen within the separation
bubble. These characteristics of the separation bubble have
been found in many experimental investigations, as
sketched in Fig. 1. The streamlines show a recirculation
bubble with a small counter-rotating vortex centered
within. The counter-rotating vortex within the primary
separation bubble has also been observed in other laminar
separation studies. 19
The time-averaged surface pressure results of the cur-

3104 Phys. Fluids A, Vol. 5, No. 12, December 1993 M. D. Ripley and L. L. Pauley 3104

Downloaded 01 Apr 2013 to 128.206.9.138. This article is copyrighted as indicated in the abstract. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://pof.aip.org/about/rights_and_permissions
 TABLE IL. Separation characteristics from present computations. o Gaster's experimental value

Case 1 4 6

U. (m/sec) 20.79 12.19 6.64

Separation point conditions

Xs (cm) 26.04 26.25 26.66 P -

RG,, 364747 209038 113928

Us (m/sec) 28.75 16.81 8.79 0.50 -
6* (mm) 0.655 0.881 1.265
Os (mm) 0.220 0.300 0.376
Unsteady behavior 0.25-

f (Hz) 753 312 149

Stek [Eq. (2)] 0.005 76 0.005 56 0.005 73 0.(
Time-averaged bubble 15.0 17.5 20.0

1, (cm) 3.18 4.69 5.47

1.25-
1, (cm) 4.06 5.86 7.46
P., [Eq. (1)] -0.2463 -0.2441 -0.1819

rent investigation are plotted with the results of Gaster's

experimental study (Fig. 7). The wall pressure distribu- -cp
tions measured by Gaster are well reproduced by the
present computations. The location of the pressure plateau
and the reattachment point are accurately described in the
computation. A sharp pressure spike, however, exists at
the end of the pressure plateau which is not observed by
Gaster. The pressure spike corresponds to the position of
the counter-rotating vortex, suggesting that this vortex is
stronger in the computational study than in Gaster's study.
The discrepancy may be due to the lack of small-scale 1.0-T
viscous dissipation within the numerical study which o Gaster's experimental value
would diminish the strength of the vortex structures. It o.a-4-
should be pointed out that Gaster's measurements do not
0.6-

0.4
-c P
0.4t-
Y

0.2
0.24
0- --

y I I I I * . I I
0.0-
0 I 77.5
5. . .lO.0
I 12.5
12.5~ 15.
151.0 17.
17.5 220.0

0.4[
X

FIG. 7. Time-averaged surface pressure coefficient. (a) Case 1; (b) case

4; (c) case 6.

0.4
clearly resolve the transition region of the separation bub-
By ble and a rise in - C may occur in the experiments. The
0.2- computations also produced a slight undershoot past the
potential pressure distribution at the reattachment point
which was not seen in Gaster's study. However, an over-
10 10.5 11 11.5 12 12.5 13 13.5 14 shoot and undershoot of the -C,, distribution have been
x observed in other detailed experimental studies, see for ex-
ample McGhee et al.
FIG. 6. Time-averaged streamlines. (a) Case 1; (b) ease 4; (c) case 6. Table II summarizes the main characteristics of the

3105 Phys. Fluids A, Vol. 5, No. 12, December 1993 M. D. Ripley and L L. Pauley 3105

Downloaded 01 Apr 2013 to 128.206.9.138. This article is copyrighted as indicated in the abstract. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://pof.aip.org/about/rights_and_permissions
 time-averaged computational separation bubble. The com-
putational results accurately predict the experimentally
measured momentum thickness at separation, 0, as listed
in Table I. In general, the length of the laminar region of
the separation bubble, I, and the total separation bubble
length, 4, are well predicted by the computation. Errors in
the agreement may be attributed to differences in the meth-
ods used to determine the bubble lengths. In the computa-
tion, I, was the distance from the separation point to the
maximum bubble height. Since Gaster measured the wall
pressure but not the wall shear stress, he defined 4t as the
length of the pressure plateau. Comparison between Figs. 6
and 7 show that the separation point occurs nearly 0.5 cm
upstream of the pressure plateau for all cases tested. This
causes the computational separation bubble length to be
larger than that recorded by Gaster. The total separation
bubble length was also determined by different methods for
the experiment and computation. Gaster considered the
bubble length, 4, as the distance from the start of the
pressure plateau to the recovery of the inviscid pressure
distribution. In the computations, the entire flow field is
known and the bubble length can be defined as the distance
from the separation point to the reattachment point. For
case 6, the length of the laminar region is closely predicted
by the computation but the total separation bubble length
is underpredicted.
The difference between Gaster's experimental results
and the current numerical study may be due to the absence
of turbulence modeling or the assumption of two-
dimensional flow in the computations. However, without
accounting for these effects the major separation charac-
teristics of Gaster's study are reproduced. The ability of
the present computations to reproduce Gaster's study in-
dicates that large-scale, two-dimensional motion is the
dominant mechanism which controls the separation struc-
ture while small-scale turbulence and three-dimensionality
provide a weaker influence.
V. CONCLUSIONS
The structure of laminar separation bubbles was stud-
ied computationally by solving the unsteady incompress-
ible Navier-Stokes equations. The inviscid surface pressure
distribution of Gaster 5 was imposed along the test surface
in a rectangular computational domain. An unsteady sep-
aration structure evolved having periodic vortex shedding
from a stationary primary separation. The local Strouhal
number of vortex shedding was nearly independent of Rey-
nolds number. The Strouhal number, however, differed
from that found by Pauley et al.,2 indicating that the shed-
ding frequency is influenced by the nondimensional pres-
sure gradient distribution.
The unsteady computational results were time aver-
aged over several shedding cycles and the results were
compared with the experimental measurements of Gaster.
The time-averaged surface pressure distribution showed a
region of nearly constant pressure followed by an abrupt
decrease in surface pressure just prior to reattachment.
This time-averaged surface pressure distribution was simi-
lar to that found by Gaster. The similarity between the
3106 Phys. Fluids A, Vol. 5, No. 12, December 1993
Downloaded 01 Apr 2013 to 128.206.9.138. This article is copyrighted as indicated in the abstract. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://pof.aip.org/about/rights_and_permissions
time-averaged pressure distribution from the computation
and Gaster's pressure distribution indicates that the low-
frequency oscillations of Gaster's study were due primarily
to large-scale vortex motion. In the absence of a third di-
mension, such as in Gaster's study, the success of the cur-
rent investigation to duplicate much of the measured re-
sults suggests that the two-dimensional vortex motion
controls the size and shape of the separation region, and
that small-scale turbulence plays only a secondary role.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This research has been supported by the Office of Na-
val Research under Contract No. N00014-90-J-1169.
'H. P. Horton, "Laminar separation bubble in two and three-
dimensional incompressible flow," Ph.D. thesis, University of London,
1968.
21. Tani, "Low speed flows involving bubble separations," Prog. Aero.
Sci. 5, 70 (1964).
3
M. Brendel and T. J. Mueller, "Boundary layer measurements on an
airfoil at low Reynolds numbers," J. Aircr. 25, 612 (1988).
4R. J. McGhee, G. S. Jones, and R. Jouty, "Performance characteristics
from wind-tunnel tests of a low-Reynolds-number Airfoil," AIAA Pa-
per No. 88-0607 (1988).
5
M. Gaster, "The structure and behavior of laminar separation bubbles,"
AGARD CP 4, 813 (1966).
6C. Gleyzes, J. Cousteix, and J. L. Bonnet, "Theoretical and experimen-
tal study of low Reynolds number transitional separation bubbles," in
Proceedings of the Conference of Low Reynolds Number Airfoil Aero-
dynamics, Notre Dame, Indiana, June 1985, pp. 137-152.
7
K. B. M. Q. Zaman, D. J. McKinzie, and C. L. Rumsey, "A natural
low-frequency oscillation of the flow over an airfoil near stalling condi-
tions," J. Fluid Mech. 202, 403 (1989).
8D. G. Mabey, "Analysis and correlations of data on pressure fluctua-
9
tions in separated flows," J. Aircr. 9, 642 (1972).
W. J. McCroskey, "Some current research in unsteady fluid dynamics,"
J. Fluids Eng. 5, 8 (1977).
10C. A. Koromilas and D. P. Telionis, "Unsteady laminar separation: An
experimental study," J. Fluid Mech. 97, 347 (1980).
"1T. Rohlings, K. N. Ghia, and U. Ghia, "Chaotic behavior of high
incidence flows past airfoils," ASME Fluids Engineering Conference,
Los Angeles, California, 21-26 June 1992 (ASME, New York, 1992),
Vol. 133, pp. 223-224.
2
1 H. Bestek, K. Gruber, and H. Fasel, "Self-excited unsteadiness of lam-
inar separation bubbles caused by natural transition," in The Prediction
and Exploitation of Separated Flows (The Royal Aeronautical Society,
London, 1989).
3
1 L. L. Pauley, P. Moin, and W. C. Reynolds, "The structure of two-
dimensional separation," J. Fluid Mech. 220, 397 (1990).
14J. Kim and P. Moin, "Application of a fractional-step method to in-
compressible Navier-Stokes equations," J. Comput. Phys. 59, 308
(1985).
15L. L. Pauley, P. Moin, and W. C. Reynolds, "A numerical study of
unsteady laminar boundary layer separation," Report No. TF-34, De-
partment of Mechanical Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford,
CA, 1988.
16A. Bottaro, "Note on open boundary conditions for elliptic flows,"
Num. Heat Trans. B 18, 243 (1990).
7
1 F. Nataf, "An open boundary condition for the computation of the
steady incompressible Navier-Stokes equations," in Proceedings of the
Fifth International Symposium of Numerical Methods in Engineering
(Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1989), Vol. 1, pp. 749-756.
'5 K. Gruber, H. Bestek, and H. Fasel, "Interaction between a Tollmien-
Schlichting wave and a laminar separation bubble," AIAA Paper No.
87-1256, 1987.
19 R. L. Davis and J. E. Carter, "Analysis of airfoil transitional separation
bubbles," NASA CR 3791 (1984).
20R. J. McGhee, B. S. Walker, and B. F. Millard, "Experimental results
for the Eppler 387 airfoil at low Reynolds numbers in the Langley
low-turbulence pressure tunnel," NASA Tech. Memo. TM 4062
(1988).
M. D. Ripley and L. L. Pauley 3106