A simple model for low-frequency unsteadiness in shock-induced separation

By S. Piponniau, J. Dussauge, J. Debiève, P. Dupont. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 2009

435 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Aerospace Engineering, Computational Mechanics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/826cdd2e5a4f14480a233ed386c19ed6cb86e694

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Aerospace Engineering

In Computational Mechanics

Citations in the corpus

Low-frequency dynamics in a shock-induced separated flow (2016, background): “Piponniau et al. (2009) proposed a mechanism based on the entrainment of fluid by the shear layer.”
Low-Frequency Unsteadiness of Shock Wave/Turbulent Boundary Layer Interactions (2014, methodology): “Priebe & Martin (2012) also specifically discussed the changes in the turbulence activity in the shear layer at different phases of the oscillation cycle, which appear to support the shear layer entrainment model of Wu & Martin (2008) and Piponniau et al. (2009).”
A scaling analysis for turbulent shock-wave/boundary-layer interactions (2013, background): “…Wu & Martin 2008) and incident-reflecting shock interactions (Green 1970; Dupont, Haddad & Debiève 2006; Pirozzoli & Grasso 2006; Touber & Sandham 2008; Piponniau et al. 2009; Humble et al. 2009a; Souverein et al. 2009; Polivanov, Sidorenko & Maslov 2009; Garnier 2009; Touber & Sandham 2009a;…”
Some physical aspects of shock wave/boundary layer interactions (2009, background): “[32] have proposed an analysis for the origin of this unsteadiness.”
Confinement effects in shock wave/turbulent boundary layer interactions through wall-modelled large-eddy simulations (2014, methodology): “Those previous experiments (see, e.g., Dussauge et al. 2006; Piponniau et al. 2009) present some differences compared with the ones that are the object of our present simulations: the aspect ratio of the wind tunnel cross-section was larger, the relative size of the incoming boundary layers was…”
Low-order stochastic modelling of low-frequency motions in reflected shock-wave/boundary-layer interactions (2011, background): “This does not mean that specific forcing from upstream (see Ganapathisubramani et al. 2007, amongst others) or downstream (see Pirozzoli & Grasso 2006; Robinet 2007; Piponniau et al. 2009; Touber & Sandham 2009b) does not play a role, but that they are not necessary.”
Analysis of unsteady behaviour in shockwave turbulent boundary layer interaction (2012, background): “In extending the work of Dupont et al. (2006), Piponniau et al. (2009) introduced a model to explain the low-frequency unsteadiness found in shock-induced separation for cases where the flow reattaches downstream.”
Flow physics and RANS modelling of oblique shock/turbulent boundary layer interaction (2013, methodology): “As Piponniau et al. (2009) and Souverein (2010) have conjectured, there may be a change in the dominant mechanism behind low-frequency oscillations when moving from the incipient to the strongly separated regime.”
Unsteady effects of strong shock-wave/boundary-layer interaction at high Reynolds number (2017, methodology): “The instantaneous separation bubble is strongly perturbed near the initial part of the interaction zone, probably being related to fluid entrainment through the shear layer vortices in this region (Piponniau et al. 2009).”
Turbulence in supersonic boundary layers at moderate Reynolds number (2011, result): “…results qualitatively agree with all the available experimental data, but much better quantitative correspondence is found with the recent data by Piponniau et al. (2009), with the exception of the wall-normal velocity component, which is known to be somewhat underestimated in experiments…”