The paper is devoted to an experimental and theoretical study of effect of moderate angle-of-attack variation on disturbances evolution and laminar-turbulent transition in a supersonic boundary layer on swept wing at Mach 2. Monotonous growth of the transition Reynolds numbers with angle of attack increasing from −2° to 2.7° is confirmed. For the same conditions, calculations based on linear stability theory are performed. The experimental and computational results show a favourable comparison.
Arnal D, Casalis G and Juillen JC. Experimental and theoretical analysis of natural transition on “infinite” swept wing. In: Arnal D and Michel R (eds) Laminar-turbulent transition. New York: Springer, 1990, pp.311–325.
2.
SaricWSReedHLWhiteEB. Stability and transition of three-dimensional boundary layers. Annu Rev Fluid Mech2003; 35: 413–440.
3.
UstinovMV. Laminar−turbulent transition in boundary layers (review). Part. 1: main types of laminar−turbulent transition in a swept-wing boundary layer. TsAGI Sci J2013; 44: 1–63.
4.
Semionov NV, Yermolaev YuG, Kosinov AD, et al. The influence of flow parameters on the transition to turbulence in supersonic boundary layer on swept wing. In: AIP conference proceedings, Vol. 1770, 2016.
5.
SchneiderSP. Hypersonic laminar-turbulent transition on circular cones and scramjet forebodies. Prog Aerosp Sci2004; 40: 1–50.
6.
IvanovAK. Features of the transition of a laminar boundary layer to a turbulent on sharp cone at an angle of attack in a supersonic gas flow. Uchenye Zapiski TsAGI1977; 8: 34–43.
7.
Banner RD, McTigue JG and Petty G Jr. Boundary layer transition measurements in full-scale flight. NASA TM 79863, 1958.
8.
Chapman GT. Transition of the laminar boundary layer on a delta wing with 74° sweep in free flights at Mach numbers from 2.8 to 5.3. NASA TN D-1066, 1961.
9.
Pate SR and Brilihart RE. Investigation of boundary-layer transition on swept wings at Mach numbers 2.5 to 5. Technical documentary report no. AEDC-TDR-63-109, 1963.
10.
SugiuraHYoshidaKTokugawaN, et al.Transition measurements on the natural laminar flow wing at Mach 2. J Aircraft2002; 39: 996–1002.
11.
Cattafesta LNIIIIyerVMasadJA, et al.Three-dimensional boundary-layer transition on a swept wing at Mach 3.5. AIAA J1995; 33: 2032–2037.
12.
Kosinov AD, Semionov NV and Yermolaev YuG. Disturbances in test section of T-325 supersonic wind tunnel. Preprint Institute of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics. 1999. No 6-99, Novosibirsk: 24 pp.
13.
SemionovNVErmolaevYuGKosinovAD, et al.Experimental investigation of development of disturbances in a supersonic boundary layer on a swept wing. Thermophys Aeromech2003; 10: 347–358.
14.
ErmolaevYGKosinovADSemenovAN, et al.Effect of unit Reynolds number on the laminar-turbulent transition on a swept wing in supersonic flow. Thermophys Aeromech2018; 25: 659–665.
15.
GaponovSASmorodskiiBV. Linear stability of three-dimensional boundary layers. J Appl Mech Technol Phys2008; 49: 157–166.
16.
ErmolaevYuGKosinovADSemionovNV. Experimental investigation of the supersonic boundary layer stability on a swept wing at Mach number M = 2. TsAGI Sci J2011; 42: 1–12.
17.
YermolaevYuGKosinovADSemionovNV. Experimental study of nonlinear processes in a swept-wing boundary layer at the Mach number M = 2. J Appl Mech Technol Phys2014; 55: 764–772.
18.
ErmolaevYuGKosinovADLevchenkoVYa, et al.Instability of a three-dimensional supersonic boundary layer. J Appl Mech Technol Phys1995; 36: 840–843.
19.
SemionovNVKosinovADYermolaevYuG. Experimental study of turbulence beginning of supersonic boundary layer on swept wing at Mach numbers 2–4. J Phys: Conf Ser2011; 318: 032018–032018.
20.
KosinovADKolosovGLSemionovNV, et al.Linear development of controlled disturbances in the supersonic boundary layer on a swept wing at Mach 2. Phys Fluids2016; 28: 064101–064101.
21.
Arnal D. Laminar-turbulent transition problem in supersonic and hypersonic flows. AGARD Rep. No 761, 1989.
