The effects of pulsed vortex generator jets on a naturally separating low-pressure turbine boundary layer have been investigated experimentally. Blade Reynolds numbers in the linear turbine cascade match those for high-altitude aircraft engines and industrial turbine engines with elevated turbine inlet temperatures. The vortex generator jets (30 deg pitch and 90 deg skew angle) are pulsed over a wide range of frequency at constant amplitude and selected duty cycles. The resulting wake loss coefficient versus pulsing frequency data add to previously presented work by the authors documenting the loss dependency on amplitude and duty cycle. As in the previous studies, vortex generator jets are shown to be highly effective in controlling laminar boundary layer separation. This is found to be true at dimensionless forcing frequencies $F+$ well below unity and with low (10 percent) duty cycles. This unexpected low-frequency effectiveness is due to the relatively long relaxation time of the boundary layer as it resumes its separated state. Extensive phase-locked velocity measurements taken in the blade wake at an $F+$ of 0.01 with 50 percent duty cycle (a condition at which the flow is essentially quasi-steady) document the ejection of bound vorticity associated with a low-momentum fluid packet at the beginning of each jet pulse. Once this initial fluid event has swept down the suction surface of the blade, a reduced wake signature indicates the presence of an attached boundary layer until just after the jet termination. The boundary layer subsequently relaxes back to its naturally separated state. This relaxation occurs on a timescale which is five to six times longer than the original attachment due to the starting vortex. Phase-locked boundary layer measurements taken at various stations along the blade chord illustrate this slow relaxation phenomenon. This behavior suggests that some economy of jet flow may be possible by optimizing the pulse duty cycle and frequency for a particular application. At higher pulsing frequencies, for which the flow is fully dynamic, the boundary layer is dominated by periodic shedding and separation bubble migration, never recovering its fully separated (uncontrolled) state.

1.
Sharma, O., 1998, “Impact of Reynolds Number on LP Turbine Performance,” Proc. of 1997 Minnowbrook II Workshop on Boundary Layer Transition in Turbomachines, NASA/CP-1998-206958.
2.
Matsunuma, T., Abe, H., Tsutsui, Y., and Murata, K., 1998, “Characteristics of an Annular Turbine Cascade at Low Reynolds Numbers,” presented at IGTI 1998 in Stockholm, Sweden, June 1998. Paper No. 98-GT-518.
3.
Matsunuma, T., Abe, H., and Tsutsui, Y., 1999, “Influence of Turbulence Intensity on Annular Turbine Stator Aerodynamics at Low Reynolds Numbers,” presented at IGTI 1999 in Indianapolis, Indiana, June 1999, Paper No. 99-GT-151.
4.
Helton, D., 1997, private communication.
5.
Lin, J. C., Howard, F. G., Bushnell, D. M., and Selby, G. V., 1990, “Investigation of Several Passive and Active Methods of Turbulent Flow Separation Control,” AIAA Paper No. 90-1598.
6.
Compton, D. A., and Johnston, J. P., 1992, “Streamwise Vortex Production by Pitched and Skewed Jets in a Turbulent Boundary Layer,” AIAA J., 30, No. 3.
7.
Henry, F. S., and Pearcey, H. H., 1994, “Numerical Model of Boundary-Layer Control Using Air-Jet Generated Vortices,” AIAA J., 32, No. 12.
8.
Chang
,
R.
,
Hsiao
,
F. B.
, and
Shyu
,
R. N.
,
1992
, “
Forcing Level Effects of Internal Acoustic Excitation on the Improvement of Airfoil Performance
,”
J. Aircr.
,
29
, No.
5
, pp.
823
829
.
9.
Amitay, M., Kibens, V., Parekh, D., and Glezer, A., 1999, “The Dynamics of Flow Reattachment over a Thick Airfoil Controlled by Synthetic Jet Actuators,” AIAA Paper No. 99-1001.
10.
Weaver, D., McAlister, K., and Tso, J., 1998, “Suppression of Dynamic Stall by Steady and Pulsed Upper-Surface Blowing,” AIAA Paper No. 98-2413.
11.
Wu
,
J.
,
Lu
,
X.
,
Denny
,
A.
,
Fan
,
M.
, and
Wu
,
J.
,
1998
, “
Post-stall flow control on an airfoil by local unsteady forcing
,”
J. Fluid Mech.
,
371
, pp.
21
58
.
12.
Seifert
,
A.
,
Bachar
,
T.
,
Koss
,
D.
,
Shepshelovich
,
M.
, and
Wygnanski
,
I.
,
1993
, “
Oscillatory Blowing: A Tool to Delay Boundary-Layer Separation
,”
AIAA J.
,
31
, No.
11
, pp.
2052
2060
.
13.
Kwong, A., and Dowling, A., 1994, “Active Boundary-Layer Control in Diffusers,” AIAA J., 32, No. 12.
14.
McManus, K., Legner, H., and Davis, S., 1994, “Pulsed Vortex Generator Jets for Active Control of Flow Separation,” AIAA Paper No. 94-2218.
15.
Raghunathan, S., Watterson, J., Cooper, R., and Lee, S., 1999, “Short Wide Angle Diffuser with Pulse Jet Control,” AIAA paper No. 99-0280.
16.
Bons
,
J.
,
Sondergaard
,
R.
, and
Rivir
,
R.
,
2000
, “
Turbine Separation Control Using Pulsed Vortex Generator Jets
,”
ASME J. Turbomach.
,
123, pp.
198
206
.
17.
Sondergaard, R., Bons, J., and Rivir, R., 2000, “Control of Low-Pressure Turbine Separation Using Vortex Generator Jets,” accepted for publication in AIAA Power and Propulsion.
18.
Bons, J., Sondergaard, R., and Rivir, R., 1999, “Control of Low-Pressure Turbine Separation Using Vortex Generator Jets,” AIAA Paper No. 99-0367.
19.
Seifert, A., Daraby, A., Nishri, B., and Wygnanski, I., 1993, “The Effects of Forced Oscillations on the Performance of Airfoils,” AIAA Paper No. 93-3264. AIAA Shear Flow Conf. Orlando, FL, July 6–9.
20.
Johari, H., and McManus, K., 1997, “Visualization of Pulsed Vortex Generator Jets for Active Control of Boundary Layer Separation,” AIAA paper No. 97-2021.
21.
Gharib
,
M.
,
Rambod
,
E.
, and
Shariff
,
K.
,
1998
, “
A Universal Time Scale for Vortex Ring Formation
,”
J. Fluid Mech.
,
360
, pp.
121
140
.