Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Investigates wall modelling for boundary-layer flows, highlighting new predictive methods.
We investigate compressible turbulent boundary layers over prism-shaped roughness using direct numerical simulations at Mach 2 and 4, with adiabatic and isothermal walls. Analysis of instantaneous and mean-density fields shows that compressibility effects and wall-thermal conditions significantly influence the boundary-layer structure, although the roughness elements remain submerged within the subsonic layer. While roughness disrupts near-wall momentum–energy coupling within the roughness sublayer, the Reynolds analogy recovers in the outer region where velocity and temperature fields exhibit smooth-wall-like similarity. A systematic comparison of different formulations indicates that a mixed Prandtl number approach provides the most accurate heat-flux predictions among the tested closures. Based on these observations, we develop a wall model that couples drag prediction for small prism-shaped roughness patterns with a compressibility transformation and a temperature–velocity closure. The formulation is modular, allowing the straightforward incorporation of alternative closures and traditional correlations. The model predicts both wall-shear stress and heat flux using only roughness geometry and information from the matching location, and shows good a priori agreement with the present direct numerical simulation data.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cogo et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: