Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-8r8nv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-09T05:55:55.091Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Recirculating flow structures of a square-back Ahmed body at a variable attitude

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 November 2025

Yajun Fan
Affiliation:
School of Engineering, University of Liverpool, Liverpool L69 3GH, UK
Chao Xia*
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanics and Maritime Sciences, Chalmers University of Technology , Gothenburg 412 96, Sweden School of Automotive Studies, Tongji University , Shanghai 201804, PR China
Guglielmo Minelli
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanics and Maritime Sciences, Chalmers University of Technology , Gothenburg 412 96, Sweden Department of Industrial Engineering / CIRI Aerospace, University of Bologna, 47121 Forlì, Italy
Simone Sebben
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanics and Maritime Sciences, Chalmers University of Technology , Gothenburg 412 96, Sweden
Olivier Cadot
Affiliation:
School of Engineering, University of Liverpool, Liverpool L69 3GH, UK
*
Corresponding author: Chao Xia, chao.xia@chalmers.se

Abstract

The recirculating flow at the rear of a flat-base three-dimensional body with ground proximity is investigated for different body attitudes defined by the pitch angle varying in the range $-1.5^\circ \lt \alpha \lt +2.6^\circ$ and the yaw angle in the range $0^\circ \lt \beta \lt +12^\circ$. Experiments measuring the three components of the mean velocity field in two perpendicular planes intersecting the recirculation area as well as the base pressure distribution are conducted for 50 different attitudes. They provide a clear correlation between the orientation of the spatially averaged reversed flow and the gradient at the centre of the base pressure distribution. Both vectors are found to be in the same so-called w-plane, that is perpendicular to the base of which the azimuthal position changes with the body attitude due to either the flow orientation at the base separation or sometimes to a ground separation for large nose-up pitch. Numerical simulations of the same geometry realised for 10 attitudes show satisfactory agreement with the force coefficients measured in the experiment. Base flow variations induced by attitude changes are also well captured, particularly that of the w-plane. The full three-dimensional simulation data are used to show that the inner structure of the separation bubble is always a tilted recirculation torus, where the tilt orientation is given by the base pressure gradient. At the bubble closure, a pair of longitudinal vortices symmetrically located on both sides of the w-plane are permanently observed with circulations consistent with the circulation of the dividing streamline separation in the w-plane.

Information

Type
JFM Papers
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press
Figure 0

Figure 1. Sketch of the experimental set-up showing the isometric view ($a$) of the model, with base pressure taps marked as dots, a side view ($b$) and a top view ($c$). The detail in ($a$) is the afterbody with a rear cavity. The two coordinates systems ($oxyz$) and ($OXYZ$) are shown at two attitudes in ($b,c$), where the dashed line represents the body at the wind aligned attitude. The two particle image velocimetry measurement planes, $X^*=0.5$ and $y^*=0$, are highlighted with green and blue colours, respectively in ($a,b,c$).

Figure 1

Figure 2. Detailed set-up of the wind tunnel test section, showing the model mounting in side view ($a$) and the rear view ($b$).

Figure 2

Figure 3. Computational domain and boundary conditions in side view ($a$) and front view ($b$).

Figure 3

Table 1. Force components and base suction coefficients obtained for the experiment, using the correction factor $C_i/C_i^{\textit{WT}}$ (see 2.6), and LES, at different body attitudes.

Figure 4

Figure 4. Body attitudes investigated with both experiments and LES. The $(\alpha , \beta )$ parametric space is superimposed to the transition diagram reported in Fan et al. (2022) (see the text).

Figure 5

Figure 5. Comparison of the aerodynamic coefficients from experiments and the LES: ($a$) drag; ($b$) base suction; ($c$) side force and ($d$) lift.

Figure 6

Table 2. Conditional averaging of some aerodynamic coefficients (see text) at the four attitudes reported in figure 15. Labels ($a, b, c, d$) refer to the labels in figure 15.

Figure 7

Figure 6. Separated and recirculating mean flow visualisations at different body attitudes: ($a$) wind aligned $(\beta =\alpha =0^\circ )$, ($b$) nose-down attitude $(\beta = 0^\circ , \alpha =-1.5^\circ )$ and ($c$) with yaw at $(\beta = 6^\circ , \alpha =0^\circ )$. In ($c$), the windward side is on the right-hand side of the base. Top row (isometric view) and middle row (side view) show the isosurface of $Q^*=12.5$, coloured by the longitudinal vorticity component $\varOmega _x^*$; the bottom row are streamlines seeded close to the base surface.

Figure 8

Figure 7. Mean flow characteristic for the baseline body attitude ($\beta =0^\circ$, $\alpha =0^\circ$): ($a,b$) experimental velocity fields on the $X^*=0.5$ plane ($a$) and $y^*=0$ plane ($b$); ($c$) LES simulation showing the identified recirculating torus (the vortex core is highlighted with a red thick line) and the base pressure coefficient distribution. The white dashed line in ($a$) denotes the isoline $U^*=0$, while white crosses are used to facilitate references between the two pictures.

Figure 9

Figure 8. Mean flow characteristics at $\beta =0^\circ$ for three pitch attitudes: ($a$) $\alpha =-1.5^\circ$; ($b$) $\alpha =+1.5^\circ$; ($c$) $\alpha =+2.6^\circ$. Experimental velocity fields in the $X^*=0.5$ plane (left) and $y^*=0$ plane (middle); LES with the identified torus (vortex core highlighted by a red thick line) and base pressure coefficient distribution (right). The black point in the thumbnail (far right) is used as a visual aid to locate the body attitude from the transition diagram of figure 4. See figure 7 for the colour scales of the velocity $U^*$ and the pressure coefficient $C_p$.

Figure 10

Figure 9. Details as for figure 8. Yaw at $\beta =+6^\circ$ for three pitch attitudes: ($a$) $\alpha =-1.5^\circ$; ($b$) $\alpha =0^\circ$; ($c$) $\alpha =1.5^\circ$. The windward side is on the right-hand side of the base ($Y^*\gt 0$).

Figure 11

Figure 10. Details as for figure 8. Yaw at $\beta =+12^\circ$ for three pitch attitudes: ($a$) $\alpha =-1.5^\circ$; ($b$) $\alpha =0^\circ$; ($c$) $\alpha =1.5^\circ$. The windward side is on the right-hand side of the base ($Y^*\gt 0$).

Figure 12

Figure 11. Visualisation from the leeward ($a$) and windward ($b$) side of the flow around the body at yaw attitude $\beta =12^\circ , \alpha =0^\circ$ through the isosurface of $Q^*=12.5$ coloured by the longitudinal vorticity component $\varOmega _x^*$.

Figure 13

Figure 12. Relationship between the base pressure gradient and the reversed flow obtained from the experimental (filled black circle) and the LES (red stars) datasets: ($a$) orientation of the cross-flow component of the reversed flow $\theta _{{R}}$ (see text) vs. the base pressure gradient orientation $\theta _{{b}}$; ($b$) modulus of the cross-flow component of the reversed flow vs. the modulus of the base pressure gradient.

Figure 14

Figure 13. Experimental velocity components of the mean reversed flow (see text) $\langle U^* \rangle _{{R}}$, $\langle V^* \rangle _{{R}}$ and $\langle W^* \rangle _{{R}}$: ($a$) varying pitch attitude at $\beta =0^\circ$; (b) varying yaw attitude at $\alpha =0^\circ$; (c) $\alpha =-1.5^\circ$ and (d) $\alpha =+1.5^\circ$. The filled circle symbols represent the data for the Ahmed body, and the empty circle symbols are data for the model with a rear cavity. A reminder of the transition diagram (figure 4) indicates the corresponding attitude variations at the centre of the figure.

Figure 15

Figure 14. Experimental mean velocity field in the $X^*=0.5$ plane of the model with cavity at $\beta =0^\circ$ (left), $\beta =6^\circ$ (middle) and $\beta =12^\circ$ (right) for three pitch attitudes: ($a$) $\alpha =-1.5^\circ$; ($b$) $\alpha =0^\circ$; ($c$) $\alpha =1.5^\circ$. The windward side is on the right-hand side of the base ($Y^*\gt 0$). See figure 7 for the colour scales of the velocity $U^*$.

Figure 16

Figure 15. Characterisation of the four typical unsteady transitions identified in figure 4 with (left) time series of the vertical component of both the base pressure gradient and reversed flow, conditionally averaged velocity field in $y^*=0$ plane with $g_z\lt 0$ (middle) and $g_z\gt 0$ (right): ($a$) transition I–II$_\alpha$ at $(\beta , \alpha )=(0^\circ , 2.3^\circ )$; ($b$) transition I–II$_\beta$ at $(\beta , \alpha )=(2.5^\circ , 1.25^\circ )$; ($c$) transition I–III at $(\beta , \alpha )=(1.5^\circ , 0.25^\circ )$; ($d$) transition I–V at $(\beta , \alpha )=(0^\circ , -0.15^\circ )$. Same colour scale as in figure 7 for the velocity $U^*$.

Figure 17

Figure 16. ($a$) Topologically admissible separation surface from Délery (2013). ($b$) Three-dimensional sketch attempt of the N$_z$ state at the $\beta =\alpha =0^\circ$ attitude measured in figure 7 featuring the recirculating torus displayed with a thick grey line. Blue streamlines show the reversed flow in the plane $y^*=0$. The base pressure gradient $\boldsymbol{g}$ is also referring to plane $y^*=0$. The separated bubble is closed with a pair of vortices ($V^+,V^-$), as in ($a$) with circulations originating from the circulation $\varGamma$ of the asymmetric recirculating flow.

Figure 18

Figure 17. Terms contributing to the momentum bubble equilibrium in the vertical $z$-direction in (4.1) obtained for the wind aligned attitude ($\beta =\alpha =0^\circ$) of the LES with ($a$) pressure, ($b$) Reynolds normal stress and ($c$) Reynolds shear stress, where the factor $-\rho$ has been omitted. ($d$) The three integrants of (4.1) along the closed path $\mathscr{C}$ extracted from values at the white line shown in ($a,b,c$).

Figure 19

Figure 18. The LES results at body attitude $\beta =6^\circ , \alpha =-1.5^\circ$. Panels show ($a$) $C_p$ distribution at the base; ($b$) longitudinal vorticity in the plane $x_B^*=2$; ($c$) flow field and $C_p$ in the w-plane; ($d$) flow field and $C_p$ in the plane perpendicular to the w-plane. In these plots, the coordinate system ($x_B^*, y_B^*,z_B^*$) is attached to the base, meaning that the direction $x_B^*$ is perpendicular to the base and that directions $y_B^*, z_B^*$ are parallel to the base.

Figure 20

Figure 19. The time-averaged wall shear stress on the ground coloured by the streamwise shear stress $\tau _{x}^* = ({1}/{\textit{Re}}) ({{\textrm d}U^*}/{{\textrm d}z^*})|_{z^*=0}$ from LES for body attitudes $\beta =0^\circ$ ($a$), $\beta =6^\circ$ ($b$), $\beta =12^\circ$ ($c$) and $\alpha =1.5^\circ$. The red line represents the iso-value $\tau _{x}^* =0$ and surrounds a region of reverse flow, where $\tau _{x}^* \lt 0$. In ($b$) and ($c$), the windward side is on the right-hand side of the base. The black point in each thumbnail is used as a visual aid to locate the body attitude from the transition diagram of figure 4.

Figure 21

Figure 20. The LES result at the same attitude as in figures 9($c$) and 19($b$) but with a moving ground.

Figure 22

Figure 21. Medium mesh details: ($a$) the horizontal plane at $z^*=0.6$; ($b$) the vertical plane at $y^*=0$; and ($c$) a zoomed view of the prism layer.

Figure 23

Figure 22. The time-averaged $y^+$ in the model.

Figure 24

Table 3. Mesh sensitivity study – time-averaged flow metrics.