International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow 56 (2015) 344–354

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijheatfluidflow

Active flow control of laminar boundary layers for variable flow

conditions
B. Simon a,∗, T. Nemitz a,1, J. Rohlfing b, F. Fischer b, D. Mayer c, S. Grundmann d
a
Center of Smart Interfaces, Flughafenstrasse 19, D-64347 Griesheim, Technische Universität Darmstadt, Germany
b
Institute for System Reliability and Machine Acoustics SzM, Technische Universität Darmstadt, Germany
c
Smart Structures Division, Fraunhofer Institute for Structural Durability and System Reliability LBF, Darmstadt, Germany
d
Department of Fluid Mechanics, University of Rostock, Germany

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This work investigates the stability of a fxLMS controller for active wave cancelation of broad-band Tollmien–
Received 20 April 2015 Schlichting disturbances in a flat plate boundary-layer with a single DBD plasma actuator. In particular the
Revised 1 September 2015
influence of a changing free stream velocity and the resulting off-design operation of the control algorithm is
Accepted 24 September 2015
analyzed up to an unstable behavior. As the main reason for unstable controller operation in the off-design
case the difference between actual and predicted phase angle of the disturbances at the position of the error
Keywords: sensor is identified. A method for an online adjustment of the secondary-path model to different free-stream
Laminar flow control velocities is presented. Finally a wall-bounded method based on the disturbances phase speed is developed
Active wave cancelation that can cope with changes of the physical secondary path not only due to changes of the free-stream velocity
Plasma actuator
but also due to changes of the pressure distribution. This method enables the extension of the stable operation
fxLMS
range of the control system significantly.
Adaptive secondary path
© 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction known that suction is a common method to keep a boundary layer

The laminar-turbulent transition in boundary-layer flows has
been extensively investigated in the last decades and most mech-
anisms are well understood (Saric et al., 2002; Würz et al., 2012).
Modern composite materials and accompanying smooth surfaces al-
low the successful application of NLF (natural laminar flow) airfoils,
especially for gliders, ultra-light airplanes and UAVs. The special de-
sign of the NLF airfoils causes an acceleration of the boundary-layer
flow for a high percentage of chord and therefore a favorable pressure
gradient with laminar flow (Joslin, 1998). The goal is a reduction of
skin-friction drag by keeping the boundary layer laminar and avoid-
ing the transition to turbulence. Besides the airfoil shape and surface
quality active flow control techniques have been a relevant research
topic over the years. The usage of actuators to enhance the properties
of NLF airfoils in terms of laminar flow is denoted as hybrid laminar
flow control.
Most of the common active laminar flow control techniques are
based on increasing the momentum of the near wall region of the
boundary layer which leads to improved stability properties. It is well
∗
Corresponding author. Tel.: +491636918342.
E-mail address: simon@csi.tu-darmstadt.de, bernhardsimon@gmail.com
(B. Simon).
1
Principal corresponding author
laminar and the most common actuators in flow control are fluidic
actuators (Cattafesta and Sheplak, 2011). The plasma actuator (PA) as
a flow-control device is relatively new and the lack of moving parts,
its short response time and the simple construction principle makes
it suitable for active flow control. The application of the plasma ac-
tuators for different flow-control approaches has been reviewed by
Moreau (2007) and Corke et al. (2010). The fluid dynamic efficiency
of the PA is only in the order of 0.1% and this requires a smart applica-
tion of the actuator in order to reach a total energy saving as discussed
by Kriegseis et al. (2013a).
A recent approach for laminar flow control is the active cancela-
tion of disturbances in the boundary layer by superposition before
they lead to an early transition to turbulence. Downstream propa-
gating waves are sensed by a surface mounted sensor and directly
canceled by an appropriate actuator. This approach, called active
wave cancelation (AWC), has been investigated with different actua-
tor types such as moving wall actuators (Sturzebecher and Nitsche,
2003; Thomas, 1983). The first experiments on the cancelation of
artificially induced harmonic Tollmien–Schlichting (TS) waves with
the DBD plasma actuator were conducted by Grundmann and Tropea
(2008). The control algorithms for this kind of flow control have been
developed further over the years. While the numerical investigations
mainly focussed on model based control techniques (Fabbiane et al.,
2014), the experimental community mostly used adaptive control

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatfluidflow.2015.09.003
S0142-727X(15)00115-0/© 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
 B. Simon et al. / International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow 56 (2015) 344–354
Fig. 1. Flat plate setup, equipped with a disturbance source d, three upstream sensors
p1 , p2 and r, the plasma actuator c and a downstream error sensor e. The phase shift
detection algorithm P extends the fxLMS controller sketched below the flat plate.
algorithms such as the fxLMS (filtered-x Least-Mean-Squares) algo-
rithm. The use of adaptive algorithms for wind-tunnel and in-flight
(Kurz et al., 2014) experiments is based on the robustness of the con-
trol algorithms and their ability to adapt to slight changes of the flow
parameters, which result in changes of the growth rates and propa-
gation speed of the disturbances in the boundary layer.
Active flow control in future technical applications will have to
cope with changing flow conditions and should work reliably over
a certain range of operation conditions. The presented work investi-
gates and evaluates the robustness and stability of a fxLMS controller
under varying free-stream velocities in a flat-plate wind-tunnel ex-
periment. The investigations described in the following do not only
affect active-wave cancelation with plasma actuators but also the ap-
plication of the fxLMS algorithm for laminar-flow control in general.
The experimental setup with sensors, disturbance source, actuator
and the control algorithm is described in Section 2. The base-flow
case and the dynamic transmission behavior of the boundary layer
are systematically investigated in Section 3. The stability of the ba-
sic fxLMS controller with a constant secondary path model Ĥec and
its robustness against changes of the free-stream velocity is inves-
tigated in Section 4, focusing on changes of the disturbances’ phase
speed and its connection to the controller stability. Finally, Section 5
presents a method for extending the range of operation of a fxLMS
controller by continuously adapting the secondary path model Ĥec
during operation. Concluding remarks summarize the the major re-
sults in Section 6.
2. Experimental setup
The experiments are conducted in an open-circuit Eiffel type wind
tunnel at TU Darmstadt, which provides an 450 mm × 450 mm test
section and an averaged turbulence intensity of Tu = 0.1%, measured
at the end of the 1:24 contraction nozzle. A 1600 mm long flat plate,
equipped with an 1:6 elliptical leading edge and an adjustable trail-
ing edge, is mounted horizontally at half height of the test section.
The wind-tunnel velocity UWT is varied from 7 m/s to 17 m/s whereas
a wind-tunnel speed of UW T = 12 m/s leads to a free-stream veloc-
ity U∞ = 14 m/s on the upper side of the flat plate. Fig. 1 shows the
experimental setup of the experiment. A broad-band disturbance is
generated by a disturbance source d. Four surface hot-wire sensors
(p1 , p2 , r and e) capture the induced velocity fluctuations as they
propagate downstream. A single DBD plasma actuator c is placed be-
tween the reference sensor r and the error sensor e. By modulating
the amplitude of the PAs AC operating voltage, the generated body-
force can cancel out the artificially created disturbances by superpo-
sition. The setup consists only of one actuator and one control cir-
cuit. Therefore an ‘artificial’ 2D transition scenario with an even wave
front is required. Natural transition with spanwise distributed wave
345
Fig. 2. (a) Disturbance source design: tubes are connected to a 0.2 mm wide slit. (b)
Surface hot-wire sensor in a plastic case.
packages as it occurs without targeted manipulation of the bound-
ary layer would not allow 2D investigations as presented in this
manuscript. The adaptive fxLMS algorithm (sketched in Fig. 1) is im-
plemented on a dSPACE digital signal processor and extended by a
phase shift detection algorithm P.
2.1. Disturbance source and sensors
The disturbance source d is positioned at x = 225 mm down-
stream of the leading edge and allows to create artificial disturbances
in the boundary layer. It consists of tubes, mounted below a 0.2 mm
wide spanwise slit (Fig. 2(a)), which are connected to 16 Visaton BF45
speakers, amplified by Kemo M031N audio amplifiers. Each of the 16
speakers is connected to five 1.2 m long tubes with an outer tube di-
ameter of 3 mm. This construction principle has already been docu-
mented in literature before (Borodulin et al., 2002; Würz et al., 2012).
A measurement system based on National Instruments LabVIEW is
used for the signal generation on a NI9024 real time system equipped
with a NI9264 16Ch analog output module. A spanwise row of 30
Sennheiser KE 4-211-2 microphones is mounted at x = 318 mm with
a spanwise spacing of 9 mm. Phase averaging of the microphone sig-
nals, acquired with a NI9205 A/D converter at 4 kHz, allows online
monitoring of the disturbances in order to recheck the generation of
mostly two-dimensional disturbances.
Four surface hot-wires (p1 , p2 , r and e) are flush mounted at x p1 =
287 mm, x p2 = 301 mm, xr = 335 mm, xe = 408 mm and are ampli-
fied by a three channel Dantec Streamline CTA and a two channel
DISA 55M01 hot-wire bridge. The surface hot-wires (Sturzebecher
and Nitsche, 2003) consist of two needles molded in a plastic case
and a 5 μm thin and 1.25 mm long gilded-tungsten wire is welded
on top of the needles (Fig. 2(b)). All wires are operated at an overheat
ratio of 1.7. The signals are bandpass filtered (10 Hz to 1 kHz) and am-
plified by a factor of 32. The high signal-to-noise ratio as compared to
hot-film sensors favors this kind of sensor for this flow control appli-
cation. A traversable hot-wire probe (Dantec 55P15) is mounted on
a traversing system for conducting boundary-layer measurements,
while a NI PCI6254 A/D converter acquires the low-pass filtered (3
kHz) signals at 10 kHz, synchronized with the disturbance generation
and the dSPACE system.
2.2. Plasma actuator
The implemented plasma actuator has been used in several ex-
periments before (Duchmann et al., 2014; Kurz et al., 2014) and its
electrical and fluid-dynamic properties were investigated and docu-
mented extensively over the years by Kriegseis et al. (2011); 2013b). It
consists of a 10 mm wide grounded lower copper electrode of 35 μm
thickness and a 5 mm wide upper electrode divided by five layers of
polyimid tape with a total thickness of 0.3 mm. Fig. 3 qualitatively
shows the body-force distribution of this actuator operated at 12 kV
and the electric circuit below. A GBS Minipuls 2.1 high-voltage supply
is driving the 270 mm long plasma actuator, which is installed flush
mounted at x = 363 mm in a spanwise groove.
By modulating the amplitude of the driving AC voltage V,
which runs at fPA = 10 kHz (Fig. 4), the resulting body-force can be
346 B. Simon et al. / International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow 56 (2015) 344–354
Fig. 3. Spatial distribution of the body-force fx and electric circuit of the plasma actu-
ator.
Fig. 4. Operation modes of the plasma actuator.
modulated such that velocity disturbances can be canceled out (Kurz
et al., 2013). On the time scales of the boundary-layer flow the plasma
actuator force is unidirectional and always directed in the down-
stream direction. Therefore a net force remains in average which
modifies the stability properties of the boundary layer additionally
to the intended wave cancelation. This mean body-force can im-
prove the stability properties of the flow (boundary-layer stabiliza-
tion) whereas the modulated PA force is able to attenuate velocity
fluctuations in the boundary layer (active wave cancelation). One can
say, that a hybrid operation mode is applied, if the steady mean part
changes the stability properties of the mean flow significantly and the
PA is additionally modulated in time for active wave cancelation.
2.3. Control algorithm and digital signal processor
The flow-control system (Fig. 1) is a SISO (single-input-single-
output) system, which consists of a reference sensor r, the error
sensor e and the actuator c. Hxy stands for a transfer function (to actu-
ator/sensor x, from actuator/sensor y) therefore Her denotes the pri-
mary path (to e, from r) while Hec is the secondary path (to e, from
c). Thus the secondary path describes the transfer function between
the plasma actuator c and the error sensor e while the primary path
describes the transmission behavior between reference sensor r and
error sensor e in downstream direction. Experimental investigations
showed that there is no significant fluid mechanical upstream effect
of the plasma actuator on the flow at the reference sensor position.
The feedback path Hrc (to r, from c) is therefore negligible in the pre-
sented flow control system as the disturbances only propagate down-
stream. Therefore the applied control approach can be classified as
feed forward type. The fxLMS control algorithm is based on FIR (fi-
nite impulse response) filters. The output y(n) of the FIR filter w is a
linear combination of the last M + 1 input signals x:

M the measurement of a single frequency harmonic TS-wave, which ist
y(n) = wi x[n − i] = wT x(n) = xT (n)w (1)
i=0
M gives the filter order and n indicates the discrete-time signal. A
transmission path in the control circuit can be characterized by an
impulse response. An example of an impulse response modeled by a
FIR filter with 256 coefficients is shown in Fig. 10.
The LMS (least mean square) algorithm (Eq. (2)) is based on an
adaptive FIR filter w(n), which is modified online in order to minimize
the error e(n):
w(n + 1) = w(n) + α r(n)e(n) (2)
where α is the step size and r(n) the discretized reference sensor sig-
nal. If the error sensor is not installed at the actuator position, the re-
sulting phase-angle error due to Hec can lead to an unstable controller
behavior of the LMS. The sensor has to be positioned at least 30 mm
downstream of the actuator in order to avoid electromagnetical inter-
ference and/or damaging the sensor. To account for this displacement
the physical path Hec is modeled by a FIR filter Ĥec , as the lower part
of Fig. 1 shows. The discretized input r(n) is then filtered by Ĥec and
the resulting r (n) serves as an input for the LMS algorithm to adapt
the filter w. In the literature r is often called x and the additional fil-
tering with Ĥec causes the name fxLMS (filtered x LMS) (Elliott, 2000).
Eq. (3) shows the algorithm for the fxLMS controller:
w(n + 1) = w(n) + α r (n)e(n). (3)
The output of the filter w(n) is the control signal c calculated with
the upstream sensor signal r(n) and therefore is an estimator for the
transmission path Hcr (to c from r). After switching on the controller
the filter w(n) is adapting starting with zero for all filter coefficients.
Depending on the step size α it can take several seconds up to one
minute until the filter is fully adapted for a steady point of operation.
For the experiments presented in this paper α is chosen to be α =
10−3 which has proven to be a good compromise between adaptation
speed and controller stability.
The fxLMS algorithm is commonly used for flow control (Kotsonis
et al., 2013; Peltzer et al., 2009) because of its robustness and ability
to adapt to slight changes of the transmission path. In this manuscript
the algorithm has been expanded by an adaptive secondary path
model Ĥec to increase the range of stable controller operation for
changes in wind-tunnel speed UWT . Different ways of adapting the
secondary path model by a function P and experimental results are
presented in Section 5.
The control algorithm is implemented in MATLAB Simulink and
compiled for a dSPACE digital signal processor, consisting of a DS1007
processor board, a high speed A/D board DS2004 as well as a DS2102
high-resolution D/A board. The control algorithm and data acquisi-
tion run at 10 kHz, synchronized with the LabVIEW measurement
system.
3. Base flow characterization
Hot-wire boundary-layer measurements have been carried out to
characterize the flow for the reference case at a wind-tunnel speed
of UW T = 12 m/s, which corresponds to a free-stream velocity of the
flat-plate boundary layer of U∞ = 14 m/s due to blockage. The lin-
ear stability theory (LST) calculations for the reference case UW T =
12 m/s are shown in Fig. 5, assuming a 2D wave front (spanwise wave
number β = 0) and a Blasius boundary layer. All stability calculations
in this manuscript have been performed with a code provided by
Reeh (2014).
Fig. 6 shows the boundary-layer profiles at x p1 = 287 mm, xr =
335 mm and xe = 408 mm. Three profiles are measured next to the
surface hot-wires p1 , r and e. All profiles have been acquired at 10
kHz sampling rate for 10 s for each data point. Phase averaging allows
created by the disturbance source d at f = 200Hz. The resulting mea-
sured waveforms are averaged over 2000 samples for each of the 50
 B. Simon et al. / International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow 56 (2015) 344–354
Fig. 5. Neutral stability curve (αi = 0) and N-factor contours for the reference case
UW T = 12 m/s (U∞ = 14 m/s) and zero pressure gradient, spanwise wave number β =0.
Fig. 6. Normalized measured boundary-layer profiles (blue ◦) and phase averaged
(200 Hz) disturbance amplitude (black ), corresponding Blasius profile (solid line)
and TS eigenmode (dashed line) calculated by LST for the positions of xp1 , xr and xe
at reference speed UW T = 12 m/s (U∞ = 14 m/s). The shape factor H12 is stated below
each velocity profile. (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend,
the reader is referred to the web version of this article)
phase angles. The measured amplitude of the TS-wave ATS is normal-
ized and plotted as triangles in Fig. 6 and the dashed curves show
the corresponding eigenforms, calculated by linear stability analysis.
The good agreement between the theoretical and the experimental
results confirms the applicability of linear stability theory; the mea-
sured maximum amplitude is ATS, max ≈ 0.8 % U∞ at the reference
sensor position for the presented measurement while ATS, max is the
maximum of the measured Eigenform (black ) in Fig. 6.
The measurements presented in this paper do not claim to ver-
ify linear stability theory calculations for the velocity range of 7 m/s
< UWT < 17 m/s as the experimental setup does not allow adjusting
perfect zero-pressure gradient flow conditions at all velocities, as as-
sumed for the following LST calculations. Nevertheless LST is used as
a tool to provide/illuminate the physical background behind the ex-
perimental data presented in the following sections.
3.1. Boundary-layer receptivity
The active wave cancelation experiments are conducted with
broad-band disturbances, introduced into the boundary layer by
a low pass filtered white-noise (wn) input signal for the dis-
turbance source loudspeakers. The wn signal is generated with
a sample rate of 5 kHz, which results in a cut-off frequency of
2.5 kHz. Phase averaging allows to monitor the TS-wave ampli-
tude of single-frequency disturbances only or of a superposition
347
Fig. 7. Boundary-layer receptivity for different test runs.
of harmonic waves. Therefore the RMS value of the reference-
sensor signal r(t) is used as a measure of the disturbance ampli-
tude. The single-frequency (200 Hz) reference disturbance ampli-
tude at UW T = 12 m/s (cmp. Fig 6) yields a RMS value of r(t) of
RMS(r(t )200Hz,12 m/s ) = 0.0174 V. For the white noise excitation the
RMS value is lowered to RMS(r(t )wn,12 m/s ) = 0.0124 V in order to
avoid non-linear effects. The ratio D (Eq. (4)) of the RMS(r(t )wn,UW T )
and the wind-tunnel velocity UWT was tried to keep constant for all
wind-tunnel velocities.
RMS(r(t )wn,UW T )
D= (4)
UW T
The special construction of the wind-tunnel does not allow for
perfectly repeatable experiments concerning the receptivity of the
boundary layer. The open-circuit tunnel sucks air from outside the
building and therefore provides varying conditions concerning hu-
midity and temperature. The disturbance source amplitude for each
wind tunnel velocity UWT has only been calibrated once to achieve an
almost constant ratio D for the considered velocity range. The curve
for the calibration test run in Fig. 7(a) is marked with a diamond sym-
bol (). It shows the parameter D for different wind-tunnel velocities
UWT . The change in receptivity becomes obvious by the vertical dis-
placement of the curves for different runs but the same calibrated
disturbance source amplitude. The deviation of the curves varies
about ± 10% for one test series, if the borderline cases UW T = 7 m/s
and UW T = 17 m/s are not taken into account. Each curve is recorded
in a short time frame of several minutes while the RMS is calculated
for a data set of 20 s at each wind-tunnel speed. The power spec-
tral density of the reference-sensor signal r(t) at UW T = 12 m/s with
a constant disturbance source amplitude is shown in Fig. 7(b) for two
measurements. The narrow peaks at 150 Hz, 250 Hz and 350 Hz in
Figs. 7(b) and 8 occur because of electromagnetic interference caused
by the wind-tunnel motor power supply. The curves of the different
348 B. Simon et al. / International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow 56 (2015) 344–354
Fig. 8. Coherence γ 2 of the primary path Her for different UWT .
Fig. 9. Upper and lower TS-wave frequency limits, extracted from the coherence γ 2 of
Her .
test runs show a rise of the amplitude for all frequencies, which con-
firms the assumption of a change in boundary-layer receptivity.
However, the magnitude of the variation of the receptivity process
between different runs is considered to not have an influence on the
controller stability.
3.2. Boundary-layer transmission behavior for variable flow velocities
The transmission behavior of the boundary layer is changing with
the local Reynolds number Rex = U∞ x
ν and pressure gradient. If x is
held constant and a Blasius boundary layer is assumed over the whole
velocity range, the boundary-layers’ transmission behavior is mainly
depending on U∞ or UWT , respectively. Fig. 8 shows the coherence γ 2
of the primary path Her , whereas γ 2 close to one implies a linear re-
lation between the upstream and downstream sensor signals r(t) and
e(t) for a white-noise disturbance excitation. Therefore it shows the
relevant frequency band for the active wave cancelation at different
UWT . The dashed parts of the spectra indicate low and high frequency
disturbances, which are not considered to be in the TS-wave band.
The control success of the TS-wave attenuation is measured within
this frequency band, which makes the definition of these boundaries
necessary. In Fig. 8 the TS-wave band for UW T = 8 m/s is clearly vis-
ible whereby it starts at about 100 Hz and ends at 200 Hz. Low fre-
quency disturbances up to 100 Hz are only slightly damped, which
is verified by a coherence γ 2 ≈ 0.4. The drop for frequencies higher
than 200 Hz is steeper and ends at a lower level of γ 2 ≈ 0.1. The lower
frequency limit of the TS-wave band is defined at a coherence level of
γ 2 = 0.7 and the upper limit is defined at a level of γ 2 = 0.1. The
solid part of the curves in Fig. 8 lies in between the two limits and
indicates the TS-wave bandpass.
The amplified TS-frequency band of the primary path Her , ex-
tracted with the described method, is shown in Fig. 9 for the whole
velocity range. In addition the lower and upper frequency of the neu-
tral stability curve αi = 0 at x = 0.37 m is plotted. The lower and up-
per bound of the TS-wave band, extracted from the coherence of
Her , do not match the neutral stability curve αi = 0 perfectly be-
Fig. 10. Impulse response model for the secondary path Ĥer at different UWT , modeled
by a FIR filter with M = 256 coefficients.
Fig. 11. Coherence γ 2 of the secondary path Hec for different UWT .
cause the spatial amplification of the disturbance is not taken into ac-
count for αi = 0. However, the spatial amplification is included in the
calculation of the amplification factor N, as done for the plot of Fig. 5.
By extracting the bandpass from the contour plot of N for UW T =
12 m/s in Fig. 5 at x = 0.37 m, the bandpass boundaries of 150 Hz < f
< 300 Hz compare very well to the experiment.
The control success of the fxLMS controller is depended on a good
model Ĥec of the boundary-layers transmission behavior between
plasma actuator c and error sensor e. All experiments in this doc-
ument have been conducted in a boundary layer with almost zero
pressure gradient, therefore Ĥec only changes with UWT as the sensor
and actuator positions are fixed. Fig. 10 shows the impulse response
of the secondary path Ĥec , modeled by a finite impulse response (FIR)
filter with M = 256 filter coefficients. It is obtained by operating the
high voltage generator with an input voltage c(t), which consists of
a DC offset voltage and an AC PRBS (pseudo random binary signal),
resulting in a modulation of the plasma-actuator body force (Fig. 4).
This broad-band body-force causes random velocity fluctuations in
streamwise direction, which are filtered by the boundary layer while
propagating downstream due to the bandpass characteristic of the
boundary-layer flow, as the coherence of Ĥec in Fig. 11 demonstrates.
In the TS-wave bandpass region a coherence of γ 2 ≈ 0.95 indicates
an almost linear behavior of the PA at the given average high-voltage
amplitude of V = 9 kV. The impulse-response shape changes as the
bandpass shifts to higher frequencies, when UWT is increased (Fig. 10).
The shape of the impulse-response model mainly relies on the change
of the phase speed c and the amplification of the disturbances in the
boundary layer.
Fig. 12 shows the non-dimensionalized (by U∞ ) phase speed c of
a disturbance at 200 Hz in a Blasius boundary layer at different UWT
calculated by LST. The phase speed c changes only slightly in the spa-
tial region of interest between the first and the last sensor (0.3 m < x
< 0.41 m). In order to compare the calculated data from the LST with
the experiment, the calculated wave speed from Fig. 12 is averaged
between the sensors p2 and r and plotted as a solid line in Fig. 13.
 B. Simon et al. / International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow 56 (2015) 344–354
Fig. 12. Non-dimensionalized phase speed c of the disturbance at f = 200 Hz for dif-
ferent UWT .
Fig. 13. Phase speed c of the disturbance at f = 200 Hz, calculated with different sen-
sor pairs for the experiment and corresponding phase speed, calculated with LST at
x = 0.37 m.
The disturbance-wave speed c in the experiment can be determined
with the phase-angle difference d (in degree) between two sensor
signals with the sensor distance x at a given frequency f:
360◦
c( f ) = x · f.
d
The phase-angle difference d is extracted from the measure-
ment data with a FFT. For a comparison between LST and experiment,
the measured wave speed is shown in Fig. 13 for different upstream
sensor combinations at f = 200 Hz. The experimentally determined
curves, calculated with the phase-angle difference between the sen-
sor pairs, show a similar behavior but the slope differs, leading to
a deviation of c ≈ 1 m/s at UW T = 17 m/s. There are two main er-
ror sources, which may contribute to an error of c. First, the data has
been acquired at a sampling rate of 10 kHz, which leads to a phase-
◦ 200 Hz
angle resolution of 360 ◦
10000 Hz = 7.2 . On the other hand an accuracy
of 1 mm for the positioning of the sensors is assumed. Error bars,
which include both error sources are shown in Fig. 13. The phase
speed c calculated by LST differs from the experimental results which
may be owed to the fact that a zero-pressure gradient boundary layer
cannot be assumed for the whole velocity range of 7 m/s < UWT <
17 m/s. Nevertheless, the LST calculations give an insight on the fluid-
dynamic behavior while the surface hot-wire sensors only can char-
acterize the local behavior of the boundary layer at one specific point.
3.3. Transmission behavior for steady plasma actuator force
As mentioned before, the plasma actuator has two effects on the
boundary layer. Unsteady force generation can be used to introduce
velocity fluctuations and steady forcing can change the stability prop-
erties of the boundary layer. As shown by Kurz et al. (2013) both
effects can be applied simultaneously by modulating a steady force
(hybrid mode). However, even without an intentionally added steady
force offset to an unsteady forcing the plasma actuator always adds
a net momentum to a flow because its body force is unidirectional
349
Fig. 14. Power density spectrum of the error sensor signal e(t) with and without steady
actuator forcing at UW T = 12 m/s.
Fig. 15. Secondary path model Ĥec for different high voltage amplitudes V at UW T =
12 m/s.
(on the timescale of the boundary-layer flow). This leads to a slightly
fuller boundary-layer profile and a broad-band damping of the dis-
turbances as shown in Fig. 14. The dashed line indicates the power
density spectrum of the error-sensor signal e(t) with a broad-band
(5) disturbance caused by the disturbances source while the solid line
shows the case for steady forcing at a high voltage V = 9 kV. This off-
set corresponds to the steady force during the experiments presented
in Sections 4 and 5 and leads to an attenuation of about 2 dB in the
TS-wave band. The stability characteristics of the boundary layer are
not significantly influenced by this rather small steady force because
the attenuation of 2 dB only contributes a small portion to the total
control success of about 12 dB with active-wave cancelation (cmp.
Section 4). The average high-voltage amplitude of V = 9 kV is chosen
to ensure a continuous and stable discharge of the PA during the am-
plitude modulation while a lower amplitude could lead to additional
turbulence production caused by the discharge onset, which is about
V = 5 kV for this actuator setup. Also the PA shows an almost linear
relation between the analog input voltage of the high-voltage gen-
erator GBS Minipuls 2.1 and the resulting body-force in the operation
range of 7 kV < V < 11 kV. This linear relation has already been shown
with a coherence γ 2 ≈ 0.95 in Fig. 11 in the TS-wave frequency band.
The stabilizing effect of the steady body-force offset causes a
change in phase speed c, as shown before with linear stability cal-
culations by Duchmann et al. (2010). The steady force causes a local
acceleration of the wave and therefore a phase-angle difference in
the secondary path Hec . Fig. 15 shows the impulse-response model
Ĥec for different values of V. In contrast to the stretching and scal-
ing of the FIR filter coefficients due to a change in wind-tunnel speed
UWT (Fig. 10) the impulse-response curves seem to be shifted in time
by the changing steady actuator force. In conclusion the steady ac-
tuator force can have a significant impact on the secondary path
Hec in hybrid operation mode. This can not only be caused by dif-
ferent voltage amplitudes but also by changing environmental con-
ditions and a thereby changing discharge behavior and body-force
production.
350 B. Simon et al. / International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow 56 (2015) 344–354
Fig. 16. Power density spectra of the error sensor signal e(t) with and without active
wave cancelation at UW T = 13 m/s. The maximum error sensor signal reduction Emax is
indicated with a double-arrow.
Fig. 17. Maximum error sensor signal reduction Emax with constant secondary path
model (identified at UWT, ident ) and controller performance for different flow speeds
UWT .
4. Stability of the fxLMS controller
Successful TS-wave cancelation experiments with broad-band
disturbances have been documented in the literature before (e.g.
Fabbiane et al., 2015; Sturzebecher and Nitsche, 2003). This section
discusses the stability of the control algorithm for changes in UWT
based on the investigation on the boundary-layer transmission be-
havior in Section 3.2. An example for wave attenuation at UW T =
13 m/s is shown in Fig. 16. The TS-wave “hump”, which ranges from
about 120 Hz to 300 Hz, is attenuated almost completely. The nar-
row peaks at 150 Hz, 250 Hz and 350 Hz occur due to electromag-
netic interference caused by the wind-tunnel motor power supply.
The maximum disturbance attenuation Emax = 13 dB is achieved in a
small band, representing the most amplified TS-wave frequencies. In
addition, disturbances below the TS-wave band are damped by the
plasma actuator. The amplitudes above 300 Hz seem to be amplified,
which can be caused either by the turbulence production of the PA or
the electromagnetic interference caused by the plasma discharge.
If the control algorithm is operated off the design point, at which
the model of the secondary path Ĥec has been extracted, the con-
troller can become unstable due to the change of the transmission
behavior of the boundary-layer flow (Section 3.2). Fig. 17 shows the
maximum achieved reduction of the disturbance Emax as a function
of the wind-tunnel velocity during the experiment UWT and the ve-
locity UWT, ident where the secondary path model Ĥec,UW T was ac-
quired. The investigation of the stability of the controller was con-
ducted for different wind-tunnel velocities in steps of UW T = 1 m/s.
The white areas represent unstable controller operation (no cancela-
Fig. 18. Phase-angle error e caused by different UWT , relative to UW T = 12 m/s. The
solid curves show the experimental data while the dashed curves indicate LST calcula-
tions.
tion or even amplification). Because of the unstable behavior of the
controller the measurement has been stopped to prevent actuator
damage and therefore no representative data is available for these
operation points. All colored blocks show measured cases and their
corresponding reduction of the error sensor signal Emax . Red color in-
dicates a stable controller operation and successful TS-wave attenua-
tion whereas yellow blocks indicate a marginally stable controller, for
which the achieved attenuation is almost negligible. The controller
can successfully attenuate TS-waves in the velocity range 11 m/s <
UWT < 15 m/s with a secondary path model, identified at UW T,ident =
12 m/s. The border-line cases UW T = 10 m/s and UW T = 16 m/s show
marginal stable behavior while all other wind-tunnel velocities do
not allow a stable controller operation with this particular model.
Higher UWT allow a wider operation range in terms of wind-tunnel
speed deviation off the design point than lower UWT . This observation
leads to the following more precise discussion of the operating range
of the controller dependent on the phase-angle error, which is caused
by a secondary path model Ĥec,UW T recorded at UWT, ident = UWT .
4.1. Phase-angle dependent stability of the control algorithm
The results in Fig. 17 show an unstable behavior of the controller,
when the deviation of UWT from the design case exceeds a certain
limit of 2 − 3 m/s. A reason for the unstable controller is the change of
the transmission behavior (stability features) of the boundary-layer
flow (Section 3.2), which results in a change of phase speed and am-
plification of the disturbances. This effect has been discussed in the
literature before (Fabbiane et al., 2015; Pätzold, 2013). The following
results show a detailed analysis of the controller stability based on
the phase-angle error, which is caused by the changing phase speed
of Hec . The phase-angle error due to changing free-stream velocity
e is shown in Fig. 18 for the frequency band of 50–400 Hz, rel-
ative to the phase angle of the reference case at UW T = 12 m/s. Af-
ter a (counter-)wave is excited by the plasma actuator c it travels
downstream with the flow and is measured by the error sensor e.
The phase-angle error e (f), relative to a reference phase angle
ref (f), depends on the traveled distance xe − xc = l = 0.045 m, the
phase speed c and its frequency f = T1 :
360◦ · l
e ( f ) = − re f ( f ). (6)
c·T
The controller takes this phase-angle error into account by using
the model Ĥec , which is determined for a given situation (here a given
UWT ). If one of these parameters changes, the controller uses a wrong
model which results in a phase-angle error. Using the LST the effect
of varying free-stream velocities on the phase-angle error is investi-
gated and compared to the experimental results. The experimental
and theoretically calculated e presented in Fig. 18 show differ-
ences but the qualitative behavior is basically the same. The reasons
for the deviation between LST (dashed curves) and experiment (solid
curves) have been discussed in Section 3.2.
 B. Simon et al. / International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow 56 (2015) 344–354
Fig. 19. Stability of the fxLMS control algorithm with constant Ĥec,UW T at different UWT .
The absolute value of the phase-angle error e increases for de-
creasing flow velocity. The horizontal spacing of the curves decreases
for increasing UW T. On the other hand higher frequencies also cause a
higher phase-angle error and the most amplified frequency is higher
for increasing velocity.
For the phase-angle based investigations on the controller stabil-
ity the phase-angle error e is now calculated for each design point
UW T,ident = 7 − 17 m/s at which a model Ĥec,UW T has been identified.
The TS-wave bandpass is shifting to higher frequencies with higher
UWT and the phase-angle error e (f) is a function of frequency f.
Therefore the phase-angle error at the upper TS-wave bandpass limit
(cmp. Fig. 9) is defined as the critical phase-angle error. The exam-
ple for UW T = 12 m/s shown in Fig. 18 leads to a phase-angle error of
e = 75◦ at the upper frequency limit of 300 Hz, if the controller is
operated off design at UW T = 14 m/s.
Fig. 19 shows the phase-angle error at that upper frequency limit
caused by an off design controller operation. For each secondary path
model Ĥec,UW T , identified at UWT, ident , the wind-tunnel velocity UWT
has been varied from UW T = 7 − 17 m/s. The dashed lines connect the
data points which belong to the same UWT whereas the wind-tunnel
speed rises from bottom to top in steps of UW T = 1 m/s. All data
points marked with filled circles show stable fxLMS controller opera-
tion and a successful wave attenuation, all other configurations went
unstable (cmp. Fig. 17). It is commonly known that the fxLMS control
algorithm can theoretically compensate a ± 90° phase-angle error be-
tween the secondary path model Ĥec and the physical path Hec by
adapting the filter online (Hansen, 2002; Snyder and Hansen, 1994).
These two borders are drawn as solid horizontal lines. The postpro-
cessing based on the phase-angle error e demonstrates the flexi-
bility of the adaptive control algorithm in the band of ± 90°. Almost
all configurations in this band are stable.
The fxLMS control algorithm is able to adapt the filter w on-
line and to compensate the phase-angle error between the physical
secondary path Hec and its model Ĥec,UW T . Fig. 20 shows the fxLMS
kernels, acquired at UW T = [11, 13, 15]m/s and additionally (dashed
lines) two cases with off-design operation. The adaption process of
the filter was completed in all cases shown. The kernels of the off-
design cases differ only slightly from the on-design cases, which
shows the ability of the fxLMS to overcome the phase-angle error in
the adaption process.
5. Adaptive secondary path
The fxLMS controller has shown a robust behavior in a certain op-
eration range, corresponding to ± 90° phase-angle error (Section 4).
In order to extend the operational range of the controller it is neces-
sary to adapt the secondary path online (Elliott, 2000; Kuo and Mor-
gan, 1995). Several methods for the continuous online identification
of secondary paths have been investigated within the last decades
351
Fig. 20. fxLMS kernels for controller operation at design point and off design opera-
tion.
Fig. 21. Measured and scaled/stretched secondary path model Ĥec for different wind-
tunnel velocities based on a reference UW T,ref = 12 m/s.
(e.g. Zhang et al., 2003). However, these methods are usually very
application specific and significantly increase the complexity of the
controller. In cases where the changes in the secondary path are dom-
inated by a small number of dominant parameters, an online adapta-
tion can be conducted using look up tables of secondary path esti-
mates for in parameter range of interest. The secondary path is then
adopted online by measuring this dominating parameter and inter-
polating within the look up table. For this approach a lot of effort is
required for the initial experimental identification of the secondary
path look up table. Alternatively, if there is a functional dependency
of the secondary path on the dominant parameters, then the sec-
ondary path model may be extrapolated from a single reference sec-
ondary path model.
Investigations of the transmission behavior of the boundary-layer
with different flow speeds in Section 3 indicate that it is possible
adapt the secondary path model Hec by stretching and scaling the
impulse-response model Ĥec with changing UWT (cmp. Fig. 13). This
Section discusses the extension of the stable controller operation
range by adapting the secondary path model Ĥec .
5.1. Parameterized scaling and stretching of Ĥec
The secondary path model Ĥec can be adapted during the ex-
periments by stretching and scaling the reference impulse response
Ĥec,ref . This approach is depicted in Fig. 21 where the solid curves
show the measured Ĥec , copied from Fig. 10. The zero crossing be-
tween the global minimum and maximum was chosen as a measure
for the temporal stretching and the value of the global minimum was
chosen as a parameter for the amplitude scaling. The thereby de-
rived scaling and stretching parameters and the 4th order polynomi-
als are plotted in Fig. 22. The dashed curves in Fig. 21 show stretched
and scaled impulse responses based on a Ĥec for UW T,ref = 12 m/s
compared to the models Ĥec measured at each velocity individually.
The presented procedure matches the shape of measured impulse
responses quite well. It is updated depending on the free-stream
352 B. Simon et al. / International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow 56 (2015) 344–354
Fig. 22. Scaling and stretching parameters for secondary path model adaption.
Fig. 23. Controller performance Emax with adaptive secondary path Ĥec , adaption
based on UWT with reference UW T,ref = 12 m/s.
velocity during the controller operation in the experiment. This pro-
cedure allows a dynamic adaption to changing flow conditions. Nev-
ertheless a calibration of the secondary path model adaption method
is unavoidable which means, that the impulse response models have
to be recorded before controller operation.
5.2. Controller stability with adaptive secondary path Ĥec
The stability of the basic fxLMS control algorithm is based on Ĥec
as a model of the boundary-layer transmission behavior. Because of
its ability to adapt, the basic control algorithm also works well with
slight changes of the flow velocity but becomes unstable for larger ve-
locity deviations (cmp. Fig. 17). The circles in Fig. 23 show the maxi-
mum disturbance attenuation Emax for constant secondary path mod-
els Ĥec determined for each wind tunnel velocity UWT and operated at
each design point. The solid line shows the attenuation obtained with
a single secondary path model Ĥec adapted online as described in the
previous section. Deviations in the control success Emax between both
cases at the same UWT result from difficulties with repeatable recep-
tivity properties (Section 3.1) and are unlikely caused by a lower con-
trol success due to the adapted secondary path. The main benefit of
the adaptive secondary path model Ĥec is a broader operation range
while the fxLMS controller with constant Ĥec only can adapt phase
changes up to 90°.
As a comparison to the fxLMS kernels without secondary path
adaption (Fig. 20) the kernels with adapted/stretched Ĥec are shown
in Fig. 24. In addition the kernel for design-point operation is plotted.
The shape in both cases is similar but the amplitude of the first peak
(local maximum) is lower. This underestimated amplitude of the first
peak does not seem to alter the stability properties of the controller
and the control success Emax significantly.
5.3. Embedded sensors for flow-state identification
The previously described approach for the adaption of the sec-
ondary path model is based on the knowledge of the free-stream
Fig. 24. fxLMS kernel for design point operation (solid curves) and adaption of Ĥec
with UW T,re f = 12 m/s (dashed curves).
Fig. 25. Surface hot-wire signals p1 (t) and p2 (t) for white noise excitation.
velocity. Towards the development of more capable boundary-layer
control systems it seems beneficial to conduct the adjustment based
on locally obtained information on the flow. Alternatively to the ex-
ternal measure UWT the secondary path Ĥec can also be adapted based
on the estimate of the phase-angle difference d between the sig-
nals captured at the two upstream sensors p1 and p2 (Fig. 25). The
phase-angle difference d is directly related to UWT via the phase
speed c of the disturbances (Section 3.2). This technique allows to
adapt Ĥec based on signals measured locally by wall mounted sensors
and does not rely on a remote measure of UWT . Therefore an inter-
esting application for this technique are flight experiments, where
not only the flow speed but also the pressure distribution can vary in
time. The phase-angle difference d catches the phase speed of the
disturbance by implication and therefore adapts the controller based
on the phase speed (propagation speed) of the disturbances. This is
an important feature because the wave cancelation success mainly
depends on the correct phase angle relation between the disturbance
and the counteracting force. The following paragraph describes the
implementation of the phase-angle difference detection algorithm,
which is indicated with a P in the block diagram of the control algo-
rithm in Fig. 1.
Fig. 25 shows the amplified AC signals of the surface hot-wires p1
and p2 at UW T = 12 m/s. The disturbances created upstream of the
sensors travel downstream with the phase speed c and cause a shift
d between both sensor signals. The short distance between both
sensors only lead to a limited phase-angle difference but it can be
extracted as a measure for the phase speed c and UWT , respectively.
An algorithm for phase-angle difference detection has been imple-
mented in order to run it online on the dSPACE system. The data is
first filtered with a narrow 8th order IIR bandpass filter at 200 Hz.
The resulting signal is then normalized in between one cycle dura-
tion T200 Hz = 0.005 s. The normalized signals p1, n and p2, n are now
approximated as two sinusoidal signals with the same frequency f, as
indicated in Eqs. (7) and (8).
p1,n = sin (2π f t + 1 ) (7)
p2,n = sin (2π f t + 2 ) (8)
 B. Simon et al. / International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow 56 (2015) 344–354
Fig. 26. Applied phase-angle difference detection (a) and comparison to the current
measured wind-tunnel speed (b).
Multiplication and integration of the time signals over m periods
leads to
 mT
1 1
p1,n · p2,n dt = cos (1 − 2 ).
mT 0 2
The phase-angle difference d = 1 − 2 for both signals with
the same frequency can now be calculated:
  mT
 360◦ 200 Hz
2
d = arccos p1,n · p2,n dt
mT 0
This algorithm enables to calculate the phase-angle difference on-
line and to update the secondary path Ĥec every second parallel to
the controller operation. Using the trigonometric cosine function the
algorithm is only able to determine a phase-angle difference of 0°
< d < 180°. The operation range of 7 m/s < UWT < 17 m/s leads
to phase-angle differences of less than 140° for the given sensor dis-
tance between p1 and p2 . Fig. 26(a) shows d calculated online dur-
ing controller operation. The frequency of 200 Hz is chosen as it is in
the amplified frequency band for almost the whole operation range
(cmp. Fig. 9) and only common integer divisors of the sample rate
fS = 10 kHz are possible. Nevertheless the phase-angle difference de-
tection algorithm does not work stable for 15 m/s < UWT < 17 m/s. In
comparison to the actual wind-tunnel speed (Fig. 26(b)), the detected
phase-angle difference d maps the velocity fluctuations UWT only
for the velocities lower than UWT < 15 m/s. At higher velocities the
coherence of both sensor signals at f = 200 Hz is already too low be-
cause the disturbances are not amplified anymore (cmp. Fig. 9).
The previously described method for determining the propaga-
tion speed is certainly not the most sophisticated one but serves well
as a first version for testing the usefulness of the phase-speed ap-
proach. With the applied phase-angle difference detection algorithm
the achieved attenuation rate does not differ significantly from the
experiments with an adaption of Ĥec based on UWT . Fig. 27 shows a
comparison between the two approaches of secondary path adap-
tion. The dashed line shows the adaption with the external measure
UWT as presented in Fig. 23 whereas the solid line in Fig. 27 shows the
measurement results obtained with the adaption based on the phase-
angle difference d . Except the borderline cases UW T = 7 m/s and
353
Fig. 27. Controller performance Emax with adaptive secondary path Ĥec . Compari-
son between adaption based on UWT and phase-angle difference d with reference
UW T,ref = 12 m/s.
UW T = 17 m/s both adaption methods perform equally well even if
the phase-angle difference based adaption does not adapt the sec-
ondary path model Ĥec as exact as the adaption based on the mea-
surement of UWT . This is because of the robustness of the fxLMS con-
troller, which can adapt an phase-angle error between the model
Ĥec and the current physical secondary path Hec (Section 4). Future
phase-angle difference detection algorithms for higher phase-angle
differences d could be an online FFT or a cross correlation of both
signals, which might require more computational power.
In conclusion the application of the adaptive secondary path
model Ĥec can be considered successful but not mandatory, if the
flow speed changes are in the order of ± 2 m/s. However, the adaptive
secondary path will show its real benefits when not only changes of
the free-stream velocity come into play but also changes of the an-
gle of attack of an aerodynamic airfoil. On the other hand an adap-
(9) tive secondary path could be necessary, if the phase-angle resolu-
tion is lowered due to a lower execution speed of the controller. A
execution speed of 1 kHz would allow to cancel out disturbances
with a frequency of 200 Hz but the resulting phase resolution of
◦
1000 Hz = 72 is already a large amount of the ± 90° phase-angle
(10) error which can be adapted by the fxLMS algorithm.
6. Conclusions
The stability of an adaptive fxLMS control algorithm for cancel-
ing broad-band Tollmien–Schlichting waves with a DBD plasma ac-
tuator has been investigated for changing free-stream velocities in a
flat plate boundary layer. The main focus of the work was put on the
phase-angle error depended stability of the controller and its flow-
physical background, explained by linear stability theory. The basic
fxLMS controller is able to adapt changes in the physical secondary
path Hec of ± 90° compared to the used secondary path model Ĥec .
This allows stable controller operation with velocity deviations up to
4 m/s in the considered operation range for wind-tunnel speeds of
7 m/s < UWT < 17 m/s. The successful adaption is reflected in the sim-
ilar shape of the fxLMS kernel for the design case and the off-design
case.
In order to extend the operation range of the system an adap-
tive secondary path model Ĥec is implemented, which allows a sta-
ble controller operation for the whole considered velocity range. The
adaptive secondary path model Ĥec requires a calibration before run-
ning the controller but allows a parameterized adaption based on
flow quantities. The adaption can be realized by an external measure
like the wind- tunnel speed UWT or by wall bounded phase speed
measurements with two surface hot-wires upstream of the plasma
actuator.
Even though non-perfect zero pressure gradient conditions at dif-
ferent free-stream velocities hinder a perfect match with linear sta-
bility theory, the comparisons show that the stable controller opera-
tion range can be predicted by LST.
354 B. Simon et al. / International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow 56 (2015) 344–354

Acknowledgments Kriegseis, J., Moeller, B., Grundmann, S., Tropea, C., 2011. Capacitance and power con-
sumption quantification of dielectric barrier discharge(DBD) plasma actuators. J.
Electrostat. 69 (4), 302–312.
This work was supported by the German research foundation Kriegseis, J., Schwarz, C., Tropea, C., Grundmann, S., 2013b. Velocity-information-based
(DFG) under the grant No. GR 3524/4-1. force-term estimation of dielectric-barrier discharge plasma actuators. J. Phys. D:
Appl. Phys. 46 (5), 055202.
References Kuo, S.M., Morgan, D., 1995. Active Noise Control Systems: Algorithms and DSP Imple-
mentations. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Kurz, A., Goldin, N., King, R., Tropea, C., Grundmann, S., 2013. Hybrid transition control
Borodulin, V., Kachanov, Y.S., Koptsev, D., Roschektayev, A., 2002. Experimental study
approach for plasma actuators. Exp. Fluids 54 (11), 1–4.
of resonant interactions of instability waves in self-similar boundary layer with an
Kurz, A., Simon, B., Tropea, C., Grundmann, S., 2014. Active wave cancellation using
adverse pressure gradient: Ii. detuned resonances∗. J. Turbul. 3 (062).
plasma acutators in flight. In: Proceedings of the 52st AIAA Aerospace Sciences
Cattafesta, L.N., Sheplak, M., 2011. Actuators for active flow control. Annu. Rev. Fluid
Meeting.
Mech. 43, 247–272.
Moreau, E., 2007. Airflow control by non-thermal plasma actuators. J. Phys. D: Appl.
Corke, T.C., Enloe, C.L., Wilkinson, S.P., 2010. Dielectric barrier discharge plasma actua-
Phys. 40, 605–636.
tors for flow control. Ann. Rev. Fluid Mech. 42 (1), 505–529.
Pätzold, A., 2013. Experimentelle Untersuchungen aktiv ausgelenkter Oberflächen zur
Duchmann, A., Reeh, A., Quadros, R., Kriegseis, J., Tropea, C., 2010. Linear stability anal-
Reduktion der Wandreibung durch Transitionsverzögerung. TU Berlin Ph.D. thesis.
ysis for manipulated boundary-layer flows using plasma actuators. In: Proceed-
Peltzer, I., Pätzold, A., Nitsche, W., 2009. In-flight experiments for delaying laminar-
ings of the Seventh IUTAM Symposium on Laminar-Turbulent Transition. Springer,
turbulent transition on a laminar wing glove. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., Part G: J.
pp. 153–158.
Aerosp. Eng. 223 (6), 619–626.
Duchmann, A., Simon, B., Tropea, C., Grundmann, S., 2014. Dielectric barrier discharge
Reeh, A.D., 2014. Natural Laminar Flow Airfoil Behavior in Cruise Flight through Atmo-
plasma actuators for in-flight transition delay. AIAA J 52 (2), 358–367.
spheric Turbulence. TU Darmstadt Ph.D. thesis.
Elliott, S., 2000. Signal Processing for Active Control. Academic press.
Saric, W., Reed, H., Kerschen, E., 2002. Boundary-layer receptivity to freestream distur-
Fabbiane, N., Semeraro, O., Bagheri, S., Henningson, D.S., 2014. Adaptive and model-
bances. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 34 (1), 291–319.
based control theory applied to convectively unstable flows. Appl. Mech. Rev. 66
Snyder, S.D., Hansen, C.H., 1994. The effect of transfer function estimation errors on the
(6), 060801. doi:10.1115/1.4027483.
filtered-x lms algorithm. IEEE Trans. Signal Process. 42 (4), 950–953.
Fabbiane, N., Simon, B., Fischer, F., Grundmann, S., Bagheri, S., Henningson, D.S., 2015.
Sturzebecher, D., Nitsche, W., 2003. Active cancellation of Tollmien–Schlichting insta-
On the role of adaptivity for robust laminar flow control. J. Fluid Mech. 767.
bilities on a wing using multi-channel sensor actuator systems. Int. J. Heat Fluid
Grundmann, S., Tropea, C., 2008. Active cancellation of artificially introduced Tollmien–
Flow 24 (4), 572–583.
Schlichting waves using plasma actuators. Exp. Fluids 44 (5), 795–806.
Thomas, A.S., 1983. The control of boundary-layer transition using a wave-
Hansen, C.N., 2002. Understanding Active Noise Cancellation. CRC Press.
superposition principle. J. Fluid Mech. 137, 233–250.
Joslin, R., 1998. Aircraft laminar flow control 1. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 30 (1), 1–29.
Würz, W., Sartorius, D., Kloker, M., Borodulin, V., Kachanov, Y., Smorodsky, B., 2012.
Kotsonis, M., Giepman, R., Hulshoff, S., Veldhuis, L., 2013. Numerical study of the con-
Nonlinear instabilities of a non-self-similar boundary layer on an airfoil: experi-
trol of Tollmien–Schlichting waves using plasma actuators. AIAA J. 51 (10), 2353–
ments, dns, and theory. Eur. J. Mech.-B/Fluids 31, 102–128.
2364.
Zhang, M., Lan, H., Ser, W., 2003. A robust online secondary path modeling method with
Kriegseis, J., Duchmann, A., Tropea, C., Grundmann, S., 2013a. On the classification of
auxiliary noise power scheduling strategy and norm constraint manipulation. IEEE
dielectric barrier discharge plasma actuators: a comprehensive performance eval-
Trans. Speech Audio Process. 11 (1), 45–53.
uation study. J. Appl. Phys. 114 (5), 053301.