This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

**Commun Nonlinear Sci Numer Simulat
**

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

Short communication

**Asymptotic bubble evolutions of the Rayleigh–Taylor instability
**

Sung-Ik Sohn

Department of Mathematics, Gangneung-Wonju National University, 7 Jukhungil, Gangneung 210-702, South Korea

a r t i c l e

i n f o

a b s t r a c t

We examine the multiple harmonic model for the single-mode Rayleigh–Taylor instability, and present a new class of the asymptotic solution for the bubble evolution. Previously reported solutions for the bubble curvature and velocity from the model were quantitatively different from other theoretical models and numerical results, for small density jumps. The discrepancy between the theoretical models is resolved by our new approach to the model. Our solution agrees with the Layzer–Goncharov model, and gives the independence of the bubble curvature on the density ratio. Ó 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Article history: Received 31 January 2012 Received in revised form 4 March 2012 Accepted 8 March 2012 Available online 15 March 2012 Keywords: Rayleigh–Taylor instability Multiple harmonic model Layzer model Asymptotic solution

1. Introduction Fluid mixing occurs frequently in basic science and engineering applications. When a heavy ﬂuid is supported by a lighter ﬂuid in a gravitational ﬁeld, the interface between the ﬂuids is unstable under small disturbances, and is known as the Rayleigh–Taylor (RT) instability [1]. The RT instability plays important roles in many ﬁelds ranging from astrophysics to inertial conﬁnement fusion [2]. The hydrodynamic instability leads to development of spikes, penetrating of the heavy ﬂuid into the light ﬂuid, and bubbles, rising of the light ﬂuid through the heavy ﬂuid. At a later time, a bubble in the RT instability attains a constant growth rate. Eventually, a turbulent mixing caused by vortex structures around spikes breaks the ordered ﬂuid motion. Several theoretical models for the nonlinear evolution of the single-mode RT instability have been proposed. However, disagreements between the solutions of the models have been found, and argued in the literatures. In this paper, we resolve the discrepancy between the theoretical models, and present the asymptotic solution for the RT bubble. Layzer [3] ﬁrst proposed a potential-ﬂow model for comprehensive descriptions of the motion of the interface in the ﬂuids of inﬁnite density ratio. The Layzer model has been extended to the interface of a ﬁnite density contrast in various ways [4–8]. Among several approaches, people have had preferences for Goncharov’s solution [4], owing to the simplicity. The asymptotic bubble curvature and velocity from the Layzer–Goncharov model in two dimensions is given by

k n!À ; 6

sﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ 2Ag ; V! 3ð1 þ AÞk

ð 1Þ

where k ¼ 2p=k is the wavenumber of the interface, k the wave-length of the interface, and g the gravitational acceleration. The Atwood number A is deﬁned by A ¼ ðqh À ql Þ=ðqh þ ql Þ, where qh and ql are the densities of the heavy and light ﬂuids, respectively. The solution (1) gives the independence of the asymptotic bubble curvature on the density ratio. It has been shown that the bubble velocity (1) is in good agreements with numerical and experimental results, over all Atwood numbers

E-mail address: sohnsi@gwnu.ac.kr 1007-5704/$ - see front matter Ó 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cnsns.2012.03.006

natural questions and issues arise as the followings: (1) Why the solution of the multiple harmonic model is quantitatively different with the Layzer-type models. and describes the bubble velocity as a function of the bubble curvature.10] on comparisons with the solutions of the theoretical models. v l ðy ! À1Þ ¼ V .4018 S.10]. From this physical behavior. k k k !1 = 2 rﬃﬃﬃ 3 g À2Aðn=kÞð1 À 4ðn=kÞ2 Þ2 V¼ : 2 k A À 4ðn=kÞ þ 4Aðn=kÞ2 ð2Þ ð3Þ This solution gives the dependence of the bubble curvature on the Atwood number. although it satisﬁes the boundary condition at the negative inﬁnity. The solution of the multiple harmonic model is quantitatively different with the solution (1) of the Layzer–Goncharov model. the boundary condition (6) becomes v h ¼ v l ¼ 0 as y ! Æ1. /m ðt Þ mk m¼1 1 P ~ m ðt Þ 1 cosðmkxÞemky À y : /l ¼ / mk m¼1 1 P ð7Þ ð8Þ The interface near the bubble tip is approximated as g ¼ nðt Þx2 . Sohn / Commun Nonlinear Sci Numer Simulat 17 (2012) 4017–4022 [4. l. is on the zero velocity boundary condition at negative inﬁnity. the solution of the multiple harmonic model is obtained by the following set of equations [13]: 48A 4 3 2 n n n À 64 þ 24A À A ¼ 0. In the laboratory frame of reference. This model employs multiple harmonics for the ﬂow. or not? Although there were numerical and experimental studies [9. . are x and y components of the interface velocity taken from the heavy and light ﬂuids. The Layzertype models give good descriptions for the ﬂow near the bubble tip. for a moderate Atwood number. and g is the gravitational acceleration. the fastest stable solution is chosen as a physically signiﬁcant one. A crucial difference between the Layzer-type models and the multiple harmonic model. The kinematic condition and the Bernoulli equation on the interface y ¼ gðx. We will show that our solution from the multiple harmonic model agrees with the Layzer–Goncharov model. By comparing the solutions of the two models. /h ¼ 1 cosðmkxÞeÀmky þ y . Another theoretical model for the single-mode RT instability is the multiple harmonic model developed by Abarzhi [12– 14]. which is a phenomenological model. The failure of the multiple harmonic model for the prediction for the bubble motion is due to the potential (8) for the light ﬂuid. by giving a new approach to the multiple harmonic model. (5). but allow a mass ﬂux at negative inﬁnity. and how can it be cured? (3) Does the asymptotic bubble curvature depend on the density ratio. The main purpose of this paper is to answer the questions and issues above. The potential of the light ﬂuid thus gives a negligible inﬂuence on the motion of the bubble. þ jr/h j2 þ g þ þ jr/l j2 þ g þ 2 dt dt @t @t 2 with the boundary conditions ð4Þ ð5Þ v h ðy ! 1Þ ¼ V . the velocity ﬁeld behind the bubble was ﬂatten [4]. We take the moving frame of reference ðx. @ t @x @x @ /h 1 dV @ /l 1 dV qh g ¼ ql g . tÞ are @g @g @g ¼ Àuh þ v h ¼ Àul þ v l. We present a new class of the asymptotic solution for the bubble motion from the multiple harmonic model. The kinematic condition implies the continuity of the normal component of ﬂuid velocity across the interface. Model description We consider a single-mode interface between two incompressible ﬂuids in two dimensions. We take the velocity potentials from the multiple harmonic model [13]. 2. The bubble velocity (1) also agrees with the prediction from the drag-buoyancy model [11]. for low Atwood numbers. This potential does not give an appropriate description for the ﬂow near the bubble. The multiple harmonic model forces the ﬂow to satisfy the boundary condition at the negative inﬁnity. In two dimensions.9.-I. Among a continuous family of the solution. for the case of a ﬁnite density jump. and where does the difference come from? (2) Why does the multiple harmonic model fail for the prediction for the bubble motion for low Atwood numbers. yÞ with the bubble tip. It was shown that. i ¼ h. ð6Þ where ui and v i . The bubble curvature is a key parameter in this model. investigations on these fundamental issues have not been attempted. our idea to overcome the limitation of the potential (8) for the ﬂow behind the bubble is the neglect of the higher-order contribution of the term jr/l j2 in the Bernoulli Eq.

which is derived from the Euler equation. Neglecting the e 2 =2. The dashed and dash-dotted lines correspond to the locations of the bubble at x ¼ 0:02k. more precisely. Details of the numerical method can be found in Sohn [16]. they are ﬂattened behind the bubble. (See also Eq. The initial amplitude of the interface is set to a0 k ¼ 0:5. The proﬁles of ulin and v lin corresponds to the velocity in the linear regime.20]. the interface is considered as a set of point vortices. 1 is the velocity proﬁles from the numerical simulation for the incompressible inviscid ﬂuids of A = 0. The motion of the vortex sheet is governed by the Birkhoff–Rott integral equation [17]. and in turn disregard jr/l j2 in the second-order expansion of the model. . the velocity ﬁelds decay exponentially from the interface to the heavy and light ﬂuids. This advantage of the vortex method provides highly accurate solutions for the evolution of unstable interfaces. while steep ahead of the bubble. For a numerical simulation. When the bubble amplitude becomes around ak $ 1:4. ak ¼ 1:39.18]. Therefore.05. 1 shows that.-I. and expanding up to second order in x. the velocities are evaluated at x ¼ 0:02k. Numerical results and validation of the vortex method for the RT instability. 1. In the vortex method. and the gravitational acceleration g ¼ 1. second-order contributions of the velocity potentials (7) and (8) to the term jr/j2 in the Bernoulli equation come only from ð@ /=@ xÞ2 . the bubble velocity tends to saturate to a constant limit. and the proﬁles of unonlin and v nonlin are the velocity in the nonlinear regime. Asymptotic solution in two dimensions We now derive the asymptotic solution for the RT bubble from the new approach to the model. The drag-buoyancy model was successfully applied to the modelling of the RT turbulent mixing [11.) The term ð@ /=@ yÞ2 gives fourth-order contributions to the equation. not solving equations in whole two-dimensional grids. the drag force depends only on the density of the heavy ﬂuid. Fig. were presented by many authors [15. Note that our approach is also consistent with the drag-buoyancy model [11]. The interface is approximated by a vortex sheet across which the tangential velocity is discontinuous. Validation of the approximation To validate our approach for the model. from the ﬂattening of the transverse velocity behind the bubble. Velocity proﬁles near the bubble tip from the numerical simulation for A = 0. we have a system of differential equations for n and the moments.1:1). Substituting the potentials into Eqs. M m¼1 ð10Þ e 0 ðtÞ ¼ ÀV ðt Þ. even for the ﬂuids of a low Atwood number. (12). (4) and where n is an integer. we employ the point vortex method [15. 1. (9). This result validates that the velocity gradients are very small behind the bubble. 4. which is M 1 Fig. The boundary condition (6) gives M 0 ðt Þ ¼ À M (5). we perform a numerical simulation for the RT instability for a case of small density jump and examine the velocity ﬁeld near the bubble tip. at the linear regime. The physical behavior of the ﬂattening of the velocity ﬁelds behind the bubble suggests to suppress high-order contributions from jr/l j2 in the Bernoulli equation.16.16].05 (density ratio 1. but at the nonlinear regime. Fig. In fact. In Eq. which is given by ðql þ C a qh Þ dV Cd ¼ ðqh À ql Þg À qh V 2 . ak ¼ 0:54. one may suppress ð@ /l =@ xÞ2 . We deﬁne the moments by M n ðt Þ ¼ 1 P m¼1 /m ðtÞðkmÞn . and the proﬁles of unonlin and v nonlin are the velocity in the nonlinear regime. Sohn / Commun Nonlinear Sci Numer Simulat 17 (2012) 4017–4022 4019 3. one has second order term from jr/l j2 . and these vortices are computed in Lagrangian manner. in agreements with the solution of the Euler equation. In Fig.S. dt k ð 9Þ where C a is an added mass coefﬁcient and C d a drag coefﬁcient.19. The proﬁles of ulin and v lin represent the velocity in the linear regime. 1 e n ðt Þ ¼ P / ~ m ðt ÞðkmÞn .

the bubble curvature is written as ð11Þ ð12Þ n1 ¼ À M2 . since all time derivatives are set to zero.6 0.5 Fr 0. the solution (16) coincides with Eq. we have the bubble velocity as a function of the curvature. 6M 1 ð13Þ where the superscript 1 represents the asymptotic solution.2 0. and we run more simulations for low Atwood numbers.-I.4 A 0. The bubble Froude number is deﬁned by 0. numerical and physical parameters are set to the same as [16]. Retaining the ﬁrst and second harmonics in the potentials. and it gives the fastest solution for the velocity. . (12) becomes ð1 þ AÞM 2 1 ¼ À4Ag n . and the moments for the light ﬂuid are not used in the derivation of Eq. for comparisons. Bubble Froude number vs.6 0.4 0. g ! 1 and Ag ! 1. For A > 0. (13) and (14) for the bubble curvature and velocity are written solely by the moments for the heavy ﬂuid. (11).8 1 Fig. is taken for the simulation. On the value nc ¼ Àk=6. and numerical results. we ﬁnd the asymptotic bubble curvature and velocity as k n!À . Àk=2. V 1 ﬃ sﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ 1 ÀAg n n1 : ¼3 1þ2 ð 1 þ AÞ k k k ð15Þ The critical solutions in the family (15) are on the values n1 c ¼ Àk=6. Then. The numerical results for the RT instability. Sohn / Commun Nonlinear Sci Numer Simulat 17 (2012) 4017–4022 e 1n À 1 M e 2. the results for the bubble velocity are given in terms of the Froude number. 2. (1) of the Layzer–Goncharov model.2 0 0. in our approach. (15). The asymptotic velocity 1 2 2 becomes 0 for n1 c ¼ Àk=2. The potential /l thus does not give inﬂuences on the bubble motion. 2. Atwood number. The bubble velocity of the previous model is taken from Eqs. Therefore. the previous model [13]. we have M 0 ¼ /1 þ /2 ¼ ð3M 1 =2kÞð1 À M 2 =3M 1 kÞ. We compare the solutions of the multiple harmonic models with numerical simulations. _ ¼ 3M 1 n þ 1 M 2 ¼ 3 M n 2 2 1 _ 1 2 1e _ _ _ e M 1 À nM qh M ¼ ql 1 þ nM 0 À M 1 À g n 0 À gn : 2 2 2 From Eq.7 0. The solid curve corresponds to the solution (16) of the present multiple harmonic model. the second-order derivative @ V =@ n is less than 0. (2) and (3). and the symbol to the numerical results. and ql =qh ¼ ð1 À AÞ=ð1 þ AÞ. 6 sﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ 2Ag : V! 3ð1 þ AÞk ð16Þ Surprisingly. by solving @ V =@ n ¼ 0. using the point vortex method. the asymptotic bubble curvature is independent on the Atwood number. Fig. 2 is the asymptotic bubble velocity of the present model.4020 S. For A = 0. In Fig. Unlikely as the previous multiple harmonic model [13]. The asymptotic bubble velocity is then given by V1 ¼ À 3 n1 M1 1 þ 2 : 2k k ð14Þ 1 Eq.3 0. as t ! 1. the Boussinesq limit. are given in Sohn [16] for several Atwood numbers. Eqs. the dashed curve to the solution of the previous multiple harmonic model.

supporting the independence on the density ratio. 3. Asymptotic solution in three dimensions The procedure described above for the two-dimensional ﬂow can be extended to the bubble evolutions in three-dimensional (3D) geometries. Ag k 2 ð17Þ where k represents the wave-length of the interface. 3 shows that the bubble curvature from the previous model varies with the Atwood number. which gives a ﬁnite bubble curvature. Asymptotic bubble curvature vs. The agreement indicates the trend of the dependence of the Froude number on 1=ð1 þ AÞ. Substituting the potentials (18) and (19) into the kinematic condition and Bernoulli equation. k3 ¼ k1 À k2 . The solid curve corresponds to the solution (16) of the present multiple harmonic model. À1=2Þ. yÞ. 3. Atwood number.S. and k ¼ jki j ¼ 4p= 3k.5 and 0. The relative differences of the previous model from the numerical results are 24% for A = 0.55. the velocity potentials in the heavy and light ﬂuids take the form /h ¼ 3 1 Àmky P e cosðmki rÞ þ z . The bubble curvature is non-dimensionalized to f ¼ À2n1 =k. 3mk m¼1 i¼ 1 1 P /m ðt Þ ð18Þ ð19Þ pﬃﬃﬃ pﬃﬃﬃ where r ¼ ðx. Fig. and it might be reduced by higher-order expansions of the model. and the symbol to the numerical results. and pﬃﬃﬃ ki are the vectors of the reciprocal lattice with k1 ¼ kð 3=2.-I. On the other hand. .1. k2 ¼ kð 3=2. 3mk m¼1 i¼1 1 3 P P 1 ~ m ðt Þ / /l ¼ emky cosðmki rÞ À z . The numerical results for the asymptotic bubble curvature are between 0. 5. e 1n À 1 M _ ¼ 2M 1 n þ 1 M 2 ¼ 2 M n 4 4 1 _ 1 2 1e _ _ e _ M 1 À nM qh M ¼ ql 1 þ nM 0 À M 1 À g n 0 À gn : 4 8 4 The bubble velocity is then given by ð20Þ ð21Þ Fig. and this suggests that the RT bubble may have a constant limit of the curvature. the bubble curvature of the previous model becomes 0. Fig. 2 shows that the solution of the present model agrees well with the numerical results over all Atwood numbers. the dashed curve to the solution of the previous model. one has e 2.21]. The multiple harmonic models in various types of symmetric 3D ﬂows were presented in [14. and 34% for A = 0. and has large differences with the numerical results for low Atwood numbers. although the procedure would be complicated. independent on the density ratio. At the bubble tip. 3 is the comparison of the asymptotic bubble curvature of the present model and the previous model. Assuming a 3D ﬂow with hexagonal symmetry. Fig. The present model predicts the constant asymptotic bubble curvature. 1=2Þ. Especially for A ! 0. In Fig. the interface is approximated as z ¼ nðx2 þ y2 Þ. Sohn / Commun Nonlinear Sci Numer Simulat 17 (2012) 4017–4022 4021 V1 Fr ¼ qﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ . The difference of the curvature of our model from the numerical results is relatively large. This contradicts to our numerical result. with the numerical results. the solution of the previous model deviates from the numerical results as the Atwood number decreases. which means the ﬂattening of the interface. and neglecting the second order term from jr/l j2 . the bubble curvature is non-dimensionalized to f ¼ À2n1 =k.

The multiple harmonic model gives inappropriate descriptions for the near ﬂow ﬁeld behind the bubble. They also reported that the bubble curvature had nearly a constant limit. vol II. Explicit expressions for the evolution of single-mode Rayleigh–Taylor and Richtmyer–Meshkov instabilities at arbitrary Atwood numbers.19:124102. England: Cambridge University Press. Meiron DI. Phys Fluids 1980. The present model gives a new family of the solution for the bubble motion. Arazi L. Phys Rev E 2004. 8 ð23Þ The solution (23) agrees with the Layzer–Goncharov model in 3D [4]. Layzer D.81:337–40. Wilkinson JP.122:1–12. Astrophys J 1955. Goncharov VN. Single-mode dynamics of the Rayleigh–Taylor instability at any density ratio. Abarzhi SI. Lin A-D. vol. Rikanati A.88:134502. Ramaprabhu and Dimonte [9] conducted three-dimensional numerical simulations for the RT instability. Nishihara K. Baker GR. Dimonte G. Glimm J. k n!À .12:3–10. Phys Rev E 2007. Phys Fluids 2003.83:046317. Cheng B. Conclusion We summarize the conclusion regarding the issues raised in the Introduction of the paper.73:036310.23:1485–90. 6. Dimensionality dependence of the Rayleigh–Taylor and Richtmyer–Meshkov instability latetime scaling laws. Science and Technology (Grant No. Numerical simulation of the Rayleigh–Taylor instability. Ramaprabhu P. Phys Plasmas 2000. Sohn S-I. Spanwise homogeneous buoyancy-drag model for Rayleigh–Taylor mixing and experimental evaluation. and the discrepancy between two models is resolved by our approach. Multiscale character of the nonlinear coherent dynamics in the Rayleigh–Taylor instability. the difference of the solutions of the Layzer-type models and the previous multiple harmonic model comes from different types of the potentials. Glimm J. Phys Lett A 2003. Phys Rev E 2004. Nishihara K. Bubble interaction model for hydrodynamic unstable mixing. Sohn / Commun Nonlinear Sci Numer Simulat 17 (2012) 4017–4022 V 1 ﬃ sﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ 1 À4Ag n 8n1 ¼3 : 1þ ð 1 þ AÞ k k 3k sﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ 2Ag V! : ð1 þ AÞk ð22Þ We ﬁnd the asymptotic bubble curvature and velocity. Phys Plasmas 2001. Abarzhi SI.70:045301. and showed that the numerical results for the asymptotic bubble velocity were in agreements with the solution (23). Phys Rev E 2003. Analytical model of nonlinear. Rollin B.317:470–6. An overview of Rayleigh–Taylor instability. We have presented the new approach to the multiple harmonic model. Sharp DH.15:2190–7.71:036314. Proceedings of symposia in applied mathematics. Rosner R. Dimonte G. Vortex model and simulations for Rayleigh–Taylor and Richtmyer–Meshkov instabilities. Jacobs JW. Abarzhi SI. where b0 is the ﬁrst zero of the Bessel function J 0 . Density dependence of Rayleigh–Taylor and Richtmyer–Meshkov mixing fronts. On the instability of superposed ﬂuids in a gravitational ﬁeld. Density dependence of a Zuﬁria-type model for Rayleigh–Taylor and Richtmyer–Meshkov bubble fronts. Sohn S-I. The asymptotic bubble curvature is found to be independent on the density ratio. J Comput Phys 1988.268:366–74. changing k ¼ 2b0 =k for a tabular ﬂow. Phys Rev E 2011. 13. Mathematical model of Rayleigh–Taylor and Richtmyer–Meshkov instabilities for viscoelastic ﬂuids.-I. Orszag SA. Abarzhi SI. Tryggvason G. Physica D 1984. Phys Rev E 2005. Phys Fluids 2007. Experimental study of the single-mode three-dimensional Rayleigh–Taylor instability. which is the fastest solution of Eq. .67:026319. single-mode classical Rayleigh–Taylor instability at arbitrary Atwood numbers.7:2255–69.69:036703.75:253–82. Providence: American Mathematical Society. References [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] Rayleigh L. Phys Rev E 2006. insensitive to the density ratio. Phys Lett A 2000. (22). Phys Rev Lett 1998. Sharp D. 1962. Sohn S-I. Stable steady ﬂows in Rayleigh–Taylor instability. suppressing the contribution of the potential of the light ﬂuid. 55–76. 2012-0002995). Vortex simulations of the Rayleigh–Taylor instability. Basically.75:066312. Alon U.4022 S. Oron D. Cambridge. Acknowledgments This research was supported by Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Education. Rayleigh–Taylor and Richtmyer–Meshkov instabilities for ﬂuids with a ﬁnite density ratio. Birkhoff G. Glimm J. Kartoon D. p. The solution of the present multiple harmonic model agrees with the Layzer–Goncharov model. Andrews MJ. Dynamics of two-dimensional Rayleigh–Taylor bubbles for ﬂuids with a ﬁnite density contrast. Shvarts D. Phys Rev Lett 2002. Mikaelian KO.8:2883–9. 1900. Scientiﬁc papers. Helmholtz and Taylor instability.

- Two-Step Loading in a Split Hopkinson Pressure Bar
- The Richtmeyer-Meshkov Instability
- The MHD Kelvin-Helmholtz Instability and the Roles of Weak and Oblique Fields in Planar Flows
- Kelvin-Helmholtz Instability in a Hele-Shaw Cell
- Viscous Potential Analysis of Kelvin-Helmholtz Instability in a Channel
- Kelvin-Helmholtz Instability of Finite Amplitude
- RT-Sharp
- RT-RM-Menon
- RT Dipierro
- RT Abarzhi
- RMI-Zhang
- RMI Zabuskey 1999
- RMI Holmes 2000
- RMI-Hahn
- RMI FronTier
- RMI Dimonte
- RMI Brouillette 2000
- RMI Anderson
- KH-MHD
- KH-Hinch
- KH-Funada
- KH-Drazin
- Crow Proctor
- Crow Gareth

- Potential Flow theory
- Karman Vortex berg
- Vortex Models
- APCWE
- The Formation of Vortex Rings in a Strongly Forced Round Jet
- J. R. Soc. Interface-2011-Jiang-rsif.2010
- 22 Basic Flow
- ABO-paper03-LCS.pdf
- Aerodynamic 1
- Potential Flow Tutorial_jan-feb 2013
- usermanual
- An Analytical Model of Wake Deflection Due to Shear Flow
- MD1
- Lecture Notes for Section 16-6
- scratching the serfec
- Lab3 Fortran Eserc
- HW2
- An Experimental Study on Vortex Motion_sent_conference
- HW2
- Seismin-3
- Cyclonic Separation
- Jet Turbine from Victor Schauberger
- Sizing a Supply/Return Register of Diffuser
- cggv_0000010923
- sdarticle (23)
- mod-PATH3DU_Manual_v1-0-0.pdf
- Schauberger Viktor Dynamic Hydro Power
- Ire Me
- 2013-10-06T16-37-14_r3dlog
- Meshes
- RT-Sohn

Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

We've moved you to where you read on your other device.

Get the full title to continue

Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.

scribd