Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Introduction
• Turbulence is a very complex phenomenon
• Dominated by a wide range of length and time
scales
• Turbulence is always 3D and unsteady
• An ideal model should introduce the minimum
amount of complexity while capturing the essence
of the relevant physics
• Often the required result necessitates a very simple
turbulence model
• Alternatively a seemingly simple quantity might
require comprehensive resolution of turbulence
• Knowledge, understanding and experience vital in
making a choice
Physical Description
• For small length scales and low velocities flows are laminar
• Viscous diffusion dominates, damping vorticity and
momentum
• At higher velocities and larger length scales the viscous
stresses are overcome by the fluid’s inertia, rapid fluctuations
are observed and the flow becomes essentially 3D and
unsteady
• Turbulent motion is characterized by swirling motions or
eddies over a wide range of length scales
• Time and length scales are represented by frequencies and
wavelengths obtained from a Fourier analysis of the turbulent-
flow time history
• Length scales range from the mean flow width down to the
smallest length scale of turbulence (much larger than
molecular length scales)
Physical Description -
continued
• Turbulence develops as an instability of laminar flows
• There is strong interaction between fluctuations of differing
wavelengths and directions
• Turbulent motion is spread across wavelengths primarily
through vortex stretching
• Energy is gained if vortex elements are orientated as to allow
the mean velocity gradients to stretch them
• Larger wavelengths interact the most strongly with the mean
flow
• Large-scale turbulence carries the most energy – responsible
for enhanced diffusivity
• Large eddies stretch smaller eddies, transferring or cascading
energy to them
• Finally the energy is dissipated by viscosity in the shortest
length scales
Physical Description -
continued
• Rate of dissipation set by long-wave motion,
shorter length scales simply adjust
• Turbulent flow is always dissipative
• Large eddies contain smaller eddies
• Large eddies move across the flow carrying smaller
eddies with them
• Large eddies have a long lifetime, can persist for
distances of up to 30 times the width of the flow
• As such, turbulence at any location depends on
history of flow, cannot be based on the local strain-
rate tensor as in laminar flow
• Enhances diffusivity of the flow
Physical Description - continued
Physical Description - continued
Physical Description - continued
Physical Description - continued
Physical Description - continued
Physical Description - continued
Physical Description - continued
Smallest Scales
• Cascade process involves transfer of turbulent
kinetic energy (per unit mass), k, from large to
small eddies
• Small scale eddies associated with a short time
scale Smallest scales in
turbulent flow
• Dissipation rate should be nearly equal to rate at
which energy is transferred to smaller scales
η ≡ (ν 3 / ε )
1
• Kolmogorov’s universal equilibrium theory: 4
motion of smallest scales depend on
– Rate of energy supplied by large eddies, ε = -dk/dt
τ ≡ (ν / ε )
1
– Kinematic viscosity, ν 2
• Kolmogorov scales: length, time and velocity
υ ≡ (νε )
1
• Turbulent boundary layer associated with an air
flow of 100 km/h: η ≈ 4.6 micron 4
λ = wavelength
κ = 2π/λ = wavenumber
Large eddies => small κ
Small eddies => large κ
SR - continued
• E(κ) is a function of
– l – length characteristic of larger eddies
– S – mean strain rate
– ν and ε - turbulence is dissipative
– κ - by definition
• Dimensional analysis and measurements confirm
that for high Re (Taylor):
3
2
⇒ k ∝ (εl )
k 2
ε∝ 3
l
• l – integral length scale
SR - continued
• Most turbulence models assume a large separation of scales (high
Re)
1
3 2
l k l
∝ Re , ReT ≡
4
η ν
T
E (κ ) = Cκ ε 2 3κ −5 3 ,
1 1
<< κ <<
l η
• CK – Kolmogorov constant
• Range of wavenumbers – inertial subrange
• Existence of inertial subrange confirmed experimentally
• Kolmogorov -5/3 law, central in DNS and LES
SR - continued
Understand this
image well since it's come
up twice!
Turbulent Boundary Layer
• Primarily an empirical investigation
• At wall: viscous shear dominates
• In outer region: turbulent shear
dominates
• Middle region: both viscous and
turbulent shear are important
TBL - continued
• Law of the Wall – 1930, Ludwig Prandtl deduced that close to the
wall, velocity is unaffected by shear layer thickness
• u* - friction velocity
• y+ - dimensionless distance from wall (Reynolds number based on
friction velocity and normal distance from wall)
τw ρyu ∗
yu ∗
∗
u = y+ = =
ρ µ ν
u = φ (ρ , µ , τ w , y )
u+ = y+
TBL - continued
• Velocity Defect Law – 1933, Theodore Von Kármán,
deviation in velocity in the outer layer is
– Independent of molecular viscosity
– Dependent on boundary layer thickness, δ and other properties
• U – free stream velocity
(U − u ) = φ (ρ , δ , τ w , y )
U −u y
= G
δ
∗
u
TBL - continued
• Logarithmic Overlap Layer – 1937, C.B Millikan
uses functional analysis to demonstrate that only a
logarithmic distribution could span middle region
• The equation holds for smooth surfaces in the
absence of any adverse pressure gradients
+
u =
1
κ
( )
ln y + + C
κ ≈ 0.41
C ≈ 5 .0
TBL - continued
• Composite
turbulent
velocity profile
TBL - continued
25
15
Shows that log-layer law
u+
5
linear/viscous sublayer (law of the wall)
u+ = y+
0
0.1 1 10 100 1000
y+
logarithmic overlap layer TBL - continued
2.5
Wall
• Water flow in pipe,
Overlap
demonstrating thickness
of laminar sub-layer
2
1.5
u (m/s)
d = 13.6 mm
uave= 2.7586 m/s
1 Re = 24700 Use these values to make calculations!
f Blasius = 0.00532
2
το = 20.24 N/m
0.5
2
u (m/s)
0
0 2 4 6 8 still looking at fairly small scale
y (mm)
TBL - continued
6
Wall • Laminar vs. turbulent
5
Overlap
Laminar
velocity profile for the
same flow rate
4
laminar velocity profile
u (m/s)
d = 13.6 mm
2
uave= 2.7586 m/s
Re = 24700
1 f Blasius = 0.00532
2
το = 20.24 N/m
turbulent velocity profile (log-overlap region)
0 steep velocity change!
0 2 4 6 8
y (mm)
TBL - continued
• For rough walls the law of the wall still holds
• C is a function of the average roughness height, ks
k ≡ + u * ks
C → 8.5 −
1
κ
( )
ln k s+ , k s+ >> 1
ν
s
+ y
1
u = ln + 8.5
κ ks
TBL - continued
• Defect layer lies between the log layer and edge of boundary
layer
• Velocity deviates noticeably from logarithmic behavior as free
stream is approached
• Law of the Wake:
2Π π y
u+ =
1
κ
( )
ln y + + C +
κ
sin 2
δ
2
• Spatial averaging
FV (t ) = lim ∫∫∫ f (x, t )dV
1
V →∞ V
V
• Ensemble averaging
N
FE (x, t ) = lim ∑ f (x, t )
1
n
N →∞ N
n =1
RA - continued
• Stationary turbulence
• “Unsteady” stationary
turbulence
• T1 << T2
∂u i ∂U i
≈ , ui ' << U i
∂t ∂t
∂U i
=0
∂xi
ρ
∂U i
∂t
+ρ
∂
∂x j
( )
U jU i + u j ' ui ' = −
∂P
+
∂
∂xi ∂x j
(2µSij )
ρ
∂U i
∂t
+ρ
∂
∂x j ∂xi ∂x j
(
(U jU i ) = − ∂P + ∂ 2µSij − ρ u j ' ui ' )
RA - continued
• Reynolds stress tensor is symmetric and introduces 6 new
variables -u_x u_y = -u_y u_x; -u_x u_z = -u_z u_x; -u_y u_z = -u_z u_y
• Continuity and N-S: 4 equations
• Pressure, velocity and Reynolds stresses: 10 variables
• τij – specific Reynolds stress tensor
1 2
( 1
)
k = u ' + v' + w' = ui ' ui ' RHS acts like dot product?
2
2 2
2 k
T ' ≡ 100
3 U e2
Algebraic Models
Boussinesq hypothesis used to
• Boussinesq eddy-viscosity approximation: model Reynolds stress term
u = U + u' '
1
µ = ρvthlmfp
2
Algebraic Models- continued
• Prandtl (1925) – mixing length hypothesis
where clumps of fluid (eddies) behave in a
manner analogous to gas molecules
• lmix ↔ lmfp, vmix ↔ vth
dU
vmix = constant ⋅ lmix
dU νT = l 2
mix
dy dy
∂ui ∂ui ∂p ∂ 2 ui
N (ui ) = ρ + ρu k + −µ
∂t ∂xk ∂xi ∂xk ∂xk
1 and 2 EM - continued
∂k ∂k ∂U i ∂ ∂k 1 1
+U j = τ ij −ε + ν − ui ' ui ' u j ' − p ' u j '
∂t ∂x j ∂x j ∂x j ∂x j 2 ρ
Transport equation?
Derive!
1 1 ν T ∂k
ui ' ui ' u j ' + p ' u j ' = −
2 ρ σ k ∂x j
1 and 2 EM - continued
∂k ∂k 2 ∂U i ∂ ν T ∂k
+U j = 2ν T Sij − kδ ij −ε + ν +
∂t ∂x j 3 ∂x j ∂x j σ k ∂x j
3
2
k
ε∝
l
3
2
k
ε = CD
l
2 Equations Models
• The choice of the 2nd turbulence transport equation
is nearly unlimited
• Length and velocity scales are constructed based
on dimensional grounds
• No guarantee that dimensional analysis would
correctly mirror the physics of turbulence
• There is little reason to believe that 2-equation
models would be more accurate or physically
realistic than algebraic or 1-equation models
• A given is that they are numerically more difficult to
implement
2 EM: k-ε Model
• Most popular model
• Earliest work: Chou (1945), Davidov (1961) and Harlow &
Nakayama (1968)
• Jones and Launder (1972) – central paper Standard k-εε model
• Launder and Sharma (1974) – closure coefficients
• The exact equation for dissipation rate is formed by
∂ui ' ∂
2ν [N (ui )] = 0
∂x j ∂x j
• Results in a host of unknown terms that even defy
measurement
• Drastic surgery is performed to approximate these terms
based on dubious concepts and ideas
2 EM: k-ε Model -continued
ν T= Cµ k 2 / ε
∂k ∂k 2 ∂U ∂ ν T ∂k
+U j = 2ν T S ij − kδ ij i − ε + ν +
∂t ∂x j 3 ∂x j ∂x j σ k ∂x j
∂ε ∂ε ε 2 ∂U i ε2 ∂ ν T ∂ε
+U j = Cε 1 2ν T Sij − kδ ij − Cε 2 + ν +
∂t ∂x j k 3 ∂x j k ∂x j σ ε ∂x j