Publication 97/2

An Introduction to Turbulence
Models
Lars Davidson, http://www.tfd.chalmers.se/˜lada
Department of Thermo and Fluid Dynamics
CHALMERS UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY
G¨ oteborg, Sweden, February 24, 2011
CONTENTS 2
Contents
Nomenclature 3
1 Turbulence 5
1.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.2 Turbulent Scales . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.3 Vorticity/Velocity Gradient Interaction . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1.4 Energy spectrum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2 Turbulence Models 12
2.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.2 Boussinesq Assumption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.3 Algebraic Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.4 Equations for Kinetic Energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.4.1 The Exact k Equation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.4.2 The Equation for 1/2(
¯
U
i
¯
U
i
) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
2.5 The Modelled k Equation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
2.6 One Equation Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
3 Two-Equation Turbulence Models 22
3.1 The Modelled ε Equation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
3.2 Wall Functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
3.3 The k −ε Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
3.4 The k −ω Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
3.5 The k −τ Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
4 Low-Re Number Turbulence Models 28
4.1 Low-Re k −ε Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
4.2 The Launder-Sharma Low-Re k −ε Models . . . . . . . . . . 32
4.3 Boundary Condition for ε and ˜ ε . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
4.4 The Two-Layer k −ε Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
4.5 The low-Re k −ω Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
4.5.1 The low-Re k −ω Model of Peng et al. . . . . . . . . . 36
4.5.2 The low-Re k −ω Model of Bredberg et al. . . . . . . . 36
5 Reynolds Stress Models 38
5.1 Reynolds Stress Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
5.2 Reynolds Stress Models vs. Eddy Viscosity Models . . . . . . 40
5.3 Curvature Effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
5.4 Acceleration and Retardation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
2
Nomenclature 3
Nomenclature
Latin Symbols
c
1
, c
2
, c
s
constants in the Reynolds stress model
c

1
, c

2
constants in the Reynolds stress model
c
ε1
, c
ε2
constants in the modelled ε equation
c
ω1
, c
ω2
constants in the modelled ω equation
c
µ
constant in turbulence model
E energy (see Eq. 1.8); constant in wall functions (see Eq. 3.4)
f damping function in pressure strain tensor
k turbulent kinetic energy (≡
1
2
u
i
u
i
)
U instantaneous (or laminar) velocity in x-direction
U
i
instantaneous (or laminar) velocity in x
i
-direction
¯
U time-averaged velocity in x-direction
¯
U
i
time-averaged velocity in x
i
-direction
uv, uw shear stresses
u fluctuating velocity in x-direction
u
2
normal stress in the x-direction
u
i
fluctuating velocity in x
i
-direction
u
i
u
j
Reynolds stress tensor
V instantaneous (or laminar) velocity in y-direction
¯
V time-averaged velocity in y-direction
v fluctuating (or laminar) velocity in y-direction
v
2
normal stress in the y-direction
vw shear stress
W instantaneous (or laminar) velocity in z-direction
¯
W time-averaged velocity in z-direction
w fluctuating velocity in z-direction
w
2
normal stress in the z-direction
Greek Symbols
δ boundary layer thickness; half channel height
ε dissipation
κ wave number; von Karman constant (= 0.41)
µ dynamic viscosity
µ
t
dynamic turbulent viscosity
ν kinematic viscosity
ν
t
kinematic turbulent viscosity

i
instantaneous (or laminar) vorticity component in x
i
-direction
3
Nomenclature 4
¯

i
time-averaged vorticity component in x
i
-direction
ω specific dissipation (∝ ε/k)
ω
i
fluctuating vorticity component in x
i
-direction
σ
Φ
turbulent Prandtl number for variable Φ
τ
lam
laminar shear stress
τ
tot
total shear stress
τ
turb
turbulent shear stress
Subscript
C centerline
w wall
4
5
1 Turbulence
1.1 Introduction
Almost all fluid flow which we encounter in daily life is turbulent. Typical
examples are flow around (as well as in) cars, aeroplanes and buildings.
The boundary layers and the wakes around and after bluff bodies such as
cars, aeroplanes and buildings are turbulent. Also the flowand combustion
in engines, both in piston engines and gas turbines and combustors, are
highly turbulent. Air movements in rooms are also turbulent, at least along
the walls where wall-jets are formed. Hence, when we compute fluid flow
it will most likely be turbulent.
In turbulent flow we usually divide the variables in one time-averaged
part
¯
U, which is independent of time (when the mean flow is steady), and
one fluctuating part u so that U =
¯
U + u.
There is no definition on turbulent flow, but it has a number of charac-
teristic features (see Tennekes & Lumley [43]) such as:
I. Irregularity. Turbulent flow is irregular, random and chaotic. The
flow consists of a spectrum of different scales (eddy sizes) where largest
eddies are of the order of the flow geometry (i.e. boundary layer thickness,
jet width, etc). At the other end of the spectra we have the smallest ed-
dies which are by viscous forces (stresses) dissipated into internal energy.
Even though turbulence is chaotic it is deterministic and is described by
the Navier-Stokes equations.
II. Diffusivity. In turbulent flow the diffusivity increases. This means
that the spreading rate of boundary layers, jets, etc. increases as the flow
becomes turbulent. The turbulence increases the exchange of momentum
in e.g. boundary layers and reduces or delays thereby separation at bluff
bodies such as cylinders, airfoils and cars. The increased diffusivity also
increases the resistance (wall friction) in internal flows such as in channels
and pipes.
III. Large Reynolds Numbers. Turbulent flowoccurs at high Reynolds
number. For example, the transition to turbulent flow in pipes occurs that
Re
D
≃ 2300, and in boundary layers at Re
x
≃ 100000.
IV. Three-Dimensional. Turbulent flow is always three-dimensional.
However, when the equations are time averaged we can treat the flow as
two-dimensional.
V. Dissipation. Turbulent flow is dissipative, which means that ki-
netic energy in the small (dissipative) eddies are transformed into internal
energy. The small eddies receive the kinetic energy from slightly larger ed-
dies. The slightly larger eddies receive their energy fromeven larger eddies
and so on. The largest eddies extract their energy from the mean flow. This
process of transferred energy from the largest turbulent scales (eddies) to
the smallest is called cascade process.
5
1.2 Turbulent Scales 6
VI. Continuum. Even though we have small turbulent scales in the
flow they are much larger than the molecular scale and we can treat the
flow as a continuum.
1.2 Turbulent Scales
As mentioned above there are a wide range of scales in turbulent flow. The
larger scales are of the order of the flow geometry, for example the bound-
ary layer thickness, with length scale ℓ and velocity scale U. These scales
extract kinetic energy from the mean flow which has a time scale compara-
ble to the large scales, i.e.

¯
U
∂y
= O(T
−1
) = O(U/ℓ)
The kinetic energy of the large scales is lost to slightly smaller scales with
which the large scales interact. Through the cascade process the kinetic en-
ergy is in this way transferred from the largest scale to smaller scales. At
the smallest scales the frictional forces (viscous stresses) become too large
and the kinetic energy is transformed (dissipated) into internal energy. The
dissipation is denoted by ε which is energy per unit time and unit mass
(ε = [m
2
/s
3
]). The dissipation is proportional to the kinematic viscosity ν
times the fluctuating velocity gradient up to the power of two (see Sec-
tion 2.4.1). The friction forces exist of course at all scales, but they are
larger the smaller the eddies. Thus it is not quite true that eddies which
receive their kinetic energy from slightly larger scales give away all of that
the slightly smaller scales but a small fraction is dissipated. However it is
assumed that most of the energy (say 90 %) that goes into the large scales
is finally dissipated at the smallest (dissipative) scales.
The smallest scales where dissipation occurs are called the Kolmogo-
rov scales: the velocity scale υ, the length scale η and the time scale τ. We
assume that these scales are determined by viscosity ν and dissipation ε.
Since the kinetic energy is destroyed by viscous forces it is natural to as-
sume that viscosity plays a part in determining these scales; the larger vis-
cosity, the larger scales. The amount of energy that is to be dissipated is
ε. The more energy that is to be transformed from kinetic energy to inter-
nal energy, the larger the velocity gradients must be. Having assumed that
the dissipative scales are determined by viscosity and dissipation, we can
express υ, η and τ in ν and ε using dimensional analysis. We write
υ = ν
a
ε
b
[m/s] = [m
2
/s] [m
2
/s
3
]
(1.1)
where below each variable its dimensions are given. The dimensions of the
left-hand and the right-hand side must be the same. We get two equations,
6
1.3 Vorticity/Velocity Gradient Interaction 7
one for meters [m]
1 = 2a + 2b, (1.2)
and one for seconds [s]
−1 = −a −3b, (1.3)
which gives a = b = 1/4. In the same way we obtain the expressions for η
and τ so that
υ = (νε)
1/4
, η =

ν
3
ε

1/4
, τ =

ν
ε

1/2
(1.4)
1.3 Vorticity/Velocity Gradient Interaction
The interaction between vorticity and velocity gradients is an essential in-
gredient to create and maintain turbulence. Disturbances are amplified
– the actual process depending on type of flow – and these disturbances,
which still are laminar and organized and well defined in terms of phys-
ical orientation and frequency are turned into chaotic, three-dimensional,
random fluctuations, i.e. turbulent flow by interaction between the vor-
ticity vector and the velocity gradients. Two idealized phenomena in this
interaction process can be identified: vortex stretching and vortex tilting.
In order to gain some insight in vortex shedding we will study an ide-
alized, inviscid (viscosity equals to zero) case. The equation for instanta-
neous vorticity (Ω
i
=
¯

i
+ ω
i
) reads [43, 33, 46]
U
j

i,j
= Ω
j
U
i,j
+ νΩ
i,jj

i
= ǫ
ijk
U
k,j
(1.5)
where ǫ
ijk
is the Levi-Civita tensor (it is +1 if i, j k are in cyclic order, −1 if
i, j k are in anti-cyclic order, and 0 if any two of i, j k are equal), and where
(.)
,j
denotes derivation with respect to x
j
. We see that this equation is not
an ordinary convection-diffusion equation but is has an additional term on
the right-hand side which represents amplification and rotation/tilting of
the vorticity lines. If we write it term-by-term it reads

1
U
1,1
+ Ω
2
U
1,2
+ Ω
3
U
1,3
(1.6)

1
U
2,1
+ Ω
2
U
2,2
+ Ω
3
U
2,3

1
U
3,1
+ Ω
2
U
3,2
+ Ω
3
U
3,3
The diagonal terms in this matrix represent vortex stretching. Imagine a Vortex
stretching slender, cylindrical fluid element which vorticity Ω. We introduce a cylin-
drical coordinate system with the x
1
-axis as the cylinder axis and x
2
as the
7
1.3 Vorticity/Velocity Gradient Interaction 8

1

1
Figure 1.1: Vortex stretching.
radial coordinate (see Fig. 1.1) so that Ω = (Ω
1
, 0, 0). A positive U
1,1
will
stretch the cylinder. From the continuity equation
U
1,1
+
1
r
(rU
2
)
,2
= 0
we find that the radial derivative of the radial velocity U
2
must be negative,
i.e. the radius of the cylinder will decrease. We have neglected the viscosity
since viscous diffusion at high Reynolds number is much smaller than the
turbulent one and since viscous dissipation occurs at small scales (see p. 6).
Thus there are no viscous stresses acting on the cylindrical fluid element
surface which means that the rotation momentum
r
2
Ω (1.7)
remains constant as the radius of the fluid element decreases (note that also
the circulation Γ ∝ Ωr
2
is constant). Equation 1.7 shows that the vortic-
ity increases as the radius decreases. We see that a stretching/compressing
will decrease/increase the radius of a slender fluid element and increase/decrease
its vorticity component aligned with the element. This process will affect
the vorticity components in the other two coordinate directions.
The off-diagonal terms in Eq. 1.6 represent vortex tilting. Again, take a Vortex
tilting slender fluid element with its axis aligned with the x
2
axis, Fig. 1.2. The ve-
locity gradient U
1,2
will tilt the fluid element so that it rotates in clock-wise
direction. The second term Ω
2
U
1,2
in line one in Eq. 1.6 gives a contribution
to Ω
1
.
Vortex stretching and vortex tilting thus qualitatively explains how in-
teraction between vorticity and velocity gradient create vorticity in all three
coordinate directions from a disturbance which initially was well defined
in one coordinate direction. Once this process has started it continues, be-
cause vorticity generated by vortex stretching and vortex tilting interacts
with the velocity field and creates further vorticity and so on. The vortic-
ity and velocity field becomes chaotic and random: turbulence has been
created. The turbulence is also maintained by these processes.
From the discussion above we can now understand why turbulence al-
ways must be three-dimensional (Item IV on p. 5). If the instantaneous
flow is two-dimensional we find that all interaction terms between vortic-
ity and velocity gradients in Eq. 1.6 vanish. For example if U
3
≡ 0 and all
derivatives with respect to x
3
are zero. If U
3
≡ 0 the third line in Eq. 1.6
vanishes, and if U
i,3
≡ 0 the third column in Eq. 1.6 disappears. Finally, the
8
1.4 Energy spectrum 9

2

2
U
1
(x
2
)
Figure 1.2: Vortex tilting.
remaining terms in Eq. 1.6 will also be zero since

1
= U
3,2
−U
2,3
≡ 0

2
= U
1,3
−U
3,1
≡ 0.
The interaction between vorticity and velocity gradients will, on av-
erage, create smaller and smaller scales. Whereas the large scales which
interact with the mean flow have an orientation imposed by the mean flow
the small scales will not remember the structure and orientation of the large
scales. Thus the small scales will be isotropic, i.e independent of direction.
1.4 Energy spectrum
The turbulent scales are distributed over a range of scales which extends
from the largest scales which interact with the mean flow to the smallest
scales where dissipation occurs. In wave number space the energy of ed-
dies from κ to κ + dκ can be expressed as
E(κ)dκ (1.8)
where Eq. 1.8 expresses the contribution from the scales with wave number
between κ and κ + dκ to the turbulent kinetic energy k. The dimension
of wave number is one over length; thus we can think of wave number
as proportional to the inverse of an eddy’s radius, i.e κ ∝ 1/r. The total
turbulent kinetic energy is obtained by integrating over the whole wave
number space i.e.
k =


0
E(κ)dκ (1.9)
9
1.4 Energy spectrum 10
I
I
I
III
κ
E(κ)
Figure 1.3: Spectrum for k. I: Range for the large, energy containing eddies.
II: the inertial subrange. III: Range for small, isotropic scales.
The kinetic energy is the sum of the kinetic energy of the three fluctuat-
ing velocity components, i.e.
k =
1
2

u
2
+ v
2
+ w
2

=
1
2
u
i
u
i
(1.10)
The spectrumof E is shown in Fig. 1.3. We find region I, II and III which
correspond to:
I. In the region we have the large eddies which carry most of the energy.
These eddies interact with the mean flow and extract energy from the
mean flow. Their energy is past on to slightly smaller scales. The
eddies’ velocity and length scales are U and ℓ, respectively.
III. Dissipation range. The eddies are small and isotropic and it is here
that the dissipation occurs. The scales of the eddies are described by
the Kolmogorov scales (see Eq. 1.4)
II. Inertial subrange. The existence of this region requires that the Reynolds
number is high (fully turbulent flow). The eddies in this region repre-
sent the mid-region. This region is a “transport” region in the cascade
process. Energy per time unit (ε) is coming from the large eddies at
the lower part of this range and is given off to the dissipation range
at the higher part. The eddies in this region are independent of both
the large, energy containing eddies and the eddies in the dissipation
range. One can argue that the eddies in this region should be char-
acterized by the flow of energy (ε) and the size of the eddies 1/κ.
Dimensional reasoning gives
E(κ) = const. ε
2
3
κ

5
3
(1.11)
This is a very important law (Kolmogorov spectrum law or the −5/3
law) which states that, if the flow is fully turbulent (high Reynolds
10
1.4 Energy spectrum 11
number), the energy spectra should exhibit a −5/3-decay. This of-
ten used in experiment and Large Eddy Simulations (LES) and Direct
Numerical Simulations (DNS) to verify that the flow is fully turbu-
lent.
As explained on p. 6 (cascade process) the energy dissipated at the small
scales can be estimated using the large scales U and ℓ. The energy at the
large scales lose their energy during a time proportional to ℓ/U, which gives
ε = O

U
2
ℓ/U

= O

U
3

(1.12)
11
12
2 Turbulence Models
2.1 Introduction
When the flow is turbulent it is preferable to decompose the instantaneous
variables (for example velocity components and pressure) into a mean value
and a fluctuating value, i.e.
U
i
=
¯
U
i
+ u
i
P =
¯
P + p.
(2.1)
One reason why we decompose the variables is that when we measure flow
quantities we are usually interested in the mean values rather that the time
histories. Another reason is that when we want to solve the Navier-Stokes
equation numerically it would require a very fine grid to resolve all tur-
bulent scales and it would also require a fine resolution in time (turbulent
flow is always unsteady).
The continuity equation and the Navier-Stokes equation read
∂ρ
∂t
+ (ρU
i
)
,i
= 0 (2.2)
∂ρU
i
∂t
+ (ρU
i
U
j
)
,j
= −P
,i
+
¸
µ

U
i,j
+ U
j,i

2
3
δ
ij
U
k,k

,j
(2.3)
where (.)
,j
denotes derivation with respect to x
j
. Since we are dealing with
incompressible flow(i.e lowMach number) the dilatation termon the right-
hand side of Eq. 2.3 is neglected so that
∂ρU
i
∂t
+ (ρU
i
U
j
)
,j
= −P
,i
+ [µ(U
i,j
+ U
j,i
)]
,j
. (2.4)
Note that we here use the term“incompressible” in the sense that density is
independent of pressure (∂P/∂ρ = 0) , but it does not mean that density is
constant; it can be dependent on for example temperature or concentration.
Inserting Eq. 2.1 into the continuity equation (2.2) and the Navier-Stokes
equation (2.4) we obtain the time averaged continuity equation and Navier-
Stokes equation
∂ρ
∂t
+ (ρ
¯
U
i
)
,i
= 0 (2.5)
∂ρ
¯
U
i
∂t
+

ρ
¯
U
i
¯
U
j

,j
= −
¯
P
,i
+

µ(
¯
U
i,j
+
¯
U
j,i
) −ρu
i
u
j

,j
. (2.6)
A new term u
i
u
j
appears on the right-hand side of Eq. 2.6 which is
called the Reynolds stress tensor. The tensor is symmetric (for example u
1
u
2
=
u
2
u
1
). It represents correlations between fluctuating velocities. It is an ad-
ditional stress term due to turbulence (fluctuating velocities) and it is un-
known. We need a model for u
i
u
j
to close the equation system in Eq. 2.6.
12
2.1 Introduction 13
y
τ
τ
lam
τ
turb
τ
tot
y
+
≃ 10
Figure 2.1: Shear stress near a wall.
This is called the closure problem: the number of unknowns (ten: three veloc- closure
problem ity components, pressure, six stresses) is larger than the number of equa-
tions (four: the continuity equation and three components of the Navier-
Stokes equations).
For steady, two-dimensional boundary-layer type of flow (i.e. bound-
ary layers along a flat plate, channel flow, pipe flow, jet and wake flow, etc.)
where
¯
V ≪
¯
U,

∂x


∂y
(2.7)
Eq. 2.6 reads
∂ρ
¯
U
¯
U
∂x
+
∂ρ
¯
V
¯
U
∂y
= −

¯
P
∂x
+

∂y
¸
µ

¯
U
∂y
−ρuv

. .. .
τtot
. (2.8)
x = x
1
denotes streamwise coordinate, and y = x
2
coordinate normal to
the flow. Often the pressure gradient ∂
¯
P/∂x is zero.
To the viscous shear stress µ∂
¯
U/∂y on the right-hand side of Eq. 2.8 shear
stress appears an additional turbulent one, a turbulent shear stress. The total shear
stress is thus
τ
tot
= µ

¯
U
∂y
−ρuv
In the wall region (the viscous sublayer, the buffert layer and the logarith-
mic layer) the total shear stress is approximately constant and equal to the
wall shear stress τ
w
, see Fig. 2.1. Note that the total shear stress is constant
only close to the wall; further away from the wall it decreases (in fully de-
veloped channel flow it decreases linearly by the distance form the wall).
At the wall the turbulent shear stress vanishes as u = v = 0, and the viscous
shear stress attains its wall-stress value τ
w
= ρu
2

. As we go away from the
wall the viscous stress decreases and turbulent one increases and at y
+
≃ 10
they are approximately equal. In the logarithmic layer the viscous stress is
negligible compared to the turbulent stress.
In boundary-layer type of flow the turbulent shear stress and the ve-
locity gradient ∂
¯
U/∂y have nearly always opposite sign (for a wall jet this
13
2.1 Introduction 14
x
y
v < 0 v > 0
y
1
y
2
U(y)
Figure 2.2: Sign of the turbulent shear stress −ρuv in a boundary layer.
is not the case close to the wall). To get a physical picture of this let us
study the flow in a boundary layer, see Fig. 2.2. A fluid particle is moving
downwards (particle drawn with solid line) from y
2
to y
1
with (the turbu-
lent fluctuating) velocity v. At its new location the U velocity is in average
smaller than at its old, i.e.
¯
U(y
1
) <
¯
U(y
2
). This means that when the par-
ticle at y
2
(which has streamwise velocity U(y
2
)) comes down to y
1
(where
the streamwise velocity is U(y
1
)) is has an excess of streamwise velocity
compared to its new environment at y
1
. Thus the streamwise fluctuation is
positive, i.e. u > 0 and the correlation between u and v is negative (uv < 0).
If we look at the other particle (dashed line in Fig. 2.2) we reach the
same conclusion. The particle is moving upwards (v > 0), and it is bringing
a deficit in U so that u < 0. Thus, again, uv < 0. If we study this flow for
a long time and average over time we get uv < 0. If we change the sign
of the velocity gradient so that ∂
¯
U/∂y < 0 we will find that the sign of uv
also changes.
Above we have used physical reasoning to show the the signs of uv
and ∂
¯
U/∂y are opposite. This can also be found by looking at the produc-
tion term in the transport equation of the Reynolds stresses (see Section 5).
In cases where the shear stress and the velocity gradient have the same
sign (for example, in a wall jet) this means that there are other terms in the
transport equation which are more important than the production term.
There are different levels of approximations involved when closing the
equation system in Eq. 2.6.
I. Algebraic models. An algebraic equation is used to compute a tur-
bulent viscosity, often called eddy viscosity. The Reynolds stress ten-
sor is then computedusing an assumption which relates the Reynolds
stress tensor to the velocity gradients and the turbulent viscosity. This
assumption is called the Boussinesq assumption. Models which are
based on a turbulent (eddy) viscosity are called eddy viscosity mod-
14
2.2 Boussinesq Assumption 15
els.
II. One-equation models. In these models a transport equation is solved
for a turbulent quantity (usually the turbulent kinetic energy) and
a second turbulent quantity (usually a turbulent length scale) is ob-
tained from an algebraic expression. The turbulent viscosity is calcu-
lated from Boussinesq assumption.
III. Two-equation models. These models fall into the class of eddy vis-
cosity models. Two transport equations are derived which describe
transport of two scalars, for example the turbulent kinetic energy k
and its dissipation ε. The Reynolds stress tensor is then computed
using an assumption which relates the Reynolds stress tensor to the
velocity gradients and an eddy viscosity. The latter is obtained from
the two transported scalars.
IV. Reynolds stress models. Here a transport equation is derived for
the Reynolds tensor u
i
u
j
. One transport equation has to be added for
determining the length scale of the turbulence. Usually an equation
for the dissipation ε is used.
Above the different types of turbulence models have been listed in in-
creasing order of complexity, ability to model the turbulence, and cost in
terms of computational work (CPU time).
2.2 Boussinesq Assumption
In eddy viscosity turbulence models the Reynolds stresses are linked to
the velocity gradients via the turbulent viscosity: this relation is called the
Boussinesq assumption, where the Reynolds stress tensor in the time aver-
aged Navier-Stokes equation is replaced by the turbulent viscosity multi-
plied by the velocity gradients. To show this we introduce this assumption
for the diffusion term at the right-hand side of Eq. 2.6 and make an identi-
fication

µ(
¯
U
i,j
+
¯
U
j,i
) −ρu
i
u
j

,j
=

(µ + µ
t
)(
¯
U
i,j
+
¯
U
j,i
)

,j
which gives
ρu
i
u
j
= −µ
t
(
¯
U
i,j
+
¯
U
j,i
). (2.9)
If we in Eq. 2.9 do a contraction (i.e. setting indices i = j) the right-hand
side gives
u
i
u
i
≡ 2k
where k is the turbulent kinetic energy (see Eq. 1.10). On the other hand
the continuity equation (Eq. 2.5) gives that the right-hand side of Eq. 2.9
15
2.3 Algebraic Models 16
is equal to zero. In order to make Eq. 2.9 valid upon contraction we add
2/3ρδ
ij
k to the left-hand side of Eq. 2.9 so that
ρu
i
u
j
= −µ
t
(
¯
U
i,j
+
¯
U
j,i
) +
2
3
δ
ij
ρk. (2.10)
Note that contraction of δ
ij
gives
δ
ii
= δ
11
+ δ
22
+ δ
33
= 1 + 1 + 1 = 3
2.3 Algebraic Models
In eddy viscosity models we want an expression for the turbulent viscosity
µ
t
= ρν
t
. The dimension of ν
t
is [m
2
/s] (same as ν). A turbulent velocity Eddy
viscosity
model
scale multiplied with a turbulent length scale gives the correct dimension,
i.e.
ν
t
∝ Uℓ (2.11)
Above we have used U and ℓ which are characteristic for the large turbulent
scales. This is reasonable, because it is these scales which are responsible
for most of the transport by turbulent diffusion.
In an algebraic turbulence model the velocity gradient is used as a ve-
locity scale and some physical length is used as the length scale. In bound-
ary layer-type of flow (see Eq. 2.7) we obtain
ν
t
= ℓ
2
mix

∂U
∂y

(2.12)
where y is the coordinate normal to the wall, and where ℓ
mix
is the mixing
length, and the model is called the mixing length model. It is an old model
and is hardly used any more. One problem with the model is that ℓ
mix
is
unknown and must be determined.
More modern algebraic models are the Baldwin-Lomax model [2] and
the Cebeci-Smith [6] model which are frequently used in aerodynamics
when computing the flow around airfoils, aeroplanes, etc. For a presen-
tation and discussion of algebraic turbulence models the interested reader
is referred to Wilcox [48].
2.4 Equations for Kinetic Energy
2.4.1 The Exact k Equation
The equation for turbulent kinetic energy k =
1
2
u
i
u
i
is derived from the
Navier-Stokes equation which reads assuming steady, incompressible, con-
stant viscosity (cf. Eq. 2.4)
(ρU
i
U
j
)
,j
= −P
,i
+ µU
i,jj
. (2.13)
16
2.4 Equations for Kinetic Energy 17
The time averaged Navier-Stokes equation reads (cf. Eq. 2.6)

¯
U
i
¯
U
j
)
,j
= −
¯
P
,i
+ µ
¯
U
i,jj
−ρ(u
i
u
j
)
,j
(2.14)
Subtract Eq. 2.14 from Eq. 2.13, multiply by u
i
and time average and we
obtain

ρU
i
U
j
−ρ
¯
U
i
¯
U
j

,j
u
i
=

P −
¯
P

,i
u
i
+ µ

U
i

¯
U
i

,jj
u
i
+ ρ(u
i
u
j
)
,j
u
i
(2.15)
The left-hand side can be rewritten as
ρ

(
¯
U
i
+ u
i
)(
¯
U
j
+ u
j
) −
¯
U
i
¯
U
j

,j
u
i
= ρ

¯
U
i
u
j
+ u
i
¯
U
j
+ u
i
u
j

,j
u
i
. (2.16)
Using the continuity equation (ρu
j
)
,j
= 0, the first term is rewritten as

ρ
¯
U
i
u
j

,j
u
i
= ρu
i
u
j
¯
U
i,j
. (2.17)
We obtain the second term (using (ρ
¯
U
j
)
,j
= 0) from

ρ
¯
U
j
k

,j
=
¯
U
j
ρ
¸
1
2
u
i
u
i

,j
=
1
2
ρ
¯
U
j
{u
i
u
i,j
+ u
i
u
i,j
} = u
i

ρ
¯
U
j
u
i

,j
(2.18)
The third term in Eq. 2.16 can be written as (using the same technique as in
Eq. 2.18)
1
2
(ρu
j
u
i
u
i
)
,j
. (2.19)
The first term on the right-hand side of Eq. 2.15 has the form
−p
,i
u
i
= −(pu
i
)
,i
(2.20)
The second term on the right-hand side of Eq. 2.15 reads
µu
i,jj
u
i
= µ

(u
i,j
u
i
)
,j
−u
i,j
u
i,j
¸
(2.21)
For the first term we use the same trick as in Eq. 2.18 so that
µ(u
i,j
u
i
)
,j
= µ
1
2
(u
i
u
i
)
,jj
= µk
,jj
(2.22)
The last term on the right-hand side of Eq. 2.15 is zero. Now we can
assemble the transport equation for the turbulent kinetic energy. Equa-
tions 2.17, 2.18, 2.20, 2.21,2.22 give

¯
U
j
k)
,j
. .. .
I
= −ρu
i
u
j
¯
U
i,j
. .. .
II

¸
u
j
p +
1
2
ρu
j
u
i
u
i
−µk
,j

,j
. .. .
III
−µu
i,j
u
i,j
. .. .
IV
(2.23)
The terms in Eq. 2.23 have the following meaning.
17
2.4 Equations for Kinetic Energy 18
0 5 10 15 20
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
x
+
2
Figure 2.3: Channel flow at Re
τ
= 2000. Comparison of mean and fluc-
tuating dissipation terms. Both terms are normalized by u
4
τ
/ν. DNS
data [21, 20]. Solid line: ν(∂
¯
V
1
/∂x
2
)
2
; dashed line: ε.
I. Convection.
II. Production. The large turbulent scales extract energy fromthe mean
flow. This term (including the minus sign) is almost always positive.
III. The two first terms represent turbulent diffusion by pressure-velocity
fluctuations, and velocity fluctuations, respectively. The last term is
viscous diffusion.
IV. Dissipation. This term is responsible for transformation of kinetic
energy at small scales to internal energy. The term (including the
minus sign) is always negative.
In boundary-layer flow the exact k equation read
∂ρ
¯
Uk
∂x
+
∂ρ
¯
V k
∂y
= −ρuv

¯
U
∂y


∂y
¸
pv +
1
2
ρvu
i
u
i
−µ
∂k
∂y

−µu
i,j
u
i,j
(2.24)
Note that the dissipation includes all derivatives. This is because the dis-
sipation term is at its largest for small, isotropic scales where the usual
boundary-layer approximation that ∂u
i
/∂x ≪∂u
i
/∂y is not valid.
2.4.2 The Equation for 1/2(
¯
U
i
¯
U
i
)
The equation for 1/2(
¯
U
i
¯
U
i
) is derived in the same way as that for 1/2u

i
u

i
.
Assume steady, incompressible flow with constant viscosity and multiply
the time-averaged Navier-Stokes equations (Eq. 2.14) so that
¯
U
i

¯
U
i
¯
U
j
)
,j
= −
¯
U
i
¯
P
,i
+ µ
¯
U
i
¯
U
i,jj

¯
U
i
ρ(u
i
u
j
)
,j
. (2.25)
The term on the left-hand side can be rewritten as

¯
U
i
¯
U
i
¯
U
j
)
,j
−ρ
¯
U
i
¯
U
j
¯
U
i,j
= ρ
¯
U
j
(
¯
U
i
¯
U
i
)
,j

1
2
ρ
¯
U
j
(
¯
U
i
¯
U
i
)
,j
=
1
2
ρ
¯
U
j
(
¯
U
i
¯
U
i
)
,j
= (ρ
¯
U
j
¯
KK)
,j
(2.26)
18
2.5 The Modelled k Equation 19
The first term on the right-hand side of Eq. 2.25 can be written as
−U
i
P
,i
= −(U
i
P)
,i
. (2.27)
The viscous term in Eq. 2.25 is rewritten in the same way as the viscous
term in Section 2.4.1, see Eqs. 2.21 and 2.22, i.e.
µ
¯
U
i
¯
U
i,jj
= µ
¯
K
,jj
−µ
¯
U
i,j
¯
U
i,j
. (2.28)
Now we can assemble the transport equation for
¯
K by inserting Eqs. 2.26,
2.27 and 2.28 into Eq. 2.25

¯
U
j
¯
K)
,j
= µ
¯
K
,jj
−(
¯
U
i
¯
P)
,i
−µ
¯
U
i,j
¯
U
i,j

¯
U
i
ρ(u
i
u
j
)
,j
, (2.29)
where
¯
K = 1/2(
¯
U
i
¯
U
i
). The last term is rewritten as

¯
U
i
ρ(u
i
u
j
)
,j
= −(
¯
U
i
ρu
i
u
j
)
,j
+ ρ(u
i
u
j
)
¯
U
i,j
. (2.30)
Inserted in Eq. 2.29 gives

¯
U
j
¯
K)
,j
= µ
¯
K
,jj
−(
¯
U
i
¯
P)
,i
−µ
¯
U
i,j
¯
U
i,j
−(
¯
U
i
ρu
i
u
j
)
,j
+ ρu
i
u
j
¯
U
i,j
.
(2.31)
On the left-hand side we have the usual convective term. On the right-hand
side we find: transport by viscous diffusion, transport by pressure-velocity
interaction, viscous dissipation, transport by velocity-stress interaction and
loss of energy to the fluctuating velocity field, i.e. to k. Note that the last
term in Eq. 2.31 is the same as the last term in Eq. 2.23 but with opposite
sign: here we clearly can see that the main source term in the k equation
(the production term) appears as a sink term in the
¯
K equation.
In the
¯
K equation the dissipation term and the negative production
term (representing loss of kinetic energy to the k field) read
−µ
¯
U
i,j
¯
U
i,j
+ ρu
i
u
j
¯
U
i,j
, (2.32)
and in the k equation the production and the dissipation terms read
−ρu
i
u
j
¯
U
i,j
−µu
i,j
u
i,j
. (2.33)
The gradient of the time-averaged velocity field,
¯
U
i
, is much smoother
than that of the fluctuating velocity field, u

i
. Hence the dissipation by the
fluctuations, ε, is much larger than the dissipation by the mean flow (left
side of Eq. 2.32). This is clearly seen in Fig. 2.3. The mean dissipation,
ν(∂
¯
U
1
/∂x
2
)
2
, is largest at the wall where it takes the value ν = 1/2000
(normalized by u
4
τ
/ν).
19
2.5 The Modelled k Equation 20
2.5 The Modelled k Equation
In Eq. 2.23 a number of terms are unknown, namely the production term,
the turbulent diffusion term and the dissipation term.
In the production term it is the stress tensor which is unknown. Since production
term we have an expression for this which is used in the Navier-Stokes equation
we use the same expression in the production term. Equation 2.10 inserted
in the production term (term II) in Eq. 2.23 gives
P
k
= −ρu
i
u
j
¯
U
i,j
= µ
t

¯
U
i,j
+
¯
U
j,i

¯
U
i,j

2
3
ρk
¯
U
i,i
(2.34)
Note that the last term in Eq. 2.34 is zero for incompressible flow due to
continuity.
The triple correlations in termIII in Eq. 2.23 is modeled using a gradient turbulent
diffusion
term
lawwhere we assume that k is diffused down the gradient, i.e fromregion of
high k to regions of small k (cf. Fourier’s law for heat flux: heat is diffused
from hot to cold regions). We get
1
2
ρu
j
u
i
u
i
= −
µ
t
σ
k
k
,j
. (2.35)
where σ
k
is the turbulent Prandtl number for k. There is no model for the
pressure diffusion term in Eq. 2.23. It is small (see Figs. 4.1 and 4.3) and
thus it is simply neglected.
The dissipation termin Eq. 2.23 is basically estimated as in Eq. 1.12. The dissipation
term velocity scale is now
U =

k (2.36)
so that
ε ≡ νu
i,j
u
i,j
=
k
3
2

(2.37)
The modelled k equation can now be assembled and we get

¯
U
j
k)
,j
=
¸
µ +
µ
t
σ
k

k
,j

,j
+ P
k
−ρ
k
3
2

(2.38)
We have one constant in the turbulent diffusion term and it will be de-
termined later. The dissipation term contains another unknown quantity,
the turbulent length scale. An additional transport will be derived from
which we can compute ℓ. In the k −ε model, where ε is obtained from its
own transport, the dissipation term ρk
3
2
/ℓ in Eq. 2.38 is simply ρε.
For boundary-layer flow Eq. 2.38 has the form
∂ρ
¯
Uk
∂x
+
∂ρ
¯
V k
∂y
=

∂y
¸
µ +
µ
t
σ
k

∂k
∂y

+ µ
t


¯
U
∂y

2
−ρ
k
3
2

. (2.39)
20
2.6 One Equation Models 21
2.6 One Equation Models
In one equation models a transport equation is often solved for the turbu-
lent kinetic energy. The unknown turbulent length scale must be given,
and often an algebraic expression is used [4, 50]. This length scale is, for
example, taken as proportional to the thickness of the boundary layer, the
width of a jet or a wake. The main disadvantage of this type of model is
that it is not applicable to general flows since it is not possible to find a
general expression for an algebraic length scale.
However, some proposals have been made where the turbulent length
scale is computed in a more general way [14, 32]. In [32] a transport equa-
tion for turbulent viscosity is used.
21
22
3 Two-Equation Turbulence Models
3.1 The Modelled ε Equation
An exact equation for the dissipation can be derivedfromthe Navier-Stokes
equation (see, for instance, Wilcox [48]). However, the number of unknown
terms is very large and they involve double correlations of fluctuating ve-
locities, and gradients of fluctuating velocities and pressure. It is better to
derive an ε equation based on physical reasoning. In the exact equation for
ε the production term includes, as in the k equation, turbulent quantities
and and velocity gradients. If we choose to include u
i
u
j
and
¯
U
i,j
in the
production term and only turbulent quantities in the dissipation term, we
take, glancing at the k equation (Eq. 2.38)
P
ε
= −c
ε1
ε
k

¯
U
i,j
+
¯
U
j,i

¯
U
i,j
(3.1)
diss.term = −c
ε2
ρ
ε
2
k
.
Note that for the production term we have P
ε
= c
ε1
(ε/k)P
k
. Now we can
write the transport equation for the dissipation as

¯
U
j
ε)
,j
=
¸
µ +
µ
t
σ
ε

ε
,j

,j
+
ε
k
(c
ε1
P
k
−c
ε2
ρε) (3.2)
For boundary-layer flow Eq. 3.2 reads
∂ρ
¯

∂x
+
∂ρ
¯
V ε
∂y
=

∂y
¸
µ +
µ
t
σ
ε

∂ε
∂y

+ c
ε1
ε
k
µ
t


¯
U
∂y

2
−ρc
ε2
ε
2
k
(3.3)
3.2 Wall Functions
The natural way to treat wall boundaries is to make the grid sufficiently fine
so that the sharp gradients prevailing there are resolved. Often, when com-
puting complex three-dimensional flow, that requires too much computer
resources. An alternative is to assume that the flow near the wall behaves
like a fully developed turbulent boundary layer and prescribe boundary
conditions employing wall functions. The assumption that the flow near
the wall has the characteristics of a that in a boundary layer if often not
true at all. However, given a maximum number of nodes that we can af-
ford to use in a computation, it is often preferable to use wall functions
which allows us to use fine grid in other regions where the gradients of the
flow variables are large.
In a fully turbulent boundary layer the production term and the dissi-
pation term in the log-law region (30 < y
+
< 100) are much larger than the
22
3.2 Wall Functions 23
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
−20
−10
0
10
20
L
o
s
s
G
a
i
n
y
+
Production
Dissipation
Diffusion
Convection
Figure 3.1: Boundary along a flat plate. Energy balance in k equation [45].
Re
δ
≃ 4400, u

/U
0
≃ 0.043.
other terms, see Fig. 3.1. The log-law we use can be written as
U
u

=
1
κ
ln

Eu

y
ν

(3.4)
E = 9.0 (3.5)
Comparing this with the standard form of the log-law
U
u

= Aln

u

y
ν

+ B (3.6)
we see that
A =
1
κ
(3.7)
B =
1
κ
ln E.
In the log-layer we can write the modelled k equation (see Eq. 2.39) as
0 = µ
t


¯
U
∂y

2
−ρε. (3.8)
where we have replaced the dissipation term ρk
3
2
/ℓ by ρε. In the log-law
region the shear stress −ρuv is equal to the wall shear stress τ
w
, see Fig. 2.1.
The Boussinesq assumption for the shear stress reads (see Eq. 2.10)
τ
w
= −ρuv = µ
t

¯
U
∂y
(3.9)
Using the definition of the wall shear stress τ
w
= ρu
2

, and inserting Eqs. 3.9,
3.15 into Eq. 3.8 we get
c
µ
=

u
2

k

2
(3.10)
23
3.2 Wall Functions 24
From experiments we have that in the log-law region of a boundary layer
u
2

/k ≃ 0.3 so that c
µ
= 0.09. c
µ
con-
stant When we are using wall functions k and ε are not solved at the nodes
adjacent to the walls. Instead they are fixed according to the theory pre-
sented above. The turbulent kinetic energy is set from Eq. 3.10, i.e. b.c. for k
k
P
= c
−1/2
µ
u
2

(3.11)
where the friction velocity u

is obtained, iteratively, fromthe log-law(Eq. 3.4).
Index P denotes the first interior node (adjacent to the wall).
The dissipation ε is obtained from observing that production and dis-
sipation are in balance (see Eq. 3.8). The dissipation can thus be written
as b.c. for ε
ε
P
= P
k
=
u
3

κy
(3.12)
where the velocity gradient in the production term −uv∂U/∂y has been
computed from the log-law in Eq. 3.4, i.e.
∂U
∂y
=
u

κy
. (3.13)
For the velocity component parallel to the wall the wall shear stress is b.c. for
velocity used as a flux boundary condition (cf. prescribing heat flux in the temper-
ature equation).
When the wall is not parallel to any velocity component, it is more con-
venient to prescribe the turbulent viscosity. The wall shear stress τ
w
is ob-
tained by calculating the viscosity at the node adjacent to the wall from the
log-law. The viscosity used in momentum equations is prescribed at the
nodes adjacent to the wall (index P) as follows. The shear stress at the wall
can be expressed as
τ
w
= µ
t,P

¯
U
∂η
≈ µ
t,P
¯
U
,P
η
where
¯
U
,P
denotes the velocity parallel to the wall and η is the normal
distance to the wall. Using the definition of the friction velocity u

τ
w
= ρu
2

we obtain
µ
t,P
U
,P
η
= ρu
2

→µ
t,P
=
u

U
,P
ρu

η
Substituting u

/
¯
U
,P
with the log-law (Eq. 3.4) we finally can write
µ
t,P
=
ρu

ηκ
ln(Eη
+
)
where η
+
= u

η/ν.
24
3.3 The k −ε Model 25
3.3 The k −ε Model
In the k −ε model the modelled transport equations for k and ε (Eqs. 2.38,
3.2) are solved. The turbulent length scale is obtainedfrom(see Eq. 1.12,2.37)
ℓ =
k
3/2
ε
. (3.14)
The turbulent viscosity is computed from (see Eqs. 2.11, 2.36, 1.12)
ν
t
= c
µ
k
1/2
ℓ = c
µ
k
2
ε
. (3.15)
We have five unknown constants c
µ
, c
ε1
, c
ε2
, σ
k
and σ
ε
, which we hope
should be universal i.e same for all types of flows. Simple flows are chosen
where the equation can be simplified and where experimental data are used
to determine the constants. The c
µ
constant was determined above (Sub-
section 3.2). The k equation in the logarithmic part of a turbulent boundary
layer was studied where the convection and the diffusion term could be
neglected.
In a similar way we can find a value for the c
ε1
constant . We look at the c
ε1
con-
stant ε equation for the logarithmic part of a turbulent boundary layer, where the
convection termis negligible, and utilizing that production and dissipation
are in balance P
k
= ρε, we can write Eq. 3.3 as
0 =

∂y
¸
µ
t
σ
ε
∂ε
∂y

. .. .

+(c
ε1
−c
ε2
) ρ
ε
2
k
(3.16)
The dissipation and production termcan be estimatedas (see Sub-section 3.2)
ε =
k
3/2

(3.17)
P
k
= ρ
u
3

κy
,
which together with P
k
= ρε gives
ℓ = κc
−3/4
µ
y. (3.18)
In the logarithmic layer we have that ∂k/∂y = 0, but fromEqs. 3.17, 3.18 we
find that ∂ε/∂y = 0. Instead the diffusion term in Eq. 3.16 can be rewritten
using Eqs. 3.17, 3.18, 3.15 as
D
ε
=

∂y
¸
µ
t
σ
ε

∂y

k
3/2
κc
−3/4
µ
y
¸
=
k
2
κ
2
σ
ε

2
c
1/2
µ
(3.19)
25
3.4 The k −ω Model 26
Inserting Eq. 3.19 and Eq. 3.17 into Eq. 3.16 gives
c
ε1
= c
ε2

κ
2
c
1/2
µ
σ
ε
(3.20)
The flow behind a turbulence generating grid is a simple flow which
allows us to determine the c
ε2
constant. Far behind the grid the velocity c
ε2
con-
stant gradients are very small which means that P
k
= 0. Furthermore V = 0 and
the diffusion terms are negligible so that the modelled k and ε equations
(Eqs. 2.38, 3.2) read
ρ
¯
U
dk
dx
= −ρε (3.21)
ρ
¯
U

dx
= −c
ε2
ρ
ε
2
k
(3.22)
Assuming that the decay of k is exponential k ∝ x
−m
, Eq. 3.21 gives k ∝
−mx
−m−1
. Insert this in Eq. 3.21, derivate to find dε/dx and insert it into
Eq. 3.22 yields
c
ε2
=
m + 1
m
(3.23)
Experimental data give m = 1.25 ±0.06 [45], and c
ε2
= 1.92 is chosen.
We have found three relations (Eqs. 3.10, 3.20, 3.23) to determine three
of the five unknown constants. The last two constants, σ
k
and σ
ε
, are opti-
mized by applying the model to various fundamental flows such as flow in
channel, pipes, jets, wakes, etc. The five constants are given the following
values: c
µ
= 0.09, c
ε1
= 1.44, c
ε2
= 1.92, σ
k
= 1.0, σ
ε
= 1.31.
3.4 The k −ω Model
The k − ω model is gaining in popularity. The model was proposed by
Wilcox [47, 48, 38]. In this model the standard k equation is solved, but as a
length determining equation ω is used. This quantity is often called specific
dissipation from its definition ω ∝ ε/k. The modelled k and ω equation read

¯
U
j
k)
,j
=
¸
µ +
µ
t
σ
ω
k

k
,j

,j
+ P
k
−β

ωk (3.24)

¯
U
j
ω)
,j
=
¸
µ +
µ
t
σ
ω

ω
,j

,j
+
ω
k
(c
ω1
P
k
−c
ω2
ρkω) (3.25)
µ
t
= ρ
k
ω
, ε = β

ωk.
26
3.5 The k −τ Model 27
The constants are determined as in Sub-section 3.3: β

= 0.09, c
ω1
= 5/9,
c
ω2
= 3/40, σ
ω
k
= 2 and σ
ω
= 2.
When wall functions are usedk and ω are prescribed as (cf. Sub-section 3.2):
k
wall
= (β

)
−1/2
u
2

, ω
wall
= (β

)
−1/2
u

κy
. (3.26)
In regions of low turbulence when both k and ε go to zero, large numer-
ical problems for the k −ε model appear in the ε equation as k becomes
zero. The destruction term in the ε equation includes ε
2
/k, and this causes
problems as k → 0 even if ε also goes to zero; they must both go to zero
at a correct rate to avoid problems, and this is often not the case. On the
contrary, no such problems appear in the ω equation. If k → 0 in the ω
equation in Eq. 3.24, the turbulent diffusion term simply goes to zero. Note
that the production term in the ω equation does not include k since
ω
k
c
ω1
P
k
=
ω
k
c
ω1
µ
t


¯
U
i
∂x
j
+

¯
U
j
∂x
i


¯
U
i
∂x
j
= c
ω1
β


¯
U
i
∂x
j
+

¯
U
j
∂x
i


¯
U
i
∂x
j
.
In Ref. [37] the k − ω model was used to predict transitional, recirculating
flow.
3.5 The k −τ Model
One of the most recent proposals is the k − τ model of Speziale et al. [41]
where the transport equation for the turbulent time scale τ is derived. The
exact equation for τ = k/ε is derived from the exact k and ε equations. The
modelled k and τ equations read

¯
U
j
k)
,j
=
¸
µ +
µ
t
σ
τ
k

k
,j

,j
+ P
k
−ρ
k
τ
(3.27)

¯
U
j
τ)
,j
=
¸
µ +
µ
t
σ
τ2

τ
,j

,j
+
τ
k
¸
(1 −c
ε1
)P
k
+ (c
ε2
−1)
k
τ

(3.28)
+
2
k

µ +
µ
t
σ
τ1

k
,j
τ
,j

2
τ

µ +
µ
t
σ
τ2

τ
,j
τ
,j
µ
t
= c
µ
ρkτ, ε = k/τ
The constants are: c
µ
, c
ε1
and c
ε2
are taken from the k −ε model, and σ
τ
k
=
σ
τ1
= σ
τ2
= 1.36.
27
28
4 Low-Re Number Turbulence Models
In the previous section we discussed wall functions which are used in order
to reduce the number of cells. However, we must be aware that this is
an approximation which, if the flow near the boundary is important, can
be rather crude. In many internal flows – where all boundaries are either
walls, symmetry planes, inlet or outlets – the boundary layer may not be
that important, as the flow field is often pressure-determined. For external
flows (for example flow around cars, ships, aeroplanes etc.), however, the
flow conditions in the boundaries are almost invariably important. When
we are predicting heat transfer it is in general no good idea to use wall
functions, because the heat transfer at the walls are very important for the
temperature field in the whole domain.
When we chose not to use wall functions we thus insert sufficiently
many grid lines near solid boundaries so that the boundary layer can be
adequately resolved. However, when the wall is approached the viscous
effects become more important and for y
+
< 5 the flow is viscous dom-
inating, i.e. the viscous diffusion is much larger that the turbulent one
(see Fig. 4.1). Thus, the turbulence models presented so far may not be
correct since fully turbulent conditions have been assumed; this type of
models are often referred to as high-Re number models. In this section
we will discuss modifications of high-Re number models so that they can
be used all the way down to the wall. These modified models are termed
low Reynolds number models. Please note that “high Reynolds number”
and “low Reynolds number” do not refer to the global Reynolds number
(for example Re
L
, Re
x
, Re
x
etc.) but here we are talking about the local
turbulent Reynolds number Re

= Uℓ/ν formed by a turbulent fluctuation
and turbulent length scale. This Reynolds number varies throughout the
computational domain and is proportional to the ratio of the turbulent and
physical viscosity ν
t
/ν, i.e. Re

∝ ν
t
/ν. This ratio is of the order of 100 or
larger in fully turbulent flow and it goes to zero when a wall is approached.
We start by studying how various quantities behave close to the wall
when y → 0. Taylor expansion of the fluctuating velocities u
i
(also valid
for the mean velocities
¯
U
i
) gives
u = a
0
+ a
1
y + a
2
y
2
. . .
v = b
0
+ b
1
y + b
2
y
2
. . .
w = c
0
+ c
1
y + c
2
y
2
. . .
(4.1)
where a
0
. . . c
2
are functions of space and time. At the wall we have no-
slip, i.e. u = v = w = 0 which gives a
0
= b
0
= c
0
. Furthermore, at the wall
∂u/∂x = ∂w/∂z = 0, and the continuity equation gives ∂v/∂y = 0 so that
28
4.1 Low-Re k −ε Models 29
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
−0.2
−0.1
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
L
o
s
s
G
a
i
n
y
+
P
k
ε
D
ν
D
T
+ D
p
Figure 4.1: Flow between two parallel plates. Direct numerical simula-
tions [23]. Re = U
C
δ/ν = 7890. u

/U
C
= 0.050. Energy balance in
k equation. Production P
k
, dissipation ε, turbulent diffusion (by velocity
triple correlations and pressure) D
T
+ D
p
, and viscous diffusion D
ν
. All
terms have been scaled with u
4

/ν.
b
1
= 0. Equation 4.1 can now be written
u = a
1
y + a
2
y
2
. . .
v = b
2
y
2
. . .
w = c
1
y + c
2
y
2
. . .
(4.2)
From Eq. 4.2 we immediately get
u
2
= a
2
1
y
2
. . . = O(y
2
)
v
2
= b
2
2
y
4
. . . = O(y
4
)
w
2
= c
2
1
y
2
. . . = O(y
2
)
uv = a
1
b
2
y
3
. . . = O(y
3
)
k = (a
2
1
+ c
2
1
)y
2
. . . = O(y
2
)

¯
U/∂y = a
1
. . . = O(y
0
)
(4.3)
In Fig. 4.2 DNS-data for the fully developed flow in a channel is pre-
sented.
4.1 Low-Re k −ε Models
There exist a number of Low-Re number k −ε models [34, 7, 10, 1, 29].
When deriving low-Re models it is common to study the behavior of the
terms when y → 0 in the exact equations and require that the correspond-
ing terms in the modelled equations behave in the same way. Let us study
29
4.1 Low-Re k −ε Models 30
0 20 40 60 80 100
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
y
+
u

/u

v

/u

w

/u

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
0
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.1
0.12
0.14
y/δ
u

/
¯
U
C
v

/
¯
U
C
w

/
¯
U
C
Figure 4.2: Flow between two parallel plates. Direct numerical simula-
tions [23]. Re = U
C
δ/ν = 7890. u

/U
C
= 0.050. Fluctuating velocity
components u

i
=

u
2
i
.
the exact k equation near the wall (see Eq. 2.24).
∂ρ
¯
Uk
∂x
+
∂ρ
¯
V k
∂y
= −ρuv

¯
U
∂y
. .. .
O(y
3
)

∂pv
∂y


∂y

1
2
ρvu
i
u
i

. .. .
O(y
3
)
+ µ

2
k
∂y
2
−µu
i,j
u
i,j
. .. .
O(y
0
)
(4.4)
The pressure diffusion ∂pv/∂y term is usually neglected, partly because it
is not measurable, and partly because close to the wall it is not important,
see Fig. 4.3 (see also [30]). The modelled equation reads
∂ρ
¯
Uk
∂x
+
∂ρ
¯
V k
∂y
= µ
t


¯
U
∂y

2
. .. .
O(y
4
)
+

∂y

µ
t
σ
k
∂k
∂y

. .. .
O(y
4
)
+ µ

2
k
∂y
2
− ρε
....
O(y
0
)
(4.5)
When arriving at that the production term is O(y
4
) we have used
ν
t
= c
µ
ρ
k
2
ε
=
O(y
4
)
O(y
0
)
= O(y
4
) (4.6)
Comparing Eqs. 4.4 and 4.5 we find that the dissipation term in the mod-
elled equation behaves in the same way as in the exact equation when
30
4.1 Low-Re k −ε Models 31
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
−0.1
−0.05
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
L
o
s
s
G
a
i
n
y
+
D
ν
D
T
D
p
Figure 4.3: Flow between two parallel plates. Direct numerical simula-
tions [23]. Re = U
C
δ/ν = 7890. u

/U
C
= 0.050. Energy balance in k
equation. Turbulent diffusion by velocity triple correlations D
T
, Turbulent
diffusion by pressure D
p
, and viscous diffusion D
ν
. All terms have been
scaled with u
4

/ν.
y → 0. However, both the modelled production and the diffusion term
are of O(y
4
) whereas the exact terms are of O(y
3
). This inconsistency of
the modelled terms can be removed by replacing the c
µ
constant by c
µ
f
µ
where f
µ
is a damping function f
µ
so that f
µ
= O(y
−1
) when y → 0 and
f
µ
→ 1 when y
+
≥ 50. Please note that the term “damping term” in this
case is not correct since f
µ
actually is augmenting µ
t
when y → 0 rather
than damping. However, it is common to call all low-Re number functions
for “damping functions”.
Instead of introducing a damping function f
µ
, we can choose to solve
for a modified dissipation which is denoted ˜ ε, see Ref. [27] and Section 4.2.
It is possible to proceed in the same way when deriving damping func-
tions for the ε equation [41]. An alternative way is to study the modelled ε
equation near the wall and keep only the terms which do not tend to zero.
From Eq. 3.3 we get
∂ρ
¯

∂x
. .. .
O(y
1
)
+
∂ρ
¯
V ε
∂y
. .. .
O(y
1
)
= c
ε1
ε
k
P
k
. .. .
O(y
1
)
+

∂y

µ
t
σ
ε
∂ε
∂y

. .. .
O(y
1
)
+ µ

2
ε
∂y
2
. .. .
O(y
0
)
− c
ε2
ρ
ε
2
k
. .. .
O(y
−2
)
(4.7)
where it has been assumed that the production term P
k
has been suitable
modified so that P
k
= O(y
3
). We find that the only term which do not
vanish at the wall are the viscous diffusion term and the dissipation term
31
4.2 The Launder-Sharma Low-Re k −ε Models 32
so that close to the wall the dissipation equation reads
0 = µ

2
ε
∂y
2
−c
ε2
ρ
ε
2
k
. (4.8)
The equation needs to be modified since the diffusion term cannot balance
the destruction term when y →0.
4.2 The Launder-Sharma Low-Re k −ε Models
There are at least a dozen different low Re k −ε models presented in the
literature. Most of them can be cast in the form [34] (in boundary-layer
form, for convenience)
∂ρ
¯
Uk
∂x
+
∂ρ
¯
V k
∂y
=

∂y
¸
µ +
µ
t
σ
k

∂k
∂y

+ µ
t


¯
U
∂y

2
−ρε (4.9)
∂ρ
¯
U˜ ε
∂x
+
∂ρ
¯
V ˜ ε
∂y
=

∂y
¸
µ +
µ
t
σ
ε

∂˜ ε
∂y

+ c

f
1
˜ ε
k
µ
t


¯
U
∂y

2
−c
ε2
f
2
ρ
˜ ε
2
k
+ E
(4.10)
µ
t
= c
µ
f
µ
ρ
k
2
˜ ε
(4.11)
ε = ˜ ε + D (4.12)
Different models use different damping functions (f
µ
, f
1
and f
2
) and
different extra terms (D and E). Many models solve for ˜ ε rather than for
ε where D is equal to the wall value of ε which gives an easy boundary
condition ˜ ε = 0 (see Sub-section 4.3). Other models which solve for ε use
no extra source in the k equation, i.e. D = 0.
Below we give some details for one of the most popular low-Re k −ε
models, the Launder-Sharma model [27] which is based on the model of Launder-
Sharma Jones & Launder [22]. The model is given by Eqs. 4.9, 4.10, 4.11 and 4.12
32
4.3 Boundary Condition for ε and ˜ ε 33
where
f
µ
= exp

−3.4
(1 + R
T
/50)
2

f
1
= 1
f
2
= 1 −0.3 exp

−R
2
T

D = 2µ



k
∂y

2
E = 2µ
µ
t
ρ


2
¯
U
∂y
2

2
R
T
=
k
2
ν˜ ε
(4.13)
The term E was added to match the experimental peak in k around y+ ≃
20 [22]. The f
2
termis introduced to mimic the final stage of decay of turbu-
lence behind a turbulence generating grid when the exponent in k ∝ x
−m
changes from m = 1.25 to m = 2.5.
4.3 Boundary Condition for ε and ˜ ε
In many low-Re k −ε models ˜ ε is the dependent variable rather than ε.
The main reason is that the boundary condition for ε is rather complicated.
The largest term in the k equation (see Eq. 4.4) close to the wall, are the
dissipation term and the viscous diffusion term which both are of O(y
0
) so
that
0 = µ

2
k
∂y
2
−ρε. (4.14)
From this equation we get immediately a boundary condition for ε as
ε
wall
= ν

2
k
∂y
2
. (4.15)
FromEq. 4.14 we can derive alternative boundary conditions. The exact
form of the dissipation term close to the wall reads (see Eq. 2.24)
ε = ν

∂u
∂y

2
+

∂w
∂y

2
¸
(4.16)
where ∂/∂y ≫ ∂/∂x ≃ ∂/∂z and u ≃ w ≫ v have been assumed. Using
Taylor expansion in Eq. 4.1 gives
ε = ν

a
2
1
+ c
2
1

+ . . . (4.17)
33
4.4 The Two-Layer k −ε Model 34
In the same way we get an expression for the turbulent kinetic energy
k =
1
2

a
2
1
+ c
2
1

y
2
. . . (4.18)
so that



k
∂y

2
=
1
2

a
2
1
+ c
2
1

. . . (4.19)
Comparing Eqs. 4.17 and 4.19 we find
ε
wall
= 2ν



k
∂y

2
. (4.20)
In the Sharma-Launder model this is exactly the expression for D in Eqs. 4.12
and 4.13, which means that the boundary condition for ˜ ε is zero, i.e. ˜ ε = 0.
In the model of Chien [8], the following boundary condition is used
ε
wall
= 2ν
k
y
2
(4.21)
This is obtained by assuming a
1
= c
1
in Eqs. 4.17 and 4.18 so that
ε = 2νa
2
1
k = a
2
1
y
2
(4.22)
which gives Eq. 4.21.
4.4 The Two-Layer k −ε Model
Near the walls the one-equation model by Wolfshtein [50], modified by
Chen and Patel [7], is used. In this model the standard k equation is solved;
the diffusion term in the k-equation is modelled using the eddy viscosity
assumption. The turbulent length scales are prescribed as [15, 11]

µ
= c

n[1 −exp (−R
n
/A
µ
)] , ℓ
ε
= c

n[1 −exp (−R
n
/A
ε
)]
(n is the normal distance from the wall) so that the dissipation term in the
k-equation and the turbulent viscosity are obtained as:
ε =
k
3/2

ε
, µ
t
= c
µ
ρ

kℓ
µ
(4.23)
The Reynolds number R
n
and the constants are defined as
R
n
=

kn
ν
, c
µ
= 0.09, c

= κc
−3/4
µ
, A
µ
= 70, A
ε
= 2c

34
4.5 The low-Re k −ω Model 35
The one-equation model is used near the walls (for R
n
≤ 250), and the
standard high-Re k −ε in the remaining part of the flow. The matching line
could either be chosen along a pre-selected grid line, or it could be defined
as the cell where the damping function
1 −exp (−R
n
/A
µ
)
takes, e.g., the value 0.95. The matching of the one-equation model and the
k −ε model does not pose any problems but gives a smooth distribution of
µ
t
and ε across the matching line.
4.5 The low-Re k −ω Model
Amodel which is being usedmore and more is the k−ω model of Wilcox [47].
The standard k−ω model can actually be used all the way to the wall with-
out any modifications [47, 31, 36]. One problem is the boundary condition
for ω at walls since (see Eq. 3.25)
ω =
ε
β

k
= O(y
−2
) (4.24)
tends to infinity. In Sub-section 4.3 we derived boundary conditions for
ε by studying the k equation close to the wall. In the same way we can
here use the ω equation (Eq. 3.25) close to the wall to derive a boundary
condition for ω. The largest terms in Eq. 3.25 are the viscous diffusion term
and the destruction term, i.e.
0 = µ

2
ω
∂y
2
−c
ω2
ρω
2
. (4.25)
The solution to this equation is
ω =

c
ω2
y
2
(4.26)
The ω equation is normally not solved close to the wall but for y
+
< 2.5, ω is
computed from Eq. 4.26, and thus no boundary condition actually needed.
This works well in finite volume methods but when finite element methods
are used ω is needed at the wall. A slightly different approach must then
be used [16].
Wilcox has also proposed a k − ω model [49] which is modified for vis-
cous effects, i.e. a true low-Re model with damping function. He demon-
strates that this model can predict transition and claims that it can be used
for taking the effect of surface roughness into account which later has been
confirmed [35]. A modification of this model has been proposed in [38].
35
4.5 The low-Re k −ω Model 36
4.5.1 The low-Re k −ω Model of Peng et al.
The k −ω model of Peng et al. reads [38]
∂k
∂t
+

∂x
j
(
¯
U
j
k) =

∂x
j
¸
ν +
ν
t
σ
k

∂k
∂x
j

+ P
k
−c
k
f
k
ωk
∂ω
∂t
+

∂x
j
(
¯
U
j
ω) =

∂x
j
¸
ν +
ν
t
σ
ω

∂ω
∂x
j

+
ω
k
(c
ω1
f
ω
P
k
−c
ω2
kω) + c
ω
ν
t
k

∂k
∂x
j
∂ω
∂x
j

ν
t
= f
µ
k
ω
f
k
= 1 −0.722 exp
¸

R
t
10

4
¸
f
µ
= 0.025 +

1 −exp
¸

R
t
10

3/4
¸¸

0.975 +
0.001
R
t
exp
¸

R
t
200

2
¸¸
f
ω
= 1 + 4.3 exp
¸

R
t
1.5

1/2
¸
, f
ω
= 1 + 4.3 exp
¸

R
t
1.5

1/2
¸
c
k
= 0.09, c
ω1
= 0.42, c
ω2
= 0.075
c
ω
= 0.75, σ
k
= 0.8, σ
ω
= 1.35
(4.27)
4.5.2 The low-Re k −ω Model of Bredberg et al.
Anewk−ω model was recently proposedby Bredberg et al. [5] which reads
∂k
∂t
+

∂x
j
(
¯
U
j
k) = P
k
−C
k
kω +

∂x
j
¸
ν +
ν
t
σ
k

∂k
∂x
j

∂ω
∂t
+

∂x
j
(
¯
U
j
ω) = C
ω1
ω
k
P
k
−C
ω2
ω
2
+
C
ω

ν
k
+
ν
t
k

∂k
∂x
j
∂ω
∂x
j
+

∂x
j
¸
ν +
ν
t
σ
ω

∂ω
∂x
j

(4.28)
The turbulent viscosity is given by
ν
t
= C
µ
f
µ
k
ω
f
µ
= 0.09 +

0.91 +
1
R
3
t

¸
1 −exp

R
t
25

2.75
¸¸
(4.29)
36
4.5 The low-Re k −ω Model 37
with the turbulent Reynolds number definedas R
t
= k/(ων). The constants
in the model are given as
C
k
= 0.09, C
µ
= 1, C
ω
= 1.1, C
ω1
= 0.49,
C
ω2
= 0.072, σ
k
= 1, σ
ω
= 1.8
(4.30)
37
38
5 Reynolds Stress Models
In Reynolds Stress Models the Boussinesq assumption (Eq. 2.10) is not used
but a partial differential equation (transport equation) for the stress tensor
is derived from the Navier-Stokes equation. This is done in the same way
as for the k equation (Eq. 2.23).
Take the Navier-Stokes equation for the instantaneous velocity U
i
(Eq. 2.4).
Subtract the momentumequation for the time averaged velocity
¯
U
i
((Eq. 2.6)
and multiply by u
j
. Derive the same equation with indices i and j inter-
changed. Add the two equations and time average. The resulting equation
reads
(
¯
U
k
u
i
u
j
)
,k
. .. .
C
ij
= −u
i
u
k
¯
U
j,k
−u
j
u
k
¯
U
i,k
. .. .
P
ij
+
p
ρ
(u
i,j
+ u
j,i
)
. .. .
Φ
ij

¸
u
i
u
j
u
k
+
pu
j
ρ
δ
ik
+
pu
i
ρ
δ
jk
−ν(u
i
u
j
)
,k

,k
. .. .
D
ij
−2νu
i,k
u
j,k
. .. .
ε
ij
(5.1)
where
P
ij
is the production of u
i
u
j
[note that P
ii
=
1
2
P
k
(P
ii
= P
11
+ P
22
+
P
33
)];
Φ
ij
is the pressure-strain term, which promotes isotropy of the turbu-
lence;
ε
ij
is the dissipation (i.e. transformation of mechanical energy into
heat in the small-scale turbulence) of u
i
u
j
;
C
ij
and D
ij
are the convection and diffusion, respectively, of u
i
u
j
.
Note that if we take the trace of Eq. 5.1 and divide by two we get the
equation for the turbulent kinetic energy (Eq. 2.23). When taking the trace
the pressure-strain term vanishes since
Φ
ii
= 2
p
ρ
u
i,i
= 0 (5.2)
due to continuity. Thus the pressure-strain term in the Reynolds stress
equation does not add or destruct any turbulent kinetic energy it merely
redistributes the energy between the normal components (u
2
, v
2
and w
2
).
Furthermore, it can be shown using physical reasoning [19] that Φ
ij
acts to
reduce the large normal stress component(s) and distributes this energy to
the other normal component(s).
38
5.1 Reynolds Stress Models 39
5.1 Reynolds Stress Models
We find that there are terms which are unknown in Eq. 5.1, such as the
triple correlations u
i
u
j
u
k
, the pressure diffusion (pu
j
δ
ik
+ +pu
i
δ
jk
)/ρ and
the pressure strain Φ
ij
, and the dissipation tensor ε
ij
. From Navier-Stokes
equation we could derive transport equations for this unknown quantities
but this would add further unknowns to the equation system (the closure
problem, see p. 12). Instead we supply models for the unknown terms.
The pressure strain term, which is an important term since its contribu- Φ
ij
tion is significant, is modelled as [26, 17]
Φ
ij
= Φ
ij,1
+ Φ
ij,2
+ Φ

ij,1
+ Φ

ij,2
Φ
ij,1
= −c
1
ε
k

u
i
u
j

2
3
δ
ij
k

Φ
ij,2
= −c
2

P
ij

2
3
δ
ij
P
k

Φ

nn,1
= −2c

1
ε
k
u
2
n
f
Φ

ss,1
= c

1
ε
k
u
2
n
f
f =
k
3
2
2.55x
n
ε
(5.3)
The object of the wall correction terms Φ

nn,1
and Φ

ss,1
is to take the effect of
the wall into account. Here we have introduced a s −n coordinate system,
with s along the wall and n normal to the wall. Near a wall (the term
“near” may well extend to y
+
= 200) the normal stress normal to the wall is
damped (for a wall located at, for example, x = 0 this mean that the normal
stress v
2
is damped), and the other two are augmented (see Fig. 4.2).
In the literature there are many proposals for better (and more compli-
cated) pressure strain models [42, 25].
The triple correlation in the diffusion term is often modelled as [9] triple
correla-
tion D
ij
=

c
s
ρu
k
u
m
k
ε
(u
i
u
j
)
,k

,m
(5.4)
The pressure diffusion termis for two reasons commonly neglected. First, it
is not possible to measure this termand before DNS-data (Direct Numerical
Simulations) were available it was thus not possible to model this term.
Second, from DNS-data is has indeed been found to be small (see Fig. 4.3).
The dissipation tensor ε
ij
is assumed to be isotropic, i.e.
ε
ij
=
2
3
δ
ij
ε. (5.5)
From the definition of ε
ij
(see 5.1) we find that the assumption in Eq. 5.5 is
equivalent to assuming that for small scales (where dissipation occurs) the
39
5.2 Reynolds Stress Models vs. Eddy Viscosity Models 40
two derivative u
i,k
and u
j,k
are not correlated for i = j. This is the same as
assuming that for small scales u
i
and u
j
are not correlated for i = j which is
a good approximation since the turbulence at these small scale is isotropic,
see Section 1.4.
We have given models for all unknown term in Eq. 5.1 and the modelled
Reynolds equation reads [26, 17]
(
¯
U
k
u
i
u
j
)
,k
= −u
i
u
k
¯
U
j,k
−u
j
u
k
¯
U
i,k
+

µ(u
i
u
j
)
,k
+ c
s
ρu
k
u
m
k
ε
(u
i
u
j
)
,m

,k
+ Φ
ij

2
3
δ
ij
ρε
(5.6)
where Φ
ij
should be taken from Eq. 5.3. For a review on RSMs (Reynolds
Stress Models), see [18, 24, 28, 40].
5.2 Reynolds Stress Models vs. Eddy Viscosity Models
Whenever non-isotropic effects are important we should consider using RSMs.
Note that in a turbulent boundary layer the turbulence is always non-isotropic,
but isotropic eddy viscosity models handle this type of flow excellent as far
as mean flow quantities are concerned. Of course a k −ε model give very
poor representation of the normal stresses. Examples where non-isotropic
effects often are important are flows with strong curvature, swirling flows,
flows with strong acceleration/retardation. Below we present list some ad-
vantages and disadvantages with RSMs and eddy viscosity models.
Advantages with eddy viscosity models:
i) simple due to the use of an isotropic eddy (turbulent) viscosity;
ii) stable via stability-promoting second-order gradients in the mean-
flow equations;
iii) work reasonably well for a large number of engineering flows.
Disadvantages with eddy viscosity models:
i) isotropic, and thus not good in predicting normal stresses (u
2
, v
2
, w
2
);
ii) as a consequence of i) it is unable to account for curvature effects;
iii) as a consequence of i) it is unable to account for irrotational strains.
Advantages with RSMs:
i) the production terms need not to be modelled;
ii) thanks to i) it can selectively augment or damp the stresses due to
curvature effects, acceleration/retardation, swirling flow, buoyancy
etc.
Disadvantages with RSMs:
40
5.3 Curvature Effects 41
0
0
A
A
B
B
U
θ
(r)
r
Figure 5.1: Curved boundary layer flow along r = constant. U
θ
=
U
θ
(r), U
r
= 0.
i) complex and difficult to implement;
ii) numerically unstable because small stabilizing second-order deriva-
tives in the momentum equations (only laminar diffusion);
iii) CPU consuming.
5.3 Curvature Effects
Curvature effects, related either to curvature of the wall or streamline cur-
vature, are known to have significant effects on the turbulence [3]. Both
types of curvature are present in attached flows on curved surfaces, and
in separation regions. The entire Reynolds stress tensor is active in the
interaction process between shear stresses, normal stresses and mean ve-
locity strains. When predicting flows where curvature effects are impor-
tant, it is thus necessary to use turbulence models that accurately predict
all Reynolds stresses, not only the shear stresses. For a discussion of curva-
ture effects, see Refs. [12, 13].
When the streamlines in boundary layer type of flow have a convex
(concave) curvature, the turbulence is stabilized (destabilized), which damp-
ens (augments) the turbulence [3, 39], especially the shear stress and the
Reynolds stress normal to the wall. Thus convex streamline curvature de-
creases the stress levels. It can be shown that it is the exact modelling of the
production terms in the RSM which allows the RSM to respond correctly to
this effect. The k −ε model, in contrast, is not able to respond to streamline
curvature.
The ratio of boundary layer thickness δ to curvature radius R is a com-
mon parameter for quantifying the curvature effects on the turbulence. The
work reviewed by Bradshaw demonstrates that even such small amounts
of convex curvature as δ/R = 0.01 can have a significant effect on the tur-
bulence. Thompson and Whitelaw [44] carried out an experimental inves-
41
5.3 Curvature Effects 42
x
y
streamline
Figure 5.2: The streamlines which in flat-plate boundary layers are along
the x-axis are suddenly deflected upwards (concave curvature) owing to e.g.
an approaching separation region.
tigation on a configuration simulating the flow near a trailing edge of an
airfoil, where they measured δ/R ≃ 0.03. They reported a 50 percent de-
crease of ρv
2
(Reynolds stress in the normal direction to the wall) owing to
curvature. The reduction of ρu
2
and −ρuv was also substantial. In addition
they reported significant damping of the turbulence in the shear layer in
the outer part of the separation region.
An illustrative model case is curved boundary layer flow. A polar coor-
dinate systemr −θ (see Fig. 5.1)) with
ˆ
θ locally aligned with the streamline
is introduced. As U
θ
= U
θ
(r) (with ∂U
θ
/∂r > 0 and U
r
= 0), the radial
inviscid momentum equation degenerates to
ρU
2
θ
r

∂p
∂r
= 0 (5.7)
Here the variables are instantaneous or laminar. The centrifugal force ex-
erts a force in the normal direction (outward) on a fluid following the stream-
line, which is balanced by the pressure gradient. If the fluid is displaced by
some disturbance (e.g. turbulent fluctuation) outwards to level A, it en-
counters a pressure gradient larger than that to which it was accustomed
at r = r
0
, as (U
θ
)
A
> (U
θ
)
0
, which from Eq. 5.7 gives (∂p/∂r)
A
> (∂p/∂r)
0
.
Hence the fluid is forced back to r = r
0
. Similarly, if the fluid is displaced
inwards to level B, the pressure gradient is smaller here than at r = r
0
and
cannot keep the fluid at level B. Instead the centrifugal force drives it back
to its original level.
It is clear from the model problem above that convex curvature, when
∂U
θ
/∂r > 0, has a stabilizing effect on (turbulent) fluctuations, at least in
the radial direction. It is discussed below how the Reynolds stress model
responds to streamline curvature.
Assume that there is a flat-plate boundary layer flow. The ratio of the
normal stresses ρu
2
and ρv
2
is typically 5. At one x station, the flow is
deflected upwards, see Fig. 5.2. How will this affect the turbulence? Let us
study the effect of concave streamline curvature. The production terms P
ij
owing to rotational strains can be written as
42
5.3 Curvature Effects 43

¯
U
θ
/∂r > 0 ∂
¯
U
θ
/∂r < 0
convex curvature stabilizing destabilizing
concave curvature destabilizing stabilizing
Table 5.1: Effect of streamline curvature on turbulence.
RSM, u
2
−eq. : P
11
= −2ρuv

¯
U
∂y
(5.8)
RSM, uv −eq. : P
12
= −ρu
2

¯
V
∂x
−ρv
2

¯
U
∂y
(5.9)
RSM, v
2
−eq. : P
22
= −2ρuv

¯
V
∂x
(5.10)
k −ε : P
k
= µ
t


¯
U
∂y
+

¯
V
∂x

2
(5.11)
As long as the streamlines in Fig. 5.2 are parallel to the wall, all pro-
duction is a result of ∂
¯
U/∂y. However as soon as the streamlines are de-
flected, there are more terms resulting from ∂
¯
V /∂x. Even if ∂
¯
V /∂x is much
smaller that ∂
¯
U/∂y it will still contribute non-negligibly to P
12
as ρu
2
is
much larger than ρv
2
. Thus the magnitude of P
12
will increase (P
12
is nega-
tive) as ∂
¯
V /∂x > 0. An increase in the magnitude of P
12
will increase −uv,
which in turn will increase P
11
and P
22
. This means that ρu
2
and ρv
2
will
be larger and the magnitude of P
12
will be further increased, and so on. It
is seen that there is a positive feedback, which continuously increases the
Reynolds stresses. It can be said that the turbulence is destabilized owing
to concave curvature of the streamlines.
However, the k −ε model is not very sensitive to streamline curvature
(neither convex nor concave), as the two rotational strains are multiplied
by the same coefficient (the turbulent viscosity).
If the flow(concave curvature) in Fig. 5.2 is a wall jet flowwhere ∂
¯
U/∂y <
0, the situation will be reversed: the turbulence will be stabilized. If the
streamline (and the wall) in Fig. 5.2 is deflected downwards, the situation
will be as follows: the turbulence is stabilizing when ∂
¯
U/∂y > 0, and desta-
bilizing for ∂
¯
U/∂y < 0.
The stabilizing or destabilizing effect of streamline curvature is thus
dependent on the type of curvature (convex or concave), and whether there
is an increase or decrease in momentum in the tangential direction with
radial distance from its origin (i.e. the sign of ∂
¯
U
θ
/∂r). For convenience,
these cases are summarized in Table 5.1.
43
5.4 Acceleration and Retardation 44
x1
x2 x1
x2
x
y
Figure 5.3: Stagnation flow.
5.4 Acceleration and Retardation
When the flowaccelerates and/or decelerate the irrotational strains (∂
¯
U/∂x,

¯
V /∂y and ∂
¯
W/∂z) become important.
In boundary layer flow, the only term which contributes to the pro-
duction term in the k equation is −ρuv∂U/∂y (x denotes streamwise direc-
tion). Thompson and Whitelaw [44] found that, near the separation point
as well as in the separation zone, the production term −ρ(u
2
− v
2
)∂U/∂x
is of equal importance. This was confirmed in prediction of separated flow
using RSM [12, 13].
In pure boundary layer flow the only term which contributes to the
production term in the k and ε-equations is −ρuv∂
¯
U/∂y. Thompson and
Whitelaw [44] found that near the separation point, as well as in the sepa-
ration zone, the production term−ρ(u
2
−v
2
)∂
¯
U/∂x is of equal importance.
As the exact form of the production terms are used in second-moment clo-
sures, the production due to irrotational strains is correctly accounted for.
In the case of stagnation-like flow (see Fig. 5.3), where u
2
≃ v
2
the pro-
duction due to normal stresses is zero, which is also the results given by
second-moment closure, whereas k −ε models give a large production. In
order to illustrate this, let us write the production due to the irrotational
strains ∂
¯
U/∂x and ∂
¯
V /∂y for RSM and k −ε:
RSM : 0.5 (P
11
+ P
22
) = −ρu
2

¯
U
∂x
−ρv
2

¯
V
∂y
k −ε : P
k
= 2µ
t


¯
U
∂x

2
+


¯
V
∂y

2
¸
If u
2
≃ v
2
we get P
11
+ P
22
≃ 0 since ∂
¯
U/∂x = −∂
¯
V /∂y due to continuity.
The production term P
k
in k −ε model, however, will be large, since it will
be sum of the two strains.
44
REFERENCES 45
References
[1] Abe, K., Kondoh, T., and Nagano, Y. A new turbulence model
for predicting fluid flow and heat transfer in separating and reattach-
ing flows - 1. Flowfield calculations. Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 37 (1994),
139–151.
[2] Baldwin, B., and Lomax, H. Thin-layer approximation and alge-
braic model for separated turbulent flows. AIAA 78-257, Huntsville,
AL, 1978.
[3] Bradshaw, P. Effects of streamline curvature on turbulent flow.
Agardograph progress no. 169, AGARD, 1973.
[4] Bradshaw, P., Ferriss, D., and Atwell, N. Calculation of
boundary-layer development using the turbulent energy equation.
Journal of Fluid Mechanics 28 (1967), 593–616.
[5] Bredberg, J., Peng, S.-H., and Davidson, L. An improved k −ω
turbulence model applied to recirculating flows. International Journal
of Heat and Fluid Flow 23, 6 (2002), 731–743.
[6] Cebeci, T., and Smith, A. Analysis of Turbulent Boundary Layers.
Academic Press, 1974.
[7] Chen, H., and Patel, V. Near-wall turbulence models for complex
flows including separation. AIAA Journal 26 (1988), 641–648.
[8] Chien, K. Predictions of channel and boundary layer flows with a
low-reynolds-number turbulence model. AIAA Journal 20 (1982), 33–
38.
[9] Daly, B., and Harlow, F. Transport equation in turbulence. Physics
of Fluids 13 (1970), 2634–2649.
[10] Davidson, L. Calculation of the turbulent buoyancy-driven flow in
a rectangular cavity using an efficient solver and two different low
reynolds number k −ε turbulence models. Numer. Heat Transfer 18
(1990), 129–147.
[11] Davidson, L. Reynolds stress transport modelling of
shock/boundary-layer interaction. 24th AIAA Fluid Dynamics
Conference, AIAA 93-3099, Orlando, 1993.
[12] Davidson, L. Prediction of the flow around an airfoil using a
Reynolds stress transport model. Journal of Fluids Engineering 117
(1995), 50–57.
45
REFERENCES 46
[13] Davidson, L. Reynolds stress transport modelling of shock-induced
separated flow. Computers & Fluids 24 (1995), 253–268.
[14] Davidson, L., and Olsson, E. Calculation of some parabolic and
elliptic flows using a new one-equation turbulence model. In 5th Int.
Conf. on Numerical Methods in Laminar and Turbulent Flow(1987), C. Tay-
lor, W. Habashi, and M. Hafez, Eds., Pineridge Press, pp. 411–422.
[15] Davidson, L., and Rizzi, A. Navier-Stokes stall predictions using
an algebraic stress model. J. Spacecraft and Rockets 29 (1992), 794–800.
[16] Emvin, P. The Full Multigrid Method Applied to Turbulent Flow in Ven-
tilated Enclosures Using Structured and Unstructured Grids. PhD thesis,
Dept. of Thermo and Fluid Dynamics, Chalmers University of Tech-
nology, G¨ oteborg, 1997.
[17] Gibson, M., and Launder, B. Ground effects on pressure fluctua-
tions in the atmospheric boundary layer. Journal of Fluid Mechanics 86
(1978), 491–511.
[18] Hanjali´ c, K. Advanced turbulence closure models: A view of cur-
rent status and future prospects. Int. J. Heat and Fluid Flow 15 (1994),
178–203.
[19] Hinze, J. Turbulence, second ed. McGraw-Hill, New York, 1975.
[20] Hoyas, S., and Jim´enez, J. http://torroja.dmt.upm.es/ftp/channels/data/statistics/.
[21] Hoyas, S., and Jim´enez, J. Scaling of the velocity fluctuations in
turbulent channels up to Re
τ
= 2003. Physics of Fluids A 18, 011702
(2006).
[22] Jones, W., and Launder, B. The prediction of laminarization with
a two-equation model of turbulence. Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 15 (1972),
301–314.
[23] Kim, J. The collaborative testing of turbulence models (organized by
P. Bradshawet al.). Data Disk No. 4 (also available at Ercoftac’s www-
server http://fluindigo.mech.surrey.ac.uk/database),
1990.
[24] Launder, B. Second-moment closure: Present ... and future? Int. J.
Heat and Fluid Flow 10 (1989), 282–300.
[25] Launder, B., and Li, S.-P. On the elimination of wall-topography
parameters from second-moment closures. Physics of Fluids A 6 (1994),
999–1006.
46
REFERENCES 47
[26] Launder, B., Reece, G., and Rodi, W. Progress in the develop-
ment of a Reynolds-stress turbulence closure. Journal of Fluid Mechan-
ics 68, 3 (1975), 537–566.
[27] Launder, B., and Sharma, B. Application of the energy dissipation
model of turbulence to the calculation of flow near a spinning disc.
Lett. Heat and Mass Transfer 1 (1974), 131–138.
[28] Leschziner, M. Modelling engineering flows with Reynolds stress
turbulence closure. J. Wind Engng. and Ind. Aerodyn. 35 (1991), 21–47.
[29] Lien, F., and Leschziner, M. Low-Reynolds-number eddy-
viscosity modelling based on non-linear stress-strain/vorticity rela-
tions. In Engineering Turbulence Modelling and Experiments 3 (1996),
W. Rodi and G. Bergeles, Eds., Elsevier, pp. 91–100.
[30] Mansour, N., Kim, J., and Moin, P. Reynolds-stress and
dissipation-rate budgets in a turbulent channel flow. Journal of Fluid
Mechanics 194 (1988), 15–44.
[31] Menter, F. Two-equation eddy-viscosity turbulence models for en-
gineering applications. AIAA Journal 32 (1994), 1598–1605.
[32] Menter, F. On the connection between one- and two-equation mod-
els of turbulence. In Engineering Turbulence Modelling and Experiments
3 (1996), W. Rodi and G. Bergeles, Eds., Elsevier, pp. 131–140.
[33] Panton, R. Incompressible Flow. John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1984.
[34] Patel, V., Rodi, W., and Scheuerer, G. Turbulence models for
near-wall and low Reynolds number flows: A review. AIAA Journal 23
(1985), 1308–1319.
[35] Patel, V., and Yoon, J. Application of turbulence models to sep-
arated flows over rough surfaces. Journal of Fluids Engineering 117
(1995), 234–241.
[36] Peng, S.-H., Davidson, L., and Holmberg, S. Performance
of two-equation turbulence models for numerical simulation of ven-
tilation flows. In 5th Int. Conf. on Air Distributions in Rooms,
ROOMVENT’96 (Yokohama, Japan, 1996), S. Murakami, Ed., vol. 2,
pp. 153–160.
[37] Peng, S.-H., Davidson, L., and Holmberg, S. The two-equations
turbulence k−ω model applied to recirculating ventilation flows. Tech.
Rep. 96/13, Dept. of Thermo and Fluid Dynamics, Chalmers Univer-
sity of Technology, Gothenburg, 1996.
47
REFERENCES 48
[38] Peng, S.-H., Davidson, L., and Holmberg, S. A modified low-
Reynolds-number k −ω model for recirculating flows. Journal of Fluids
Engineering 119 (1997), 867–875.
[39] Rodi, W., and Scheuerer, G. Calculation of curved shear lay-
ers with two-equation turbulence models. Physics of Fluids 26 (1983),
1422–1435.
[40] So, R., Lai, Y., and Zhang, H. Second-order near-wall turbulence
closures: a review. AIAA Journal 29 (1991), 1819–1835.
[41] Speziale, C., Abid, R., and Anderson, E. Critical evaluation of
two-equation models for near-wall turbulence. AIAAJournal 30 (1992),
324–331.
[42] Speziale, C., Sarkar, S., and Gatski, T. Modelling the pressure-
strain correlation of turbulence: an invariant dynamical system ap-
proach. Journal of Fluid Mechanics 227 (1991), 245–272.
[43] Tennekes, H., and Lumley, J. A First Course in Turbulence. The
MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1972.
[44] Thompson, B., and Whitelaw, J. Characteristics of a trailing-
edge flow with turbulent boundary-layer separation. Journal of Fluid
Mechanics 157 (1985), 305–326.
[45] Townsend, A. The Structure of Turbulent Shear Flow, second ed. Cam-
bridge University Press, New York, 1976.
[46] White, F. Fluid Mechanics. McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York, 1994.
[47] Wilcox, D. Reassessment of the scale-determining equation. AIAA
Journal 26, 11 (1988), 1299–1310.
[48] Wilcox, D. Turbulence Modeling for CFD. DCW Industries, Inc., 5354
Palm Drive, La Ca˜ nada, California 91011, 1993.
[49] Wilcox, D. Simulation of transition with a two-equation turbulence
model. AIAA Journal 32 (1994), 247–255.
[50] Wolfshtein, M. The velocity and temperature distribution in one-
dimensional flow with turbulence augmentation and pressure gradi-
ent. Int. J. Mass Heat Transfer 12 (1969), 301–318.
48

CONTENTS

2

Contents
Nomenclature 1 Turbulence 1.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2 Turbulent Scales . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.3 Vorticity/Velocity Gradient Interaction . 1.4 Energy spectrum . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Turbulence Models 2.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2 Boussinesq Assumption . . . . . . 2.3 Algebraic Models . . . . . . . . . . 2.4 Equations for Kinetic Energy . . . 2.4.1 The Exact k Equation . . . . ¯ ¯ 2.4.2 The Equation for 1/2(Ui Ui ) 2.5 The Modelled k Equation . . . . . 2.6 One Equation Models . . . . . . . . 3 Two-Equation Turbulence Models 3.1 The Modelled ε Equation . . . 3.2 Wall Functions . . . . . . . . . 3.3 The k − ε Model . . . . . . . . 3.4 The k − ω Model . . . . . . . 3.5 The k − τ Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 5 5 6 7 9 12 12 15 16 16 16 18 20 21 22 22 22 25 26 27 28 29 32 33 34 35 36 36 38 39 40 41 44

4 Low-Re Number Turbulence Models 4.1 Low-Re k − ε Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2 The Launder-Sharma Low-Re k − ε Models . . . . 4.3 Boundary Condition for ε and ε . . . . . . . . . . . ˜ 4.4 The Two-Layer k − ε Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.5 The low-Re k − ω Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.5.1 The low-Re k − ω Model of Peng et al. . . . 4.5.2 The low-Re k − ω Model of Bredberg et al. . 5 Reynolds Stress Models 5.1 Reynolds Stress Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.2 Reynolds Stress Models vs. Eddy Viscosity Models 5.3 Curvature Effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.4 Acceleration and Retardation . . . . . . . . . . . .

2

Nomenclature

3

Nomenclature
Latin Symbols
c1 , c2 , cs c′ , c′ 1 2 cε1 , cε2 cω1 , cω2 cµ E f k U Ui ¯ U ¯ Ui uv, uw u u2 ui ui uj V ¯ V v v2 vw W ¯ W w w2 constants in the Reynolds stress model constants in the Reynolds stress model constants in the modelled ε equation constants in the modelled ω equation constant in turbulence model energy (see Eq. 1.8); constant in wall functions (see Eq. 3.4) damping function in pressure strain tensor turbulent kinetic energy (≡ 1 ui ui ) 2 instantaneous (or laminar) velocity in x-direction instantaneous (or laminar) velocity in xi -direction time-averaged velocity in x-direction time-averaged velocity in xi -direction shear stresses fluctuating velocity in x-direction normal stress in the x-direction fluctuating velocity in xi -direction Reynolds stress tensor instantaneous (or laminar) velocity in y-direction time-averaged velocity in y-direction fluctuating (or laminar) velocity in y-direction normal stress in the y-direction shear stress instantaneous (or laminar) velocity in z-direction time-averaged velocity in z-direction fluctuating velocity in z-direction normal stress in the z-direction

Greek Symbols
δ ε κ µ µt ν νt Ωi boundary layer thickness; half channel height dissipation wave number; von Karman constant (= 0.41) dynamic viscosity dynamic turbulent viscosity kinematic viscosity kinematic turbulent viscosity instantaneous (or laminar) vorticity component in xi -direction 3

Nomenclature ¯ Ωi ω ωi σΦ τlam τtot τturb

4

time-averaged vorticity component in xi -direction specific dissipation (∝ ε/k) fluctuating vorticity component in xi -direction turbulent Prandtl number for variable Φ laminar shear stress total shear stress turbulent shear stress

Subscript
C w centerline wall

4

In turbulent flow the diffusivity increases. The flow consists of a spectrum of different scales (eddy sizes) where largest eddies are of the order of the flow geometry (i. III. The slightly larger eddies receive their energy from even larger eddies and so on. are highly turbulent. which is independent of time (when the mean flow is steady). This process of transferred energy from the largest turbulent scales (eddies) to the smallest is called cascade process. Diffusivity. increases as the flow becomes turbulent. The small eddies receive the kinetic energy from slightly larger eddies. The largest eddies extract their energy from the mean flow.1 Turbulence Introduction Almost all fluid flow which we encounter in daily life is turbulent. Also the flow and combustion in engines. Turbulent flow is dissipative. This means that the spreading rate of boundary layers. At the other end of the spectra we have the smallest eddies which are by viscous forces (stresses) dissipated into internal energy. Even though turbulence is chaotic it is deterministic and is described by the Navier-Stokes equations. jet width. Large Reynolds Numbers. jets. However.5 1 1. V.g. random and chaotic. Air movements in rooms are also turbulent. 5 . In turbulent flow we usually divide the variables in one time-averaged ¯ part U . There is no definition on turbulent flow. boundary layers and reduces or delays thereby separation at bluff bodies such as cylinders.e. Irregularity. For example. aeroplanes and buildings. IV. Three-Dimensional. and in boundary layers at Rex ≃ 100000. II. Turbulent flow is always three-dimensional. aeroplanes and buildings are turbulent. airfoils and cars. the transition to turbulent flow in pipes occurs that ReD ≃ 2300. Dissipation. at least along the walls where wall-jets are formed. The turbulence increases the exchange of momentum in e. The boundary layers and the wakes around and after bluff bodies such as cars. and ¯ one fluctuating part u so that U = U + u. Hence. which means that kinetic energy in the small (dissipative) eddies are transformed into internal energy. boundary layer thickness. Turbulent flow occurs at high Reynolds number. when the equations are time averaged we can treat the flow as two-dimensional. etc. Turbulent flow is irregular. The increased diffusivity also increases the resistance (wall friction) in internal flows such as in channels and pipes. Typical examples are flow around (as well as in) cars. etc). both in piston engines and gas turbines and combustors. but it has a number of characteristic features (see Tennekes & Lumley [43]) such as: I. when we compute fluid flow it will most likely be turbulent.

4. However it is assumed that most of the energy (say 90 %) that goes into the large scales is finally dissipated at the smallest (dissipative) scales. The friction forces exist of course at all scales. for example the boundary layer thickness.2 Turbulent Scales As mentioned above there are a wide range of scales in turbulent flow. Even though we have small turbulent scales in the flow they are much larger than the molecular scale and we can treat the flow as a continuum. Continuum. We write υ = νa εb [m/s] = [m2 /s] [m2 /s3 ] (1.1). 6 . The smallest scales where dissipation occurs are called the Kolmogorov scales: the velocity scale υ. We assume that these scales are determined by viscosity ν and dissipation ε. the length scale η and the time scale τ . These scales extract kinetic energy from the mean flow which has a time scale comparable to the large scales. the larger viscosity.1) where below each variable its dimensions are given. the larger the velocity gradients must be. we can express υ.2 Turbulent Scales 6 VI. We get two equations. 1. Having assumed that the dissipative scales are determined by viscosity and dissipation.1. The larger scales are of the order of the flow geometry. i. but they are larger the smaller the eddies. The more energy that is to be transformed from kinetic energy to internal energy. The dimensions of the left-hand and the right-hand side must be the same.e. the larger scales. The dissipation is denoted by ε which is energy per unit time and unit mass (ε = [m2 /s3 ]). η and τ in ν and ε using dimensional analysis. The amount of energy that is to be dissipated is ε. The dissipation is proportional to the kinematic viscosity ν times the fluctuating velocity gradient up to the power of two (see Section 2. ¯ ∂U ∂y = O(T −1 ) = O(U/ℓ) The kinetic energy of the large scales is lost to slightly smaller scales with which the large scales interact. with length scale ℓ and velocity scale U. Through the cascade process the kinetic energy is in this way transferred from the largest scale to smaller scales. Since the kinetic energy is destroyed by viscous forces it is natural to assume that viscosity plays a part in determining these scales. Thus it is not quite true that eddies which receive their kinetic energy from slightly larger scales give away all of that the slightly smaller scales but a small fraction is dissipated. At the smallest scales the frictional forces (viscous stresses) become too large and the kinetic energy is transformed (dissipated) into internal energy.

stretching drical coordinate system with the x1 -axis as the cylinder axis and x2 as the (1.3) (1.j + νΩi. (1. cylindrical fluid element which vorticity Ω. We see that this equation is not an ordinary convection-diffusion equation but is has an additional term on the right-hand side which represents amplification and rotation/tilting of the vorticity lines.1 + Ω2 U3. In order to gain some insight in vortex shedding we will study an idealized.3 Ω1 U2. 46] Uj Ωi.1 + Ω2 U1.3 Vorticity/Velocity Gradient Interaction 7 one for meters [m] 1 = 2a + 2b. j k are equal). −1 if i. τ= ν ε 1/2 (1.4) 1.jj Ωi = ǫijk Uk.2 + Ω3 U3.j (1.j = Ωj Ui. i.2) which gives a = b = 1/4. The equation for instanta¯ neous vorticity (Ωi = Ωi + ωi ) reads [43. which still are laminar and organized and well defined in terms of physical orientation and frequency are turned into chaotic.3 Vorticity/Velocity Gradient Interaction The interaction between vorticity and velocity gradients is an essential ingredient to create and maintain turbulence. We introduce a cylin. In the same way we obtain the expressions for η and τ so that υ = (νε)1/4 . If we write it term-by-term it reads Ω1 U1.1.6) 7 .5) where ǫijk is the Levi-Civita tensor (it is +1 if i. j k are in cyclic order.). η = ν3 ε 1/4 .e. three-dimensional.1 + Ω2 U2. inviscid (viscosity equals to zero) case. j k are in anti-cyclic order. 33.3 Ω1 U3. Two idealized phenomena in this interaction process can be identified: vortex stretching and vortex tilting.j denotes derivation with respect to xj . and where (. Disturbances are amplified – the actual process depending on type of flow – and these disturbances.2 + Ω3 U1. and one for seconds [s] − 1 = −a − 3b. and 0 if any two of i. turbulent flow by interaction between the vorticity vector and the velocity gradients. random fluctuations. Imagine a Vortex slender.3 The diagonal terms in this matrix represent vortex stretching.2 + Ω3 U2.

1.1: Vortex stretching.1.6 represent vortex tilting. For example if U3 ≡ 0 and all derivatives with respect to x3 are zero. From the discussion above we can now understand why turbulence always must be three-dimensional (Item IV on p. The turbulence is also maintained by these processes.6 disappears.2 in line one in Eq. Finally. We have neglected the viscosity since viscous diffusion at high Reynolds number is much smaller than the turbulent one and since viscous dissipation occurs at small scales (see p.1) so that Ω = (Ω1 .1 will stretch the cylinder. because vorticity generated by vortex stretching and vortex tilting interacts with the velocity field and creates further vorticity and so on. 6). This process will affect the vorticity components in the other two coordinate directions. The second term Ω2 U1.3 ≡ 0 the third column in Eq.3 Vorticity/Velocity Gradient Interaction Ω1 Figure 1.2 will tilt the fluid element so that it rotates in clock-wise direction. 1. The ve.6 gives a contribution to Ω1 . The vorticity and velocity field becomes chaotic and random: turbulence has been created. Fig. 0). 1.tilting locity gradient U1.2 = 0 r we find that the radial derivative of the radial velocity U2 must be negative.7) remains constant as the radius of the fluid element decreases (note that also the circulation Γ ∝ Ωr 2 is constant). Vortex stretching and vortex tilting thus qualitatively explains how interaction between vorticity and velocity gradient create vorticity in all three coordinate directions from a disturbance which initially was well defined in one coordinate direction. The off-diagonal terms in Eq. 1.e. the radius of the cylinder will decrease.6 vanishes. Thus there are no viscous stresses acting on the cylindrical fluid element surface which means that the rotation momentum r2Ω (1. i. Once this process has started it continues.1 + (rU2 ). A positive U1.6 vanish. 1. We see that a stretching/compressing will decrease/increase the radius of a slender fluid element and increase/decrease its vorticity component aligned with the element. From the continuity equation 1 U1. Ω1 8 radial coordinate (see Fig.2. the 8 . 1. 5). take a Vortex slender fluid element with its axis aligned with the x2 axis. Equation 1. If U3 ≡ 0 the third line in Eq. Again. and if Ui. 0.7 shows that the vorticity increases as the radius decreases. 1. If the instantaneous flow is two-dimensional we find that all interaction terms between vorticity and velocity gradients in Eq.

i.8) where Eq.4 Energy spectrum The turbulent scales are distributed over a range of scales which extends from the largest scales which interact with the mean flow to the smallest scales where dissipation occurs. thus we can think of wave number as proportional to the inverse of an eddy’s radius.4 Energy spectrum 9 Ω2 U1 (x2 ) Ω2 Figure 1. The total turbulent kinetic energy is obtained by integrating over the whole wave number space i. 1. create smaller and smaller scales.e independent of direction.9) .2: Vortex tilting.3 ≡ 0 Ω2 = U1. Thus the small scales will be isotropic. 1.8 expresses the contribution from the scales with wave number between κ and κ + dκ to the turbulent kinetic energy k. 1. on average. The dimension of wave number is one over length. The interaction between vorticity and velocity gradients will.1 ≡ 0.2 − U2.1. In wave number space the energy of eddies from κ to κ + dκ can be expressed as E(κ)dκ (1.3 − U3.6 will also be zero since Ω1 = U3. Whereas the large scales which interact with the mean flow have an orientation imposed by the mean flow the small scales will not remember the structure and orientation of the large scales. remaining terms in Eq.e. ∞ k= 0 E(κ)dκ 9 (1.e κ ∝ 1/r. i.

We find region I. The eddies in this region are independent of both the large.4) II.1. Dimensional reasoning gives E(κ) = const. 1. The kinetic energy is the sum of the kinetic energy of the three fluctuating velocity components. In the region we have the large eddies which carry most of the energy. III.11) This is a very important law (Kolmogorov spectrum law or the −5/3 law) which states that. II: the inertial subrange.4 Energy spectrum 10 E(κ) I II III κ Figure 1. Energy per time unit (ε) is coming from the large eddies at the lower part of this range and is given off to the dissipation range at the higher part. Their energy is past on to slightly smaller scales.3. The eddies are small and isotropic and it is here that the dissipation occurs. The existence of this region requires that the Reynolds number is high (fully turbulent flow). ε 3 κ− 3 2 5 (1. energy containing eddies. This region is a “transport” region in the cascade process. The scales of the eddies are described by the Kolmogorov scales (see Eq. respectively. 1 1 2 u + v 2 + w 2 = ui ui (1. These eddies interact with the mean flow and extract energy from the mean flow. II and III which correspond to: k= I.3: Spectrum for k. I: Range for the large. III: Range for small.e. Dissipation range. The eddies’ velocity and length scales are U and ℓ. Inertial subrange. energy containing eddies and the eddies in the dissipation range. One can argue that the eddies in this region should be characterized by the flow of energy (ε) and the size of the eddies 1/κ. 1. The eddies in this region represent the mid-region. i. isotropic scales.10) 2 2 The spectrum of E is shown in Fig. if the flow is fully turbulent (high Reynolds 10 .

This often used in experiment and Large Eddy Simulations (LES) and Direct Numerical Simulations (DNS) to verify that the flow is fully turbulent.12) 11 . which gives U2 ℓ/U U3 ℓ ε=O =O (1. the energy spectra should exhibit a −5/3-decay.1. The energy at the large scales lose their energy during a time proportional to ℓ/U. As explained on p. 6 (cascade process) the energy dissipated at the small scales can be estimated using the large scales U and ℓ.4 Energy spectrum 11 number).

i = 0 ∂t . (2.1 Turbulence Models Introduction When the flow is turbulent it is preferable to decompose the instantaneous variables (for example velocity components and pressure) into a mean value and a fluctuating value. ∂t (2.e low Mach number) the dilatation term on the righthand side of Eq.12 2 2.6 which is called the Reynolds stress tensor.i = 0 ∂t ∂ρUi 2 + (ρUi Uj ).4) Note that we here use the term “incompressible” in the sense that density is independent of pressure (∂P/∂ρ = 0) .2) and the Navier-Stokes equation (2. Another reason is that when we want to solve the Navier-Stokes equation numerically it would require a very fine grid to resolve all turbulent scales and it would also require a fine resolution in time (turbulent flow is always unsteady).j ¯ ∂ρUi ¯ ¯ + ρUi Uj ∂t ¯ ¯ ¯ = −P. 2.6) A new term ui uj appears on the right-hand side of Eq.i + µ(Ui. 2.j + Uj. We need a model for ui uj to close the equation system in Eq. i.k ∂t 3 .j (2.j = −P.6.3 is neglected so that ∂ρUi + (ρUi Uj ).j denotes derivation with respect to xj .3) where (.i + [µ(Ui.i )].).e. It is an additional stress term due to turbulence (fluctuating velocities) and it is unknown.1 into the continuity equation (2. The continuity equation and the Navier-Stokes equation read ∂ρ + (ρUi ). it can be dependent on for example temperature or concentration. The tensor is symmetric (for example u1 u2 = u2 u1 ). (2.i + µ Ui.i − δij Uk. Since we are dealing with incompressible flow (i. It represents correlations between fluctuating velocities.4) we obtain the time averaged continuity equation and NavierStokes equation ∂ρ ¯ + (ρUi ).1) One reason why we decompose the variables is that when we measure flow quantities we are usually interested in the mean values rather that the time histories. 12 . Inserting Eq.2) (2. 2.j (2.5) . but it does not mean that density is constant.j = −P.j .j + Uj. ¯ Ui = Ui + ui ¯ P = P + p.j + Uj. 2.i ) − ρui uj .

1.closure ity components. ¯ /∂y on the right-hand side of Eq. 2.8) x = x1 denotes streamwise coordinate. Note that the total shear stress is constant only close to the wall.e.7) V ≪ U. two-dimensional boundary-layer type of flow (i. a turbulent shear stress. boundary layers along a flat plate.6 reads ¯¯ ¯¯ ∂ρU U ∂ρV U + ∂x ∂y = − ¯ ¯ ∂P ∂ ∂U + − ρuv .problem tions (four: the continuity equation and three components of the NavierStokes equations).8 shear To the viscous shear stress µ∂ U appears an additional turbulent one. etc. In the logarithmic layer the viscous stress is negligible compared to the turbulent stress. and y = x2 coordinate normal to ¯ the flow. ∂x ∂y Eq. the buffert layer and the logarithmic layer) the total shear stress is approximately constant and equal to the wall shear stress τw . For steady. pipe flow.2. jet and wake flow.1: Shear stress near a wall.) where ¯ ¯ ∂ ≪ ∂ (2. The total shear stress stress is thus ¯ ∂U − ρuv τtot = µ ∂y In the wall region (the viscous sublayer. further away from the wall it decreases (in fully developed channel flow it decreases linearly by the distance form the wall). As we go away from the ∗ wall the viscous stress decreases and turbulent one increases and at y + ≃ 10 they are approximately equal. six stresses) is larger than the number of equa. At the wall the turbulent shear stress vanishes as u = v = 0. µ ∂x ∂y ∂y τtot (2. pressure. channel flow.1 Introduction τ τtot τlam y y + ≃ 10 Figure 2. In boundary-layer type of flow the turbulent shear stress and the ve¯ locity gradient ∂ U /∂y have nearly always opposite sign (for a wall jet this 13 . and the viscous shear stress attains its wall-stress value τw = ρu2 . Often the pressure gradient ∂ P /∂x is zero. τturb 13 This is called the closure problem: the number of unknowns (ten: three veloc. 2. see Fig. 2.

Thus the streamwise fluctuation is positive.e. A fluid particle is moving downwards (particle drawn with solid line) from y2 to y1 with (the turbulent fluctuating) velocity v.e. An algebraic equation is used to compute a turbulent viscosity. If we look at the other particle (dashed line in Fig. i.1 Introduction 14 y2 v<0 y1 y x Figure 2. At its new location the U velocity is in average ¯ ¯ smaller than at its old. Thus.2. There are different levels of approximations involved when closing the equation system in Eq. i.2) we reach the same conclusion. This means that when the particle at y2 (which has streamwise velocity U (y2 )) comes down to y1 (where the streamwise velocity is U (y1 )) is has an excess of streamwise velocity compared to its new environment at y1 . To get a physical picture of this let us study the flow in a boundary layer. I. in a wall jet) this means that there are other terms in the transport equation which are more important than the production term. In cases where the shear stress and the velocity gradient have the same sign (for example. The Reynolds stress tensor is then computed using an assumption which relates the Reynolds stress tensor to the velocity gradients and the turbulent viscosity. Algebraic models. If we study this flow for a long time and average over time we get uv < 0. The particle is moving upwards (v > 0). Above we have used physical reasoning to show the the signs of uv ¯ and ∂ U /∂y are opposite.2: Sign of the turbulent shear stress −ρuv in a boundary layer. often called eddy viscosity. 2. u > 0 and the correlation between u and v is negative (uv < 0). Models which are based on a turbulent (eddy) viscosity are called eddy viscosity mod14 v>0 U (y) . and it is bringing a deficit in U so that u < 0. This assumption is called the Boussinesq assumption.6. 2. 2. If we change the sign ¯ of the velocity gradient so that ∂ U /∂y < 0 we will find that the sign of uv also changes. uv < 0. again.2. is not the case close to the wall). see Fig. This can also be found by looking at the production term in the transport equation of the Reynolds stresses (see Section 5). U (y1 ) < U (y2 ).

j ¯ ¯ = (µ + µt )(Ui.9) . Above the different types of turbulence models have been listed in increasing order of complexity. The latter is obtained from the two transported scalars. II.2.e.9 do a contraction (i. One-equation models. where the Reynolds stress tensor in the time averaged Navier-Stokes equation is replaced by the turbulent viscosity multiplied by the velocity gradients. (2. 2. ability to model the turbulence.6 and make an identification ¯ ¯ µ(Ui.i ) − ρui uj which gives ¯ ¯ ρui uj = −µt (Ui. The turbulent viscosity is calculated from Boussinesq assumption.9 15 . Here a transport equation is derived for the Reynolds tensor ui uj . To show this we introduce this assumption for the diffusion term at the right-hand side of Eq. These models fall into the class of eddy viscosity models.2 Boussinesq Assumption 15 els.10). On the other hand the continuity equation (Eq. setting indices i = j) the right-hand side gives ui ui ≡ 2k where k is the turbulent kinetic energy (see Eq. Two-equation models.2 Boussinesq Assumption In eddy viscosity turbulence models the Reynolds stresses are linked to the velocity gradients via the turbulent viscosity: this relation is called the Boussinesq assumption. Reynolds stress models. for example the turbulent kinetic energy k and its dissipation ε. and cost in terms of computational work (CPU time).j + Uj. 2.5) gives that the right-hand side of Eq. One transport equation has to be added for determining the length scale of the turbulence. 2. III. 2.i ).j If we in Eq.i ) . Usually an equation for the dissipation ε is used.j + Uj.j + Uj. 2. Two transport equations are derived which describe transport of two scalars. IV. 1. In these models a transport equation is solved for a turbulent quantity (usually the turbulent kinetic energy) and a second turbulent quantity (usually a turbulent length scale) is obtained from an algebraic expression. The Reynolds stress tensor is then computed using an assumption which relates the Reynolds stress tensor to the velocity gradients and an eddy viscosity.

In boundary layer-type of flow (see Eq. because it is these scales which are responsible for most of the transport by turbulent diffusion. 2. and the model is called the mixing length model.11) Above we have used U and ℓ which are characteristic for the large turbulent scales.12) where y is the coordinate normal to the wall. constant viscosity (cf. More modern algebraic models are the Baldwin-Lomax model [2] and the Cebeci-Smith [6] model which are frequently used in aerodynamics when computing the flow around airfoils.7) we obtain νt = ℓ2 mix ∂U ∂y (2. In an algebraic turbulence model the velocity gradient is used as a velocity scale and some physical length is used as the length scale.e. This is reasonable.3 Algebraic Models In eddy viscosity models we want an expression for the turbulent viscosity µt = ρνt .i + µUi. viscosity i. 16 (2. 2. The dimension of νt is [m2 /s] (same as ν).9 valid upon contraction we add 2/3ρδij k to the left-hand side of Eq. and where ℓmix is the mixing length. In order to make Eq. 2. For a presentation and discussion of algebraic turbulence models the interested reader is referred to Wilcox [48]. etc.4 2. 2.3 Algebraic Models 16 is equal to zero.4. aeroplanes. 2. model νt ∝ Uℓ (2.9 so that 2 ¯ ¯ ρui uj = −µt (Ui.1 Equations for Kinetic Energy The Exact k Equation The equation for turbulent kinetic energy k = 1 ui ui is derived from the 2 Navier-Stokes equation which reads assuming steady.i ) + δij ρk.4) (ρUi Uj ).j + Uj. A turbulent velocity Eddy scale multiplied with a turbulent length scale gives the correct dimension.jj . 3 Note that contraction of δij gives δii = δ11 + δ22 + δ33 = 1 + 1 + 1 = 3 (2.j = −P. It is an old model and is hardly used any more. One problem with the model is that ℓmix is unknown and must be determined.10) 2. Eq. incompressible.2.13) .

j .18.18) The third term in Eq.21) .2.21. 2 The first term on the right-hand side of Eq.14) Subtract Eq.j (2. (2. multiply by ui and time average and we obtain ¯ ¯ ρUi Uj − ρUi Uj . the first term is rewritten as . 2.17) ¯ We obtain the second term (using (ρUj ). 2.15 is zero.j = −P.j ui = ¯ − P −P ¯ u + µ Ui − Ui . 2. Now we can assemble the transport equation for the turbulent kinetic energy.6) ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ (ρUi Uj ).j .23) The terms in Eq.j 1 ¯ ¯ ρUj {ui ui.15) The left-hand side can be rewritten as ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ρ (Ui + ui )(Uj + uj ) − Ui Uj ¯ ρUi uj ¯ ui = ρui uj Ui.i + µUi. 2. 2. 2.j For the first term we use the same trick as in Eq.j (2.4 Equations for Kinetic Energy 17 The time averaged Navier-Stokes equation reads (cf.j ui .i i u + ρ(ui uj ).jj i ¯ ¯ ui = ρ Ui uj + ui Uj + ui uj (2.j = −ρui uj Ui.j ui . 2.17.i ui = −(pui ).18) 1 (ρuj ui ui ). 2.j ui.23 have the following meaning.j − ui.j 1 ¯ = Uj ρ ui ui 2 = .j − uj p + ρuj ui ui − µk.16) Using the continuity equation (ρuj ).j ui. 2.18 so that 1 (2. 2.13. Eq.20. 2.j IV (2.jj − ρ(ui uj ).20) (2.2. 2.j .j ui ).j + ui ui.j − µui.j = 0) from ¯ ρUj k .i The second term on the right-hand side of Eq.j = µ (ui ui ).jj ui = µ (ui.j 2 I II III (2.19) (2. 2.j ui ).15 has the form − p.j .22) µ(ui. Equations 2.14 from Eq.j } = ui ρUj ui 2 (2.j = 0. .16 can be written as (using the same technique as in Eq.22 give 1 ¯ ¯ (ρUj k).15 reads µui.jj = µk. 17 .jj 2 The last term on the right-hand side of Eq.

I. This is because the dissipation term is at its largest for small.jj − Ui ρ(ui uj ).2 0.j − ρUj (Ui Ui ).05 0 0 5 10 15 20 x+ 2 Figure 2.j − ρUi Uj Ui. i i Assume steady.j (2. and velocity fluctuations. Dissipation. Both terms are normalized by u4 /ν. The two first terms represent turbulent diffusion by pressure-velocity fluctuations.26) . Convection.j 2 1 ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ = ρUj (Ui Ui ).25) Ui (ρUi Uj ). isotropic scales where the usual boundary-layer approximation that ∂ui /∂x ≪ ∂ui /∂y is not valid. Solid line: ν(∂ V1 /∂x2 )2 .15 0. dashed line: ε. respectively. 2. The large turbulent scales extract energy from the mean flow.2.2 ¯ ¯ The Equation for 1/2(Ui Ui ) ¯ ¯ The equation for 1/2(Ui Ui ) is derived in the same way as that for 1/2u′ u′ .j = ρUj (Ui Ui ).j = (ρUj KK). Comparison of mean and fluctuating dissipation terms.i + µUi Ui. This term (including the minus sign) is almost always positive.j . IV.25 0. The term on the left-hand side can be rewritten as 1 ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ (ρUi Ui Uj ).j = −Ui P.j ui.3: Channel flow at Reτ = 2000. DNS τ ¯ data [21. The last term is viscous diffusion. III.4.14) so that ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ (2. 20]. In boundary-layer flow the exact k equation read ¯ ¯ ¯ 1 ∂ ∂U ∂k ∂ρU k ∂ρV k pv + ρvui ui − µ + = −ρuv − − µui.24) ∂x ∂y ∂y ∂y 2 ∂y Note that the dissipation includes all derivatives.4 Equations for Kinetic Energy 18 0. The term (including the minus sign) is always negative. incompressible flow with constant viscosity and multiply the time-averaged Navier-Stokes equations (Eq. 2. II.1 0. Production. This term is responsible for transformation of kinetic energy at small scales to internal energy.j 2 18 (2.

¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ µUi Ui. is much larger than the dissipation by the mean flow (left side of Eq.22.e. 2. is largest at the wall where it takes the value ν = 1/2000 (normalized by u4 /ν). (2.27) The viscous term in Eq.j .30) (2. 2. transport by pressure-velocity interaction.31) (2.j . The mean dissipation.32).j Ui.j − Ui ρ(ui uj ).26. (2. 2. Note that the last term in Eq. ¯ ν(∂ U1 /∂x2 )2 .jj − (Ui P ).29) On the left-hand side we have the usual convective term.i − µUi.j .21 and 2.j + ρui uj Ui.25 ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ (ρUj K). 2. The last term is rewritten as ¯ ¯ ¯ −Ui ρ(ui uj ).i − µUi. (2. 2.j + ρui uj Ui.28) ¯ Now we can assemble the transport equation for K by inserting Eqs. 2.j .27 and 2. 2.3. 2.5 The Modelled k Equation 19 The first term on the right-hand side of Eq.j Ui.33) (2.j .jj − (Ui P ). 2.31 is the same as the last term in Eq.1.i = −(Ui P ).j = µK.25 can be written as −Ui P. 2.23 but with opposite sign: here we clearly can see that the main source term in the k equation ¯ (the production term) appears as a sink term in the K equation.j ui. is much smoother ′ .jj = µK. 2.e. On the right-hand side we find: transport by viscous diffusion. (2. viscous dissipation.28 into Eq. ¯ equation the dissipation term and the negative production In the K term (representing loss of kinetic energy to the k field) read ¯ ¯ ¯ −µUi.j Ui.j − µui.j + ρ(ui uj )Ui. and in the k equation the production and the dissipation terms read ¯ −ρui uj Ui.29 gives ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ (ρUj K).j = −(Ui ρui uj ). ε. This is clearly seen in Fig. Ui .j ¯ ¯ − (Ui ρui uj ).j = µK. i. Hence the dissipation by the than that of the fluctuating velocity field.jj − µUi.j .25 is rewritten in the same way as the viscous term in Section 2. see Eqs. transport by velocity-stress interaction and loss of energy to the fluctuating velocity field.32) ¯ The gradient of the time-averaged velocity field. τ 19 . ui fluctuations.i . ¯ ¯ ¯ where K = 1/2(Ui Ui ).4.2. i.j Ui. Inserted in Eq. to k.

the dissipation term ρk 2 /ℓ in Eq. The dissipation term in Eq. There is no model for the pressure diffusion term in Eq.12. The dissipation term contains another unknown quantity.39) . 4.1 and 4.j + Uj. 2.j .23 is basically estimated as in Eq.36) so that ε ≡ νui.j − ρkUi. where ε is obtained from its 3 own transport. 2. the turbulent diffusion term and the dissipation term.38) We have one constant in the turbulent diffusion term and it will be determined later.38 has the form ¯ ¯ ∂ρU k ∂ρV k ∂ + = ∂x ∂y ∂y µt µ+ σk 20 ∂k + µt ∂y ¯ ∂U ∂y 2 k2 −ρ .34 is zero for incompressible flow due to continuity. 1. For boundary-layer flow Eq.38 is simply ρε. Fourier’s law for heat flux: heat is diffused term from hot to cold regions).37) The modelled k equation can now be assembled and we get ¯ (ρUj k).e from region of diffusion high k to regions of small k (cf.10 inserted in the production term (term II) in Eq. 2.23. We get µt 1 ρuj ui ui = − k.23 gives 2 ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ Pk = −ρui uj Ui.j ui. It is small (see Figs. In the production term it is the stress tensor which is unknown.j k2 = ℓ 3 (2. 2. 2. Equation 2. Since production we have an expression for this which is used in the Navier-Stokes equation term we use the same expression in the production term. The dissipation velocity scale is now term √ U= k (2.j k2 + Pk − ρ ℓ 3 (2. 2. 2.34) Note that the last term in Eq.23 a number of terms are unknown.j = µt µ+ σk k.5 The Modelled k Equation In Eq.i 3 (2.5 The Modelled k Equation 20 2. 2.j . namely the production term.2.j = µt Ui.35) where σk is the turbulent Prandtl number for k. 2 σk (2. ℓ 3 (2. the turbulent length scale.23 is modeled using a gradient turbulent law where we assume that k is diffused down the gradient. An additional transport will be derived from which we can compute ℓ. In the k − ε model.3) and thus it is simply neglected.i Ui. The triple correlations in term III in Eq. i.

for example. This length scale is. taken as proportional to the thickness of the boundary layer. The main disadvantage of this type of model is that it is not applicable to general flows since it is not possible to find a general expression for an algebraic length scale. 32].2. However. 21 . and often an algebraic expression is used [4. some proposals have been made where the turbulent length scale is computed in a more general way [14. 50]. the width of a jet or a wake. The unknown turbulent length scale must be given.6 One Equation Models In one equation models a transport equation is often solved for the turbulent kinetic energy.6 One Equation Models 21 2. In [32] a transport equation for turbulent viscosity is used.

If we choose to include ui uj and Ui. for instance.38) ε ¯ ¯ ¯ Ui.j .22 3 3.2 Wall Functions The natural way to treat wall boundaries is to make the grid sufficiently fine so that the sharp gradients prevailing there are resolved.j + Uj. The assumption that the flow near the wall has the characteristics of a that in a boundary layer if often not true at all. we take. k Pε = −cε1 (3. the number of unknown terms is very large and they involve double correlations of fluctuating velocities.j in the production term and only turbulent quantities in the dissipation term.1) Note that for the production term we have Pε = cε1 (ε/k)Pk .j + ε (cε1 Pk − cε2 ρε) k (3.j k ε2 diss. However. it is often preferable to use wall functions which allows us to use fine grid in other regions where the gradients of the flow variables are large. when computing complex three-dimensional flow. turbulent quantities ¯ and and velocity gradients. Wilcox [48]). given a maximum number of nodes that we can afford to use in a computation. Now we can write the transport equation for the dissipation as ¯ (ρUj ε). glancing at the k equation (Eq. as in the k equation. Often. In a fully turbulent boundary layer the production term and the dissipation term in the log-law region (30 < y + < 100) are much larger than the 22 .2 reads ¯ ¯ ∂ ∂ρU ε ∂ρV ε + = ∂x ∂y ∂y µ+ µt σε ∂ε ε + cε1 µt ∂y k ¯ ∂U ∂y 2 − ρcε2 ε2 (3. that requires too much computer resources.j = µ+ µt σε ε. It is better to derive an ε equation based on physical reasoning. In the exact equation for ε the production term includes.term = −cε2 ρ . 2.2) For boundary-layer flow Eq. and gradients of fluctuating velocities and pressure. 3. However. An alternative is to assume that the flow near the wall behaves like a fully developed turbulent boundary layer and prescribe boundary conditions employing wall functions.i Ui.3) k 3.1 Two-Equation Turbulence Models The Modelled ε Equation An exact equation for the dissipation can be derived from the Navier-Stokes equation (see.

other terms. 2. ∗ 3.043.3. 3. 2. see Fig.8 we get cµ = u2 ∗ k 2 (3.39) as B = 0 = µt ¯ ∂U ∂y 2 (3. 3.15 into Eq.5) Comparing this with the standard form of the log-law U u∗ y +B = A ln u∗ ν we see that A = 1 κ (3. see Fig. and inserting Eqs.10) 23 .7) 1 ln E. κ In the log-layer we can write the modelled k equation (see Eq.10) ¯ ∂U τw = −ρuv = µt (3. 3. The Boussinesq assumption for the shear stress reads (see Eq. Energy balance in k equation [45].6) − ρε. u∗ /U0 ≃ 0.1. Reδ ≃ 4400.1. In the log-law region the shear stress −ρuv is equal to the wall shear stress τw .9) ∂y Using the definition of the wall shear stress τw = ρu2 .8) where we have replaced the dissipation term ρk 2 /ℓ by ρε.9.1: Boundary along a flat plate. 2.0 Eu∗ y ν (3. 3 (3. The log-law we use can be written as U 1 = ln u∗ κ E = 9.2 Wall Functions 23 20 Gain 10 0 −10 −20 0 200 400 600 Production Dissipation Diffusion Convection 800 1000 1200 Loss y+ Figure 3.4) (3.

i. cµ con∗ When we are using wall functions k and ε are not solved at the nodes stant adjacent to the walls.3.3 so that cµ = 0.4. 3.e.P ∂U ≈ µt.e. 3.2 Wall Functions 24 From experiments we have that in the log-law region of a boundary layer u2 /k ≃ 0. The wall shear stress τw is obtained by calculating the viscosity at the node adjacent to the wall from the log-law. prescribing heat flux in the temper. 24 . from the log-law (Eq. i.4) we finally can write ρu∗ ηκ ln(Eη + ) where η + = u∗ η/ν.09. b.P ∂η η ¯ where U . 3. iteratively. ∂y κy (3. for k −1/2 kP = cµ u2 ∗ (3.11) where the friction velocity u∗ is obtained.13) For the velocity component parallel to the wall the wall shear stress is b.c.4). The shear stress at the wall can be expressed as τw = µt. Instead they are fixed according to the theory presented above. The viscosity used in momentum equations is prescribed at the nodes adjacent to the wall (index P) as follows.12) where the velocity gradient in the production term −uv∂U/∂y has been computed from the log-law in Eq. for used as a flux boundary condition (cf.P = ∗ .velocity ature equation).P = with the log-law (Eq. for ε εP = Pk = u3 ∗ κy (3. it is more convenient to prescribe the turbulent viscosity.P ¯ Substituting u∗ /U µt.P ¯ ¯ U .P u∗ ρu∗ η U . ∂U u∗ = .P denotes the velocity parallel to the wall and η is the normal distance to the wall.10. 3. Using the definition of the friction velocity u∗ τw = ρu2 ∗ we obtain µt.8). When the wall is not parallel to any velocity component.P U .c. The turbulent kinetic energy is set from Eq.c. 3. Index P denotes the first interior node (adjacent to the wall). The dissipation can thus be written as b. The dissipation ε is obtained from observing that production and dissipation are in balance (see Eq.P η = ρu2 → µt.

36. 1. ε (3.18.16) The dissipation and production term can be estimated as (see Sub-section 3.12) νt = cµ k1/2 ℓ = cµ k2 . Simple flows are chosen where the equation can be simplified and where experimental data are used to determine the constants.12. In a similar way we can find a value for the cε1 constant . We look at the cε1 conε equation for the logarithmic part of a turbulent boundary layer.3 The k − ε Model In the k − ε model the modelled transport equations for k and ε (Eqs. The cµ constant was determined above (Subsection 3.18) In the logarithmic layer we have that ∂k/∂y = 0.17) Pk = ρ u3 ∗ κy . σk and σε .38.2.2) ε = k3/2 ℓ (3. we can write Eq. The turbulent length scale is obtained from (see Eq. (3. 3.3 as 0= ε2 ∂ µt ∂ε + (cε1 − cε2 ) ρ ∂y σε ∂y k Dε (3. cε1 .3 The k − ε Model 25 3. which we hope should be universal i. Instead the diffusion term in Eq. 1. ε (3.16 can be rewritten using Eqs.19) 25 . 2.2) are solved.3.11.15) We have five unknown constants cµ . 3. 3.14) The turbulent viscosity is computed from (see Eqs.15 as Dε = ∂ ∂y µt ∂ σε ∂y k3/2 κcµ −3/4 y = k2 κ2 σε ℓ2 cµ 1/2 (3.17. 2.e same for all types of flows. but from Eqs. The k equation in the logarithmic part of a turbulent boundary layer was studied where the convection and the diffusion term could be neglected. 3. 2. where the stant convection term is negligible.37) ℓ= k3/2 . 3. 3.17. 3. which together with Pk = ρε gives −3/4 ℓ = κcµ y. 3. cε2 .18 we find that ∂ε/∂y = 0. and utilizing that production and dissipation are in balance Pk = ρε.2).

16 gives cε1 = cε2 − κ2 cµ σε 1/2 26 (3. 3.92. Far behind the grid the velocity cε2 congradients are very small which means that Pk = 0. 3.17 into Eq. σk and σε . In this model the standard k equation is solved.j + (3. 3.3. 2.21. and cε2 = 1.24) ¯ (ρUj ω).j . jets.25) k µt = ρ . The modelled k and ω equation read ¯ (ρUj k). 3. 3.20. ε = β ∗ ωk.10.23) Experimental data give m = 1. cε1 = 1. Insert this in Eq.22 yields cε2 = m+1 m (3.4 The k − ω Model Inserting Eq. etc.j = µ+ µt ω σk k.92 is chosen. derivate to find dε/dx and insert it into Eq. σk = 1.j . The five constants are given the following values: cµ = 0.21 gives k ∝ −mx−m−1 . 48.20) The flow behind a turbulence generating grid is a simple flow which allows us to determine the cε2 constant.21) ¯ ρU (3.4 The k − ω Model The k − ω model is gaining in popularity.0. 3.25 ± 0. σε = 1.06 [45]. 38].23) to determine three of the five unknown constants. wakes. 3.j + Pk − β ∗ ωk ω (cω1 Pk − cω2 ρkω) k (3. 3. pipes. are optimized by applying the model to various fundamental flows such as flow in channel.2) read ¯ ρU dk = −ρε dx dε ε2 = −cε2 ρ dx k (3. We have found three relations (Eqs.19 and Eq. This quantity is often called specific dissipation from its definition ω ∝ ε/k. 3.31. 3. but as a length determining equation ω is used. Furthermore V = 0 and stant the diffusion terms are negligible so that the modelled k and ε equations (Eqs.44.38.09.22) Assuming that the decay of k is exponential k ∝ x−m .j = µ+ µt σω ω. 3. The last two constants. cε2 = 1. The model was proposed by Wilcox [47. Eq. ω 26 .

ω cω2 = 3/40. ωwall = (β ∗ )−1/2 ∗ u∗ . The modelled k and τ equations read ¯ (ρUj k).27) ¯ (ρUj τ ).j − µt = cµ ρkτ. When wall functions are used k and ω are prescribed as (cf. no such problems appear in the ω equation. σk = 2 and σω = 2. they must both go to zero at a correct rate to avoid problems. recirculating flow.26) In regions of low turbulence when both k and ε go to zero.5 The k − τ Model One of the most recent proposals is the k − τ model of Speziale et al. Note that the production term in the ω equation does not include k since ω ω cω1 Pk = cω1 µt k k ¯ ¯ ∂ Ui ∂ Uj + ∂xj ∂xi ¯ ∂ Ui = cω1 β ∗ ∂xj ¯ ¯ ∂ Ui ∂ Uj + ∂xj ∂xi ¯ ∂ Ui . [41] where the transport equation for the turbulent time scale τ is derived. The exact equation for τ = k/ε is derived from the exact k and ε equations. Sub-section 3.j + Pk − ρ k τ (3.3.j . [37] the k − ω model was used to predict transitional.3: β ∗ = 0.2): kwall = (β ∗ )−1/2 u2 .j τ.5 The k − τ Model 27 The constants are determined as in Sub-section 3. ε = k/τ τ The constants are: cµ .j + k τ (1 − cε1 )Pk + (cε2 − 1) (3. ∂xj In Ref. 27 .j τ.j = µ+ µt τ σk k. On the contrary. cε1 and cε2 are taken from the k − ε model.24.36. cω1 = 5/9.28) k τ 2 τ µ+ µt στ 2 τ.j = + 2 k µ+ µt στ 2 µt στ 1 τ. If k → 0 in the ω equation in Eq. and this causes problems as k → 0 even if ε also goes to zero. large numerical problems for the k − ε model appear in the ε equation as k becomes zero. the turbulent diffusion term simply goes to zero. κy (3.j µ+ k.09.j . and this is often not the case. 3. and σk = στ 1 = στ 2 = 1. 3. The destruction term in the ε equation includes ε2 /k.

This Reynolds number varies throughout the computational domain and is proportional to the ratio of the turbulent and physical viscosity νt /ν. . i.1).). . Rex etc. . ships. the viscous diffusion is much larger that the turbulent one (see Fig. However. as the flow field is often pressure-determined.e. however. c2 are functions of space and time. Please note that “high Reynolds number” and “low Reynolds number” do not refer to the global Reynolds number (for example ReL . aeroplanes etc. at the wall ∂u/∂x = ∂w/∂z = 0. Reℓ ∝ νt /ν.e. Furthermore. In this section we will discuss modifications of high-Re number models so that they can be used all the way down to the wall. . the flow conditions in the boundaries are almost invariably important.) but here we are talking about the local turbulent Reynolds number Reℓ = Uℓ/ν formed by a turbulent fluctuation and turbulent length scale. 4. However. the turbulence models presented so far may not be correct since fully turbulent conditions have been assumed. if the flow near the boundary is important. can be rather crude. For external flows (for example flow around cars.1) 28 . When we are predicting heat transfer it is in general no good idea to use wall functions. . i. We start by studying how various quantities behave close to the wall when y → 0. Thus. Taylor expansion of the fluctuating velocities ui (also valid ¯ for the mean velocities Ui ) gives u = a0 + a1 y + a2 y 2 .e. when the wall is approached the viscous effects become more important and for y + < 5 the flow is viscous dominating. . . symmetry planes. inlet or outlets – the boundary layer may not be that important. These modified models are termed low Reynolds number models. u = v = w = 0 which gives a0 = b0 = c0 . i. When we chose not to use wall functions we thus insert sufficiently many grid lines near solid boundaries so that the boundary layer can be adequately resolved. w = c0 + c1 y + c2 y . v = b 0 + b1 y + b 2 y 2 . Rex .28 4 Low-Re Number Turbulence Models In the previous section we discussed wall functions which are used in order to reduce the number of cells. we must be aware that this is an approximation which. where a0 . this type of models are often referred to as high-Re number models. and the continuity equation gives ∂v/∂y = 0 so that 2 (4. . In many internal flows – where all boundaries are either walls. because the heat transfer at the walls are very important for the temperature field in the whole domain. At the wall we have noslip. This ratio is of the order of 100 or larger in fully turbulent flow and it goes to zero when a wall is approached.

. Production Pk . .2 y+ Figure 4. . . Equation 4. From Eq. 4. 1.3) In Fig.3 0. . . = (a2 + c2 )y 2 . . 1 1 = a1 . ∗ b1 = 0. . Re = UC δ/ν = 7890. . Let us study 29 .2 0. . Direct numerical simulations [23]. u∗ /UC = 0. 1 = a1 b2 y 3 . = O(y 2 ) = O(y 4 ) = O(y 2 ) = O(y 3 ) = O(y 2 ) = O(y 0 ) (4. 10. v = b2 y 2 .2 DNS-data for the fully developed flow in a channel is presented. 1 = b2 y 4 .2 we immediately get u2 v2 w2 uv k ¯ ∂ U /∂y = a2 y 2 .1 0 29 Gain Dν DT + Dp Pk Loss −0. 29].2) (4. .1 Low-Re k − ε Models There exist a number of Low-Re number k − ε models [34. All terms have been scaled with u4 /ν.050. w = c1 y + c2 y 2 .1 ε 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 −0. . When deriving low-Re models it is common to study the behavior of the terms when y → 0 in the exact equations and require that the corresponding terms in the modelled equations behave in the same way. 4. . . Energy balance in k equation. 2 = c2 y 2 . 4.1: Flow between two parallel plates. . dissipation ε. . . and viscous diffusion D ν . .1 can now be written u = a1 y + a2 y 2 . 7. turbulent diffusion (by velocity triple correlations and pressure) D T + D p .4.1 Low-Re k − ε Models 0.

4 0.04 0.3 (see also [30]).24). 2.050.06 0. i the exact k equation near the wall (see Eq.4. partly because it is not measurable. see Fig.j ∂y O(y 0 ) The pressure diffusion ∂pv/∂y term is usually neglected.5 2 1. 4.8 1 w′ /u∗ v ′ /u∗ 20 40 60 80 100 0. u∗ /UC = 0. Direct numerical simulations [23].12 0.08 0.6 0.1 ¯ u′ /UC ¯ w′ /UC ¯ v ′ /UC 0.14 30 u′ /u∗ 0.4 and 4.5 we find that the dissipation term in the modelled equation behaves in the same way as in the exact equation when 30 .2: Flow between two parallel plates.02 0 0 y+ y/δ Figure 4.4) O(y 3 ) + ∂ ∂y µt ∂k σk ∂y O(y 4 ) (4.5 1 0.5) +µ ∂2k ∂y 2 Comparing Eqs.2 0.5 0 0 0. Fluctuating velocity components u′ = u2 i .1 Low-Re k − ε Models 3 2.j ui. The modelled equation reads ¯ ¯ ∂ρU k ∂ρV k + = µt ∂x ∂y ¯ ∂U ∂y O(y 4 ) − ρε O(y 0 ) When arriving at that the production term is O(y 4 ) we have used νt = cµ ρ k2 O(y 4 ) = = O(y 4 ) ε O(y 0 ) (4.6) 2 1 ρvui ui 2 O(y 3 ) (4. 4. ¯ ¯ ¯ ∂ U ∂pv ∂ ∂ρU k ∂ρV k − + = −ρuv − ∂x ∂y ∂y ∂y ∂y ∂2k + µ 2 − µui. and partly because close to the wall it is not important. Re = UC δ/ν = 7890.

Please note that the term “damping term” in this case is not correct since fµ actually is augmenting µt when y → 0 rather than damping. An alternative way is to study the modelled ε equation near the wall and keep only the terms which do not tend to zero. However. and viscous diffusion D ν . ∗ y → 0. We find that the only term which do not vanish at the wall are the viscous diffusion term and the dissipation term 31 .3 we get ¯ ¯ ∂ ∂ρU ε ∂ρV ε ε + = cε1 Pk + ∂x ∂y k ∂y O(y 1 ) O(y 1 ) ∂2ε ε2 + µ 2 − cε2 ρ ∂y k O(y 0 ) O(y 1 ) µt ∂ε σε ∂y O(y 1 ) (4. 3. Re = UC δ/ν = 7890.050. Energy balance in k equation. All terms have been scaled with u4 /ν. both the modelled production and the diffusion term are of O(y 4 ) whereas the exact terms are of O(y 3 ). see Ref. it is common to call all low-Re number functions for “damping functions”.05 −0.1 0 5 10 DT 15 20 25 30 y+ Figure 4. we can choose to solve for a modified dissipation which is denoted ε.1 0.1 Low-Re k − ε Models 0. From Eq.3: Flow between two parallel plates. Instead of introducing a damping function fµ . ˜ It is possible to proceed in the same way when deriving damping functions for the ε equation [41]. Direct numerical simulations [23]. However.2 31 Gain Dν 0. Turbulent diffusion by pressure D p . [27] and Section 4.05 Loss Dp 0 −0. Turbulent diffusion by velocity triple correlations D T .4. This inconsistency of the modelled terms can be removed by replacing the cµ constant by cµ fµ where fµ is a damping function fµ so that fµ = O(y −1 ) when y → 0 and fµ → 1 when y + ≥ 50.25 0.15 0.2. u∗ /UC = 0.7) O(y −2 ) where it has been assumed that the production term Pk has been suitable modified so that Pk = O(y 3 ).

4.12 Sharma 32 .4.11) ε =ε+D ˜ (4.3). Most of them can be cast in the form [34] (in boundary-layer form.10. 4.10) µt = cµ fµ ρ (4. f1 and f2 ) and different extra terms (D and E). i. for convenience) ¯ ¯ ∂ ∂ρU k ∂ρV k + = ∂x ∂y ∂y ¯˜ ¯˜ ∂ρU ε ∂ρV ε ∂ + = ∂x ∂y ∂y µ+ µt σk ∂k + µt ∂y ¯ ∂U ∂y 2 − ρε ¯ ∂U ∂y 2 (4. 4. ∂y 2 k 32 (4.12) Different models use different damping functions (fµ . 4. D = 0.2 The Launder-Sharma Low-Re k − ε Models There are at least a dozen different low Re k − ε models presented in the literature. the Launder-Sharma model [27] which is based on the model of LaunderJones & Launder [22].9) µ+ µt σε ∂ε ˜ ε ˜ + c1ε f1 µt ∂y k ε2 ˜ − cε2 f2 ρ + E k k2 ε ˜ (4. Other models which solve for ε use ˜ no extra source in the k equation.11 and 4.2 The Launder-Sharma Low-Re k − ε Models so that close to the wall the dissipation equation reads 0=µ ε2 ∂2ε − cε2 ρ .9.8) The equation needs to be modified since the diffusion term cannot balance the destruction term when y → 0. The model is given by Eqs.e. Many models solve for ε rather than for ˜ ε where D is equal to the wall value of ε which gives an easy boundary condition ε = 0 (see Sub-section 4. Below we give some details for one of the most popular low-Re k − ε models.

16) where ∂/∂y ≫ ∂/∂x ≃ ∂/∂z and u ≃ w ≫ v have been assumed. ∂y 2 (4. Using Taylor expansion in Eq.17) .15) From Eq.3 Boundary Condition for ε and ε ˜ 33 where fµ = exp f1 = 1 2 f2 = 1 − 0.25 to m = 2. The largest term in the k equation (see Eq. .1 gives ε = ν a2 + c2 + . 2. ∂y 2 (4.14 we can derive alternative boundary conditions. 4. . 4.13) E = 2µ RT = µt ρ ¯ ∂2U ∂y 2 2 k2 νε ˜ The term E was added to match the experimental peak in k around y+ ≃ 20 [22]. 4.24) ∂u ∂y 2 ε=ν + ∂w ∂y 2 (4.4 (1 + RT /50)2 (4.5. 1 1 33 (4. The f2 term is introduced to mimic the final stage of decay of turbulence behind a turbulence generating grid when the exponent in k ∝ x−m changes from m = 1. are the dissipation term and the viscous diffusion term which both are of O(y 0 ) so that 0=µ ∂2k − ρε.4. 4.3 Boundary Condition for ε and ε ˜ In many low-Re k − ε models ε is the dependent variable rather than ε. The exact form of the dissipation term close to the wall reads (see Eq.3 exp −RT √ 2 ∂ k D = 2µ ∂y −3.4) close to the wall. ˜ The main reason is that the boundary condition for ε is rather complicated.14) From this equation we get immediately a boundary condition for ε as εwall = ν ∂2k .

i.23) The Reynolds number Rn and the constants are defined as √ kn −3/4 Rn = . 4.22) 4.12 and 4. . ˜ ˜ In the model of Chien [8]. 4.18) = 1 2 a + c2 . Aµ = 70. the following boundary condition is used εwall = 2ν k y2 (4.18 so that ε = 2νa2 1 k = a2 y 2 1 which gives Eq. 1 2 1 (4.09. (4. µt = cµ ρ kℓµ ℓε (4. 4. .19) Comparing Eqs. The turbulent length scales are prescribed as [15.13. is used.4 The Two-Layer k − ε Model Near the walls the one-equation model by Wolfshtein [50].e. 1 2 1 (4.19 we find εwall = 2ν √ ∂ k ∂y 2 . the diffusion term in the k-equation is modelled using the eddy viscosity assumption. Aε = 2cℓ ν 34 . cℓ = κcµ . ε = 0. 11] ℓµ = cℓ n [1 − exp (−Rn /Aµ )] .4. .4 The Two-Layer k − ε Model In the same way we get an expression for the turbulent kinetic energy k= so that √ ∂ k ∂y 2 34 1 2 a + c2 y 2 .20) In the Sharma-Launder model this is exactly the expression for D in Eqs.21.17 and 4. In this model the standard k equation is solved. cµ = 0. . which means that the boundary condition for ε is zero. (4. modified by Chen and Patel [7]. 4. ℓε = cℓ n [1 − exp (−Rn /Aε )] (n is the normal distance from the wall) so that the dissipation term in the k-equation and the turbulent viscosity are obtained as: ε= √ k3/2 .17 and 4.21) This is obtained by assuming a1 = c1 in Eqs.

25) ω= ε β∗k = O(y −2 ) (4. In the same way we can here use the ω equation (Eq.26) The ω equation is normally not solved close to the wall but for y + < 2. One problem is the boundary condition for ω at walls since (see Eq.5 The low-Re k − ω Model A model which is being used more and more is the k−ω model of Wilcox [47]. or it could be defined as the cell where the damping function 1 − exp (−Rn /Aµ ) takes. the value 0.5. and thus no boundary condition actually needed.5 The low-Re k − ω Model 35 The one-equation model is used near the walls (for Rn ≤ 250).e. Wilcox has also proposed a k − ω model [49] which is modified for viscous effects.26. 35 . a true low-Re model with damping function.25) close to the wall to derive a boundary condition for ω. He demonstrates that this model can predict transition and claims that it can be used for taking the effect of surface roughness into account which later has been confirmed [35].e. The matching of the one-equation model and the k − ε model does not pose any problems but gives a smooth distribution of µt and ε across the matching line. 3.g. and the standard high-Re k − ε in the remaining part of the flow. The standard k − ω model can actually be used all the way to the wall without any modifications [47. ∂y 2 (4. ω is computed from Eq.. A slightly different approach must then be used [16]. A modification of this model has been proposed in [38].95. This works well in finite volume methods but when finite element methods are used ω is needed at the wall. 0=µ ∂2ω − cω2 ρω 2 .25) The solution to this equation is ω= 6ν cω2 y 2 (4. 31.24) tends to infinity. 3. e. The matching line could either be chosen along a pre-selected grid line.3 we derived boundary conditions for ε by studying the k equation close to the wall. i. 4. In Sub-section 4. The largest terms in Eq. 36]. 4. i.25 are the viscous diffusion term and the destruction term.4. 3.

3 exp − . [5] which reads ∂k ∂ ¯ ∂ νt ∂k + (Uj k) = Pk − Ck kω + ν+ ∂t ∂xj ∂xj σk ∂xj ∂ ¯ ω ∂ω + (Uj ω) = Cω1 Pk − Cω2 ω 2 + ∂t ∂xj k ν νt ∂k ∂ω ∂ νt Cω + + ν+ k k ∂xj ∂xj ∂xj σω The turbulent viscosity is given by ν t = Cµ f µ k ω 1 3 Rt 1 − exp − Rt 25 2.3 exp − Rt 1.5 2 fω = 1 + 4.001 exp − Rt Rt 1.35 (4.09 + 0.975 + Rt 10 4 1 − exp − Rt 10 Rt 200 1/2 3/4 0.09.5 The low-Re k − ω Model 4.27) 4.5.75 (4.4. fω = 1 + 4.42.28) ∂ω ∂xj (4. σω = 1. reads [38] ∂ ¯ ∂k + (Uj k) = ∂t ∂xj ∂ ¯ ∂ω + (Uj ω) = ∂t ∂xj ∂ ∂xj ∂ ∂xj k νt = f µ ω νt σk νt ν+ σω ν+ ∂k + Pk − ck fk ωk ∂xj ∂ω νt ω + (cω1 fω Pk − cω2 kω) + cω ∂xj k k ∂k ∂ω ∂xj ∂xj fk = 1 − 0.025 + 0.075 cω = 0. cω2 = 0.2 The low-Re k − ω Model of Bredberg et al.29) fµ = 0.8. 36 The k − ω model of Peng et al. σk = 0.75.5.91 + 36 .5 1/2 ck = 0.1 The low-Re k − ω Model of Peng et al. A new k−ω model was recently proposed by Bredberg et al.722 exp − fµ = 0. cω1 = 0.

Cω2 = 0. σk = 1. Cω = 1.1. (4.072.49. σω = 1.09.5 The low-Re k − ω Model 37 with the turbulent Reynolds number defined as Rt = k/(ων). Cµ = 1. The constants in the model are given as Ck = 0.4.8 Cω1 = 0.30) 37 .

respectively. Take the Navier-Stokes equation for the instantaneous velocity Ui (Eq.10) is not used but a partial differential equation (transport equation) for the stress tensor is derived from the Navier-Stokes equation.i = 0 ρ (5. which promotes isotropy of the turbulence. v 2 and w2 ).4). The resulting equation reads p ¯ ¯ ¯ (Uk ui uj ). εij is the dissipation (i. Add the two equations and time average. When taking the trace the pressure-strain term vanishes since p Φii = 2 ui.e.k (5. 2. 5. transformation of mechanical energy into heat in the small-scale turbulence) of ui uj .k εij where 1 Pij is the production of ui uj [note that Pii = 2 Pk (Pii = P11 + P22 + P33 )].38 5 Reynolds Stress Models In Reynolds Stress Models the Boussinesq assumption (Eq.23). Cij and Dij are the convection and diffusion.1 and divide by two we get the equation for the turbulent kinetic energy (Eq. 38 .6) and multiply by uj . ¯ Subtract the momentum equation for the time averaged velocity Ui ((Eq.k + (ui.k ρ ρ Dij − 2νui. Furthermore. This is done in the same way as for the k equation (Eq.1) Φij is the pressure-strain term.k = −ui uk Uj.j + uj. it can be shown using physical reasoning [19] that Φij acts to reduce the large normal stress component(s) and distributes this energy to the other normal component(s).k − uj uk Ui.23). 2.k uj. of ui uj . Thus the pressure-strain term in the Reynolds stress equation does not add or destruct any turbulent kinetic energy it merely redistributes the energy between the normal components (u2 . Note that if we take the trace of Eq. Derive the same equation with indices i and j interchanged.i ) ρ Cij Pij Φij − ui uj uk + puj pui δik + δjk − ν(ui uj ).2) due to continuity. 2. . 2. 2.

1 + Φij. 25]. x = 0 this mean that the normal stress v 2 is damped).m The pressure diffusion term is for two reasons commonly neglected. 4.55xn ε Φij. 4.3). Near a wall (the term “near” may well extend to y + = 200) the normal stress normal to the wall is damped (for a wall located at.Φij tion is significant. 5. The dissipation tensor εij is assumed to be isotropic.2 = −c2 Pij − δij Pk 3 ′ ′ ε 2 Φnn. which is an important term since its contribu.3) ′ The object of the wall correction terms Φ′ nn.2 + Φ′ + Φ′ ij. 12). and the dissipation tensor εij .2 2 ui uj − δij k 3 2 Φij. see p.1 = −2c1 un f k ′ ′ ε 2 Φss.1 = −c1 ε k (5.1 Reynolds Stress Models 39 5.1 ij. The pressure strain term. εij = 2 δij ε. from DNS-data is has indeed been found to be small (see Fig.4) tion Dij = cs ρuk um (ui uj ). Here we have introduced a s − n coordinate system. for example. the pressure diffusion (puj δik + +pui δjk )/ρ and the pressure strain Φij . 3 (5.1 Reynolds Stress Models We find that there are terms which are unknown in Eq. and the other two are augmented (see Fig.5.1 = c1 un f k 3 k2 f= 2.1. 5. triple The triple correlation in the diffusion term is often modelled as [9] correlak (5.e. with s along the wall and n normal to the wall. In the literature there are many proposals for better (and more complicated) pressure strain models [42. it is not possible to measure this term and before DNS-data (Direct Numerical Simulations) were available it was thus not possible to model this term.k ε .2).5) From the definition of εij (see 5.1) we find that the assumption in Eq. First. i.1 is to take the effect of the wall into account. such as the triple correlations ui uj uk . Instead we supply models for the unknown terms. From Navier-Stokes equation we could derive transport equations for this unknown quantities but this would add further unknowns to the equation system (the closure problem. is modelled as [26.5 is equivalent to assuming that for small scales (where dissipation occurs) the 39 .1 and Φss. 17] Φij = Φij. Second.

Examples where non-isotropic effects often are important are flows with strong curvature. Advantages with eddy viscosity models: i) simple due to the use of an isotropic eddy (turbulent) viscosity. w2 ). flows with strong acceleration/retardation.k are not correlated for i = j. 24. iii) work reasonably well for a large number of engineering flows.k − uj uk Ui. Disadvantages with eddy viscosity models: i) isotropic. and thus not good in predicting normal stresses (u2 . 17] ¯ ¯ ¯ (Uk ui uj ). but isotropic eddy viscosity models handle this type of flow excellent as far as mean flow quantities are concerned.k + cs ρuk um (ui uj ). 5. Below we present list some advantages and disadvantages with RSMs and eddy viscosity models.k and uj. 28. swirling flow. swirling flows.6) 2 + Φij − δij ρε 3 . Eddy Viscosity Models Whenever non-isotropic effects are important we should consider using RSMs. see [18. Of course a k − ε model give very poor representation of the normal stresses. Advantages with RSMs: i) the production terms need not to be modelled.3. Disadvantages with RSMs: 40 . 40]. For a review on RSMs (Reynolds Stress Models). buoyancy etc.5. This is the same as assuming that for small scales ui and uj are not correlated for i = j which is a good approximation since the turbulence at these small scale is isotropic. Eddy Viscosity Models 40 two derivative ui. 5.1 and the modelled Reynolds equation reads [26. We have given models for all unknown term in Eq. ii) stable via stability-promoting second-order gradients in the meanflow equations. v 2 . acceleration/retardation.k = −ui uk Uj. ii) as a consequence of i) it is unable to account for curvature effects. see Section 1.2 Reynolds Stress Models vs. Note that in a turbulent boundary layer the turbulence is always non-isotropic.k k + µ(ui uj ). 5. iii) as a consequence of i) it is unable to account for irrotational strains.2 Reynolds Stress Models vs.4.m ε (5.k where Φij should be taken from Eq. ii) thanks to i) it can selectively augment or damp the stresses due to curvature effects.

01 can have a significant effect on the turbulence. The work reviewed by Bradshaw demonstrates that even such small amounts of convex curvature as δ/R = 0. in contrast. It can be shown that it is the exact modelling of the production terms in the RSM which allows the RSM to respond correctly to this effect.3 Curvature Effects Curvature effects.5. [12.3 Curvature Effects 41 A 0 B r B 0 A Uθ (r) Figure 5. For a discussion of curvature effects. which dampens (augments) the turbulence [3. Uθ = i) complex and difficult to implement. is not able to respond to streamline curvature. Both types of curvature are present in attached flows on curved surfaces. and in separation regions. Thompson and Whitelaw [44] carried out an experimental inves41 . The entire Reynolds stress tensor is active in the interaction process between shear stresses. When the streamlines in boundary layer type of flow have a convex (concave) curvature. The ratio of boundary layer thickness δ to curvature radius R is a common parameter for quantifying the curvature effects on the turbulence. see Refs. The k − ε model. When predicting flows where curvature effects are important. 39]. related either to curvature of the wall or streamline curvature.1: Curved boundary layer flow along r = constant. are known to have significant effects on the turbulence [3]. Thus convex streamline curvature decreases the stress levels. Uθ (r). especially the shear stress and the Reynolds stress normal to the wall. 5. Ur = 0. the turbulence is stabilized (destabilized). iii) CPU consuming. normal stresses and mean velocity strains. 13]. it is thus necessary to use turbulence models that accurately predict all Reynolds stresses. ii) numerically unstable because small stabilizing second-order derivatives in the momentum equations (only laminar diffusion). not only the shear stresses.

if the fluid is displaced inwards to level B.5. An illustrative model case is curved boundary layer flow. it encounters a pressure gradient larger than that to which it was accustomed at r = r0 . It is clear from the model problem above that convex curvature. Instead the centrifugal force drives it back to its original level.3 Curvature Effects 42 y x streamline Figure 5. The reduction of ρu2 and −ρuv was also substantial.g. 5. It is discussed below how the Reynolds stress model responds to streamline curvature.03. where they measured δ/R ≃ 0.7 gives (∂p/∂r)A > (∂p/∂r)0 . The ratio of the normal stresses ρu2 and ρv 2 is typically 5. the flow is deflected upwards. turbulent fluctuation) outwards to level A. 5.g. The production terms Pij owing to rotational strains can be written as 42 .2. an approaching separation region. The centrifugal force exerts a force in the normal direction (outward) on a fluid following the streamline. As Uθ = Uθ (r) (with ∂Uθ /∂r > 0 and Ur = 0). They reported a 50 percent decrease of ρv 2 (Reynolds stress in the normal direction to the wall) owing to curvature.7) Here the variables are instantaneous or laminar. at least in the radial direction.1)) with θ locally aligned with the streamline is introduced. which is balanced by the pressure gradient. when ∂Uθ /∂r > 0.2: The streamlines which in flat-plate boundary layers are along the x-axis are suddenly deflected upwards (concave curvature) owing to e. has a stabilizing effect on (turbulent) fluctuations. Hence the fluid is forced back to r = r0 . In addition they reported significant damping of the turbulence in the shear layer in the outer part of the separation region. as (Uθ )A > (Uθ )0 . At one x station. How will this affect the turbulence? Let us study the effect of concave streamline curvature. Similarly. the pressure gradient is smaller here than at r = r0 and cannot keep the fluid at level B. the radial inviscid momentum equation degenerates to 2 ρUθ ∂p − =0 r ∂r (5. tigation on a configuration simulating the flow near a trailing edge of an airfoil. If the fluid is displaced by some disturbance (e. which from Eq. 5. Assume that there is a flat-plate boundary layer flow. see Fig. A polar coorˆ dinate system r − θ (see Fig.

these cases are summarized in Table 5.e. If the streamline (and the wall) in Fig. 43 . as the two rotational strains are multiplied by the same coefficient (the turbulent viscosity).9) (5. An increase in the magnitude of P12 will increase −uv.11) As long as the streamlines in Fig. the situation will be reversed: the turbulence will be stabilized. v 2 − eq. and so on. : RSM.8) (5.2 is a wall jet flow where ∂ U /∂y < 0. It can be said that the turbulence is destabilized owing to concave curvature of the streamlines. However. 5. the sign of ∂ Uθ /∂r). However as soon as the streamlines are de¯ ¯ flected. RSM. : k−ε : P11 = −2ρuv P12 = −ρu2 ¯ ∂U ∂y (5.1. the situation ¯ will be as follows: the turbulence is stabilizing when ∂ U /∂y > 0. which in turn will increase P11 and P22 . which continuously increases the Reynolds stresses. bilizing for ∂ U The stabilizing or destabilizing effect of streamline curvature is thus dependent on the type of curvature (convex or concave). the k − ε model is not very sensitive to streamline curvature (neither convex nor concave).1: Effect of streamline curvature on turbulence. and whether there is an increase or decrease in momentum in the tangential direction with ¯ radial distance from its origin (i. For convenience. 5. uv − eq. and desta¯ /∂y < 0. This means that ρu2 and ρv 2 will be larger and the magnitude of P12 will be further increased.2 are parallel to the wall. u2 − eq. ¯ If the flow (concave curvature) in Fig. all pro¯ duction is a result of ∂ U /∂y. Thus the magnitude of P12 will increase (P12 is nega¯ tive) as ∂ V /∂x > 0.10) 2 ¯ ¯ ∂V ∂U − ρv 2 ∂x ∂y ¯ ∂V ∂x P22 = −2ρuv Pk = µt ¯ ¯ ∂V ∂U + ∂y ∂x (5. there are more terms resulting from ∂ V /∂x.5.2 is deflected downwards. It is seen that there is a positive feedback. : RSM. Even if ∂ V /∂x is much ¯ /∂y it will still contribute non-negligibly to P12 as ρu2 is smaller that ∂ U much larger than ρv 2 . 5.3 Curvature Effects ¯ ∂ Uθ /∂r > 0 convex curvature concave curvature stabilizing destabilizing ¯ ∂ Uθ /∂r < 0 destabilizing stabilizing 43 Table 5.

5 (P11 + P22 ) = −ρu2 ¯ ∂U ∂x 2 ¯ ¯ ∂U ∂V − ρv 2 ∂x ∂y ¯ ∂V ∂y 2 k − ε : Pk = 2µt + ¯ ¯ If u2 ≃ v 2 we get P11 + P22 ≃ 0 since ∂ U /∂x = −∂ V /∂y due to continuity. which is also the results given by second-moment closure. 5. In boundary layer flow. The production term Pk in k − ε model. since it will be sum of the two strains. whereas k − ε models give a large production. the production term −ρ(u2 − v 2 )∂U/∂x is of equal importance.3: Stagnation flow. where u2 ≃ v 2 the production due to normal stresses is zero. In order to illustrate this. In the case of stagnation-like flow (see Fig. Thompson and Whitelaw [44] found that near the separation point. will be large. let us write the production due to the irrotational ¯ ¯ strains ∂ U /∂x and ∂ V /∂y for RSM and k − ε: RSM : 0. however. the production due to irrotational strains is correctly accounted for.4 Acceleration and Retardation 44 x2 y x1 x x2 x1 Figure 5. As the exact form of the production terms are used in second-moment closures.4 Acceleration and Retardation ¯ When the flow accelerates and/or decelerate the irrotational strains (∂ U /∂x.3). 5. This was confirmed in prediction of separated flow using RSM [12. near the separation point as well as in the separation zone. the only term which contributes to the production term in the k equation is −ρuv∂U/∂y (x denotes streamwise direction). the production term −ρ(u2 − v 2 )∂ U /∂x is of equal importance.5. In pure boundary layer flow the only term which contributes to the ¯ production term in the k and ε-equations is −ρuv∂ U /∂y. ¯ ¯ ∂ V /∂y and ∂ W /∂z) become important. 13]. 44 . as well as in the sepa¯ ration zone. Thompson and Whitelaw [44] found that.

Thin-layer approximation and algebraic model for separated turbulent flows. 593–616. H. J. and Nagano. and Harlow. AIAA Journal 26 (1988).. T. [3] Bradshaw.. P. Agardograph progress no. Numer. Physics of Fluids 13 (1970).. Reynolds stress transport modelling of shock/boundary-layer interaction. AIAA 93-3099.. Prediction of the flow around an airfoil using a Reynolds stress transport model. 45 . B. and Patel. [8] Chien. Calculation of boundary-layer development using the turbulent energy equation.1. [12] Davidson. and Lomax. [5] Bredberg. 731–743. and Davidson.REFERENCES 45 References [1] Abe. Kondoh. 24th AIAA Fluid Dynamics Conference. and Atwell. 2634–2649. An improved k − ω turbulence model applied to recirculating flows. 1973. K. N.. Y. [9] Daly. 1993. AIAA Journal 20 (1982). Calculation of the turbulent buoyancy-driven flow in a rectangular cavity using an efficient solver and two different low reynolds number k − ε turbulence models.. 129–147. [7] Chen. 1978. Effects of streamline curvature on turbulent flow.. A. F. Flow field calculations. Heat Transfer 18 (1990). AL. [4] Bradshaw.-H. K. Academic Press. AIAA 78-257. 169. Ferriss. 50–57. 139–151. J. Journal of Fluid Mechanics 28 (1967). Predictions of channel and boundary layer flows with a low-reynolds-number turbulence model. Journal of Fluids Engineering 117 (1995). AGARD. 641–648. Transport equation in turbulence. 33– 38. Near-wall turbulence models for complex flows including separation. A new turbulence model for predicting fluid flow and heat transfer in separating and reattaching flows . H. Huntsville. L. Heat Mass Transfer 37 (1994). V. [2] Baldwin. [10] Davidson. P... International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow 23. 6 (2002). D.. [11] Davidson. Analysis of Turbulent Boundary Layers. L. Peng. L. and Smith. B. [6] Cebeci. S. L. 1974. Int. Orlando. T.

. [24] Launder. Heat and Fluid Flow 10 (1989). 794–800. Conf. J. [16] Emvin. Int. Chalmers University of Technology. Journal of Fluid Mechanics 86 (1978).ac. Ground effects on pressure fluctuations in the atmospheric boundary layer. and future? Int. and Jimenez. Navier-Stokes stall predictions using an algebraic stress model. [15] Davidson. B. Reynolds stress transport modelling of shock-induced separated flow. and Jim´nez. J. Computers & Fluids 24 (1995). and Olsson.REFERENCES 46 [13] Davidson.. J. S. Hafez. [20] Hoyas.. B. http://torroja. S. of Thermo and Fluid Dynamics. 411–422. Scaling of the velocity fluctuations in turbulent channels up to Reτ = 2003. on Numerical Methods in Laminar and Turbulent Flow (1987). and Rizzi. L. M. [19] Hinze. [14] Davidson. Eds.uk/database). J. and Launder. e ´ [21] Hoyas. ´ [18] Hanjalic. W. Habashi. [23] Kim. Heat and Fluid Flow 15 (1994). 301–314. B. K. In 5th Int. Turbulence. L. S.. 1990. J. A. 46 . 282–300. Pineridge Press. Data Disk No. 011702 (2006). 4 (also available at Ercoftac’s wwwserver http://fluindigo. J. Int. 1997.es/ftp/channels/data/statistics/. Bradshaw et al. On the elimination of wall-topography parameters from second-moment closures. Calculation of some parabolic and elliptic flows using a new one-equation turbulence model. Taylor. The Full Multigrid Method Applied to Turbulent Flow in Ventilated Enclosures Using Structured and Unstructured Grids. C.. and Li. pp. J. 178–203. Dept. Spacecraft and Rockets 29 (1992). and Launder. B.mech.dmt. 999–1006. Advanced turbulence closure models: A view of current status and future prospects. ¨ [17] Gibson. PhD thesis.upm.surrey. 491–511. [22] Jones. New York. P. Heat Mass Transfer 15 (1972). E.. Physics of Fluids A 6 (1994). Physics of Fluids A 18.. J. The prediction of laminarization with a two-equation model of turbulence. and M..-P. [25] Launder. McGraw-Hill.. 253–268. L.). The collaborative testing of turbulence models (organized by P. Second-moment closure: Present . 1975.. Goteborg. second ed. W.

Application of turbulence models to separated flows over rough surfaces. Japan. vol. F. Reynolds-stress and dissipation-rate budgets in a turbulent channel flow. Application of the energy dissipation model of turbulence to the calculation of flow near a spinning disc. B.. In 5th Int... 1308–1319. Performance of two-equation turbulence models for numerical simulation of ventilation flows. 131–138. [32] Menter. W. Journal of Fluids Engineering 117 (1995). Dept. on Air Distributions in Rooms. 1598–1605. 91–100. [33] Panton. V.. and Holmberg..-H. Reece. [36] Peng. F. and Scheuerer. Elsevier. ROOMVENT’96 (Yokohama. L. Ed. Davidson. Bergeles. 3 (1975). Tech. Eds. Heat and Mass Transfer 1 (1974). of Thermo and Fluid Dynamics. B. and Moin. R. J. 131–140. 15–44. 1984. 35 (1991).and two-equation models of turbulence. 234–241. John Wiley & Sons.. 1996. and Sharma. The two-equations turbulence k−ω model applied to recirculating ventilation flows.. S. 21–47. pp. Rodi.. W. [37] Peng. In Engineering Turbulence Modelling and Experiments 3 (1996). Bergeles. In Engineering Turbulence Modelling and Experiments 3 (1996).. Lett. M. S.. Incompressible Flow. 47 . Conf. Elsevier. Low-Reynolds-number eddyviscosity modelling based on non-linear stress-strain/vorticity relations.. Journal of Fluid Mechanics 68. AIAA Journal 23 (1985). Wind Engng. M. AIAA Journal 32 (1994). Modelling engineering flows with Reynolds stress turbulence closure. and Holmberg. Murakami. 537–566. Rodi and G.. Turbulence models for near-wall and low Reynolds number flows: A review. Two-equation eddy-viscosity turbulence models for engineering applications. [34] Patel. [35] Patel. G.. W. Rodi and G. W. 153–160. Progress in the development of a Reynolds-stress turbulence closure.. P. G. N. 2.-H. pp. S. pp. Journal of Fluid Mechanics 194 (1988). and Rodi.REFERENCES 47 [26] Launder. Aerodyn. L. S. New York. [31] Menter. [28] Leschziner. and Ind. V. S. Eds. Rep. [30] Mansour. and Leschziner. B. Kim. On the connection between one. [29] Lien. J. 96/13. F. J. Davidson.. and Yoon. Gothenburg. 1996).. Chalmers University of Technology. [27] Launder.

D. Abid.. J. [44] Thompson. AIAA Journal 32 (1994). Turbulence Modeling for CFD.REFERENCES 48 [38] Peng. and Scheuerer. Cambridge University Press. Second-order near-wall turbulence closures: a review. Journal of Fluid Mechanics 157 (1985). A First Course in Turbulence. [46] White. Int. and Whitelaw. Cambridge. Sarkar. A. R. 1422–1435. Reassessment of the scale-determining equation. B. 247–255. Y. 305–326. C. M. S. Fluid Mechanics. S. [50] Wolfshtein. second ed. 1993.. A modified lowReynolds-number k − ω model for recirculating flows. Journal of Fluid Mechanics 227 (1991). Physics of Fluids 26 (1983). [43] Tennekes. C. H. AIAA Journal 30 (1992). G.. 324–331. [42] Speziale. Davidson. [40] So. New York. Calculation of curved shear layers with two-equation turbulence models.. AIAA Journal 29 (1991). R. and Holmberg. W. California 91011... Modelling the pressurestrain correlation of turbulence: an invariant dynamical system approach. Characteristics of a trailingedge flow with turbulent boundary-layer separation. Inc. La Canada. T. [45] Townsend. 1972. 11 (1988). 867–875.. AIAA Journal 26. 1994. Massachusetts. The MIT Press. S. F. and Anderson. [41] Speziale. 301–318. and Gatski. Mass Heat Transfer 12 (1969). McGraw-Hill. [39] Rodi. New York. and Lumley. Lai. DCW Industries. H. 48 . E.. 1819–1835. 1976. 1299–1310. [48] Wilcox.. D. and Zhang.. Critical evaluation of two-equation models for near-wall turbulence. J. Journal of Fluids Engineering 119 (1997).. J.-H. ˜ [49] Wilcox. Simulation of transition with a two-equation turbulence model. D. The Structure of Turbulent Shear Flow. [47] Wilcox. The velocity and temperature distribution in onedimensional flow with turbulence augmentation and pressure gradient.. 245–272. 5354 Palm Drive. Inc.. L.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful