Book contents
- Coarse Grained Simulation and Turbulent Mixing
- Coarse Grained Simulation and Turbulent Mixing
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Contributors
- Preface
- Prologue
- Part I Fundamentals
- 1 Proof of Concept
- 2 A Minimum Turbulence State for Coarse Grained Simulation
- 3 Finite Scale Theory
- 4 Material Conservation of Passive Scalar Mixing in Finite Scale Navier Stokes Fluid Turbulence
- Part II Challenges
- Part III Complex Mixing Consequences
- Index
- Plate section
- References
3 - Finite Scale Theory
Compressible Hydrodynamics at Second Order
from Part I - Fundamentals
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 June 2016
Edited by
Book contents
- Coarse Grained Simulation and Turbulent Mixing
- Coarse Grained Simulation and Turbulent Mixing
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Contributors
- Preface
- Prologue
- Part I Fundamentals
- 1 Proof of Concept
- 2 A Minimum Turbulence State for Coarse Grained Simulation
- 3 Finite Scale Theory
- 4 Material Conservation of Passive Scalar Mixing in Finite Scale Navier Stokes Fluid Turbulence
- Part II Challenges
- Part III Complex Mixing Consequences
- Index
- Plate section
- References
Summary
A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Coarse Grained Simulation and Turbulent Mixing , pp. 48 - 86Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2016
References
Alsmeyer, H., 1976, “Density profiles in argon and nitrogen shock waves measured by the absorption of an electron beam,” J. Fluid Mech. 74, 497–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aluie, H., 2013, “Scale decomposition in compressible turbulence,” Physica D 247, 54–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aspden, A., Nikiforakis, N., Dalziel, S., and Bell, J. B., 2008, “Analysis of implicit LES methods,” Comm. App. Math. Comp. Sci. 3, 103–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bethe, H., 1942 [1998], “On the theory of shock waves for an arbitrary equation of state,” Technical Report NDRC-B-237, office of Scientfic Research and Development. Reprinted in Classic Papers in Shock Compression Science, Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Boris, J.P., 1990, “On large eddy simulation using subgrid turbulence models,” in Whither Turbulence? Turbulence at the Crossroads, ed. by Lumley, J.L., Springer-Verlag, 344–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boris, J.P., 2013, “Flux-corrected transport looks at forty,” Computers & Fluids 84, 113–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boris, J.P., Book, D.L., 1973: “Flux-corrected transport: 1. SHASTA, A fluid transport algorithm that works,” J. Comp. Phys. 11, 38–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chapman, S. and Cowling, T.G., 1991, The Mathematical Theory of Non-uniform Gases: An Account of the Kinetic theory of Viscosity, Thermal Conduction and Diffusion in Gases, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Clark, R.A., Ferziger, J.H., Reynolds, W.C., 1979, “Evaluation of subgrid scale models using an accurately simulated turbulent flow,” J. Fluid Mech. 91, 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colella, P. and Woodward, P.R., 1984, “The piecewise parabolic method (PPM) for gas-dynamical simulations,” J. Comput. Phys. 54, 174–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corrsin, S., 1974, “Limitations of gradient transport models in random walks and turbulence,” Adv. Geophys. 18 A, 25–60.Google Scholar
Deardorff, J.W., 1972, “Theoretical expression for the countergradient vertical heat flux,” J. Geophysical Res. 77, 5900–5904.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eyink, G.L., 1994, “Energy dissipation without viscosity in ideal hydrodynamics,” Physica D 78, 222–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eyink, G.L., 2003, “Local 4/5-law and energy dissipation anomaly in turbulence,” Nonlinearity 16, 137–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Favre, A., 1983, “Turbulence: Spacetime statistical properties and behavior in supersonic flows,” Phys. Fluids 26, 2851–2863.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foias, C., Sell, G.R., Temam, R., 1988, “Inertial manifolds for nonlinear evolutionary equations,” J. Differential Eqs. 73, 309–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foias, C., Holm, D.D., Titi, E.S., 2001, “The Navier–Stokes–alpha model of fluid turbulence,” Physica D 152, 505–519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frederiksen, J.S and Davies, A.G., 1997, “Eddy viscosity and stocastic backscatter parameterizations on the sphere for atmospheric circulation models,” J. Atmos. Sci. 54, 2475–2492.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ghosal, S., 1996, “An analysis of numerical errors in large-eddy simulations of turbulence,” J. Comput. Phys. 125, 187–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Godunov, S.K. and Sergei, K., 1954, “Different Methods for Shock Waves,” PhD Dissertation, Moscow State University.Google Scholar
Grad, H., 1958, “Principles of the kinetic theory of gases,” in Handbuch der Physik Vol. XII, ed. by Flugge, S., Springer, 205–294.Google Scholar
Greenshields, C.J. and Reese, J.M., 2007, “The structure of shock waves as a test of Brenner’s modifications to the Navier-Stokes equations," J. Fluid Mech. 580, 407–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grinstein, F.F., Margolin, L.G., and Rider, W.J., 2007, Implicit Large Eddy Simulation: Computing Turbulent Fluid Dynamics, Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, S., 1971, An Introduction to the Theory of the Boltzmann Equation, Holt, Rinehart and Winston,.Google Scholar
Hirt, C.W., 1968, “Heuristic stability theory for finite difference equations,” J. Comput. Phys. 2, 339–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirt, C.W., 1969, “Computer studies of time-dependent turbulent flows,” Phys. Fluids Supplement II, 219–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ho, C-M. and Tai, Y-C., 1998, “Micro-electro-mechanical systems (MEMs) and fluid flows,” Ann. Rev. Fluid Mech. 30, 579–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holm, D.D., Marsden, J.E., and Ratiu, T.S., 1998, “Euler–Poincaré models of ideal fluids with nonlinear dispersion,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 4173–4176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, D.A., Margolin, L.G., and Poje, A.C., 2002, “Accuracy and nonoscillatory properties of enslaved difference schemes,” J. Comput. Phys. 181, 705–728.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jordan, P.M. and Kieffer, R.S., 2015, “A note on finite-scale Navier–Stokes theory: the case of constant viscosity, strictly adiabatic flow,” Phys. Letters A 379, 124–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kremer, G.M., 2010, An Introduction to the Boltzmann Equation and Transport Processes in Gases, Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landau, L.D. and Lifshitz, E.M., 1959, Fluid Mechanics, Course of Theoretical Physics Vol. 6, Addison-Wesley, chapter 17.Google Scholar
Lax, P.D., 1952, “On discontinuous initial value problems for nonlinear equations and finite differences,” Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory report LAMS-1332.Google Scholar
Leith, C.E., 1990, “Stochastic backscatter in a subgridscale model,” Phys. Fluids A 2, 297–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
LeVeque, R.J., 2002, Finite Volume Methods for Hyperbolic Problems, Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Linden, P.F., Redondo, J.M., and Youngs, D.L., 1994, “Molecular mixing in Rayleigh-Taylor instability,” J. Fluid Mech. 265, 97–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Majda, A. and Osher, S., 1977, “Propagation of error into regions of smoothness for accurate difference approximations to hyperbolic equations,” Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 30, 671–705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Margolin, L.G., 2009, “Finite-scale equations for compressible fluid flow,” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A 367, 2861–2871.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Margolin, L.G., 2014, “Finite scale theory: The role of the observer in classical fluid flow,” Mech. Res. Comm. 57, 10–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Margolin, L.G. and Rider, W.J., 2002, “A rationale for implicit turbulence modeling,” Int. J. Num. Meth. Fluids 39, 821–841.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Margolin, L.G., Rider, W.J., and Grinstein, F.F., 2006, “Modeling turbulent flow with implicit LES,” J. Turbulence 7, 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Margolin, L.G., Ruppel, H.M., and Demuth, R. B., 1985, “Gradient Scaling for Nonuniform Meshes,” Proc. 4th International Conference on Numerical Methods in Laminar and Turbulent Flow, The University of Wales, Swansea, 1477.Google Scholar
Margolin, L.G. and Shashkov, M., 2005, “MPDATA: Gauge transformation, limiters and monotonicity,” Int. J. Num. Meth. Fluids 50, 1193–1206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Margolin, L.G. and Shashkov, M., 2007, “Finite volume methods and the equations of finite scale: a mimetic approach,” Int. J. Num. Methods Fluids 56, 991–1002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Margolin, L.G., Smolarkiewicz, P.K., and Sorbjan, Z., 1999, “Large eddy simulations of convective boundary layers using nonoscillatory differencing,” Physica D 133, 390–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Margolin, L.G., Smolarkiewicz, P.K., and Wyszogradzki, A.A., 2006, “Dissipation in implicit turbulence models: A computational study,” J. Appl. Mech. 73, 469–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Margolin, L.G. and Vaughan, D.E., 2012, “Traveling wave solutions for finite scale equations,” Mech. Res. Comm. 45, 64–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mattiussi, C., 1997, “An analysis of finite volume, finite element and finite differences methods using some concepts from algebraid topology,” 133, 289–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merriam, M.L., 1987, “Smoothing and the Second Law,” Comp. Meth. Appl. Mech. Eng. 64, 177–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nie, X.B., Chen, S.Y., W.N. E, and Robbins, M.O., 2004, “A continuum and molecular dynamics hybrid method for micro- and nano-fluid flow,” J. Fluid Mech. 500, 55–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Noh, W.F., 1964, “CEL: a time-dependent two-dimensional coupled Eulerian-Lagrangian code,” in Methods in Computational Physics, ed. Alder, B.J.. Academic Press, 117–180.Google Scholar
Peierls, R.E., 1945, “Theory of von Neumann’s method of treating shocks,” Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory report LA-332.Google Scholar
Porter, D.H., Pouquet, A., and Woodward, P.R., 1994, “Kolmogorov-like spectra in decaying three-dimensional supersonic flows,” Phys. Fluids 6, 2133–2142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reif, F., 1965, Fundamentals of Statistical and Thermal Physics, McGraw-Hill, 475–476.Google Scholar
Ren, W. and Weinan, E, 2005, “Heterogeneous multiscale method for the modeling of complex fluids and micro–fluidics,” J. Comput. Phys. 204, 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richtmyer, R.D., 1948, ”Proposed numerical method for calculation of shocks,” Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory report LA-671.Google Scholar
Schmidt, B., 1969, “Electron beam density measurements in shock waves in argon,” J. Fluid Mech. 39, 361–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmitt, F.G., 2007, “About Boussinesq’s turbulent viscosity hypothesis: Historical remarks and a direct evaluation of its validity,” C.R. Mecanique 335, 617–627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shan, X., Yuan, X-F., and Chen, H., 2006, “Kinetic theory representation of hydrodynamics: A way beyond the Navier-Stokes equation,” J. Fluid Mech. 550, 413–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shashkov, M., 1996, Conservative Finite Diference Methods on General Grids, CRC Press.Google Scholar
Smagorinsky, J., 1963, “ General circulation experiments with the primitive equations I. The basic experiment,” Mon. Wea. Rev. 91, 99–164.2.3.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smagorinsky, J., 1983, “The beginnings of numerical weather prediction and general circulation modeling: early recollections,” Adv. Geophys. 25, 3–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smolarkiewicz, P.K. and Margolin, L.G., 1998, “MPDATA: A finite-difference solver for geophysical flows,” J. Comput. Phys. 140, 459–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stull, R.B., 1991, “Review of non-local mixing in turbulent atmospheres: transilient turbulence theory,” Boundary-Layer Meteorology 62, 21–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tikhonov, A.N. and Samarskii, A.A., 1962, “Homogeneous difference schemes,” USSR Computational Mathematics and Mathematical Physics 1, 5–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Uribe, F.J., 2011, “The shock wave problem revisited: The Navier–Stokes equations and Brenner’s two velocity hydrodynamics,” in Coping with Complexity: Model Reduction and Data Analysis, ed. by Gorban, A.N. and Roose, D., Springer–Verlag, 207–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Leer, B., 1979, “Towards the ultimate conservative difference scheme 5: 2nd-order sequel to Godunov’s method,” J. Comput. Phys. 32, 101–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
von Neumann, J. and Richtmyer, R.D., 1950, “A method for the numerical calculation of hydrodynamic shocks,” J. Appl. Phys. 21, 232–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wesseling, P., 2001, Principles of Computational Fluid Dynamics, Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilkins, M.L., 1964, “Calculation of Elastic-Plastic Flow,” in Methods in Computational Physics, ed. Alder, B.J., Academic Press, 211–263.Google Scholar
Wilkins, M.L., 1980, “Use of artificial viscosity in multidimensional fluid dynamic calculations,” J. Comput. Phys. 36, 281–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, S.A., Bell, J.B., and Garcia, A.L., 2008, “Algorithm refinement for fluctuating hydrodynamics,” Multiscale Model. Simul. 6, 1256–1280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winckelmans, G., Wray, A., Vasilyev, O., and Jeanmart, O., 2001, “Explicit filtering large edddy simulation using the tensor diffusivity model supplemented by a dynamic Smagorinsky term,” Phys. Fluids 13, 1385–1403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhou, Y., Grinstein, F.F., Wachtor, A.J., and Haines, B.M., 2014, “Estimating the effective Reynolds number in implicit large eddy simulation,” Phys. Rev. E 89, 013303.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
- 1
- Cited by