Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-hvd4g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-25T19:42:05.177Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Analysis of a strongly sheared, nearly homogeneous turbulent shear flow

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 April 2006

D. C. Leslie
D. C. Leslie
Affiliation:
Department of Nuclear Engineering, Queen Mary College, Mile End Road, London E1 4NS
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Harris, Graham & Corrsin (1977) have measured the properties of the quasi-homo-geneous turbulence field induced by a large mean shear, and in analysing their measurements they neglect the diagonal components of the mean-field contribution to the pressure–strain correlation. Their measurements are re-analysed using the recommendations of Gibson & Launder (1978) for modelling this correlation, the imbalance between production and dissipation being allowed for by the algebraic modelling technique of Rodi (1976): the experimental data give strong support to Rodi's basic assumption.

The data suggest that the only substantial defect in the Gibson–Launder model is its failure to predict the anisotropy measured in the 23 plane normal to the mean flow. The longitudinal predictions are good, and those for the shear (12) component are much improved when measured values of the anisotropy are substituted into the calculation. This analysis does not suggest any clear need for a nonlinear representation of the pressure–strain correlation. However, the most general linear representation of the mean-field term is even more complex than the analysis of Launder, Reece & Rodi (1975) would suggest: their model is disproved by an example.

Attempts to deduce the dissipation directly from the experiments, rather than by energy balance, are not very successful.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Fluid Mechanics , Volume 98 , Issue 2 , 29 May 1980 , pp. 435 - 448
Copyright
© 1980 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Champagne, F. H., Harris, V. G. & Corrsin, S. 1970 Experiments on nearly homogeneous turbulent shear flow. J. Fluid Mech. 41, 81.Google Scholar
Chung, M. K. & Adrian, R. J. 1979 Evaluation of variable coefficients in second order turbulence models. Paper given at 2nd Symp, on Turbulent Shear Flow, Imperial College, London.
Crow, S. C. 1968 Visco-elastic properties of fine-grained incompressible turbulence. J. Fluid Mech. 33, 1.Google Scholar
Daly, B. J. & Harlow, F. H. 1970 Transport equations of turbulence. Phys. Fluids 13, 2634.Google Scholar
Gibson, M. M. & Launder, B. E. 1978 Ground effects on pressure fluctuations in the atmospheric boundary layer. J. Fluid Mech. 86, 491.Google Scholar
Harris, V. G., Graham, J. A. H. & Corrsin, S. 1977 Further experiments in nearly homogeneous shear flow. J. Fluid Mech. 81, 657.Google Scholar
Herring, J. R. 1974 Approach of axisymmetric turbulence to isotropy. Phys. Fluids 17, 859.Google Scholar
Launder, B. E., Reece, G. J. & Rodi, W. 1975 Progress in the development of a Reynolds-stress turbulence closure. J. Fluid Mech. 68, 537.Google Scholar
Leslie, D. C. 1973 Developments in the Theory of Turbulence. Clarendon.
Lumley, J. L. 1978 Computational modelling of turbulent flows. Adv. appl. Mech. 18, 123.Google Scholar
Meroney, R. M. 1976 An algebraic stress model for stratified turbulent shear flows. Comp. & Fluids 4, 93.Google Scholar
Naot, D., Shavit, A. & Wolfshtein, M. 1970 Interactions between components of the turbulent velocity correlation tensor due to pressure fluctuations. Israel J. Tech. 8, 259.Google Scholar
Rodi, W. 1976 A new algebraic relation for calculating the Reynolds stresses. Z. angew. Math. Mech. 56, 219.Google Scholar
Rotta, J. C. 1951 Statistische Theorie nichthomogener Turbulenz. Z. Phys. 129, 547; 131, 51.Google Scholar