arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv周末暂无论文更新,休息一下吧,周末愉快~~
arXiv 1606.08396physics.flu-dyn
收藏

再论有壁面发汗的槽道湍流的李群对称方法

Revisiting the Lie-group symmetry method for turbulent channel flow with wall transpiration

George Khujadze, Michael Frewer

摘要:

基于李群的对称性分析,首先在Avsarkisov等人(2014)中提出,然后在Oberlack等人(2015)中进行了修改,以生成不变解,从而预测具有均匀壁蒸发的通道流的缩放行为。通过首先关注Avsarkisov等人(2014)获得的结果,我们未能重现两个关键结果:(i)对于恒定雷诺数下的不同蒸腾速率,平均速度分布(赤字形式)并不像所声称的那样普遍塌陷到单一曲线上。(ii)普遍提出的对数标度律在通道的中心不匹配的直接数值模拟(DNS)数据的参数值。事实上,从他们的DNS数据中无法检测到通道中心的通用缩放行为,正如Avsarkisov等人(2014)所声称的那样。此外,我们将证明,假设的一个独立的对称性分析是不合理的流动条件下考虑。只有当还包括粘性项时,才能提供总体一致的对称性分析。这在他们随后的研究Oberlack et al.(2015)中进行了尝试。但是,其中提出的基于(粘性)李群的标度理论也是不一致的,除了Oberlack et al.(2015)的这项研究在技术上也有缺陷之外。这种永久不一致的原因是,他们的对称性分析不断涉及到几个非物理的统计对称性,是不兼容的基础确定性描述的Navier-Stokes湍流。

英文摘要:

The Lie-group-based symmetry analysis, as first proposed in Avsarkisov et al. (2014) and then later modified in Oberlack et al. (2015), to generate invariant solutions in order to predict the scaling behavior of a channel flow with uniform wall transpiration, is revisited. By focusing first on the results obtained in Avsarkisov et al. (2014), we failed to reproduce two key results: (i) For different transpiration rates at a constant Reynolds number, the mean velocity profiles (in deficit form) do not universally collapse onto a single curve as claimed. (ii) The universally proposed logarithmic scaling law in the center of the channel does not match the direct numerical simulation (DNS) data for the presented parameter values. In fact, no universal scaling behavior in the center of the channel can be detected from their DNS data, as it is misleadingly claimed in Avsarkisov et al. (2014). Moreover, we will demonstrate that the assumption of a Reynolds-number independent symmetry analysis is not justified for the flow conditions considered therein. Only when including also the viscous terms, an overall consistent symmetry analysis can be provided. This has been attempted in their subsequent study Oberlack et al. (2015). But, also the (viscous) Lie-group-based scaling theory proposed therein is inconsistent, apart from the additional fact that this study of Oberlack et al. (2015) is also technically flawed. The reason for this permanent inconsistency is that their symmetry analysis constantly involves several unphysical statistical symmetries that are incompatible to the underlying deterministic description of Navier-Stokes turbulence.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑