NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory California Institute of Technology Follow this link to skip to the main content

BEACON eSpace at Jet Propulsion Laboratory >
JPL Technical Report Server >
JPL TRS 1992+ >

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

Title: Consistent large-eddy simulation of a temporal mixing layer ladden with evaporating drops : Part 2. a posteriori modelling.
Authors: Leboissertier, Anthony
Okong'o, Nora
Bellan, Josette
Keywords: drops
flow simulation
two-phase flow
Issue Date: 25-Jan-2005
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Citation: Journal of Fuild Mechanics, Vol. 523, pp. 37-78, DOI: 10.1017/S0022112004002101
Abstract: Large-eddy simulation (LES) is conducted of a three-dimensional temporal mixing layer whose lower stream is initially laden with liquid drops which may evaporate during the simulation. The gas-phase equations are written in an Eulerian frame for two perfect gas species (carrier gas and vapour emanating from the drops), while the liquid-phase equations are written in a Lagrangian frame. The effect of drop evaporation on the gas phase is considered through mass, species, momentum and energy source terms. The drop evolution is modelled using physical drops, or using computational drops to represent the physical drops. Simulations are performed using various LES models previously assessed on a database obtained from direct numerical simulations (DNS). These LES models are for: (i) the subgrid-scale (SGS) fluxes and (ii) the filtered source terms (FSTs) based on computational drops. The LES, which are compared to filtered-and-coarsened (FC) DNS results at the coarser LES grid, are conducted with 64 times fewer grid points than the DNS, and up to 64 times fewer computational than physical drops. It is found that both constant-coefficient and dynamic Smagorinsky SGS-flux models, though numerically stable, are overly dissipative and damp generated small-resolved-scale (SRS) turbulent structures. Although the global growth and mixing predictions of LES using Smagorinsky models are in good agreement with the FC-DNS, the spatial distributions of the drops differ significantly. In contrast, the constant-coefficient scale-similarity model and the dynamic gradient model perform well in predicting most flow features, with the latter model having the advantage of not requiring a priori calibration of the model coefficient. The ability of the dynamic models to determine the model coefficient during LES is found to be essential since the constant-coefficient gradient model, although more accurate than the Smagorinsky model, is not consistently numerically stable despite using DNS-calibrated coefficients. With accurate SGS-flux models, namely scale-similarity and dynamic gradient, the FST model allows up to a 32-fold reduction in computational drops compared to the number of physical drops, without degradation of accuracy; a 64-fold reduction leads to a slight decrease in accuracy.
Appears in Collections:JPL TRS 1992+

Files in This Item:

File Description SizeFormat
02-1806.pdf966.2 kBAdobe PDFView/Open

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, but are furnished with U.S. government purpose use rights.


Privacy/Copyright Image Policy Beacon Home Contact Us
NASA Home Page + Div 27
+ JPL Space
Site last updated on December 5, 2014.
If you have any comments or suggestions for this web site, please e-mail Robert Powers.