Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-cfpbc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T18:47:08.665Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Direct numerical simulations of supersonic turbulent channel flows of dense gases

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 May 2017

L. Sciacovelli ,
P. Cinnella Open the ORCID record for P. Cinnella [Opens in a new window]  and
X. Gloerfelt
L. Sciacovelli
Affiliation:
Laboratoire DynFluid, Arts et Métiers ParisTech, 75013 Paris, FR, France Dipartimento di Meccanica, Matematica e Management, Politecnico di Bari, 70125 Bari, IT, Italy
P. Cinnella*
Affiliation:
Laboratoire DynFluid, Arts et Métiers ParisTech, 75013 Paris, FR, France
X. Gloerfelt
Affiliation:
Laboratoire DynFluid, Arts et Métiers ParisTech, 75013 Paris, FR, France
*
†Email address for correspondence: paola.cinnella@ensam.eu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The influence of dense-gas effects on compressible wall-bounded turbulence is investigated by means of direct numerical simulations of supersonic turbulent channel flows. Results are obtained for PP11, a heavy fluorocarbon representative of dense gases, the thermophysics properties of which are described by using a fifth-order virial equation of state and advanced models for the transport properties. In the dense-gas regime, the speed of sound varies non-monotonically in small perturbations and the dependency of the transport properties on the fluid density (in addition to the temperature) is no longer negligible. A parametric study is carried out by varying the bulk Mach and Reynolds numbers, and results are compared to those obtained for a perfect gas, namely air. Dense-gas flow exhibits almost negligible friction heating effects, since the high specific heat of the fluids leads to a loose coupling between thermal and kinetic fields, even at high Mach numbers. Despite negligible temperature variations across the channel, the mean viscosity tends to decrease from the channel walls to the centreline (liquid-like behaviour), due to its complex dependency on fluid density. On the other hand, strong density fluctuations are present, but due to the non-standard sound speed variation (opposite to the mean density evolution across the channel), the amplitude is maximal close to the channel wall, i.e. in the viscous sublayer instead of the buffer layer like in perfect gases. As a consequence, these fluctuations do not alter the turbulence structure significantly, and Morkovin’s hypothesis is well respected at any Mach number considered in the study. The preceding features make high Mach wall-bounded flows of dense gases similar to incompressible flows with variable properties, despite the significant fluctuations of density and speed of sound. Indeed, the semi-local scaling of Patel et al. (Phys. Fluids, vol. 27 (9), 2015, 095101) or Trettel & Larsson (Phys. Fluids, vol. 28 (2), 2016, 026102) is shown to be well adapted to compare results from existing surveys and with the well-documented incompressible limit. Additionally, for a dense gas the isothermal channel flow is also almost adiabatic, and the Van Driest transformation also performs reasonably well. The present observations open the way to the development of suitable models for dense-gas turbulent flows.

JFM classification

Turbulent Flows: Compressible turbulence Turbulent Flows: Turbulence simulation Turbulent Flows: Turbulent Flows
Type
Papers
Information
Journal of Fluid Mechanics , Volume 821 , 25 June 2017 , pp. 153 - 199
Check for updates
Copyright
© 2017 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

Anderson, W. K. 1991 Numerical study on using sulfur hexafluoride as a wind tunnel test gas. AIAA J. 29 (12), 2179–2180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aubard, G., Gloerfelt, X. & Robinet, J.-C. 2013 Large-eddy simulation of broadband unsteadiness in a shock/boundary-layer interaction. AIAA J. 51 (10), 2395–2409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bae, J. H., Yoo, J. Y. & Choi, H. 2005 Direct numerical simulation of turbulent supercritical flows with heat transfer. Phys. Fluids 17 (10), 105104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bogey, C. & Bailly, C. 2004 A family of low dispersive and low dissipative explicit schemes for flow and noise computations. J. Comput. Phys. 194 (1), 194–214.Google Scholar
Bogey, C. & Bailly, C. 2009 Turbulence and energy budget in a self-preserving round jet: direct evaluation using large eddy simulation. J. Fluid Mech. 627, 129–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bogey, C., De Cacqueray, N. & Bailly, C. 2009 A shock-capturing methodology based on adaptative spatial filtering for high-order non-linear computations. J. Comput. Phys. 228 (5), 1447–1465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bogey, C., Marsden, O. & Bailly, C. 2012 Influence of initial turbulence level on the flow and sound fields of a subsonic jet at a diameter-based Reynolds number of 105. J. Fluid Mech. 701, 352–385.Google Scholar
Bradshaw, P. 1977 Compressible turbulent shear layers. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 9 (1), 33–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, B. P. & Argrow, B. M. 2000 Application of Bethe–Zel’dovich–Thompson fluids in organic Rankine cycle engines. J. Propul. Power 16 (6), 1118–1124.Google Scholar
Brun, C., Boiarciuc, M. P., Hakerborn, M. & Comte, P. 2008 Large eddy simulation of compressible channel flow – arguments in favour of universality of compressible turbulent wall bounded flows. Theor. Comput. Fluid Dyn. 22, 189–212.Google Scholar
Bufi, E. A. & Cinnella, P. 2015 Efficient uncertainty quantification of turbulent flows through supersonic ORC nozzle blades. Energy Procedia 82, 186–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chang, P. A. III, Piomelli, U. & Blake, W. K. 1999 Relationship between wall pressure and velocity-field sources. Phys. Fluids 11 (11), 3434–3448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chernyshenko, S. I. & Baig, M. F. 2005 The mechanism of streak formation in near-wall turbulence. J. Fluid Mech. 544 (1), 99–131.Google Scholar
Chu, B.-T. & Kovasznay, L. S. G. 1958 Non-linear interactions in a viscous heat-conducting compressible gaz. J. Fluid Mech. 3, 494–514.Google Scholar
Chung, T. H., Ajlan, M., Lee, L. L. & Starling, K. E. 1988 Generalized multiparameter correlation for nonpolar and polar fluid transport properties. Indust. Engng Chem. Res. 27 (4), 671–679.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chung, T. H., Lee, L. L. & Starling, K. E. 1984 Applications of kinetic gas theories and multiparameter correlation for prediction of dilute gas viscosity and thermal conductivity. Indust. Engng Chem. Fundamentals 23 (1), 8–13.Google Scholar
Cinnella, P. & Congedo, P. M. 2007 Inviscid and viscous aerodynamics of dense gases. J. Fluid Mech. 580, 179–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coleman, G. N., Kim, J. & Moser, R. D. 1995 A numerical study of turbulent supersonic isothermal-wall channel flow. J. Fluid Mech. 305, 159–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Congedo, P. M., Corre, C. & Cinnella, P. 2011 Numerical investigation of dense-gas effects in turbomachinery. Comput. Fluids 49 (1), 290–301.Google Scholar
Cramer, M. S. 1989 Negative nonlinearity in selected fluorocarbons. Phys. Fluids 1 (11), 1894–1897.Google Scholar
Cramer, M. S. & Bahmani, F. 2014 Effect of large bulk viscosity on large-Reynolds-number flows. J. Fluid Mech. 751, 142–163.Google Scholar
Cramer, M. S. & Kluwick, A. 1984 On the propagation of waves exhibiting both positive and negative nonlinearity. J. Fluid Mech. 142 (1), 9–37.Google Scholar
Cramer, M. S. & Park, S. 1999 On the suppression of shock-induced separation in Bethe–Zel’dovich–Thompson fluids. J. Fluid Mech. 393, 1–21.Google Scholar
Cramer, M. S. & Tarkenton, G. M. 1992 Transonic flows of Bethe–Zel’dovich–Thompson fluids. J. Fluid Mech. 240, 197–228.Google Scholar
Cramer, M. S. 2012 Numerical estimates for the bulk viscosity of ideal gases. Phys. Fluids 24 (6), 066102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dean, R. B. 1978 Reynolds number dependence of skin friction and other bulk flow variables in two-dimensional rectangular duct flow. Trans. ASME J. Fluids Engng 100 (2), 215–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donzis, D. A. & Jagannathan, S. 2013 Fluctuations of thermodynamic variables in stationary compressible turbulence. J. Fluid Mech. 733, 221–244.Google Scholar
Duan, L., Beekman, I. & Martin, M. P. 2010 Direct numerical simulation of hypersonic turbulent boundary layers. Part 2. Effect of wall temperature. J. Fluid Mech. 655, 419–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foysi, H., Sarkar, S. & Friedrich, R. 2004 Compressibility effects and turbulence scalings in supersonic channel flow. J. Fluid Mech. 509, 207–216.Google Scholar
Fukagata, K., Iwamoto, K. & Kasagi, N. 2002 Contribution of Reynolds stress distribution to the skin friction in wall-bounded flows. Phys. Fluids 14 (11), L73–L76.Google Scholar
Gerolymos, G. A., Sénéchal, D. & Vallet, I. 2010 Performance of very-high-order upwind schemes for DNS of compressible wall-turbulence. Intl J. Numer. Meth. Fluids 63 (7), 769–810.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerolymos, G. A. & Vallet, I. 2014 Pressure, density, temperature and entropy fluctuations in compressible turbulent plane channel flow. J. Fluid Mech. 757, 701–746.Google Scholar
Gloerfelt, X. & Berland, J. 2013 Turbulent boundary-layer noise: direct radiation at Mach number 0.5. J. Fluid Mech. 723, 318–351.Google Scholar
Gomez, T., Flutet, V. & Sagaut, P. 2009 Contribution of Reynolds stress distribution to the skin friction in compressible turbulent channel flows. Phys. Rev. E 79 (3), 035301.Google Scholar
Guardone, A. & Argrow, B. M. 2005 Nonclassical gasdynamic region of selected fluorocarbons. Phys. Fluids 17 (11), 116102.Google Scholar
Guarini, S. E., Moser, R. D., Shariff, K. & Wray, A. 2000 Direct numerical simulation of a supersonic turbulent boundary layer at Mach 2.5. J. Fluid Mech. 414, 1–33.Google Scholar
Huang, P. G., Bradshaw, P. & Coakley, T. J. 1993 Skin friction and velocity profile family for compressible turbulent boundary layers. AIAA J. 31 (9), 1600–1604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huang, P. G., Coleman, G. N. & Bradshaw, P. 1995 Compressible turbulent channel flows: DNS results and modelling. J. Fluid Mech. 305, 185–218.Google Scholar
Incropera, F. P. & DeWitt, D. P. 2007 Fundamentals of Heat and Mass Transfer, 6th edn. Wiley.Google Scholar
Kim, J. 1989 On the structure of pressure fluctuations in simulated turbulent channel flow. J. Fluid Mech. 205, 421–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, J., Moin, P. & Moser, R. 1987 Turbulence statistics in fully developed channel flow at low Reynolds number. J. Fluid Mech. 177, 133–166.Google Scholar
Lagha, M., Kim, J., Eldredge, J. D. & Zhong, X. 2011 A numerical study of compressible turbulent boundary layers. Phys. Fluids 23 (1), 015106.Google Scholar
Laufer, J.1969 Thoughts on compressible turbulent boundary layers. NASA S.P. 216.Google Scholar
Lechner, R., Sesterhenn, J. & Friedrich, R. 2001 Turbulent supersonic channel flow. J. Turbul. 2 (1), 001–001.Google Scholar
Lee, J., Jung, S. Y., Sung, H. J. & Zaki, T. A. 2013 Effect of wall heating on turbulent boundary layers with temperature-dependent viscosity. J. Fluid Mech. 726, 196–225.Google Scholar
Lee, M. & Moser, R. D. 2015 Direct numerical simulation of turbulent channel flow up to Re 𝜏 ≈ 5200. J. Fluid Mech. 774, 395–415.Google Scholar
Li, X., Hashimoto, K., Tominaga, Y., Tanahashi, M. & Miyauchi, T. 2008 Numerical study of heat transfer mechanism in turbulent supercritical CO2 channel flow. J. Therm. Sci. Technol. 3 (1), 112–123.Google Scholar
Martin, J. J. & Hou, Y. C. 1955 Development of an equation of state for gases. AIChE J. 1 (2), 142–151.Google Scholar
Mathijssen, T., Gallo, M., Casati, E., Nannan, N. R., Zamfirescu, C., Guardone, A. & Colonna, P. 2015 The flexible asymmetric shock tube (FAST): a Ludwieg tube facility for wave propagation measurements in high-temperature vapours of organic fluids. Exp. Fluids 56 (10), 1–12.Google Scholar
Modesti, D. & Pirozzoli, S. 2016 Reynolds and Mach number effects in compressible turbulent channel flow. Intl J. Heat Fluid Flow 59, 33–49.Google Scholar
Monaco, J. F., Cramer, M. S. & Watson, L. T. 1997 Supersonic flows of dense gases in cascade configurations. J. Fluid Mech. 330, 31–59.Google Scholar
Moneghan, R. J.1953 A review and assessment of various formulae for tubulent skin friction in compressible flow. Tech. Rep. Aeronautical Research Council. Current Paper 142.Google Scholar
Morinishi, Y., Tamano, S. & Nakabayashi, K. 2004 Direct numerical simulation of compressible turbulent channel flow between adiabatic and isothermal walls. J. Fluid Mech. 502, 273–308.Google Scholar
Morkovin, M. V. 1961 Effect of compressibility on turbulent flows. In Mécanique de la Turbulence (ed. Favre, A.), pp. 367–380. CNRS.Google Scholar
Moser, R., Kim, J. & Mansour, N. N. 1999 Direct numerical simulation of turbulent channel flow up to re 𝜏 = 590. Phys. Fluids 11, 943–945.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neufeld, P. D., Janzen, A. R. & Aziz, R. A. 1972 Empirical equations to calculate 16 of the transport collision integrals 𝛺(l, s)∗ for the Lennard-Jones (12–6) potential. J. Chem. Phys. 57 (3), 1100–1102.Google Scholar
Nicoud, F. & Poinsot, T. 1999 DNS of a channel flow with variable properties. In Proceedings of First International Symposium on Turbulence and Shear Flow Phenomena, TSFP-1, Santa Barbara, USA, TSFP.Google Scholar
Patel, A., Peeters, J. W. R., Boersma, B. J. & Pecnik, R. 2015 Semi-local scaling and turbulence modulation in variable property turbulent channel flows. Phys. Fluids 27 (9), 095101.Google Scholar
Pirozzoli, S. & Bernardini, M. 2011 Turbulence in supersonic boundary layers at moderate Reynolds number. J. Fluid Mech. 688, 120–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pirozzoli, S., Grasso, F. & Gatski, T. B. 2004 Direct numerical simulation and analysis of a spatially evolving supersonic turbulent boundary layer at M = 2. 25. Phys. Fluids 16 (3), 530–545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poling, B. E., Prausnitz, J. M., O’Connell, J. P. & Reid, R. C. 2001 The Properties of Gases and Liquids, vol. 5. McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Rubesin, M. W.1990 Extra compressibility terms for Favre-averaged two-equation models of inhomogeneous turbulent flows. NASA Contractor Rep. 177556.Google Scholar
Sarkar, S. 1995 The stabilizing effect of compressibility in turbulent shear flow. J. Fluid Mech. 282, 163–186.Google Scholar
Sciacovelli, L. & Cinnella, P. 2015 Numerical simulation of dense gas compressible homogeneous isotropic turbulence. In 15th European Turbulence Conference, EUROMECH/ETC15.Google Scholar
Sciacovelli, L., Cinnella, P., Content, C. & Grasso, F. 2016a Dense gas effects in inviscid homogeneous isotropic turbulence. J. Fluid Mech. 800 (1), 140–179.Google Scholar
Sciacovelli, L., Cinnella, P. & Grasso, F.2016b Small-scale dynamics of dense gas compressible homogeneous isotropic turbulence. J. Fluid Mech. (submitted).Google Scholar
Sewall, E. A. & Tafti, D. K. 2008 A time-accurate variable property algorithm for calculating flows with large temperature variations. Comput. Fluids 37, 51–63.Google Scholar
Sieder, E. N. & Tate, G. E. 1936 Heat transfer and pressure drop of liquids in tubes. Indust. Engng Chem. 28 (12), 1429–1435.Google Scholar
Spina, E. F., Smits, A. J. & Robinson, S. K. 1994 The physics of supersonic turbulent boundary layers. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 26, 287–319.Google Scholar
Spinelli, A., Pini, M., Dossena, V., Gaetani, P. & Casella, F. 2013 Design, simulation, and construction of a test rig for organic vapors. Trans. ASME J. Engng Gas Turbines Power 135 (4), 042304.Google Scholar
Tamano, S. & Morinishi, Y. 2006 Effect of different thermal wall boundary conditions on compressible turbulent channel flow at M = 1. 5. J. Fluid Mech. 548, 361–373.Google Scholar
Teitel, M. & Antonia, R. A. 1993 Heat transfer in fully developed turbulent channel flow: comparison between experiment and direct numerical simulations. Intl J. Heat Mass Transfer 36 (6), 1701–1706.Google Scholar
Thompson, P. A. 1971 A fundamental derivative in gasdynamics. Phys. Fluids 14 (9), 1843–1849.Google Scholar
Trettel, A. & Larsson, J. 2016 Mean velocity scaling for compressible wall turbulence with heat transfer. Phys. Fluids 28 (2), 026102.Google Scholar
Van Driest, E. R. 1951 Turbulent boundary layer in compressible fluids. J. Aero. Sci. 18 (3), 145–160.Google Scholar
Wallace, J. M. 2016 Quadrant analysis in turbulence research: history and evolution. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 48, 131–158.Google Scholar
Wei, L. & Pollard, A. 2011 Interactions among pressure, density, vorticity and their gradients in compressible turbulent channel flows. J. Fluid Mech. 673, 1–18.Google Scholar
Zonta, F. 2013 Nusselt number and friction factor in thermally stratified turbulent channel flow under Non-Oberbeck-Boussinesq conditions. Intl J. Heat Fluid Flow 44, 489–494.Google Scholar
Zonta, F., Marchioli, C. & Soldati, A. 2012 Modulation of turbulence in forced convection by temperature-dependent viscosity. J. Fluid Mech. 697, 150–174.Google Scholar