Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-8r8nv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-10T08:35:16.948Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Effect of flow topology on the kinetic energy flux in compressible isotropic turbulence

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 November 2019

Jianchun Wang*
Affiliation:
Shenzhen Key Laboratory of Complex Aerospace Flows, Center for Complex Flows and Soft Matter Research, Department of Mechanics and Aerospace Engineering, Southern University of Science and Technology, Shenzhen, Guangdong 518055, PR China
Minping Wan
Affiliation:
Shenzhen Key Laboratory of Complex Aerospace Flows, Center for Complex Flows and Soft Matter Research, Department of Mechanics and Aerospace Engineering, Southern University of Science and Technology, Shenzhen, Guangdong 518055, PR China
Song Chen
Affiliation:
Shenzhen Key Laboratory of Complex Aerospace Flows, Center for Complex Flows and Soft Matter Research, Department of Mechanics and Aerospace Engineering, Southern University of Science and Technology, Shenzhen, Guangdong 518055, PR China
Chenyue Xie
Affiliation:
Shenzhen Key Laboratory of Complex Aerospace Flows, Center for Complex Flows and Soft Matter Research, Department of Mechanics and Aerospace Engineering, Southern University of Science and Technology, Shenzhen, Guangdong 518055, PR China
Qinmin Zheng
Affiliation:
Shenzhen Key Laboratory of Complex Aerospace Flows, Center for Complex Flows and Soft Matter Research, Department of Mechanics and Aerospace Engineering, Southern University of Science and Technology, Shenzhen, Guangdong 518055, PR China
Lian-Ping Wang
Affiliation:
Shenzhen Key Laboratory of Complex Aerospace Flows, Center for Complex Flows and Soft Matter Research, Department of Mechanics and Aerospace Engineering, Southern University of Science and Technology, Shenzhen, Guangdong 518055, PR China Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Delaware, Newark, DE 19716, USA
Shiyi Chen*
Affiliation:
Shenzhen Key Laboratory of Complex Aerospace Flows, Center for Complex Flows and Soft Matter Research, Department of Mechanics and Aerospace Engineering, Southern University of Science and Technology, Shenzhen, Guangdong 518055, PR China State Key Laboratory of Turbulence and Complex Systems, Peking University, Beijing 100871, PR China
*
†Email addresses for correspondence: wangjc@sustech.edu.cn, chensy@sustech.edu.cn
†Email addresses for correspondence: wangjc@sustech.edu.cn, chensy@sustech.edu.cn

Abstract

The effects of flow topology on the subgrid-scale (SGS) kinetic energy flux in compressible isotropic turbulence is studied. The eight flow topological types based on the three invariants of the filtered velocity gradient tensor are analysed at different scales, along with their roles in the magnitude and direction of kinetic energy transfer. The unstable focus/compressing (UFC), unstable node/saddle/saddle (UN/S/S) and stable focus/stretching (SFS), are the three predominant topological types at all scales; they account for at least 75 % of the flow domain. The UN/S/S and SFS types make major contributions to the average SGS flux of the kinetic energy from large scales to small scales in the inertial range. The unstable focus/stretching (UFS) topology makes a contribution to the reverse SGS flux of kinetic energy from small scales to large scales. In strong compression regions, the average contribution of the stable node/saddle/saddle (SN/S/S) topology to the SGS kinetic energy flux is positive and is predominant over those of other flow topologies. In strong expansion regions, the UFS topology makes a major contribution to the reverse SGS flux of the kinetic energy. As the turbulent Mach number increases, the increase of volume fraction of the UFS topological regions leads to the increase of the SGS backscatter of kinetic energy. The SN/S/S topology makes a dominant contribution to the direct SGS flux of the compressible component of the kinetic energy, while the UFS topology makes a dominant contribution to the reverse SGS flux of the compressible component of the kinetic energy.

Information

Type
JFM Papers
Copyright
© 2019 Cambridge University Press
Figure 0

Table 1. Simulation parameters and flow statistics.

Figure 1

Figure 1. Normalized r.m.s. values of filtered vorticity, filtered velocity divergence and filtered strain-rate tensor: (a) $\unicode[STIX]{x1D714}_{l}^{\prime }/\unicode[STIX]{x1D714}^{\prime }$; (b) $\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{l}^{\prime }/\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}^{\prime }$; (c) $\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{l}^{\prime }/\unicode[STIX]{x1D714}_{l}^{\prime }$; (d) $S_{l}^{\prime }/\unicode[STIX]{x1D714}_{l}^{\prime }$.

Figure 2

Figure 2. The topological classifications of three representative $Q_{l}\,{-}\,R_{l}$ planes: (a) $P_{l}=0$, (b) $P_{l}>0$ and (c) $P_{l}<0$. A description of the cases for various flow topologies is provided in table 2.

Figure 3

Table 2. Description of cases of various flow topological types.

Figure 4

Figure 3. Logarithm of joint PDF of the second and third invariants of the filtered velocity gradient tensor $\log _{10}\text{PDF}(Q_{l},R_{l})$, at $M_{t}=0.6,1.0$, for three filter widths $l/\unicode[STIX]{x1D702}=4,16,64$, in the range of filtered velocity divergence $-0.05\leqslant \unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{l}/\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{l}^{\prime }\leqslant 0.05$: (a,b) $l/\unicode[STIX]{x1D702}=4$, (c,d) $l/\unicode[STIX]{x1D702}=16$ and (e,f) $l/\unicode[STIX]{x1D702}=64$. (a,c,e) $M_{t}=0.6$; (b,d,f) $M_{t}=1.0$. The second and third invariants are normalized as $Q_{l}/\langle Q_{l,W}\rangle$ and $R_{l}/\langle Q_{l,W}\rangle ^{3/2}$, respectively.

Figure 5

Figure 4. Logarithm of the joint PDF of the second and third invariants of the filtered velocity gradient tensor $\log _{10}\text{PDF}(Q_{l},R_{l})$, at $M_{t}=0.6,0.8,1.0$, for three filter widths $l/\unicode[STIX]{x1D702}=4,16,64$, in the range of filtered velocity divergence $-3.15\leqslant \unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{l}/\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{l}^{\prime }\leqslant -2.85$: (a–c) $l/\unicode[STIX]{x1D702}=4$, (d–f) $l/\unicode[STIX]{x1D702}=16$ and (g–i) $l/\unicode[STIX]{x1D702}=64$. (a,d,g) $M_{t}=0.6$; (b,e,h) $M_{t}=0.8$; (c,f,i) $M_{t}=1.0$. The second and third invariants are normalized as $Q_{l}/\langle Q_{l,W}\rangle$ and $R_{l}/\langle Q_{l,W}\rangle ^{3/2}$, respectively.

Figure 6

Figure 5. Logarithm of joint PDF of the second and third invariants of the filtered velocity gradient tensor $\log _{10}\text{PDF}(Q_{l},R_{l})$, at $M_{t}=0.6,0.8,1.0$, for three filter widths $l/\unicode[STIX]{x1D702}=4,16,64$, in the range of filtered velocity divergence $2.85\leqslant \unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{l}/\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{l}^{\prime }\leqslant 3.15$: (a–c) $l/\unicode[STIX]{x1D702}=4$, (d–f) $l/\unicode[STIX]{x1D702}=16$ and (g–i) $l/\unicode[STIX]{x1D702}=64$. (a,d,g) $M_{t}=0.6$; (b,e,h) $M_{t}=0.8$; (c,f,i) $M_{t}=1.0$. The second and third invariants are normalized as $Q_{l}/\langle Q_{l,W}\rangle$ and $R_{l}/\langle Q_{l,W}\rangle ^{3/2}$, respectively.

Figure 7

Figure 6. The relative contribution of each region of the $Q_{l}\,{-}\,R_{l}$ plane to the SGS kinetic energy flux $F_{KEF}(Q_{l},R_{l})$, at $M_{t}=0.6,0.8,1.0$, for the filter width $l/\unicode[STIX]{x1D702}=16$, in three ranges of filtered velocity divergence: (a–c) $-0.05\leqslant \unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{l}/\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{l}^{\prime }\leqslant 0.05$, (d–f) $-3.15\leqslant \unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{l}/\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{l}^{\prime }\leqslant -2.85$ and (g–i) $2.85\leqslant \unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{l}/\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{l}^{\prime }\leqslant 3.15$. (a,d,g) $M_{t}=0.6$; (b,e,h) $M_{t}=0.8$; (c,f,i) $M_{t}=1.0$. The second and third invariants of the velocity gradient tensor are normalized as $Q_{l}/\langle Q_{l,W}\rangle$ and $R_{l}/\langle Q_{l,W}\rangle ^{3/2}$, respectively.

Figure 8

Figure 7. Volume fractions $V_{f}^{(k)}$ of various flow topologies $S^{(k)}$. (a,b) $M_{t}=0.6$; (c,d) $M_{t}=0.8$; (e,f) $M_{t}=1.0$.

Figure 9

Figure 8. The average of contributions $\langle \unicode[STIX]{x1D6F1}_{l,k}\rangle /\unicode[STIX]{x1D716}_{T}$ of various flow topologies $S^{(k)}$ to the normalized SGS kinetic energy flux $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6F1}_{l}/\unicode[STIX]{x1D716}_{T}$. (a,b) $M_{t}=0.6$; (c,d) $M_{t}=0.8$; (e,f) $M_{t}=1.0$.

Figure 10

Figure 9. Normalized average of the negative component of SGS kinetic energy flux $\langle \unicode[STIX]{x1D6F1}_{l,k}^{-}\rangle /(|\langle \unicode[STIX]{x1D6F1}_{l,k}^{-}\rangle |+|\langle \unicode[STIX]{x1D6F1}_{l,k}^{+}\rangle |)$ for the flow topology $S^{(k)}$. (a,b) $M_{t}=0.6$; (c,d) $M_{t}=0.8$; (e,f) $M_{t}=1.0$.

Figure 11

Figure 10. The average of contributions $\langle \unicode[STIX]{x1D6F1}_{l,k}^{s}\rangle /\unicode[STIX]{x1D716}_{T}$ of various flow topologies $S^{(k)}$ to the solenoidal component of the normalized SGS kinetic energy flux $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6F1}_{l}^{s}/\unicode[STIX]{x1D716}_{T}$. (a,b) $M_{t}=0.6$; (c,d) $M_{t}=0.8$; (e,f) $M_{t}=1.0$.

Figure 12

Figure 11. The average of contributions $\langle \unicode[STIX]{x1D6F1}_{l,k}^{c}\rangle /\unicode[STIX]{x1D716}_{T}$ of various flow topologies $S^{(k)}$ to the compressible component of the normalized SGS kinetic energy flux $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6F1}_{l}^{c}/\unicode[STIX]{x1D716}_{T}$. (a–b) $M_{t}=0.6$; (c–d) $M_{t}=0.8$; (e–f) $M_{t}=1.0$.

Figure 13

Figure 12. Volume fractions $V_{f}^{(k)}$ of various flow topologies $S^{(k)}$ conditioned on the normalized filtered velocity divergence for the filter width $l/\unicode[STIX]{x1D702}=16$. (a,b) $M_{t}=0.6$; (c,d) $M_{t}=0.8$; (e,f) $M_{t}=1.0$.

Figure 14

Figure 13. The average of contributions $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6F1}_{l,k}/\unicode[STIX]{x1D716}_{T}$ of various flow topologies $S^{(k)}$ to the normalized SGS kinetic energy flux $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6F1}_{l}/\unicode[STIX]{x1D716}_{T}$ conditioned on the normalized filtered velocity divergence for the filter width $l/\unicode[STIX]{x1D702}=16$. (a,b) $M_{t}=0.6$; (c,d) $M_{t}=0.8$; (e,f) $M_{t}=1.0$.

Figure 15

Figure 14. Normalized conditional average of the negative component of SGS kinetic energy flux $\langle \unicode[STIX]{x1D6F1}_{l,k}^{-}|\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{l}/\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{l}^{\prime }\rangle /\langle \unicode[STIX]{x1D6F1}_{l,k}^{+}-\unicode[STIX]{x1D6F1}_{l,k}^{-}|\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{l}/\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{l}^{\prime }\rangle$ in the flow topology $S^{(k)}$ for the filter width $l/\unicode[STIX]{x1D702}=16$. (a,b) $M_{t}=0.6$; (c,d) $M_{t}=0.8$; (e,f) $M_{t}=1.0$.

Figure 16

Figure 15. Average of $\unicode[STIX]{x1D709}_{l}$ conditioned on the normalized velocity divergence and the flow topology $S^{(k)}$ for the filter width $l/\unicode[STIX]{x1D702}=16$. (a,b) $M_{t}=0.6$; (c,d) $M_{t}=0.8$; (e,f) $M_{t}=1.0$.

Figure 17

Figure 16. The average contributions $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6F1}_{l,k}^{s}/\unicode[STIX]{x1D716}_{T}$ of various flow topologies $S^{(k)}$ to the solenoidal component of the normalized SGS kinetic energy flux $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6F1}_{l}^{s}/\unicode[STIX]{x1D716}_{T}$ conditioned on the normalized filtered velocity divergence for the filter width $l/\unicode[STIX]{x1D702}=16$. (a,b) $M_{t}=0.6$; (c,d) $M_{t}=0.8$; (e,f) $M_{t}=1.0$.

Figure 18

Figure 17. The average contributions $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6F1}_{l,k}^{c}/\unicode[STIX]{x1D716}_{T}$ of various flow topologies $S^{(k)}$ to the compressible component of normalized SGS kinetic energy flux $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6F1}_{l}^{c}/\unicode[STIX]{x1D716}_{T}$ conditioned on the normalized filtered velocity divergence for the filter width $l/\unicode[STIX]{x1D702}=16$. (a,b) $M_{t}=0.6$; (c,d) $M_{t}=0.8$; (e,f) $M_{t}=1.0$.

Figure 19

Figure 18. Volume fractions $V_{f}^{(3)}$ and $V_{f}^{(7)}$ of flow topologies $S^{(3)}$ and $S^{(7)}$ conditioned on the normalized filtered velocity divergence. (a,b) $M_{t}=0.8$; (c,d) $M_{t}=1.0$.

Figure 20

Figure 19. The average of contributions $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6F1}_{l,3}/\unicode[STIX]{x1D716}_{T}$ and $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6F1}_{l,7}/\unicode[STIX]{x1D716}_{T}$ of flow topologies $S^{(3)}$ and $S^{(7)}$ to the normalized SGS kinetic energy flux $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6F1}_{l}/\unicode[STIX]{x1D716}_{T}$ conditioned on the normalized filtered velocity divergence. (a,b) $M_{t}=0.8$; (c,d) $M_{t}=1.0$. Here, $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}_{3}=0.1,0.23$ for turbulent Mach numbers $M_{t}=0.8,1.0$, respectively; $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}_{7}=0.1,0.18$ for turbulent Mach numbers $M_{t}=0.8,1.0$, respectively.

Figure 21

Figure 20. Iso-surfaces of filtered velocity divergence for $l/\unicode[STIX]{x1D702}=16,32$ at $M_{t}=1.0$. (a) $\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{l}/\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{l}^{\prime }=-3.0$ and $l/\unicode[STIX]{x1D702}=16$; (b) $\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{l}/\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{l}^{\prime }=2.0$ and $l/\unicode[STIX]{x1D702}=16$; (c) $\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{l}/\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{l}^{\prime }=-3.0$ and $l/\unicode[STIX]{x1D702}=32$; (d) $\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{l}/\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}_{l}^{\prime }=2.0$ and $l/\unicode[STIX]{x1D702}=32$.

Figure 22

Figure 21. The average of contributions $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6F1}_{l,3}^{s}/\unicode[STIX]{x1D716}_{T}$ and $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6F1}_{l,7}^{s}/\unicode[STIX]{x1D716}_{T}$ of flow topologies $S^{(3)}$ and $S^{(7)}$ to the solenoidal component of the normalized SGS kinetic energy flux $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6F1}_{l}^{s}/\unicode[STIX]{x1D716}_{T}$ conditioned on the normalized filtered velocity divergence. (a,b) $M_{t}=0.8$; (c,d) $M_{t}=1.0$. Here, $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}_{3}^{s}=0.052,0.11$ for turbulent Mach numbers $M_{t}=0.8,1.0$, respectively; $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}_{7}^{s}=0.042,0.075$ for turbulent Mach numbers $M_{t}=0.8,1.0$, respectively.

Figure 23

Figure 22. The average of contributions $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6F1}_{l,3}^{c}/\unicode[STIX]{x1D716}_{T}$ and $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6F1}_{l,7}^{c}/\unicode[STIX]{x1D716}_{T}$ of flow topologies $S^{(3)}$ and $S^{(7)}$ to the compressible component of normalized SGS kinetic energy flux $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6F1}_{l}^{c}/\unicode[STIX]{x1D716}_{T}$ conditioned on the normalized filtered velocity divergence. (a,b) $M_{t}=0.8$; (c,d) $M_{t}=1.0$. Here, $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}_{3}^{c}=0.050,0.12$ for turbulent Mach numbers $M_{t}=0.8,1.0$, respectively; $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}_{7}^{c}=0.058,0.10$ for turbulent Mach numbers $M_{t}=0.8,1.0$, respectively.