Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-kl59c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-20T12:50:47.080Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Numerical simulation of turbulent flow through Schiller’s wavy pipe

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 November 2014

G. Daschiel
Affiliation:
Institut für Strömungsmechanik, Karlsruher Institut für Technologie, Kaiserstraße 10, D-76131 Karlsruhe, Germany
V. Krieger
Affiliation:
Lehrstuhl für Strömungsmechanik, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Cauerstraße 4, D-91058 Erlangen, Germany
J. Jovanović*
Affiliation:
Lehrstuhl für Strömungsmechanik, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Cauerstraße 4, D-91058 Erlangen, Germany
A. Delgado
Affiliation:
Lehrstuhl für Strömungsmechanik, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Cauerstraße 4, D-91058 Erlangen, Germany
*
Email address for correspondence: jovan.jovanovic@fau.de
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The development of incompressible turbulent flow through a pipe of wavy cross-section was studied numerically by direct integration of the Navier–Stokes equations. Simulations were performed at Reynolds numbers of $4.5\times 10^{3}$ and $10^{4}$ based on the hydraulic diameter and the bulk velocity. Results for the pressure resistance coefficient ${\it\lambda}$ were found to be in excellent agreement with experimental data of Schiller (Z. Angew. Math. Mech., vol. 3, 1922, pp. 2–13). Of particular interest is the decrease in ${\it\lambda}$ below the level predicted from the Blasius correlation, which fits almost all experimental results for pipes and ducts of complex cross-sectional geometries. Simulation databases were used to evaluate turbulence anisotropy and provide insights into structural changes of turbulence leading to flow relaminarization. Anisotropy-invariant mapping of turbulence confirmed that suppression of turbulence is due to statistical axisymmetry in the turbulent stresses.

Information

Type
Papers
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
© 2014 Cambridge University Press
Figure 0

Figure 1. Resistance coefficient as a function of the Reynolds number measured by Schiller (1922) in pipes of threaded and wavy cross-sections.

Figure 1

Figure 2. Experimental results for the resistance coefficient as a function of the Reynolds number from the original publication of Schiller (1922) and data fits of ${\it\lambda}=a\mathit{Re}_{m}^{-b}$ for each pipe cross-sectional configuration.

Figure 2

Figure 3. (a) Cell generation for a pipe of wavy cross-section used for calculation of laminar and turbulent flow development; and (b) comparison of the wavy pipe contour with the contour of an Erlangen pipe from Lammers et al. (2012).

Figure 3

Figure 4. Non-structured grid arrangement generated for simulations of laminar and turbulent flow through a pipe of wavy cross-section (a) with enlarged detail (b).

Figure 4

Table 1. Streamwise pressure gradient for a pipe of wavy cross-section for three different grid levels at $\mathit{Re}_{m}=1000$.

Figure 5

Figure 5. Comparison of turbulent stresses in a plane channel flow with simulation results from (Kuroda 1990). Stresses are normalized with the wall friction velocity $\overline{\unicode[STIX]{x1D636}_{i}\unicode[STIX]{x1D636}_{j}}^{+}=\overline{\unicode[STIX]{x1D636}_{i}\unicode[STIX]{x1D636}_{j}}/u_{{\it\tau}}^{2}$ and the wall distance $x_{2}$ with $u_{{\it\tau}}$ and ${\it\nu}$ as $x_{2}^{+}=u_{{\it\tau}}x_{2}/{\it\nu}$.

Figure 6

Figure 6. (a) The computational domain for simulations of turbulent flow through a square duct, and (b,c) comparisons of turbulent stresses for different domain lengths and computational cells with simulation results from Gavrilakis (1992).

Figure 7

Figure 7. Development of turbulent flow through a triangular duct (Daschiel, Frohnapfel & Jovanović 2013). (a) Cross-section of the duct with (b) contour plot of the turbulent kinetic energy normalized with the wall friction velocity for a duct with ${\it\alpha}=11.5^{\circ }$. (c) Comparisons of ${\it\lambda}$ versus $\mathit{Re}_{m}$ from measurements (open symbols) and computations (solid symbols) for different duct configurations: A, square duct, measurements from Hartnett et al. (1962); B, equilateral triangular duct, measurements from Nikuradse (1930); C, triangular duct with ${\it\alpha}=11.5^{\circ }$, measurements from Eckert & Irvine (1956, 1960); D, triangular duct with ${\it\alpha}=4^{\circ }$, measurements from Carlson & Irvine (1961). (d) Anisotropy-invariant mapping of turbulence in a triangular duct with ${\it\alpha}=11.5^{\circ }$: trajectories corresponding to different cross-sections $0.25\leqslant x_{3}/H\leqslant 0.8$ indicate a tendency towards axisymmetry in the region of flow laminarization $x_{3}/H\leqslant 0.3$, which is followed by suppression of the turbulence development along the two-component state. Such an evolution of trajectories across the invariant map, in wall-bounded flows, implies a reduction of the turbulent dissipation rate at and away from the wall, leading to viscous drag reduction.

Figure 8

Figure 8. The turbulence energy spectra of the streamwise velocity fluctuations at different locations along the $x_{3}$ axis of a triangular duct with ${\it\alpha}=11.5^{\circ }$ normalized with Kolmogorov variables ${\it\eta}_{K}$, $u_{K}={\it\nu}/{\it\eta}_{K}$ and $f_{K}=u_{K}/{\it\eta}_{K}$: (a) time spectra; (b) spectra in the streamwise direction.

Figure 9

Figure 9. Variation of ${\it\lambda}$ against $\mathit{Re}_{m}$ for a wavy pipe cross-section: comparisons between experiments and simulations.

Figure 10

Table 2. Comparison of simulation and experimental results for the resistance coefficients in a wavy pipe.

Figure 11

Figure 10. Anisotropy-invariant mapping of turbulence in a wavy pipe cross-section: trajectories along (a) the crest region and (b) the valley region display substantially different flow behaviour, which can be readily seen in the distribution of the turbulence energy production (c).

Figure 12

Figure 11. Distributions of turbulent stresses along (a) valley and (b) crest bisectors of the wavy pipe and comparisons with the stress distributions in a square duct.

Figure 13

Figure 12. Turbulence energy spectra of the streamwise velocity fluctuations across a wavy pipe cross-section. Distributions correspond to locations on crest and valley bisectors measured from the pipe centreline $r$ relative to distance $r_{B}$ from the pipe centreline up to the wall: (a,b) time spectra; (c,d) spectra in the streamwise direction.

Figure 14

Figure 13. Turbulent dissipation rate at the wall, ${\it\epsilon}_{wall}$, normalized with $u_{{\it\tau}}$ and ${\it\nu}$ versus the anisotropy of turbulence $\text{II}_{a}$ at the wall extracted from available numerical databases. A best fit through the numerical data extrapolates well the trend predicted by Jovanović & Hillerbrand (2005) as the one-component limit $(\text{II}_{a}=2/3)$ is approached. Amplification of the kinetic energy of turbulence $k$ close to the wall is in the direction of the sketched arrow.

Figure 15

Figure 14. Segment of the cross-sectional plane of a wavy pipe with a cylindrical coordinate system and bisectors corresponding to crest ($r_{B}$) and valley ($R_{b}$) regions. Circular arcs at positions $r/r_{B}=0.9$ (square symbol), $r/r_{B}=0.95$ (circle symbol), $r/r_{B}=0.99$ (rectangle symbol) and $B(r)$ denotes the length of a circular arc.

Figure 16

Figure 15. Analysis of velocity profiles in the radial direction: profiles along crest and valley regions in (a) laminar and (b) turbulent flow regimes; (c) first derivative $\partial U_{z}/\partial r$ and (d) second derivative $\partial ^{2}U_{z}/\partial r^{2}$ of the profiles shown at the top. There is no sign of inflectional instability $\partial ^{2}U_{z}/\partial r^{2}=0$ for the laminar velocity profile.

Figure 17

Figure 16. Analysis of velocity profiles in the tangential direction: profiles for (a) laminar and (b) turbulent flow regimes; (c) first derivative $\partial U_{z}/\partial {\it\phi}$ and (d) second derivative $\partial ^{2}U_{z}/\partial {\it\phi}^{2}$ of profiles shown at the top. There is weak evidence of inflectional instability $\partial ^{2}U_{z}/\partial {\it\phi}^{2}$ for laminar flow.

Figure 18

Figure 17. Time development of the streamwise pressure gradient normalized with the corresponding value for the laminar flow regime as a function of the turnover time of turbulence for pipes of circular and wavy cross sections for $\mathit{Re}_{m}=4.95\times 10^{3}$ and the same level of flow blockage corresponding to 15 % of the pipe cross-sectional area.

Figure 19

Table 3. Comparison of the pressure resistance coefficients for pipes of circular and wavy cross-sections for the same level of flow blockage corresponding to 15 % of the pipe cross-sectional area.

Figure 20

Figure 18. Turbulence development in pipes of non-circular cross-section. Note that the minimum in $P_{k}$ corresponds to the Erlangen design shown in panel (c).