Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-7c8c6479df-ph5wq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-27T23:15:12.129Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

5 - Turbulence

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2016

Paul G. Tucker
Affiliation:
University of Cambridge
Get access

Summary

Introduction

Turbulence generally plays a key role in drag generation, heat transfer, particle dispersion and scalar mixing along with sound generation. These are all aspects that are vital in aerodynamic design. The modelling of turbulence has strongly defined CFD as a postdictive rather than predictive process. Hence, this chapter has strong importance in relation to the safe and reliable use of CFD. Initially the nature of turbulence is outlined and thus the modelling challenges defined. Then a range of established modelling approaches is outlined, starting with low order and then moving to techniques where CFD becomes predictive with no modelling.

The Basic Nature of Turbulence

The formidable task facing turbulence modelling is reflected by Richard Feynman (Physics Nobel Laureate), who wrote, “Turbulence is the last great unsolved problem in classical physics.” Indeed we have the situation where we do not even know basic physical constants. For example, for the Karman ‘constant’, κ, (in l = κ d, where l is the mixing length and d nearest wall distance) the published range is 0.38–0.45) and we do not even know if it is a constant! As noted by Spalart et al. (2006), a 2% decrease in κ gives 1% decrease in predicted aircraft drag. This might not sound like much, but it matters greatly to plane manufacturers. They sell planes before they are made and if the craft do not make the range, serious problems arise.

If a sensitive velocity-measuring device (such as a hot wire anemometer) is placed in a turbulent flow, the trace shown in Figure 5.1 will be produced. Similar graphs can be plotted for the remaining v (y direction) and w (z direction) velocity components. As can be seen, the fluid velocity can be decomposed into mean (Φ) and fluctuating (ϕʹ) components. Hence, instantaneous velocities can be expressed as

Transition to turbulence occurs when inertial forces overwhelm the viscous. The transition process can be observed in the smoke patterns rising from the tip of a cigarette. The initial smoke has a laminar region. This is followed by a turbulent zone, where the fluid flow has a more chaotic appearance. The latter can clearly be seen in the Figure 5.2a schematic adjacent to the flow visualization for a more fully turbulent jet. Figure 5.2b shows a sketch of da Vinci for which he describes the “clouds as scattered and torn.”

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2016

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

ABE, K., KONDOH, T. & NAGANO, Y. 1994. A new turbulence model for predicting fluid flow and heat transfer in separating and reattaching flows – I: Flow field calculations. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 37, 139–151.Google Scholar
ABID, R. 1993. Evaluation of two-equation turbulence models for predicting transitional flows. International Journal of Engineering Science, 31, 831–840.Google Scholar
ABID, R., MORRISON, J. H., GATSKI, T. B. & SPEZIALE, C. G. 1996. Prediction of aerodynamic flows with a new explicit algebraic stress model. AIAA Journal, 34, 2632–2635.Google Scholar
ABU-GHANNAM, B. & SHAW, R. 1980. Natural transition of boundary layers – the effects of turbulence, pressure gradient, and flow history. Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science, 22, 213–228.Google Scholar
ALLMARAS, S. R., JOHNSON, F. T. & SPALART, P. R. 2012. Modifications and clarifications for the implementation of the Spalart-Allmaras turbulence model. Seventh International Conference on Computational Fluid Dynamics, Big Island, Hawaii, 9–13 July, Paper No. ICCFD7–1902
AMES, F., KWON, O. & MOFFAT, R. 1999. An algebraic model for high intensity large scale turbulence. ASME, International Gas Turbine and Aeroengine Congress and Exhibition, Indianapolis, Indiana, ASME Paper No. 99-GT-160.
ANDERSSON, N., ERIKSSON, L.-E. & DAVIDSON, L. 2005. LES prediction of flow and acoustic field of a coaxial jet. 11 AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference, 23–25 May, Monterey, California, AIAA Paper No AIAA-2884, 2005.
ARKO, B. M. & MCQUILLING, M. 2013. Computational study of high-lift low-pressure turbine cascade aerodynamics at low reynolds number. Journal of Propulsion and Power, 29, 446–459.Google Scholar
ARNAL, D. 1992. Boundary layer transition: prediction, application to drag reduction. DTIC Document.
AUPOIX, B. & SPALART, P. 2003. Extensions of the Spalart–Allmaras turbulence model to account for wall roughness. International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow, 24, 454–462.Google Scholar
BALDWIN, B. S. & BARTH, T. J. 1990. A one-equation turbulence transport model for high Reynolds number wall-bounded flows, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Ames Research Center. NASA Technical Memorandum No. 102847.
BARDINA, J., FERZIGER, J. & REYNOLDS, W. 1980. Improved subgrid-scale models for large-eddy simulation. Simulation. Proceedings of the 13th AIAA Fluid and Plasma Dynamics Conference, Snowmass, Colo., 14–16 July 1980, AIAA Paper No. AIAA-80-1357.
BARDINA, J., FERZIGER, J. H. & REYNOLDS, W. C. 1983. Improved turbulence models based on large eddy simulation of homogeneous, incompressible turbulent flows. Stanford University Report, May.
BASSI, F., CRIVELLINI, A., REBAY, S. & SAVINI, M. 2005. Discontinuous Galerkin solution of the Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes and k-ω turbulence model equations. Computers & Fluids, 34, 507–540.Google Scholar
BASTIN, F., LAFON, P. & CANDEL, S. 1997. Computation of jet mixing noise due to coherent structures: the plane jet case. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 335, 261–304.Google Scholar
BATTEN, P., GOLDBERG, U. & CHAKRAVARTHY, S. 2002. LNS – an approach towards embedded LES. Fortieth AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting & Exhibit. January, AIAA Paper No. AIAA-2002-0427.
BATTEN, P., GOLDBERG, U. & CHAKRAVARTHY, S. 2004. Interfacing statistical turbulence closures with large-eddy simulation. AIAA Journal, 42, 485–492.Google Scholar
BATTEN, P., GOLDBERG, U., CHAKRAVARTHY, S. & KANG, E. 2011. Smart sub-grid-scale models for les and hybrid RANS/LES. Sixth AIAA Theoretical Fluid Mechanics Conference. Honolulu, HI, 27–30 June, AIAA Paper Number AIAA-2011-3472.
BATTEN, P., SPALART, P. & TERRACOL, M. 2007. Use of hybrid RANS-LES for acoustic source prediction. In HUTTL, T., , C. W., SAGAUT, P. (eds.) Large-Eddy Simulation for Acoustics, Cambridge University Press.
BENTALEB, Y., LARDEAU, S. & LESCHZINER, M. A. 2012. Large-eddy simulation of turbulent boundary layer separation from a rounded step. Journal of Turbulence, 13, 1–28.Google Scholar
BISEK, N. J., RIZZETTA, D. P. & POGGIE, J. 2013. Plasma control of a turbulent shock boundary-layer interaction. AIAA Journal, 51, 1789–1804.Google Scholar
BO, T., IACOVIDES, H. & LAUNDER, B. 1995. Developing buoyancy-modified turbulent flow in ducts rotating in orthogonal mode. Journal of Turbomachinery, 117, 474–484.Google Scholar
BORIS, J., GRINSTEIN, F., ORAN, E. & KOLBE, R. 1992. New insights into large eddy simulation. Fluid Dynamics Research, 10(4-6), 199–228.Google Scholar
BOUSSINESQ, J. 1877. Theory de lecoulment tourbillant. Mem Pre. Par. Div. Sav. XXIII, Paris.
BRANDT, T. T. 2008. Usability of explicit filtering in large eddy simulation with a low‐order numerical scheme and different subgrid‐scale models. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Fluids, 57, 905–928.Google Scholar
BREUER, M. & RODI, W. 1994. Large-eddy simulation of turbulent flow through a straight square duct and a 180 bend. Direct and Large-Eddy Simulation I, 273–285 Springer.Google Scholar
BRIDGES, J. & WERNET, M. P. 2003. Measurements of the aeroacoustic sound source in hot jets. AIAA Paper, 3130, 2003.Google Scholar
CEBECI, T. & CHANG, K. 1978. Calculation of incompressible rough-wall boundary-layer flows. AIAA Journal, 16, 730–735.Google Scholar
CHAKRABORTY, N. & CANT, R. 2009. Direct numerical simulation analysis of the flame surface density transport equation in the context of large eddy simulation. Proceedings of the Combustion Institute, 32, 1445–1453.Google Scholar
CHAOUAT, B. & SCHIESTEL, R. 2005. A new partially integrated transport model for subgrid-scale stresses and dissipation rate for turbulent developing flows. Physics of Fluids (1994–present), 17, 065106.Google Scholar
CHAPMAN, D. K. 1979. Computational aerodynamics development and outlook. AIAA Journal, 17, 1293–1313.Google Scholar
CHARBONNIER, D., OTT, P., JONSSON, M., KOBKE, T. & COTTIER, F. 2008. Comparison of numerical investigations with measured heat transfer performance of a film cooled turbine vane. ASME Turbo Expo 2008: Power for Land, Sea, and Air, 571–582, ASME Paper No. GT2008-50623
CHAUVET, N., DECK, S. & JACQUIN, L. 2007. Zonal detached eddy simulation of a controlled propulsive jet. AIAA Journal, 45, 2458–2473.Google Scholar
CHIEN, K.-Y. 1982. Predictions of channel and boundary-layer flows with a low-Reynolds-number turbulence model. AIAA Journal, 20, 33–38.Google Scholar
CHOW, F. K. & MOIN, P. 2003. A further study of numerical errors in large-eddy simulations. Journal of Computational Physics, 184, 366–380.Google Scholar
CLARK, R. A., FERZIGER, J. H. & REYNOLDS, W. 1979. Evaluation of subgrid-scale models using an accurately simulated turbulent flow. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 91, 1–16.Google Scholar
COLBAN, W., THOLE, K. & HAENDLER, M. 2007. Experimental and computational comparisons of fan-shaped film cooling on a turbine vane surface. Journal of Turbomachinery, 129, 23–31.Google Scholar
COULL, J. D. & HODSON, H. P. 2011. Unsteady boundary-layer transition in low-pressure turbines. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 681, 370–410.Google Scholar
CRAFT, T., GERASIMOV, A., IACOVIDES, H., KIDGER, J. & LAUNDER, B. 2004. The negatively buoyant turbulent wall jet: performance of alternative options in RANS modelling. International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow, 25, 809–823.Google Scholar
CRAFT, T., LAUNDER, B. & SUGA, K. 1996. Development and application of a cubic eddy- viscosity model of turbulence. International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow, 17, 108–115.Google Scholar
CRIVELLINI, A., D'ALESSANDRO, V. & BASSI, F. 2013. A Spalart–Allmaras turbulence model implementation in a discontinuous Galerkin solver for incompressible flows. Journal of Computational Physics, 241, 388–415.Google Scholar
DACLES-MARIANI, J., ZILLIAC, G. G., CHOW, J. S. & BRADSHAW, P. 1995. Numerical/experimental study of a wingtip vortex in the near field. AIAA Journal, 33, 1561–1568.Google Scholar
DAKHOUL, Y. M. & BEDFORD, K. W. 1986a. Improved averaging method for turbulent flow simulation, Part I: Theoretical development and application to Burgers' transport equation. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Fluids, 6, 49–64.Google Scholar
DAKHOUL, Y. M. & BEDFORD, K. W. 1986b. Improved averaging method for turbulent flow simulation, Part II: Calculations and verification. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Fluids, 6, 65–82.Google Scholar
DAVIDSON, L. 2009. Hybrid LES–RANS: back scatter from a scale-similarity model used as forcing. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 367, 2905–2915.Google Scholar
DAVIDSON, L. & BILLSON, M. 2006. Hybrid LES-RANS using synthesized turbulent fluctuations for forcing in the interface region. International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow, 27, 1028–1042.Google Scholar
DAVIDSON, L. & PENG, S. 2003. Hybrid LES-RANS: a one-equation SGS model combined with a k-omega model for predicting recirculating flows. International Journal of Numerical Methods in Fluids, 43, 1003–1018.Google Scholar
DEARDORFF, J. W. 1970. A numerical study of three-dimensional turbulent channel flow at large Reynolds numbers. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 41, 453–480.Google Scholar
DECK, S., WEISS, , , P.-É., PAMIÈS, M. & GARNIER, E. 2011. Zonal detached eddy simulation of a spatially developing flat plate turbulent boundary layer. Computers & Fluids, 48, 1–15.Google Scholar
DEMUREN, A. & RODI, W. 1984. Calculation of turbulence-driven secondary motion in non-circular ducts. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 140, 189–222.Google Scholar
DIMOTAKIS, D.E, MIAKE-LYE, R. C. & PAPANTONIOU, D. A. 1983. Structure and dynamics of round turbulent jets. Physics of Fluids, 26(11), 3185–3192.Google Scholar
DOMARADZKI, J. & HOLM, D. D. 2001. Navier-Stokes-alpha model: LES equations with nonlinear dispersion in Modern Simulation Strategies for Turbulent Flow, ed. by GEURTS, B. J.. ERCOFTAC Bulletin, 107(48), 2, Edwards Publishing.
DRUAULT, P., LARDEAU, S., BONNET, J.-P., COIFFET, F., DELVILLE, J., LAMBALLAIS, E., LARGEAU, J.-F. & PERRET, L. 2004. Generation of three-dimensional turbulent inlet conditions for large-eddy simulation. AIAA Journal, 42, 447–456.Google Scholar
DURBIN, P. A. 1991. Near-wall turbulence closure modeling without “damping functions.” Theoretical and Computational Fluid Dynamics, 3, 1–13.Google Scholar
DURBIN, P., MEDIC, G., SEO, J.-M., EATON, J. & SONG, S. 2001. Rough Wall Modification of Two-Layer k-ε. Journal of Fluids Engineering, 123, 16–21.Google Scholar
EASTWOOD, S. 2010. Hybrid LES–RANS of complex geometry jets, PhD Thesis, School of Engineering, University of Cambridge.
EÇA, L. & HOEKSTRA, M. 2011. Numerical aspects of including wall roughness effects in the SST k-ω eddy-viscosity turbulence model. Computers & Fluids, 40, 299–314.Google Scholar
FARES, E. & SCHRÖDER, W. 2005. A general one-equation turbulence model for free shear and wall-bounded flows. Flow, Turbulence and Combustion, 73, 187–215.Google Scholar
FARGE, M. & SCHNEIDER, K. 2001. Coherent vortex simulation (CVS), a semi-deterministic turbulence model using wavelets. Flow, Turbulence and Combustion, 66, 393–426.Google Scholar
FIALA, A. & KÜGELER, E. 2011. Roughness modeling for turbomachinery. Proceedings of the ASME Turboexpo, Power for Land, Sea and Air, GT2011, 6–11 June, Vancouver, BC, Canada, ASME Paper No. GT2011-45424.
FOROUTAN, H. & YAVUZKURT, S. 2013. A model for simulation of turbulent flow with high free stream turbulence implemented in OpenFOAM®. Journal of Turbomachinery, 135, 031022.Google Scholar
GATSKI, T. & SPEZIALE, C. 1993. On explicit algebraic stress models for complex turbulent flows. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 254, 59–78.Google Scholar
GATSKI, T. B., RUMSEY, C. L. & MANCEAU, R. 2007. Current trends in modelling research for turbulent aerodynamic flows. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 365, 2389–2418.Google Scholar
GEORGIADIS, N. J., ALEXANDER, J. I. & RESHOTKO, E. 2003. Hybrid Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes/large-eddy simulations of supersonic turbulent mixing. AIAA Journal, 41, 218–229.Google Scholar
GEORGIADIS, N. J. & DEBONIS, J. R. 2006. Navier-Stokes analysis methods for turbulent jet flows with application to aircraft exhaust nozzles. Progress in Aerospace Sciences, 42, 377–418.Google Scholar
GEORGIADIS, N. J. & YODER, D. A. 2013. Recalibration of the shear stress transport model to improve calculation of shock separated flows. 51st AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting including the new horizons forum and aerospace exposition, Grapevine(Dallas/Ft.WorthRegion), Texas, AIAA Paper No. AIAA-2013–0685.
GEURTS, B. J. & HOLM, D. D. 2006. Leray and LANS-α modelling of turbulent mixing. Journal of Turbulence, 7(10), 1–33.Google Scholar
GIBSON, M. & LAUNDER, B. 1978. Ground effects on pressure fluctuations in the atmospheric boundary layer. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 86, 491–511.Google Scholar
GIESEKING, D. A., CHOI, J.-I., EDWARDS, J. R. & HASSAN, H. A. 2011. Compressible-flow simulations using a new large-eddy simulation/Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes model. AIAA Journal, 49, 2194–2209.Google Scholar
GIRIMAJI, S. S. 2006. Partially-averaged Navier-Stokes model for turbulence: A Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes to direct numerical simulation bridging method. Journal of Applied Mechanics, 73, 413–421.Google Scholar
HAMBA, F. 2006. A hybrid RANS/LES simulation of high-Reynolds-number channel flow using additional filtering at the interface. Theoretical and Computational Fluid Dynamics, 20, 89–101.Google Scholar
HANIMANN, L., MANGANI, L., CASARTELLI, E., MOKULYS, T. & MAURI, S. 2014. Development of a novel mixing plane interface using a fully implicit averaging for stage analysis. Journal of Turbomachinery, 136, 081010.Google Scholar
HANJALIC, K. 2002. One-point closure models for buoyancy-driven turbulent flows. Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics, 34, 321–347.Google Scholar
HANJALIC, K. & LAUNDER, B. 1980. Sensitizing the dissipation equation to irrotational strains. Journal of Fluids Engineering, 102, 34–40.Google Scholar
HERMANSON, K., KERN, S., PICKER, G. & PARNEIX, S. 2003. Predictions of external heat transfer for turbine vanes and blades with secondary flow fields. Journal of Turbomachinery, 125, 107–113.Google Scholar
HUGHES, T. J., MAZZEI, L. & JANSEN, K. E. 2000. Large eddy simulation and the variational multiscale method. Computing and Visualization in Science, 3, 47–59.Google Scholar
HUNT, J. 1973. A theory of turbulent flow round two-dimensional bluff bodies. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 61, 625–706.Google Scholar
IACOVIDES, H. & CHEW, J. 1993. The computation of convective heat transfer in rotating cavities. International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow, 14, 146–154.Google Scholar
IACOVIDES, H. & THEOFANOPOULOS, I. 1991. Turbulence modeling of axisymmetric flow inside rotating cavities. International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow, 12, 2–11.Google Scholar
KAMENETSKIY, D., BUSSOLETTI, J., HILMES, C., JOHNSON, F., VENKATAKRISHNAN, V. & WIGTON, L. 2013. Numerical Evidence of Multiple Solutions for the Reynolds-Averaged Navier-Stokes Equations for High-Lift Configurations. 51st AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting Including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition, Dallas/Ft. Worth, Texas, AIAA Paper No. AIAA-2013–0663.
KARCZ, M. & BADUR, J. 2005. An alternative two-equation turbulent heat diffusivity closure. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 48, 2013–2022.Google Scholar
KATO, M. & LAUNDER, B. 1993. The modeling of turbulent flow around stationary and vibrating square cylinders. Ninth Symposium on Turbulent Shear Flows, pp. 10-4-1–10-4-6.
KEATING, A., PIOMELLI, U., BALARAS, E. & KALTENBACH, H.-J. 2004. A priori and a posteriori tests of inflow conditions for large-eddy simulation. Physics of Fluids (1994–present), 16, 4696–4712.Google Scholar
KELTERER, M., PECNIK, R. & SANZ, W. 2010. Computation of laminar-turbulent transition in turbumachinery using the correlation based γ-Reθ transition model. ASME Turbo Expo 2010: Power for Land, Sea, and Air, ASME Paper No. GT 2010-22207.
KHAN, M., LUO, X., NICOLLEAU, F., TUCKER, P. & LO IACONO, G. 2010. Effects of LES sub‐grid flow structure on particle deposition in a plane channel with a ribbed wall. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Biomedical Engineering, 26, 999–1015.Google Scholar
KHAVARAN, A. & KENZAKOWSKI, D. C. 2007. Progress toward improving jet noise predictions in hot jets. NASA/CR-2007-214671.
KIM, S. H. & CHUNG, M. K. 2001. New vt-k model for calculation of wall-bounded turbulent flows. AIAA Journal, 39, 1803–1805.Google Scholar
KLEIN, M., SADIKI, A. & JANICKA, J. 2003. A digital filter based generation of inflow data for spatially developing direct numerical or large eddy simulations. Journal of Computational Physics, 186, 652–665.Google Scholar
KNOPP, T., EISFELD, B. & CALVO, J. B. 2009. A new extension for k-ω turbulence models to account for wall roughness. International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow, 30, 54–65.Google Scholar
KONOPKA, M., JESSEN, W., MEINKE, M. & SCHRÖDER, W. 2013. Large-eddy simulation of film cooling in an adverse pressure gradient flow. Journal of Turbomachinery, 135, 031031.Google Scholar
KOSOVIC, B. 1997. Subgrid-scale modelling for the large-eddy simulation of high-Reynolds-number boundary layers. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 336, 151–182.Google Scholar
KOŽULOVIĆ, D. & LAPWORTH, B. L. 2009. An approach for inclusion of a nonlocal transition model in a parallel unstructured computational fluid dynamics code. Journal of Turbomachinery, 131, 031008.Google Scholar
KRAICHNAN, R. H. 1970. Diffusion by a random velocity field. Physics of Fluids (1958–1988), 13, 22–31.Google Scholar
KURBATSKIJ, A., POROSEVA, S. & YAKOVENKO, S. 1995. Calculation of statistical characteristics of a turbulent flow in a rotated cylindrical pipe. High Temperature, 33, 738–748.Google Scholar
LAKEHAL, D. 2002. Near-wall modeling of turbulent convective heat transport in film cooling of turbine blades with the aid of direct numerical simulation data. Journal of Turbomachinery, 124, 485–498.Google Scholar
LAM, C. & BREMHORST, K. 1981. A modified form of the k-ε model for predicting wall turbulence. Journal of Fluids Engineering, 103, 456–460.Google Scholar
LARAUFIE, R., DECK, S. & SAGAUT, P. 2011. A dynamic forcing method for unsteady turbulent inflow conditions. Journal of Computational Physics, 230, 8647–8663.Google Scholar
LASHERAS, J. & CHOI, H. 1988. Three-dimensional instability of a plane free shear layer: an experimental study of the formation and evolution of streamwise vortices. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 189, 53–86.Google Scholar
LAUNDER, B. E., MORSE, A. P., RODU, W. & SPALDING, D. B. 1972. Prediction of free shear flows – A comparison of the performance of six turbulence models. NASASP-311.
LAUNDER, B. E. & JONES, W. P. 1969. On the prediction of laminarisation, HM Stationery Office, ARC CP 1036.
LAUNDER, B., REECE, G. J. & RODI, W. 1975. Progress in the development of a Reynolds-stress turbulence closure. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 68, 537–566.Google Scholar
LAUNDER, B. & SHARMA, B. 1974. Application of the energy-dissipation model of turbulence to the calculation of flow near a spinning disc. Letters in Heat and Mass Transfer, 1, 131–137.Google Scholar
LAUNDER, B. E. & PRIDDIN, C. 1973. A comparison of some proposals for the mixing length near a wall. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 16, 700–702.Google Scholar
LAUNDER, B. E. & SPALDING, D. 1974. The numerical computation of turbulent flows. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 3, 269–289.Google Scholar
LESCHZINER, M. A. 2000. Turbulence modelling for separated flows with anisotropy-resolving closures. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 358, 3247–3277.Google Scholar
LESCHZINER, M., LI, N. & TESSICINI, F. 2009. Simulating flow separation from continuous surfaces: routes to overcoming the Reynolds number barrier. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 367, 2885–2903.Google Scholar
LICARI, A. & CHRISTENSEN, K. 2011. Modeling cumulative surface damage and assessing its impact on wall turbulence. AIAA Journal, 49, 2305–2320.Google Scholar
LIEN, F.-S. & LESCHZINER, M. 1994. Assessment of turbulence-transport models including non-linear RNG eddy-viscosity formulation and second-moment closure for flow over a backward-facing step. Computers & Fluids, 23, 983–1004.Google Scholar
LIGRANI, P. M. & MOFFAT, R. J. 1986. Structure of transitionally rough and fully rough turbulent boundary layers. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 162, 69–98.Google Scholar
LIU, Y. & TUCKER, P. 2007. Contrasting zonal LES and non‐linear zonal URANS models when predicting a complex electronics system flow. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 71, 1–24.Google Scholar
LIU, Y., TUCKER, P. G. & LO IACONO, G. 2006. Comparison of zonal RANS and LES for a non-isothermal ribbed channel flow. International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow, 27, 391–401.Google Scholar
LODEFIER, K. & DICK, E. 2006. Modelling of unsteady transition in low-pressure turbine blade flows with two dynamic intermittency equations. Flow, Turbulence and Combustion, 76, 103–132.Google Scholar
LUND, T. S. & NOVIKOV, E. 1992. Parameterization of subgrid-scale stress by the velocity gradient tensor. Annual Research Briefs, 27–43.Google Scholar
LUND, T. S., WU, X. & SQUIRES, K. D. 1998. Generation of turbulent inflow data for spatially-developing boundary layer simulations. Journal of Computational Physics, 140, 233–258.Google Scholar
LUO, J. & RAZINSKY, E. H. 2007. Conjugate heat transfer analysis of a cooled turbine vane using the v2f turbulence model. Journal of Turbomachinery, 129, 773–781.Google Scholar
MANI, M. 2004. Hybrid turbulence models for unsteady flow simulation. Journal of Aircraft, 41, 110–118.Google Scholar
MANI, M., BABCOCK, D., WINKLER, C. & SPALART, P. 2013. Predictions of a supersonic turbulent flow in a square duct. Fifty-first AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition, January, AIAA Paper No. AIAA-2013-0860.
MARGOLIN, L., RIDER, W. & GRINSTEIN, F. 2006. Modeling turbulent flow with implicit LES. Journal of Turbulence, 7(15), 1–27.Google Scholar
MAYLE, R. & SCHULZ, A. 1997. Heat transfer committee and turbomachinery committee best paper of 1996 award: The path to predicting bypass transition. Journal of Turbomachinery, 119, 405–411.Google Scholar
MCGUIRK, J. & RODI, W. 1979. The calculation of three-dimensional turbulent free jets. In Turbulent Shear Flows I, Springer, pp. 71–83.
MELLOR, G. L. & HERRING, H. 1968. Two methods of calculating turbulent boundary layer behavior based on numerical solutions of the equations of motion. Proceedings of the Computation of Turbulent Boundary Layers Conference, August, Stanford, California, 18–25.
MENTER, F. R. 1993. Zonal two equation k-turbulence models for aerodynamic flows. AIAA Paper No. AIAA-1993-2906.
MENTER, F., KUNTZ, M. & BENDER, R. 2003. A Scale-Adaptive Simulation Model for Turbulent Flow Predictions. 41st Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, AIAA Paper No. AIAA-2003-767.
MENTER, F., LANGTRY, R., LIKKI, S., SUZEN, Y., HUANG, P. & VÖLKER, S. 2006. A correlation-based transition model using local variables – Part I: model formulation. Journal of Turbomachinery, 128, 413–422.Google Scholar
MICHELASSI, V., GIANGIACOMO, P., MARTELLI, F., DÉNOS, R. & PANIAGUA, G. 2001. Steady three-dimensional simulation of a transonic axial turbine stage. ASME Turbo Expo 2001: Power for Land, Sea, and Air, ASME Paper No. 2001-GT-0174.
MOMPEAN, G., GAVRILAKIS, S., MACHIELS, L. & DEVILLE, M. 1996. On predicting the turbulence‐induced secondary flows using nonlinear k‐ε models. Physics of Fluids (1994–present), 8, 1856–1868.Google Scholar
MONTOMOLI, F., HODSON, H. & HASELBACH, F. 2008. Effect of roughness and unsteadiness on the performance of a new LPT blade at low Reynolds numbers. ASME Turbo Expo 2008: Power for Land, Sea, and Air, ASME Paper No. GT2008-50488.
MOORE, C. 1977. The role of shear-layer instability waves in jet exhaust noise. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 80, 321–367.Google Scholar
MORSE, A. 1977. Axisymmetric Turbulent Sheer Flows with and Without Swirl. PhD thesis, University of London.
MULLENIX, N. J., GAITONDE, D. V. & VISBAL, M. R. 2011. A plasma-actuator-based method to generate a supersonic turbulent boundary layer inflow condition for numerical simulations. Proceedings of the 20th AIAA Computational Fluid Dynamics Conference, Honolulu, HI, 27–30 June 2011. AIAA Paper No. AIAA-2011-3556.
MURMAN, S. M. 2011. Evaluating modified diffusion coefficients for the SST turbulence model using benchmark tests, 41st AIAA Fluid Dynamics Conference and Exhibit, June, AIAA Paper No. AIAA-2011-3571.
NAGABHUSHANA, R. V. 2014. Numerical investigation of separated flows in low pressure turbines: current status and future outlook. PhDthesis, University of Cambridge.
NEE, V. W. & KOVASZNAY, L. S. 1969. Simple phenomenological theory of turbulent shear flows. Physics of Fluids (1958–1988), 12, 473–484.Google Scholar
NEWMAN, G., LAUNDER, B. & LUMLEY, J. 1981. Modelling the behaviour of homogeneous scalar turbulence. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 111, 217–232.Google Scholar
NICOUD, F. & DUCROS, F. 1999. Subgrid-scale stress modelling based on the square of the velocity gradient tensor. Flow, Turbulence and Combustion, 62, 183–200.Google Scholar
NIKITIN, N., NICOUD, F., WASISTHO, B., SQUIRES, K. & SPALART, P. 2000. An approach to wall modeling in large-eddy simulations. Physics of Fluids (1994–present), 12, 1629–1632.Google Scholar
NISHIMURA, M., TOKUHIRO, A., KIMURA, N. & KAMIDE, H. 2000. Numerical study on mixing of oscillating quasi-planar jets with low Reynolds number turbulent stress and heat flux equation models. Nuclear Engineering and Design, 202, 77–95.Google Scholar
OLIVER, T. A. 2008. A high-order, adaptive, discontinuous Galerkin finite element method for the Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes equations. Ph.D Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
ORIJI, U. R. & TUCKER, P. G. 2013. RANS modelling of accelerating boundary layers. ASME 2013 International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition, IMECE2013, November 13-21, 2013, San Diego, CA, Paper No. IMECE2013-63467.
ORIJI, U. R., KARIMISANI, S. & TUCKER, P. G. 2014a. RANS Modeling of accelerating boundary layers. Journal of Fluids Engineering, 137, 011202–011202.Google Scholar
ORIJI, U. R., YANG, X. & TUCKER, P. G. 2014b. Hybrid RANS/ILES for aero engine intake. Proceedings of ASME Turbo Expo 2014 GT2014 June 16-20, 2014, Dusseldorf, Germany, Paper No. GT2014-26472.
PACCIANI, R., MARCONCINI, M., ARNONE, A. & BERTINI, F. 2011a. An assessment of the laminar kinetic energy concept for the prediction of high-lift, low-Reynolds number cascade flows. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part A: Journal of Power and Energy, 225, 995–1003.Google Scholar
PACCIANI, R., MARCONCINI, M., FADAI-GHOTBI, A., LARDEAU, S. & LESCHZINER, M. A. 2011b. Calculation of high-lift cascades in low pressure turbine conditions using a three-equation model. Journal of Turbomachinery, 133, 031016.Google Scholar
PACCIANI, R., MARCONCINI, M., ARNONE, A. & BERTINI, F. 2012. URANS analysis of wake-induced effects in high-lift, low Reynolds number cascade flows. ASME Turbo Expo 2012: Turbine Technical Conference and Exposition, ASME Paper No. GT2012-69479, 1521–1530.
PACCIANI, R., MARCONCINI, M., ARNONE, A. & BERTINI, F. 2013. Predicting high-lift LP turbine cascades flows using transition-sensitive turbulence closures. ASME Turbo Expo 2013: Turbine Technical Conference and Exposition, 3–7 June, San Antonio, TX, ASME Paper No. GT2013-95605.
PARK, T. S. & SUNG, H. J. 1997. A new low-Reynolds-number k-epsilon-fμ model for predictions involving multiple surfaces. Fluid Dynamics Research, 20, 97.Google Scholar
PECNIK, R. & SANZ, W. 2007. Application of the turbulent potential model to heat transfer predictions on a turbine guide vane. Journal of Turbomachinery, 129, 628–635.Google Scholar
PEROT, B. 1999. Turbulence modeling using body force potentials. Physics of Fluids (1994–present), 11, 2645–2656.Google Scholar
PERRET, L., DELVILLE, J., MANCEAU, R. & BONNET, J.-P. 2008. Turbulent inflow conditions for large-eddy simulation based on low-order empirical model. Physics of Fluids (1994–present), 20, 075107.Google Scholar
PIOMELLI, U. & BALARAS, E. 2002. Wall-layer models for large-eddy simulations. Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics, 34, 349–374.Google Scholar
PIOMELLI, U., FERZIGER, J., MOIN, P. & KIM, J. 1989. New approximate boundary conditions for large eddy simulations of wall‐bounded flows. Physics of Fluids A: Fluid Dynamics (1989–1993), 1, 1061–1068.Google Scholar
PIOMELLI, U., BALARAS, E., PASINATO, H., SQUIRES, K. D. & SPALART, P. R. 2003. The inner–outer layer interface in large-eddy simulations with wall-layer models. International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow, 24, 538–550.Google Scholar
POPE, S. 1978. An explanation of the turbulent round-jet/plane-jet anomaly. AIAA Journal, 16, 279–281.Google Scholar
POROSEVA, S. 2013. Personal Communication.
PRUETT, C. D. 2000. Eulerian time-domain filtering for spatial large-eddy simulation. AIAA Journal, 38, 1634–1642.Google Scholar
RAO, V. N., JEFFERSON-LOVEDAY, R., TUCKER, P. G. & LARDEAU, S. 2014. Large Eddy Simulations in Turbines: Influence of Roughness and Free-Stream Turbulence. Flow, Turbulence and Combustion, 92, 543–561.Google Scholar
RAVERDY, B., MARY, I., SAGAUT, P. & LIAMIS, N. 2003. High-resolution large-eddy simulation of flow around low-pressure turbine blade. AIAA Journal, 41, 390–397.Google Scholar
REAU, N. & TUMIN, A. 2002. On harmonic perturbations in a turbulent mixing layer. European Journal of Mechanics-B/Fluids, 21, 143–155.Google Scholar
REVELL, A. J., CRAFT, T. J. & LAURENCE, D. R. 2011. Turbulence modelling of unsteady turbulent flows using the stress strain lag model. Flow, Turbulence and Combustion, 86, 129–151.Google Scholar
RHIE, C. & CHOW, W. 1983. Numerical study of the turbulent flow past an airfoil with trailing edge separation. AIAA Journal, 21, 1525–1532.Google Scholar
RICHARDSON, L. 1922. Weather prediction by numerical process, Cambridge University Press.
RUMSEY, C. L. 2007. Apparent transition behavior of widely-used turbulence models. International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow, 28, 1460–1471.Google Scholar
RUMSEY, C. L., PETTERSSON REIF, B. A. & GATSKI, T. B. 2006. Arbitrary steady-state solutions with the k-epsilon model. AIAA Journal, 44, 1586–1592.Google Scholar
SAGAUT, P., HÜTTL, T. & WAGNER, C. 2007. Large-eddy simulation for acoustics. Large-eddy Simulation for Acoustics, Cambridge University Press, 89–127.
SCHLICHTING, H. 1979. Boundarv Layerer Theory, 7th edition, McGraw-Hill.
SCHUMANN, U. 1975. Subgrid scale model for finite difference simulations of turbulent flows in plane channels and annuli. Journal of Computational Physics, 18, 376–404.Google Scholar
SCOTTI, A., MENEVEAU, C. & LILLY, D. K. 1993. Generalized Smagorinsky model for anisotropic grids. Physics of Fluids A: Fluid Dynamics (1989–1993), 5, 2306–2308.Google Scholar
SECUNDOV, A., STRELETS, M. K. & TRAVIN, A. 2001. Generalization of vvt-92 turbulence model for shear-free and stagnation point flows. Journal of Fluids Engineering, 123, 11–15.Google Scholar
SHUR, M. L., STRELETS, M. K., TRAVIN, A. K. & SPALART, P. R. 2000. Turbulence modeling in rotating and curved channels: Assessing the Spalart-Shur correction. AIAA Journal, 38, 784–792.Google Scholar
SLOAN, D. G., SMITH, P. J. & SMOOT, L. D. 1986. Modeling of swirl in turbulent flow systems. Progress in Energy and Combustion Science, 12, 163–250.Google Scholar
SMAGORINSKY, J. 1963. General circulation experiments with the primitive equations, I: The basic experiment*. Monthly Weather Review, 91, 99–164.Google Scholar
SMIRNOV, A., SHI, S. & CELIK, I. 2001. Random flow generation technique for large eddy simulations and particle-dynamics modeling. Journal of Fluids Engineering, 123, 359–371.Google Scholar
SPALART, P. 2000. Strategies for turbulence modelling and simulations. International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow, 21, 252–263.Google Scholar
SPALART, P. & ALLMARAS, S. 1994. A one-equation turbulence model for aerodynamic flows. Recherche Aerospatiale, 1, 5–21.Google Scholar
SPALART, P. & SHUR, M. 1997. On the sensitization of turbulence models to rotation and curvature. Aerospace Science and Technology, 1, 297–302.Google Scholar
SPALART, P. R. & RUMSEY, C. L. 2007. Effective inflow conditions for turbulence models in aerodynamic calculations. AIAA Journal, 45, 2544–2553.Google Scholar
SPALART, P. R. & STRELETS, M. K. 2000. Mechanisms of transition and heat transfer in a separation bubble. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 403, 329–349.Google Scholar
SPALART, P. R., DECK, S., SHUR, M., SQUIRES, K., STRELETS, M. K. & TRAVIN, A. 2006. A new version of detached-eddy simulation, resistant to ambiguous grid densities. Theoretical and Computational Fluid Dynamics, 20, 181–195.Google Scholar
SPALDING, D. 1994. Calculation of turbulent heat transfer in cluttered spaces. Proceedings of the tenth International Heat Transfer Conference, Brighton.
SPEZIALE, C. G. 1987. On nonlinear k-l and k-ε; models of turbulence. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 178, 459–475.Google Scholar
SPEZIALE, C. 1998. Turbulence modeling for time-dependent RANS and VLES: a review. AIAA Journal, 36, 173–184.Google Scholar
STRELETS, M. 2001. Detached eddy simulation of massively separated flows. Proceedings of the 39th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, NV, USA, 8–11 January 2001. AIAA Paper No. AIAA-2001-0879.
STRIPF, M., SCHULZ, A., BAUER, H.-J. & WITTIG, S. 2009a. Extended models for transitional rough wall boundary layers with heat transfer – Part I: Model Formulations. Journal of Turbomachinery, 131, 031016.Google Scholar
STRIPF, M., SCHULZ, A., BAUER, H.-J. & WITTIG, S. 2009b. Extended models for transitional rough wall boundary layers with heat transfer – Part II: Model Validation and Benchmarking. Journal of Turbomachinery, 131, 031017.Google Scholar
SUDER, K. L., CHIMA, R. V., STRAZISAR, A. J. & ROBERTS, W. B. 1995. The effect of adding roughness and thickness to a transonic axial compressor rotor. Journal of Turbomachinery, 117, 491–505.Google Scholar
SVENINGSSON, A. 2006. Turbulence transport modelling in gas turbine related applications, D.Phil. Thesis, Department of Applied Mechanics, Chalmers University of Technology.
SVENINGSSON, A. & DAVIDSON, L. 2005. Computations of flow field and heat transfer in a stator vane passage using the v2− f turbulence model. Journal of Turbomachinery, 127, 627–634.Google Scholar
TABOR, G. & BABA-AHMADI, M. 2010. Inlet conditions for large eddy simulation: a review. Computers & Fluids, 39, 553–567.Google Scholar
TAKAHASHI, T., FUNAZAKI, K.-I., SALLEH, H. B., SAKAI, E. & WATANABE, K. 2012. Assessment of URANS and DES for prediction of leading edge film cooling. Journal of Turbomachinery, 134, 031008.Google Scholar
TEMMERMAN, L. & LESCHZINER, M. 2002. A priori studies of near wall RANS model within a hybrid LES/RANS scheme, Engineering Turbulence Modelling and Experiments, 5, ed. by W. Rodi, N. Fueyo, pp. 326–371.
TERRACOL, M., MANOHA, E., HERRERO, C., LABOURASSE, E., REDONNET, S. & SAGAUT, P. 2005. Hybrid methods for airframe noise numerical prediction. Theoretical and Computational Fluid Dynamics, 19, 197–227.Google Scholar
THIELEN, L., HANJALIĆ, K., JONKER, H. & MANCEAU, R. 2005. Predictions of flow and heat transfer in multiple impinging jets with an elliptic-blending second-moment closure. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 48, 1583–1598.Google Scholar
TRAVIN, A., SHUR, M., STRELETS, M. & SPALART, P. 2000. Detached-eddy simulations past a circular cylinder. Flow, Turbulence and Combustion, 63, 293–313.Google Scholar
TUCKER, P. 2003. Differential equation-based wall distance computation for DES and RANS. Journal of Computational Physics, 190, 229–248.Google Scholar
TUCKER, P. 2008. The LES model's role in jet noise. Progress in Aerospace Sciences, 44, 427–436.Google Scholar
TUCKER, P. 2013a. Trends in turbomachinery turbulence treatments. Progress in Aerospace Sciences, 63, 1–32.Google Scholar
TUCKER, P. G. 2013b. Unsteady Computational Fluid Dynamics in Aeronautics, Springer.
TUCKER, P. G. 2001. Computation of unsteady internal flows. Springer.
TUCKER, P. G. 2004. Novel MILES computations for jet flows and noise. International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow, 25, 625–635.Google Scholar
TUCKER, P. G. & DAVIDSON, L. 2004. Zonal k-l based large eddy simulations. Computers & Fluids, 33, 267–287.Google Scholar
TUCKER, P. G., RUMSEY, C. L., SPALART, P. R., BARTELS, R. B. & BIEDRON, R. T. 2005. Computations of wall distances based on differential equations. AIAA Journal, 43, 539–549.Google Scholar
TURNER, C. 2012. Laminar kinetic energy modelling for improved laminar-turbulent transition prediction, D.Phil. Thesis, Faculty of Engineering and Physical Sciences, The University of Manchester.
TYACKE, J., JEFFERSON-LOVEDAY, R. & TUCKER, P. 2012. Numerical modelling of seal type geometries. Proc. of ASME Turbo Expo, Copenhagen, Denmark, 11–15 June, ASME Paper No GT2012–68840.
WALTERS, D. K. & COKLJAT, D. 2008. A three-equation eddy-viscosity model for Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes simulations of transitional flow. Journal of Fluids Engineering, 130, 121401.Google Scholar
WALTERS, D. K. & LEYLEK, J. H. 2004. A new model for boundary layer transition using a single-point rans approach. Journal of Turbomachinery, 126(1), 193–202.Google Scholar
WARNER, J. C., SHERWOOD, C. R., ARANGO, H. G. & SIGNELL, R. P. 2005. Performance of four turbulence closure models implemented using a generic length scale method. Ocean Modelling, 8, 81–113.Google Scholar
WILCOX, D. 1998. Turbulence modeling for CFD, DCW Industries. Inc.
WILCOX, D. C. 1988. Multiscale model for turbulent flows. AIAA Journal, 26, 1311–1320.Google Scholar
WOLFSHTEIN, M. 1969. The velocity and temperature distribution in one-dimensional flow with turbulence augmentation and pressure gradient. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 12, 301–318.Google Scholar
WONG, V. 1992. A proposed statistical‐dynamic closure method for the linear or nonlinear subgrid‐scale stresses. Physics of Fluids A: Fluid Dynamics (1989–1993), 4, 1080–1082.Google Scholar
WU, X. 2010. Establishing the generality of three phenomena using a boundary layer with free-stream passing wakes. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 664, 193–219.Google Scholar
YAKHOT, V., ORSZAG, S., THANGAM, S., GATSKI, T. & SPEZIALE, C. 1992. Development of turbulence models for shear flows by a double expansion technique. Physics of Fluids A: Fluid Dynamics (1989–1993), 4, 1510–1520.Google Scholar
YAP, C. R. 1987. Turbulent heat and momentum transfer in recirculating and impinging flows. PhD thesis, University of Manchester, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Technology.
YOSHIZAWA, A. 1993. Bridging between eddy-viscosity-type and second-order models using a two-scale DIA. Proceedings of the ninth International Symposium on Turbulent Shear Flow, August, Kyoto, Japan, 16–18.
ZAHRAI, S., BARK, F. & KARLSSON, R. 1995. On anisotropic subgrid modeling. European Journal of Mechanics B, Fluids, 14, 459–486.Google Scholar
ZHONG, B. & TUCKER, P. G. 2004. k–l based hybrid LES/RANS approach and its application to heat transfer simulation. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Fluids, 46, 983–1005.Google Scholar
ZUCKERMAN, N. & LIOR, N. 2005. Impingement heat transfer: correlations and numerical modeling. Journal of Heat Transfer, 127, 544–552.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

  • Turbulence
  • Paul G. Tucker, University of Cambridge
  • Book: Advanced Computational Fluid and Aerodynamics
  • Online publication: 05 June 2016
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139872010.006
Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

  • Turbulence
  • Paul G. Tucker, University of Cambridge
  • Book: Advanced Computational Fluid and Aerodynamics
  • Online publication: 05 June 2016
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139872010.006
Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

  • Turbulence
  • Paul G. Tucker, University of Cambridge
  • Book: Advanced Computational Fluid and Aerodynamics
  • Online publication: 05 June 2016
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139872010.006
Available formats
×