William A. Sirignano, Wes Hellwig, Sylvain L. Walsh
{"title":"Flamelet Connection to Turbulence Kinetic Energy Dissipation Rate","authors":"William A. Sirignano, Wes Hellwig, Sylvain L. Walsh","doi":"arxiv-2409.04929","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"An analysis takes the variable value for turbulence kinetic energy\ndissipation rate $\\epsilon$ as it might appear from a turbulent combustion\ncomputation using either Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) or large-eddy\nsimulation (LES) and relates it to both viscous dissipation rate and turbulence\nkinetic energy at the Kolmogorov scale. The imposed strain rate and vorticity\non these smallest eddies are readily and uniquely determined from knowledge of\nthat kinetic energy and viscous dissipation rate. Thus, a given value of\n$\\epsilon$ at a specific time and location determines the two mechanical\nconstraints (vorticity and strain rate) on the inflow to the flamelet. It is\nalso shown how $\\epsilon$ affects the sign of the Laplacian of pressure, which\nmust be negative to allow the existence of the flamelet. Using several\ndifferent flamelet models, with and without vorticity and with and without\ndifferential mass transport, different results for maximum flamelet\ntemperature, integrated flamelet burning rate, and stoichiometric flamelet\nscalar dissipation rate are obtained. For a given $\\epsilon$ value, flamelet\nmodels that do not consider vorticity and differential diffusion produce\nsubstantial errors in the information to be provided to the resolved or\nfiltered scales in a turbulent combustion computation.","PeriodicalId":501125,"journal":{"name":"arXiv - PHYS - Fluid Dynamics","volume":"51 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"arXiv - PHYS - Fluid Dynamics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/arxiv-2409.04929","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
An analysis takes the variable value for turbulence kinetic energy
dissipation rate $\epsilon$ as it might appear from a turbulent combustion
computation using either Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) or large-eddy
simulation (LES) and relates it to both viscous dissipation rate and turbulence
kinetic energy at the Kolmogorov scale. The imposed strain rate and vorticity
on these smallest eddies are readily and uniquely determined from knowledge of
that kinetic energy and viscous dissipation rate. Thus, a given value of
$\epsilon$ at a specific time and location determines the two mechanical
constraints (vorticity and strain rate) on the inflow to the flamelet. It is
also shown how $\epsilon$ affects the sign of the Laplacian of pressure, which
must be negative to allow the existence of the flamelet. Using several
different flamelet models, with and without vorticity and with and without
differential mass transport, different results for maximum flamelet
temperature, integrated flamelet burning rate, and stoichiometric flamelet
scalar dissipation rate are obtained. For a given $\epsilon$ value, flamelet
models that do not consider vorticity and differential diffusion produce
substantial errors in the information to be provided to the resolved or
filtered scales in a turbulent combustion computation.