Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T05:28:04.007Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Numerical simulation of turbulent duct flows with constant power input

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 June 2014

Yosuke Hasegawa ,
Maurizio Quadrio  and
Bettina Frohnapfel
Yosuke Hasegawa
Affiliation:
Institute of Industrial Science, The University of Tokyo, 4-6-1 Komaba, Meguro-ku, Tokyo 153-8505, Japan
Maurizio Quadrio
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Scienze e Tecnologie Aerospaziali del Politecnico di Milano, via La Masa 34, 20156 Milano, Italy
Bettina Frohnapfel*
Affiliation:
Institute of Fluid Mechanics, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT) Kaiserstrasse 10, 76131 Karlsruhe, Germany
*
†Email address for correspondence: frohnapfel@kit.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The numerical simulation of a flow through a duct requires an externally specified forcing that makes the fluid flow against viscous friction. To this end, it is customary to enforce a constant value for either the flow rate (CFR) or the pressure gradient (CPG). When comparing a laminar duct flow before and after a geometrical modification that induces a change of the viscous drag, both approaches lead to a change of the power input across the comparison. Similarly, when carrying out direct numerical simulation or large-eddy simulation of unsteady turbulent flows, the power input is not constant over time. Carrying out a simulation at constant power input (CPI) is thus a further physically sound option, that becomes particularly appealing in the context of flow control, where a comparison between control-on and control-off conditions has to be made. We describe how to carry out a CPI simulation, and start with defining a new power-related Reynolds number, whose velocity scale is the bulk flow that can be attained with a given pumping power in the laminar regime. Under the CPI condition, we derive a relation that is equivalent to the Fukagata–Iwamoto–Kasagi relation valid for CFR (and to its extension valid for CPG), that presents the additional advantage of naturally including the required control power. The implementation of the CPI approach is then exemplified in the standard case of a plane turbulent channel flow, and then further applied to a flow control case, where a spanwise-oscillating wall is used for skin-friction drag reduction. For this low-Reynolds-number flow, using 90 % of the available power for the pumping system and the remaining 10 % for the control system is found to be the optimum share that yields the largest increase of the flow rate above the reference case where 100 % of the power goes to the pump.

JFM classification

Flow Control: Drag reduction Turbulent Flows: Turbulence simulation
Type
Papers
Information
Journal of Fluid Mechanics , Volume 750 , 10 July 2014 , pp. 191 - 209
Copyright
© 2014 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

Baron, A. & Quadrio, M. 1996 Turbulent drag reduction by spanwise wall oscillations. Appl. Sci. Res. 55, 311–326.Google Scholar
Bewley, T. R. 2009 A fundamental limit on the balance of power in a transpiration-controlled channel flow. J. Fluid Mech. 632, 443–446.Google Scholar
Dean, R. B. 1978 Reynolds number dependence of skin friction and other bulk flow variables in two-dimensional rectangular duct flow. Trans. ASME I: J. Fluids Engng 100, 215–223.Google Scholar
Frohnapfel, B., Hasegawa, Y. & Quadrio, M. 2012 Money versus time: evaluation of flow control in terms of energy consumption and convenience. J. Fluid Mech. 700, 406–418.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
Fukagata, K., Sugiyama, K. & Kasagi, N. 2009 On the lower bound of net driving power in controlled duct flows. Physica D 238, 1082–1086.Google Scholar
Hoyas, S. & Jiménez, J. 2008 Reynolds number effects on the Reynolds-stress budgets in turbulent channels. Phys. Fluids 20, 101511.Google Scholar
Jung, W. J., Mangiavacchi, N. & Akhavan, R. 1992 Suppression of turbulence in wall-bounded flows by high-frequency spanwise oscillations. Phys. Fluids A 4 (8), 1605–1607.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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lozano-Durán, A. & Jiménez, J. 2014 Effect of the computational domain on direct simulations of turbulent channels up to ${R}e_{\tau }=4200$ . Phys. Fluids 26, 011702.Google Scholar
Luchini, P. & Quadrio, M. 2006 A low-cost parallel implementation of direct numerical simulation of wall turbulence. J. Comput. Phys. 211 (2), 551–571.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marusic, I., Joseph, D. D. & Mahesh, K. 2007 Laminar and turbulent comparisons for channel flow and flow control. J. Fluid Mech. 570, 467–477.Google Scholar
Min, T., Kang, S. M., Speyer, J. L. & Kim, J. 2006 Sustained sub-laminar drag in a fully developed channel flow. J. Fluid Mech. 558, 309–318.Google Scholar
Quadrio, M. & Ricco, P. 2004 Critical assessment of turbulent drag reduction through spanwise wall oscillation. J. Fluid Mech. 521, 251–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quadrio, M. & Ricco, P. 2011 The laminar generalized Stokes layer and turbulent drag reduction. J. Fluid Mech. 667, 135–157.Google Scholar
Quadrio, M. & Sibilla, S. 2000 Numerical simulation of turbulent flow in a pipe oscillating around its axis. J. Fluid Mech. 424, 217–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ricco, P., Ottonelli, C., Hasegawa, Y. & Quadrio, M. 2012 Changes in turbulent dissipation in a channel flow with oscillating walls. J. Fluid Mech. 700, 77–104.Google Scholar