Plane turbulent mixing between two streams of different gases (especially nitrogen and helium) was studied in a novel apparatus Spark shadow pictures showed that, for all ratios of densities in the two streams, the mixing layer is dominated by large coherent structures High-speed movies showed that these convect at nearly constant speed, and increase their size and spacing discontinuously by amalgamation with neighbouring ones The pictures and measurements of density fluctuations suggest that turbulent mixing and entrainment is a process of entanglement on the scale of the large structures; some statistical properties of the latter are used to obtain an estimate of entrainment rates Large changes of the density ratio across the mixing layer were found to have a relatively small effect on the spreading angle; it is concluded that the strong effects, which are observed when one stream is supersonic, are due to compressibility effects, not density effects, as has been generally supposed

/pdf/on-density-effects-and-large-structure-in-turbulent-mixing-17pzvnqtgz.pdf

On density effects and large structure in turbulent mixing layers

Perturbed Free Shear Layers

▪ Abstract The single-point statistics of turbulence in the ‘roughness sub-layer’ occupied by the plant canopy and the air layer just above it differ significantly from those in the surface layer. The mean velocity profile is inflected, second moments are strongly inhomogeneous with height, skewnesses are large, and second-moment budgets are far from local equilibrium. Velocity moments scale with single length and time scales throughout the layer rather than depending on height. Large coherent structures control turbulence dynamics. Sweeps rather than ejections dominate eddy fluxes and a typical large eddy consists of a pair of counter-rotating streamwise vortices, the downdraft between the vortex pair generating the sweep. Comparison with the statistics and instability modes of the plane mixing layer shows that the latter rather than the boundary layer is the appropriate model for canopy flow and that the dominant large eddies are the result of an inviscid instability of the inflected mean velocity profi...

Turbulence in plant canopies

This is a personal statement on the present state of understanding of coherent structures, in particular their spatial details and dynamical significance. The characteristic measures of coherent structures are discussed, emphasizing coherent vorticity as the crucial property. We present here a general scheme for educing structures in any transitional or fully turbulent flow. From smoothed vorticity maps in convenient flow planes, this scheme recognizes patterns of the same mode and parameter size, and then phase-aligns and ensemble-averages them to obtain coherent structure measures. The departure of individual realizations from the ensemble average denotes incoherent turbulence. This robust scheme has been used to educe structures from velocity data using a rake of hot wires as well as direct numerical simulations and can educe structures using newer measurement techniques such as digital image processing. Our recent studies of coherent structures in several free shear flows are briefly reviewed. Detailed data in circular and elliptic jets, mixing layers, and a plane wake reveal that incoherent turbulence is produced at the ‘saddles’ and then advected to the ‘centres’ of the structures. The mechanism of production of turbulence in shear layers is the stretching of longitudinal vortices or ‘ribs’ which connect the predominantly spanwise ‘rolls’; the ribs induce spanwise contortions of rolls and cause mixing and dissipation, mostly at points where they connect with rolls. We also briefly discuss the role of coherent structures in aerodynamic noise generation and argue that the structure breakdown process, rather than vortex pairing, is the dominant mechanism of noise generation. The ‘cut-and-connect’ interaction of coherent structures is proposed as a specific mechanism of aerodynamic noise generation, and a simple analytical model of it shows that it can provide acceptable predictions of jet noise. The coherent-structures approach to turbulence, apart from explaining flow physics, has also enabled turbulence management via control of structure evolution and interactions. We also discuss some new ideas under investigation: in particular, helicity as a characteristic property of coherent structures.

https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/S0022112086001192

Coherent structures and turbulence.

Simple aerodynamic configurations under even modest conditions can exhibit complex flows with a wide range of temporal and spatial features. It has become common practice in the analysis of these flows to look for and extract physically important features, or modes, as a first step in the analysis. This step typically starts with a modal decomposition of an experimental or numerical dataset of the flowfield, or of an operator relevant to the system. We describe herein some of the dominant techniques for accomplishing these modal decompositions and analyses that have seen a surge of activity in recent decades [1–8]. For a nonexpert, keeping track of recent developments can be daunting, and the intent of this document is to provide an introduction to modal analysis that is accessible to the larger fluid dynamics community. In particular, we present a brief overview of several of the well-established techniques and clearly lay the framework of these methods using familiar linear algebra. The modal analysis techniques covered in this paper include the proper orthogonal decomposition (POD), balanced proper orthogonal decomposition (balanced POD), dynamic mode decomposition (DMD), Koopman analysis, global linear stability analysis, and resolvent analysis.

https://arc.aiaa.org/doi/pdf/10.2514/1.J056060

Modal Analysis of Fluid Flows: An Overview

A mixing layer is formed by bringing two streams of water, moving at different velocities, together in a lucite-walled channel. The Reynolds number, based on the velocity difference and the thickness of the shear layer, varies from about 45, where the shear layer originates, to about 850 at a distance of 50 cm. Dye is injected between the two streams just before they are brought together, marking the vorticity-carrying fluid. Unstable waves grow, and fluid is observed to roll up into discrete two-dimensional vortical structures. These turbulent vortices interact by rolling around each other, and a single vortical structure, with approximately twice the spacing of the former vortices, is formed. This pairing process is observed to occur repeatedly, controlling the growth of the mixing layer. A simple model of the mixing layer contains, as the important elements controlling growth, the degree of non-uniformity in the vortex train and the ‘lumpiness’ of the vorticity field.

https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/A67DA3AA1031294B48E2216DB0CBF3D8/S0022112074001121a.pdf/div-class-title-vortex-pairing-the-mechanism-of-turbulent-mixing-layer-growth-at-moderate-reynolds-number-div.pdf

C. D. Winant

Papers

Vortex pairing : the mechanism of turbulent mixing-layer growth at moderate Reynolds number