4.7 Article

Linear temporal and spatio-temporal stability analysis of a binary liquid film flowing down an inclined uniformly heated plate

期刊

JOURNAL OF FLUID MECHANICS
卷 599, 期 -, 页码 269-298

出版社

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S0022112007000110

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Temporal and spatio-temporal instabilities of binary liquid films flowing down an inclined uniformly heated plate with Soret effect are investigated by using the Chebyshev collocation method to solve the full system of linear stability equations. Seven dimensionless parameters, i.e. the Kapitza, Galileo, Prandtl, Lewis, Soret, Marangoni, and Biot numbers (Ka, G, Pr, L, X, M, B), as well as the inclination angle (beta) are used to control the flow system. In the case of pure spanwise perturbations, thermocapillary S- and P-modes are obtained. It is found that the most dangerous modes are stationary for positive Soret numbers (chi >= 0), and oscillatory for chi < 0. Moreover, the P-mode which is short-wave unstable for chi = 0 remains so for chi < 0, but becomes long-wave unstable for chi > 0 and even merges with the long-wave S-mode. In the case of streamwise perturbations, a long-wave surface mode (H-mode) is also obtained. From the neutral curves, it is found that larger Soret numbers make the film flow more unstable as do larger Marangoni numbers. The increase of these parameters leads to the merging of the long-wave H- and S-modes, making the situation long-wave unstable for any Galileo number. It also strongly influences the short-wave P-mode which becomes the most critical for large enough Galileo numbers. Furthermore, from the boundary curves between absolute and convective instabilities (AI/CI) calculated for both the long-wave instability (S- and H-modes) and the short-wave instability (P-mode), it is shown that for small Galileo numbers the AI/CI boundary curves are determined by the long-wave instability, while for large Galileo numbers they are determined by the short-wave instability.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据