4.7 Article

On the relationship between the non-local clustering mechanism and preferential concentration

期刊

JOURNAL OF FLUID MECHANICS
卷 780, 期 -, 页码 327-343

出版社

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/jfm.2015.474

关键词

isotropic turbulence; multiphase and particle-laden flows; turbulent flows

资金

  1. National Science Foundation [CBET-0967349]
  2. National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

'Preferential concentration' (Squires & Eaton, Phys. Fluids, vol. A3, 1991, pp. 1169-1178) refers to the clustering of inertial particles in the high strain, low-rotation regions of turbulence. The 'centrifuge mechanism' of Maxey (J. Fluid Mech., vol. 174, 1987, pp. 441-465) appears to explain this phenomenon. In a recent paper, Bragg & Collins (New J. Phys., vol. 16, 2014, 055013) showed that the centrifuge mechanism is dominant only in the regime St << 1, where St is the Stokes number based on the Kolmogorov time scale. Outside this regime, the centrifuge mechanism gives way to a non-local, path history symmetry breaking mechanism. However, despite the change in the clustering mechanism, the instantaneous particle positions continue to correlate with high strain, low-rotation regions of the turbulence. In this paper, we analyse the exact equation governing the radial distribution function and show how the non-local clustering mechanism is influenced by, but not dependent upon, the preferential sampling of the fluid velocity gradient tensor along the particle path histories in such a way as to generate a bias for clustering in high strain regions of the turbulence. We also show how the non-local mechanism still generates clustering, but without preferential concentration, in the limit where the time scales of the fluid velocity gradient tensor measured along the inertial particle trajectories approaches zero (such as white noise flows or for particles in turbulence settling under strong gravity). Finally, we use data from a direct numerical simulation of inertial particles suspended in Navier-Stokes turbulence to validate the arguments presented in this study.

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