Is There a Limit to Turbulence in Fluid Dynamics?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Aero51
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Limit Turbulence
AI Thread Summary
Turbulence in fluid dynamics does not have a definitive limit, as it can become increasingly chaotic without a discernible pattern. The complexity of modeling turbulence is highlighted by the challenges in accurately resolving the Kolmogorov scale, which requires extremely fine mesh that is often impractical even for supercomputers. While the Reynolds number is commonly used to characterize flow regimes, the onset of turbulence is influenced by various factors beyond just this number, such as surface roughness and external disturbances. Research has shown that turbulence can occur at very high Reynolds numbers, with some regimes reaching values as high as 10^12 in stellar interiors. Overall, turbulence remains a complex phenomenon that continues to challenge researchers in fluid dynamics.
Aero51
Messages
545
Reaction score
10
Just out of curiosity, is there a limit to how turbulent a flow can become? In otherwords, turbulence develop that is so chaotic that no discernible pattern/path can be found in the flow? Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Why should there be a limit to "how turbulent a flow can become"? It is nearly impossible now to model simple turbulence even with powerful supercomputers, so how would we even measure extreme chaos?
 
In theory, no. In fact, at extremely higher Reynolds numbers, a flow can re-laminarize (e.g. the Princeton Superpipe).

Otherwise, in a normal situation, turbulence will always involve energy cascades from large flow-scale eddies all the way down to those of the Kolmogorov scale.

Therein lies the problem in performing a DNS of a full-scale turbulent flow. To accurately resolve the Kolmogorov scale in a given flow field, the mesh must be so fine that the problems often cannot be solved in an economically feasible length of time, even on supercomputers.
 
Aero51 said:
Just out of curiosity, is there a limit to how turbulent a flow can become? In otherwords, turbulence develop that is so chaotic that no discernible pattern/path can be found in the flow? Thanks.

Turbulence is like pornography- you know it when you see it. Often, laminar/turbulent flow can be parametrized by the Reynolds number, with turbulent flow indicated around a Reynolds number Re ~ 10000. At the low end, the onset of turbulence, there appears to be a fairly well-defined transition region. However, AFAIK, there does not appear to be anything fundamentally new regardless of how large the Reynolds number is: Russel Donnelly's group has done a lot of work generating flow regimes as high as Re ~ 10^7- 10^9, and IIRC stellar interiors can reach Re ~ 10^12.
 
FWIW, turbulence onset as a function of Reynolds number is only well-defined for pipe flow and perhaps a tiny handful of others. I don't know where 10000 was found, but for things such as airplane wings or automobiles (in the absence of separation), the transition Reynolds number is often much, much higher; well over 10^6. The problem is that the onset o turbulence is dependent on more than just the Reynolds number, notably the free-stream disturbances (sound, turbulence, temperature), surface temperature and surface roughness.
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Hello everyone, Consider the problem in which a car is told to travel at 30 km/h for L kilometers and then at 60 km/h for another L kilometers. Next, you are asked to determine the average speed. My question is: although we know that the average speed in this case is the harmonic mean of the two speeds, is it also possible to state that the average speed over this 2L-kilometer stretch can be obtained as a weighted average of the two speeds? Best regards, DaTario
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Back
Top