Closure of the Reynolds stress and scalar flux equations

Jones, W.P.; Musonge, Paul

doi:10.1063/1.866876

Cited by 204 publications

(108 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Indeed the 2 nd moment closure model of Jones and Mussonge [24] was also applied to the jet fires considered here with little or no improvement. The modification to the k-ε model introduced above is due to Morse, [25] and has been used successfully in previous rim-stabilised fire simulation, [25].…”

Section: Mathematical Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modeling Lifted Methane Jet Fires Using the Boundary-Layer Equations

Cumber

Spearpoint

2006

Numerical Heat Transfer, Part B: Fundamentals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The focus of this paper is turbulent lifted jet fires. The main objective is to present a lifted jet fire methodology using the boundary layer equations as a basis. The advantages of this are finite volume mesh independent predictions of the mean flow fields can be calculated on readily available computer resources which leads to rigorous model calibration. A number of lift-off models are evaluated. The model of choice is one based on the laminar flamelet quenching concept combined with a model for the large-scale strain rate.

show abstract

Section: Mathematical Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modeling Lifted Methane Jet Fires Using the Boundary-Layer Equations

Cumber

Spearpoint

2006

Numerical Heat Transfer, Part B: Fundamentals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The constants values adopted for the turbulence models are respectively: k-ε model: C ε2 = 1.83, rev. RSM of Jones and Musonge [9]: C ε2 = 1.78. For the axial and radial velocity and turbulence fields, the agreement in the far field is satisfactory, but in the near field the deviations are large.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Transported-PDF (IEM, EMST) micromixing models in a hydrogen-air nonpremixed turbulent flame

Senouci¹,

Bounif²,

Abidat³

et al. 2013

Acta Mech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The topic of this study is the numerical simulation of a turbulent non-premixed hydrogen flame with different micromixing models in order to investigate their predictive capability. The two micromixing models are compared. Comparisons with experimental data demonstrate that predictions based on the EMST model are slightly better. The EMST improves largely the precision of the results to the detriment of the RAM and the CPU performances. Overall, profile predictions of mixture fraction, flame temperature and major species are in reasonable agreement with experimental data.

show abstract

“…It was proposed by Launder et al [14], and is also referred to as LRR-IP model. In addition to the LRR-IP model, many other well-known DRSMs have been proposed, including: the original model of Hanjalic and Launder (HL) [6]; the quasi-isotropic model (LRR-QI) of Launder et al [14]; the model proposed by Jones and Musonge (JM) [10]; the model of Fu, Launder and Tselepidakis (FLT) [5]; the model of Craft and Launder (CL) [1]; and the SSG model proposed by Speziale, Sarkar, and Gatski [27].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Numerical Investigation of a Bluff-Body Stabilised Nonpremixed Flame with Differential Reynolds-Stress Models

Naud

Roekaerts

2003

Flow, Turbulence and Combustion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract.A numerical investigation of a bluff-body stabilised nonpremixed flame, and the corresponding nonreacting flow, has been performed with differential Reynolds-stress models (DRSMs). The equilibrium chemistry model is employed and an assumed-shape beta function PDF approach is used to represent the interaction between turbulence and chemistry. The Reynolds flux of the mixture fraction is obtained from a transport equation, hence a full second moment closure is used. To clarify the applicability of the existing DRSMs in this complex flame, several models, including LRR-IP model, JM model, SSG model as well as a modified LRR-IP model, have been applied and evaluated. The existing models, with default values of the coefficients, cannot provide overall satisfactory predictions for this challenging test case. The standard LRR-IP model over predicts the centreline velocity decay rate, and therefore does not perform satisfactory. The modified LRR-IP model, with model constant C 1 = 1.6 instead of the standard value 1.44 (here named BM-M1), gives better results for the mean velocity. However in the nonreacting case this does not lead to improvement in predicting rms fluctuating velocities especially downstream of the recirculation zone. Motivated by the need to improve the prediction, a new modification of the LRR-IP model is proposed (BM-M2), with model constant C 2 = 0.7 in the pressure strain correlation rather than the standard value 0.6. With the new modified model, a very significant improvement of the prediction of flow field is obtained in the nonreacting case, whereas in the reacting case the prediction of the flow field is of the same overall quality as with BM-M1. This shows that some DRSMs have different behaviour in the nonreacting case and the reacting case. In the reacting case also the mean and variance of mixture fraction are considered and it is found that the best results are obtained with the BM-M1 model, with SSG as second best. Combining the results for flow field and mixture fraction field it is concluded that the BM-M1 model is recommended for further studies of this bluff-body stabilised flame. Grid independence of the result is demonstrated.

show abstract

Closure of the Reynolds stress and scalar flux equations

Cited by 204 publications

References 33 publications

Modeling Lifted Methane Jet Fires Using the Boundary-Layer Equations

Modeling Lifted Methane Jet Fires Using the Boundary-Layer Equations

Transported-PDF (IEM, EMST) micromixing models in a hydrogen-air nonpremixed turbulent flame

Numerical Investigation of a Bluff-Body Stabilised Nonpremixed Flame with Differential Reynolds-Stress Models

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About