Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T19:02:56.764Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Two-phase modelling of a fluid mixing layer

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 January 1999

J. GLIMM
Affiliation:
Department of Applied Mathematics and Statistics, University at Stony Brook, Stony Brook, NY 11794, USA
D. SALTZ
Affiliation:
Department of Applied Mathematics and Statistics, University at Stony Brook, Stony Brook, NY 11794, USA
D. H. SHARP
Affiliation:
Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM 87545, USA

Abstract

We analyse and improve a recently-proposed two-phase flow model for the statistical evolution of two-fluid mixing. A hyperbolic equation for the volume fraction, whose characteristic speed is the average interface velocity v*, plays a central role. We propose a new model for v* in terms of the volume fraction and fluid velocities, which can be interpreted as a constitutive law for two-fluid mixing. In the incompressible limit, the two-phase equations admit a self-similar solution for an arbitrary scaling of lengths. We show that the constitutive law for v* can be expressed directly in terms of the volume fraction, and thus it is an experimentally measurable quantity. For incompressible Rayleigh–Taylor mixing, we examine the self-similar solution based on a simple zero-parameter model for v*. It is shown that the present approach gives improved agreement with experimental data for the growth rate of a Rayleigh–Taylor mixing layer.

Closure of the two-phase flow model requires boundary conditions for the surfaces that separate the two-phase and single-phase regions, i.e. the edges of the mixing layer. We propose boundary conditions for Rayleigh–Taylor mixing based on the inertial, drag, and buoyant forces on the furthest penetrating structures which define these edges. Our analysis indicates that the compatibility of the boundary conditions with the two-phase flow model is an important consideration. The closure assumptions introduced here and their consequences in relation to experimental data are compared to the work of others.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© 1999 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)