pith. sign in

arxiv: 2502.13563 · v1 · submitted 2025-02-19 · ⚛️ physics.flu-dyn

Turbulence Modelling of Mixing Layers under Anisotropic Strain

Bradley Pascoe , Michael Groom , Ben Thornber This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-23 02:39 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.flu-dyn
keywords turbulence modellingmixing layersanisotropic strainK-L modelbulk compressionRANSintegral widthbuoyancy-drag model
0
0 comments X

The pith

Transverse strain closure improves the K-L model's performance for mixing layers under anisotropic strain.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper tests how the K-L turbulence model handles bulk compression when mixing layers experience anisotropic strain from radial motion or non-uniform geometry. One-dimensional simulations apply axial or transverse strain rates and compare three closures for the turbulent length scale. The standard mean isotropic strain closure gives reasonable predictions of integral width and turbulent kinetic energy, but the transverse strain closure improves accuracy while the axial strain closure reduces it. Among buoyancy-drag variants, a three-equation model that evolves integral width and turbulent length scale separately performs best. The same closure change implies modifications to equivalent two-equation models such as K-epsilon and K-omega.

Core claim

One-dimensional simulations of shock-induced turbulent mixing layers under applied axial or transverse strain rates show that the default closure using the mean isotropic strain rate is able to reasonably predict the integral width and turbulent kinetic energy of the mixing layer. The K-L model's performance is improved with the transverse strain closure, while the axial strain closure worsens the model. The effects of this new closure are investigated for the buoyancy-drag model, showing that a three-equation model which evolves the integral width and turbulent length scale separately is most effective for modelling anisotropic strain.

What carries the argument

Bulk compression closure for the turbulent length scale in the K-L model, tested with mean isotropic, transverse, and axial strain rates.

If this is right

  • Transverse strain closure yields improved predictions of integral width and turbulent kinetic energy under anisotropic strain.
  • Axial strain closure reduces the accuracy of the K-L model for the same flows.
  • A three-equation buoyancy-drag model that evolves integral width and turbulent length scale separately handles anisotropic strain more effectively than two-equation versions.
  • The modified bulk compression closure suggests corresponding changes to the K-epsilon and K-omega models through their equivalence to the K-L model.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The transverse closure may produce better results in engineering flows that combine compression with shear, such as those in convergent implosions.
  • Evolving integral width and turbulent length scale as separate variables could help capture directional effects in other multi-directional strain problems.
  • The equivalence to K-epsilon and K-omega models indicates that similar closure adjustments could be tested across a wider set of Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes codes.

Load-bearing premise

One-dimensional simulations with externally imposed axial or transverse strain rates represent the bulk compression effects that arise from radial motion in convergent geometry or passage through non-uniform geometry in actual three-dimensional flows.

What would settle it

Direct comparison of predicted integral width and turbulent kinetic energy against three-dimensional experimental data or simulations that include actual radial compression or non-uniform geometry effects.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.13563 by Ben Thornber, Bradley Pascoe, Michael Groom.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1: Self similar profiles as a function of relative radius, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2: Characteristics of idealised implosion simulation [31]. ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3: Integral width for simulations under the applied axial strain [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: Integral width for simulations under the applied transvers [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: Turbulent kinetic energy for simulations under the applied ax [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6: Turbulent kinetic energy for simulations under the applied tr [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9: Buoyancy-drag model for simulations under the applied axia [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p031_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10: Buoyancy-drag model for simulations under the applied tr [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p032_10.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The development of turbulent mixing layers can be altered by the application of anisotropic strain rates, potentially arising from radial motion in convergent geometry or movement through non-uniform geometry. Previous closure models and calibrations of compressible turbulence models tend to focus on incompressible flows or isotropic strain cases, which is in contrast to many real flow conditions. The treatment of bulk compression under anisotropic strain is investigated using the K-L turbulence model, a two-equation Reynolds-Averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) model that is commonly used for simulating interfacial instabilities. One-dimensional simulations of shock-induced turbulent mixing layers under applied axial or transverse strain rates are performed using three different closures for the bulk compression of the turbulent length scale. The default closure method using the mean isotropic strain rate is able to reasonably predict the integral width and turbulent kinetic energy of the mixing layer under the applied strain rates. However, the K-L model's performance is improved with the transverse strain closure, while the axial strain closure worsens the model. The effects of this new closure are investigated for the buoyancy-drag model, showing that a three-equation model which evolves the integral width and turbulent length scale separately is most effective for modelling anisotropic strain. Through the equivalence of two-equation RANS models, the modification of the bulk compression closure for the turbulent length scale also suggests an alteration to the K-$\epsilon$ and K-$\omega$ models.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript examines closures for the treatment of bulk compression in the K-L two-equation RANS model for shock-induced turbulent mixing layers subjected to anisotropic strain. Using one-dimensional simulations with imposed axial or transverse strain rates, it reports that the default isotropic-strain closure gives reasonable predictions of integral width and turbulent kinetic energy, the transverse-strain closure improves performance, and the axial-strain closure degrades it. The work further shows that a three-equation model evolving integral width and turbulent length scale separately performs best and, via equivalence of two-equation models, proposes corresponding modifications to the K-ε and K-ω closures.

Significance. If the ordering of closures is confirmed to hold in three-dimensional flows, the transverse-strain modification would improve RANS predictions for mixing layers in convergent or non-uniform geometries relevant to inertial confinement fusion and high-speed aerodynamics. The explicit link to modifications of standard K-ε and K-ω models and the demonstration that a three-equation formulation is superior extend the potential utility beyond the K-L model.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the central ranking of closures (transverse improves, axial worsens) rests on the unverified premise that one-dimensional simulations with externally imposed axial or transverse strain rates faithfully reproduce the divergence and compression-tensor components that arise from radial motion in three-dimensional convergent geometry; no analytic mapping or additional three-dimensional test cases are supplied to close this gap.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: the statement that 'simulations support the ranking of closures' is not accompanied by quantitative error metrics, grid-convergence studies, or direct comparison against experimental data, leaving the claimed performance differences unquantified and the soundness of the ordering difficult to assess.
minor comments (1)
  1. Notation for the three bulk-compression closures should be introduced with explicit equations early in the text rather than only in the abstract.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive comments. We respond point-by-point to the major comments below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the central ranking of closures (transverse improves, axial worsens) rests on the unverified premise that one-dimensional simulations with externally imposed axial or transverse strain rates faithfully reproduce the divergence and compression-tensor components that arise from radial motion in three-dimensional convergent geometry; no analytic mapping or additional three-dimensional test cases are supplied to close this gap.

    Authors: The one-dimensional simulations impose strain rates chosen to match the divergence and the axial/transverse components of the strain tensor that would be present under radial motion, thereby isolating the effect of each closure term. This controlled setup follows standard practice for assessing anisotropic-strain closures in the literature. We agree that an explicit analytic mapping to full 3D convergent geometry is absent and will add a dedicated paragraph in the revised manuscript discussing this modeling choice and its limitations; the abstract will be updated to state that the reported ranking applies to these idealized 1D tests. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the statement that 'simulations support the ranking of closures' is not accompanied by quantitative error metrics, grid-convergence studies, or direct comparison against experimental data, leaving the claimed performance differences unquantified and the soundness of the ordering difficult to assess.

    Authors: We accept that quantitative support is needed. The revised manuscript will include tabulated relative errors in integral width and turbulent kinetic energy for each closure, results of grid-convergence studies demonstrating numerical accuracy, and an explicit statement that direct experimental data for these specific anisotropic-strain configurations are not available. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: empirical closure tests via external 1D benchmarks

full rationale

The paper evaluates three bulk-compression closures for the K-L model by running one-dimensional simulations with imposed axial or transverse strain rates and comparing integral width and turbulent kinetic energy outcomes. Performance ordering (transverse improves, axial worsens, three-equation variant best) is established by direct comparison to those simulation results rather than by any self-referential definition, fitted-parameter renaming, or load-bearing self-citation. No equation is shown to reduce to its own input by construction, and the abstract explicitly frames the work as numerical testing of existing model variants against imposed-strain proxies. This is the normal non-circular case of benchmark-driven model assessment.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The work rests on standard RANS modeling assumptions and previously calibrated constants in the K-L model; no new entities are postulated.

free parameters (1)
  • K-L model constants
    Standard closure coefficients in the two-equation model are presumed to have been calibrated on prior data sets.
axioms (1)
  • standard math Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes equations govern the mean flow
    Invoked as the foundation for all RANS simulations described.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5776 in / 1320 out tokens · 43152 ms · 2026-05-23T02:39:02.007874+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

94 extracted references · 94 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    and implemented by Dimonte and Tipton [39] for the K-L model. Fo r interfacial in- stabilities such as RTI and RMI, the initial turbulent length scale has a greater physical meaning than an initial dissipation rate, and also allows for easier self- similarity analysis at late-time where the turbulent length scale is assumed to be proport ional to the mixi...

    work page

  2. [2]

    As noted previously, in practical applications turbulent mixing layers ar e neither homogenous or experiencing isotropic strain

    used the same expression for bulk compression but found it nec essary to introduce a variable viscosity term in the length scale transport equation to align with DNS results. As noted previously, in practical applications turbulent mixing layers ar e neither homogenous or experiencing isotropic strain. The goal of this paper is to quantify the ability of ...

    work page

  3. [3]

    It is interesting to note that the model performs bet ter for these anisotropic cases than it does for the isotropic ones

    The expansion cases tend towards isotropy for the TKE as the simulation continues, whilst the compression cases are anisotropic, with the TKE becoming more aligned with the x-direction [9]. It is interesting to note that the model performs bet ter for these anisotropic cases than it does for the isotropic ones. The domain integrated turbulent kinetic ener...

    work page doi:10.48569/18sb-8s43 1988

  4. [4]

    J. C. R. Hunt and D. J. Carruthers, Rapid distortion theor y and the ‘problems’ of turbulence, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 212, 497 (1990)

    work page 1990

  5. [5]

    P. A. Durbin and O. Zeman, Rapid distortion theory for hom ogeneous compressed turbulence with application to modelling, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 242, 349 (1992)

    work page 1992

  6. [6]

    Cambon, G

    C. Cambon, G. N. Coleman, and N. N. Mansour, Rapid distort ion analysis and direct sim- ulation of compressible homogeneous turbulence at finite Ma ch number, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 257, 641 (1993)

    work page 1993

  7. [7]

    G. A. Blaisdell, G. N. Coleman, and N. N. Mansour, Rapid di stortion theory for compressible homogeneous turbulence under isotropic mean strain, Physi cs of Fluids 8, 2692 (1996)

    work page 1996

  8. [8]

    G. I. Bell, Taylor Instability on Cylinders and Spheres in the Small Ampli tude Approximation, Tech. Rep. LA-1321 (Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory, 1951)

    work page 1951

  9. [9]

    M. S. Plesset, On the Stability of Fluid Flows with Spheri cal Symmetry, Journal of Applied Physics 25, 96 (1954)

    work page 1954

  10. [10]

    Penney and A

    W. Penney and A. Price, On the changing form of a nearly sph erical submarine bubble, Underwarter Explosion Research 2, 145 (1942)

    work page 1942

  11. [11]

    R. Epstein, On the Bell–Plesset effects: The effects of unifo rm compression and geometrical convergence on the classical Rayleigh–Taylor instability , Physics of Plasmas 11, 5114 (2004)

    work page 2004

  12. [12]

    Pascoe, M

    B. Pascoe, M. Groom, D. L. Youngs, and B. Thornber, Impact of axial strain on linear, transitional and self-similar turbulent mixing layers, Jo urnal of Fluid Mechanics 999, A5 (2024)

    work page 2024

  13. [13]

    Pascoe, M

    B. Pascoe, M. Groom, D. Youngs, and B. Thornber, The impa ct of transverse strain of linear, transitional, and self-similar turbulent mixing layers, ( Submitted) (2025)

    work page 2025

  14. [14]

    Zhou, Rayleigh–Taylor and Richtmyer–Meshkov insta bility induced flow, turbulence, and mixing

    Y. Zhou, Rayleigh–Taylor and Richtmyer–Meshkov insta bility induced flow, turbulence, and mixing. I, Physics Reports Rayleigh-Taylor and Richtmyer- Meshkov Instability Induced Flow, Turbulence, and Mixing. I, 720–722, 1 (2017)

    work page 2017

  15. [15]

    Zhou, Rayleigh–Taylor and Richtmyer–Meshkov insta bility induced flow, turbulence, and mixing

    Y. Zhou, Rayleigh–Taylor and Richtmyer–Meshkov insta bility induced flow, turbulence, and mixing. II, Physics Reports Rayleigh–Taylor and Richtmyer –Meshkov Instability Induced Flow, Turbulence, and Mixing. II, 723–725, 1 (2017). 37

    work page 2017

  16. [16]

    Y. Zhou, R. J. R. Williams, P. Ramaprabhu, M. Groom, B. Th ornber, A. Hillier, W. Mostert, B. Rollin, S. Balachandar, P. D. Powell, A. Mahalov, and N. At tal, Rayleigh–Taylor and Richtmyer–Meshkov instabilities: A journey through scale s, Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena 423, 132838 (2021)

    work page 2021

  17. [17]

    Arnett, The Role of Mixing in Astrophysics, The Astro physical Journal Supplement Series 127, 213 (2000)

    D. Arnett, The Role of Mixing in Astrophysics, The Astro physical Journal Supplement Series 127, 213 (2000)

    work page 2000

  18. [18]

    A. R. Miles, The Blast-Wave-Driven Instability as a Veh icle for Understanding Supernova Explosion Structure, The Astrophysical Journal 696, 498 (2009)

    work page 2009

  19. [19]

    L. I. Sedov, Propagation of strong shock waves, Journal of Applied Mathematics and Mechanics 10, 241 (1946)

    work page 1946

  20. [20]

    G. I. Taylor, The formation of a blast wave by a very inten se explosion I. Theoretical discussion, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A. Mathem atical and Physical Sciences 201, 159 (1950)

    work page 1950

  21. [21]

    G. I. Taylor, The formation of a blast wave by a very inten se explosion. - II. The atomic explosion of 1945, Proceedings of the Royal Society of Londo n. Series A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences 201, 175 (1950)

    work page 1945

  22. [22]

    H. H. Goldstine and J. V. Neumann, Blast wave calculatio n, Communications on Pure and Applied Mathematics 8, 327 (1955)

    work page 1955

  23. [23]

    Nuckolls, L

    J. Nuckolls, L. Wood, A. Thiessen, and G. Zimmerman, Las er Compression of Matter to Super-High Densities: Thermonuclear (CTR) Applications, Nature 239, 139 (1972)

    work page 1972

  24. [24]

    Betti and O

    R. Betti and O. A. Hurricane, Inertial-confinement fusi on with lasers, Nature Physics 12, 435 (2016)

    work page 2016

  25. [25]

    J. D. Lindl, P. Amendt, R. L. Berger, S. G. Glendinning, S . H. Glenzer, S. W. Haan, R. L. Kauffman, O. L. Landen, and L. J. Suter, The physics basis for ig nition using indirect-drive targets on the National Ignition Facility, Physics of Plasm as 11, 339 (2004)

    work page 2004

  26. [26]

    Lindl, O

    J. Lindl, O. Landen, J. Edwards, E. Moses, and NIC Team, R eview of the National Ignition Campaign 2009-2012, Physics of Plasmas 21, 020501 (2014)

    work page 2009

  27. [27]

    D. L. Youngs and R. J. R. Williams, Turbulent mixing in sp herical implosions, International Journal for Numerical Methods in Fluids 56, 1597 (2008)

    work page 2008

  28. [28]

    Flaig, D

    M. Flaig, D. Clark, C. Weber, D. L. Youngs, and B. Thornbe r, Single-mode perturbation growth in an idealized spherical implosion, Journal of Comp utational Physics 371, 801 (2018). 38

    work page 2018

  29. [29]

    Heidt, M

    L. Heidt, M. Flaig, and B. Thornber, The effect of initial a mplitude and convergence ra- tio on instability development and deposited fluctuating ki netic energy in the single-mode Richtmyer–Meshkov instability in spherical implosions, C omputers & Fluids 218, 104842 (2021)

    work page 2021

  30. [30]

    C. C. Joggerst, A. Nelson, P. Woodward, C. Lovekin, T. Ma sser, C. L. Fryer, P. Ramaprabhu, M. Francois, and G. Rockefeller, Cross-code comparisons of mixing during the implosion of dense cylindrical and spherical shells, Journal of Computa tional Physics 275, 154 (2014)

    work page 2014

  31. [31]

    Boureima, P

    I. Boureima, P. Ramaprabhu, and N. Attal, Properties of the Turbulent Mixing Layer in a Spherical Implosion, Journal of Fluids Engineering 140 (2017)

    work page 2017

  32. [32]

    El Rafei, M

    M. El Rafei, M. Flaig, D. L. Youngs, and B. Thornber, Thre e-dimensional simulations of turbulent mixing in spherical implosions, Physics of Fluid s 31, 114101 (2019)

    work page 2019

  33. [33]

    El Rafei and B

    M. El Rafei and B. Thornber, Numerical study and buoyanc y–drag modeling of bubble and spike distances in three-dimensional spherical implosion s, Physics of Fluids 32, 124107 (2020)

    work page 2020

  34. [34]

    El Rafei and B

    M. El Rafei and B. Thornber, Turbulence statistics and t ransport in compressible mixing driven by spherical implosions with narrowband and broadba nd initial perturbations, Physical Review Fluids 9, 034501 (2024)

    work page 2024

  35. [35]

    Besnard, F

    D. Besnard, F. H. Harlow, R. M. Rauenzahn, and C. Zemach, Turbulence Transport Equations for Variable-Density Turbulence and Their Relationship to Tw o-Field Models, Tech. Rep. LA- 12303-MS (Los Alamos National Lab. (LANL), Los Alamos, NM (U nited States), 1992)

    work page 1992

  36. [36]

    W. P. Jones and B. E. Launder, The prediction of laminari zation with a two-equation model of turbulence, International Journal of Heat and Mass Trans fer 15, 301 (1972)

    work page 1972

  37. [37]

    B. E. Launder and D. B. Spalding, The numerical computat ion of turbulent flows, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 3, 269 (1974)

    work page 1974

  38. [38]

    D. C. Wilcox, Turbulence modeling for CFD, in Turbulence Modeling for CFD (DCW Indus- tries, La C˜ anada, Calif, 2006) 3rd ed

    work page 2006

  39. [39]

    Gr´ egoire, D

    O. Gr´ egoire, D. Souffland, and S. Gauthier, A second-ord er turbulence model for gaseous mixtures induced by Richtmyer—Meshkov instability, Journ al of Turbulence 6, N29 (2005)

    work page 2005

  40. [40]

    J. T. Mor´ an-L´ opez and O. Schilling, Multi-componentReynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes sim- ulations of Richtmyer–Meshkov instability and mixing indu ced by reshock at different times, Shock Waves 24, 325 (2014). 39

    work page 2014

  41. [41]

    J. T. Mor´ an-L´ opez, O. Schilling, and J. P. Holloway, Reynolds-Averaged Navier–Stokes Mod- eling of Reshocked Richtmyer–Meshkov Instability Experim ents and Simulations, in 29th In- ternational Symposium on Shock Waves 2 , edited by R. Bonazza and D. Ranjan (Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2015) pp. 1047–1052

    work page 2015

  42. [42]

    Dimonte and R

    G. Dimonte and R. Tipton, K-L turbulence model for the se lf-similar growth of the Rayleigh- Taylor and Richtmyer-Meshkov instabilities, Physics of Fl uids 18, 085101 (2006)

    work page 2006

  43. [43]

    B. E. Morgan and J. A. Greenough, Large-eddy and unstead y RANS simulations of a shock- accelerated heavy gas cylinder, Shock Waves 26, 355 (2016)

    work page 2016

  44. [44]

    M. Xiao, Y. Zhang, and B. Tian, Unified prediction of resh ocked Richtmyer–Meshkov mixing with K-L model, Physics of Fluids 32, 032107 (2020)

    work page 2020

  45. [45]

    M. Xiao, Y. Zhang, and B. Tian, Modeling of turbulent mix ing with an improved K–L model, Physics of Fluids 32, 092104 (2020)

    work page 2020

  46. [46]

    Zhang, Z.-w

    Y.-s. Zhang, Z.-w. He, H.-s. Xie, M.-J. Xiao, and B.-l. T ian, Methodology for determining coefficients of turbulent mixing model, Journal of Fluid Mech anics 905, A26 (2020)

    work page 2020

  47. [47]

    I. W. Kokkinakis, D. Drikakis, D. L. Youngs, and R. J. R. W illiams, Two-equation and multi- fluid turbulence models for Rayleigh–Taylor mixing, Intern ational Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow 56, 233 (2015)

    work page 2015

  48. [48]

    I. W. Kokkinakis, D. Drikakis, and D. L. Youngs, Two-equ ation and multi-fluid turbulence models for Richtmyer–Meshkov mixing, Physics of Fluids 32, 074102 (2020)

    work page 2020

  49. [49]

    M. Xiao, Y. Zhang, and B. Tian, A K–L model with improved r ealizability for turbulent mixing, Physics of Fluids 33, 022104 (2021)

    work page 2021

  50. [50]

    B. E. Morgan and M. E. Wickett, Three-equation model for the self-similar growth of Rayleigh- Taylor and Richtmyer-Meskov instabilities, Physical Revi ew E 91, 043002 (2015)

    work page 2015

  51. [51]

    B. E. Morgan, B. J. Olson, W. J. Black, and J. A. McFarland , Large-eddy simulation and Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes modeling of a reacting Ra yleigh-Taylor mixing layer in a spherical geometry, Physical Review E 98, 033111 (2018)

    work page 2018

  52. [52]

    B. E. Morgan, O. Schilling, and T. A. Hartland, Two-leng th-scale turbulence model for self- similar buoyancy-, shock-, and shear-driven mixing, Physi cal Review E 97, 013104 (2018)

    work page 2018

  53. [53]

    B. E. Morgan, Self-consistent, high-order spatial pro files in a model for two-fluid turbulent mixing, Physical Review E 104, 015107 (2021). 40

    work page 2021

  54. [54]

    B. E. Morgan, Simulation and Reynolds-averaged Navier -Stokes modeling of a three- component Rayleigh-Taylor mixing problem with thermonucl ear burn, Physical Review E 105, 045104 (2022)

    work page 2022

  55. [55]

    B. E. Morgan, K. Ferguson, and B. J. Olson, Two self-simi lar Reynolds-stress transport models with anisotropic eddy viscosity, Physical Review E 108, 055104 (2023)

    work page 2023

  56. [56]

    Banerjee, R

    A. Banerjee, R. A. Gore, and M. J. Andrews, Development a nd validation of a turbulent-mix model for variable-density and compressible flows, Physica l Review E 82, 046309 (2010)

    work page 2010

  57. [57]

    N. A. Denissen, J. Fung, J. M. Reisner, and M. J. Andrews, Implementation and Validation of the BHR Turbulence Model in the FLAG Hydrocode , Tech. Rep. LA-UR-12-24386 (Los Alamos National Lab. (LANL), Los Alamos, NM (United States), 2012)

    work page 2012

  58. [58]

    J. D. Schwarzkopf, D. Livescu, J. R. Baltzer, R. A. Gore, and J. R. Ristorcelli, A Two- length Scale Turbulence Model for Single-phase Multi-fluid Mixing, Flow, Turbulence and Combustion 96, 1 (2016)

    work page 2016

  59. [59]

    N. O. Braun and R. A. Gore, A multispecies turbulence mod el for the mixing and de-mixing of miscible fluids, Journal of Turbulence 22, 784 (2021)

    work page 2021

  60. [60]

    W. C. Reynolds, Modeling of fluid motions in engines—an i ntroductory overview, in Sympo- sium on Combustion Modeling in Reciprocatina Engine (Plenum Press, 1980) pp. 41–66

    work page 1980

  61. [61]

    Reynolds, Fundamentals of Turbulence for Turbulence Modeling and Sim ulation, Tech

    W. Reynolds, Fundamentals of Turbulence for Turbulence Modeling and Sim ulation, Tech. Rep. Agard Report No. 755 (Defense Technical Information Ce nter, 1987)

    work page 1987

  62. [62]

    Morel and N

    T. Morel and N. N. Mansour, Modeling of Turbulence in Internal Combustion Engines , SAE Technical Paper 820040 (SAE International, Warrendale, PA , 1982)

    work page 1982

  63. [63]

    Campos and B

    A. Campos and B. E. Morgan, Direct numerical simulation and Reynolds-averaged Navier- Stokes modeling of the sudden viscous dissipation for multi component turbulence, Physical Review E 99, 063103 (2019)

    work page 2019

  64. [64]

    S. K. Godunov, A. V. Zabrodin, M. Ia. Ivanov, A. N. Kraiko , and G. P. Prokopov, Numerical Solution of Multidimensional Problems of Gas Dynamics (Nauka Press, 1976)

    work page 1976

  65. [65]

    K. H. Kim and C. Kim, Accurate, efficient and monotonic num erical methods for multi- dimensional compressible flows: Part II: Multi-dimensiona l limiting process, Journal of Com- putational Physics 208, 570 (2005)

    work page 2005

  66. [66]

    Thornber, D

    B. Thornber, D. Drikakis, R. J. R. Williams, and D. Young s, On entropy generation and dissi- pation of kinetic energy in high-resolution shock-capturi ng schemes, Journal of Computational 41 Physics 227, 4853 (2008)

    work page 2008

  67. [67]

    Thornber, A

    B. Thornber, A. Mosedale, D. Drikakis, D. Youngs, and R. J. R. Williams, An improved reconstruction method for compressible flows with low Mach n umber features, Journal of Computational Physics 227, 4873 (2008)

    work page 2008

  68. [68]

    E. F. Toro, M. Spruce, and W. Speares, Restoration of the contact surface in the HLL-Riemann solver, Shock Waves 4, 25 (1994)

    work page 1994

  69. [69]

    R. J. Spiteri and S. J. Ruuth, A New Class of Optimal High- Order Strong-Stability-Preserving Time Discretization Methods, SIAM Journal on Numerical Ana lysis 40, 469 (2002)

    work page 2002

  70. [70]

    H. Luo, J. D. Baum, and R. L¨ ohner, On the computation of m ulti-material flows using ALE formulation, Journal of Computational Physics 194, 304 (2004)

    work page 2004

  71. [71]

    Thornber, J

    B. Thornber, J. Griffond, O. Poujade, N. Attal, H. Varshoc hi, P. Bigdelou, P. Ramaprabhu, B. Olson, J. Greenough, Y. Zhou, O. Schilling, K. A. Garside, R. J. R. Williams, C. A. Batha, P. A. Kuchugov, M. E. Ladonkina, V. F. Tishkin, N. V. Zm itrenko, V. B. Rozanov, and D. L. Youngs, Late-time growth rate, mixing, and anisotr opy in the multimode narrow- ba...

    work page 2017

  72. [72]

    D. L. Youngs and B. Thornber, Buoyancy–Drag modelling o f bubble and spike distances for single-shock Richtmyer–Meshkov mixing, Physica D: Non linear Phenomena 410, 132517 (2020)

    work page 2020

  73. [73]

    D. L. Youngs and B. Thornber, Early Time Modifications to the Buoyancy-Drag Model for Richtmyer–Meshkov Mixing, Journal of Fluids Engineering 142 (2020)

    work page 2020

  74. [74]

    M. J. Andrews, An Experimental Study of Turbulent Mixin g by the Rayleigh-Taylor Instabili- ties and a Two-Fluid Model of the Mixing Phenomena, in Advances in Compressible Turbulent Mixing (Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, 1992) pp. 7–19

    work page 1992

  75. [75]

    D. L. Youngs, Numerical simulation of mixing by Rayleig h–Taylor and Richtmyer–Meshkov instabilities, Laser and Particle Beams 12, 725 (1994)

    work page 1994

  76. [76]

    Allaire, S

    G. Allaire, S. Clerc, and S. Kokh, A Five-Equation Model for the Simulation of Interfaces between Compressible Fluids, Journal of Computational Phy sics 181, 577 (2002)

    work page 2002

  77. [77]

    J. Ge, H. Li, X. Zhang, and B. Tian, Evaluating the stretc hing/compression effect of Richtmyer–Meshkov instability in convergent geometries, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 946, A18 (2022). 42

    work page 2022

  78. [78]

    S. B. Pope, Turbulent Flows (Cambridge University Press, 2000)

    work page 2000

  79. [79]

    J. T. Mor´ an-L´ opez and O. Schilling, Multicomponent Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes sim- ulations of reshocked Richtmyer–Meshkov instability-ind uced mixing, High Energy Density Physics 9, 112 (2013)

    work page 2013

  80. [80]

    Gauthier and M

    S. Gauthier and M. Bonnet, A k- ε model for turbulent mixing in shock-tube flows induced by Rayleigh–Taylor instability, Physics of Fluids A: Fluid Dy namics 2, 1685 (1990)

    work page 1990

Showing first 80 references.