Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 57 references

Spatio-temporal pulse propagation during highly-resolved onset of Rayleigh-Taylor and Kelvin-Helmholtz Rayleigh-Taylor instabilities

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Acoustic pressure pulses, not baroclinic vorticity, initiate Rayleigh-Taylor and Kelvin-Helmholtz Rayleigh-Taylor instabilities.

desk verdict Large careful DNS of RTI/KHRTI onset with useful new POD and enstrophy-budget comparisons, but the 'acoustic trigger' claim is inherited from the authors' prior work and is not made unequivocal by the impulsive initialization. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.07433 v1 pith:MRYAASGZ submitted 2025-05-12 physics.flu-dyn

Bhavna Joshi , Aditi Sengupta , Yassin Ajanif , Lucas Lestandi This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.flu-dyn
keywords Rayleigh-TaylorinstabilityKelvin-Helmholtzacoustictriggerdisturbancepressurefieldcompressibleenstrophytransportequationproperorthogonaldecompositiondirectnumericalsimulationbaroclinicvorticity
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper asks what actually starts the Rayleigh-Taylor instability (RTI) and the combined Kelvin-Helmholtz Rayleigh-Taylor instability (KHRTI) once a dense, cold layer of air is released above a light, warm layer. Using highly resolved compressible Navier-Stokes simulations—4.19 billion points for RTI and 480 million for KHRTI—the authors track disturbance pressure and vorticity from the first instants after the separating partition is removed. They conclude that the first signal is an acoustic pressure pulse, of order $10^{-6}$ relative to hydrostatic pressure, and that baroclinic vorticity, long treated as the trigger, is generated later as a consequence of that pulse. The distinction matters because it moves the causal origin of these instabilities from the vorticity production term to the compressible pressure field. The paper also documents how the pulse travels differently in the two cases and provides a benchmark dataset for onset-stage dynamics.

What carries the argument

The object that carries the argument is the disturbance pressure field $p' = p - p_{\mathrm{hydrostatic}}$, resolved to amplitudes of order $10^{-6}$ in two perpendicular planes, read together with the compressible enstrophy transport equation (CETE) budget. The machinery that makes the claim visible is the combination of a highly accurate dispersion-relation-preserving compact scheme, a non-overlapping parallel subdomain closure, and a non-zero bulk viscosity for air obtained by regression of measured acoustic attenuation data. The pressure field supplies the temporal and spatial ordering (pulse first, vorticity later), while the CETE budget shows that at onset the enstrophy growth is dominated by viscous terms—especially the bulk-viscosity term $T_4$—with the baroclinic term $T_3$ playing a secondary role.

What would settle it

Repeat the RTI or KHRTI simulation with a gradual, finite-time partition removal or an initially perturbed interface that produces no acoustic transient; if baroclinic vorticity appears at the interface before, or simultaneously with, any pressure pulse, the acoustic-trigger claim is wrong. A second check is a grid-convergence study: if the $10^{-6}$ pressure pulses shrink or change sign as the mesh is refined, they are numerical artifacts rather than physical signals.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is a causal ordering: in both RTI and KHRTI, the incipient mechanism of instability is acoustic pulse propagation, not baroclinic torque. After partition removal, compression and rarefaction fronts travel from the interface—normal to the interface in RTI, and radially upstream in the shear plane with interface-normal fronts in the perpendicular plane for KHRTI—and it is these travelling pressure gradients that misalign $\nabla p$ and $\nabla \rho$, producing baroclinic vorticity at the side-wall/interface junctions. The authors state that this ordering has been demonstrated for the first time in their simulations. Supporting observations include: the first five POD modes of disturbance pressure capture 95.30% of the variance for RTI and 98.61% for KHRTI, each case showing two regular mode pairs and one anomalous shift mode; and the compressible enstrophy transport equation budget at onset is dominated by viscous terms, with the baroclinic term sub-dominant during the stage studied.

Load-bearing premise

The whole ordering depends on the assumption that instantly removing the partition—which necessarily fires acoustic waves into the fluid—is a faithful stand-in for how these instabilities begin in unforced experiments, so that the pressure-before-vorticity sequence is not an artifact of the starting procedure.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the acoustic trigger is real, models that initialize RTI or KHRTI with prescribed vorticity perturbations omit the initiating mechanism and will mis-time the onset of mixing.
  • The different propagation geometry—interface-normal pulses for RTI, radial upstream pulses in the shear plane for KHRTI—implies that shear not only adds kinetic energy but redirects the acoustic wavefronts, which is why KHRTI spectra look chaotic over a wide wavenumber range.
  • The POD decomposition of disturbance pressure provides a low-dimensional description of onset: regular mode pairs track interfacial and propagating pressure signals, while the anomalous shift mode carries the transient adjustment; these are direct candidates for reduced-order models of instability onset.
  • The enstrophy budget result—viscous dominance with baroclinicity secondary at onset—recasts the usual emphasis on baroclinic torque for onset-stage enstrophy production, though the authors expect the baroclinic term to grow once coherent spikes, bubbles, and KH eddies form.
  • The pressure-probe time series show side-wall locations have stronger disturbance pressure than the center for both instabilities, identifying side-wall/interface junctions as the preferred sites where the acoustic pulse first converts into vorticity.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Inference: If the acoustic-trigger ordering holds, unforced experiments should show a measurable pressure transient arriving at the interface before any vorticity signature appears; placing fast pressure sensors near the interface in a laboratory RTI tank would test this directly.
  • Inference: The same causal ordering may extend to other impulsively started instabilities, such as Richtmyer-Meshkov flows, where a shock provides an explicit pressure pulse; in those settings the vortex-stretching and baroclinic terms in enstrophy budgets may likewise be consequences of the acoustic forcing rather than independent triggers.
  • Inference: Because the claim rests on the impulsive partition removal, a parameter study that gradually withdraws the partition over a finite time, or introduces the density mismatch without a pressure transient, would clarify how much of the acoustic trigger is initialization-dependent; this is a natural numerical extension of the present work.
  • Inference: The identification of an anomalous shift mode in the pressure POD suggests that reduced-order models of RTI/KHRTI onset could treat that mode as the acoustic transient degree of freedom and the regular pairs as the instability carriers, potentially allowing prediction of when the acoustic stage ends and vorticity-driven growth begins.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper presents three-dimensional compressible Navier-Stokes direct numerical simulations of the onset of Rayleigh-Taylor instability (RTI, 4.19 billion grid points) and Kelvin-Helmholtz Rayleigh-Taylor instability (KHRTI, 480 million grid points), with setups patterned after experiments by Read and Akula et al. The authors analyze disturbance pressure fields, spectra, proper orthogonal decomposition, and a compressible enstrophy transport equation to compare the two instabilities. Their headline claim is that acoustic pulses trigger both instabilities, with baroclinic torque generation appearing as a downstream consequence, and that this is demonstrated 'unequivocally' for the first time. The paper also reports dominant viscous terms in the enstrophy budget and identifies regular and anomalous/shift POD modes.

Significance. If the causal claim were established, the paper would challenge the textbook attribution of RTI genesis to baroclinic torque and would provide a physically distinct picture of KHRTI onset. The computational effort is substantial, and the descriptive material—pressure-pulse morphology, spectral signatures, POD modes, and enstrophy budgets for two very large DNS runs—is potentially valuable as a reference database. The paper is explicit about its numerical methods and gives reproducible-looking parameter settings. However, the central claim is not supported by the evidence as presented: the simulations initialize the instability by impulsive partition removal, which is itself an acoustic source, and no convergence study, smooth-start control, or quantitative causality measure is provided. The finding is therefore currently a plausible interpretation of one numerical experiment per case rather than an unequivocal demonstration.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 2 (initialization) and Section 3.1] In both setups the instability is initiated by impulsive removal of the partition at t=0. For the compressible Navier-Stokes equations, this discontinuous removal is an acoustic source by construction, so the pressure pulses of order 10^-6 reported in Section 3.1 and their temporal precedence over baroclinic vorticity may reflect the initialization protocol rather than the physical onset mechanism of an unforced instability. The paper presents no smooth-start or alternative-initialization run, and no grid-refinement or time-step convergence study for the disturbance-pressure signal. Consequently, the sentence in Section 4 that acoustics trigger the instability 'has been demonstrated here unequivocally' overstates what the simulations can establish.
  2. [Section 3.4, Figs. 11-12 and Section 4] The causal ordering is inferred from visual inspection of contours at a small number of time instants: pressure pulses are visible in Figs. 2 and 3 at early times, and baroclinic vorticity features appear later in Figs. 11 and 12. No quantitative diagnostic connects the two: for example, a time-lagged correlation between p' and baroclinic torque, or a budget of the vorticity equation showing when T3 first exceeds a threshold, would be needed to demonstrate that the acoustic field causes the vorticity rather than accompanying it. Without such a measure, the claim 'acoustics trigger the instability' remains an interpretation of temporal ordering in a single run per case.
  3. [Section 1 and Section 4] The paper's own literature review says that prior works [22] and [35] already attribute RTI and KHRTI genesis to acoustic excitation, yet Section 4 claims this is demonstrated 'for the first time.' This is internally inconsistent: either the prior works already made the causal claim, in which case the present novelty must be the specific comparative or quantitative evidence, or they did not, in which case the paper should specify what, exactly, is new. The wording should be corrected and the contribution re-scoped.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 3.1] The word 'acosutic' appears in the discussion of pressure-pulse propagation and should be 'acoustic.'
  2. [Section 3.2] The terms 'unomodal' and 'nonomodal' appear to be typos for 'nonmodal'; please correct them throughout the spectrum discussion.
  3. [Section 4] The phrase 'demonstrated here unequivocally here for the first time' repeats 'here'; please revise.
  4. [Eq. (18) and bullet list] The scalar factors in Eq. (18), such as 2/rho^2 for T3 and 4/rho for T5, are not reflected in the term definitions given in the bullet list; please reconcile the notation so the terms match the equation exactly.
  5. [Figure 6] The caption refers to 'line a', 'line b', and 'line c' while the legend uses solid, dash-dotted, and dashed lines; please align the labels.

Circularity Check

3 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

The headline causal claim—acoustics trigger RTI/KHRTI—is built into the impulsive partition-removal initialization and is loaded from the authors' own prior works, while the POD, spectra, and CETE analyses are not circular.

  1. self definitional [Section 2, problem formulation (RTI setup; KHRTI setup analogous)]
    "At t = 0, the separating partition is removed, initiating the RTI. The instability is further influenced by acoustic disturbances, which are described in detail in the subsequent section."

    The simulations are initialized by an impulsive removal of the partition, which is itself an acoustic source in a compressible gas. The paper's central conclusion—that acoustics trigger the instability before baroclinic vorticity—is therefore the expected consequence of the chosen initial condition: the pressure pulse is created at t=0 by the initialization itself, before any baroclinic vorticity can develop. The KHRTI version is even more explicit, calling the impulsive removal 'the initial perturbation.' Without a smooth-start or control initialization, the temporal ordering of pressure-before-vorticity is built into the numerical protocol rather than demonstrated as independent physics.

  2. self citation load bearing [Section 3, opening paragraph]
    "Emphasis is placed on the disturbance pressure, as the early onset of RTI and KHRTI is triggered by acoustic pulses, as described in [22] and [35], respectively, and in other references cited therein."

    The paper's central premise—that acoustic pulses trigger the onset—is imported as already established from the authors' own prior DNS papers [22] (RTI) and [35] (KHRTI). The present pressure-contour analysis is then interpreted under that premise rather than deriving it from an independent control, external benchmark, or machine-checked result. The final 'demonstrated ... for the first time' claim is in tension with this reliance: the load-bearing assertion is effectively inherited from self-citations, not established by the present study alone.

1 more flagged steps
  1. self definitional [Section 4, Summary and conclusions]
    "Thus, it is the acoustics which trigger the instability, not the baroclinic vorticity (which is a consequence of the acoustic waves). This has been demonstrated here unequivocally here for the first time."

    This summary restates the setup's built-in acoustic source as a discovered result. Since the partition removal at t=0 necessarily generates acoustic pressure transients, the sentence 'acoustics trigger the instability' reduces to a property of the initialization already declared in Section 2. Moreover, the phrase 'for the first time' conflicts with the paper's own citations [22,35], which already attributed onset to acoustic excitation. Thus the headline conclusion is a combination of an initialization artifact and a self-citation chain, not an independent first-principles prediction.

full rationale

The paper contains substantial non-circular content: the high-resolution DNS, pressure spectra, POD mode analysis, energy budgets, and compressible enstrophy transport analysis are self-contained numerical investigations of the simulated flow fields. Those analyses are not circular merely because they use the same data. However, the central causal claim—that acoustics trigger RTI and KHRTI and baroclinic vorticity is only a consequence—is partially circular in two ways. First, the simulations are initialized by impulsively removing a partition between fluids at different temperatures and velocities; in a compressible gas this is an acoustic source, so the observation that pressure pulse fronts appear before vorticity is built into the experimental protocol rather than an independent outcome. Second, the paper explicitly adopts the acoustic-trigger premise from the authors' own prior works [22] and [35] before analyzing the pressure field, and then declares the same conclusion to have been demonstrated 'unequivocally here for the first time.' No convergence study, grid-refinement test, or smooth-start control is provided to separate the O(10^-6) pressure signals from initialization artifacts, though that absence is a correctness risk rather than a circularity per se. On balance, the headline result reduces by construction and by self-citation, while the supporting POD/CETE analyses are independent; a score of 6 reflects this partial circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central causal claim rests mainly on the impulsive partition-removal initialization and on the physical fidelity of tiny pressure disturbances. The only fitted numerical model is the bulk viscosity regression from external data. No new entities are introduced.

free parameters (1)
  • bulk viscosity regression coefficients = mu_b = (3.381*T* - 7.383) x 10^-4, T* in K
    Fitted to acoustic dispersion and attenuation data from reference [39]; used in the compressible NSE solver and directly affects the CETE budget terms T4 and the pressure wave dynamics.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Compressible Navier-Stokes equations with ideal gas law, Sutherland viscosity, and Stokes hypothesis relaxation are an adequate model for the onset dynamics.
    The entire DNS rests on this governing equation set (Section 2).
  • ad hoc to paper Impulsive removal of the partition at t=0 generates only acoustic disturbances and no direct vorticity injection.
    This initial condition is the basis for the temporal-ordering argument in Section 3.4 that acoustics precede baroclinic vorticity.
  • domain assumption Non-reflective boundary conditions prevent spurious acoustic reflections from contaminating the O(10^-6) pressure signals.
    Used at KHRTI inflow and outflow (Section 2.1); no reflection assessment is reported.
  • ad hoc to paper The resolved O(10^-6) pressure perturbations are physical and not numerical noise.
    No grid-convergence or resolution study is presented for the pressure field; the whole acoustic-trigger claim depends on this.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Spatio-temporal pulse propagation during highly-resolved onset of Rayleigh-Taylor and Kelvin-Helmholtz Rayleigh-Taylor instabilities." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/MRYAASGZ

@misc{pith2026250507433,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Spatio-temporal pulse propagation during highly-resolved onset of Rayleigh-Taylor and Kelvin-Helmholtz Rayleigh-Taylor instabilities},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/MRYAASGZ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.07433}
}
read the original abstract

The present study explores the onset of the Rayleigh-Taylor instability (RTI) and Kelvin-Helmholtz Rayleigh-Taylor instability (KHRTI) with highly-resolved direct numerical simulations of two setups which consider air at different temperatures (or densities) and/or velocities in two halves of three-dimensional cuboidal domains. The compressible Navier-Stokes equations are solved using a novel parallel algorithm which does not involve overlapping points at sub-domain boundaries. The pressure disturbance field is compared during onset of RTI and KHRTI and corresponding convection- and advection-dominated mechanisms are highlighted by instantaneous features, spectra, and proper orthogonal decomposition. The relative contributions of pressure, kinetic energy and rotational energy to the overall energy budget is explored for both instabilities, revealing acoustic trigger to be the incipient mechanism for both RTI and KHRTI. The nonlinear, spatio-temporal nature of the instability is further explored by application of a transport equation for enstrophy of compressible flows. This provides insights into the similarities and differences between the onset mechanisms of RTI and KHRTI, serving as a benchmark data set for shear and buoyancy-driven instabilities across diverse applications in geophysics, nuclear energy and atmospheric fluid dynamics.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.07433 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Schematic of the computational domain for (a) RTI and (b) KHRTI, with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Disturbance pressure contours of the onset of the RTI demonstrating primarily [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Disturbance pressure contours for KHRTI during the onset showing radially [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (11 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Spectra of disturbance pressure at the indicated time instants during the (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Pressure disturbance contours explaining the anomalous behavior in spectra of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Time-series of disturbance pressure probed at center (line b), left (line a), and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Time-dependent amplitude functions of first five POD modes of RTI, evaluated [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Time-dependent amplitude functions of first five POD modes of KHRTI, evalu [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Contour plots of first six spatial/eigenfunction modes ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Contour plots of first six spatial/eigenfunction modes ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Disturbance vorticity contours shown across mid-z and mid-x planes for RTI [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Disturbance vorticity contours shown across mid-z and mid-x planes for KHRTI [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Wall-normal distribution of p ′ , enstrophy and the turbulent kinetic energy are plotted for mid-x and mid-z planes at indicated time instant for the RTI and KHRTI able tool for analyzing the generation, distribution, and evolution of enstro￾phy during the transition …
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Evolution of maximum CETE budget terms (T1-T6) and enstrophy shown for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p033_14.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

57 extracted references · 56 canonical work pages

  1. [22]

    Sengupta, P

    A. Sengupta, P. Sundaram, V. K. Suman, T. K. Sengupta, Three- dimensional direct numerical simulation of Rayleigh–Taylor instability triggered by acoustic excitation, Physics of Fluids 34 (5) (2022)

    work page 2022

  2. [35]

    Joshi, T

    B. Joshi, T. K. Sengupta, P. Sundaram, A. Sengupta, Highly resolved peta-scale direct numerical simulations: Onset of Kelvin–Helmholtz Rayleigh–Taylor instability via pressure pulses, Computers & Fluids (2024) 106442

    work page 2024

  3. [1]

    Y. Zhou, R. J. Williams, P. Ramaprabhu, M. Groom, B. Thornber, A. Hillier, W. Mostert, B. Rollin, S. Balachandar, P. D. Powell, et al., Rayleigh–taylor and richtmyer–meshkov instabilities: a journey through scales, Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena 423 (2021) 132838

    work page 2021

  4. [2]

    Read, Experimental investigation of turbulent mixing by Rayleigh- Taylor instability, Physica D Nonlinear Phenomena 12 (1-3) (1984) 45– 58

    K. Read, Experimental investigation of turbulent mixing by Rayleigh- Taylor instability, Physica D Nonlinear Phenomena 12 (1-3) (1984) 45– 58

    work page 1984

  5. [3]

    F. K. Browand, C. D. Winant, Laboratory observations of shear-layer in- stability in a stratified fluid, Boundary-Layer Meteorology 5 (1-2) (1973) 67–77. doi:10.1007/BF02188312

    work page doi:10.1007/bf02188312 1973

  6. [4]

    W. H. Cabot, A. W. Cook, Reynolds number effects on Rayleigh–Taylor instability with possible implications for type ia supernovae, Nature Physics 2 (8) (2006) 562–568. doi:10.1038/nphys361. URL https://doi.org/10.1038/nphys361

    work page doi:10.1038/nphys361 2006

  7. [5]

    Rayleigh, Scientific Papers, 2, Cambridge University Press, 1900

    L. Rayleigh, Scientific Papers, 2, Cambridge University Press, 1900

    work page 1900

  8. [6]

    J. S. Turner, Buoyancy effects in fluids, Cambridge university press, 1979. 35

    work page 1979

Show all 57 references
  1. [7]

    Sengupta, H

    A. Sengupta, H. Ulloa, B. Joshi, Multi-layer Rayleigh-Taylor instability: Consequences for naturally occurring stratified mixing layers, Physics of Fluids 35 (10) (2023) 102110

    2023

  2. [8]

    Nagata, S

    K. Nagata, S. Komori, The effects of unstable stratification and mean shear on the chemical reaction in grid turbulence, Journal of Fluid Me- chanics 408 (2000) 39–52

    2000

  3. [9]

    Atzeni, J

    S. Atzeni, J. Meyer-ter Vehn, The physics of inertial fusion: beam plasma interaction, hydrodynamics, hot dense matter, Vol. 125, OUP Oxford, 2004

    2004

  4. [10]

    Shumlak, N

    U. Shumlak, N. Roderick, Mitigation of the rayleigh–taylor instability by sheared axial flows, Physics of Plasmas 5 (6) (1998) 2384–2389

    1998

  5. [11]

    B. J. Olson, J. Larsson, S. K. Lele, A. W. Cook, Nonlinear effects in the combined rayleigh-taylor/kelvin-helmholtz instability, Physics of Fluids 23 (11) (2011)

    2011

  6. [12]

    Zhou, Hydrodynamic Instabilities and Turbulence: Rayleigh–Taylor, Richtmyer–Meshkov, and Kelvin–Helmholtz Mixing, Cambridge Univer- sity Press, 2024

    Y. Zhou, Hydrodynamic Instabilities and Turbulence: Rayleigh–Taylor, Richtmyer–Meshkov, and Kelvin–Helmholtz Mixing, Cambridge Univer- sity Press, 2024

    2024

  7. [13]

    Sengupta, R

    A. Sengupta, R. J. Samuel, P. Sundaram, T. K. Sengupta, Role of non- zero bulk viscosity in three-dimensional Rayleigh-Taylor instability: Be- yond Stokes’ hypothesis, Computers & Fluids 225 (2021) 104995

    2021

  8. [14]

    Rayleigh, Scientific Papers, 1, Cambridge University Press, 1889

    L. Rayleigh, Scientific Papers, 1, Cambridge University Press, 1889. URL https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511703973

    doi

  9. [15]

    G. I. Taylor, The instability of liquid surfaces when accelerated in a di- rection perpendicular to their planes. i, Proceedings of the Royal Soci- ety of London. Series A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences 201 (1065) (1950) 192–196

    1950

  10. [16]

    Chandrasekhar, Hydrodynamic and hydromagnetic stability, Press (Clarendon) London and New York (1961)

    S. Chandrasekhar, Hydrodynamic and hydromagnetic stability, Press (Clarendon) London and New York (1961)

    1961

  11. [17]

    D. H. Sharp, An overview of Rayleigh-Taylor instability, Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena 12 (1-3) (1984) 3–18. 36

    1984

  12. [18]

    D. L. Youngs, Modelling turbulent mixing by rayleigh-taylor instability, Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena 37 (1-3) (1989) 270–287

    1989

  13. [19]

    M. J. Andrews, D. B. Spalding, A simple experiment to investigate two- dimensional mixing by Rayleigh–Taylor instability, Physics of Fluids A: Fluid Dynamics 2 (6) (1990) 922–927

    1990

  14. [20]

    Roberts, J

    M. Roberts, J. W. Jacobs, The effects of forced small-wavelength, finite-bandwidth initial perturbations and miscibility on the turbulent rayleigh–taylor instability, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 787 (2016) 50–83

    2016

  15. [21]

    Sengupta, A

    A. Sengupta, A. K. Verma, Role of unstable thermal stratifications on the Rayleigh–Taylor instability, Computers & Fluids 252 (2023) 105773

    2023

  16. [23]

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

    Y. Zhou, Rayleigh–Taylor and Richtmyer–Meshkov instability induced flow, turbulence, and mixing. I, Physics Reports 720-722 (2017) 1–136

    2017

  17. [24]

    Lawrie, Rayleigh-Taylor mixing: Confinement by stratification and geometry, Ph.D

    A. Lawrie, Rayleigh-Taylor mixing: Confinement by stratification and geometry, Ph.D. thesis, University of Cambridge (2010)

    2010

  18. [25]

    H. W. Liepmann, J. Laufer, Investigations of free turbulent mixing, Tech. rep. (1947)

    1947

  19. [26]

    C. D. Winant, F. K. Browand, Vortex pairing: the mechanism of turbu- lent mixing-layer growth at moderate reynolds number, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 63 (2) (1974) 237–255

    1974

  20. [27]

    M. M. Koochesfahani, P. E. Dimotakis, Mixing and chemical reactions in a turbulent liquid mixing layer, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 170 (1986) 83–112

    1986

  21. [28]

    G. L. Brown, A. Roshko, On density effects and large structure in tur- bulent mixing layers, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 64 (4) (1974) 775–816

    1974

  22. [29]

    Y. Zhou, T. T. Clark, D. S. Clark, S. Gail Glendinning, M. Aaron Skin- ner, C. M. Huntington, O. A. Hurricane, A. M. Dimits, B. A. Remington, Turbulent mixing and transition criteria of flows induced by hydrody- namic instabilities, Physics of Plasmas 26 (8) (2019). 37

    2019

  23. [30]

    Lawrence, F

    G. Lawrence, F. K. Browand, L. Redekopp, The stability of a sheared density interface, Physics of Fluids A: Fluid Dynamics 3 (10) (1991) 2360–2370

    1991

  24. [31]

    P. Finn, Experimental study and computational turbulence modelling of combined Rayleigh-Taylor and Kelvin-Helmoltz mixing with complex stratification, Master’s thesis, Texas A& M University, 2014

    2014

  25. [32]

    Akula, P

    B. Akula, P. Suchandra, M. Mikhaeil, D. Ranjan, Dynamics of unsta- bly stratified free shear flows: an experimental investigation of coupled kelvin–helmholtz and rayleigh–taylor instability, Journal of Fluid Me- chanics 816 (2017) 619–660

    2017

  26. [33]

    Sengupta, B

    A. Sengupta, B. Joshi, Effects of stabilizing and destabilizing ther- mal gradients on reversed shear-stratified flows: Combined Kelvin– Helmholtz Rayleigh–Taylor instability, Physics of Fluids 35 (1) (2023)

    2023

  27. [34]

    Sengupta, B

    A. Sengupta, B. Joshi, A. K. Verma, Thermally stratified free shear lay- ers: Combined Kelvin–Helmholtz Rayleigh–Taylor instability, Physics of Fluids 34 (9) (2022)

    2022

  28. [36]

    B. R. Noack, K. Afanasiev, M. Morzy´ nski, G. Tadmor, F. Thiele, A hierarchy of low-dimensional models for the transient and post-transient cylinder wake, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 497 (2003) 335–363

    2003

  29. [37]

    T. K. Sengupta, High accuracy computing methods: Fluid flows and wave phenomena, Cambridge University Press, 2013

    2013

  30. [38]

    Hoffmann, S

    K. Hoffmann, S. Chiang, Computational Fluid Dynamics, no. v. 1 in Computational Fluid Dynamics, Engineering Education System, 2000. URL https://books.google.co.in/books?id=98gjAAAACAAJ

    2000

  31. [39]

    R. L. Ash, A. J. Zuckerwar, Z. Zheng, Second coefficient of viscosity in air, Tech. rep. (1991). 38

    1991

  32. [40]

    T. K. Sengupta, A. Sengupta, N. Sharma, S. Sengupta, A. Bhole, K. Shruti, Roles of bulk viscosity on Rayleigh-Taylor instability: Non- equilibrium thermodynamics due to spatio-temporal pressure fronts, Physics of Fluids 28 (9) (2016)

    2016

  33. [41]

    T. K. Sengupta, A. Sengupta, S. Sengupta, A. Bhole, K. Shruti, Non- equilibrium thermodynamics of rayleigh–taylor instability, International Journal of Thermophysics 37 (2016) 1–25

    2016

  34. [42]

    Sharma, A

    N. Sharma, A. Sengupta, M. Rajpoot, R. Samuel, Hybrid sixth order spatial discretization scheme for non-uniform cartesian grids, Computers & Fluids 157 (08 2017). doi:10.1016/j.compfluid.2017.08.034

    2017 doi

  35. [43]

    Sundaram, A

    P. Sundaram, A. Sengupta, T. K. Sengupta, A non-overlapping high accuracy parallel subdomain closure for compact scheme: Onset of Rayleigh-Taylor instability by ultrasonic waves, Journal of Computa- tional Physics 470 (2022) 111593

    2022

  36. [44]

    T. K. Sengupta, A. Sengupta, A new alternating bi-diagonal compact scheme for non-uniform grids, Journal of Computational Physics 310 (2016) 1–25. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2016.01.014

    2016 doi

  37. [45]

    Sagaut, V

    P. Sagaut, V. Suman, P. Sundaram, M. Rajpoot, Y. Bhumkar, S. Sen- gupta, A. Sengupta, T. Sengupta, Global spectral analysis: Review of numerical methods, Computers & Fluids 261 (2023) 105915

    2023

  38. [46]

    T. K. Sengupta, Instabilities of Flow and Transition to Turbulence, CRC Press, Boca Raton, USA, 2012. doi:10.1201/b11900. URL https://doi.org/10.1201/b11900

    2012 doi

  39. [47]

    Sengupta, N

    A. Sengupta, N. Gupta, B. N. Ubald, Separation-induced transition on a T106A blade under low and elevated free stream turbulence, Physics of Fluids 36 (2) (2024)

    2024

  40. [48]

    Sengupta, P

    A. Sengupta, P. Sundaram, T. K. Sengupta, Nonmodal nonlinear route of transition to two-dimensional turbulence, Physical Review Research 2 (1) (2020) 012033

    2020

  41. [49]

    Y. A. Kucherenko, O. Shestachenko, Y. A. Piskunov, E. Sviridov, V. Medvedev, A. Baishev, Experimental investigation into the self- similar mode of mixing of different density gases in the earth’s gravi- tational field, Laser and Particle Beams 21 (3) (2003) 385–388. 39

    2003

  42. [50]

    Berkooz, J

    G. Berkooz, J. Elezgaray, P. Holmes, Coherent structures in random media and wavelets, Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena 61 (1-4) (1992) 47–58

    1992

  43. [51]

    Sirovich, Turbulence and the dynamics of coherent structures

    L. Sirovich, Turbulence and the dynamics of coherent structures. ii. sym- metries and transformations, Quarterly of Applied mathematics 45 (3) (1987) 573–582

    1987

  44. [52]

    Lestandi, S

    L. Lestandi, S. Bhaumik, G. Avatar, M. Azaiez, T. K. Sengupta, Mul- tiple hopf bifurcations and flow dynamics inside a 2d singular lid driven cavity, Computers & Fluids 166 (2018) 86–103

    2018

  45. [53]

    Sengupta, P

    A. Sengupta, P. Tucker, Effects of forced frequency oscillations and free stream turbulence on the separation-induced transition in pressure gra- dient dominated flows, Physics of Fluids 32 (10) (2020)

    2020

  46. [54]

    V. K. Suman, P. Sundaram, J. Puttam, A. Sengupta, T. K. Sengupta, A novel compressible enstrophy transport equation-based analysis of instability during Magnus–Robins effects for high rotation rates, Physics of Fluids 34 (4) (2022)

    2022

  47. [55]

    Pereira, F

    F. Pereira, F. F. Grinstein, D. Israel, Effect of the numerical discretiza- tion scheme in shock-driven turbulent mixing simulations, Computers & Fluids 201 (2020) 104487

    2020

  48. [56]

    Y. Zhou, M. Groom, B. Thornber, Dependence of enstrophy trans- port and mixed mass on dimensionality and initial conditions in the Richtmyer–Meshkov instability induced flows, Journal of Fluids Engi- neering 142 (12) (2020) 121104

    2020

  49. [57]

    Sundaram, A

    P. Sundaram, A. Sengupta, V. K. Suman, T. K. Sengupta, Non- overlapping high-accuracy parallel closure for compact schemes: Ap- plication in multiphysics and complex geometry, ACM Transactions on Parallel Computing 10 (1) (2023) 1–28. 40

    2023

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.