Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 47 references

Density Effects on the Post-shock Turbulence Structure and Dynamics

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Density determines whether post-shock turbulence becomes symmetric or keeps its tear-drop shape.

desk verdict First Lagrangian VGT analysis of variable-density shock-turbulence interaction with a plausible pressure-Hessian mechanism, but the headline density-conditioned topology claim rests on a P≈0 filter whose density bias is never checked. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.05327 v1 pith:HYUMAI44 submitted 2019-08-14 physics.flu-dyn physics.comp-ph

Yifeng Tian , Farhad A. Jaberi , Daniel Livescu This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.flu-dynphysics.comp-ph
keywords shock-turbulenceinteractionvariabledensityturbulencevelocitygradienttensorflowtopologyLagrangianstatisticspressureHessianAtwoodnumbervortexstretching
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 whether density variations in a binary-fluid mixture change how turbulence is restructured by a Mach 2 shock, and how that structure evolves downstream. Using shock-capturing turbulence-resolving simulations with Eulerian and Lagrangian statistics, it claims that density does more than modulate amplitudes: it splits the post-shock flow topology by region. In heavy fluid regions the joint PDF of the second and third invariants of the anisotropic velocity gradient tensor becomes nearly symmetric, while light fluid regions keep the standard tear-drop shape seen in isotropic turbulence. The paper further claims that the pressure Hessian term in the Lagrangian transport equations for the invariants is the mechanism that drives these density-dependent differences. A sympathetic reader would care because this identifies a concrete, density-controlled reorganization of small-scale turbulence that any subgrid model for variable-density shock-turbulence interaction must reproduce.

What carries the argument

The central object is the velocity gradient tensor $A_{ij}=\partial u_i/\partial x_j$, examined through the second and third invariants $Q^*$ and $R^*$ of its anisotropic, deviatoric part; the joint PDF of those invariants classifies local flow topology into four quadrant types. The Lagrangian part of the argument uses conditional mean vectors $(\langle DQ/Dt\rangle,\langle DR/Dt\rangle)$ in the $(Q,R)$ plane, together with the transport equations for the invariants, to separate the dynamics into mutual-interaction, pressure Hessian, baroclinic, and viscous terms. The pressure Hessian is the load-bearing term: it is the only contribution whose conditional-mean field qualitatively changes from isotropic turbulence after the shock, and it is the term whose action differs most strongly between heavy and light fluid particles.

What would settle it

Repeat the finest-grid simulation with a larger scale-separation ratio, for example by moving to a higher Reynolds number or using a shock-resolving method with $\eta/\delta_n \gtrsim 5$, and check whether the heavy-fluid $(Q^*,R^*)$ joint PDF remains nearly symmetric and whether the pressure Hessian remains the dominant term. If the symmetrization weakens or the heavy-fluid counterclockwise conditional-mean trajectories disappear, the central claim depends on the finite numerical shock thickness.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

At Atwood number 0.28, after a binary mixture of heavy and light fluids passes through a Mach 2 normal shock, the velocity-gradient invariant statistics separate according to local density. The joint PDF $(Q^*, R^*)$ of the second and third invariants of the anisotropic velocity gradient tensor becomes nearly symmetric in heavy-fluid regions, with an enlarged share of stable-node/saddle/saddle topology, while light-fluid regions retain the characteristic tear-drop distribution of isotropic turbulence. The same density split appears in the vortex stretching contribution to enstrophy, whose joint PDF with $-Q_s^*$ becomes almost fully symmetric in the multi-fluid case. Lagrangian tracking of 4.5 million particles shows that the circulating conditional-mean dynamics of $(Q,R)$ in isotropic turbulence is weakened after the shock, and in heavy-fluid regions the conditional mean trajectories reverse to counterclockwise motion. The transport-equation decomposition attributes these differences mainly to the pressure Hessian: it is amplified across the shock, from about 61 percent to about 74 percent of the total contribution, and it acts differently on heavy, medium, and light fluid particles.

Load-bearing premise

The numerical shock thickness is small enough relative to the Kolmogorov scale, about $\eta/\delta_n = 1.9$ on the finest grid, that shock-capturing artifacts do not corrupt the post-shock velocity-gradient statistics or the Lagrangian particle trajectories.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Immediately downstream of the shock, multi-fluid turbulence is not uniformly two-dimensionalized: heavy-fluid regions become more axisymmetric and strain-dominated than light-fluid regions at the same location.
  • The mean vortex stretching rate is reduced in the multi-fluid case mainly by a change in topology, through enhanced Q1 and Q3 regions, rather than by a decrease in the variance of the stretching term.
  • The return to the classic tear-drop shape is driven by particles starting in Q1 and Q3, whose contributions to vortex stretching recover faster than those from Q2 and Q4 particles.
  • Any subgrid-scale model for variable-density shock-turbulence interaction should include a density-dependent pressure Hessian to capture the differing evolution of heavy and light fluid regions.
  • The baroclinic term, despite strong density and pressure gradients, remains the smallest of the four invariant-transport contributions for the parameters studied and does not directly control the topological evolution.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The paper's conditional statistics suggest a testable prediction: in the broken-shock regime at higher Atwood number, the density split in topology should sharpen further, with heavy-fluid regions becoming even more symmetric and light-fluid regions approaching the isotropic tear-drop more quickly; the same analysis could be repeated there.
  • A natural extension is to form a mixing measure from the conditional PDF asymmetry, for example the difference in quadrant population fractions between heavy and light regions, and use it as a one-parameter marker of density effects on post-shock structure.
  • The finding that the pressure Hessian, not the baroclinic term, carries the density effect implies that reduced models respecting the pressure Hessian structure may outperform models that emphasize baroclinic vorticity generation, a point the paper does not explicitly pursue.
  • Because Lagrangian residence times are shorter in the multi-fluid case, particle-based subgrid models may need a density-dependent eddy-turnover time in this regime.
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

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. This manuscript studies the interaction of a Mach 2 shock with multi-fluid, variable-density isotropic turbulence at Atwood number 0.28, using turbulence-resolving shock-capturing simulations and tracking 4.5 million Lagrangian particles. It analyzes the post-shock turbulence structure through velocity-gradient-tensor (VGT) invariants, compares the multi-fluid results with single-fluid STI and isotropic turbulence, and reports that the joint PDF of the anisotropic invariants, PDF(Q*,R*), becomes nearly symmetric in heavy-fluid regions while light-fluid regions retain the tear-drop shape. Lagrangian conditional-mean dynamics are used to show that the pressure Hessian is the dominant and density-dependent contribution to the evolution of the VGT invariants. The paper includes grid-convergence tests and Lagrangian sample-size convergence tests as supporting evidence.

Significance. The strengths of the paper are substantial: the simulation data are grid-converged for the dissipation rates shown in Fig. 2, the Lagrangian conditional statistics are checked for sample-size convergence in Figs. 3-4, the VGT invariant equations in Eqs. (5)-(7) are exact transforms of the Navier-Stokes equations, and the study contains no fitted parameters, with single-fluid STI and isotropic turbulence serving as external anchors. If the density-conditioned PDF claim survives scrutiny, the work would provide new, physically detailed understanding of variable-density shock-turbulence interaction and useful constraints for subgrid models. However, the central headline claim currently rests on a P≈0-filtered subset without demonstration that the filter is density-neutral; this must be resolved before the result is fully established.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 3.2, Figure 16] The central claim that PDF(Q*,R*) is nearly symmetric in heavy-fluid regions while light-fluid regions retain the tear-drop shape is computed on the P≈0 subset introduced in Section 3.2, yet the paper does not report whether the filter probability is uniform across density bins. This matters because the authors themselves argue in Section 3.2 that local shock strength is positively correlated with pre-shock density, so heavy-fluid regions should plausibly have larger mean dilatation P. If the P≈0 criterion preferentially excludes heavy-fluid points, the comparison in Figure 16 is confounded: the apparent symmetrization could be a property of the incompressible subset rather than of heavy-fluid regions in the actual flow. The abstract and conclusions state the claim without this caveat. Please report the probability of satisfying the filter, e.g., P/⟨Qw⟩^0.5 < 0.1, as a function of density; recompute the density-conditioned PDFs either without the filter or with an appropriate reweighting; and provide a quantitative symmetry metric, such as quadrant probability ratios or a comparison to the reflected PDF, instead of visual inspection alone.
  2. [Section 2.4] The paper relies on η/δn ≈ 1.9, together with earlier LIA convergence tests in Tian et al. (2017a), to justify using the finest-grid data for all subsequent statistical claims. However, the grid-convergence test shown in Fig. 2 covers dissipation rates and scalar dissipation, not the VGT invariant PDFs or the density-conditioned topology that underpin the main claims. Immediately post-shock, invariant statistics are sensitive to the numerical shock structure, and the scale separation is only about a factor of two. Please provide a resolution sensitivity check for Figures 15-16, or at least for the proposed symmetry metric, on coarser grids, or state explicitly which quantitative criterion from Tian et al. (2017a) establishes that η/δn ≈ 1.9 is sufficient for derivative-level statistics of this type.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Figure 19] The caption labels the panels as (a) Q2, (b) Q1, (c) Q3 and (d) Q4, while the text in Section 3.2 describes (a,b) as Q1 and Q2; the labels should be reconciled.
  2. [Figure 30] The caption uses the label (a) twice; the medium-density panel should be labeled (b).
  3. [Equation (6a)] The notation ∂p2/∂xi∂xj is ambiguous; it should be written as ∂²p/(∂xi∂xj) or equivalent.
  4. [Section 3.3] The sentence beginning 'The percentage of contributions, using the means indicate...' is incomplete or garbled; please restate how the percentages 61.3%, 74.9% and 73.9% are defined and computed.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity; the statistical claims are measured from direct simulation and exact Lagrangian post-processing, not reduced to fitted inputs or self-citation chains.

full rationale

The paper's central claims—the density-conditioned joint PDF(Q*,R*) shape, the vortex-stretching PDF, and the pressure-Hessian contributions—are quantities measured from the simulated velocity fields and from the exact Lagrangian evolution equations (Eqs. 5–7), which are rearrangements of the Navier-Stokes equations rather than fitted models. The database and LIA convergence results are taken from earlier work by the same group, but those citations are independent simulation benchmarks and parameter-free convergence checks; they do not define the post-shock statistics. The only conditioning choice that deserves scrutiny is Section 3.2's restriction to "data points where P≈ 0," which the paper states "encompass about 60% of the flow." Because the paper does not report whether the P≈0 selection probability is uniform across density bins, and because it cites its own prior result that local shock strength increases with pre-shock density, the heavy-fluid conditional PDF in Figure 16 could in principle reflect a density-biased incompressible subset. That is a sampling/confounding concern, not circularity: the reported PDFs are direct measurements of the selected subset, not quantities that are equivalent to the selection criterion by definition. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, no definition builds the conclusion into an input, and no load-bearing uniqueness claim rests on self-citation. Accordingly, the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on the fidelity of the shock-capturing simulations and the exactness of the VGT invariant equations. The simulation parameters (At=0.28, Mt=0.1, Re_lambda=45, k0=4, Pr=Sc=0.75) are chosen inputs that limit the regime. The main axioms are standard fluid mechanics and the assumption that the numerical shock is sufficiently resolved (eta/delta_n around 1.9). No new entities are introduced.

free parameters (5)
  • Atwood number At = 0.28
    Chosen so that variable-density effects are non-negligible while the shock remains in the wrinkled regime (Section 2.2). The analysis is restricted to this value.
  • Inflow turbulent Mach number Mt = 0.1 (about 0.09 before the shock)
    Set low so compressibility effects are weak and Taylor's hypothesis is applicable (Section 2.2).
  • Taylor Reynolds number Re_lambda = 45 (about 42 before the shock)
    Set to keep viscous effects small while providing a turbulent flow; moderate by modern DNS standards (Section 2.2).
  • Inflow peak wavenumber k0 = 4
    Sets the initial integral scale of the pre-shock turbulence (Section 2.2).
  • Prandtl and Schmidt numbers = 0.75
    Chosen equal values for the binary mixture transport (Section 2.2).
assumptions (5)
  • standard math The compressible Navier-Stokes equations for a miscible binary mixture, with the perfect gas law and Fickian diffusion, govern the flow (Section 2.1).
    Governing equations taken from prior literature; no derivation in this paper.
  • standard math The Lagrangian evolution equations for the VGT invariants (Eqs. 5-7) are exact consequences of the Navier-Stokes equations as given by Chu & Lu (2013).
    Used without re-derivation to interpret particle statistics.
  • domain assumption Taylor's hypothesis is valid for converting temporal turbulence into spatial inflow at Mt around 0.1 (Section 2.2).
    Underpins the use of spatially developing STI with pre-generated isotropic turbulence box.
  • domain assumption The numerical shock is sufficiently resolved with eta/delta_n around 1.9 such that shock-capturing artifacts do not contaminate the post-shock statistics (Section 2.4).
    Critical for using the finest-grid results; based on prior LIA convergence tests in Tian et al. 2017a.
  • domain assumption Compressibility (dilatational) effects are weak for the present parameters, so the anisotropic VGT analysis restricted to small |P| data (about 60% of the flow) is representative (Sections 3.2 and 3.3).
    The topological conclusions are drawn from this subset; excluded compressible regions might behave differently.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Density Effects on the Post-shock Turbulence Structure and Dynamics." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/HYUMAI44

@misc{pith2026190805327,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Density Effects on the Post-shock Turbulence Structure and Dynamics},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/HYUMAI44}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.05327}
}
abstract

Turbulence structure resulting from multi-fluid or multi-species, variable-density isotropic turbulence interaction with a Mach 2 shock is studied using turbulence-resolving shock-capturing simulations and Eulerian (grid) and Lagrangian (particle) methods. The complex roles density play in the modification of turbulence by the shock wave are identified. Statistical analyses of the velocity gradient tensor (VGT) show that the density variations significantly change the turbulence structure and flow topology. Specifically, a stronger symmetrization of the joint probability density function (PDF) of second and third invariants of the anisotropic velocity gradient tensor, PDF$(Q^\ast, R^\ast)$, as well as the PDF of the vortex stretching contribution to the enstrophy equation, are observed in the multi-species case. Furthermore, subsequent to the interaction with the shock, turbulent statistics also acquire a differential distribution in regions having different densities. This results in a nearly symmetrical PDF$(Q^\ast, R^\ast)$ in heavy fluid regions, while the light fluid regions retain the characteristic tear-drop shape. To understand this behavior and the return to "standard" turbulence structure as the flow evolves away from the shock, Lagrangian dynamics of the VGT and its invariants are studied by considering particle residence times and conditional particle variables in different flow regions. The pressure Hessian contributions to the VGT invariants transport equations are shown to be not only affected by the shock wave, but also by the density in the multi-fluid case, making them critically important to the flow dynamics and turbulence structure.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.05327 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Instantaneous contours of vorticity and shock surface in isotropic turbulence interacting [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Results of multi-fluid grid convergence tests at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The statistical convergence for (a) (DQ/Dt)/ hQwi 3/2 and (DR/Dt)/ hQwi 2 and (b) their standard deviations conditioned at point (3.0,3.0) in the (Q, R) phase plane for multi-fluid case. number of samples in each bin 102 103 104 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 number of samples in each bin 102 103 104 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 (a) 2 σ( DQ Dt )/ hQwi 3/2 σ( DR Dt )/ hQwi 2 DR Dt / hQwi 2 DQ Dt / hQwi 3/2 (b) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (27 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The statistical convergence for (a) (DQ/Dt)/ hQwi 3/2 and (DR/Dt)/ hQwi 2 and (b) their standard deviations conditioned at point (3.0,3.0) in the (Q, R) phase plane for single-fluid case. 7 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Comparison of the PDFs of the normalized post-shock velocity derivatives with a Gaussian [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: PDF of the strain-enstrophy angle Ψ in radians for post-shock turbulence. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Conditional expectation of the magnitude of strain rate tensor as a function of density [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: PDF of the orientation between the vorticity vector and density gradient in y-z direction [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Vortex structures captured using the Q-criterion, colored by density, for multi-fluid ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Development of (a) turbulence dissipation rate, (b) pressure variance, (c) vortex stretch￾ing, and (d) anisotropy (b11) of Reynolds stress and vorticity. In order to quantitatively study the evolution of turbulence anisotropy, we consider here the Reynolds stress anis…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Development of (a) skewness, and (b) flatness, of the streamwise and transverse compo￾nents of velocity derivatives. density effects. For isotropic turbulence, the skewness of the longitudinal velocity gradient should be around -0.5, which is observed to be true in th…
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: PDF of the density gradient at different streamwise locations for: ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: PDFs of the cosine angle between eigenvectors of the strain rate tensor and streamwise [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: PDFs of the normalized dilatation and vorticity for isotropic turbulence (IT), single-fluid [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_14.png]
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Iso-contour lines of joint PDFs of normalized second and third invariants of the anisotropic [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_15.png]
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Iso-contour lines of post-shock (k0x ≈ 0.44) joint PDF of second and third invariants of the anisotropic part of the velocity gradient tensor, (Q∗ , R∗ ), in regions with different densities. (a) regions with high density values, ρ > (ρ+ 90%ρ 0 rms), (b) regions with …
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Color illustration of the flow topology for the multi-fluid STI. The flow topology is [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_17.png]
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: Iso-contour lines of joint PDF of (-Q∗ s , Σ∗ ) for (a) isotropic box turbulence and (b,c) single-fluid and multi-fluid turbulence at post-shock position of k0x ≈ 0.44. rate, can be calculated based on the VGT invariants using the formula: Σ∗ = wiSijwj = (R∗ s − R∗ )/…
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: Iso-contour lines of joint PDF of (-Q∗ s , Σ∗ ) for different quadrants right after the shock wave. (a) Q2, (b) Q1 ,(c) Q3 and (d) Q4. 21 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_19.png]
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20: Percentage of fluid particles that stay in each quadrant following particles initialized [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_20.png]
Figure 21
Figure 21. Figure 21: Visualization of the temporal development (left to right) of the turbulence structure using [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_21.png]
Figure 22
Figure 22. Figure 22: Contributions to the vortex stretching rate from particles starting in each quadrant. The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_22.png]
Figure 23
Figure 23. Figure 23: PDFs of (a) (DQ/Dt)/ hQwi 3/2 and (b) (DR/Dt)/ hQwi 2 for fluid particles with different densities at streamwise location of k0x ≈ 0.5. the dilatational part of the VGT and their coupling with the variable density effects in highly compressible turbulence are still un…
Figure 24
Figure 24. Figure 24: Conditional mean rate of change vectors of ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_24.png]
Figure 25
Figure 25. Figure 25: Conditional mean vectors in the (Q, R) invariants plane for (a) light fluid, (b) medium density fluid and (c) heavy fluid at streamwise location of k0x ≈ 0.5. 0 5 10 15 20 25 PDF 10-4 10-3 10-2 10-1 100 101 mutual interaction pressure Hessian baroclinic term viscous t…
Figure 26
Figure 26. Figure 26: PDFs of the normalized magnitude of the different contributions from Lagrangian dynam [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_26.png]
Figure 27
Figure 27. Figure 27: Contributions to the transport equations of the VGT invariants by different terms for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_27.png]
Figure 28
Figure 28. Figure 28: Contributions to the transport equations of the VGT invariants by different terms for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_28.png]
Figure 29
Figure 29. Figure 29: Contributions to the dynamics of the VGT invariants by different terms for multi-fluid [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p031_29.png]
Figure 30
Figure 30. Figure 30: Contributions from pressure Hessian to the dynamics of the VGT invariants in ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p031_30.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

47 extracted references · 43 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    & Sandberg, R

    Bechlars, P. & Sandberg, R. D. 2017 Evolution of the velocity gradient tensor invariant dynamics in a turbulent boundary layer . J. Fluid Mech. 815 , 223--242

    work page 2017

  2. [2]

    , Bouali, Z

    Boukharfane, R. , Bouali, Z. & Mura, A. 2018 Evolution of scalar and velocity dynamics in planar shock-turbulence interaction . Shock Waves 28 (6), 1117--1141

    work page 2018

  3. [3]

    , Lehnasch, G

    Buttay, R. , Lehnasch, G. & Mura, A. 2016 Analysis of small-scale scalar mixing processes in highly under-expanded jets . Shock Waves 26 (2), 193--212

    work page 2016

  4. [4]

    Chong, M. S. , Perry, A. E. & Cantwell, B. J. 1990 A general classification of three-dimensional flow fields . Phys. Fluids A: Fluid Dynam. 2 (5), 765--777

    work page 1990

  5. [5]

    Chong, M. S. , Soria, J. , Perry, A. E. , Chacin, J. , Cantwell, B. J. & Na, Y. 1998 Turbulence structures of wall-bounded shear flows found using dns data . J. Fluid Mech. 357 , 225--247

    work page 1998

  6. [6]

    Chu, Y. B. & Lu, X. Y. 2013 Topological evolution in compressible turbulent boundary layers . J. Fluid Mech. 733 , 414--438

    work page 2013

  7. [7]

    & Friedrich, R

    Hannappel, R. & Friedrich, R. 1995 Direct numerical simulation of a Mach 2 shock interacting with isotropic turbulence . Appl. Sci. Res. 54 (3), 205--221

    work page 1995

  8. [8]

    , Jin, T

    Huete, C. , Jin, T. , Mart \' nez-Ruiz, D. & Luo, K. 2017 Interaction of a planar reacting shock wave with an isotropic turbulent vorticity field . Phys. Rev. E 96 (5), 053104

    work page 2017

Show all 47 references
  1. [9]

    Jaberi, F. A. , Livescu, D. & Madnia, C. K. 2000 Characteristics of chemically reacting compressible homogeneous turbulence . Phys. Fluids 12 (5), 1189--1209

    2000

  2. [10]

    , Cazalbou, J.-B

    Jamme, S. , Cazalbou, J.-B. , Torres, F. & Chassaing, P. 2002 Direct numerical simulation of the interaction between a shock wave and various types of isotropic turbulence . Flow Turbul. Combust. 68 (3), 227--268

    2002

  3. [11]

    , Luo, K

    Jin, T. , Luo, K. , Dai, Q. & Fan, J. 2015 Simulations of cellular detonation interaction with turbulent flows . AIAA Journal 54 (2), 419--433

    2015

  4. [12]

    Kovasznay, L. S. G. 1953 Turbulence in supersonic flow . J. Aeronaut. Sci. 20 (10), 657--674

    1953

  5. [13]

    , Bermejo-Moreno, I

    Larsson, J. , Bermejo-Moreno, I. & Lele, S. K. 2013 Reynolds- and Mach -number effects in canonical shock - turbulence interaction . J. Fluid Mech. 717 , 293--321

    2013

  6. [14]

    & Lele, S

    Larsson, J. & Lele, S. K. 2009 Direct numerical simulation of canonical shock/turbulence interaction . Phys. Fluids 21 (12), 126101

    2009

  7. [15]

    , Lele, S

    Lee, S. , Lele, S. K. & Moin, P. 1992 Simulation of spatially evolving turbulence and the applicability of taylor’s hypothesis in compressible flow . Phys. Fluids A: Fluid Dynam. 4 (7), 1521--1530

    1992

  8. [16]

    , Lele, S

    Lee, S. , Lele, S. K. & Moin, P. 1993 Direct numerical simulation of isotropic turbulence interacting with a weak shock wave . J. Fluid Mech. 251 , 533--562

    1993

  9. [17]

    , Lele, S

    Lee, S. , Lele, S. K. & Moin, P. 1997 Interaction of isotropic turbulence with shock waves: effect of shock strength . J. Fluid Mech. 340 , 225--247

    1997

  10. [18]

    Lele, S. K. 1992 Compact finite difference schemes with spectral-like resolution . J. Comput. Phys. 103 (1), 16--42

    1992

  11. [19]

    & Jaberi, F

    Li, Z. & Jaberi, F. A. 2012 A high-order finite difference method for numerical simulations of supersonic turbulent flows . Int. J. Numer. Meth. Fl. 68 (6), 740--766

    2012

  12. [20]

    , Ristorcelli, J

    Livescu, D. , Ristorcelli, J. R. , Petersen, M. R. & Gore, R. A. 2010 New phenomena in variable-density Rayleigh -- Taylor turbulence . Phys. Scr. T142 , 014015

    2010

  13. [21]

    & Ryu, J

    Livescu, D. & Ryu, J. 2016 Vorticity dynamics after the shock--turbulence interaction . Shock Waves 26 (3), 241--251

    2016

  14. [22]

    , Lee, S

    Mahesh, K. , Lee, S. , Lele, S. K. & Moin, P. 1995 The interaction of an isotropic field of acoustic waves with a shock wave . J. Fluid Mech. 300 , 383--407

    1995

  15. [23]

    , Lele, S

    Mahesh, K. , Lele, S. K. & Moin, P. 1997 The influence of entropy fluctuations on the interaction of turbulence with a shock wave . J. Fluid Mech. 334 , 353--379

    1997

  16. [24]

    2011 Lagrangian dynamics and models of the velocity gradient tensor in turbulent flows

    Meneveau, C. 2011 Lagrangian dynamics and models of the velocity gradient tensor in turbulent flows . Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 43 , 219--245

    2011

  17. [25]

    , Martin, J

    Ooi, A. , Martin, J. , Soria, J. & Chong, M. S. 1999 A study of the evolution and characteristics of the invariants of the velocity-gradient tensor in isotropic turbulence . J. Fluid Mech. 381 , 141--174

    1999

  18. [26]

    Perry, A. E. & Chong, M. S. 1987 A description of eddying motions and flow patterns using critical-point concepts . Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 19 (1), 125--155

    1987

  19. [27]

    & Grasso, F

    Pirozzoli, S. & Grasso, F. 2004 Direct numerical simulations of isotropic compressible turbulence: Influence of compressibility on dynamics and structures . Phys. Fluids 16 (12), 4386--4407

    2004

  20. [28]

    , Sinha, K

    Quadros, R. , Sinha, K. & Larsson, J. 2016 Turbulent energy flux generated by shock/homogeneous-turbulence interaction . J. Fluid Mech. 796 , 113--157

    2016

  21. [29]

    Ribner, H. S. 1954 Convection of a pattern of vorticity through a shock wave. NACA TR-1164

    1954

  22. [30]

    & Livescu, D

    Ryu, J. & Livescu, D. 2014 Turbulence structure behind the shock in canonical shock - vortical turbulence interaction . J. Fluid Mech. 756 , R1

    2014

  23. [31]

    Sethuraman, Y. P. M. , Sinha, K. & Larsson, J. 2018 Thermodynamic fluctuations in canonical shock--turbulence interaction: effect of shock strength . Theor. Comp. Fluid Dyn. 32 (5), 629--654

    2018

  24. [32]

    & Girimaji, S

    Suman, S. & Girimaji, S. S. 2010 Velocity gradient invariants and local flow-field topology in compressible turbulence . J. Turbul. (11), N2

    2010

  25. [33]

    , Jaberi, F

    Tian, Y. , Jaberi, F. , Li, Z. & Livescu, D. 2017 a\/ Numerical study of variable density turbulence interaction with a normal shock wave . J. Fluid Mech. 829 , 551--588

    2017

  26. [34]

    , Jaberi, F

    Tian, Y. , Jaberi, F. & Livescu, D. 2018 Density effects on the flow structure in multi-fluid shock-turbulence interaction. In 2018 AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting\/ , p. 0374

    2018

  27. [35]

    , Jaberi, F

    Tian, Y. , Jaberi, F. , Livescu, D. & Li, Z. 2017 b\/ Numerical study of shock--turbulence interactions in variable density flows. In Proceedings of TSFP-10 (2017) Chicago\/ , International Symposium on Turbulence and Shear Flow Phenomena , vol. 3 , pp. 8C--3

    2017

  28. [36]

    , Jaberi, F

    Tian, Y. , Jaberi, F. A. & Livescu, D. 2019 Shock propagation in media with non-uniform density . In 31st International Symposium on Shock Waves 1. ISSW 2017\/ (ed. A. Sasoh, T. Aoki & M. Tatayama ) . Springer, Cham

    2019

  29. [37]

    , Jaberi, F

    Tian, Y. , Jaberi, F. A. , Livescu, D. & Li, Z. 2017 c\/ Numerical simulation of multi-fluid shock-turbulence interaction. In AIP Conference Proceedings\/ , Shock Compression of Condensed Matter , vol. 1793 , p. 150010 . AIP Publishing

    2017

  30. [38]

    Vaghefi, N. S. & Madnia, C. K. 2015 Local flow topology and velocity gradient invariants in compressible turbulent mixing layer . J. Fluid Mech. 774 , 67--94

    2015

  31. [39]

    , Shi, Y

    Wang, J. , Shi, Y. , Wang, L. P. , Xiao, Z. , He, X. T. & Chen, S. 2012 Effect of compressibility on the small-scale structures in isotropic turbulence . J. Fluid Mech. 713 , 588--631

    2012

  32. [40]

    Wang, L. & Lu, X. Y. 2012 Flow topology in compressible turbulent boundary layer . J. Fluid Mech. 703 , 255--278

    2012

  33. [41]

    Yeung, P. K. 2002 Lagrangian investigations of turbulence . Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 34 (1), 115--142

    2002

  34. [42]

    Yeung, P. K. & Pope, S. B. 1988 An algorithm for tracking fluid particles in numerical simulations of homogeneous turbulence . J. Comput. Phys. 79 (2), 373--416

    1988

  35. [43]

    , " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

    ENTRY address author booktitle chapter edition editor howpublished institution journal key month note number organization pages publisher school series title type volume year eprint label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sen...

  36. [44]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION n.dashify 't := "" t empty not t #1 #1 substring "-" = t #1 #2 substring "--" = not "--" * t #2 global.max substring 't := t #1 #1 substring "-" = "-" * t #2 global.max substring 't := while if t #1 #1 substring * t #2 gl...

  37. [45]

    @esa (Ref

    \@ifclassloaded aguplus natbib The aguplus class already includes natbib coding, so you should not add it explicitly Type <Return> for now, but then later remove the command natbib from the document \@ifclassloaded nlinproc natbib The nlinproc class already includes natbib cod...

  38. [46]

    @stdbsttrue NAT@ctr \@lbibitem[ NAT@ctr ] \@lbibitem[#1]#2 \@extra@b@citeb \@ifundefined br@#2\@extra@b@citeb \@namedef br@#2 \@nameuse br@#2\@extra@b@citeb \@ifundefined b@#2\@extra@b@citeb @num @parse #2 [ @natanchorstart #2\@extra@b@citeb \@biblabel @num @natanchorend] @ifc...

  39. [47]

    @open @close @open @close and [1] URL: #1 \@ifundefined chapter * \@mkboth \@ifundefined NAT@sectionbib * \@mkboth * \@mkboth\@gobbletwo \@ifclassloaded amsart * \@ifclassloaded amsbook * \@ifundefined bib@heading @heading NAT@ctr thebibliography [1] @ \@biblabel NAT@ctr \@bib...

    1996

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.