chaos, transport, and mesh convergence for fluid mixingyan2000/paper/chaos.pdffig. 1: initial (left)...

23
Chaos, Transport, and Mesh Convergence for Fluid Mixing * H. Lim, 1 Y. Yu, 1 J. Glimm, 1, 2 X.-L. Li, 1 and D. H. Sharp 3 1 Department of Applied Mathematics and Statistics, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY 11794-3600, USA 2 Computational Science Center, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY 11793-6000, USA 3 Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM (Dated: January 30, 2008) Chaotic mixing of distinct fluids produces a convoluted structure to the inter- face separating these fluids. For miscible fluids (as considered here), this interface is defined as a 50% mass concentration isosurface. For shock wave induced (Richtmyer- Meshkov) instabilities, we find the interface to be increasingly complex as the com- putational mesh is refined. This interfacial chaos is cut off by viscosity, or by the computational mesh if the Kolmogorov scale is small relative to the mesh. In a regime of converged interface statistics, we then examine mixing, i.e. concentration statis- tics, regularized by mass diffusion. For Schmidt numbers significantly larger than unity, typical of a liquid or dense plasma, additional mesh refinement is normally needed to overcome numerical mass diffusion and to achieve a converged solution of the mixing problem. However, with the benefit of front tracking and with an algo- rithm that allows limited interface diffusion, we can assure convergence uniformly in the Schmidt number. We show that different solutions result from variation of the Schmidt number. We propose subgrid viscosity and mass diffusion parameterizations which might allow converged solutions at realistic grid levels. PACS numbers: 47.27.wj, 47.27.tb, 47.27.-i Keywords: Schmidt number, Mass Diffusion, Turbulence, Multiphase flow

Upload: others

Post on 24-Jan-2021

6 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

  • Chaos, Transport, and Mesh Convergence for Fluid Mixing∗

    H. Lim,1 Y. Yu,1 J. Glimm,1, 2 X.-L. Li,1 and D. H. Sharp3

    1Department of Applied Mathematics and Statistics,

    Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY 11794-3600, USA

    2Computational Science Center, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY 11793-6000, USA

    3Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM

    (Dated: January 30, 2008)

    Chaotic mixing of distinct fluids produces a convoluted structure to the inter-

    face separating these fluids. For miscible fluids (as considered here), this interface is

    defined as a 50% mass concentration isosurface. For shock wave induced (Richtmyer-

    Meshkov) instabilities, we find the interface to be increasingly complex as the com-

    putational mesh is refined. This interfacial chaos is cut off by viscosity, or by the

    computational mesh if the Kolmogorov scale is small relative to the mesh. In a regime

    of converged interface statistics, we then examine mixing, i.e. concentration statis-

    tics, regularized by mass diffusion. For Schmidt numbers significantly larger than

    unity, typical of a liquid or dense plasma, additional mesh refinement is normally

    needed to overcome numerical mass diffusion and to achieve a converged solution of

    the mixing problem. However, with the benefit of front tracking and with an algo-

    rithm that allows limited interface diffusion, we can assure convergence uniformly in

    the Schmidt number. We show that different solutions result from variation of the

    Schmidt number. We propose subgrid viscosity and mass diffusion parameterizations

    which might allow converged solutions at realistic grid levels.

    PACS numbers: 47.27.wj, 47.27.tb, 47.27.-i

    Keywords: Schmidt number, Mass Diffusion, Turbulence, Multiphase flow

  • 2

    I. INTRODUCTION

    A. Overview

    Acceleration driven turbulent mixing is a classical hydrodynamical instability, in which

    acceleration is directed across a fluid interface separating distinct fluids of different

    densities23. We are concerned here with impulsive acceleration produced by a shock

    wave passing through the fluids. This problem is known as the Richtmyer-Meshkov

    (RM) instability. We consider a circular geometry, with a converging circular shock at

    the outer edge, and inside this, two fluids separated by a perturbed circular interface.

    The problem was previously described in detail12,14,26. We consider the problem in two

    dimensions, in order to pursue conveniently issues of mesh refinement. Initial and late

    time simulation density plots are shown in Fig. 1.

    The fluid interface, at late time, is volume filling. The transport coefficients (viscosity,

    mass diffusion, and heat conductivity) are given dimensionlessly as the Reynolds number

    Re = UL/ν, the Schmidt number Sc = ν/µ, and the Prandtl number Pr = ν/κ.

    Here ν is the kinematic viscosity, µ the mass diffusivity and κ the thermal diffusion rate.

    Throughout this paper, thermal diffusion is set to zero. U and L are characteristic velocity

    and length scales. Dilute gases have Schmidt numbers of the order of unity or smaller,

    while liquids and dense plasmas typically have larger Schmidt numbers. We show that

    the solution depends on the Schmidt number. With under resolved physical transport

    mechanisms, their numerical analogues (numerical mass diffusion, heat conduction and

    numerical or artificial viscosity) play the role of the missing or under resolved physical

    variables, and select the solution. Computer codes then apparently converge to one of

    the nonunique solutions.

    The ability of the microphysics at the smallest turbulent scales (and those below

    this scale, limited by a diffusive length scale) to affect the macroscopic flow occurs with

    turbulent combustion18, where details of atomic level mixing affect stoichiometry and

    temperature, thus the local flame speeds and the macroscopic flow. From the point of

  • 3

    FIG. 1: Initial (left) and late time (right) density plot for the Richtmyer-Meshkov fluid insta-

    bility under study in this paper.

    view of turbulent combustion, a converged solution should yield a converged probability

    density function (pdf), as a function of space and time, for the joint distribution of the

    species concentrations and the temperature. The sensitive dependence of the temperature

    and species concentration pdfs is interface related and is amplified by the chaotic nature

    of the volume filling interface.

  • 4

    B. The Flow Instability Problem

    In the problem considered here, see Fig. 1, the flow is dominated by a single strong

    shock wave, starting at the outer edge of the computational domain (a half circle). The

    shock passes through the interface separating the two fluids, proceeds to the origin, re-

    flects there and expands outward, recrossing the interface region and finally exiting at the

    outer boundary. The interface region, due to the shock induced instability, expands into

    a mixing zone, which has a very complex structure. Especially after the second passage

    of the shock (the reshock or reflected shock passage), the mixing zone becomes highly

    chaotic. The inner and outer edges of the mixing zone are defined in terms of 5% and

    95% volume fraction contours, after a spatial average over the circular symmetry vari-

    able. The mixing zone is then defined as the region between these inner and outer edges.

    The software which captures the space time trajectory of these waves in the numerical

    solution is known as a wave filter7,8,26. A space time plot of the shock trajectories and

    mixing zone edges is shown in Fig. 2.

    The numerical solutions are by the front tracking FronTier algorithm6. This algo-

    rithm uses a Godunov finite difference solver based on the MUSCL algorithm4,24, and a

    sharp (tracked) interface to eliminate, or optionally13, to limit mass diffusion across the

    interface. Thus the FronTier numerical Schmidt number is ∞, and it allows simulationof any desired (physical) Schmidt or Prandtl number. From the point of view of tur-

    bulence modeling, the simulations can be described as under resolved or resolved direct

    numerical simulation (DNS). Specifically, no subgrid algorithms are used to represent the

    unresolved scales.

    In order to explore grid and convergence effects on simulated turbulence and mixing in

    high Schmidt number flows, we artificially specify non-physical (high) values for viscosity.

    In this way we explore the range of convergence to DNS for a single problem.

    We have already observed11 that the interface for the problem under study is chaotic,

    with length proportional to ∆x−1, with respect to its mesh (non) convergence (i.e. rate of

    divergence) properties. This fact is demonstrated in Fig. 3, where the length / area ratio

  • 5

    Radius

    Tim

    e

    0 5 10 15 20

    020

    4060

    8010

    012

    0

    FIG. 2: Space time (r, t) contours of the primary waves, as detected by the wave filter algorithm.

    These are the inward (direct) and outward (reflected) shock waves and the inner and outer

    edges of the mixing zone, all detected within a single rotational averaging window, in this case

    θ ∈ [−45o, 0o].

    is shown in physical units (left frame) and mesh units (right frame); transport coefficients

    have been set to zero.

    From Fig. 3, we observe that somewhat after reshock, the interface length, in mesh

    units, occupies a constant ratio to the mesh area of the mixing zone. We call this ratio

    the mesh level surface fraction. Its value is approximately time independent (about

    30%), after a transient period following the second shock passage. We note here and

    in many later plots, some lost of mesh level complexity in the finest grid simulations.

    Further mesh refinement studies will be needed to determine the evolution of mesh level

  • 6

    time

    inte

    rfac

    ele

    ngth

    /mix

    ing

    zon

    evo

    lum

    e

    0 20 40 60 80 100 1200

    5

    10

    15

    20

    200 x 400400 x 800800 x 16001600 x 3200

    time

    grid

    len

    gth

    /grid

    area

    0 20 40 60 80 100 1200

    0.2

    0.4

    0.6

    200 x 400400 x 800800 x 16001600 x 3200

    FIG. 3: Plot of the interface length divided by the mixing zone area vs. time. Left: Length

    and volume measured in physical units. Right: Length and volume measured in mesh units

    ([physical length / physical area] ×∆x). Results for four mesh levels are displayed.

    complexity under continued mesh refinement. In any case, at the grid levels attained

    here, the interface is mesh volume filling, cutoff by the mesh, and highly complex or

    chaotic in nature.

    C. Organization of Paper

    The goal of this paper is to study mixing at the atomic scale, and its dependence

    on transport parameters (viscosity and diffusivity). According to conventional ideas,

    viscosity15 (after a time delay2 for the initiation of turbulence) limits the vorticity at high

    wave numbers. At high Schmidt numbers, and at still higher wave numbers, the scaling

    exponent for the concentration fluctuations is predicted to change from an Obukov-

    Corrsin exponent to a lower Batchelor exponent1,22, before being suppressed by mass

    diffusion. These ideas form the basis of the stretched vortex subgrid model10,21. Presum-

    ably, there will be a time delay for the applicability1 of the Batchelor spectrum, which is

    based on an assumed statistically steady state theory for the concentration fluctuations.

    We follow a different approach to this problem, based on DNS to determine the con-

  • 7

    centration pdfs for converged solutions and to parameterize diffusive subgrid models for

    large eddy simulations (LES). In this sense, our program can be related to conventional

    ideas in the modeling of turbulence18. In Sec. II, we explore the role of viscosity to limit

    the velocity fluctuations and small scale eddies. The Atwood number of the flow is de-

    fined as A = (ρ2 − ρ1)/(ρ2 + ρ1). Initially A = 0.72 while at time of reshock, A ≈ 0.26.This non negligible value for A indicates that density fluctuations couple into the fluid

    equations, and thus that the concentration is not accurately regarded as a passive scalar.

    We report evidence of mesh convergence of the statistics describing interfacial complex-

    ity and the fine scale features of the mix, for simulations in a DNS regime. Evidence

    indicating a sensitivity of temperature to details of physical and numerical modeling for

    the flow problem considered here was reported earlier12,14. Sec. III studies mass diffusion

    to determine the concentration pdfs. A final Sec. IV contains some speculations regard-

    ing mathematical existence theories and comments regarding subgrid models to allow

    converged calculations on realistic meshes.

    II. TURBULENCE, CUTOFFS AND MESH CONVERGENCE

    We set a (time dependent) length scale L to be the width of the mixing zone, and

    the velocity scale U to be the turbulent velocity U =√〈δv2〉. The angle brackets 〈· · · 〉

    denote an angular (or in principle ensemble) average. We also define Remesh = U∆x/ν.

    The Kolmogorov scale is λK = (ν3/²)1/4 . Here ² is the dissipation rate,

    ² =ν

    2‖ Sij ‖22 , (1)

    where Sij is the strain rate tensor,

    Sij =1

    2

    (∂ui∂xj

    +∂uj∂xi

    ). (2)

    We plot Re and the mesh Kolmogorov scale λKmesh = λK/∆x vs. Remesh for the sim-

    ulations analyzed here, in Fig 4. The condition λKmesh ≥ 1 is generally taken as thedefinition of a DNS.

  • 8

    Remesh

    Re

    10-1 100 101 102 103 104100

    101

    102

    103

    104

    105

    106

    200x400400x800800x16001600x3200

    Remesh

    λ Km

    esh

    10-1 100 101 102 103 10410-3

    10-2

    10-1

    100

    101

    200x400400x800800x16001600x3200

    FIG. 4: Left: Re vs. Remesh at t = 90 for several mesh levels. Right: λKmesh vs. Remesh. Both

    plots are virtually independent of Sc for the range of Sc considered. Some of the simulations

    at each grid level are resolved below the Kolmogorov scale, and are resolved DNS. Others, on

    the route to resolution, are under resolved DNS.

    A. Convergence of Macroscopic Flow Observables

    The objective here is to compute the large scale solution features accurately. This

    includes the trajectories of the principal waves, as illustrated in Fig. 2, and other macro

    solution features, such as the mean densities and velocities of each phase within each

    homogeneous solution region between the principal waves. This objective is related to

    the systematic convergence study carried out earlier26. In that study, we found statis-

    tical convergence for many mean flow variables, to define what we call the macroscopic

    description of the flow. In Fig. 5, we plot the relative wave error defined in terms of

    the mixing zone edge positions, for a variety of mesh levels and transport coefficients.

    The error (or discrepancy) is determined by comparison of the simulation to a fine grid

    (3200× 1600) simulation having zero transport coefficients. The reported discrepancy isthus a mixture of mesh errors (except for the finest grid) and discrepancies associated

    with modification of the transport coefficients from a nominal value (zero).

    We consider convergence in this macro sense as a function of Remesh for each value of

    ∆x. From Fig. 5, we see that for the three grid levels shown, the smallest converged value

  • 9

    Remesh

    rela

    tive

    wav

    eer

    ror

    10-1 100 101 102 103 1040

    0.05

    0.1

    0.15

    0.2400x800 Sc=0.1400x800 Sc=1400x800 Sc=10800x1600 Sc=0.1800x1600 Sc=1800x1600 Sc=101600x3200 Sc=0.11600x3200 Sc=11600x3200 Sc=10

    FIG. 5: Time integrated relative errors in the mixing zone edge locations as compared to a fine

    grid, zero transport simulation.

    of Remesh progresses from about 30 to 2 as the mesh is refined. Some of the simulations

    shown (coarse grids, to the far left of Fig. 5) are clearly not convergent and are eliminated

    from subsequent analysis. With a macro converged simulation having Remesh = 2, we turn

    to Fig. 4 and observe that on the finest grid, the corresponding λKmesh = 2, indicating

    that the simulation is clearly DNS.

    To examine in more detail the effects of modified transport on the accuracy of the

    simulation, as compared to an ideal case with zero transport, we consider in Table I

    a range of additional variables. We consider mean density and radial velocity data.

    The mean angular velocity is essentially zero. Energy data is not presented, as it was

    observed12,14 that temperature is sensitive to details of numerical and physical modeling;

    we expect a similar dependence for energy. Energy and temperature will be considered

    in a separate study in which the Prandtl number plays a role.

    We consider Sc = 10 but not Sc = 1.0 or Sc = 0.1. The density and velocity

    distributions depend on the Schmidt number, and the high Schmidt number cases are

    the most comparable to the ideal case (computed with ideal parameters, i.e. with zero

    numerical mass diffusion). Since any physical problem must have a finite Schmidt number

  • 10

    and other transport coefficients, the discrepancy between the ideal (zero transport) and

    the finite Schmidt simulations probably reflects ideal simulation errors compared to an

    (infeasible) DNS simulation with molecular values for the transport coefficients. We

    cannot fully determine which of the two solutions is “better”. We only present data

    showing that the difference is small for Sc = 10.

    We consider separately the errors in the mixed regions and the single phase regions,

    singly or doubly shocked. Each simulation thus defines five regions in space time, to be

    analyzed separately, with boundaries as illustrated in Fig. 2. Comparing two simulations,

    we consider the space time points which lie in a common region for both simulations.

    Call these points R, and call the fluid variable v, with v1 and v2 the variables to becompared between the two simulations. Then the discrepancy is defined as

    ∫R |v1 − v2|dxdt∫

    R |v1|dxdt, (3)

    where v1 refers to the ideal simulation. The twice shocked heavy fluid is nearly stationary,

    so that the velocities are small and the denominator in (3) is small. Thus the large

    relative error in Table I for this variable reflects relatively large differences between small

    quantities.

    From Table I and Fig. 5, we conclude that our strategy of forcing a DNS simulation by

    an artificial increase of the viscosity does not seriously degrade the simulation accuracy

    with regard to the macro variables. Its effect could be compared to computing with a

    somewhat coarser mesh, and since the mesh is already rather fine, the resulting solutions

    appear to be acceptable as far as macro variable convergence is concerned. We regard the

    modified transport parameters as turbulent viscosity coefficients in a Smagorinsky type

    LES subgrid model. In this sense, we describe these simulations as converged LES or as

    DNS relative to the modified transport parameters. The benefit is a possibly converged

    study of the micro variables.

  • 11

    Re 5× 102 3× 103 3× 104 4× 105

    Once shocked pure

    phase heavy density 0.005 0.001 0.0003 0.0001

    Twice shocked pure

    phase heavy density 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01

    Once shocked pure

    phase light density 0.02 0.008 0.002 0.0007

    Twice shocked pure

    phase light density 0.03 0.01 0.008 0.007

    Mixed phase density 0.06 0.03 0.02 0.02

    Once shocked pure

    phase heavy velocity 0.02 0.005 0.001 0.0005

    Twice shocked pure

    phase heavy velocity 0.71 0.39 0.26 0.33

    Once shocked pure

    phase light velocity 0.09 0.03 0.004 0.0008

    Twice shocked pure

    phase light velocity 0.17 0.07 0.03 0.03

    Mixed phase velocity 0.20 0.08 0.04 0.04

    Shock position 0.06 0.02 0.003 0.002

    TABLE I: Relative discrepancy: fine grid Sc = 10 solutions compared to an ideal simulation

    with zero transport, for a series of error measures.

    B. Convergence of the Interface Length

    A second objective of our simulations, to be addressed in Sec. III, is to investigate fine

    scale level mixing properties, including mass fraction concentration pdfs for the distinct

  • 12

    species of the mixtures. In preparation for Sec. III, we study here statistical measures

    related to convergence of the interface. The basic result is that DNS, with λK ≥ ∆x(λKmesh ≥ 1), show convergence of statistics measuring fine scale interface properties.Our first result concerns the mesh length fraction. The ratio, as defined by Fig. 3, right

    frame, for a fixed time t = 90, is plotted in Fig. 6 for a range of simulations with a

    large range of viscosities and mass diffusivities. The ratio is largely independent of the

    Schmidt number and is also mainly independent of Reynolds number and the Kolmogorov

    scale for λKmesh ≤ 0.5, namely for the under resolved DNS range. For these simulations,approximately 30% of the mesh blocks have a unit of interface length. This statement

    is independent of mesh for the range of simulations explored here. With more mesh

    resolution, i.e. larger values of λKmesh, the simulations are in transition to a DNS. In

    this case the chaotic development of the interface appears to be limited, in that mesh

    refinement with no other change of parameters (which will increase λKmesh, decrease

    Remesh but not influence Re) also decreases the mesh length fraction.

    The mesh related scaling of Fig. 6 is useful for understanding the under resolved

    DNS range of simulations, where the simulations are chaotic and growing new fine scale

    features at each level of mesh refinement. The data collapse onto a single curve. For the

    DNS regime, however, it is more convenient to use physical units, with mesh dependence

    and convergence clearly displayed. For this purpose, we replot the same data in Fig. 7.

    With this scaling, we can observe the convergence of the interface length for the DNS

    range of simulations. Convergence occurs more rapidly for smaller Schmidt numbers and

    for smaller Reynolds numbers. For Sc = 0.1 and the finest mesh shown, convergence

    appears to occur at Reynolds numbers near 4000.

    C. An Interfacial Correlation Length Scale

    We introduce a correlation length scale λC to characterize the microstructure of mix.

    The correlation length is defined in terms of the probability of exit distance ξ from a

    given phase or mean distance to the complementary phase, introduced19,20 for models of

  • 13

    x

    xxxxxx

    xx

    λKmesh

    Inte

    rfac

    eF

    ract

    ion

    10-3 10-2 10-1 100 1010

    0.1

    0.2

    0.3

    0.4

    0.5200x400400x800800x16001600x3200

    xSc = 10t = 90

    x

    xxxxxxxx

    λKmeshIn

    terf

    ace

    Fra

    ctio

    n

    10-3 10-2 10-1 100 1010

    0.1

    0.2

    0.3

    0.4

    0.5200x400400x800800x16001600x3200

    xSc = 1t = 90

    x

    xxx

    xxxx

    λKmesh

    Inte

    rfac

    eF

    ract

    ion

    10-3 10-2 10-1 100 1010

    0.1

    0.2

    0.3

    0.4

    0.5200x400400x800800x16001600x3200

    xSc = 0.1t = 90

    FIG. 6: Plot of mesh length fraction vs. λKmesh for several grid levels, at t = 90. Left to right:

    Sc = 10, 1.0, 0.1.

    x x x x x x x x x

    Re

    Inte

    rfac

    eF

    ract

    ion

    100 101 102 103 104 105 1060

    5

    10

    15

    20200x400400x800800x16001600x3200

    xSc = 10t = 90

    x x x x x xx x x

    Re

    Inte

    rfac

    eF

    ract

    ion

    100 101 102 103 104 105 1060

    5

    10

    15

    20200x400400x800800x16001600x3200

    xSc = 1t = 90

    x x xx x x x x

    Re

    Inte

    rfac

    eF

    ract

    ion

    100 101 102 103 104 105 1060

    5

    10

    15

    20200x400400x800800x16001600x3200

    xSc = 0.1t = 90

    FIG. 7: Plot of interface length to mixing zone area ratio (physical units) vs. Re for several

    grid levels, at t = 90. Left to right: Sc = 10, 1.0, 0.1.

    opacity, and studied9,12 as a measure of fine scale mixing length. Using this probability

    measure dξ, we define λC =∫

    ξdξ. We plot in Fig. 8 the probability of a minimum

    distance for change of fluid component, starting at a random point in the light fluid at

    the mid radius, for three simulations.

    The exit probability data is collected into bins, each holding the data for an interval of

    possible exit lengths. The binned data is fit to an exponential (modeling an exponential

    process or a Markov random field), and from the exponent, the correlation length may be

    determined. Due to mathematical properties of the exponential distribution, this length

    is determined instead directly from the data as a correlation length. See Fig. 9.

  • 14

    length

    prob

    abili

    tyde

    nsi

    ty

    0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 110-2

    10-1

    100

    101

    lengthpr

    obab

    ility

    den

    sity

    0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 110-2

    10-1

    100

    101

    length

    prob

    abili

    tyde

    nsi

    ty

    0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 110-2

    10-1

    100

    101

    FIG. 8: Probability of minimum exit distance from the light phase, starting at a random light

    fluid point on the mid radius. The dashed line in each frame is the plot of the best fit exponential

    distribution. Three DNS, left to right, Sc = 10, 1, 0.1.

    Remesh

    λ Cm

    esh

    10-1 100 101 102 103 1040

    2

    4

    6

    8

    10

    12400x800 Sc=0.1400x800 Sc=1400x800 Sc=10800x1600 Sc=0.1800x1600 Sc=1800x1600 Sc=101600x3200 Sc=0.11600x3200 Sc=11600x3200 Sc=10

    Re

    λ C

    102 103 104 105 1060

    0.05

    0.1

    0.15

    0.2

    0.25

    0.3

    0.35400x800 Sc=0.1400x800 Sc=1400x800 Sc=10800x1600 Sc=0.1800x1600 Sc=1800x1600 Sc=101600x3200 Sc=0.11600x3200 Sc=11600x3200 Sc=10

    FIG. 9: Left: plot of λC/∆x vs. Remesh for a range of transport parameters and mesh levels,

    at t = 90. Right: the same data replotted as λC vs. Re.

    We can now assess interface convergence in terms of the behavior of λC . For the under

    resolved regime, we look at the large Remesh limit of the left frame of Fig. 9. In this regime,

    λCmesh has a nearly constant value (about 2), independent of mesh and Schmidt number.

    As noted earlier, the finest grids display some loss of grid level complexity. For the DNS

    regime, we look at the smaller Reynolds numbers in the right frame of Fig. 9. This limit

    also suggests convergence, to an Sc dependent limit, as we expect.

    λC can be thought of as a mean bubble or droplet radius for two phase flow having

  • 15

    volume fractions near 0 or 1 and thus having well defined continuous and separated

    phases. However, the definition of λC does not assume a continuous and a separated

    phase. It is applicable to all values of the volume fraction. With our present usage,

    defined using the mid radius of the mixing zone, the volume fraction is near 0.5. λC

    provides a length scale over which thermal or mass diffusion must operate to smooth out

    or eliminate thermal or concentration fluctuations.

    We analyze in more detail the hypothesis that the exit probability can be modeled

    by a exponential distribution. Having determined a correlation length for each simula-

    tion, each radius and each time, we compare the observed binned exit probabilities to a

    binned exponential distribution with the same correlation length. The two distributions

    are defined by weights w that modify the probability of a bin, relative to the uniform

    probability (1/number of bins) of each bin. The error in the model is then defined as

    ∑|wmodel − wdata|wdata/

    ∑wdata , (4)

    with the sum running over the bins. The exponential model error, as defined by (4) is

    plotted in Fig. 10 for a range of transport coefficients and grids.

    III. MASS DIFFUSION AND THE SCHMIDT NUMBER

    Here we study the pdf for the mass concentration of the fluid mixture, defined as a

    function of time and radius. The mass fraction pdf depends sensitively on details of both

    physical and numerical modeling. To create the pdfs from the simulation data, we collect

    the mixture fraction variable along a constant radius at the middle of the mixing zone.

    Mixed cells are not averaged, but each cell fraction contributes its own mixture fraction

    with its own probabilities (proportional to area). The mixture fractions are then binned

    into 10 bins, and the resulting histogram is fit to a smooth curve.

    We find only a limited range of histograms from the many different simulations. We

    introduce the time dependent diffusion length scale λD = 2(µ(t− t0))1/2, where t0 is thetime of reshock. The ratio λD/λC is a measure of the microscopic mixing level. We plot

  • 16

    Remesh

    exp

    onen

    tialm

    odel

    erro

    r

    10-1 100 101 102 103 1040

    0.2

    0.4

    0.6

    0.8

    1400x800 Sc=0.1400x800 Sc=1400x800 Sc=10800x1600 Sc=0.1800x1600 Sc=1800x1600 Sc=101600x3200 Sc=0.11600x3200 Sc=11600x3200 Sc=10

    FIG. 10: Plot of the exponential model error for a range of transport parameters and mesh

    levels, at t = 90.

    Remesh

    λ D/λ

    C

    10-1 100 101 102 103 104-2

    0

    2

    4

    6

    8

    10

    12400x800 Sc=10800x1600 Sc=101600x3200 Sc=10

    Remesh

    λ D/λ

    C

    10-1 100 101 102 103 104-2

    0

    2

    4

    6

    8

    10

    12400x800 Sc=1800x1600 Sc=11600x3200 Sc=1

    Remesh

    λ D/λ

    C

    10-1 100 101 102 103 104-2

    0

    2

    4

    6

    8

    10

    12400x800 Sc=0.1800x1600 Sc=0.11600x3200 Sc=0.1

    FIG. 11: The ratio λD/λC vs. Remesh for several mesh levels and for Sc = 10, 1.0, 0.1.

    this ratio vs. Remesh in Fig. 11 for a variety of Schmidt numbers and meshes. To analyze

    this figure, we discuss separately the small and large Remesh asymptotes. The latter is

    the under resolved regime. In this regime, λD/λC is independent of the Schmidt number,

    and has a value below 1, indicating little opportunity for mass diffusion to occur. In

    contrast, the small Remesh limit in this figure represents the DNS. These are strongly

    dependent on Sc. They appear to be converged to a grid independent value.

  • 17

    Light fluid mixture fraction

    Pro

    bab

    ility

    den

    sity

    0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 10

    1

    2

    3

    4

    5

    6

    θ = 0.11λD/λC = 0.98

    Light fluid mixture fractionP

    roba

    bili

    tyde

    nsi

    ty

    0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 10

    1

    2

    3

    4

    5

    6

    θ = 0.23λD/λC = 3.29

    Light fluid mixture fraction

    Pro

    bab

    ility

    den

    sity

    0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 10

    1

    2

    3

    4

    5

    θ = 0.38λD/λC = 5.25

    FIG. 12: Pdfs of light species volume fraction at time t = 90. The data has been collected

    into 10 bins; we show both the resulting histogram and a smooth (Akima spline) interpolation.

    Left: typical bimodal case (λKmesh = 0.7, Sc = 10). Center and right: increasingly diffused

    light fluid cases (λKmesh = 1.1, Sc = 1.0 and (λKmesh = 0.8, Sc = 0.1, respectively). The mesh

    is 1600× 800 in all cases.

    We anticipate that the ratio λD/λC largely determines the mass concentration pdfs.

    In other words, the pdfs are naturally approximated as belonging to a one parameter

    family, indexed by λD/λC . We return to this important point later.

    Most of the pdfs are strongly bimodal, with narrow peaks at mixture fractions perhaps

    0.1 and 0.9. For a few, the light fluid peak (at 0.9) is considerably diffused or even missing

    completely. We display typical plots of the pdfs representative of these types. All of the

    simulations in the under resolved region (λKmesh ≤ 0.5) are strongly bimodal. In theDNS regime (λKmesh ≥ 1), the highly diffusive simulations (Sc = 0.1) have a partiallyor highly diffused light fluid component, while the less diffusive simulations (Sc ≥ 1 andespecially Sc = 10) do not. See Fig. 12. The trends in the pdfs are as predicted by the

    trends in the λD/λC ratio. The data presented is from the time t = 90, which is the

    beginning of the chaotic stage of interface development. We also examined the light fluid

    mixture fraction pdf at t = 110, in order to allow more time for diffusion, and did not

    observe a striking change in the pdfs.

    All the simulations of Fig. 12 are in the DNS regime, with λKmesh = O(1) and somedegree of convergence for the interface length. Thus the progression of increased diffusion

  • 18

    observed in Fig. 12 reflects a change in the physical formulation of the problem, namely

    an approximate 10 fold increase in mass diffusion with each successive frame, and is not

    related to mesh convergence or subgrid modeling issues.

    To understand the greater sensitivity of the light fluid peak than the heavy peak to

    mass diffusion, we note that the result of diffusing heavy fluid into a region of light fluid

    can easily make a large change in the mass weighted mixture fraction, while the diffusion

    of the same fraction of light fluid into a region of heavy fluid will have a relatively smaller

    effect.

    The mean molecular mixing fraction θ, defined25 as

    θ =〈f1f2〉〈f1〉 〈f2〉 (5)

    is a common measure of mixing. Here fk is the mass concentration fraction for the species

    k. With Sc = ∞, obviously there will be zero mass diffusion, and θ = 0. The probabilitydistribution function for the species concentrations fi is a more refined measure of mixing,

    and provides the level of detail needed for prediction of turbulent combustion. In each

    frame of Fig. 12, the values of θ = θ(rmid) on the mid radius of the mixing zone and

    λD/λC are indicated. θ depends sensitively on the grid resolution for the under resolved

    regime. In the DNS regime it depends on the transport coefficients but should be mesh

    independent. The values of θ we report are smaller than those commonly reported for

    simulation studies of mixing, especially for Rayleigh-Taylor mixing.

    IV. A MATHEMATICAL AND COMPUTATIONAL FOOTNOTE

    A. Mathematical Existence and Uniqueness Theories

    If it is true that numerical solutions to the Euler equations are underdetermined,

    and that the convergence process produces new structures on each length scale, what is

    the consequence of these facts for a mathematical existence theory for these equations?

    It would appear that if such a mathematical solution were to exist, it might not be

  • 19

    a function, but a generalized function in the sense of compensated compactness. The

    compensated compactness generalized functions are pdfs depending on space and time,

    not dissimilar from what is observed computationally. In the one dimensional existence

    theory of compensated compactness of DiPerna16,17 and Ding and co-workers3,5, the first

    and easier step is to show existence of the generalized solution. The more difficult second

    step is to show that a generalized solution is a classical (weak) one. In view of the

    slow rate of progress with the existence theory in two dimensions, and in view of the

    possibility that this second step might not be correct, it is worth trying to establish

    generalized compensated compactness solutions without the step of passing to a classical

    one. Typically such proofs are based on compactness, a method of proof which yields

    existence but not uniqueness for the weak solutions. We have already commented on

    the possible nonuniqueness of solutions to the Euler equations. We also note that weak

    solutions in the form of a space time dependent pdf for the primitive variables are actually

    what is required scientifically for a combustion simulation. For this reason, such pdf

    weak solutions couple into the requirements of computational physics, whether they are

    required as a fundamental scientific truth or not.

    B. A Practical LES Subgrid Model

    We also speculate on the consequences of the ideas expressed here for practical simula-

    tions of fluid mixing. We start by recalling the two types of objectives for the simulations.

    The first, which we call macro objectives, are to obtain locations of the principal waves

    and mean flow quantities in agreement with a fine grid simulation having minimal or zero

    transport coefficients. The comparison simulations have viscosity and mass diffusion co-

    efficients set to the molecular values or as modified by turbulent subgrid models. The

    second objective is to obtain converged values for the joint pdfs of temperature and mass

    concentration of the mixing species. Since these pdfs appear to depend on the physical

    choice of the transport coefficients, the convergence algorithm must be parameterized

    to be consistent with the physics. We call this the micro objective. Both are required

  • 20

    within a single simulation.

    To attain these two goals, and a third goal of practical or feasible levels of simulation,

    we are proposing two different classes of simulations. The purpose of the first is to

    obtain, to the extent possible, direct knowledge of the micro observables. Here we allow

    artificially high levels of viscosity, as long as the macro variables are in approximate

    agreement with the reference solution. For such simulations, the interface appears to

    have converged, and we use molecular values of the Schmidt number to set values of the

    coefficient of mass diffusion. Continued mesh refinement should lead to stable values for

    the micro variables. We anticipate a one parameter family of concentration pdfs as the

    Schmidt number or the ratio λD/λC is varied. This is a conjecture which has still be

    verified.

    If we manage in this manner to obtain converged values for the micro observables,

    we then move to our second class of simulations. For this class of simulations, we set

    the physical viscosity to its molecular value, perhaps as modified by a subgrid model to

    account for the influence of the unresolved scales on those being computed. With the

    knowledge of the concentration pdfs from the first class of simulations, we can also adjust

    the mass diffusion coefficient in the second class of simulations to give micro observables

    in agreement with the first. To achieve this agreement, we depend on the conjecture that

    the concentration pdfs lie approximately on a one parameter family, which can be indexed

    by the mass diffusion (i.e., the Schmidt number or the ratio λD/λC). Here the grids can

    be notable coarser, and the simulations should be readily feasible. This program appears

    to be consistent with accepted ideas in turbulence modeling18.

    In future work, we hope to fill in the gaps in this program and establish the practicality

    of simulations which are converged in both their micro and macro observables.

    ∗ This work was supported in part by U.S. Department of Energy grants DE-AC02-98CH10886

    and DE-FG52-06NA26208, and the Army Research Office grant W911NF0510413. The sim-

  • 21

    ulations reported here were performed in part on the Galaxy linux cluster in the Department

    of Applied Mathematics and Statistics, Stony Brook University, and in part on New York

    Blue, the BG/L computer operated jointly by Stony Brook University and BNL. Los Alamos

    National Laboratory Preprint LA-UR-08-0068.

    1 G. Batchelor. The Theory of Homogeneous Turbulence. The University Press, Cambridge,

    1955.

    2 William Cabot and Andrew Cook. Reynolds number effects on Rayleigh-Taylor instability

    with possible implications for type Ia supernovae. Nature Physics, 2:562–568, 2006.

    3 G.-Q. Chen. Convergence of the Lax-Friedrichs scheme for isentropic gas dynamics III. Acta

    Mathematica Scienitia, 6:75–120, 1986.

    4 P. Colella. A direct Eulerian MUSCL scheme for gas dynamics. SIAM Journal on Computing,

    6(1):104–117, 1985.

    5 X. Ding, G.-Q. Chen, and P. Luo. Convergence of the Lax-Friedrichs scheme for isentropic

    gas dynamics I and II. Acta Mathematica Scientia, 5:415–432, 433–472, 1985.

    6 Jian Du, Brian Fix, James Glimm, Xicheng Jia, Xiaolin Li, Yunhua Li, and Lingling Wu.

    A simple package for front tracking. J. Comp. Phys., 213:613–628, 2006. Stony Brook

    University preprint SUNYSB-AMS-05-02.

    7 S. Dutta, E. George, J. Glimm, J. Grove, H. Jin, T. Lee, X. Li, D. H. Sharp, K. Ye, Y. Yu,

    Y. Zhang, and M. Zhao. Shock wave interactions in spherical and perturbed spherical

    geometries. Nonlinear Analysis, 63:644–652, 2005. University at Stony Brook preprint

    number SB-AMS-04-09 and LANL report No. LA-UR-04-2989.

    8 J. Glimm, J. W. Grove, Y. Kang, T. Lee, X. Li, D. H. Sharp, Y. Yu, K. Ye, and M. Zhao.

    Statistical Riemann problems and a composition law for errors in numerical solutions of shock

    physics problems. SISC, 26:666–697, 2004. University at Stony Brook Preprint Number SB-

    AMS-03-11, Los Alamos National Laboratory number LA-UR-03-2921.

    9 J. Glimm, J. W. Grove, X. L. Li, W. Oh, and D. H. Sharp. A critical analysis of Rayleigh-

    Taylor growth rates. J. Comp. Phys., 169:652–677, 2001.

  • 22

    10 D. J. Hill, C. Pantano, and D. L. Pullin. Large-eddy simulation and multiscale modeling of

    a Richtmyer-Meshkov instability with reshock. J. Fluid Mech, 557:29–61, 2006.

    11 H. Lee, H. Jin, Y. Yu, and J. Glimm. On the validation of turbulent mixing simulations

    of Rayleigh-Taylor mixing. Phys. Fluids, 2007. Accepted for publication. Stony Brook

    University Preprint SUNYSB-AMS-07-03.

    12 H. Lim, Y. Yu, H. Jin, D. Kim, H. Lee, J. Glimm, X.-L. Li, and D. H. Sharp. Multi scale

    models for fluid mixing. Special issue CMAME, 2007. Accepted for publication. Stony Brook

    University Preprint SUNYSB-AMS-07-05.

    13 X. F. Liu, Y. H. Li, J. Glimm, and X. L. Li. A front tracking algorithm for limited mass

    diffusion. J. of Comp. Phys., 2007. Accepted. Stony Brook University preprint number

    SUNYSB-AMS-06-01.

    14 T. O. Masser. Breaking Temperature Equilibrium in Mixed Cell Hydrodynamics. Ph.d. thesis,

    State University of New York at Stony Brook, 2007.

    15 A. S. Monin and A. M. Yaglom. Statistical Fluid Mechanics: Mechanics of Turbulence. MIT

    Press, 1971.

    16 R. Di Perna. Convergence of approximate solutions to conservation laws. Arch. Rational

    Mech. Anal., 82:27–70, 1983.

    17 R. Di Perna. Compensated compactness and general systems of conservation laws. Trans.

    Amer. Math. Soc., 292:383–420, 1985.

    18 Heintz Pitsch. Large-eddy simulation of turbulent combustion. Annual Rev. Fluid Mech.,

    38:453–482, 2006.

    19 G. C. Pomraning. Linear kinetic theory and particle transport in stochastic mixtures, vol-

    ume 7 of Series on Advances in Mathematics for Applied Sciences. World Scientific, Singa-

    pore, 1991.

    20 G. C. Pomraning. Transport theory in discrete stochastic mixtures. Advances in Nuclear

    Science and Technology, 24:47–93, 1996.

    21 D. Pullin. A vortex based model for the subgrid flux of a passive scalar. Phys. of Fluids,

  • 23

    12:2311–2319, 2000.

    22 D. Pullin and T. S. Lundgren. Axial motion and scalar transport in stretched spiral vortices.

    Phys. of Fluids, 13:2553–2563, 2001.

    23 D. H. Sharp. An overview of Rayleigh-Taylor instability. Physica D, 12:3–18, 1984.

    24 P. Woodward and P. Colella. Numerical simulation of two-dimensional fluid flows with strong

    shocks. J. Comp. Phys., 54:115, 1984.

    25 D. L. Youngs. Three-dimensional numerical simulation of turbulent mixing by Rayleigh-

    Taylor instability. Phys. Fluids A, 3:1312–1319, 1991.

    26 Y. Yu, M. Zhao, T. Lee, N. Pestieau, W. Bo, J. Glimm, and J. W. Grove. Uncertainty

    quantification for chaotic computational fluid dynamics. J. Comp. Phys., 217:200–216, 2006.

    Stony Brook Preprint number SB-AMS-05-16 and LANL preprint number LA-UR-05-6212.