Environmental Fluid Mechanics

, Volume 12, Issue 3, pp 227–250 | Cite as

The flow structure in the wake of a fractal fence and the absence of an “inertial regime”

Original Article

Abstract

Recent theoretical work has highlighted the importance of multi-scale forcing of the flow for altering the nature of turbulence energy transfer and dissipation. In particular, fractal types of forcing have been studied. This is potentially of real significance in environmental fluid mechanics where multi-scale forcing is perhaps more common than the excitation of a specific mode. In this paper we report the first results studying the detail of the wake structure behind fences in a boundary layer where, for a constant porosity, we vary the average spacing of the struts and also introduce fractal fences. As expected, to first order, and in the far-wake region, in particular, the response of the fences is governed by their porosity. However, we show that there are some significant differences in the detail of the turbulent structure between the fractal and non-fractal fences and that these override differences in porosity. In the near wake, the structure of the fence dominates porosity effects and a modified wake interaction length seems to have potential for collapsing the data. With regards to the intermittency of the velocities, the fractal fences behave more similarly to homogeneous, isotropic turbulence. In addition, there is a high amount of dissipation for the fractal fences over scales that, based on the energy spectrum, should be dominated by inter-scale transfers. This latter result is consistent with numerical simulations of flow forced at multiple scales and shows that what appears to be an “inertial regime” cannot be as production and dissipation are both high.

Keywords

Turbulence Wakes Fractal forcing Intermittency Inter-scale energy transfer 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Anselmet F, Gagne Y, Hopfinger E, Antonia RA (1984) High-order velocity structure functions in turbulent shear flow. J Fluid Mech 140: 63–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Babiano A, Dubrulle B, Frick P (1995) Scaling properties of numerical 2-dimensional turbulence. Phys Rev E 52: 3719–3729CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Batchelor GK (1953) The theory of homogeneous turbulence. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Benzi R, Ciliberto S, Tripiccione R (1993) Extended self-similariy in turbulent flows. Phys Rev E 48: R29–R32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Benzi R, Ciliberto S, Baudet C, Chavarria GR (1995) On the scaling of 3-dimensional homogeneous and isotropic turbulence. Physica D 80: 385–398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chaudhary V, Mathur P (2004) Composite avalanche control scheme developed for the lower himalayan zone: a case history. Cold Reg Sci Technol 39: 243–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chen SY, Dhruva B et al (2005) Anomalous scaling of low-order structure functions of turbulent velocity. J Fluid Mech 533: 183–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cheskidov A, Doering CR, Petrov N (2007) Energy dissipation in fractal-forced flow. J Math Phys 48: 065,208Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Comte-Bellot G, Corrsin S (1966) The use of a contraction to improve the isotropy of grid-generated turbulence. J Fluid Mech 25: 657CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dong ZB, Chen GT, He XD (2004) Controlling blown sand along the highway crossing the taklimakan desert. J Arid Environ 57: 329–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Donoho DL, Johnstone I (1994) Ideal spatial adaptation by wavelet shrinkage. Biometrika 81: 425–455CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Finnigan J (2000) Turbulence in plant canopies. Ann Rev Fluid Mech 32: 519–571CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Frisch U, Parisi G (1985) The singularity structure of fully developed turbulence. In: Ghil M, Benzi R, Parisi G (eds) Turbulence and predictability in geophysical fluid dynamics and climate dynamics. North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp 84–88Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gaudin E, Protas B, Goujon-Durand S, Wojciechowski J, Wesfriedl JE (1998) Spatial properties of velocity structure functions in turbulent wake flows. Phys Rev E 57: R9–R12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    George WK (1992) The decay of homogeneous isotropic turbulence. Phys Fluids A 4: 1492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    George WK, Wang H (2009) The exponential decay of homogeneous isotropic turbulence. Phys Fluids 21: 108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gledzer E (1997) On the Taylor hypothesis corrections for measured energy spectra of turbulence. Physica D 104: 163–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Goring DG, Nikora VI (2002) Despiking acoustic doppler velocimeter records. ASCE J Hydraul Eng 128: 117–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hurst D, Vassilicos JC (2007) Scalings and decay of fractal-generated turbulence. Phys Fluids 19: 103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Iversen JD (1984) Comparison of snowdrift modeling criteria—commentary on application of anno modeling conditions to outdoor modeling of snowdrifts. Cold Reg Sci Technol 9: 259–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Keylock CJ (2006) Constrained surrogate time series with preservation of the mean and variance structure. Phys Rev E 73: 036,707CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Keylock CJ (2007) The visualisation of turbulence data using a wavelet-based method. Earth Surf Proc Land 32: 637–647CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Keylock CJ (2008) A criterion for delimiting active periods within turbulent flows. Geophys Res Lett 35: L11,804CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Keylock CJ (2009) Evaluating the dimensionality and significance of “active periods” in turbulent environmental flows defined using Lipshitz/Hölder regularity. Environ Fluid Mech 9: 509–523CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Keylock CJ (2010) Characterizing the structure of nonlinear systems using gradual wavelet reconstruction. Nonlin Proc Geophys 17: 615–632CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kolmogorov AN (1941) The local structure of turbulence in incompressible viscous fluid for very large Reynolds numbers. Dokl Akad Nauk SSSR 30: 299–303Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kolmogorov AN (1962) A refinement of previous hypotheses concerning the local structure of turbulence in a viscous, incompressible fluid at high Reynolds number. J Fluid Mech 13: 82–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kolwankar KM, Lévy Véhel J (2002) A time domain characterisation of the fine local regularity of functions. J Fourier Anal Appl 8: 319–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kosugi K, Sato T, Sato A (2004) Dependence of drifting snow saltation lengths on snow surface hardness. Cold Reg Sci Technol 39: 133–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kuczaj AK, Geurts BJ (2006) Mixing in manipulated turbulence. J Turbul 7: 1–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kuczaj AK, Geurts BJ, McComb WD (2006) Nonlocal modulation of the energy cascade in broadband-forced turbulence. Phys Rev E 74: 016,306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Laizet S, Vassilicos JC. Dns of fractal-generated turbulence. Flow Turbulence Combust doi: 10.1007/s10494-011-9351-2
  33. 33.
    Lang RM, Blaisdall GL (1998) Passive snow removal with a vortex generator at the pegasus runway, antarctica. Ann Glaciol 26: 231–236Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Lumley JL (1965) Interpretation of time spectra measured in high intensity shear flows. Phys Fluids 8: 1056–1062CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Mazellier N, Vassilicos JC (2010) Turbulence without Richardson–Kolmogorov cascade. Phys Fluids 22: 075,101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Mazzi B, Vassilicos JC (2004) Fractal-generated turbulence. J Fluid Mech 502: 65–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Mazzi B, Okkels F, Vassilicos JC (2002) A shell-model approach to fractal-induced turbulence. Eur Phys J B 28: 243–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    McCoy A, Constantinescu G, Weber L (2007) A numerical investigation of coherent structures and mass exchange processes in channel flow with two lateral submerged groynes. Water Resour Res 43: W05,445. doi: 10.1029/2006WR005267 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Meneveau C, Sreenivasan KR (1987) Simple multifractal cascade model for fully developed turbulence. Phys Rev Lett 59: 1424–1427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Muzy JF, Bacry E, Arnéodo A (1991) Wavelets and multifractal formalism for singular signals: Application to turbulence data. Phys Rev Lett 67: 3515–3518CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Naaim-Bouvet F, Naaim M, Michaux JL (2002) Snow fences on slopes at high wind speed: physical modelling in the cstb cold wind tunnel. Nat Hazard Earth Syst 2: 137–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Nemoto M, Nishimura K (2001) Direct measurement of shear stress during snow saltation. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 100: 149–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Nemoto M, Nishimura K (2004) Numerical simulation of snow saltation and suspension in a turbulent boundary layer. J Geophys Res 109. doi: 10.1029/2004JD004657
  44. 44.
    Percival DB, Walden AT (2000) Wavelet methods for times series analysis. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Pinton JF, Labbé R (1994) Correction to the Taylor hypothesis in swirling flows. J Phys II 4: 1461–1468CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Saddoughi SG, Veeravali SV (1994) Local isotropy in turbulent boundary-layers at high Reynolds number. J Fluid Mech 268: 333–372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Seoud RE, Vassilicos JC (2007) Dissipation and decay of fractal generated turbulence. Phys Fluids 19: 108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    She ZS, Leveque E (1994) Universal scaling laws in fully developed turbulence. Phys Rev Lett 72: 336–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Staicu A, Mazzi B, Vassilicos JC, van de Water W (2003) Turbulent wakes of fractal objects. Phys Rev E 67: 066,306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Stresing R, Peinke J, Seoud S, Vassilicos JC (2010) Defining a new class of turbulent flows. Phys Rev Lett 104: 194,501CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Tabler RD (1980) Geometry and density of drifts formed by snow fences. J Glaciol 26: 405–419Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Tabler RD (1991) Snow fence guide. Strategic Highway Research Program SHRP-H-320. National Research Council, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Takeuchi Y, Kobayashi S, Sato T (2001) The effect of wind direction on drift control by snow fences. Ann Glaciol 32: 159–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Vassilicos JC, Hunt JCR (1991) Fractal dimensions and spectra of interfaces with application to turbulence. Proc R Soc Lond A 435: 505–534CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    von Karman T, Howarth L (1938) On the statistical theory of turbulence. Proc R Soc Lond Ser A 164: 192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Wang H, George WK (2002) The integral scale in homogeneous, isotropic turbulence. J Fluid Mech 459: 429Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • C. J. Keylock
    • 1
  • K. Nishimura
    • 2
  • M. Nemoto
    • 3
  • Y. Ito
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Civil and Structural EngineeringUniversity of SheffieldSheffieldUK
  2. 2.Graduate School of Environmental StudiesNagoya UniversityNagoyaJapan
  3. 3.Nagaoka Institute for Snow and Ice StudiesSuyoshi, NagaokaJapan
  4. 4.Nagaoka Institute for Snow and Ice StudiesShinjoJapan

Personalised recommendations