
Mixing is the basis of stable and efficient combustion in air-breathing power systems, and it is also an important problem in fluid mechanics, which has been extensively studied from various perspectives. The purpose of this review is to investigate mixing mechanisms based on two commonly-used mixing indicators, namely ci (c refers to concentration, and i is either 1 or 2, indicating first- or second-order statistics), with a focus on passive-scalar (PS) and variable-density (VD) mixing. For PS mixing, the flow is not influenced by the mixing process. By using first-order statistics with concentration as the core, the PS mixing mechanisms on lamella structures can be described as stretching enhancing diffusion and promoting mixing. On the other hand, second-order statistics represented by the scalar dissipation rate can investigate mixing mechanisms on specific type of flow structures described by the invariants of velocity gradient tensors and the rotation of principal strain axis. As such, it has been found that strain-dominated flow structures can promote mixing, while rotation-dominated flow structures hinder it. For VD mixing, it has two distinct characteristics: flow changes due to baroclinic vorticity, and the inherent velocity divergence alters the mixing indicators. Studies using first-order statistics center on the mixing time in different types of VD flows, leading to the discovery of new phenomena. For instance, the second baroclinic vorticity can promote stretching in shock bubble interactions. Studies on second-order statistics for VD mixing have defined several mixing indicators from the component-transport equation, which have been utilized in phenomenological studies on VD mixing. This review aims to provide an overview of mixing phenomena, mixing indicators, and mixing mechanisms, and proposes research directions for understanding the mixing characteristics, flow structures, and their relationship with specific combustion phenomena particularly by second-order statistics.
Citation: Xu Han, Bin Yu, Hong Liu. Mixing mechanisms in the view of mixing indicators: from passive-scalar mixing to variable-density mixing[J]. Metascience in Aerospace, 2024, 1(1): 1-37. doi: 10.3934/mina.2024001
[1] | Zihan Yue, Wei Jiang, Boying Wu, Biao Zhang . A meshless method based on the Laplace transform for multi-term time-space fractional diffusion equation. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(3): 7040-7062. doi: 10.3934/math.2024343 |
[2] | Farman Ali Shah, Kamran, Zareen A Khan, Fatima Azmi, Nabil Mlaiki . A hybrid collocation method for the approximation of 2D time fractional diffusion-wave equation. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(10): 27122-27149. doi: 10.3934/math.20241319 |
[3] | Xiangmei Li, Kamran, Absar Ul Haq, Xiujun Zhang . Numerical solution of the linear time fractional Klein-Gordon equation using transform based localized RBF method and quadrature. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(5): 5287-5308. doi: 10.3934/math.2020339 |
[4] | Chao Wang, Fajie Wang, Yanpeng Gong . Analysis of 2D heat conduction in nonlinear functionally graded materials using a local semi-analytical meshless method. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(11): 12599-12618. doi: 10.3934/math.2021726 |
[5] | Fouad Mohammad Salama, Nur Nadiah Abd Hamid, Norhashidah Hj. Mohd Ali, Umair Ali . An efficient modified hybrid explicit group iterative method for the time-fractional diffusion equation in two space dimensions. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(2): 2370-2392. doi: 10.3934/math.2022134 |
[6] | Xiangyun Qiu, Xingxing Yue . Solving time fractional partial differential equations with variable coefficients using a spatio-temporal meshless method. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(10): 27150-27166. doi: 10.3934/math.20241320 |
[7] | Bin Fan . Efficient numerical method for multi-term time-fractional diffusion equations with Caputo-Fabrizio derivatives. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(3): 7293-7320. doi: 10.3934/math.2024354 |
[8] | Bin He . Developing a leap-frog meshless methods with radial basis functions for modeling of electromagnetic concentrator. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(9): 17133-17149. doi: 10.3934/math.2022943 |
[9] | Hijaz Ahmad, Muhammad Nawaz Khan, Imtiaz Ahmad, Mohamed Omri, Maged F. Alotaibi . A meshless method for numerical solutions of linear and nonlinear time-fractional Black-Scholes models. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(8): 19677-19698. doi: 10.3934/math.20231003 |
[10] | Sayed Saifullah, Amir Ali, Zareen A. Khan . Analysis of nonlinear time-fractional Klein-Gordon equation with power law kernel. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(4): 5275-5290. doi: 10.3934/math.2022293 |
Mixing is the basis of stable and efficient combustion in air-breathing power systems, and it is also an important problem in fluid mechanics, which has been extensively studied from various perspectives. The purpose of this review is to investigate mixing mechanisms based on two commonly-used mixing indicators, namely ci (c refers to concentration, and i is either 1 or 2, indicating first- or second-order statistics), with a focus on passive-scalar (PS) and variable-density (VD) mixing. For PS mixing, the flow is not influenced by the mixing process. By using first-order statistics with concentration as the core, the PS mixing mechanisms on lamella structures can be described as stretching enhancing diffusion and promoting mixing. On the other hand, second-order statistics represented by the scalar dissipation rate can investigate mixing mechanisms on specific type of flow structures described by the invariants of velocity gradient tensors and the rotation of principal strain axis. As such, it has been found that strain-dominated flow structures can promote mixing, while rotation-dominated flow structures hinder it. For VD mixing, it has two distinct characteristics: flow changes due to baroclinic vorticity, and the inherent velocity divergence alters the mixing indicators. Studies using first-order statistics center on the mixing time in different types of VD flows, leading to the discovery of new phenomena. For instance, the second baroclinic vorticity can promote stretching in shock bubble interactions. Studies on second-order statistics for VD mixing have defined several mixing indicators from the component-transport equation, which have been utilized in phenomenological studies on VD mixing. This review aims to provide an overview of mixing phenomena, mixing indicators, and mixing mechanisms, and proposes research directions for understanding the mixing characteristics, flow structures, and their relationship with specific combustion phenomena particularly by second-order statistics.
Recently, partial differential equations (PDEs) with fractional derivatives have gained significant attention of the research community in applied sciences and engineering. Such equations are encountered in various applications (continuum mechanics, gas dynamics, hydrodynamics, heat and mass transfer, wave theory, acoustics, multiphase flows, chemical engineering, etc.). Numerous phenomenon in Chemistry, Physics, Biology, Finance, Economics and other relevant fields can be modelled using PDEs of fractional order [1,2,3,4,5]. In literature a significant theoretical work on the explicit solution of fractional order differential equations can be found [6,7] and there references. Since the explicit solutions can be obtained for special cases and most of the time the exact/analytical solutions are cumbersome for differential equations of non-integer order, therefore an alternative way is to find the solutions numerically. Various computational methods have been developed for approximation of differential equations of fractional order. The authors in [8], for example, have analyzed the implicit finite difference method and proved its unconditional convergence and stability. In [9] approximate solution of fractional diffusion equation is obtained via compact finite difference scheme. Liu et al.[10] studied the sub-diffusion equation having non-linear source term using analytical and numerical techniques. In [11] a numerical scheme for the solution of turbulent Riesz type diffusion equation is presented. The authors in [12] have solved diffusion-wave equations of fractional order using a compact finite difference method which is based on its equivalent integro-differential form. Garg et al.[13] utilized the matrix method for approximation of space-time wave-diffusion equation of non-integer order. In [14] the authors solved multi-term wave-diffusion equation of fractional order via Galerkin spectral method and a high order difference scheme. Two finite difference methods for approximating wave-diffusion equations are proposed in [15]. Bhrawy et al. [16] utilized Jacobi operational matrix based spectral tau algorithm for numerical solution of diffusion-wave equation of non-integer order. In [4] the authors proposed numerical schemes for approximating the multi-term wave-diffusion equation. The Legendre wavelets scheme for diffusion wave equations is proposed in [17]. The authors [18] presented a numerical scheme which is based on alternating direction implicit method and compact difference method for 2-D wave-diffusion equations. Similarly a compact difference scheme [19] is utilized for approximation of 1-D and 2-D diffusion-wave equations. Yang et al. [20] proposed a fractional multi-step method for the approximation of wave-diffusion equation of non-integer order. A spectral collocation method and its convergence analysis are presented in [21] for fractional wave-diffusion equation.
Since all these methods are mesh dependent and in modern problems these methods have been facing difficulties due to complicated geometries. Meshfree methods, as an alternative numerical method have attracted the researchers. Some meshless methods have been devoloped such as element-free Galerkin method(EFG)[22], reproducing kernel particle method (RKPM)[23], singular boundary method [24], the boundary particle method [25], Local radial point interpolation method (MLRPI) [26] and so on.
Numerous meshless methods have been developed for the approximation of fractional PDEs. Dehghan et al. [27] analyzed a meshless scheme for approximation of diffusion-wave equation of non-integer order and proved its stability and convergence. In [28] the authors presented an implicit meshless scheme for approximation of anomalous sub-diffusion equation. Diffusion equations of fractional orders are apprximated via RBF based implicit meshless method in [29]. Hosseini et al. [26] developed a local radial point interpolation meshless method based on the Galerkin weak form for numerical solution of wave-diffusion equation of non integer order. In [30] the authors approximated distributed order diffusion-wave equation of fractional order using meshless method. The authors in [31] proposed a meshless point collocation method for approximation of 2−D multi-term wave-diffusion equations. In [32] the authors proposed a local meshless method for time fractional diffusion-wave equation. Kansa method [33] is utilized for numerical solution of fractional diffusion equations. Zhuang et al. [34] proposed an implicit MLS meshless method for time fractional advection diffusion equation. The numerical solution of 2D wave-diffusion equation is studied in [35] using implicit MLS meshless method. The mentioned methods are meshfree time stepping methods and these methods faces stability restriction in time, and in these methods for convergence a very small step size is required. To overcome the issue of time instability some transformations may be used.
In literature some valuable work is available on resolving the problem of time instability. The researchers have coupled the Laplace transform with other well known numerical methods. For example the Laplace transform with Kansa method [33,36], finite element method [37,38], finite difference method [39], RBF method on unit sphere [40] and the references therein. In the present work we have coupled the Laplace transform with local meshless method for approximating the solution of the multi-term diffusion wave equation of fractional order.
In our numerical scheme we transform the multi-term time fractional wave-diffusion equation to a time independent problem with Laplace transformation. The reduced problem is then approximated using local meshless method in Laplace space. Finally the solution of the original problem is obtained using contour integration. We apply the proposed method to multi-term fractional wave-diffusion equation of the form [14]
Pα,α1,α2,...,αm(Dτ)U(χ,τ)=KLU(χ,τ)+f(χ,τ),forχ∈Ω,K∈Rτ>0, | (2.1) |
where
Pα,α1,α2,...,αm(Dτ)=Dατ+m∑j=1djDαjτ, |
1<αm<...<α1<α<2, and dj≥0,j=1,2,...,m,m∈N are constants. Dαjτ is a Caputo derivative of order αj defined by
Dαjτf(τ)=1Γ(n−αj)∫τaf(n)(ν)dν(τ−ν)αj+1−n,forn−1<αj<n,n∈N, | (2.2) |
also for n=2, we have
Dαjτf(τ)=1Γ(n−αj)∫τa∂2f(ν)∂ν2dν(τ−ν)αj−1,forαj∈(1,2). | (2.3) |
The initial conditions for the above Eq (2.1) are
U(χ,0)=U0(χ),∂U(χ,0)∂τ=U1(χ). | (2.4) |
and the boundary conditions are
BU(χ,τ)=q(χ,τ),χ∈∂Ω, | (2.5) |
where L is the governing linear differential operator, and B is the boundary differential operator. By applying the Laplace transformation to Eq (2.1), we get
ˆU(χ,s)=W(s;L)ˆg(χ,s), | (2.6) |
where
W(s;L)=(sαI+sα1I+...+sαmI−KL)−1, |
and
ˆg(χ,s)=sα−1U0(χ)+sα−2U1(χ)+sα1−1U0(χ)+sα1−2U1(χ)+...+sαm−1U0(χ)+sαm−2U1(χ)+ˆf(χ,s). |
Similarly applying the Laplace transform to (2.5), we get
BˆU(χ,s)=ˆq(χ,s), | (2.7) |
Hence, the system of time-independent equations is obtained as
ˆU(χ,s)=W(s;L)ˆg(χ,s), | (2.8) |
BˆU(χ,s)=ˆq(χ,s), | (2.9) |
In our method first we represent the solution U(χ,τ) of the original problem (2.1) as a contour integral
U(χ,τ)=12πi∫ΓesτˆU(χ,s)ds, | (2.10) |
where, for Res≥ω with ω appropriately large, and Γ is an initially appropriately chosen line Γ0 perpendicular to the real axis in the complex plane, with Ims→±∞. The integral (2.10) is just the inverse transform of ˆU(χ,τ), with the condition that ˆU(χ,τ) must be analytic to the right of Γ0. To make sure the contour of integration remains in the domain of analyticity of ˆU(χ,τ), we select Γ as a deformed contour in the set ΣΥϕ={s≠0:|args|<ϕ}∪{0}, which behaves as a pair of asymptotes in the left half plane, with Res→−∞ when Ims→±∞, which force esτ to decay towards both ends of Γ. In our work we have used two types of contours, the first contour is the hyperbolic contour Γ1 due to [38] with parametric representation
s(ξ)=Υ+ℶ(1−sin(η−ιξ)),ξ∈R,(Γ1) | (2.11) |
where,
ℶ>0,0<η<ϕ−π2,andΥ>0. | (2.12) |
By writing s=x+ιy, we observe that Γ1 is the left branch of the hyperbola
(x−Υ−ℶℶsinη)2−(yℶcosη)2=1, | (2.13) |
the asymptotes for (2.13) are y=±(x−Υ−ℶ)cotη, and x-intercept at s=Υ+ℶ(1−sinη). The condition (2.12) confirms that Γ1 lies in the sector ΣΥϕ=Υ+Σϕ⊂Σϕ, and grows into the left half plane. From (2.11) and (2.10), we have the following integral
U(χ,τ)=12πi∫∞−∞es(ξ)τˆU(χ,s(ξ))ˊs(ξ)dξ. | (2.14) |
Finally to approximate Eq (2.14), the trapezoidal rule with step k is used as
Uk(χ,τ)=k2πiM∑j=−MesjτˆU(χ,sj)ˊsj,forξj=jk,sj=s(ξj),s′j=s′(ξj). | (2.15) |
The second contour employed in this work is the Talbot's contour [41], though ignored by many researchers, yet it is one of the best method for numerical inverting the Laplace transform [42]. The authors in [43] have optimized the Talbot's contour for approximating the solution of parabolic PDEs. Other works on Talbot's method can be found in [44,45] and there references. In our work we have employed the improved Talbot's method [46] for numerical inversion of Laplace transform. The Talbot's contour has parametric representation of the form
s(ξ)=Mτθ(ξ),θ(ξ)=−σ+μξcot(γξ)+νιξ,−π≤ξ≤π,(Γ2) | (2.16) |
where the parameters σ,μ,ν, and γ are to be specified by the user. From (2.16) and (2.10) we have
U(χ,τ)=12πi∫π−πes(ξ)τˆU(χ,s(ξ))ˊs(ξ)dξ. | (2.17) |
We use M-panel mid-point rule with uniform spacing k=2πM, to approximate the integral (2.17) as
Uk(χ,τ)=1MiM∑j=1esjτˆU(χ,sj)ˊsj,forξj=−π+(j−12)k,sj=s(ξj),s′j=s′(ξj). | (2.18) |
To obtain the solution Uk(χ,τ), first we must solve system of 2M+1 equations given in (2.8) and (2.9) for quadrature points sj,|j|≤M. For this purpose the local meshless method is used to discretize operators L,B.
Given a set of points {χi}Ni=1inRd,whered≥1 the approximate function for ˆU(χ) using local meshless method has the form,
ˆU(χi)=∑χj∈Ωiλijϕ(‖χi−χij‖), | (2.19) |
where λi={λij}nj=1 is the expansion coefficients vector, ϕ(r) is a kernel function, r=‖χi−χj‖ is the distance between the centers χi and χj. Ω, and Ωi are global domain and local domains respectively. The sub-domain Ωi contains the center χi, and around it, its n neighboring centers. Thus we obtain n×n linear systems
(ˆU(χi1)ˆU(χi2)...ˆU(χin))=(ϕ(‖χi1−χi1‖)ϕ(‖χi1−χi2‖)...ϕ(‖χi1−χin‖)ϕ(‖χi2−χi1‖)ϕ(‖χi2−χi2‖)...ϕ(‖χi2−χin‖)............ϕ(‖χin−χi1‖)ϕ(‖χin−χi2‖)...ϕ(‖χin−χin‖))(λi1λi2...λin),i=1,2,...,N, | (2.20) |
which can be written as,
ˆUi=Φiλi,1≤i≤N, | (2.21) |
the matrix Φi contains elements in the form bikj=ϕ(‖χik−χij‖),whereχik,χij∈Ωi, the unknowns λi={λij:j=1,...,n} are obtained by solving each of the N systems in (2.21). For the differential operator L we have the form,
LˆU(χi)=∑χj∈ΩiλijLϕ(‖χi−χij‖), | (2.22) |
the above Eq (2.22) can be expressed as a dot product
LˆU(χi)=λi⋅νi, | (2.23) |
where νi is a n-row vector and λi is a n-column vector, entries of the n-column vector νi are given as
νi=Lϕ(‖χi−χij‖),χij∈Ωi, | (2.24) |
eliminating the co efficient λi from (2.21), and (2.23) we have the following expression
(2.25) |
where,
(2.26) |
thus at each node the approximation of the operator via local meshless method is given as
(2.27) |
In (2.27) is a sparse differentiation matrix obtained via local meshless method as an approximation to The matrix has order it has non-zero entries, and zero entries, where is number of centers in global domain, and is the number of centers in local domain. The boundary operator can be discretized in similar way.
In order to solve the multi-term time fractional diffusion wave equation using our proposed method, the local meshless method and Laplace transformation is used. In our numerical scheme first the Laplace transform is applied to time dependent equation which eliminates the time variable, and this process causes no error. Then the local meshless method is utilized for approximating time independent equation. The error estimate for local meshless method is of order , , is the shape parameter and is the fill distance. In the process of approximating the integrals (2.14) and (2.17) convergence is achieved at different rates depending on the paths and . In approximating the integrals (2.14) and (2.17) the convergence order rely upon on the step of the quadrature rule and the time domain for The proof for the order of quadrature error for the path is given in the next theorem.
Theorem 3.1 ([38], Theorem 2.1). Let be the solution of (2.1) with analytic in Let and define by , where , , and let Then for Eq (2.15), with we have for , , , , , and Hence the error estimate for the proposed scheme is
The authors in [46] derived the optimal values of the parameters for the Talbot's contour defined in (2.16) as given below
with corresponding error estimate as
To investigate the stability of the systems (2.8) and (2.9), we represent the system in discrete form as
(4.1) |
the matrix is sparse matrix obtained using local meshless method. For the system (4.1) the constant of stability is defined as
(4.2) |
for any discrete norm defined on the constant is finite. From (4.2) we may write
(4.3) |
Similarly for the pseudoinverse of , we can write
(4.4) |
Thus we have
(4.5) |
We can see that Eqs (4.3) and (4.5) confirms the bounds for the stability constant . Calculating the pseudoinverse for approximating the system (4.1) numerically be quite expansive computationally, but it confirms the stability. The MATLAB's function condest can be used to estimate in case of square systems, thus we have
(4.6) |
This work well with less number of computations for our sparse differentiation matrix . Figure 1 shows the bounds for the constant of our system (2.8) and (2.9) for Problem 1 using the Talbot's contour . Selecting , , , and at , we have It is observed that the upper and lower bounds for the stability constant are very small numbers, which guarantees that the proposed local meshless scheme is stable.
The numerical examples are given to validate our proposed Laplace transform based local meshless scheme. In our computations we have considered different and linear multi term wave-diffusion equations. In our numerical examples we have utilized the multi-quadrics(MQ) kernel function = . We have used the uncertainty principal due to [47] for optimization of the shape parameter. The accuracy of the method is measured using error defined by
is used. Here and are the numerical and exact solutions respectively.
In the first test problem we consider the following linear fractional equation
(5.1) |
where
The exact solution of the problem is
The boundary and initial conditions are
(5.2) |
and
(5.3) |
The points along the hyperbolic contour are calculated using the statement and along Talbot's contour using the relation The parameters used in our computations for the contour are The results obtained for the parameters and along the contour are displayed in Table 1, and along are displayed in Table 2. The exact and numerical spacetime solutions for the given problem is depicted in Figure 2(a) and in Figure 2(b) respectively. The absolute error and error estimate are displayed in Figure 3(a). Figure 3(b) shows error functions for various values of The results confirms that our numerical scheme is accurate, stable and can solve multi-term time fractional wave-diffusion equations with less computation time.
, | , | , | |||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
80 | 20 | 35 | 7.77 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 3.14 | 0.343148 |
55 | 7.61 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 3.64 | 1.222487 | ||
75 | 7.61 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 4.2 | 5.000861 | ||
95 | 7.61 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 4.75 | 12.067666 | ||
110 | 7.61 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 9.30 | 22.244950 | ||
40 | 15 | 80 | 5.76 | 4.5 | 1.37 | 2.4 | 2.034147 |
50 | 4.70 | 5.7 | 1.17 | 2.4 | 3.430185 | ||
60 | 4.32 | 6.9 | 1.05 | 2.4 | 4.307865 | ||
70 | 9.09 | 8.0 | 1.24 | 2.4 | 5.308744 | ||
80 | 4.82 | 9.2 | 1.14 | 2.4 | 6.327198 | ||
70 | 12 | 90 | 2.33 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 8.18 | 8.646889 |
15 | 9.09 | 8.0 | 1.24 | 8.18 | 8.534781 | ||
18 | 8.80 | 8.5 | 1.17 | 8.18 | 8.898832 | ||
21 | 4.10 | 8.8 | 1.20 | 8.18 | 8.901062 | ||
24 | 9.30 | 9.0 | 1.26 | 8.18 | 8.835825 | ||
[14] | 4.79 |
, | , | , | |||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
70 | 12 | 10 | 3.51 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 2.02 | 0.201190 |
12 | 3.98 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 1.47 | 0.202626 | ||
14 | 4.20 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 1.06 | 0.213661 | ||
16 | 4.16 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 7.76 | 0.203777 | ||
18 | 4.99 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 5.64 | 0.204327 | ||
30 | 15 | 20 | 2.97 | 3.4 | 1.00 | 4.10 | 0.203400 |
40 | 5.99 | 4.5 | 1.37 | 4.10 | 0.212062 | ||
50 | 4.82 | 5.7 | 1.17 | 4.10 | 0.210793 | ||
70 | 9.41 | 8.0 | 1.24 | 4.10 | 0.222508 | ||
90 | 8.14 | 10.4 | 1.07 | 4.10 | 0.217812 | ||
80 | 12 | 20 | 7.56 | 8.3 | 1.15 | 4.10 | 0.211422 |
14 | 7.53 | 9.0 | 1.04 | 4.10 | 0.218499 | ||
16 | 6.68 | 9.4 | 1.17 | 4.10 | 0.224207 | ||
18 | 4.87 | 9.8 | 1.02 | 4.10 | 0.226878 | ||
20 | 4.67 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 4.10 | 0.239581 | ||
[14] | 5.69 |
As a second test problem we consider the following linear fractional equation
(5.4) |
where
The exact solution of the problem is
This equation is considered on with boundary conditions
(5.5) |
and initial conditions
(5.6) |
In this experiment we have utilized both the contours with the same set of optimal parameters. The numerical experiments are performed with different nodes in the global domain in the sub-domain. The results obtained for fractional orders , and are displayed in Table 3 along the path , and in Table 4 along the path . The approximate and exact spacetime solutions are displayed in Figures 4(a) and Figure 4(b). The plot of absolute error and error estimate is displayed in Figure 5(a). Figure 5(b) shows the plot of error functions for various values of and . The results verifies the accuracy, stability and efficiency of the proposed local meshless scheme for multi-term time fractional wave-diffusion equations.
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
60 | 22 | 40 | 8.44 | 7.6 | 1.18 | 1.83 | 0.667872 |
60 | 6.62 | 7.6 | 1.18 | 2.12 | 1.580686 | ||
80 | 8.62 | 7.6 | 1.18 | 2.4 | 7.362587 | ||
90 | 8.62 | 7.6 | 1.18 | 8.18 | 10.843996 | ||
100 | 8.62 | 7.6 | 1.18 | 2.76 | 15.784191 | ||
70 | 10 | 100 | 5.52 | 6.4 | 1.15 | 2.76 | 17.932164 |
12 | 2.74 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 2.76 | 17.859075 | ||
14 | 3.44 | 7.8 | 1.21 | 2.76 | 18.129870 | ||
18 | 5.21 | 8.5 | 1.17 | 2.76 | 18.278882 | ||
22 | 7.64 | 8.9 | 1.15 | 2.76 | 18.479720 | ||
50 | 25 | 90 | 9.85 | 6.5 | 1.01 | 8.18 | 8.730629 |
60 | 1.03 | 7.8 | 1.09 | 8.18 | 11.049126 | ||
70 | 5.40 | 9.1 | 1.14 | 8.18 | 13.349187 | ||
80 | 6.57 | 10.4 | 1.19 | 8.18 | 15.124607 | ||
90 | 6.17 | 11.8 | 1.02 | 8.18 | 17.134190 | ||
[14] | 7.0080 |
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
70 | 12 | 10 | 2.56 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 2.02 | 0.202184 |
12 | 2.91 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 1.47 | 0.197720 | ||
14 | 3.10 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 1.06 | 0.200589 | ||
16 | 3.25 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 7.76 | 0.202710 | ||
18 | 5.65 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 5.64 | 0.194221 | ||
30 | 15 | 20 | 3.74 | 3.4 | 1.00 | 4.10 | 0.202098 |
40 | 6.97 | 4.5 | 1.37 | 4.10 | 0.201783 | ||
50 | 6.68 | 5.7 | 1.17 | 4.10 | 0.204199 | ||
70 | 1.00 | 8.0 | 1.24 | 4.10 | 0.205864 | ||
90 | 1.36 | 10.4 | 1.07 | 4.10 | 0.216570 | ||
80 | 12 | 20 | 9.70 | 8.3 | 1.15 | 4.10 | 0.207446 |
14 | 4.34 | 9.0 | 1.04 | 4.10 | 0.206234 | ||
16 | 8.47 | 9.4 | 1.17 | 4.10 | 0.216176 | ||
18 | 4.76 | 9.8 | 1.02 | 4.10 | 0.215397 | ||
20 | 5.66 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 4.10 | 0.244942 | ||
[14] | 1.39 |
We consider the following fractional equation
(5.7) |
where
The exact solution of the problem is
This equation is considered on with boundary conditions
(5.8) |
and initial conditions
(5.9) |
The results obtained for third test problem with fractional orders and along the hyperbolic contour are displayed in Tables 5, and along the Talbots contour are displayed in Table 6. From the Tables it can be seen the method has good results in accuracy. Figures 6(a) shows the exact spacetime solution and Figure 6(b) shows the numerical spacetime solution. Figure 7(a), and Figure 7(b) absolute error and error estimate for the contour and respectively.
, | , | ||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
80 | 25 | 50 | 4.20 | 10.4 | 1.19 | 6.25 | 2.249386 |
60 | 3.85 | 10.4 | 1.19 | 2.12 | 4.114330 | ||
70 | 3.86 | 10.4 | 1.19 | 7.2 | 7.301508 | ||
90 | 3.86 | 10.4 | 1.19 | 8.18 | 15.044453 | ||
100 | 3.86 | 10.4 | 1.19 | 2.76 | 21.588645 | ||
60 | 27 | 90 | 9.51 | 7.9 | 1.06 | 8.18 | 11.338375 |
70 | 8.41 | 9.2 | 1.16 | 8.18 | 13.565846 | ||
80 | 1.15 | 10.6 | 1.01 | 8.18 | 15.034979 | ||
90 | 9.66 | 11.9 | 1.10 | 8.18 | 17.556509 | ||
100 | 7.93 | 13.2 | 1.16 | 8.18 | 21.605433 | ||
85 | 20 | 95 | 8.45 | 10.6 | 1.21 | 4.75 | 18.828414 |
22 | 5.73 | 10.9 | 1.01 | 4.75 | 19.612251 | ||
24 | 1.68 | 11.0 | 1.16 | 4.75 | 19.670357 | ||
27 | 4.26 | 11.2 | 1.16 | 4.75 | 19.563284 | ||
30 | 5.36 | 11.4 | 1.09 | 4.75 | 20.041057 | ||
[14] | 8.81 |
, | , | ||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
70 | 12 | 10 | 3.54 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 2.02 | 0.142848 |
12 | 3.40 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 1.47 | 0.133224 | ||
14 | 2.83 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 1.06 | 0.134380 | ||
16 | 4.64 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 7.76 | 0.133445 | ||
18 | 5.19 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 5.64 | 0.136420 | ||
30 | 15 | 20 | 1.15 | 3.4 | 1.00 | 4.10 | 0.135380 |
40 | 5.10 | 4.5 | 1.37 | 4.10 | 0.142579 | ||
50 | 1.07 | 5.7 | 1.17 | 4.10 | 0.137483 | ||
70 | 1.44 | 8.0 | 1.24 | 4.10 | 0.145392 | ||
90 | 1.49 | 10.4 | 1.07 | 4.10 | 0.151340 | ||
80 | 12 | 20 | 1.29 | 8.3 | 1.15 | 4.10 | 0.144167 |
14 | 1.22 | 9.0 | 1.04 | 4.10 | 0.139500 | ||
16 | 8.31 | 9.4 | 1.17 | 4.10 | 0.148407 | ||
18 | 4.78 | 9.8 | 1.02 | 4.10 | 0.156982 | ||
20 | 9.51 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 4.10 | 0.166119 | ||
[14] | 8.81 |
We consider the two dimensional multi-term time fractional wave-diffusion equation
(5.10) |
subject to zero initial conditions and the boundary conditions are generated from the exact solution
the given 2D test problem is solved with regular nodal points in rectangular, circular and complex domains.
The rectangular domain is descretized with uniformly distributed points. For this problem also we have used the hyperbolic contour and Talbot's contour with the same set of optimal parameters used for Problem 1. The uniform nodes distribution with boundary stencil red and interior stencil green are shown in Figure 8. The graphs of exact and approximate solutions for the parameters at are shown in the Figure 9(a) and Figure 9(b). The results obtained for various values of and along the path and are depicted in Table 7 and Table 8 respectively. From the results one can see that with large number of nodes the proposed method produced accurate results.
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
900 | 14 | 70 | 4.26 | 1.1 | 1.22 | 7.20 | 755.137804 |
16 | 1.12 | 1.7 | 3.71 | 7.20 | 756.918480 | ||
18 | 5.00 | 1.9 | 1.26 | 7.20 | 751.184383 | ||
20 | 9.22 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 7.20 | 748.664343 | ||
576 | 20 | 90 | 5.15 | 1.9 | 1.51 | 8.18 | 286.863124 |
676 | 5.08 | 2.0 | 2.19 | 8.18 | 421.440624 | ||
784 | 8.58 | 2.2 | 1.77 | 8.18 | 608.764593 | ||
900 | 9.22 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 8.18 | 861.916452 | ||
729 | 20 | 20 | 1.10 | 2.1 | 1.96 | 1.55 | 22.119245 |
30 | 7.80 | 2.1 | 1.96 | 5.73 | 48.770754 | ||
50 | 7.57 | 2.1 | 1.96 | 6.25 | 138.310373 | ||
80 | 7.57 | 2.1 | 1.96 | 2.40 | 386.725304 |
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
900 | 20 | 16 | 1.98 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 7.76 | 9.513650 |
18 | 2.15 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 5.64 | 10.640051 | ||
20 | 2.00 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 4.10 | 11.661281 | ||
22 | 8.40 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 2.97 | 12.824995 | ||
24 | 9.12 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 2.16 | 13.560164 | ||
900 | 14 | 24 | 4.28 | 1.1 | 1.22 | 2.16 | 13.026362 |
16 | 1.12 | 1.7 | 3.31 | 2.16 | 13.463156 | ||
18 | 5.00 | 1.9 | 1.26 | 2.16 | 13.591828 | ||
20 | 9.12 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 2.16 | 13.601463 | ||
576 | 20 | 22 | 5.11 | 1.9 | 1.51 | 2.97 | 4.451590 |
676 | 5.17 | 2.0 | 2.19 | 2.97 | 6.401350 | ||
784 | 8.14 | 2.2 | 1.77 | 2.97 | 9.076440 | ||
900 | 8.40 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 2.97 | 12.560123 | ||
961 | 8.06 | 2.4 | 2.19 | 2.97 | 14.919706 |
Here we solve the given problem in unit circle with center at . The domain is descretized with uniform nodes. The computational results for different values of and along and are depicted in Table 9 and Table 10 respectively. Figure 10(a) shows the uniform nodes in circular domain, whereas Figure 10(b) shows the absolute error computed along the hyperbolic path. The exact and approximate solutions are presented in Figures 11(a) and Figure 11(b). The proposed method produced results with good accuracy in circular domain.
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
950 | 60 | 15 | 8.30 | 4.3 | 3.11 | 2.63 | 38.116660 |
20 | 1.20 | 4.3 | 3.11 | 1.55 | 62.890208 | ||
30 | 9.23 | 4.3 | 3.11 | 5.37 | 133.694751 | ||
40 | 9.17 | 4.3 | 3.11 | 1.83 | 369.149122 | ||
900 | 30 | 50 | 1.30 | 3.1 | 2.82 | 6.25 | 361.783503 |
40 | 2.10 | 3.5 | 5.12 | 6.25 | 366.883195 | ||
50 | 2.20 | 4.1 | 2.43 | 6.25 | 363.312789 | ||
60 | 9.17 | 4.3 | 3.11 | 6.25 | 367.839901 | ||
300 | 59 | 60 | 9.77 | 4.3 | 3.06 | 2.12 | 553.852222 |
550 | 9.77 | 4.3 | 3.06 | 2.12 | 447.562447 | ||
800 | 9.77 | 4.3 | 3.06 | 2.12 | 531.883062 | ||
1100 | 9.77 | 4.3 | 3.06 | 2.12 | 531.921143 |
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
950 | 50 | 18 | 5.87 | 4.1 | 2.43 | 5.64 | 9.258343 |
20 | 7.60 | 4.1 | 2.43 | 4.10 | 9.959348 | ||
22 | 2.40 | 4.1 | 2.43 | 2.97 | 10.597861 | ||
24 | 1.90 | 4.1 | 2.43 | 2.16 | 11.241704 | ||
1050 | 10 | 26 | 9.43 | 1.2 | 7.70 | 1.57 | 9.389988 |
30 | 1.20 | 3.1 | 2.82 | 1.57 | 10.100778 | ||
50 | 1.90 | 4.1 | 2.43 | 1.57 | 11.882140 | ||
60 | 8.84 | 4.3 | 3.11 | 1.57 | 13.157724 | ||
750 | 59 | 28 | 9.36 | 4.3 | 3.06 | 1.14 | 13.662250 |
1150 | 9.36 | 4.3 | 3.06 | 1.14 | 13.759729 | ||
1250 | 9.36 | 4.3 | 3.06 | 1.14 | 13.572409 |
In the last test problem we have considered the complex shape domain. The domain is generated by In this experiment also we have used the contours and with the same set of optimal parameters used in Problem 1. The results obtained for fractional orders , and various nodes in the global domain and in the local domain and quadrature points along the contour and are shown in Table 11 and Table 12 respectively. The regular nodes distribution in the complex domain are shown in Figure 12(a), whereas the approximate and exact solutions are presented in Figures 12(b). Figure 13 shows the absolute error obtained using the Talbots contour. It can be seen that the proposed numerical method produced very accurate and stable results in the complex domain, this confirms the efficiency of the method for such type of equations.
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
851 | 50 | 40 | 4.70 | 4.0 | 1.13 | 1.83 | 50.524737 |
50 | 6.75 | 4.0 | 1.13 | 6.25 | 79.388630 | ||
60 | 6.74 | 4.0 | 1.13 | 2.12 | 116.511151 | ||
80 | 6.74 | 4.0 | 1.13 | 2.40 | 227.719695 | ||
852 | 30 | 70 | 1.30 | 2.9 | 6.40 | 7.20 | 147.655977 |
40 | 1.20 | 3.4 | 5.83 | 7.20 | 158.960295 | ||
50 | 9.34 | 3.9 | 1.82 | 7.20 | 219.043351 | ||
60 | 9.47 | 4.2 | 1.92 | 7.20 | 268.501711 | ||
457 | 60 | 60 | 6.97 | 3.0 | 3.07 | 2.12 | 68.420275 |
542 | 4.39 | 3.3 | 1.62 | 2.12 | 89.095051 | ||
643 | 4.86 | 3.6 | 1.79 | 2.12 | 117.459116 | ||
851 | 7.29 | 4.2 | 1.90 | 2.12 | 184.241136 |
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
752 | 30 | 24 | 1.10 | 2.7 | 3.89 | 2.16 | 3.188624 |
850 | 1.80 | 2.9 | 7.98 | 2.16 | 3.613122 | ||
921 | 1.50 | 3.0 | 2.48 | 2.16 | 4.028301 | ||
974 | 9.61 | 3.2 | 5.64 | 2.16 | 4.297978 | ||
1020 | 28 | 22 | 2.90 | 2.9 | 3.79 | 2.97 | 4.261794 |
40 | 1.90 | 3.7 | 2.62 | 2.97 | 5.485432 | ||
50 | 1.00 | 4.2 | 1.13 | 2.97 | 6.750489 | ||
60 | 9.32 | 4.6 | 6.25 | 2.97 | 8.366275 | ||
1095 | 70 | 18 | 6.47 | 5.1 | 2.15 | 5.64 | 10.452683 |
20 | 6.60 | 5.1 | 2.15 | 4.10 | 10.778798 | ||
22 | 9.01 | 5.1 | 2.15 | 2.97 | 11.238818 | ||
24 | 9.97 | 5.1 | 2.15 | 2.16 | 11.540931 |
In this work, a local meshless method based on Laplace transform has been utilized for the approximation of the numerical solution of 1D and 2D multi-term time fractional wave diffusion equations. We resolved the issue of time-instability which is the common short coming of time-stepping methods using the Laplace transformation, and the issues of ill-conditioning due to dense differentiation matrices and shape parameter sensitivity with localized meshless method. The stability and convergence of the method are discussed. To verify the theoretical results some test problem in 1D and a test problem in 2D are considered. For the two dimensional problem we have considered rectangular, circular, and complex domains. For numerical inversion of Laplace transform we have utilized two types of contours the hyperbolic and the improved Talbot's contour. The results obtained using these two contours were accurate and stable. However, the results show that the Talbot's contour is more efficient computationally. The benefit of this method is that it can approximate such type equations very efficiently and accurately with less computation time, and without any time instability. The obtained results proves the simplicity in implementation, efficiency, accuracy, and stability of the proposed method.
This work was supported by “the Construction team project of the introduction and cultivation of young innovative talents in Colleges and universities of Shandong Province of China, 2019 (Project Name: Big data and business intelligence social service innovation team)” and “the Social Science Planning Project of Qingdao, China,2018 (Grant No. QDSKL1801229)”.
The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
First and second authors revised the paper, solved the examples and used software to compute and sketch the results. Third author did analysis and wrote the paper. Forth proposed the problem and verified the results.
[1] |
Cetegen BM, Mohamad N (1993) Experiments on liquid mixing and reaction in a vortex. J Fluid Mech 249: 391–414. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022112093001223 doi: 10.1017/S0022112093001223
![]() |
[2] |
Verzicco R, Orlandi P (1995) Mixedness in the formation of a vortex ring. Phys Fluids 7: 1513–1515. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.868538 doi: 10.1063/1.868538
![]() |
[3] |
Urzay J (2018) Supersonic combustion in air-breathing propulsion systems for hypersonic flight. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 50: 593–627. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-fluid-122316-045217 doi: 10.1146/annurev-fluid-122316-045217
![]() |
[4] | Ferri A, Libby PA, Zakkay V (1964) Theoretical and experimental investigation of supersonic combustion, in High Temperatures in Aeronautics, Elsevier, 55–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-010558-1.50011-6 |
[5] |
Ferri A (1973) Mixing-controlled supersonic combustion. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 5: 301–338. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.fl.05.010173.001505 doi: 10.1146/annurev.fl.05.010173.001505
![]() |
[6] | Gupta AK, Lilley DG, Syred N (1984) Swirl flows. Tunbridge Wells. |
[7] |
Candel S, Durox D, Schuller T, et al. (2014) Dynamics of swirling flames. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 46: 147–173. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-fluid-010313-141300 doi: 10.1146/annurev-fluid-010313-141300
![]() |
[8] | Bahr D (1987) Technology for the design of high temperature rise combustors. J Propuls Power 3: 179–186. |
[9] |
An Q, Steinberg AM (2019) The role of strain rate, local extinction, and hydrodynamic instability on transition between attached and lifted swirl flames. Combusti Flame 199: 267–278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.combustflame.2018.10.029 doi: 10.1016/j.combustflame.2018.10.029
![]() |
[10] |
Caulfield C (2021) Layering, instabilities, and mixing in turbulent stratified flows. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 53: 113–145. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-fluid-042320-100458 doi: 10.1146/annurev-fluid-042320-100458
![]() |
[11] |
Crimaldi JP, Zimmer RK (2014) The physics of broadcast spawning in benthic invertebrates. Annu Rev Mar Sci 6: 1. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-marine-010213-135119 doi: 10.1146/annurev-marine-010213-135119
![]() |
[12] |
Mingotti N, Wood R, Noakes C, et al. (2020) The mixing of airborne contaminants by the repeated passage of people along a corridor. J Fluid Mech 903: A52. https://doi.org/10.1017/jfm.2020.671 doi: 10.1017/jfm.2020.671
![]() |
[13] |
Lohse D, Xia KQ (2010) Small-scale properties of turbulent rayleigh-bénard convection. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 42: 335–364. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-fluid-10908.165152 doi: 10.1146/annurev-fluid-10908.165152
![]() |
[14] |
Kolmogorov AN (1941) The local structure of turbulence in incompressible viscous fluid for very large reynolds numbers. Cr Acad Sci URSS 30: 301–305. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-3030-1_45 doi: 10.1007/978-94-011-3030-1_45
![]() |
[15] |
Batchelor GK (1959) Small-scale variation of convected quantities like temperature in turbulent fluid . general discussion and the case of small conductivity. J Fluid Mech 5: 113–133. https://doi.org/10.1017/S002211205900009X doi: 10.1017/S002211205900009X
![]() |
[16] |
Warhaft Z (2000) Passive scalars in turbulent flows. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 32: 203–240. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.fluid.32.1.203 doi: 10.1146/annurev.fluid.32.1.203
![]() |
[17] |
Schwertfirm F, Manhart M (2007) Dns of passive scalar transport in turbulent channel flow at high schmidt numbers. Int J Heat Fluid Fl 28: 1204–1214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatfluidflow.2007.05.012 doi: 10.1016/j.ijheatfluidflow.2007.05.012
![]() |
[18] |
Dimotakis PE (2000) The mixing transition in turbulent flows. J Fluid Mech 409: 69–98. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022112099007946 doi: 10.1017/S0022112099007946
![]() |
[19] |
Meunier P, Villermaux E (2003) How vortices mix. J Fluid Mech 476: 213–222. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022112002003166 doi: 10.1017/S0022112002003166
![]() |
[20] |
Souzy M, Zaier I, Lhuissier H, et al. (2018) Mixing lamellae in a shear flow. J Fluid Mech 838: R3. https://doi.org/10.1017/jfm.2017.916 doi: 10.1017/jfm.2017.916
![]() |
[21] |
Buaria D, Clay MP, Sreenivasan KR, et al. (2021) Turbulence is an ineffective mixer when schmidt numbers are large. Phys Rev Lett 126: 074501. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.126.074501 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.126.074501
![]() |
[22] |
Raynal F, Gence JN (1997) Energy saving in chaotic laminar mixing. Int J Heat Mass Trans 40: 3267–3273. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0017-9310(96)00383-3 doi: 10.1016/S0017-9310(96)00383-3
![]() |
[23] |
Dimotakis PE (2005) Turbulent mixing. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 37: 329–356. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.fluid.36.050802.122015 doi: 10.1146/annurev.fluid.36.050802.122015
![]() |
[24] |
Thiffeault JL (2012) Using multiscale norms to quantify mixing and transport. Nonlinearity 25: R1. https://doi.org/10.1088/0951-7715/25/2/R1 doi: 10.1088/0951-7715/25/2/R1
![]() |
[25] |
Duplat J, Jouary A, Villermaux E (2010) Entanglement rules for random mixtures. Phys Rev Lett 105: 034504. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.105.034504 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.105.034504
![]() |
[26] |
Kree M, Duplat J, Villermaux E (2013) The mixing of distant sources. Phys Fluids 25: 091103. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4820015 doi: 10.1063/1.4820015
![]() |
[27] |
Villermaux E, Rehab H (2000) Mixing in coaxial jets. J Fluid Mech 425: 161–185. https://doi.org/10.1017/S002211200000210X doi: 10.1017/S002211200000210X
![]() |
[28] | Vidick B (1989) Critical mixing parameters for good control of cement slurry quality. in SPE Production Operations Symposium. OnePetro. https://doi.org/10.2118/18895-PA |
[29] |
Poulain S, Villermaux E, Bourouiba L (2018) Ageing and burst of surface bubbles. J Fluid Mech 851: 636–671. https://doi.org/10.1017/jfm.2018.471 doi: 10.1017/jfm.2018.471
![]() |
[30] | Marble F (1985) Growth of a diffusion flame in the field of a vortex, in Recent advances in the aerospace sciences, Springer, 395–413. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-4298-4_19 |
[31] |
Villermaux E (2019) Mixing versus stirring. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 51: 245–273. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-fluid-010518-040306 doi: 10.1146/annurev-fluid-010518-040306
![]() |
[32] |
Ranz WE (1979) Applications of a stretch model to mixing, diffusion, and reaction in laminar and turbulent flows. AIChE J 25: 41–47. https://doi.org/10.1002/aic.690250105 doi: 10.1002/aic.690250105
![]() |
[33] | Marble FE, Broadwell JE (1977) The coherent flame model for turbulent chemical reactions. Purdue Univ Lafayette in project squid head quaters. Tech Rep. Available from: https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:45411925. |
[34] |
Villermaux E, Duplat J (2003) Mixing is an aggregation process. Comptes Rendus Mécanique 331: 515–523. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1631-0721(03)00110-4 doi: 10.1016/S1631-0721(03)00110-4
![]() |
[35] |
Duplat J, Villermaux E (2008) Mixing by random stirring in confined mixtures. J Fluid Mech 617: 51–86. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022112008003789 doi: 10.1017/S0022112008003789
![]() |
[36] |
Duplat J, Innocenti C, Villermaux E (2010) A nonsequential turbulent mixing process. Phys Fluids 22: 035104. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.3319821 doi: 10.1063/1.3319821
![]() |
[37] |
Haller G (2015) Lagrangian coherent structures. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 47: 137–162. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-fluid-010313-141322 doi: 10.1146/annurev-fluid-010313-141322
![]() |
[38] |
Hang H, Yu B, Xiang Y, et al. (2020) An objective-adaptive refinement criterion based on modified ridge extraction method for finite-time lyapunov exponent (ftle) calculation. J Visual 23: 81–95. https://doi.org/10.1007/S12650-019-00605-1 doi: 10.1007/S12650-019-00605-1
![]() |
[39] |
Liang G, Yu B, Zhang B, et al. (2019) Hidden flow structures in compressible mixing layer and a quantitative analysis of entrainment based on lagrangian method. J Hydrodyn 31: 256–265. https://doi.org/10.1017/jfm.2020.295 doi: 10.1017/jfm.2020.295
![]() |
[40] |
Zheng Z, Fan Z, Wang Z, et al. (2021) Lagrangian visualization of mixing enhancement induced by finite-time stretching in compressible vortex interaction. J Visual 24: 19–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12650-020-00698-z doi: 10.1007/s12650-020-00698-z
![]() |
[41] |
Götzfried P, Emran MS, Villermaux E, et al. (2019) Comparison of lagrangian and eulerian frames of passive scalar turbulent mixing. Phys Rev Fluids 4: 044607. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevFluids.4.044607 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevFluids.4.044607
![]() |
[42] |
Meunier P, Villermaux E (2022) The diffuselet concept for scalar mixing. J Fluid Mech 951: A33. https://doi.org/10.1017/jfm.2022.771 doi: 10.1017/jfm.2022.771
![]() |
[43] |
Meunier P, Villermaux E (2010) The diffusive strip method for scalar mixing in two dimensions. J Fluid Mechanics 662: 134–172. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022112010003162 doi: 10.1017/S0022112010003162
![]() |
[44] |
Martínez-Ruiz D, Meunier P, Favier B, et al.(2018) The diffusive sheet method for scalar mixing. J Fluid Mech 837: 230–257. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022112010003162 doi: 10.1017/S0022112010003162
![]() |
[45] |
Sen S, Singh P, Heyman J, et al. (2020) The impact of stretching-enhanced mixing and coalescence on reactivity in mixing-limited reactive flows. Phys Fluids 32: 106602, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0022798 doi: 10.1063/5.0022798
![]() |
[46] |
Heyman J, Lester DR, Turuban R, et al. (2020) Stretching and folding sustain microscale chemical gradients in porous media. P Natl Acad Sci 117: 13 359–13 365. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2002858117 doi: 10.1073/pnas.2002858117
![]() |
[47] |
Guilbert E, Almarcha C, Villermaux E (2021) Chemical reaction for mixing studies. Phys Rev Fluids 6: 114501. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevFluids.6.114501 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevFluids.6.114501
![]() |
[48] |
Guilbert E, Metzger B, Villermaux E (2022) Chemical production on a deforming substrate. J Fluid Mech 934: R1. https://doi.org/10.1017/jfm.2021.1122 doi: 10.1017/jfm.2021.1122
![]() |
[49] |
Buch KA, Dahm WJ (1996) Experimental study of the fine-scale structure of conserved scalar mixing in turbulent shear flows. part 1. sc [dbl greater-than sign] 1. J Fluid Mech 317: 21–71. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0022112096000651 doi: 10.1017/s0022112096000651
![]() |
[50] |
Cetegen B, Aguirre J (1990) Analysis of molecular mixing and chemical reaction in a vortex pair. Phys Fluids 2: 2211–2216. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.857807 doi: 10.1063/1.857807
![]() |
[51] |
Basu S, Barber T, Cetegen B (2007) Computational study of scalar mixing in the field of a gaseous laminar line vortex. Phys Fluids 19: 053601. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.2732454 doi: 10.1063/1.2732454
![]() |
[52] |
Flohr P, Vassilicos J (1997) Accelerated scalar dissipation in a vortex. J Fluid Mech 348: 295–317. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022112097006927 doi: 10.1017/S0022112097006927
![]() |
[53] |
Bilger R (1976) The structure of diffusion flames. Combust Sci Technol 13: 155–170. https://doi.org/10.1080/00102207608946733 doi: 10.1080/00102207608946733
![]() |
[54] |
Bilger RW (1989) Turbulent diffusion flames. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 21: 101–135. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.fl.21.010189.000533 doi: 10.1146/annurev.fl.21.010189.000533
![]() |
[55] |
Yeung P, Girimaji S, Pope S (1990) Straining and scalar dissipation on material surfaces in turbulence: implications for flamelets. Combust Flame 79: 340–365. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-2180(90)90145-H doi: 10.1016/0010-2180(90)90145-H
![]() |
[56] |
Kim SH, Pitsch H (2007) Scalar gradient and small-scale structure in turbulent premixed combustion. Phys Fluids 19: 115104. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.2784943 doi: 10.1063/1.2784943
![]() |
[57] |
Boratav O, Elghobashi S, Zhong R (1996) On the alignment of the -strain and vorticity in turbulent nonpremixed flames. Phys Fluids 8: 2251–2253. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.869000 doi: 10.1063/1.869000
![]() |
[58] |
Boratav O, Elghobashi S, Zhong R (1998) On the alignment of strain, vorticity and scalar gradient in turbulent, buoyant, nonpremixed flames. Phys Fluids 10: 2260–2267. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.869747 doi: 10.1063/1.869747
![]() |
[59] |
Attili A, Bisetti F (2019) Statistics of scalar dissipation and strain/vorticity/scalar gradient alignment in turbulent nonpremixed jet flames. Flow Turbul Combust 103: 625–642. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10494-019-00044-w doi: 10.1007/s10494-019-00044-w
![]() |
[60] |
McManus TA, Sutton JA (2022) Conditional analysis of temperature and strain rate effects on dissipation structure in turbulent non-premixed jet flames. P Combust Inst. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proci.2022.07.052 doi: 10.1016/j.proci.2022.07.052
![]() |
[61] |
Chakraborty N, Swaminathan N (2007) Influence of the damköhler number on turbulence-scalar interaction in premixed flames. i. physical insight. Phys Fluids 19: 045103. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.2714070 doi: 10.1063/1.2714070
![]() |
[62] |
Zhao S, Er-Raiy A, Bouali Z, et al. (2018) Dynamics and kinematics of the reactive scalar gradient in weakly turbulent premixed flames. Combust Flame 198: 436–454. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.combustflame.2018.10.002 doi: 10.1016/j.combustflame.2018.10.002
![]() |
[63] |
Batchelor GK (1952) The effect of homogeneous turbulence on material lines and surfaces. Proc Math Phys Sci 213: 349–366. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.1952.0130 doi: 10.1098/rspa.1952.0130
![]() |
[64] |
Girimaji S, Pope S (1990) 'Material-element deformation in isotropic turbulence. J Fluid Mech 220: 427–458. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022112090003330 doi: 10.1017/S0022112090003330
![]() |
[65] |
Dresselhaus E, Tabor M (1992) The kinematics of stretching and alignment of material elements in general flow fields. J Fluid Mech 236: 415–444. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022112092001460 doi: 10.1017/S0022112092001460
![]() |
[66] |
Lapeyre G, Klein P, Hua B (1999) Does the tracer gradient vector align with the strain eigenvectors in 2d turbulence? Phys Fluids 11: 3729–3737. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.870234 doi: 10.1063/1.870234
![]() |
[67] |
Klein P, Hua BL, Lapeyre G (2000) Alignment of tracer gradient vectors in 2d turbulence. Physica D 146: 246–260. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-2789(00)00119-6 doi: 10.1016/S0167-2789(00)00119-6
![]() |
[68] |
Swaminathan N, Grout R (2006) Interaction of turbulence and scalar fields in premixed flames. Phys Fluids 18: 045102. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.2186590 doi: 10.1063/1.2186590
![]() |
[69] |
Minamoto Y, Jigjid K, Igari R, et al. (2022) Effect of flame–flame interaction on scalar pdf in turbulent premixed flames. Combust Flame 239: 111660. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.combustflame.2021.111660 doi: 10.1016/j.combustflame.2021.111660
![]() |
[70] |
Holzner M, Lüthi B (2011) Laminar superlayer at the turbulence boundary. Phys Rev Lett 106, : 134503. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.106.134503 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.106.134503
![]() |
[71] |
Townsend AA (1951) The diffusion of heat spots in isotropic turbulence. Proc Math Phys Sci 209: 418–430. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.1951.0216 doi: 10.1098/rspa.1951.0216
![]() |
[72] |
Cocke W (1969) Turbulent hydrodynamic line stretching: consequences of isotropy. Phys Fluids 12: 2488–2492. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1692385 doi: 10.1063/1.1692385
![]() |
[73] |
Ashurst WT, Kerstein A, Kerr R, et al. (1987) Alignment of vorticity and scalar gradient with strain rate in simulated navier–stokes turbulence. Phys Fluids 30: 2343–2353. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.866513 doi: 10.1063/1.866513
![]() |
[74] |
Vincent A, Meneguzzi M (1991) The spatial structure and statistical properties of homogeneous turbulence. J Fluid Mech 225: 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022112091001957 doi: 10.1017/S0022112091001957
![]() |
[75] |
Carter HH, Okubo A (1972) Longitudinal dispersion in non-uniform flow. Water Resour Res 8: 648–660. https://doi.org/10.1029/WR008i003p00648 doi: 10.1029/WR008i003p00648
![]() |
[76] |
Weiss J (1991) The dynamics of enstrophy transfer in two-dimensional hydrodynamics. Physica D 48: 273–294. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-2789(91)90088-Q doi: 10.1016/0167-2789(91)90088-Q
![]() |
[77] | Hunt JC, Wray AA, Moin P (1988) Eddies, streams, and convergence zones in turbulent flows. Studying turbulence using numerical simulation databases, 2. Proceedings of the 1988 summer program. Available from: https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/19890015184 |
[78] |
Basdevant C, Philipovitch T (1994) On the validity of the "weiss criterion" in two-dimensional turbulence. Physica D 73: 17–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-2789(94)90222-4 doi: 10.1016/0167-2789(94)90222-4
![]() |
[79] |
Hua B, Klein P (1998) An exact criterion for the stirring properties of nearly two-dimensional turbulence. Physica D 113: 98–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-2789(97)00143-7 doi: 10.1016/S0167-2789(97)00143-7
![]() |
[80] |
Galanti B, Gibbon J, Heritage M (1997) Vorticity alignment results for the three-dimensional euler and navier-stokes equations. Nonlinearity 10: 1675. https://doi.org/10.1088/0951-7715/10/6/013 doi: 10.1088/0951-7715/10/6/013
![]() |
[81] |
Ohkitani K, Kishiba S (1995) Nonlocal nature of vortex stretching in an inviscid fluid. Phys Fluids 7: 411–421. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.868638 doi: 10.1063/1.868638
![]() |
[82] |
Tsinober A, Ortenberg M, Shtilman L (1999) On depression of nonlinearity in turbulence. Phys Fluids 11: 2291–2297. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.870091 doi: 10.1063/1.870091
![]() |
[83] |
Wacks DH, Chakraborty N, Klein M, et al. (2016) Flow topologies in different regimes of premixed turbulent combustion: A direct numerical simulation analysis. Phys Rev Fluids 1: 083401. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevFluids.1.083401 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevFluids.1.083401
![]() |
[84] |
Meneveau C (2011) Lagrangian dynamics and models of the velocity gradient tensor in turbulent flows. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 43: 219–245. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-fluid-122109-160708 doi: 10.1146/annurev-fluid-122109-160708
![]() |
[85] |
Jeong J, Hussain F (1995) On the identification of a vortex. J Fluid Mech 285: 69–94. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022112095000462 doi: 10.1017/S0022112095000462
![]() |
[86] |
Chong MS, Perry AE, Cantwell BJ (1990) A general classification of three-dimensional flow fields. Phys Fluids A 2: 765–777. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.857730 doi: 10.1063/1.857730
![]() |
[87] |
Perry AE, Chong MS (1987) A description of eddying motions and flow patterns using critical-point concepts. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 19: 125–155. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.fl.19.010187.001013 doi: 10.1146/annurev.fl.19.010187.001013
![]() |
[88] |
Danish M, Suman S, Girimaji SS (2016) Influence of flow topology and dilatation on scalar mixing in compressible turbulence. J Fluid Mech 793: 633–655. https://doi.org/10.1017/jfm.2016.145 doi: 10.1017/jfm.2016.145
![]() |
[89] |
Gao X, Bermejo-Moreno I, Larsson J (2020) Parametric numerical study of passive scalar mixing in shock turbulence interaction. J Fluid Mech 895: A21. https://doi.org/10.1017/jfm.2020.292 doi: 10.1017/jfm.2020.292
![]() |
[90] |
Cifuentes L, Dopazo C, Martin J, et al. (2014) Local flow topologies and scalar structures in a turbulent premixed flame. Phys Fluids 26: 065108. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4884555 doi: 10.1063/1.4884555
![]() |
[91] |
Han W, Scholtissek A, Dietzsch F, et al. (2019) Influence of flow topology and scalar structure on flame-tangential diffusion in turbulent non-premixed combustion. Combust Flame 206: 21–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.combustflame.2019.04.038 doi: 10.1016/j.combustflame.2019.04.038
![]() |
[92] |
Heyman J, Lester D, Le Borgne T (2021) Scalar signatures of chaotic mixing in porous media. Phys Rev Lett 126: 034505. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.126.034505 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.126.034505
![]() |
[93] |
Waitz I, Qiu Y, Manning T, et al. (1997) Enhanced mixing with streamwise vorticity. Prog Aerosp Sci 33: 323–351. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0376-0421(96)00008-5 doi: 10.1016/S0376-0421(96)00008-5
![]() |
[94] |
Vergine F, Ground C, Maddalena L (2016) Turbulent kinetic energy decay in supersonic streamwise interacting vortices. J Fluid Mech 807: 353–385. https://doi.org/10.1017/jfm.2016.611 doi: 10.1017/jfm.2016.611
![]() |
[95] |
Wu Z, He M, Yu B, et al. (2022) A circulation prediction model for ramp and vortex generator in supersonic flow: A numerical study. Aerosp Sci Technol 127: 107688. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ast.2022.107688 doi: 10.1016/j.ast.2022.107688
![]() |
[96] |
Wang Z, Yu B, Zhang B, et al. (2021) Kinematic and mixing characteristics of vortex interaction induced by a vortex generator model: a numerical study. Appl Math Mech 42: 387–404. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10483-021-2711-5 doi: 10.1007/s10483-021-2711-5
![]() |
[97] |
Schetz JA, Maddalena L, Burger SK (2010) Molecular weight and shock-wave effects on transverse injection in supersonic flow. J Propuls Power 26: 1102–1113. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.49355 doi: 10.2514/1.49355
![]() |
[98] |
Tew DE, Hermanson JC, Waitz IA (2004) Impact of compressibility on mixing downstream of lobed mixers. AIAA J 42: 2393–2396. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.11004 doi: 10.2514/1.11004
![]() |
[99] |
Brouillette M (2002) The richtmyer-meshkov instability. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 34: 445–468. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.fluid.34.090101.162238 doi: 10.1146/annurev.fluid.34.090101.162238
![]() |
[100] |
Zhou Y (2017) Rayleigh–taylor and richtmyer–meshkov instability induced flow, turbulence, and mixing. ii. Phys Rep 723: 1–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2017.07.008 doi: 10.1016/j.physrep.2017.07.008
![]() |
[101] |
Zhou Y (2017) Rayleigh–taylor and richtmyer–meshkov instability induced flow, turbulence, and mixing. i. Phys Rep 720-722: 1–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2017.07.005 doi: 10.1016/j.physrep.2017.07.005
![]() |
[102] |
Peng G, Zabusky NJ, Zhang S (2003) Vortex-accelerated secondary baroclinic vorticity deposition and late-intermediate time dynamics of a two-dimensional richtmyer–meshkov interface. Phys Fluids 15: 3730–3744. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1621628 doi: 10.1063/1.1621628
![]() |
[103] |
Livescu D (2020) Turbulence with large thermal and compositional density variations. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 52: 309-341. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-fluid-010719-060114 doi: 10.1146/annurev-fluid-010719-060114
![]() |
[104] |
Weber C, Haehn N, Oakley J, et al. (2012) Turbulent mixing measurements in the richtmyer-meshkov instability. Phys Fluids 24: 074105. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4733447 doi: 10.1063/1.4733447
![]() |
[105] |
Mikaelian KO (1998) Analytic approach to nonlinear rayleigh-taylor and richtmyer-meshkov instabilities. Phys Rev Lett 80: 508–511. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.80.508 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.80.508
![]() |
[106] |
Zabusky NJ (1999) Vortex paradigm for accelerated inhomogeneous flows: Visiometrics for the rayleigh-taylor and richtmyer-meshkov environments. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 31: 495–536. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.fluid.31.1.495 doi: 10.1146/annurev.fluid.31.1.495
![]() |
[107] |
Kumar S, Orlicz G, Tomkins C, et al. (2005) Stretching of material lines in shock-accelerated gaseous flows. Phys Fluids 17: 082107. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.2031347 doi: 10.1063/1.2031347
![]() |
[108] |
Zhou Y, Cabot WH, Thornber B (2016) Asymptotic behavior of the mixed mass in rayleigh–taylor and richtmyer–meshkov instability induced flows. Phys Plasmas 23: 052712. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4951018 doi: 10.1063/1.4951018
![]() |
[109] |
Richtmyer RD (1960) Taylor instability in shock acceleration of compressible fluids. Commun Pure Appl Math 13: 297–319. https://doi.org/10.1002/cpa.3160130207 doi: 10.1002/cpa.3160130207
![]() |
[110] |
Meshkov E (1969) Instability of the interface of two gases accelerated by a shock wave. Fluid Dyn 4: 101–104. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01015969 doi: 10.1007/BF01015969
![]() |
[111] |
Klein RI, McKee CF, Colella P (1994) On the hydrodynamic interaction of shock waves with interstellar clouds. 1: Nonradiative shocks in small clouds. Astrophys J 420: 213–236. https://doi.org/10.1086/173554 doi: 10.1086/173554
![]() |
[112] |
Cabot WH, Cook AW (2006) Reynolds number effects on rayleigh–taylor instability with possible implications for type ia supernovae. Nat Phys 2: 562–568. https://doi.org/10.1038/nphys361 doi: 10.1038/nphys361
![]() |
[113] |
Lindl JD, McCrory RL, Campbell EM (1992) Progress toward ignition and burn propagation in inertial confinement fusion. Phys Today 45: 32–40. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.881318 doi: 10.1063/1.881318
![]() |
[114] |
EOran ES, Gamezo VN (2007) Origins of the deflagration-to-detonation transition in gas-phase combustion. Combust Flame 148: 4–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.combustflame.2006.07.010 doi: 10.1016/j.combustflame.2006.07.010
![]() |
[115] |
Yang J, Kubota T, Zukoski EE (1994) A model for characterization of a vortex pair formed by shock passage over a light-gas inhomogeneity. J Fluid Mech 258: 217–244. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022112094003307 doi: 10.1017/S0022112094003307
![]() |
[116] |
Yu B, He M, Zhang B, et al. (2020) Two-stage growth mode for lift-off mechanism in oblique shock-wave/jet interaction. Phys Fluids 32: 116105. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0022449 doi: 10.1063/5.0022449
![]() |
[117] |
Zhang B, Liu H, Yu B, et al. (2022) Numerical investigation on combustion-enhancement strategy in shock–fuel jet interaction. AIAA J 60: 393–410. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.J060168 doi: 10.2514/1.J060168
![]() |
[118] |
Zhang B, Chen H, Yu B, et al. (2019) Molecular simulation on viscous effects for microscale combustion in reactive shock-bubble interaction. Combust Flame 208: 351–363. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.combustflame.2019.07.001 doi: 10.1016/j.combustflame.2019.07.001
![]() |
[119] |
Liu H, Yu B, Chen H, et al. (2020) Contribution of viscosity to the circulation deposition in the richtmyer–meshkov instability. J Fluid Mech 895: A10. https://doi.org/10.1017/jfm.2020.295 doi: 10.1017/jfm.2020.295
![]() |
[120] |
Wang Z, Yu B, Chen H, et al. (2018) Scaling vortex breakdown mechanism based on viscous effect in shock cylindrical bubble interaction. Phys Fluids 30: 126103. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5051463 doi: 10.1063/1.5051463
![]() |
[121] |
Ding J, Si T, Yang J, et al. (2017) Measurement of a richtmyer-meshkov instability at an air-sf 6 interface in a semiannular shock tube. Phys Rev Lett 119: 014501. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.014501 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.014501
![]() |
[122] |
Cook AW, Dimotakis PE (2001) Transition stages of rayleigh–taylor instability between miscible fluids. J Fluid Mech 443: 69–99. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022112002007802 doi: 10.1017/S0022112002007802
![]() |
[123] |
Cook AW, Cabot W, Miller PL (2004) The mixing transition in rayleigh–taylor instability. J Fluid Mech 511: 333–362. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022112004009681 doi: 10.1017/S0022112004009681
![]() |
[124] |
Ristorcelli J, Clark T (2004) Rayleigh–taylor turbulence: self-similar analysis and direct numerical simulations. J Fluid Mech 507: 213–253. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022112004008286 doi: 10.1017/S0022112004008286
![]() |
[125] |
Samtaney R, Zabusky NJ (1993) On shock polar analysis and analytical expressions for vorticity deposition in shock-accelerated density-stratified interfaces. Phys Fluids A: Fluid Dyn 5: 1285–1287. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.858618 doi: 10.1063/1.858618
![]() |
[126] |
Marugan-Cruz C, Rodriguez-Rodriguez J, Martinez-Bazan C (2013) Formation regimes of vortex rings in negatively buoyant starting jets. J Fluid Mech 716: 470–486. https://doi.org/10.1017/jfm.2012.554 doi: 10.1017/jfm.2012.554
![]() |
[127] |
Soteriou MC, Ghoniem AF (1995) Effects of the free stream density ratio on free and forced spatially developing shear layers. Phys Fluids 7: 2036–2051. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.868451 doi: 10.1063/1.868451
![]() |
[128] |
Livescu D, Ristorcelli J, Petersen M, et al. (2010) New phenomena in variable-density rayleigh–taylor turbulence. Phys Scripta 2010: 014015. https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-8949/2010/T142/014015 doi: 10.1088/0031-8949/2010/T142/014015
![]() |
[129] |
Zhai Z, Si T, Luo X, et al. (2011) On the evolution of spherical gas interfaces accelerated by a planar shock wave. Phys Fluids 23: 084104. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.3623272 doi: 10.1063/1.3623272
![]() |
[130] |
Si T, Long T, Zhai Z, et al. (2015) Experimental investigation of cylindrical converging shock waves interacting with a polygonal heavy gas cylinder. J Fluid Mech 784: 225–251. https://doi.org/10.1017/jfm.2015.581 doi: 10.1017/jfm.2015.581
![]() |
[131] |
Luo X, Wang M, Si T, et al. (2015) On the interaction of a planar shock with an polygon. J Fluid Mech 773: 366–394. https://doi.org/10.1017/jfm.2015.257 doi: 10.1017/jfm.2015.257
![]() |
[132] |
Ding J, Si T, Chen M, et al. (2017) On the interaction of a planar shock with a three-dimensional light gas cylinder. J Fluid Mech 828: 289–317. https://doi.org/10.1017/jfm.2017.528 doi: 10.1017/jfm.2017.528
![]() |
[133] |
Li D, Guan B, Wang G (2022) Effects of interface diffusion and shock strength on shock-accelerated sf6 cylinder. Phys Fluids 34: 076109. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0099353 doi: 10.1063/5.0099353
![]() |
[134] |
Vorobieff P, Rightley PM, Benjamin RF (1998) Power-law spectra of incipient gas-curtain turbulence. Phys Rev Lett 81: 2240. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.81.2240 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.81.2240
![]() |
[135] |
Niederhaus JH, Greenough J, Oakley J, et al. (2008) A computational parameter study for the three-dimensional shock–bubble interaction. J Fluid Mech 594: 85–124. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022112007008749 doi: 10.1017/S0022112007008749
![]() |
[136] |
Lombardini M, Pullin D, Meiron D (2012) Transition to turbulence in shock-driven mixing: a mach number study. J Fluid Mech 690: 203–226. https://doi.org/10.1017/jfm.2011.425 doi: 10.1017/jfm.2011.425
![]() |
[137] |
Oggian T, Drikakis D, Youngs D, et al. (2015) Computing multi-mode shock-induced compressible turbulent mixing at late times. J Fluid Mech 779: 411–431. https://doi.org/10.1017/jfm.2015.392 doi: 10.1017/jfm.2015.392
![]() |
[138] |
Liu H, Yu B, Zhang B, et al. (2020) On mixing enhancement by secondary baroclinic vorticity in shock bubble interaction. J Fluid Mech 931: A17. https://doi.org/10.1017/jfm.2021.923 doi: 10.1017/jfm.2021.923
![]() |
[139] |
Li Y, Wang Z, Yu B, et al. (2019) Gaussian models for late-time evolution of two-dimensional shock–light cylindrical bubble interaction. Shock Waves 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00193-019-00928-w doi: 10.1007/s00193-019-00928-w
![]() |
[140] |
Thornber B, Griffond J, Poujade O, et al. (2017) Late-time growth rate, mixing, and anisotropy in the multimode narrowband richtmyer–meshkov instability: The -group collaboration. Phys Fluids 29: 105107. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4993464 doi: 10.1063/1.4993464
![]() |
[141] |
Li H, He Z, Zhang Y, et al. (2019) On the role of rarefaction/compression waves in richtmyer-meshkov instability with reshock. Phys Fluids 31: 054102. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5083796 doi: 10.1063/1.5083796
![]() |
[142] |
Bin Y, Xiao M, Shi Y, et al. (2021) A new idea to predict reshocked richtmyer–meshkov mixing: constrained large-eddy simulation. J Fluid Mech 918: R1. https://doi.org/10.1017/jfm.2021.332 doi: 10.1017/jfm.2021.332
![]() |
[143] |
Ruan YC, Zhang YS, Tian BL, et al. (2020) Density-ratio-invariant mean-species profile of classical rayleigh-taylor mixing. Phys Rev Fluids 5: 054501. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevFluids.5.054501 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevFluids.5.054501
![]() |
[144] |
Yu B, Liu H, Liu H (2021) Scaling behavior of density gradient accelerated mixing rate in shock bubble interaction. Phys Rev Fluids 6: 064502. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevFluids.6.064502 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevFluids.6.064502
![]() |
[145] |
Yu B, Li L, Xu H, et al. (2022) Effects of reynolds number and schmidt number on variable density mixing in shock bubble interaction. Acta Mech Sinica 38: 121256. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10409-022-09011-9 doi: 10.1007/s10409-022-09011-9
![]() |
[146] |
Tian Y, Jaberi FA, Li Z, et al. (2017) Numerical study of variable density turbulence interaction with a normal shock wave. J Fluid Mech 829: 551–588. https://doi.org/10.1017/jfm.2017.542 doi: 10.1017/jfm.2017.542
![]() |
[147] |
Wong ML, Livescu D, Lele SK (2019) High-resolution navier-stokes simulations of richtmyer-meshkov instability with reshock. Phys Rev Fluids 4: 104609. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevFluids.4.104609 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevFluids.4.104609
![]() |
[148] |
Livescu D, Ryu J (2016) Vorticity dynamics after the shock–turbulence interaction. Shock Waves 26: 241–251. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00193-015-0580-5 doi: 10.1007/s00193-015-0580-5
![]() |
[149] |
Aslangil D, Livescu D, Banerjee A (2020) Variable-density buoyancy-driven turbulence with asymmetric initial density distribution. Physica D 406: 132444. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physd.2020.132444 doi: 10.1016/j.physd.2020.132444
![]() |
[150] |
Tian Y, Jaberi FA, Livescu D (2019) Density effects on post-shock turbulence structure and dynamics. J Fluid Mech 880: 935–968. https://doi.org/10.1017/jfm.2019.707 doi: 10.1017/jfm.2019.707
![]() |
[151] |
Orlicz G, Balasubramanian S, Prestridge K (2013)Incident shock mach number effects on richtmyer-meshkov mixing in a heavy gas layer. Phys Fluids 25: 114101. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4827435 doi: 10.1063/1.4827435
![]() |
[152] |
Tomkins C, Kumar S, Orlicz G, et al. (2008) An experimental investigation of mixing mechanisms in shock-accelerated flow. J Fluid Mech 611: 131–150. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022112008002723 doi: 10.1017/S0022112008002723
![]() |
[153] |
Marble FE, Zukoski EE, Jacobs JW, et al. (1990) Shock enhancement and control of hypersonic mixing and combustion. AIAA Pap 1981: 1990. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1990-1981 doi: 10.2514/6.1990-1981
![]() |
[154] |
Ottino JM (1990) Mixing, chaotic advection, and turbulence. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 22: 207–254. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.fl.22.010190.001231 doi: 10.1146/annurev.fl.22.010190.001231
![]() |
[155] |
Sreenivasan KR (2019) Turbulent mixing: A perspective. P Natl Acad Sci 116: 18 175–18 183. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1800463115 doi: 10.1073/pnas.1800463115
![]() |
[156] |
Ranjan D, Oakley J, Bonazza R (2011) Shock-bubble interactions. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 43: 117–140. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-fluid-122109-160744 doi: 10.1146/annurev-fluid-122109-160744
![]() |
[157] |
Mulla IA, Hardalupas Y (2022) Measurement of instantaneous fully 3d scalar dissipation rate in a turbulent swirling flow. Exp Fluids 63: 173. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00348-022-03518-2 doi: 10.1007/s00348-022-03518-2
![]() |
1. | Kamran Kamran, Zahir Shah, Poom Kumam, Nasser Aedh Alreshidi, A Meshless Method Based on the Laplace Transform for the 2D Multi-Term Time Fractional Partial Integro-Differential Equation, 2020, 8, 2227-7390, 1972, 10.3390/math8111972 | |
2. | Abdul Ghafoor, Nazish Khan, Manzoor Hussain, Rahman Ullah, A hybrid collocation method for the computational study of multi-term time fractional partial differential equations, 2022, 128, 08981221, 130, 10.1016/j.camwa.2022.10.005 | |
3. | Siraj Ahmad, Kamal Shah, Thabet Abdeljawad, Bahaaeldin Abdalla, On the Approximation of Fractal-Fractional Differential Equations Using Numerical Inverse Laplace Transform Methods, 2023, 135, 1526-1506, 2743, 10.32604/cmes.2023.023705 | |
4. | A. Ahmadian, M. Salimi, S. Salahshour, Local RBF Method for Transformed Three Dimensional Sub-Diffusion Equations, 2022, 8, 2349-5103, 10.1007/s40819-022-01338-w | |
5. | Monireh Nosrati Sahlan, Hojjat Afshari, Jehad Alzabut, Ghada Alobaidi, Using Fractional Bernoulli Wavelets for Solving Fractional Diffusion Wave Equations with Initial and Boundary Conditions, 2021, 5, 2504-3110, 212, 10.3390/fractalfract5040212 | |
6. | Ujala Gul, Zareen A. Khan, Salma Haque, Nabil Mlaiki, A Local Radial Basis Function Method for Numerical Approximation of Multidimensional Multi-Term Time-Fractional Mixed Wave-Diffusion and Subdiffusion Equation Arising in Fluid Mechanics, 2024, 8, 2504-3110, 639, 10.3390/fractalfract8110639 | |
7. | Aisha Subhan, Kamal Shah, Suhad Subhi Aiadi, Nabil Mlaiki, Fahad M. Alotaibi, Abdellatif Ben Makhlouf, Analysis of Volterra Integrodifferential Equations with the Fractal-Fractional Differential Operator, 2023, 2023, 1099-0526, 1, 10.1155/2023/7210126 | |
8. | Tao Hu, Cheng Huang, Sergiy Reutskiy, Jun Lu, Ji Lin, A Novel Accurate Method for Multi-Term Time-Fractional Nonlinear Diffusion Equations in Arbitrary Domains, 2024, 138, 1526-1506, 1521, 10.32604/cmes.2023.030449 |
, | , | , | |||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
80 | 20 | 35 | 7.77 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 3.14 | 0.343148 |
55 | 7.61 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 3.64 | 1.222487 | ||
75 | 7.61 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 4.2 | 5.000861 | ||
95 | 7.61 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 4.75 | 12.067666 | ||
110 | 7.61 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 9.30 | 22.244950 | ||
40 | 15 | 80 | 5.76 | 4.5 | 1.37 | 2.4 | 2.034147 |
50 | 4.70 | 5.7 | 1.17 | 2.4 | 3.430185 | ||
60 | 4.32 | 6.9 | 1.05 | 2.4 | 4.307865 | ||
70 | 9.09 | 8.0 | 1.24 | 2.4 | 5.308744 | ||
80 | 4.82 | 9.2 | 1.14 | 2.4 | 6.327198 | ||
70 | 12 | 90 | 2.33 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 8.18 | 8.646889 |
15 | 9.09 | 8.0 | 1.24 | 8.18 | 8.534781 | ||
18 | 8.80 | 8.5 | 1.17 | 8.18 | 8.898832 | ||
21 | 4.10 | 8.8 | 1.20 | 8.18 | 8.901062 | ||
24 | 9.30 | 9.0 | 1.26 | 8.18 | 8.835825 | ||
[14] | 4.79 |
, | , | , | |||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
70 | 12 | 10 | 3.51 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 2.02 | 0.201190 |
12 | 3.98 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 1.47 | 0.202626 | ||
14 | 4.20 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 1.06 | 0.213661 | ||
16 | 4.16 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 7.76 | 0.203777 | ||
18 | 4.99 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 5.64 | 0.204327 | ||
30 | 15 | 20 | 2.97 | 3.4 | 1.00 | 4.10 | 0.203400 |
40 | 5.99 | 4.5 | 1.37 | 4.10 | 0.212062 | ||
50 | 4.82 | 5.7 | 1.17 | 4.10 | 0.210793 | ||
70 | 9.41 | 8.0 | 1.24 | 4.10 | 0.222508 | ||
90 | 8.14 | 10.4 | 1.07 | 4.10 | 0.217812 | ||
80 | 12 | 20 | 7.56 | 8.3 | 1.15 | 4.10 | 0.211422 |
14 | 7.53 | 9.0 | 1.04 | 4.10 | 0.218499 | ||
16 | 6.68 | 9.4 | 1.17 | 4.10 | 0.224207 | ||
18 | 4.87 | 9.8 | 1.02 | 4.10 | 0.226878 | ||
20 | 4.67 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 4.10 | 0.239581 | ||
[14] | 5.69 |
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
60 | 22 | 40 | 8.44 | 7.6 | 1.18 | 1.83 | 0.667872 |
60 | 6.62 | 7.6 | 1.18 | 2.12 | 1.580686 | ||
80 | 8.62 | 7.6 | 1.18 | 2.4 | 7.362587 | ||
90 | 8.62 | 7.6 | 1.18 | 8.18 | 10.843996 | ||
100 | 8.62 | 7.6 | 1.18 | 2.76 | 15.784191 | ||
70 | 10 | 100 | 5.52 | 6.4 | 1.15 | 2.76 | 17.932164 |
12 | 2.74 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 2.76 | 17.859075 | ||
14 | 3.44 | 7.8 | 1.21 | 2.76 | 18.129870 | ||
18 | 5.21 | 8.5 | 1.17 | 2.76 | 18.278882 | ||
22 | 7.64 | 8.9 | 1.15 | 2.76 | 18.479720 | ||
50 | 25 | 90 | 9.85 | 6.5 | 1.01 | 8.18 | 8.730629 |
60 | 1.03 | 7.8 | 1.09 | 8.18 | 11.049126 | ||
70 | 5.40 | 9.1 | 1.14 | 8.18 | 13.349187 | ||
80 | 6.57 | 10.4 | 1.19 | 8.18 | 15.124607 | ||
90 | 6.17 | 11.8 | 1.02 | 8.18 | 17.134190 | ||
[14] | 7.0080 |
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
70 | 12 | 10 | 2.56 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 2.02 | 0.202184 |
12 | 2.91 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 1.47 | 0.197720 | ||
14 | 3.10 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 1.06 | 0.200589 | ||
16 | 3.25 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 7.76 | 0.202710 | ||
18 | 5.65 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 5.64 | 0.194221 | ||
30 | 15 | 20 | 3.74 | 3.4 | 1.00 | 4.10 | 0.202098 |
40 | 6.97 | 4.5 | 1.37 | 4.10 | 0.201783 | ||
50 | 6.68 | 5.7 | 1.17 | 4.10 | 0.204199 | ||
70 | 1.00 | 8.0 | 1.24 | 4.10 | 0.205864 | ||
90 | 1.36 | 10.4 | 1.07 | 4.10 | 0.216570 | ||
80 | 12 | 20 | 9.70 | 8.3 | 1.15 | 4.10 | 0.207446 |
14 | 4.34 | 9.0 | 1.04 | 4.10 | 0.206234 | ||
16 | 8.47 | 9.4 | 1.17 | 4.10 | 0.216176 | ||
18 | 4.76 | 9.8 | 1.02 | 4.10 | 0.215397 | ||
20 | 5.66 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 4.10 | 0.244942 | ||
[14] | 1.39 |
, | , | ||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
80 | 25 | 50 | 4.20 | 10.4 | 1.19 | 6.25 | 2.249386 |
60 | 3.85 | 10.4 | 1.19 | 2.12 | 4.114330 | ||
70 | 3.86 | 10.4 | 1.19 | 7.2 | 7.301508 | ||
90 | 3.86 | 10.4 | 1.19 | 8.18 | 15.044453 | ||
100 | 3.86 | 10.4 | 1.19 | 2.76 | 21.588645 | ||
60 | 27 | 90 | 9.51 | 7.9 | 1.06 | 8.18 | 11.338375 |
70 | 8.41 | 9.2 | 1.16 | 8.18 | 13.565846 | ||
80 | 1.15 | 10.6 | 1.01 | 8.18 | 15.034979 | ||
90 | 9.66 | 11.9 | 1.10 | 8.18 | 17.556509 | ||
100 | 7.93 | 13.2 | 1.16 | 8.18 | 21.605433 | ||
85 | 20 | 95 | 8.45 | 10.6 | 1.21 | 4.75 | 18.828414 |
22 | 5.73 | 10.9 | 1.01 | 4.75 | 19.612251 | ||
24 | 1.68 | 11.0 | 1.16 | 4.75 | 19.670357 | ||
27 | 4.26 | 11.2 | 1.16 | 4.75 | 19.563284 | ||
30 | 5.36 | 11.4 | 1.09 | 4.75 | 20.041057 | ||
[14] | 8.81 |
, | , | ||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
70 | 12 | 10 | 3.54 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 2.02 | 0.142848 |
12 | 3.40 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 1.47 | 0.133224 | ||
14 | 2.83 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 1.06 | 0.134380 | ||
16 | 4.64 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 7.76 | 0.133445 | ||
18 | 5.19 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 5.64 | 0.136420 | ||
30 | 15 | 20 | 1.15 | 3.4 | 1.00 | 4.10 | 0.135380 |
40 | 5.10 | 4.5 | 1.37 | 4.10 | 0.142579 | ||
50 | 1.07 | 5.7 | 1.17 | 4.10 | 0.137483 | ||
70 | 1.44 | 8.0 | 1.24 | 4.10 | 0.145392 | ||
90 | 1.49 | 10.4 | 1.07 | 4.10 | 0.151340 | ||
80 | 12 | 20 | 1.29 | 8.3 | 1.15 | 4.10 | 0.144167 |
14 | 1.22 | 9.0 | 1.04 | 4.10 | 0.139500 | ||
16 | 8.31 | 9.4 | 1.17 | 4.10 | 0.148407 | ||
18 | 4.78 | 9.8 | 1.02 | 4.10 | 0.156982 | ||
20 | 9.51 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 4.10 | 0.166119 | ||
[14] | 8.81 |
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
900 | 14 | 70 | 4.26 | 1.1 | 1.22 | 7.20 | 755.137804 |
16 | 1.12 | 1.7 | 3.71 | 7.20 | 756.918480 | ||
18 | 5.00 | 1.9 | 1.26 | 7.20 | 751.184383 | ||
20 | 9.22 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 7.20 | 748.664343 | ||
576 | 20 | 90 | 5.15 | 1.9 | 1.51 | 8.18 | 286.863124 |
676 | 5.08 | 2.0 | 2.19 | 8.18 | 421.440624 | ||
784 | 8.58 | 2.2 | 1.77 | 8.18 | 608.764593 | ||
900 | 9.22 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 8.18 | 861.916452 | ||
729 | 20 | 20 | 1.10 | 2.1 | 1.96 | 1.55 | 22.119245 |
30 | 7.80 | 2.1 | 1.96 | 5.73 | 48.770754 | ||
50 | 7.57 | 2.1 | 1.96 | 6.25 | 138.310373 | ||
80 | 7.57 | 2.1 | 1.96 | 2.40 | 386.725304 |
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
900 | 20 | 16 | 1.98 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 7.76 | 9.513650 |
18 | 2.15 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 5.64 | 10.640051 | ||
20 | 2.00 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 4.10 | 11.661281 | ||
22 | 8.40 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 2.97 | 12.824995 | ||
24 | 9.12 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 2.16 | 13.560164 | ||
900 | 14 | 24 | 4.28 | 1.1 | 1.22 | 2.16 | 13.026362 |
16 | 1.12 | 1.7 | 3.31 | 2.16 | 13.463156 | ||
18 | 5.00 | 1.9 | 1.26 | 2.16 | 13.591828 | ||
20 | 9.12 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 2.16 | 13.601463 | ||
576 | 20 | 22 | 5.11 | 1.9 | 1.51 | 2.97 | 4.451590 |
676 | 5.17 | 2.0 | 2.19 | 2.97 | 6.401350 | ||
784 | 8.14 | 2.2 | 1.77 | 2.97 | 9.076440 | ||
900 | 8.40 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 2.97 | 12.560123 | ||
961 | 8.06 | 2.4 | 2.19 | 2.97 | 14.919706 |
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
950 | 60 | 15 | 8.30 | 4.3 | 3.11 | 2.63 | 38.116660 |
20 | 1.20 | 4.3 | 3.11 | 1.55 | 62.890208 | ||
30 | 9.23 | 4.3 | 3.11 | 5.37 | 133.694751 | ||
40 | 9.17 | 4.3 | 3.11 | 1.83 | 369.149122 | ||
900 | 30 | 50 | 1.30 | 3.1 | 2.82 | 6.25 | 361.783503 |
40 | 2.10 | 3.5 | 5.12 | 6.25 | 366.883195 | ||
50 | 2.20 | 4.1 | 2.43 | 6.25 | 363.312789 | ||
60 | 9.17 | 4.3 | 3.11 | 6.25 | 367.839901 | ||
300 | 59 | 60 | 9.77 | 4.3 | 3.06 | 2.12 | 553.852222 |
550 | 9.77 | 4.3 | 3.06 | 2.12 | 447.562447 | ||
800 | 9.77 | 4.3 | 3.06 | 2.12 | 531.883062 | ||
1100 | 9.77 | 4.3 | 3.06 | 2.12 | 531.921143 |
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
950 | 50 | 18 | 5.87 | 4.1 | 2.43 | 5.64 | 9.258343 |
20 | 7.60 | 4.1 | 2.43 | 4.10 | 9.959348 | ||
22 | 2.40 | 4.1 | 2.43 | 2.97 | 10.597861 | ||
24 | 1.90 | 4.1 | 2.43 | 2.16 | 11.241704 | ||
1050 | 10 | 26 | 9.43 | 1.2 | 7.70 | 1.57 | 9.389988 |
30 | 1.20 | 3.1 | 2.82 | 1.57 | 10.100778 | ||
50 | 1.90 | 4.1 | 2.43 | 1.57 | 11.882140 | ||
60 | 8.84 | 4.3 | 3.11 | 1.57 | 13.157724 | ||
750 | 59 | 28 | 9.36 | 4.3 | 3.06 | 1.14 | 13.662250 |
1150 | 9.36 | 4.3 | 3.06 | 1.14 | 13.759729 | ||
1250 | 9.36 | 4.3 | 3.06 | 1.14 | 13.572409 |
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
851 | 50 | 40 | 4.70 | 4.0 | 1.13 | 1.83 | 50.524737 |
50 | 6.75 | 4.0 | 1.13 | 6.25 | 79.388630 | ||
60 | 6.74 | 4.0 | 1.13 | 2.12 | 116.511151 | ||
80 | 6.74 | 4.0 | 1.13 | 2.40 | 227.719695 | ||
852 | 30 | 70 | 1.30 | 2.9 | 6.40 | 7.20 | 147.655977 |
40 | 1.20 | 3.4 | 5.83 | 7.20 | 158.960295 | ||
50 | 9.34 | 3.9 | 1.82 | 7.20 | 219.043351 | ||
60 | 9.47 | 4.2 | 1.92 | 7.20 | 268.501711 | ||
457 | 60 | 60 | 6.97 | 3.0 | 3.07 | 2.12 | 68.420275 |
542 | 4.39 | 3.3 | 1.62 | 2.12 | 89.095051 | ||
643 | 4.86 | 3.6 | 1.79 | 2.12 | 117.459116 | ||
851 | 7.29 | 4.2 | 1.90 | 2.12 | 184.241136 |
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
752 | 30 | 24 | 1.10 | 2.7 | 3.89 | 2.16 | 3.188624 |
850 | 1.80 | 2.9 | 7.98 | 2.16 | 3.613122 | ||
921 | 1.50 | 3.0 | 2.48 | 2.16 | 4.028301 | ||
974 | 9.61 | 3.2 | 5.64 | 2.16 | 4.297978 | ||
1020 | 28 | 22 | 2.90 | 2.9 | 3.79 | 2.97 | 4.261794 |
40 | 1.90 | 3.7 | 2.62 | 2.97 | 5.485432 | ||
50 | 1.00 | 4.2 | 1.13 | 2.97 | 6.750489 | ||
60 | 9.32 | 4.6 | 6.25 | 2.97 | 8.366275 | ||
1095 | 70 | 18 | 6.47 | 5.1 | 2.15 | 5.64 | 10.452683 |
20 | 6.60 | 5.1 | 2.15 | 4.10 | 10.778798 | ||
22 | 9.01 | 5.1 | 2.15 | 2.97 | 11.238818 | ||
24 | 9.97 | 5.1 | 2.15 | 2.16 | 11.540931 |
, | , | , | |||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
80 | 20 | 35 | 7.77 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 3.14 | 0.343148 |
55 | 7.61 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 3.64 | 1.222487 | ||
75 | 7.61 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 4.2 | 5.000861 | ||
95 | 7.61 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 4.75 | 12.067666 | ||
110 | 7.61 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 9.30 | 22.244950 | ||
40 | 15 | 80 | 5.76 | 4.5 | 1.37 | 2.4 | 2.034147 |
50 | 4.70 | 5.7 | 1.17 | 2.4 | 3.430185 | ||
60 | 4.32 | 6.9 | 1.05 | 2.4 | 4.307865 | ||
70 | 9.09 | 8.0 | 1.24 | 2.4 | 5.308744 | ||
80 | 4.82 | 9.2 | 1.14 | 2.4 | 6.327198 | ||
70 | 12 | 90 | 2.33 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 8.18 | 8.646889 |
15 | 9.09 | 8.0 | 1.24 | 8.18 | 8.534781 | ||
18 | 8.80 | 8.5 | 1.17 | 8.18 | 8.898832 | ||
21 | 4.10 | 8.8 | 1.20 | 8.18 | 8.901062 | ||
24 | 9.30 | 9.0 | 1.26 | 8.18 | 8.835825 | ||
[14] | 4.79 |
, | , | , | |||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
70 | 12 | 10 | 3.51 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 2.02 | 0.201190 |
12 | 3.98 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 1.47 | 0.202626 | ||
14 | 4.20 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 1.06 | 0.213661 | ||
16 | 4.16 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 7.76 | 0.203777 | ||
18 | 4.99 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 5.64 | 0.204327 | ||
30 | 15 | 20 | 2.97 | 3.4 | 1.00 | 4.10 | 0.203400 |
40 | 5.99 | 4.5 | 1.37 | 4.10 | 0.212062 | ||
50 | 4.82 | 5.7 | 1.17 | 4.10 | 0.210793 | ||
70 | 9.41 | 8.0 | 1.24 | 4.10 | 0.222508 | ||
90 | 8.14 | 10.4 | 1.07 | 4.10 | 0.217812 | ||
80 | 12 | 20 | 7.56 | 8.3 | 1.15 | 4.10 | 0.211422 |
14 | 7.53 | 9.0 | 1.04 | 4.10 | 0.218499 | ||
16 | 6.68 | 9.4 | 1.17 | 4.10 | 0.224207 | ||
18 | 4.87 | 9.8 | 1.02 | 4.10 | 0.226878 | ||
20 | 4.67 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 4.10 | 0.239581 | ||
[14] | 5.69 |
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
60 | 22 | 40 | 8.44 | 7.6 | 1.18 | 1.83 | 0.667872 |
60 | 6.62 | 7.6 | 1.18 | 2.12 | 1.580686 | ||
80 | 8.62 | 7.6 | 1.18 | 2.4 | 7.362587 | ||
90 | 8.62 | 7.6 | 1.18 | 8.18 | 10.843996 | ||
100 | 8.62 | 7.6 | 1.18 | 2.76 | 15.784191 | ||
70 | 10 | 100 | 5.52 | 6.4 | 1.15 | 2.76 | 17.932164 |
12 | 2.74 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 2.76 | 17.859075 | ||
14 | 3.44 | 7.8 | 1.21 | 2.76 | 18.129870 | ||
18 | 5.21 | 8.5 | 1.17 | 2.76 | 18.278882 | ||
22 | 7.64 | 8.9 | 1.15 | 2.76 | 18.479720 | ||
50 | 25 | 90 | 9.85 | 6.5 | 1.01 | 8.18 | 8.730629 |
60 | 1.03 | 7.8 | 1.09 | 8.18 | 11.049126 | ||
70 | 5.40 | 9.1 | 1.14 | 8.18 | 13.349187 | ||
80 | 6.57 | 10.4 | 1.19 | 8.18 | 15.124607 | ||
90 | 6.17 | 11.8 | 1.02 | 8.18 | 17.134190 | ||
[14] | 7.0080 |
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
70 | 12 | 10 | 2.56 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 2.02 | 0.202184 |
12 | 2.91 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 1.47 | 0.197720 | ||
14 | 3.10 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 1.06 | 0.200589 | ||
16 | 3.25 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 7.76 | 0.202710 | ||
18 | 5.65 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 5.64 | 0.194221 | ||
30 | 15 | 20 | 3.74 | 3.4 | 1.00 | 4.10 | 0.202098 |
40 | 6.97 | 4.5 | 1.37 | 4.10 | 0.201783 | ||
50 | 6.68 | 5.7 | 1.17 | 4.10 | 0.204199 | ||
70 | 1.00 | 8.0 | 1.24 | 4.10 | 0.205864 | ||
90 | 1.36 | 10.4 | 1.07 | 4.10 | 0.216570 | ||
80 | 12 | 20 | 9.70 | 8.3 | 1.15 | 4.10 | 0.207446 |
14 | 4.34 | 9.0 | 1.04 | 4.10 | 0.206234 | ||
16 | 8.47 | 9.4 | 1.17 | 4.10 | 0.216176 | ||
18 | 4.76 | 9.8 | 1.02 | 4.10 | 0.215397 | ||
20 | 5.66 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 4.10 | 0.244942 | ||
[14] | 1.39 |
, | , | ||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
80 | 25 | 50 | 4.20 | 10.4 | 1.19 | 6.25 | 2.249386 |
60 | 3.85 | 10.4 | 1.19 | 2.12 | 4.114330 | ||
70 | 3.86 | 10.4 | 1.19 | 7.2 | 7.301508 | ||
90 | 3.86 | 10.4 | 1.19 | 8.18 | 15.044453 | ||
100 | 3.86 | 10.4 | 1.19 | 2.76 | 21.588645 | ||
60 | 27 | 90 | 9.51 | 7.9 | 1.06 | 8.18 | 11.338375 |
70 | 8.41 | 9.2 | 1.16 | 8.18 | 13.565846 | ||
80 | 1.15 | 10.6 | 1.01 | 8.18 | 15.034979 | ||
90 | 9.66 | 11.9 | 1.10 | 8.18 | 17.556509 | ||
100 | 7.93 | 13.2 | 1.16 | 8.18 | 21.605433 | ||
85 | 20 | 95 | 8.45 | 10.6 | 1.21 | 4.75 | 18.828414 |
22 | 5.73 | 10.9 | 1.01 | 4.75 | 19.612251 | ||
24 | 1.68 | 11.0 | 1.16 | 4.75 | 19.670357 | ||
27 | 4.26 | 11.2 | 1.16 | 4.75 | 19.563284 | ||
30 | 5.36 | 11.4 | 1.09 | 4.75 | 20.041057 | ||
[14] | 8.81 |
, | , | ||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
70 | 12 | 10 | 3.54 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 2.02 | 0.142848 |
12 | 3.40 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 1.47 | 0.133224 | ||
14 | 2.83 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 1.06 | 0.134380 | ||
16 | 4.64 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 7.76 | 0.133445 | ||
18 | 5.19 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 5.64 | 0.136420 | ||
30 | 15 | 20 | 1.15 | 3.4 | 1.00 | 4.10 | 0.135380 |
40 | 5.10 | 4.5 | 1.37 | 4.10 | 0.142579 | ||
50 | 1.07 | 5.7 | 1.17 | 4.10 | 0.137483 | ||
70 | 1.44 | 8.0 | 1.24 | 4.10 | 0.145392 | ||
90 | 1.49 | 10.4 | 1.07 | 4.10 | 0.151340 | ||
80 | 12 | 20 | 1.29 | 8.3 | 1.15 | 4.10 | 0.144167 |
14 | 1.22 | 9.0 | 1.04 | 4.10 | 0.139500 | ||
16 | 8.31 | 9.4 | 1.17 | 4.10 | 0.148407 | ||
18 | 4.78 | 9.8 | 1.02 | 4.10 | 0.156982 | ||
20 | 9.51 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 4.10 | 0.166119 | ||
[14] | 8.81 |
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
900 | 14 | 70 | 4.26 | 1.1 | 1.22 | 7.20 | 755.137804 |
16 | 1.12 | 1.7 | 3.71 | 7.20 | 756.918480 | ||
18 | 5.00 | 1.9 | 1.26 | 7.20 | 751.184383 | ||
20 | 9.22 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 7.20 | 748.664343 | ||
576 | 20 | 90 | 5.15 | 1.9 | 1.51 | 8.18 | 286.863124 |
676 | 5.08 | 2.0 | 2.19 | 8.18 | 421.440624 | ||
784 | 8.58 | 2.2 | 1.77 | 8.18 | 608.764593 | ||
900 | 9.22 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 8.18 | 861.916452 | ||
729 | 20 | 20 | 1.10 | 2.1 | 1.96 | 1.55 | 22.119245 |
30 | 7.80 | 2.1 | 1.96 | 5.73 | 48.770754 | ||
50 | 7.57 | 2.1 | 1.96 | 6.25 | 138.310373 | ||
80 | 7.57 | 2.1 | 1.96 | 2.40 | 386.725304 |
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
900 | 20 | 16 | 1.98 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 7.76 | 9.513650 |
18 | 2.15 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 5.64 | 10.640051 | ||
20 | 2.00 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 4.10 | 11.661281 | ||
22 | 8.40 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 2.97 | 12.824995 | ||
24 | 9.12 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 2.16 | 13.560164 | ||
900 | 14 | 24 | 4.28 | 1.1 | 1.22 | 2.16 | 13.026362 |
16 | 1.12 | 1.7 | 3.31 | 2.16 | 13.463156 | ||
18 | 5.00 | 1.9 | 1.26 | 2.16 | 13.591828 | ||
20 | 9.12 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 2.16 | 13.601463 | ||
576 | 20 | 22 | 5.11 | 1.9 | 1.51 | 2.97 | 4.451590 |
676 | 5.17 | 2.0 | 2.19 | 2.97 | 6.401350 | ||
784 | 8.14 | 2.2 | 1.77 | 2.97 | 9.076440 | ||
900 | 8.40 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 2.97 | 12.560123 | ||
961 | 8.06 | 2.4 | 2.19 | 2.97 | 14.919706 |
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
950 | 60 | 15 | 8.30 | 4.3 | 3.11 | 2.63 | 38.116660 |
20 | 1.20 | 4.3 | 3.11 | 1.55 | 62.890208 | ||
30 | 9.23 | 4.3 | 3.11 | 5.37 | 133.694751 | ||
40 | 9.17 | 4.3 | 3.11 | 1.83 | 369.149122 | ||
900 | 30 | 50 | 1.30 | 3.1 | 2.82 | 6.25 | 361.783503 |
40 | 2.10 | 3.5 | 5.12 | 6.25 | 366.883195 | ||
50 | 2.20 | 4.1 | 2.43 | 6.25 | 363.312789 | ||
60 | 9.17 | 4.3 | 3.11 | 6.25 | 367.839901 | ||
300 | 59 | 60 | 9.77 | 4.3 | 3.06 | 2.12 | 553.852222 |
550 | 9.77 | 4.3 | 3.06 | 2.12 | 447.562447 | ||
800 | 9.77 | 4.3 | 3.06 | 2.12 | 531.883062 | ||
1100 | 9.77 | 4.3 | 3.06 | 2.12 | 531.921143 |
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
950 | 50 | 18 | 5.87 | 4.1 | 2.43 | 5.64 | 9.258343 |
20 | 7.60 | 4.1 | 2.43 | 4.10 | 9.959348 | ||
22 | 2.40 | 4.1 | 2.43 | 2.97 | 10.597861 | ||
24 | 1.90 | 4.1 | 2.43 | 2.16 | 11.241704 | ||
1050 | 10 | 26 | 9.43 | 1.2 | 7.70 | 1.57 | 9.389988 |
30 | 1.20 | 3.1 | 2.82 | 1.57 | 10.100778 | ||
50 | 1.90 | 4.1 | 2.43 | 1.57 | 11.882140 | ||
60 | 8.84 | 4.3 | 3.11 | 1.57 | 13.157724 | ||
750 | 59 | 28 | 9.36 | 4.3 | 3.06 | 1.14 | 13.662250 |
1150 | 9.36 | 4.3 | 3.06 | 1.14 | 13.759729 | ||
1250 | 9.36 | 4.3 | 3.06 | 1.14 | 13.572409 |
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
851 | 50 | 40 | 4.70 | 4.0 | 1.13 | 1.83 | 50.524737 |
50 | 6.75 | 4.0 | 1.13 | 6.25 | 79.388630 | ||
60 | 6.74 | 4.0 | 1.13 | 2.12 | 116.511151 | ||
80 | 6.74 | 4.0 | 1.13 | 2.40 | 227.719695 | ||
852 | 30 | 70 | 1.30 | 2.9 | 6.40 | 7.20 | 147.655977 |
40 | 1.20 | 3.4 | 5.83 | 7.20 | 158.960295 | ||
50 | 9.34 | 3.9 | 1.82 | 7.20 | 219.043351 | ||
60 | 9.47 | 4.2 | 1.92 | 7.20 | 268.501711 | ||
457 | 60 | 60 | 6.97 | 3.0 | 3.07 | 2.12 | 68.420275 |
542 | 4.39 | 3.3 | 1.62 | 2.12 | 89.095051 | ||
643 | 4.86 | 3.6 | 1.79 | 2.12 | 117.459116 | ||
851 | 7.29 | 4.2 | 1.90 | 2.12 | 184.241136 |
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
752 | 30 | 24 | 1.10 | 2.7 | 3.89 | 2.16 | 3.188624 |
850 | 1.80 | 2.9 | 7.98 | 2.16 | 3.613122 | ||
921 | 1.50 | 3.0 | 2.48 | 2.16 | 4.028301 | ||
974 | 9.61 | 3.2 | 5.64 | 2.16 | 4.297978 | ||
1020 | 28 | 22 | 2.90 | 2.9 | 3.79 | 2.97 | 4.261794 |
40 | 1.90 | 3.7 | 2.62 | 2.97 | 5.485432 | ||
50 | 1.00 | 4.2 | 1.13 | 2.97 | 6.750489 | ||
60 | 9.32 | 4.6 | 6.25 | 2.97 | 8.366275 | ||
1095 | 70 | 18 | 6.47 | 5.1 | 2.15 | 5.64 | 10.452683 |
20 | 6.60 | 5.1 | 2.15 | 4.10 | 10.778798 | ||
22 | 9.01 | 5.1 | 2.15 | 2.97 | 11.238818 | ||
24 | 9.97 | 5.1 | 2.15 | 2.16 | 11.540931 |