Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T23:38:41.664Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Under pressure: turbulent plumes in a uniform crossflow

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 December 2021

Owen H. Jordan Open the ORCID record for Owen H. Jordan [Opens in a new window] ,
Gabriel G. Rooney Open the ORCID record for Gabriel G. Rooney [Opens in a new window] ,
Benjamin J. Devenish Open the ORCID record for Benjamin J. Devenish [Opens in a new window]  and
Maarten van Reeuwijk Open the ORCID record for Maarten van Reeuwijk [Opens in a new window]
Owen H. Jordan
Affiliation:
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, UK
Gabriel G. Rooney
Affiliation:
Met Office, FitzRoy Road, Exeter EX1 3PB, UK
Benjamin J. Devenish
Affiliation:
Met Office, FitzRoy Road, Exeter EX1 3PB, UK
Maarten van Reeuwijk*
Affiliation:
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, UK
*
†Email address for correspondence: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Direct numerical simulation is used to investigate the integral behaviour of buoyant plumes subjected to a uniform crossflow that are infinitely lazy at the source. Neither a plume trajectory defined by the centre of mass of the plume $z_c$ nor a trajectory defined by the central streamline $z_{U}$ is aligned with the average streamlines inside the plume. Both $z_c$ and $z_{U}$ are shown to correlate with field lines of the total buoyancy flux, which implies that a model for the vertical turbulent buoyancy flux is required to faithfully predict the plume angle. A study of the volume conservation equation shows that entrainment due to incorporation of ambient fluid with non-zero velocity due to the increase in the surface area (the Leibniz term) is the dominant entrainment mechanism in strong crossflows. The data indicate that pressure differences between the top and bottom of the plume play a leading role in the evolution of the horizontal and vertical momentum balances and are crucial for appropriately modelling plume rise. By direct parameterisation of the vertical buoyancy flux, the entrainment and the pressure, an integral plume model is developed which is in good agreement with the simulations for sufficiently strong crossflow. A perturbation expansion shows that the current model is an intermediate-range model valid for downstream distances up to $100\ell _b$–$1000 \ell _b$, where $\ell _b$ is the buoyancy length scale based on the flow speed and plume buoyancy flux.

JFM classification

Convection: Plumes/thermals Mixing: Turbulent mixing
Type
JFM Papers
Information
Journal of Fluid Mechanics , Volume 932 , 10 February 2022 , A47
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Briggs, G.A. 1982 Plume rise predictions. In Lectures on Air Pollution and Environmental Impact Analyses (ed. D.A. Haugen), pp. 59–111. American Meteorological Society.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Briggs, G.A. 1984 Plume Rise and Buoyancy Effects, chap. 8, pp. 325–364. Office of Research. US Department of Energy.Google Scholar
Cintolesi, C., Petronio, A. & Armenio, V. 2019 Turbulent structure of buoyant jet in cross-flow studied through large-eddy simulation. Environ. Fluid Mech. 19, 401–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Contini, D., Donateo, A., Cesari, D. & Robins, A.G. 2011 Comparison of plume rise models against water tank experimental data for neutral and stable crossflows. J. Wind Engng Ind. Aerodyn. 99 (5), 539–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Costa, A., et al. 2016 Results of the eruptive column model inter-comparison study. J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 326, 2–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Craske, J. & van Reeuwijk, M. 2015 Energy dispersion in turbulent jets. Part 1. Direct simulation of steady and unsteady jets. J. Fluid Mech. 763, 500–537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davidson, G.A. 1989 Simultaneous trajectory and dilution predictions from a simple integral plume model. Atmos. Environ. 23 (2), 341–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Wit, L., Van Rhee, C. & Keetels, G. 2014 Turbulent interaction of a buoyant jet with cross-flow. ASCE J. Hydraul. Engng 140 (12), 04014060.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Devenish, B.J. 2013 Using simple plume models to refine the source mass flux of volcanic eruptions according to atmospheric conditions. J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 256, 118–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Devenish, B.J., Rooney, G.G., Webster, H.N. & Thomson, D.J. 2010 The entrainment rate for buoyant plumes in a crossflow. Boundary-Layer Meteorol. 134 (3), 411–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fan, L.-N. 1967 Turbulent buoyant jets into stratified or flowing ambient fluids. PhD thesis, CalTech.Google Scholar
Fischer, H.B., Koh, R.C.Y., Imberger, J. & Brooks, N.H. 1979 Mixing in Inland and Coastal Waters. Academic Press.Google Scholar
Frölich, J., Denev, J.A. & Bockhorn, H. 2004 Large eddy simulation of a jet in crossflow. In European Congress on Computational Methods in Applied Sciences and Engineering (ed. P. Neittaanmaki, T. Rossi, K. Majava & O. Pironneau).Google Scholar
Gaskin, S.J. 1995 Single buoyant jets in a crossflow and the advected line thermal. PhD thesis, University of Canterbury.Google Scholar
Hewett, T.A., Fay, J.A. & Hoult, D.P. 1971 Laboratory experiments of smokestack plumes in a stable atmosphere. Atmos. Environ. 5 (9), 767–789.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoult, D.P. & Weil, J.C. 1972 Turbulent plume in a laminar cross flow. Atmos. Environ. 6 (8), 513IN1531–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunt, G.R. & Kaye, N.B. 2005 Lazy plumes. J. Fluid Mech. 533, 329–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huq, P. & Dhanak, M.R. 1996 The bifurcation of circular jets in crossflow. Phys. Fluids 8 (3), 754–763.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huq, P. & Stewart, E.J. 1996 A laboratory study of buoyant plumes in laminar and turbulent crossflows. Atmos. Environ. 30 (7), 1125–1135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huq, P. & Stewart, E.J. 1997 Measurements of density fluctuations in steady, buoyant plumes in crossflow. Atmos. Environ. 31 (11), 1677–1688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jordan, O.H. 2021 Turbulent plumes in a uniform crosswind. MPhil thesis, Imperial College London.Google Scholar
Lee, J.H.W. & Chu, V.H. 2003 Turbulent Jets and Plumes: A Lagrangian Approach. Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
List, E.J. 1982 Turbulent jets and plumes. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 14 (1), 189–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mahesh, K. 2013 The interaction of jets with cross-flow. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 45, 379–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morton, B.R., Taylor, G. & Turner, J.S. 1956 Turbulent gravitational convection from maintained and instantaneous sources. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A 234 (1196), 1–23.Google Scholar
Muppidi, S. & Mahesh, K. 2005 Study of trajectories of jets in crossflow using direct numerical simulations. J. Fluid Mech. 530, 81–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muppidi, S. & Mahesh, K. 2006 Two-dimensional model problem to explain counter-rotating vortex pair formation in a transverse jet. Phys. Fluids 18, 085103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pope, S.B. 2000 Turbulent Flows. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Priestley, C.H.B. & Ball, F.K. 1955 Continuous convection from an isolated source of heat. Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc. 81 (348), 144–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Reeuwijk, M. & Craske, J. 2015 Energy-consistent entrainment relations for jets and plumes. J. Fluid Mech. 782, 333–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Reeuwijk, M., Salizzoni, P., Hunt, G.R. & Craske, J. 2016 Turbulent transport and entrainment in jets and plumes: a DNS study. Phys. Rev. Fluids 1 (7), 074301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Reeuwijk, M., Vassilicos, J.C. & Craske, J. 2021 Unified description of turbulent entrainment. J. Fluid Mech. 908, A12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rooney, G.G. 2015 Merging of a row of plumes or jets with an application to plume rise in a channel. J. Fluid Mech. 771, R1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rossi, E., Bonadonna, C. & Degruyter, W. 2019 A new strategy for the estimation of plume height from clast dispersal in various atmospheric and eruptive conditions. Earth Planet Sci. Lett. 505, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schatzmann, M. 1978 The integral equations for round buoyant jets in stratified flows. Z. Angew. Math. Phys. 29 (4), 608–630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevens, R.J.A.M., Graham, J. & Meneveau, C. 2014 A concurrent precursor inflow method for Large Eddy Simulations and applications to finite length wind farms. Renew. Energy 68, 46–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weil, J.C. 1988 Plume rise. In Lectures on Air Pollution Modeling (ed. A. Venkatram & J.C. Wyngaard), pp. 119–166. American Meteorological Society.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woodhouse, M.J., Hogg, A.J., Phillips, J.C. & Sparks, R.S.J. 2013 Interaction between volcanic plumes and wind during the 2010 Eyjafjallajökull eruption, Iceland. J. Geophys. Res. 118 (1), 92–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woods, A.W. 2010 Turbulent plumes in nature. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 42, 391–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yuan, L.L., Street, R.L. & Ferziger, J.H. 1999 Large-eddy simulations of a round jet in crossflow. J. Fluid Mech. 379, 71–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yuan, L.L. & Street, R.L. 1998 Trajectory and entrainment of a round jet in crossflow. Phys. Fluids 10, 2323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar