Collaborative testing of eddy structure identification methods in free turbulent shear flows

J. P. Bonnet, J. Delville, Mark N Glauser, R. A. Antonia, D. K. Bisset, D. R. Cole, H. E. Fiedler, J. H. Garem, D. Hilberg, J. Jeong, N. K R Kevlahan, L. S. Ukeiley, E. Vincendeau

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

101 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The thrust of this paper is to validate, test and compare several Coherent Structure eduction methods utilizing the same data base. The flow chosen was that of an experimental study of a plane, incompressible, fully developed turbulent two-stream mixing layer. The mixing layer was chosen as the data base because it has been studied extensively from a coherent structures point of view. In addition, its characteristics (similarity, convection velocities, etc.) are well documented. There are also no wall effects so that comparisons between techniques are simplified. The data was collected from hot wire rakes with good spatial resolution thus allowing the contributors to apply and test different structure eduction techniques. The techniques chosen for discussion and used here have found wide utilization over the past decade, and all hold forth the promise of extensive application in the future. These include: Conditional Sampling (Vorticity-based and other methods); Wavelets; Pattern Recognition Analysis; Proper Orthogonal Decomposition; Stochastic Estimation; Topological Concept-based methods; Full Field Methods (e.g., pseudo flow visualization). All are illustrated by application to the mixing layer data base, and comparisons made between the results. This common study has shown that direct comparisons between results of several methods are now possible. Good quantitive and qualitative agreement between the different methods have been observed as well as some differences noted. As an example, the size of the averaged structures computed from the various methods compare to within 6 percent.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)197-225
Number of pages29
JournalExperiments in Fluids
Volume25
Issue number3
StatePublished - 1998
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

data bases
Shear flow
shear flow
vortices
Testing
rakes
flow visualization
Flow visualization
Vorticity
pattern recognition
thrust
vorticity
Pattern recognition
convection
spatial resolution
sampling
wire
Wire
Sampling
Decomposition

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Fluid Flow and Transfer Processes
  • Computational Mechanics
  • Mechanical Engineering
  • Mechanics of Materials

Cite this

Bonnet, J. P., Delville, J., Glauser, M. N., Antonia, R. A., Bisset, D. K., Cole, D. R., ... Vincendeau, E. (1998). Collaborative testing of eddy structure identification methods in free turbulent shear flows. Experiments in Fluids, 25(3), 197-225.

Collaborative testing of eddy structure identification methods in free turbulent shear flows. / Bonnet, J. P.; Delville, J.; Glauser, Mark N; Antonia, R. A.; Bisset, D. K.; Cole, D. R.; Fiedler, H. E.; Garem, J. H.; Hilberg, D.; Jeong, J.; Kevlahan, N. K R; Ukeiley, L. S.; Vincendeau, E.

In: Experiments in Fluids, Vol. 25, No. 3, 1998, p. 197-225.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Bonnet, JP, Delville, J, Glauser, MN, Antonia, RA, Bisset, DK, Cole, DR, Fiedler, HE, Garem, JH, Hilberg, D, Jeong, J, Kevlahan, NKR, Ukeiley, LS & Vincendeau, E 1998, 'Collaborative testing of eddy structure identification methods in free turbulent shear flows', Experiments in Fluids, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 197-225.
Bonnet JP, Delville J, Glauser MN, Antonia RA, Bisset DK, Cole DR et al. Collaborative testing of eddy structure identification methods in free turbulent shear flows. Experiments in Fluids. 1998;25(3):197-225.
Bonnet, J. P. ; Delville, J. ; Glauser, Mark N ; Antonia, R. A. ; Bisset, D. K. ; Cole, D. R. ; Fiedler, H. E. ; Garem, J. H. ; Hilberg, D. ; Jeong, J. ; Kevlahan, N. K R ; Ukeiley, L. S. ; Vincendeau, E. / Collaborative testing of eddy structure identification methods in free turbulent shear flows. In: Experiments in Fluids. 1998 ; Vol. 25, No. 3. pp. 197-225.
@article{61a6a49467854825876f615b903c312b,
title = "Collaborative testing of eddy structure identification methods in free turbulent shear flows",
abstract = "The thrust of this paper is to validate, test and compare several Coherent Structure eduction methods utilizing the same data base. The flow chosen was that of an experimental study of a plane, incompressible, fully developed turbulent two-stream mixing layer. The mixing layer was chosen as the data base because it has been studied extensively from a coherent structures point of view. In addition, its characteristics (similarity, convection velocities, etc.) are well documented. There are also no wall effects so that comparisons between techniques are simplified. The data was collected from hot wire rakes with good spatial resolution thus allowing the contributors to apply and test different structure eduction techniques. The techniques chosen for discussion and used here have found wide utilization over the past decade, and all hold forth the promise of extensive application in the future. These include: Conditional Sampling (Vorticity-based and other methods); Wavelets; Pattern Recognition Analysis; Proper Orthogonal Decomposition; Stochastic Estimation; Topological Concept-based methods; Full Field Methods (e.g., pseudo flow visualization). All are illustrated by application to the mixing layer data base, and comparisons made between the results. This common study has shown that direct comparisons between results of several methods are now possible. Good quantitive and qualitative agreement between the different methods have been observed as well as some differences noted. As an example, the size of the averaged structures computed from the various methods compare to within 6 percent.",
author = "Bonnet, {J. P.} and J. Delville and Glauser, {Mark N} and Antonia, {R. A.} and Bisset, {D. K.} and Cole, {D. R.} and Fiedler, {H. E.} and Garem, {J. H.} and D. Hilberg and J. Jeong and Kevlahan, {N. K R} and Ukeiley, {L. S.} and E. Vincendeau",
year = "1998",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "25",
pages = "197--225",
journal = "Experiments in Fluids",
issn = "0723-4864",
publisher = "Springer Verlag",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Collaborative testing of eddy structure identification methods in free turbulent shear flows

AU - Bonnet, J. P.

AU - Delville, J.

AU - Glauser, Mark N

AU - Antonia, R. A.

AU - Bisset, D. K.

AU - Cole, D. R.

AU - Fiedler, H. E.

AU - Garem, J. H.

AU - Hilberg, D.

AU - Jeong, J.

AU - Kevlahan, N. K R

AU - Ukeiley, L. S.

AU - Vincendeau, E.

PY - 1998

Y1 - 1998

N2 - The thrust of this paper is to validate, test and compare several Coherent Structure eduction methods utilizing the same data base. The flow chosen was that of an experimental study of a plane, incompressible, fully developed turbulent two-stream mixing layer. The mixing layer was chosen as the data base because it has been studied extensively from a coherent structures point of view. In addition, its characteristics (similarity, convection velocities, etc.) are well documented. There are also no wall effects so that comparisons between techniques are simplified. The data was collected from hot wire rakes with good spatial resolution thus allowing the contributors to apply and test different structure eduction techniques. The techniques chosen for discussion and used here have found wide utilization over the past decade, and all hold forth the promise of extensive application in the future. These include: Conditional Sampling (Vorticity-based and other methods); Wavelets; Pattern Recognition Analysis; Proper Orthogonal Decomposition; Stochastic Estimation; Topological Concept-based methods; Full Field Methods (e.g., pseudo flow visualization). All are illustrated by application to the mixing layer data base, and comparisons made between the results. This common study has shown that direct comparisons between results of several methods are now possible. Good quantitive and qualitative agreement between the different methods have been observed as well as some differences noted. As an example, the size of the averaged structures computed from the various methods compare to within 6 percent.

AB - The thrust of this paper is to validate, test and compare several Coherent Structure eduction methods utilizing the same data base. The flow chosen was that of an experimental study of a plane, incompressible, fully developed turbulent two-stream mixing layer. The mixing layer was chosen as the data base because it has been studied extensively from a coherent structures point of view. In addition, its characteristics (similarity, convection velocities, etc.) are well documented. There are also no wall effects so that comparisons between techniques are simplified. The data was collected from hot wire rakes with good spatial resolution thus allowing the contributors to apply and test different structure eduction techniques. The techniques chosen for discussion and used here have found wide utilization over the past decade, and all hold forth the promise of extensive application in the future. These include: Conditional Sampling (Vorticity-based and other methods); Wavelets; Pattern Recognition Analysis; Proper Orthogonal Decomposition; Stochastic Estimation; Topological Concept-based methods; Full Field Methods (e.g., pseudo flow visualization). All are illustrated by application to the mixing layer data base, and comparisons made between the results. This common study has shown that direct comparisons between results of several methods are now possible. Good quantitive and qualitative agreement between the different methods have been observed as well as some differences noted. As an example, the size of the averaged structures computed from the various methods compare to within 6 percent.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0032131975&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0032131975&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 25

SP - 197

EP - 225

JO - Experiments in Fluids

JF - Experiments in Fluids

SN - 0723-4864

IS - 3

ER -