The performance of two-equation turbulence models (such as the low Reynolds number k-e model of Launder and Sharma 1974) is evaluated versus the algebraic stress model (ASM) (Rodi 1976) for high Reynolds number (Re ¼ 9 Â 10 4 ) jet flows with strong streamline curvature due to impingement onto a flat plate. The partial differential equations for the conservation of mass and momentum are solved using a finite volume method and the predicted velocities are compared to experimental data by Myszko (1997). The paper demonstrates that in the free-jet region both models over-predict the thickness of the jet. The ASM predicts faster jet growth rate and smaller jet thickness than the low Reynolds number model resulting to closer agreement with the experiments. As a consequence of the better performace of the ASM in the free-jet region, predictions in the wall-jet region showed that despite the use of the logarithmic law-of-the-wall function, the ASM results are closer to the experimental points than the predictions obtained with the two-equation model. However, the rate of peak velocity decay is far higher than the experimental one with both turbulence models. Again, the decay rate predicted with the ASM fits better the exprimental data. The implementation of the ASM exhibited convergence problems most of which were atributed to the cross-derivative terms in the k and e equations and were treated using a linear under-relaxation technique. In general the ASM predictions were more accurate than the low Reynolds number k-e model, with an extra computational cost of less than 25%, which makes the model very attractive for the prediction of turbulence characteristics of high Reynolds number flows with strong stramline curvature.List of symbols C AS ; C e ; C S ; C S1 ; C S2 ; C S3 algebraic stress model constants C l ; C 1 ; C 2 k-e turbulence model constants D diffusion term D n diameter of nozzle (=0.0127 m) E E k-e turbulence model additional term D D k-e turbulence model additional term E dissipation term f l ; f 1 ; f 2 k-e turbulence model damping functions H n height of nozzle above impingement surface (=10 D n ) H p height above impingement surface k turbulent kinetic energy N molecular kinematic viscosity G stress production term r radial distance from jet axial centerline r 1=2 free-jet half thickness (to 50% of U m ) Re Reynolds number Re t turbulent Reynolds number T k ; T e algebraic stress model functions U mean velocity normal to impingement surface u fluctuating velocity U n nozzle exit bulk velocity V mean velocity parallel to impingement surface x; y; z coordinates Y distance above the impingement surface Y 1=2 wall-jet half thickness (to 50% of V m ) z distance from the nozzle exit (=H n À Y)Greek symbols c algebraic stress model constant d ij Kronecker delta (=1 for i ¼ j and 0 for i 6 ¼ j) e dissipation rate of turbulent kinetic energỹ e e dissipation variable l molecular dynamic viscosity l T turbulent dynamic viscosity m T turbulent kinematic viscosity q density r k k-e turbulence model constant 466/0302
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.