2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2017.12.063
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Large eddy simulation of density current on sloping beds

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 50 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Details of the numerical method and validation studies for jet-like flows are documented elsewhere (Refs. 32–34 ).…”
Section: The Numerical Model Of the Human Anatomy And Facile Masksmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Details of the numerical method and validation studies for jet-like flows are documented elsewhere (Refs. 32–34 ).…”
Section: The Numerical Model Of the Human Anatomy And Facile Masksmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Owing to the complexity involved in deriving the Jacobian matrix, the Jacobian-free methods are also widely used to solve non-linear equations. Among them, the Jacobian-Free Newton Krylov (JFNK) method [30,[36][37][38][39] is well known for solving large-scale problems, which replaces fsolve in LionPower when a fine mesh is used in the battery simulation or integrated into a hybrid electric powertrain model, as the derivation of the analytic Jacobian matrix becomes inefficient in MATLAB with an increased number of state variables.…”
Section: Jacobian-free Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It should be acknowledged that in the published article we (1) mistakenly used the same symbols for the dynamic viscosity of water and the molecular diffusion coefficient of the scalar, (2) neglected to include the value used for the molecular diffusion, and (3) did not mention that σ * is the reciprocal of the turbulent Schmidt number. Although these details should have been included, these omissions do not change well‐established facts that in turbulent flows the mixing of the solute by molecular diffusion is many orders of magnitude less important than that induced by turbulent eddies (Chawdhary et al, ; Chou & Fringer, ; Gualtieri et al, ; Gualtieri & Bombardelli, ; Khosronejad & Sotiropoulos, ; Scalo et al, ). As we mentioned in Khosronejad et al (), the viscous sublayer in Eagle Creek was not resolved in our simulations, as the first node away from the solid boundaries in wall units was (on average) equal to z + = 45 (see Table 3 in Khosronejad et al, ).…”
Section: Response To Criticism Of Misrepresentation Of Scalar Transportmentioning
confidence: 99%