K41 Versus K62: Recent Developments
For the past 50 years or so, Kolmogorov’s (1962) correction (K62) to his 1941 hypotheses (K41) has been embraced by an overwhelming majority of turbulence researchers. Our recent work suggests that there are no valid reasons for abandoning K41. In particular, analytical considerations, based on the NS equations, which take into account the finite Reynolds number (FRN) effect, together with the available experimental laboratory data, seem to confirm a tendency towards the simple and elegant predictions of K41 as the Reynolds number increases. This is especially true when the focus is on the length scales which lie in the dissipative range. Incorrectly accounting for the FRN effect and the inclusion of the atmospheric surface layer (ASL) data, likely to have been affected by the proximity to the surface, appear to be the major factors which have contributed to a nearly unchallenged acceptance of K62.
SL Tang wishes to acknowledge support given to him from NSFC through grant 11702074.
- 12.Wyngaard JC (2010) Turbulence in the atmosphere. Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
- 15.Frisch U (1995) Turbulence: the legacy of A. N. Kolmogorov. Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
- 34.Djenidi L, Antonia RA, Talluru MK, Abe H (2017) Skewness and flatness factors of the longitudinal velocity derivative in wall-bounded flows. Phys Rev Fluids 2:064608Google Scholar
- 39.Thiesset F, Antonia RA, Djenidi L (2014) Consequences of self-preservation on the axis of a turbulent round jet. J Fluid Mech 748(R2)Google Scholar
- 44.Pope SB (2000) Turbulent flows. Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
- 49.Djenidi L, Antonia RA, Danaila L, Tang SL (2017) A note on the velocity derivative flatness factor in decaying HIT. Phys Fluids 29:051702Google Scholar
- 50.Tang SL, Antonia RA, Djenidi L, Danaila L, Zhou Y (2017) Reappraisal of the velocity derivative flatness factor in various turbulent flows. J Fluid Mech (in revision)Google Scholar