- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine
Access Provided by Xinjiang University

Physical Review E

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Access by Xinjiang University

Bounds on the attractor dimension for magnetohydrodynamic channel flow with parallel magnetic field at low magnetic Reynolds number

R. Low* and A. Pothérat†

  • Applied Mathematics Research Centre Coventry University, Coventry CV1 5FB, United Kingdom

  • *mtx014@coventry.ac.uk
  • †aa4111@coventry.ac.uk
PDF

Phys. Rev. E 91, 053022 – Published 27 May, 2015

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.91.053022

Abstract

We investigate aspects of low-magnetic-Reynolds-number flow between two parallel, perfectly insulating walls in the presence of an imposed magnetic field parallel to the bounding walls. We find a functional basis to describe the flow, well adapted to the problem of finding the attractor dimension and which is also used in subsequent direct numerical simulation of these flows. For given Reynolds and Hartmann numbers, we obtain an upper bound for the dimension of the attractor by means of known bounds on the nonlinear inertial term and this functional basis for the flow. Three distinct flow regimes emerge: a quasi-isotropic three-dimensional (3D) flow, a nonisotropic 3D flow, and a 2D flow. We find the transition curves between these regimes in the space parametrized by Hartmann number Ha and attractor dimension datt. We find how the attractor dimension scales as a function of Reynolds and Hartmann numbers (Re and Ha) in each regime. We also investigate the thickness of the boundary layer along the bounding wall and find that in all regimes this scales as 1/Re, independently of the value of Ha, unlike Hartmann boundary layers found when the field is normal to the channel. The structure of the set of least dissipative modes is indeed quite different between these two cases but the properties of turbulence far from the walls (smallest scales and number of degrees of freedom) are found to be very similar.

View figure in article

Article Text

References (21)

  1. N. Vetcha, S. Smolentsev, M. Abdou, and R. Moreau, Phys. Fluids 25, 024102 (2013).
  2. P. H. Roberts, Introduction to Magnetohydrodynamics (Longmans, London, 1967).
  3. H. K. Moffatt, J. Fluid Mech. 28, 571 (1967).
  4. P. A. Davidson, J. Fluid Mech. 336, 123 (1997).
  5. O. Zikanov and A. Thess, J. Fluid Mech. 358, 299 (1998).
  6. A. Thess and O. Zikanov, J. Fluid Mech. 579, 383 (2007).
  7. R. Klein and A. Pothérat, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 034502 (2010).
  8. A. Pothérat, Magnetohydrodynamics 48, 13 (2012).
  9. A. Pothérat and R. Klein, J. Fluid Mech. 761, 168 (2014).
  10. A. Alemany, R. Moreau, P. Sulem, and U. Frish, J. Mec. 18, 277 (1979).
  11. A. Pothérat and T. Alboussière, Phys. Fluids 15, 3170 (2003).
  12. A. Pothérat and T. Alboussière, Phys. Fluids 18, 125102 (2006).
  13. V. Dymkou and A. Pothérat, J. Theor. Comp. Fluid Mech. 23, 535 (2009).
  14. K. Kornet and A. Pothérat, J. Comput. Phys. (2015), doi: 10.1016/j.jcp.2015.05.018.
  15. C. R. Doering and J. D. Gibbons, Applied Analysis of the Navier-Stokes Equation (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1995).
  16. A. Pothérat and V. Dymkou, J. Fluid Mech. 655, 174 (2010).
  17. D. Krasnov, M. Rossi, O. Zikanov, and T. Boeck, J. Fluid Mech. 596, 73 (2008).
  18. D. Krasnov, O. Zikanov, J. Schumacher, and T. Boeck, Phys. Fluids 20, 095105 (2008).
  19. P. Constantin, C. Foias, and R. Temam, Memo. Am. Math. Soc. 53, 314 (1985).
  20. B. Knaepen and R. Moreau, Annu. Rev. Fluid. Mech. 40, 25 (2008).
  21. S. Eckert, G. Gerbeth, W. Witke, and H. Langenbrunner, Int. J. Heat Fluid Flow 22, 358 (2001).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. E 91, 053022– Published 27 May, 2015
  • Received 2 October 2014

©2015 American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation