Global energy budgets in turbulent Couette and Poiseuille flows
Andrea Andreolli, Maurizio Quadrio, Davide Gatti

TL;DR
This paper compares turbulent Couette and Poiseuille flows using energy budgets, revealing that Couette flows are less efficient but more effective at producing flow rate due to their laminar component and large-scale structures.
Contribution
It extends the constant power input framework to compare different turbulent flows and introduces analytical energy-flux identities for flow efficiency and effectiveness.
Findings
Couette flows are less efficient but more effective than Poiseuille flows.
Couette flows develop stronger large-scale structures that influence mean flow and dissipation.
When fed with the same power, Couette flows dissipate less turbulent energy.
Abstract
Turbulent plane Poiseuille and Couette flows share the same geometry, but produce their flow rate owing to different external drivers, pressure gradient and shear respectively. By looking at integral energy fluxes, we pose and answer the question of which flow performs better at creating flow rate. We define a flow {\em efficiency}, that quantifies the fraction of power used to produce flow rate instead of being wasted as a turbulent overhead; {\em effectiveness}, instead, describes the amount of flow rate produced by a given power. The work by Gatti \emph{et al.} (\emph{J. Fluid Mech.} vol.857, 2018, pp. 345--373), where the constant power input (CPI) concept was developed to compare turbulent Poiseuille flows with drag reduction, is here extended to compare different flows. By decomposing the mean velocity field into a laminar contribution and a deviation, analytical expressions are…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
