Week 5 - Rayleigh Taylor Instability
AIM: To study the Rayleigh Taylor Instability.
OBJECTIVES:
1. What are some practical CFD models that have been based on the mathematical analysis of Rayleigh Taylor waves? In
your own words, explain how these mathematical models have been adapted for CFD calculations.
2. Perform the Rayleigh Taylor instability simulation for 2 different mesh sizes with the base mesh being 0.5 mm. Compare
the results by showing the animations( Attach them from your google drive). Observe the differences in the animation and
explain the effect of mesh size on simulation. Also, explain why a steady-state approach might not be suitable for these
types of simulation.[ Choose Air and Water for this simulation]
3. Run one more simulation with water and user-defined material(density = 400 kg/m , viscosity = 0.001 kg/m-s) for refined
mesh.
4. Define the Atwood Number. Find out the Atwood number for both the cases and explain how the variation in Atwood
number in the above two cases affects the behavior of the instability.
1.What are some practical CFD models that have been based on the mathematical analysis of Rayleigh Taylor waves? In your
own words, explain how these mathematical models have been adapted for CFD calculations.
Rayleigh-Taylor Instability.
The Rayleigh–Taylor instability, or RT instability, is the instability of an interface between two fluids of different densities which
occurs when the lighter fluid is pushing the heavier fluid. Examples include the behavior of water suspended above oil in the
the gravity of Earth, mushroom clouds like those from a volcanic eruption and atmospheric nuclear explosion, supernova explosions
in which expanding core gas is accelerated into denser shell gas, instabilities in plasma fusion reactors, and inertial confinement
fusion.
Water suspended atop oil is an everyday example of Rayleigh–Taylor instability, and it may be modeled by two completely
plane-parallel layers of immiscible fluid, the denser on top of the less dense one and both subject to the Earth's gravity.
The equilibrium here is unstable to any perturbations or disturbances of the interface: if a parcel of heavier fluid is displaced
downward with an equal volume of lighter fluid displaced upwards, the potential energy of the configuration is lower than the
initial state. Thus the disturbance will grow and lead to a further release of potential energy, as the more dense material moves
down under the (effective) gravitational field, and the less dense material is further displaced upwards. This was the set-up as
studied by Lord Rayleigh. The important insight by G. I. Taylor was his realization that this situation is equivalent to the situation
when the fluids are accelerated, with the less dense fluid accelerating into the more dense fluid. This occurs deep underwater on
the surface of an expanding bubble and in a nuclear explosion.
Some of the practical CFD models that have been based on the mathematical analysis of Rayleigh Taylor waves are.
Saffman-Taylor Instability.
The Saffman–Taylor instability, also known as viscous fingering, is the formation of patterns in a morphologically unstable
interface between two fluids in a porous medium, described mathematically by Philip Saffman and G. I. Taylor in a paper of
1958. This situation is most often encountered during drainage processes through media such as soils. It occurs when a less
viscous fluid is injected, displacing a more viscous fluid; in the inverse situation, the
interface is stable and no instability is seen with the more viscous displacing the other. Essentially the same effect occurs driven by gravity (without injection) if the
interface is horizontal and separates two fluids of different densities, the heavier one being above the other: this is known as the
Rayleigh-Taylor Instability. In the rectangular configuration, the system evolves until a single finger (the Saffman–Taylor finger)
forms, whilst in the radial configuration, the pattern grows forming fingers by successive tip-splitting
The Richtmyer–Meshkov instability (RMI) occurs when two fluids of different densities are impulsively accelerated. Normally this
is by the passage of a shock wave. The development of the instability begins with small amplitude perturbations which initially
grow linearly with time. This is followed by a nonlinear regime with bubbles appearing in the case of a light fluid penetrating a
heavy fluid and spikes appearing in the case of a heavy fluid penetrating a light fluid. A chaotic regime eventually is
reached and the two fluids mix. This instability can be considered the impulsive-acceleration limit of the Rayleigh-Taylor
Instability.
Kelvin-Helmholtz Instability.
The Kelvin–Helmholtz instability typically occurs when there is velocity shear in a single continuous fluid, or additionally where
there is a velocity difference across the interface between two fluids. A common example is seen when the wind blows across a
water surface; the instability constant manifests as waves. Kelvin-Helmholtz instabilities are also visible in the atmospheres of
planets and moons, such as in cloud formation on Earth or the Red spot on Jupiter, and the atmospheres (coronas) of stars,
including the sun.
Mushroom Cloud.
A mushroom cloud is a distinctive mushroom-shaped flammagenitus cloud of debris, smoke, and usually condensed water
vapor resulting from a large explosion. The effect is most commonly associated with a nuclear explosion but any sufficiently
energetic detonation or deflagration will produce the same effect. They can be caused by powerful conventional weapons, like
thermobaric weapons, including the ATBIP and GBU-43/B Massive Ordnance Air Blast Some Volcanic eruptions and impact
events can produce natural mushroom clouds.
Mushroom clouds result from the sudden formation of a large volume of lower-density gases at any altitude, causing a
Rayleigh-Taylor instability. The buoyant mass of gas rises rapidly, resulting in turbulence vortices curling downward around its
edges, forming a temporary vortex ring that draws up a central column, possibly with smoke, debris, and/or condensed water
vapor to form the "mushroom stem". The mass of gas plus entrained moist air eventually reaches an altitude where it is no
longer of lower density than the surrounding air; at this point, it disperses, drifting back down. The stabilization altitude depends
strongly on the profiles of the temperature, dew point, and wind shear in the air at and above the starting altitude.
Plateau-Rayleigh Instability.
The Plateau–Rayleigh instability, often just called the Rayleigh instability, explains why and how a falling stream of fluid breaks
up into smaller packets with the same volume but less surface area. It is related to the Rayleigh-Taylor Instability and is part of a
greater branch of fluid dynamics concerned with fluid thread breakup. This fluid instability is exploited in the design of a
particular type of inkjet technology whereby a jet of liquid is perturbed into a steady stream of droplets.
Practical CFD Models.
SPH method(Smoother particle hydrodynamics).
Smoothed-particle hydrodynamics (SPH) is a computational method used for simulating the mechanics of continuum media,
such as solid mechanics and fluid flows. Smoothed-particle hydrodynamics is being increasingly used to model fluid motion as
well. This is due to several benefits over traditional grid-based techniques. First, SPH guarantees the conservation of mass
without extra computation since the particles themselves represent mass. Second, SPH computes pressure from weighted
contributions of neighboring particles rather than by solving linear systems of equations. Finally, unlike grid-based techniques,
which must track fluid boundaries, SPH creates a free surface for two-phase interacting fluids directly since the particles
represent the denser fluid and space represents the lighter fluid.
Single-fluid model.
A typical approach used for the analysis of two-phase flows is a mixture model, i.e. the individual fluid phases are assumed to
behave as a flowing mixture described in terms of the mixture properties. The applied single-fluid model is a five-equation
a model consisting of the mass, momentum, and energy equations for a vapor/liquid mixture, and two equations describing the
formation and growth of the liquid phase.
Two-fluid model.
In the two-fluid model, separate sets of the governing equation for the vapor and liquid phases have been used. The interaction
between the droplets and the heat exchange between the liquid phase and the solid boundary are not modeled here as well.
Additionally, the velocity slip between the vapor and the liquid phase is considered in this model.
Turbulence model.
Turbulence models are needed to predict the average mixing behavior inflows that are on average one- or two-dimensional.
The approach to the construction of the tile turbulence model is guided by experimental behavior. The equations governing
turbulent flows can only be solved directly for simple cases of flow. For most real-life turbulent flows, CFD simulations use
turbulent models to predict the evolution of turbulence. These turbulence models are simplified constitutive equations that
predict the statistical evolution of turbulent flows.
2. Perform the Rayleigh Taylor instability simulation for 2 different mesh sizes with the base mesh being 0.5 mm. Compare the
results by showing the animations( Attach them from your google drive). Observe the differences in the animation and explain
the effect of mesh size on simulation. Also, explain why a steady-state approach might not be suitable for these types of
simulation.[ Choose Air and Water for this simulation]
CASE 1.
Geometry:
In the geometry, we are creating the CAD model for the simulation that is shown in the below figure it is a 2-Dimensional
model
The geometry is created as above with the dimensions as given below.
20x20mm, the upper domain is water.
20x20mm the lower domain is air.
And then the shared topology has been enabled to observe the phenomenon happening at the interface.
MESH:
Mesh has generated for the baseline simulation.
Element size: 0.5 mm.
Nodes: 3321
Elements: 3200
Solver: Pressure-based, Transient Time solver.
Viscous model: Laminar.
Fluid Materials: Air and Water.
RESULT:
In the results, we can get the plots and the animations.
The baseline mesh with the cell counts:
Element size: 0.5 mm.
Nodes: 3321
Elements: 3200
Solver: Pressure-based, Transient Time solver.
Viscous model: Laminar.
Fluid Materials: Air and Water.
Timestep size: 0.005s
No. of Timesteps: 1000
contour:
CASE 2.
The Refined mesh with the cell counts:
Element size: 0.3 mm.
Nodes: 9180
Elements: 8978
Solver: Pressure-based, Transient Time solver.
Viscous model: Laminar.
Fluid Materials: Air and Water.
Timestep size: 0.005s
No. of Timesteps: 1000
Mesh:
Residuals:
Contour:
CASE 3.
The Refined mesh with the cell counts:
Element size: 0.2 mm.
Nodes: 20301
Elements: 20000
Solver: Pressure-based, Transient Time solver.
Viscous model: Laminar.
Fluid Materials: Air and Water.
Timestep size: 0.005s
No. of Timesteps: 1000
Mesh:
Residuals:
Contour:
From the cases of simulations, we can observe that the heavier fluid is above the lighter fluid when the heavier fluid pushes the
lighter fluid the denser fluid occupies the volume and the lighter fluid goes above, this phenomenon we can observe at the
The interface of both the fluid.
As we refine the mesh the simulation time for the refined cases will take more to solve the problem, and also the solutions get
smoother than we can observe in the last case which is most refined.
3.Run one more simulation with water and user-defined material(density = 400 kg/m , viscosity = 0.001 kg/m-s) for refined
mesh.
RESULTS.
The Refined mesh with the cell counts:
Element size: 0.3 mm.
Nodes: 9180
Elements: 8978
Solver: Pressure-based, Transient Time solver.
Viscous model: Laminar.
Fluid Materials: user-defined material with a density of 400 kg/m^3, the viscosity of 0.001 kg/m-s, and Water.
Timestep size: 0.005s
No. of Timesteps: 1000
Residuals:
Contour:
4.Define the Atwood Number. Find out the Atwood number for both the cases and explain how the variation in Atwood number in the above two cases affects the behavior of the instability.
Atwood Number.
The Atwood number (A) is dimensionless in fluid dynamics used in the study of hydrodynamic instabilities in density
stratified flows. It is a dimensionless density ratio defined as
Atwood Number,
A=0.997
For case 4,
Denser fluid (Water) = 998.2 kg/m^3
Lighter fluid (user-defined material)= 400 kg/m^3
A=0.427
variation in Atwood number in the above two cases affects the behaviour of the instability.
For Atwood numbers close to 0, RT instability flows take the form of symmetric fingers of fluid.
When Atwood number close to 1, the much lighter fluid below the heavier fluid takes the form of larger bubble-like plumes.
Therefore, from the value of Atwood number, it is seen from the simulations that air forms larger bubbles when water is poured
down the air pushes through and forms large bubbles. Therefore, the results can be validated by obtaining the value of the
Atwood number.
Atwood number is an important parameter in the body of Rayleigh Taylor instability and Richtmyer-Meshkov instability. In
Rayleigh-Taylor instability, the penetration distance of heavy fluid bubbles into the lighter fluid is a function of the acceleration
time scale. A*g*t^2, where 'I'm is the acceleration due to gravity and 'it is the time.
Atwood number effects on the instability of a uniform interface driven by a perturbed shock wave and Rayleigh Taylor
instability:-
The evaluation of a uniform interface subjected to a perturbed shock wave has been experimentally studied over a range of
Atwood numbers 0.22 <= A <= 0.68 and match numbers 1.2 <= M <= 1.8 using a vertical shock tube. The perturbed shock wave is
produced by diffracting a planar incident shock over a rigid cylinder. The wave patterns of the perturbed shock are captured by
high-speed shadowgraphy while the evolution of the shock interface is captured by planar Mie scattering. Besides the
formation of a cavity and two steps, an apparent counter-rotating vortex pair emerges on the shock interface due to the
baroclinic vorticity deposition, as both the Atwood number and Mach number increase, Quantitatively it is interesting to note
that the amplitude growth rate of the shocked interface decreases with increasing the Atwood number, which is fundamentally
different from the results related to the classical RM instability. This notable feature is explained by the approximation of an
oblique shock hitting a uniform interface. For weak shock, a suitable time scaling is employed to collapse experimental data
irrespective of the Atwood number difference.
`A =(ρheavier − ρLighter)/(ρheavier + ρLighter)`
For case 1, 2, 3
Denser fluid (Water) = 998.2 kg/m^3
Lighter fluid (Air)= 1.225 kg/m^3
`A =(998.2 − 1.225)/(998.2 + 1.225)`
A=0.997
For case 4,
Denser fluid (Water) = 998.2 kg/m^3
Lighter fluid (user-defined material)= 400 kg/m^3
`A =(998.2 − 400)/(998.2 + 400)`
A=0.427
variation in Atwood number in the above two cases affects the behaviour of the instability.
For Atwood number close to 0, RT instability flows take the form of symmetric fingers of fluid.
When Atwood number close to 1, the much lighter fluid below the heavier fluid takes the form of larger bubble-like plumes.
Therefore, from the value of Atwood number it is seen from the simulations that air forms larger bubbles when water is poured
down the air pushes through and forms large bubbles. Therefore, the results can be validated by obtaining the value of the
Atwood number.
Atwood number is an important parameter in the body of Rayleigh Taylor instability and Richtmyer-Meshkov instability. In
Rayleigh-Taylor instability, the penetration distance of heavy fluid bubbles into the lighter fluid is a function of the acceleration
time scale. A*g*t^2, where 'g' is the acceleration due to gravity and 'it is the time.
Atwood number effects on the instability of a uniform interface driven by a perturbed shock wave and Rayleigh Taylor
instability:-
The evaluation of a uniform interface subjected to a perturbed shock wave has been experimentally studied over a range of
Atwood numbers 0.22 <= A <= 0.68 and match numbers 1.2 <= M <= 1.8 using a vertical shock tube. The perturbed shock wave is
produced by diffracting a planar incident shock over a rigid cylinder. The wave patterns of the perturbed shock are captured by
high-speed shadowgraphy while the evaluation of the shock interface is captured by planar Mie scattering. Besides the
formation of a cavity and two steps, an apparent counter-rotating vortex pair emerges on the shock interface due to the
baroclinic vorticity deposition, as both the Atwood number and Mach number increase, Quantitatively it is interesting to note
that the amplitude growth rate of the shocked interface decreases with increasing the Atwood number, which is fundamentally
different from the results related to the classical RM instability. This notable feature is explained by the approximation of an
oblique shock hitting a uniform interface. For weak shock, a suitable time scaling is employed to collapse experimental data
irrespective of the Atwood number difference.