Paper detail

Radial boundary layer structure and Nusselt number in Rayleigh-Benard convection

Results from direct numerical simulations for three dimensional Rayleigh-Benard convection in a cylindrical cell of aspect ratio 1/2 and Pr=0.7 are presented. They span five decades of Ra from $2\times 10^6$ to $2 \times10^{11}$. Good numerical resolution with grid spacing $\sim$ Kolmogorov scale turns out to be crucial to accurately calculate the Nusselt number, which is in good agreement with the experimental data by Niemela et al., Nature, 404, 837 (2000). In underresolved simulations the hot (cold) plumes travel further from the bottom (top) plate than in the fully resolved case, because the thermal dissipation close to the sidewall (where the grid cells are largest) is insufficient. We compared the fully resolved thermal boundary layer profile with the Prandtl-Blasius profile. We find that the boundary layer profile is closer to the Prandtl Blasius profile at the cylinder axis than close to the sidewall, due to rising plumes in that region.

preprint2009arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.