Next Article in Journal
Investigating the Formation of Submesoscale Structures along Mesoscale Fronts and Estimating Kinematic Quantities Using Lagrangian Drifters
Next Article in Special Issue
Structures of Ethanol Spray Flames under CO2 Dilution of the Oxidizer in the Counterflow Configuration under MILD Combustion Conditions
Previous Article in Journal
Numerical Computations of Vortex Formation Length in Flow Past an Elliptical Cylinder
Previous Article in Special Issue
Validation of AIAD Sub-Models for Advanced Numerical Modelling of Horizontal Two-Phase Flows
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Direct Numerical Simulation of Water Droplets in Turbulent Flow

by Weibo Ren *, Jonathan Reutzsch and Bernhard Weigand
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2:
Submission received: 11 August 2020 / Revised: 7 September 2020 / Accepted: 8 September 2020 / Published: 11 September 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Modelling of Reactive and Non-reactive Multiphase Flows)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript titled “Direct numerical simulation of water droplets in turbulent flow” by Ren et al. investigates the behaviour of falling water drops in turbulent air using state-of-the-art numerical methods. The paper is well structured and written - I enjoyed reading it. The paper draws important conclusions on why the terminal velocity of droplets decreases with increasing turbulent intensity, which I think will be interesting for the community. However, before I can recommend the paper for publication, I would like the authors to address my concerns and questions listed below.

- A first-order scheme is applied to discretise the transient term of the momentum equations. I find this very surprising, since a first-order scheme is very diffusive and artificially dissipates turbulent kinetic energy. This may be a potentially shortcoming of this study. Can you please justify this choice in detail and, if possible, provide evidence that this choice does not interfere with your conclusions.

- The authors mention on page 5 that the time-step is limited by the CFL number. I presume the CFL number is based on the flow velocity. Has the capillary time-step constraint as a result of surface tension, which would be approximately dt = 3e-5 s for the smaller drop, been considered as well and is it relevant for the conducted simulations?

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Numerical simulation of water droplets in turbulence involving drop surface deformation and internal circulation is a very interesting topic and is the significance of understanding raindrop-related events.

The author has done an impressive and pioneer work by conducting direct numerical simulation in which the VOF method is applied to model the two-phase flow. Based on the simulation results, the terminal velocity, the hydrodynamics in raindrop, the external and internal flow field, and the droplet dynamics in turbulence are analyzed systematically. Thus I consider this work has referential value to understand the complicated flow dynamic around raindrop. The paper is well organized and written. Thus I recommend this work to be accepted in the present form.

Author Response

We would like to thank the reviewer for his /her very good comments.

Back to TopTop