CFD Online Logo CFD Online URL
www.cfd-online.com
[Sponsors]
Home > Forums > Main CFD Forum

Turbulence problem is dead

Register Blogs Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   May 21, 2000, 13:38
Default Turbulence problem is dead
  #1
John Kim
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Dear colleagues,

Turbulence has been solved. Soon it will be clear for all.

J. Kim
  Reply With Quote

Old   May 21, 2000, 14:11
Default Re: Turbulence problem is dead
  #2
kees rijk
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
been dead for ages

(since direct simulation)
  Reply With Quote

Old   May 21, 2000, 19:34
Default Re: Turbulence problem is dead
  #3
Ji
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Dear sir,

In our country there is also somebody saying that turbulence has been solved for many times. I think it is a problem of human brain, may be it has no answer anyway! but we can model turbulence for engineering usage.

However I still want to know the details that you said.

  Reply With Quote

Old   May 21, 2000, 20:30
Default Re: That's fine, many are still trying to solve inviscid or laminar flow problems
  #4
John C. Chien
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
(1). Turbulence modeling is one aspect of CFD. (2). There are still enough problems to keep engineers very busy in CFD, such as handling of complex geometry, easy mesh generation methods, fast numerical algorithms, 3-D presentation of results. (3). This requires background in geometry, calculus, 3-D modeling, CAD, numerical methods,aerodynamics, fluid mechanics, heat transfer,combustions, etc. (4). That's should be enough to keep this cfd forum alive. Well, the cold war is still around, not to mention the real war and the conflict with communism. The world is actually becoming more unstable and can easily lead to turbulence.
  Reply With Quote

Old   May 22, 2000, 02:33
Default Re: Turbulence problem is dead
  #5
Mahesh Prakash
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
So what if the turbulence problem is dead? The world goes on and cfd goes on.
  Reply With Quote

Old   May 22, 2000, 02:52
Default Please show us the proof. Thank you !
  #6
Doru Caraeni
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Dear Dr. Kim,

If you are that John Kim (Kim & Moin DNS of channel flow Re 3300), we will believe you if you send us also the proof. Probably you have in mind to characterize the turbulence in terms of statistical properties (as it is a chaotic phenomenon, I can't see any deterministic way of describing the turbulence - I may be wrong?) If you didn't make a joke () it may be the biggest discovery of this century. I can't wait to find out more details! Please, send us some details!

With all my consideration,

Thank you!

Doru
  Reply With Quote

Old   May 22, 2000, 03:44
Default Re: Turbulence problem is dead
  #7
Robin Bornoff
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
One man's solution is another man's problem.
  Reply With Quote

Old   May 22, 2000, 10:23
Default Jonas - can you read this?
  #8
Mohit Agarwal
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Hello Jonas,

I believe that you are the only one who can do this.. Could you please check out the IP address or the site from where this message originated. Curious.. simple reason. Want to know whether it is John Kim (Rockwell International Professor - UCLA) himself.

Mohit
  Reply With Quote

Old   May 22, 2000, 11:48
Default Re: Jonas - can you read this?
  #9
Jonas Larsson
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Yes, I can check it but I won't disclose it publicly here, sorry - this is not an "abuse" case and I only want to use this kind of information if we have a real problem. The email address given in the orginal message is not the email address of Professor John Kim at UCLA though, draw your own conclusions ;-)
  Reply With Quote

Old   May 22, 2000, 13:11
Default Re: Turbulence problem is dead
  #10
John Kim
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
It was brought to my attention that I posted a message saying that the turbulence problem is solved. This message was not from me. It must have been another John Kim at UCLA or an imposter.

John Kim Professor Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering UCLA
  Reply With Quote

Old   May 22, 2000, 13:53
Default Probably the last message in the thread!
  #11
Mohit Agarwal
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I believe that this one would be the last message in this thread. People have a general tendency to say things without knowing a bit about those. Take for instance a message posted a couple of days back, titled 'Grid size in LES'. A part of it reads: "In my opinion, LES is the simplist model for (large scale) turbulence." What would anybody reply to that? Funny things!

And if a similar thing is posted under the name of someone who is well known in the field, it is bound to recieve attention. Jin Li - I'm not blaming you for anything, just citing an example.

Although Jonas might say that this not an "abuse" case, I tend to disagree with him on this part. Nothing else.

regards, M.
  Reply With Quote

Old   May 22, 2000, 14:43
Default The problem with "turbulence problem is dead" is dead
  #12
Peter
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Hi

I posted the false John Kim message.

Sorry for the joke; I just wanted to see your response.

Of course, turbulence is not dead; this site is a proof.

I won't do it again.

Peter

PS: I almost died of a heart attack when I saw true John Kim Message.
  Reply With Quote

Old   May 22, 2000, 17:46
Default Re: The problem with "turbulence problem is dead" is dead
  #13
Mahesh Prakash
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Dear Peter

You had better be a little more prudent the next time you use this forum for such jokes.

Regards
  Reply With Quote

Old   May 25, 2000, 16:38
Default Re: The problem with "turbulence problem is dead" is dead
  #14
MDC
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Peter,

I think you have done a really evil thing, although maybe you don't have an evil intention. Seeing that you have admitted so quickly, I suggest that you voluntarily do 2 month service in your community. Remember that God still loves you.

  Reply With Quote

Old   June 5, 2000, 13:50
Default Re: Turbulence problem is dead
  #15
Phil Gresho
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Is this the JOHN KIM, from NASA/ Stanford, that I know????
  Reply With Quote

Old   June 5, 2000, 15:32
Default Re: Turbulence problem is dead
  #16
Jonas Larsson
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
No it is not. The real "John Kim" posted a response above stating that he did not post the original message. The imposterer has also stepped forward (see replies) and apologized.
  Reply With Quote

Old   June 5, 2000, 17:35
Default Re: Turbulence problem is dead
  #17
Phil Gresho
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
YES; i TOO saw the others....but only AFTER sending mine!! Thx.
  Reply With Quote

Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Turbulence postprocessing Mohsin FLUENT 0 September 19, 2011 21:05
High Turbulence Intensity Problem bwg FLUENT 1 January 13, 2010 14:09
About Turbulence Intensity (Pipe flow assimilated) gRomK13 Main CFD Forum 1 July 10, 2009 03:11
Code release: Flow Transition and Turbulence Chaoqun Liu Main CFD Forum 0 September 26, 2008 17:15
Turbulence boundary values lego Main CFD Forum 0 October 24, 2002 13:47


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 20:00.