A crisis for the verification and validation of turbulence simulations
Three algorithms have been proposed for solution of the Rayleigh–Taylor turbulent mixing problem. They are based upon three different physical principles governing the Euler equations for fluid flow. The principles serve to select the physically relevant solution from among many nonunique solutions. The admissibility principle is in dispute. The three different algorithms, expressing the three physical admissibility principles can be formulated in terms of the three energy dissipation rates or the entropy production rates, as selected by the size of the sub grid scale coefficients. These have maximal values or less than maximal values. The resulting solutions are markedly different. We find strong validation evidence that supports the maximum rate principle, based on a review of prior results and on new results presented here. We review experimental data used for validation and sufficient to discriminate among the three. We present a new analysis of this data. We show that the hypothesized long wave length perturbations in the initial conditions are not significant, so that validation can be based on this data in a straight forward manner. One of the algorithms is labeled direct numerical simulation, but is not, and as a consequence, the two algorithms with less than maximal SGS coefficients are variants of one another. Finally recommendations for the numerical modeling of the deflagration to detonation transition in type Ia supernova are discussed.