F. Ciaraldi-Schoolmann et al. 2009 ApJ 696 1491 doi:10.1088/0004-637X/696/2/1491
F. Ciaraldi-Schoolmann1, W. Schmidt1, J. C. Niemeyer1, F. K. Röpke2 and W. Hillebrandt2
Show affiliationsWe analyze the statistical properties of the turbulent velocity field in the deflagration model for Type Ia supernovae. In particular, we consider the question of whether turbulence is isotropic and consistent with the Kolmogorov theory at small length scales. Using numerical data from a high-resolution simulation of a thermonuclear supernova explosion, spectra of the turbulence energy and velocity structure functions are computed. We show that the turbulent velocity field is isotropic at small length scales and follows a scaling law that is consistent with the Kolmogorov theory until most of the nuclear fuel is burned. At length scales greater than a certain characteristic scale that agrees with the prediction of Niemeyer & Woosley, turbulence becomes anisotropic. Here, the radial velocity fluctuations follow the scaling law of the Rayleigh-Taylor instability, whereas the angular component still obeys the Kolmogorov scaling. In the late phase of the explosion, this characteristic scale drops below the numerical resolution of the simulation. The analysis confirms that a subgrid-scale model for the unresolved turbulence energy is required for the consistent calculation of the flame speed in deflagration models of Type Ia supernovae, and that the assumption of isotropy on these scales is appropriate.
hydrodynamics; instabilities; methods: statistical; supernovae: general; turbulence
Issue 2 (2009 May 10)
Received 2008 November 14, accepted for publication 2009 February 24
Published 2009 April 24
F. Ciaraldi-Schoolmann et al. 2009 ApJ 696 1491
John E. Gizis and James Harvin 2006 The Astronomical Journal 132 2372
Hua Qin et al 2008 Nanotechnology 19 095504
I. Neill Reid et al. 2002 The Astronomical Journal 124 2721
J. Davy Kirkpatrick et al. 2001 The Astronomical Journal 121 3235
M. F. Skrutskie et al. 2006 The Astronomical Journal 131 1163
John E. Gizis et al. 2001 The Astronomical Journal 121 2185
John E. Gizis 1998 The Astronomical Journal 115 2053
I. Neill Reid et al. 2001 The Astronomical Journal 121 1710
John J. Bochanski et al. 2005 The Astronomical Journal 130 1871