Hello

I'm interested in turbulent flow and I'm finding out turbulence stuff these days.

While finding those, I have 5 questions about those so I'm writing about it at here.

This post is not asking fundamental knowledge of turbulent flow, but rather about methods, including PIV for turbulent flow

1. Dominant method in turbulent flow research

While searching turbulent flow things, I found something that is different from what I have knew.

As far as I know, the majority of turbulent flow research is carried out by DNS(Direct Numerical Simulation) rather than experiment.

I've heard that the reason for this is due to limitation of experiment, low resolution of camera.

So, I thought DNS is kind of mainstream method in turbulence research and I have been digging into CFD(computational fluid dynamics) things until recently.

But I found that many laboratories conduct turbulence research using experimental approaches, which is totally different from what I knew.

Even in some turbulence research groups consisting of numerous teams, more than half of them adopt experimental methods rather than DNS.

So I'm confused about which one is mainstream method in turbulence research: experiments and DNS.

I know that experiments and DNS complement to each other, but I want to know whether what's going on in real?

Is the majority of turbulence research conduct by DNS or experiment? Or are both of them used equally frequently?

2. Does method selection play a major role in turbulence physics?

Additionally, I'm actually much more interested in turbulence physics than in methodologies such as imaging processes for experiments and numerical schemes for CFD(DNS). Also I'm not confident in both numerical method and image processing in my opinion although it is due to my short experience. I see methodology as just a tool to obtain velocity and pressure values at every single node point.

From the perspective of interest in turbulence physics rather than methodology, does it really matter whether the method is experimental or CFD?

Does methodology play a major role in research for turbulence physics?

3. Camera performance to capture turbulent flow accurately

Subsequently, I'm wondering whether camera performance is enough to capture small eddies in turbulent flow or not.

Actually, I have a really short experience of experimental fluid dynamics.

But at that time, I tried to capture the motion of a region close to the viscous sublayer, and I thought that the camera resolution was absolutely insufficient to capture such small motions of turbulence eddies. This is the reason why I thought that turbulence research should be carried out using DNS.

How is camera performance nowadays? Is it sufficient?

4. Real-world application

Finally, I heard that DNS is suitable for fundamental turbulence structure and scaling law, while experimental research is more appropriate to high-Reynolds-number turbulent flow which corresponds to the majority of the real-world application. Is it right? It sounds correct because high-Reynolds number requires notoriously high computation power and resolution. But I want to be sure from you who are experts in experimental fluid dynamics.

5. Communities for broad experimental fluid dynamics

If there are any other proper communities to upload this kind of questions(experimental method for fluid dynamics), can you let me know?

Thank you for reading this long post.