When a turbulent flow in a porous medium is determined numerically, the crucial question is whether turbulence models should account only for turbulent structures restricted in size to the pore scale or whether the size of turbulent structures could exceed the pore scale. The latter would mean the existence of macroscopic turbulence in porous media, when turbulent eddies exceed the pore size. In order to determine the real size of turbulent structures in a porous medium, we simulated the turbulent flow by direct numerical simulation (DNS) calculations, thus avoiding turbulence modelling of any kind. With this study, which for the first time uses DNS calculations, we provide benchmark data for turbulent flow in porous media. Since perfect DNS calculations require the resolution of scales down to the Kolmogorov scale, often only approximate DNS solutions can be obtained, especially for high Reynolds numbers. This is accounted for by using and comparing two different DNS approaches, a finite volume method (FVM) with grid refinement towards the wall and a lattice Boltzmann method (LBM) with equal grid distribution. The solid matrix was simulated by a large number of rectangular bars arranged periodically. The number of bars in the solution domain with periodic boundary conditions was reduced systematically until a minimum size was found that does not suppress any large-scale turbulent structures. Two-point correlations, integral length scales and energy spectra were determined in order to answer the question of whether or not macroscopic turbulence can be found in porous media.

Assuming that CFD solutions will be more and more used to characterize losses in terms of drag for external flows and head loss for internal flows, we suggest to replace single-valued data, like the drag force or a pressure drop, by field information about the losses. These information are gained when the entropy generation in the flow field is analyzed, an approach that often is called second law analysis (SLA), referring to the second law of thermodynamics. We show that this SLA approach is straight-forward, systematic and helpful when it comes to the physical interpretation of the losses in a flow field. Various examples are given, including external and internal flows, two phase flow, compressible flow and unsteady flow. Finally, we show that an energy transfer within a certain process can be put into a broader perspective by introducing the entropic potential of an energy.

Energy transfer operations or processes are systematically analyzed with respect to the way they can be assessed. It turns out that the energy transfer should not only be characterized by the operation or process itself but that it should be seen in a wider context. This context is introduced as the entropic potential of the energy that is transferred. It takes into account the overall transfer from the energy in its initial and finite states, i.e., starting as pure exergy when it is a primary energy, for example, and ending as pure anergy when it has become part of the internal energy of the ambient. With this concept an energy devaluation number can be defined which has several properties with a reasonable physical background. Two examples of different complexity of the process assessed are given and discussed with respect to the physical meaning of the new energy devaluation number.

The often used Nusselt number is critically questioned with respect to its physical meaning. Based on a rigorous dimensional analysis, alternative assessment numbers are found that in a systematic way separately account for the quantitative and qualitative aspect of a heat transfer process. The qualitative aspect is related to the entropy generated in the temperature field of a real, irreversible heat transfer. The irreversibility can be quantified by referring it to the so-called entropic potential of the energy involved in the transfer process.

Losses in a flow field due to single conduit components often are characterized by experimentally determined head loss coefficients K. These coefficients are defined and determined with the pressure as the critical quantity. A thermodynamic definition, given here as an alternative, is closer to the physics of flow losses, however. This definition is based upon the dissipation of mechanical energy as main quantity. With the second law of thermodynamics this dissipation can be linked to the local entropy generation in the flow field. For various conduit components K values are determined and physically interpreted by determining the entropy generation in the component as well as upstream and downstream of it. It turns out that most of the losses occur downstream of the components what carefully has to be taken into account when several components are combined in a flow network.