- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review Fluids

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Unraveling self-similar energy transfer dynamics: A case study for the one-dimensional Burgers system

Pritpal Matharu*,†

Bartosz Protas‡,§

Tsuyoshi Yoneda∥,¶

  • Department of Mathematics and Statistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario L8S 4K1, Canada

PDF

Phys. Rev. Fluids 11, 034608 – Published 23 March, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/mxk3-jx9f

Abstract

In this work we consider the problem of constructing initial conditions for a flow model such that the resulting flow evolution leads to a self-similar energy cascade consistent with Kolmogorov's statistical theory of turbulence. As a first step in this direction, we focus on the one-dimensional viscous Burgers equation as a toy model. Its solutions exhibiting self-similar behavior, in a precisely defined sense, are found by framing this problem in terms of partial differential equation (PDE)-constrained optimization. The main physical parameters are the time window over which self-similar behavior is sought (equal to approximately one eddy turnover time), viscosity (inversely proportional to the “Reynolds number”), and an integer parameter characterizing the distance in the Fourier space over which self-similar interactions occur. Local solutions to this nonconvex PDE optimization problem are obtained with a state-of-the-art adjoint-based gradient method. Two distinct families of solutions, termed viscous and inertial, are identified and are distinguished primarily by the behavior of enstrophy which, respectively, uniformly decays and grows in the two cases. The physically meaningful and appropriately self-similar inertial solutions are found only when a sufficiently small viscosity is considered. These flows achieve the self-similar behavior by a uniform steepening of the wave fronts present in the solutions. The results obtained demonstrate that the proposed methodology may be used to search for self-similar behavior in more complex flow models, including shell models, two-dimensional turbulence, and, ultimately, three-dimensional turbulence.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (42)

  1. U. Frisch, Turbulence, 1st ed. (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1995).
  2. L. F. Richardson, Weather Prediction by Numerical Process (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1922).
  3. A. Kolmogorov, The local structure of turbulence in incompressible viscous fluid for very large Reynolds number, Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 30, 9 (1941); translated and reprinted in Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A 434, 9 (1991).
  4. S. Goto, Y. Saito, and G. Kawahara, Hierarchy of antiparallel vortex tubes in spatially periodic turbulence at high Reynolds numbers, Phys. Rev. Fluids 2, 064603 (2017).
  5. T. Yoneda, S. Goto, and T. Tsuruhashi, Mathematical reformulation of the Kolmogorov–Richardson energy cascade in terms of vortex stretching, Nonlinearity 35, 1380 (2022).
  6. T. Tsuruhashi, S. Goto, S. Oka, and T. Yoneda, Self-similar hierarchy of coherent tubular vortices in turbulence, Philos. Trans. R. Soc. A 380, 20210053 (2022).
  7. M. D. Gunzburger, Perspectives in Flow Control and Optimization (SIAM, Philadelphia, PA, 2003).
  8. A. Jameson, Aerodynamic design via control theory, J. Sci. Comput. 3, 233 (1988).
  9. T. R. Bewley, P. Moin, and R. Temam, DNS–based predictive control of turbulence: An optimal benchmark for feedback algorithms, J. Fluid Mech. 447, 179 (2001).
  10. P. Matharu and B. Protas, Optimal closures in a simple model for turbulent flows, SIAM J. Sci. Comput. 42, B250 (2020).
  11. P. Matharu and B. Protas, Optimal eddy viscosity in closure models for two-dimensional turbulent flows, Phys. Rev. Fluids 7, 044605 (2022).
  12. B. Protas, Systematic search for extreme and singular behaviour in some fundamental models of fluid mechanics, Philos. Trans. R. Soc. A 380, 20210035 (2022).
  13. D. Ayala and B. Protas, On maximum enstrophy growth in a hydrodynamic system, Physica D 240, 1553 (2011).
  14. D. Ayala, C. R. Doering, and T. M. Simon, Maximum palinstrophy amplification in the two-dimensional Navier-Stokes equations, J. Fluid Mech. 837, 839 (2018).
  15. R. R. Kerswell, C. C. T. Pringle, and A. P. Willis, An optimization approach for analysing nonlinear stability with transition to turbulence in fluids as an exemplar, Rep. Prog. Phys. 77, 085901 (2014).
  16. P. Matharu, B. Protas, and T. Yoneda, On maximum enstrophy dissipation in 2D Navier–Stokes flows in the limit of vanishing viscosity, Physica D 441, 133517 (2022).
  17. D. Ayala and B. Protas, Extreme vortex states and the growth of enstrophy in 3D incompressible flows, J. Fluid Mech. 818, 772 (2017).
  18. D. Kang, D. Yun, and B. Protas, Maximum amplification of enstrophy in three-dimensional Navier-Stokes flows, J. Fluid Mech. 893, A22 (2020).
  19. D. Kang and B. Protas, Searching for singularities in Navier–Stokes flows based on the Ladyzhenskaya–Prodi–Serrin conditions, J. Nonlinear Sci. 32, 81 (2022).
  20. X. Zhao and B. Protas, Systematic search for singularities in 3D Euler flows, J. Nonlinear Sci. 33, 120 (2023).
  21. P. Hassanzadeh, G. Chini, and C. Doering, Wall to wall optimal transport, J. Fluid Mech. 751, 627 (2014).
  22. C. J. Miles and C. R. Doering, A shell model for optimal mixing, J. Nonlinear Sci. 28, 2153 (2018).
  23. H. Kreiss and J. Lorenz, Initial-Boundary Value Problems and the Navier-Stokes Equations, Classics in Applied Mathematics, Vol. 47 (SIAM, Philadelphia, PA, 2004).
  24. R. Adams, Sobolev Spaces (Academic Press, New York, NY, 2003).
  25. J. Bec and K. Khanin, Burgers turbulence, Phys. Rep. 447, 1 (2007).
  26. J.-D. Fournier and U. Frisch, L'équation de Burgers déterministe et statistique (The deterministic and statistical Burgers equation), J. Méc. Théor. Appl. 2, 699 (1983).
  27. D. Pelinovsky, Sharp bounds on enstrophy growth in the viscous Burgers equation, Proc. R. Soc. A 468, 3636 (2012).
  28. D. Pelinovsky, Enstrophy growth in the viscous Burgers equation, Dynam. Partial Differ. Eqs. 9, 305 (2012).
  29. D. Albritton and N. D. Nitti, Sharp bounds on enstrophy growth for viscous scalar conservation laws, Nonlinearity 36, 7142 (2023).
  30. B. P. Murray and M. D. Bustamante, Energy flux enhancement, intermittency and turbulence via Fourier triad phase dynamics in the 1-D Burgers equation, J. Fluid Mech. 850, 624 (2018).
  31. M. Buzzicotti, B. P. Murray, L. Biferale, and M. D. Bustamante, Phase and precession evolution in the Burgers equation, Eur. Phys. J. E 39, 34 (2016).
  32. B. Protas, D. Kang, and M. D. Bustamante, Alignments of triad phases in extreme one-dimensional Burgers flows, Phys. Rev. E 109, 055104 (2024).
  33. P.-A. Absil, R. Mahony, and R. Sepulchre, Optimization Algorithms on Matrix Manifolds (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 2008).
  34. M. S. Berger, Nonlinearity and Functional Analysis (Academic Press, San Diego, CA, 1977).
  35. B. Protas, T. R. Bewley, and G. Hagen, A computational framework for the regularization of adjoint analysis in multiscale PDE systems, J. Comput. Phys. 195, 49 (2004).
  36. J. Nocedal and S. Wright, Numerical Optimization, 2nd ed., Springer Series in Operations Research and Financial Engineering (Springer, Berlin, 2006), pp. xxii+664.
  37. T. Y. Hou, Blow-up or no blow-up? A unified computational and analytic approach to 3D incompressible Euler and Navier-Stokes equations, Acta Numer. 18, 277 (2009).
  38. R. Alimo, D. Cavaglieri, P. Beyhaghi, and T. R. Bewley, Design of IMEXRK time integration schemes via Delaunay-based derivative-free optimization with nonconvex constraints and grid-based acceleration, J. Glob. Optim. 79, 567 (2020).
  39. W. H. Press, S. A. Teukolsky, W. T. Vetterling, and B. P. Flannery, Numerical Recipes, 3rd ed. (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2007), pp. xxii+1235, the art of scientific computing.
  40. P. Matharu, Self-similar energy tranfer for 1D Burgers equation (2025), https://github.com/pipmath/BurgersEnergyTransfer.
  41. P. D. Ditlevsen, Turbulence and Shell Models (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2010).
  42. P. Matharu and B. Protas, Adjoint-based enforcement of state constraints in PDE optimization problems, J. Comput. Phys. 517, 113298 (2024).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Fluids 11, 034608– Published 23 March, 2026
  • Received 18 July 2025
  • Accepted 13 February 2026
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI. Open access publication funded by Max Planck Society.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation