36th AIAA Fluid Dynamics Conference and Exhibit, 5-8 June 2006, San Francisco, California

Study of Large Eddy Simulation and Smagorinsky

Model using Explicit Filtering
Tellervo T. Brandt

Helsinki University of Technology, Laboratory of Aerodynamics, Espoo, Finland

In this paper, the eect of explicit ltering on the total error of large eddy simulation
(LES) is studied and compared to implicit ltering provided by the standard Smagorinsky
model. Smooth lters are applied in all three coordinate directions of a channel ow.
Although explicit ltering damps down the high frequencies and thus aects the numerical
error, in the present test case, it increases the total simulation error when compared to the
case with no ltering. With lters that have the smallest eect on the low frequencies, the
total simulation error diminishes, but it remains larger than in the case with no ltering.
The eect of ltering was separated from the eect of modeling, and it was noticed that
ltering itself has a large eect on the simulation results, which causes the increased total
error. In addition, it decreases the eect of SGS modeling. When the length scale of the
Smagorinsky model is increased, the model is able to improve the results somewhat, but
it does not recover completely from the eect of ltering.
I. Introduction
In large eddy simulation (LES), the large scales of uid motion are solved from the NavierStokes equa-
tions, and a sub-grid scale (SGS) model is applied to describe the eect of the small scales on the large
ones. When low-order (i.e. second or fourth order) nite-dierence-type methods, where discretization is
not performed in the spectral space, are applied and the computational grid is let to dene the separation
between resolved and SGS scales, the numerical error becomes a problem: it has been shown in a priori tests
that the error can be larger than the eect of the SGS model.
1, 2
However, explicit ltering of the resolved
ow eld can improve the situation.
1, 2
Filtering of the whole velocity eld in the end of each time step has been the traditional approach, but if
a non-sharp lter is applied, it leads to multiple ltering of the velocity eld from the previous time levels,
3
and in a priori tests, it has led to unphysical behavior of the SGS term.
4
Explicit ltering of the non-
linear convection term of the NavierStokes equations has been suggested as an alternative approach.
3
The
approach has been successfully applied in actual simulations using a fourth-order discretization method,
5
and it gave promising results also for a second-order scheme in a priori tests.
4
Another possibility to avoid
the excessive ltering of the results from the previous time levels is to lter the change of the velocity eld
at each time step.
Despite of the damping of the high frequencies produced by ltering, it has been dicult to obtain
improved simulation results with explicit ltering when compared to simulations with no explicit ltering.
6, 7
In this paper, we study in more detail the eect of ltering on the total simulation error using a second-order
discretization scheme and the standard Smagorinsky model, which are still widely applied in applications.
First, we compare the two approaches and then dierent smooth three-dimensional lter functions. The
eect of explicit ltering and smoothing provided by the SGS model are separated from each other and
discussed, and nally explicit ltering is compared to implicit ltering provided by the Smagorinsky model.
The aim of the paper is to clarify the mechanisms via which explicit ltering aects the total simulation
error.

Researcher
Copyright c 2006 by Tellervo Brandt. Published by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc. with
permission.
1 of 10
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Paper 2006-3541
II. Governing Equations and Applied Numerical Methods
In the present study, a fully developed turbulent channel ow between two innite parallel walls is taken
as the test case. The Reynolds number is Re

= 395 based on the channel half-height and the friction

velocity u

=
_

wall
/, where
wall
is the wall shear stress and the density.
The ltered NavierStokes equations which are being solved in LES are written here in the non-dimensional
form as
u
i
t
=
P
x
i

p
x
i
+

x
j
_
u
i
u
j

ij
+
1
Re

_
u
i
x
j
+
u
j
x
i
_
_
, (1)
where (x
1
, x
2
, x
3
) = (x, y, z) refer to non-dimensional streamwise, wall-normal and spanwise spatial coordi-
nates, respectively, t to time, ( u
1
, u
2
, u
3
) = (u, v, w) to resolved velocity vector, P to mean pressure, p to
uctuating resolved pressure, and
ij
is a model for the SGS stress tensor u
i
u
j
u
i
u
j
. Here, the equations
are scaled by the channel half-height, 0.5h, and friction velocity, u

. The standard Smagorinsky model

8
is
applied to model the SGS stress as

ij
=
T
2S
ij
= (C
S

S
)
2
_
2S
ij
S
ij
. .
=T
_
u
i
x
j
+
u
j
x
i
_
, (2)
where C
S
is the model parameter, and
S
is the model length scale. In this study, the value 0.085 was used
for C
S
, and
S
was set proportional to grid spacing as

S
= (xy z)
1/3
(3)
or in cases where explicit ltering was applied, to the explicit lter width. Near the solid walls, the van
Driest damping was applied to reduce the model length scale, which is necessary because in wall-bounded
ows, the size of the smallest length scales of the oweld reduces as the wall is approached.
9
In the present simulations, the second-order central-dierence scheme was applied on a staggered grid
system
10
for spatial discretization, and for time integration, a third-order, three-stage RungeKutta method
11
was applied. The non-dimensional mean-pressure gradient was xed, and the uctuating pressure was solved
from a Poisson equation. The applied grid resolution and the dimensions of the computational domain are
given in table 1.
Table 1. Applied grid resolution and dimensions of the computational
domain.
x z y
extent of the domain (scaled by h) 6.0 3.2 1.0
number of grid points 108 108 90
size of the grid cell in wall units (
+
)

44 23 min 1.0, max 20

wall units: x
+
= Re x, where x is scaled by the channel half-height.
As explicit lters, the trapezoidal, Simpson and two so-called commutative lters
12
were applied in all
three coordinate directions. The commutative lters commute with dierentiation up to a given order, which
is important when ltering is applied in inhomogeneous directions. The trapezoidal and Simpson lters have
2nd order commutation error whereas the applied commutative lters have the commutation error of 4th
and 6th order. The coecients of the applied discrete lters with the width of two grid spacings are given
in table 2, and the lter transfer function, G, that describes the behavior of the lter in the spectral space,
is plotted in gure 1 as function of a non-dimensional wavenumber k/. The shape of the Simpson lter is
quite far from the spectral cuto lter, and the use of the trapezoidal and especially the commutative lters
improves the situation. In addition to these lters, 4th order commutative lters with the widths of 1.5, 3
and 4 grid spacings were applied in the present study.
III. Dierent Approaches to Explicit Filtering
In this paper, we compare between two approaches to explicit ltering. The idea in these approaches is
to perform the ltering with smooth lters in such a way that the excessive ltering of the results from the
2 of 10
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Paper 2006-3541
Table 2. Coecients of the applied discrete lter functions. u
i
(x
j
) =
K
l=K
a
l
u
i
_
x
j+l
_
.
a
0
a
1
a
2
a
3
a
4
a
5
Trapezoidal 1/2 1/4
Simpson 2/3 1/6
4th order commut. 1/2 9/32 0 1/32
6th order commut. 1/2 75/256 0 25/512 0 3/256
0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
G
k /
Trapezoidal
Simpson
4th order commut.
6th order commut.
Spectral cutoff
Figure 1. Filter transfer functions of the applied lters.
previous time levels is avoided. The reason behind the excessive ltering can be claried via one step of the
applied explicit Runge-Kutta method
u
n+1
i
= u
n
i
+ t
n
_
c
1
u
n
+ c
2
u
n1
_
, (4)
where the superscript refers to time levels, t
n
to the time step on nth time level, u
n
to the change of the
resolved velocity eld on nth time level, which includes the convective and dissipative terms from Eq. (1),
and c
1
and c
2
are coecients. We see from Eq. (4) that if u
n+1
i
is ltered explicitly with a smooth lter,
u
n
i
, u
n
and u
n1
will be multiply ltered which leads to excessive damping of the oweld. In the rst
applied approach, explicit ltering is applied to the change of the velocity eld, u
n
i
, and thus both the
convective and dissipative terms are ltered. In the second approach, the idea is to limit the frequency
content of all the terms in Eq. (1) to be the same.
3
The sum of the non-linear convection term and the SGS
term, u
i
u
j
+
ij
, which generates the high frequencies in the resolved oweld, is thus ltered explicitly, and
the LES-equations are rewritten as
3
u
i
t
=
P
x
i

p
x
i
+

x
j
_
u
i
u
j

ij
+
1
Re

_
u
i
x
j
+
u
j
x
i
_
_
, (5)
where the overline refers to the explicit ltering operation, and the SGS term which is modelled by
ij
is
redened as u
i
u
j
u
i
u
j
. Since the Smagorinsky model is applied here, ltering of the SGS term has no eect
on the results,
7
but if mixed models were applied, also the SGS term could introduce new higher frequencies
to the solution.
5
IV. Simulations using Explicit Filtering
A. Comparison between Two Approaches to Explicit Filtering
In cases discussed in this section, the 4th-order commutative lter with the width of two grid spacings
was applied to explicit ltering. We compare ltering of the change of the resolved velocity eld, u
i
,
and ltering of the non-linear convection term and the SGS stress, u
i
u
j
+
ij
. The results are compared
3 of 10
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Paper 2006-3541
to LES performed using the same code without explicit ltering and to DNS data presented by Moser et.
al .
13
In the cases with explicit ltering, the model length scale of the standard Smagorinsky model was set
proportional to the explicit lter width, and in the cases with no explicit ltering, the model length scale
was proportional to grid spacing. Explicit ltering reduces the eective resolution of the grid, and thus it
is necessary to model the eect of the length scales that are smaller than the lter width instead of scales
smaller than grid spacing. In the standard Smagorinsky model, the size of the largest modelled scales is
controlled via the model length scale.
The mean-velocity proles from the dierent cases are plotted in the left-hand side of gure 2. When no
ltering is applied, the slope of the velocity prole is too low, and the mean bulk velocity is underpredicted.
When the non-linear convection term u
i
u
j
is ltered, the viscous sublayer becomes thicker, and the mean
bulk velocity is overpredicted. When u
i
is ltered, the velocity prole changes only slightly. In both cases
with explicit ltering, the slope of the prole decreases. The anisotropic diagonal streamwise Reynolds stress
is given in the right-hand side of gure 2. The ltering further increases the overprediction of the Reynolds
stress ltering of u
i
u
j
slightly more than ltering of u
i
. The results for the other stress components are
similar. In the left-hand side of gure 3, we have the one-dimensional streamwise energy spectra E
uu
from
the near-wall region (y
+
5). In cases with explicit ltering, the high frequency motions are eciently
damped down as they should, and this suggests that the numerical error decreases. However, also the low
frequencies, which the grid is able to describe accurately, are damped. The SGS shear stress
12
is depicted
in the right-hand side of gure 3. When explicit ltering is applied, the SGS shear stress increases. Probably
this is mainly due to the increased model length scale which directly controls the level of eddy viscosity and
the SGS stress. Also in the other presented ow quantities, the results obtained with explicit ltering are
aected by both ltering and modeling.
Since ltering damped down the badly described high frequencies and an increase of the model length
scale also decreases the numerical error,
14
the numerical error in the present simulations should be eectively
diminished when compared to the case with no ltering. However, in cases where explicit ltering was applied,
the total simulation error was increased. In the next sections, we discuss in more detail the factors behind
this. As a conclusion from this section, we can say that there were only small dierences between the two
approaches, and thus ltering of the non-linear term, which generates the high frequency components in the
resolved oweld, seems to be the essential part of explicit ltering. For the rest of the paper, we focus on
ltering of the non-linear convection term.
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
10 100
U
+
y
+
no filter
u
i
u
j
u
i
DNS
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2

*
y/h
no filter
u
i
u
j
+
ij
u
i
DNS
Figure 2. Comparison between the ltering approaches. Left: Mean velocity prole. Right: Deviatoric
streamwise Reynolds stress.
B. Eect of Filter Shape
In this section, the non-linear convection term u
i
u
j
is ltered explicitly. The applied lters were discussed
in Section II. There are three main dierences between these lters: the commutation error, the shapes of
the lter functions, and the eective lter widths. The commutation error related to changing the order
of dierentiation and ltering is the smallest with the 6th-order lter and largest with the trapezoidal and
Simpson lters (2nd order). The shape of the lter transfer function aects the error in the conservation
4 of 10
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Paper 2006-3541
1e-07
1e-06
1e-05
1e-04
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100
E
u
u
k
x
no filter,
S
=
u
i
u
j
+
ij
u
i
MKM
0
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.1
0.12
0.14
0.16
0.18
0.2
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2

1
2
y/h
no filter,
S
=
u
i
u
j
u
i
Figure 3. Comparison between the ltering approaches. Left: One-dimensional streamwise energy spectra.
Right: SGS shear stress
12
.
of kinetic energy and in the Galilean invariance, which are broken in this formulation of explicit ltering.
3
The 6th-order commutative lter is closest to the spectral cuto lter, and thus these errors should be the
smallest with this lter. In the high-frequency part, the Simpson lter and in the low frequency area, the
trapezoidal lter are furthest away from the spectral-cut o. The eective lter widths of the commutative
and Simpson lters are two grid spacings, but the width of the trapezoidal lter is 2.45.
3
In this section, we
discuss the eect of these dierences between the lters on the obtained ow statistics.
The mean-velocity proles obtained using dierent discrete lters are plotted in the left-hand side of
gure 4 and the streamwise anisotropic Reynolds stress in the right-hand side. All the lters produce the
same slope in the logarithmic layer, but the trapezoidal and Simpson lters overpredict the mean bulk
velocity more than the commutative lters. Also the Reynolds stress is most overpredicted with there lters.
The total error is smaller with the Simpson lter than with the trapezoidal lter, whereas there are no
essential dierences between the two commutative lters.
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
10 100
U
+
y
+
no filter
Simpson
Trapezoidal
4th order commut.
6th order commut.
DNS
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2

*
y/h
no filter
Simpson
trapezoidal
4th order commut.
6th order commut.
DNS
Figure 4. Comparison between lter functions. Left: Mean-velocity prole. Right: Deviatoric streamwise
Reynolds stress.
The one-dimensional streamwise energy spectra E
uu
are given in the left-hand side of gure 5. The
commutative lters follow the DNS curve slightly better than the others and damp down the high frequencies
most eciently. The trapezoidal lter aects most the lower frequencies, which could also be expected based
on the shape of the lter. The Simpson lter transfer function obtains quite large values near the grid cuto
(see gure 1), but still it damps the high frequencies as eciently as the other lters.
As noticed in the previous subsection, the SGS shear stress increases in the present simulations via the
model length scale. In the right-hand side of gure 5, we see that the lter function has only a small eect
on this quantity.
5 of 10
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Paper 2006-3541
1e07
1e06
1e05
1e04
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100
E
u
u
k
x
no filter
Simpson
Trapezoidal
4th order commut.
6th order commut.
MKM
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2

1
2
y/h
no filter
Simpson
trapezoidal
4th order commut.
6th order commut.
Figure 5. Comparison between lter functions. Left: Streamwise energy spectra Euu. Right: SGS shear stress

12
.
Based on the results of this section, there are no essential dierences in the behavior of the two commu-
tative lters, and these lters produce better results than the Simpson and trapezoidal lters. The 6th-order
lter requires slightly more computational eort than the 4th-order lter, and thus, of the tested lters the
use of the 4th-order lter can be recommended with the present numerical schemes. The rst mentioned dif-
ference between the lters was the order of the commutation error. However, this probably does not explain
the dierences between the simulation results, since they remain also in cases where there is no ltering in
the wall-normal direction (not shown here) and thus no commutation error. The second dierence was the
shape of the lter transfer functions. Since the Simpson lter produces better results than the trapezoidal,
the shape in the low frequency area is probably crucial. The third dierence was the lter width, which
explains some of the behavior of the trapezoidal lter. Due to the larger lter width, this lter aects the
simulation results most.
V. Eect of Filtering versus Eect of SGS Modeling
In the previous section, the Smagorinsky length scale was kept proportional to the lter width, i.e. two
grid spacings, in all cases with explicit ltering, and it was proportional to grid spacing in the cases with
no ltering. Thus in cases with explicit ltering, the quality of the results was a combination of ltering
and modeling. Here, we compare cases with and without ltering, and vary the model length scale in both
cases. Firstly, the aim is to describe the eect of mere ltering on the simulation results. Secondly, we
wish to compare the eect of modeling in cases with and without explicit ltering. Thirdly, the interaction
between modeling and ltering is demonstrated. In this section, when explicit ltering is applied, we lter
the non-linear convection term using the 4th-order commutative lter.
In the left-hand side of gure 6, we have the mean velocity proles from cases with explicit ltering, and
in the right-hand side, from cases without explicit ltering. If we compare the two gures, we notice that
when explicit ltering was applied, the eect of modeling was reduced. In the right-hand side of gure 6
where no explicit ltering is applied, the increase of the model length scale rapidly increases the mean
bulk velocity and the thickness of the viscous sublayer. In the left-hand side of the gure, this inuence of
modeling is clearly diminished. In addition, we notice that most of the changes obtained in the previous
section when explicit ltering was applied are already present in the case with no model. Thus, they were
mainly due to ltering itself. However, when explicit ltering was applied and the Smagorinsky length scale
was increased, the mean velocity improved. The viscous sublayer became better captured and the slope of
the prole improved slightly. Thus, the model is able to compensate somewhat for the eect of ltering.
In gure 7, corresponding plots as for the mean-velocity prole are given for the streamwise deviatoric
Reynolds stress. Most of the overprediction of the Reynolds stress that was noticed in the previous section
is actually due to ltering and the model has again a rather small eect on the results. When the model
length scale is increased, the peak value reduces and moves towards the middle of the channel. As seen in the
right-hand side of the gure, this is due to modeling, and in the left-hand side, the use of explicit ltering
6 of 10
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Paper 2006-3541
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
10 100
U
+
y
+
u
i
u
j
, no model
u
i
u
j
,
S
=
u
i
u
j
,
S
= 2
DNS
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
10 100
U
+
y
+
no filter, no model
no filter,
S
=
no filter,
S
= 2
DNS
Figure 6. Eect of the model and ltering. Mean-velocity prole. Left: Explicit ltering is applied. Right:
No explicit ltering is applied.
prevents the prole from widening too much. Thus, a similar conclusion as drawn for the mean-velocity
prole can be stated here.
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2

*
y/h
u
i
u
j
, no model
u
i
u
j
,
S
=
u
i
u
j
,
S
= 2
DNS
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2

*
y/h
no filter, no model
no filter,
S
=
no filter,
S
= 2
DNS
Figure 7. Eect of the model and ltering. Deviatoric streamwise Reynolds stress. Left: Explicit ltering is
applied. Right: No explicit ltering is applied.
The one-dimensional streamwise energy spectra are depicted in gure 8. We notice that the main dier-
ence between explicit ltering and the damping provided by the model is their eect on the high frequencies.
The model aects the low and high frequencies in a similar manner, whereas explicit ltering damps the high
frequencies much stronger than the low frequencies. In case with explicit ltering and the large model length
scale, the low frequencies are damped in a similar manner as with only modeling, but the high frequencies
are damped more.
In the previous subsections, we noticed that the total error increased when explicit ltering was applied,
and the choice of the lter function did not have a large eect on this. Based on the results of this subsection,
there seems to be two factors behind this behavior: the eect of ltering itself and the behavior of the applied
SGS model with ltering. With the current numerical methods, explicit ltering alone had a large aect
on the ow statistics, and it was the major factor behind the large total error. When SGS modeling was
applied, ltering decreased the eect of modeling, but as the model length scale was increased, the model
was able to improve the prediction of the ow statistics. In cases with the large model length scale, the
results with explicit ltering were better than the results without explicit ltering. When the model length
scale is increased, the modeling error of the standard Smagorinsky model increases rapidly.
14
As seen in
the present results, explicit ltering reduced the modeling error, and in the mean ow quantities, there was
interaction between the eect of the model and the ltering. However, probably due to the modeling error,
the Smagorinsky model was not able to decrease the total error to the level of the case with no explicit
7 of 10
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Paper 2006-3541
1e07
1e06
1e05
1e04
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100
E
u
u
k
x
u
i
u
j
, no model
u
i
u
j
,
S
=
u
i
u
j
,
S
= 2
MKM
1e07
1e06
1e05
1e04
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100
E
u
u
k
x
no filter, no model
no filter,
S
=
no filter,
S
= 2
MKM
Figure 8. Eect of the model and ltering. One-dimensional streamwise energy spectra. Left: Explicit ltering
is applied. Right: No explicit ltering is applied.
ltering and small Smagorinsky length scale.
VI. Explicit and Implicit Filtering
In this section, we study the dierences between explicit ltering of the non-linear convection term and
the implicit ltering provided by the model. The dierences are emphasized by the use of wider explicit lter
widths and wider model length scales, i.e. implicit lter widths. In cases with explicit ltering, the lter
widths of 1.5, 2, 3 and 4 are applied, and to separate the eect of explicit ltering from modeling,
the model length scale is kept proportional to grid spacing. These results are compared to cases with no
explicit ltering and larger model length scales.
In the left-hand side of gure 9, we have the mean-velocity proles from cases with increasing explicit lter
widths. If we compare this to the right-hand side of gure 6, we notice that in the mean bulk velocity, the
eect of implicit and explicit ltering are similar to each other. However, explicit ltering does not increase
the mean bulk velocity as rapidly as implicit ltering. The main dierence is in the viscous sublayer.
When explicit ltering is applied, the velocity near the end of the layer increases, but the thickness of the
logarithmic layer remains constant. Increased velocity near the end of the viscous sublayer makes the slope
in the logarithmic layer incorrect. With implicit ltering, the viscous sublayer thickens.
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
10 100
U
+
y
+

f
= 1.5

f
= 2

f
= 3

f
= 4
DNS
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2

*
y/h

f
= 1.5

f
= 2

f
= 3

f
= 4
DNS
Figure 9. Explicit lter width is increased. Left: Mean velocity prole. Right: Deviatoric diagonal streamwise
Reynolds stress.
The deviatoric streamwise Reynolds stress from the dierent cases are plotted in the right-hand side of
gure 9. As the explicit lter width is increased, the peak of the Reynolds stresses becomes more over-
8 of 10
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Paper 2006-3541
predicted, and the distribution widens. However, when only implicit ltering is applied (right-hand side
of Fig. 7), the peak of the Reynolds stress becomes less overpredicted, but the distribution widens more
rapidly than with explicit ltering. These dierences between the ltering approaches were also visible in
the previous section.
As seen in the left-hand side of gure 10, increasing the width of the explicit lter aects the behavior
of the Smagorinsky model. The peak value of the SGS shear stress is increased with the lter width and
thus the eect of the SGS model on the turbulent shear stress increases in the near-wall region. However,
in the middle of the channel, the level of the SGS shear stress decreases. The SGS shear stress is increased
in comparison to the case with no ltering only when large explicit lter widths are applied. This supports
the conclusion of the previous section, where we noticed that when the explicit lter width equals two grid
spacings, the eect of the model decreases.
0
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.07
0.08
0.09
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2

1
2
y/h
no filter

f
= 1.5

f
= 2

f
= 3

f
= 4
1e07
1e06
1e05
1e04
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100
E
u
u
k
x

f
= 1.5

f
= 2

f
= 3

f
= 4
MKM
Figure 10. Explicit lter width is increased. Left: SGS shear stress
12
. Right: One-dimensional streamwise
energy spectra.
The one-dimensional energy spectra from cases with explicit ltering are depicted in the right-hand side
of gure 10. We see that as the explicit lter width is increased, also the lower frequencies are damped down.
Since the applied lters are not sharp, the use of wide lters aects the whole spectrum. This is similar to
the behavior of the cases with implicit ltering in the right-hand side of gure 8. However, all the explicit
lters damp down the high frequencies more eciently than implicit ltering which aects all frequencies in
a similar manner even if the model length scale is increased.
VII. Conclusions
In this paper, we have carefully studied the eect of explicit ltering in LES using a second-order dis-
cretization scheme and the standard Smagorinsky model. The aim was to clarify the eect of ltering on
the total simulation error.
In section IV A, it was noticed that there were no essential dierences between the two tested approaches
to explicit ltering. Filtering of the non-linear convection term reduces the high frequency components and
this is the essential feature when one wishes to aect the numerical error. However, ltering had a negative
eect on the total simulation error. In section IV B, the eect of the shape of the lter function on the
total error was studied, and the shape of the lter in the low frequency area turned out to be an important
feature. Of the tested smooth lters the use of the 4th-order commutative lter can be recommended with
the present numerical methods. However, the total error remained large with all the tested lters.
In section V, the simulations were repeated with dierent values of the model length scale to separate
the eect of modeling from the eect of ltering. It turned out that most of the changes obtained in the ow
statistic in section IV were due to ltering itself, and ltering reduced the eect of modeling. When explicit
ltering was applied and the model length scale was increased, modeling was able to improve the simulation
results when compared to the case with explicit ltering and low model length scale or to the case with the
increased model length scale and no ltering. Thus, there was some positive interaction between modeling
and ltering. However, the total error in the case with explicit ltering and increased model length scale
9 of 10
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Paper 2006-3541
remained large when compared to the case with no ltering and low model length scale.
In section VI, the eect of implicit and explicit ltering was compared using larger lter widths, and the
features leading to improved results when both were applied in the previous section, were more pronounced.
The main dierence was in the energy spectra where explicit ltering damped the high frequencies eciently,
whereas implicit ltering aected low and high frequencies in a similar manner.
Based on the results of this paper, explicit ltering has two eects on a simulation using the standard
Smagorinsky model. Firstly, it reduces the numerical error and secondly, it reduces the eect of the model and
thus the modeling error. However, explicit ltering with a smooth lter introduces a new error component,
and the standard Smagorinsky model is not able to compensate for this. Thus, despite of the positive eect
on the numerical error, ltering increased the total error, and it is not reasonable to apply explicit ltering
together with this SGS model.
Acknowledgements
This work has been funded by the Finnish national Graduate School in Computational Fluid Dynamics.
The computer capacity was provided by CSC, Scientic Computing Ltd. The used channel-ow code is
based on a code written by Dr. Boersma from TU Delft.
References
1
Ghosal, S., An analysis of numerical errors in large-eddy simulations of turbulence, Journal of Computational Physics,
Vol. 125, 1996, pp. 187206.
2
Kravchenko, A. G. and Moin, P., On the eect of numerical errors in large eddy simulations of turbulent ows, Journal
of Computational Physics, Vol. 131, 1997, pp. 310322.
3
Lund, T. S., On the use of discrete lters for large eddy simulation, Center for Turbulence Research, Annual Research
Briefs, 1997, pp. 8395, Stanford University.
4
Brandt, T., A priori tests on numerical errors in large eddy simulation using nite dierences and explicit ltering,
International Journal for Numerical Methods in Fluids, Vol. 51, No. 6, June 2006, pp. 635657, Published Online: 20 Dec 2005.
5
Gullbrand, J., Explicit ltering and subgrid-scale models in turbulent channel ow, Center for Turbulence Research,
Annual Research Briefs, 2001, pp. 3142, Stanford University.
6
Gullbrand, J. and Chow, F. K., The eect of numerical errors and turbulence models in large-eddy simulations of channel
ow, with and without explicit ltering, Journal of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 495, November 2003, pp. 323341.
7
Brandt, T., Comparison between Approaches to Explicit Filtering in Large Eddy Simulation, Journal of Structural
Mechanics, Special issue for 18th Nordic Seminar on Computational Mechanics, edited by J. Paavola and J. Freund, Vol. 38,
October 27-30 2005, pp. 5962.
8
Smagorinsky, J. S., General circulation experiments with the primitive equations, part I: The basic experiment, Monthly
Weather Review, Vol. 91, 1963, pp. 99152.
9
Moin, P. and Kim, J., Numerical investigation of turbulent channel ow, Journal of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 118, 1982,
pp. 341377.
10
Harlow, F. H. and Welch, J. E., Numerical calculation of time-dependent viscous incompressible ow of uid with free
surface, Physics of Fluids, Vol. 8, No. 12, 1965, pp. 21822189.
11
Lundbladh, A., Berlin, S., Skote, M., Hildings, C., Choi, J., Kim, J., and Henningson, D., An ecient spectral method
for simulation of incompressible ow over a at plate, Tech. Rep. 11, Royal Institute of Technology, Department of Mechanics,
Stockholm, Sweden, 1999.
12
Vasilyev, O. V., Lund, T. S., and Moin, P., A general class of commutative lters for LES in complex geometries,
Journal of Computational Physics, Vol. 146, No. 1, October 1998, pp. 82104.
13
Moser, R. D., Kim, J., and Mansour, N. N., Direct numerical simulation of turbulent channel ow up to Re = 590,
Physics of Fluids, Vol. 11, No. 4, April 1999, pp. 943945.
14
Brandt, T., A posteriori study on modelling and numerical error in LES applying the Smagorinsky model, Complex
Eects in Large Eddy Simulation, Limassol, Cyprus, September 20-24 2005.
10 of 10
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Paper 2006-3541