This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

BooksAudiobooksComicsSheet Music### Categories

### Categories

### Categories

### Publishers

Scribd Selects Books

Hand-picked favorites from

our editors

our editors

Scribd Selects Audiobooks

Hand-picked favorites from

our editors

our editors

Scribd Selects Comics

Hand-picked favorites from

our editors

our editors

Scribd Selects Sheet Music

Hand-picked favorites from

our editors

our editors

Top Books

What's trending, bestsellers,

award-winners & more

award-winners & more

Top Audiobooks

What's trending, bestsellers,

award-winners & more

award-winners & more

Top Comics

What's trending, bestsellers,

award-winners & more

award-winners & more

Top Sheet Music

What's trending, bestsellers,

award-winners & more

award-winners & more

P. 1

Computational Fluid Dynamics|Views: 88|Likes: 1

Published by walaywan

See more

See less

https://www.scribd.com/doc/130899128/Computational-Fluid-Dynamics

03/20/2014

text

original

Mach=0.2, α=10 degrees, Re=1.6M

Chapter 15: Computational Fluid Dynamics

ME33 : Fluid Flow

130

Computed Versus Experimental

Results

Good drag prediction

Discrepancies near stall

Chapter 15: Computational Fluid Dynamics

ME33 : Fluid Flow

131

MultigridConvergence History

Mesh independent property of Multigrid

GMRES effective but requires extra memory

Chapter 15: Computational Fluid Dynamics

ME33 : Fluid Flow

132

Parallel Scalability

Good overall Multigrid scalability

Increased communication due to coarse grid levels

Single grid solution impractical (>100 times slower)

1 hour soution time on 1450 PEs

Chapter 15: Computational Fluid Dynamics

ME33 : Fluid Flow

133

AIAA Drag Prediction Workshop (2001)

Transonic wing-body configuration

Typical cases required for design

study

Matrix of mach and CL values

Grid resolution study

Follow on with engine effects (2003)

Chapter 15: Computational Fluid Dynamics

ME33 : Fluid Flow

134

Cases Run

Baseline grid: 1.6 million points

Full drag polars for

Mach=0.5,0.6,0.7,0.75,0.76,0.77,0.78,0.8

Total = 72 cases

Medium grid: 3 million points

Full drag polar for each mach number

Total = 48 cases

Fine grid: 13 million points

Drag polar at mach=0.75

Total = 7 cases

Chapter 15: Computational Fluid Dynamics

ME33 : Fluid Flow

135

Sample Solution (1.65M Pts)

Mach=0.75, CL=0.6, Re=3M

2.5 hours on 16 Pentium IV 1.7GHz

Chapter 15: Computational Fluid Dynamics

ME33 : Fluid Flow

136

Drag Polar at Mach = 0.75

Grid resolution study

Good comparison with experimental data

Chapter 15: Computational Fluid Dynamics

ME33 : Fluid Flow

137

Cases Run on ICASE Cluster

120 Cases (excluding finest grid)

About 1 week to compute all cases

Chapter 15: Computational Fluid Dynamics

ME33 : Fluid Flow

138

Current and Future Issues

Adaptive mesh refinement

Moving geometry and mesh motion

Moving geometry and overlapping meshes

Requirements for gradient-based design

Implications for higher-order

Discretizations

Chapter 15: Computational Fluid Dynamics

ME33 : Fluid Flow

139

Adaptive Meshing

Potential for large savings through

optimized mesh resolution

Well suited for problems with large range of

scales

Possibility of error estimation / control

Requires tight CAD coupling (surface pts)

Mechanics of mesh adaptation

Refinement criteria and error estimation

Chapter 15: Computational Fluid Dynamics

ME33 : Fluid Flow

140

Mechanics of Adaptive Meshing

Various well know isotropic mesh methods

Mesh movement

Spring analogy

Linear elasticity

Local Remeshing

Delaunay point insertion/Retriangulation

Edge-face swapping

Element subdivision

Mixed elements (non-simplicial)

Anisotropic subdivision required in transition regions

Chapter 15: Computational Fluid Dynamics

ME33 : Fluid Flow

141

Subdivision Types for Tetrahedra

Chapter 15: Computational Fluid Dynamics

ME33 : Fluid Flow

142

Subdivision Types for Prisms

Chapter 15: Computational Fluid Dynamics

ME33 : Fluid Flow

143

Subdivision Types for Pyramids

Chapter 15: Computational Fluid Dynamics

ME33 : Fluid Flow

144

Subdivision Types for Hexahedra

Chapter 15: Computational Fluid Dynamics

ME33 : Fluid Flow

145

Adaptive Tetrahedral Mesh by Subdivision

Chapter 15: Computational Fluid Dynamics

ME33 : Fluid Flow

146

Adaptive Hexahedral Mesh by Subdivision

Chapter 15: Computational Fluid Dynamics

ME33 : Fluid Flow

147

Adaptive Hybrid Mesh by Subdivision

Chapter 15: Computational Fluid Dynamics

ME33 : Fluid Flow

148

Anisotropic Adaptation Methods

Large potential savings for 1 or 2D

features

Directional subdivision

Assumes element faces to line up with flow

features

Combine with mesh motion

Mapping techniques

Hessian based

Grid quality

Chapter 15: Computational Fluid Dynamics

ME33 : Fluid Flow

149

Refinement Criteria

Weakest link of adaptive meshing methods

Obvious for strong features

Difficult for non-local (ie. Convective) features

eg. Wakes

Analysis assumes in asymptotic error convergence

region

Gradient based criteria

Empirical criteria

Effect of variable discretizationerror in design

studies, parameter sweeps

Chapter 15: Computational Fluid Dynamics

ME33 : Fluid Flow

150

Adjoint-based Error Prediction

Compute sensitivity of global cost function to

local spatial grid resolution

Key on important output, ignore other features

Error in engineering output, not discretizationerror

e.g. Lift, drag, or sonic boom …

Captures non-local behavior of error

Global effect of local resolution

Requires solution of adjointequations

Adjointtechniques used for design optimization

Chapter 15: Computational Fluid Dynamics

ME33 : Fluid Flow

151

Adjoint-based Mesh Adaptation Criteria

Reproduced from

Vendittiand

Darmofal(MIT,

2002)

Chapter 15: Computational Fluid Dynamics

ME33 : Fluid Flow

152

Adjoint-based Mesh Adaptation Criteria

Reproduced from Vendittiand

Darmofal(MIT, 2002)

Chapter 15: Computational Fluid Dynamics

ME33 : Fluid Flow

153

Adjoint-based Mesh Adaptation Criteria

Reproduced

from Venditti

and Darmofal

(MIT, 2002)

Chapter 15: Computational Fluid Dynamics

ME33 : Fluid Flow

154

Overlapping Unstructured Meshes

Alternative to moving mesh for large scale

relative geometry motion

Multiple overlapping meshes treated as single

data-structure

Dynamic determination of active/inactive/ghost

cells

Advantages for parallel computing

Obviates dynamic load rebalancing required with

mesh motion techniques

Intergridcommunication must be dynamically

recomputed and rebalanced

Concept of Rendez-vousgrid (Plimpton and

Hendrickson)

Chapter 15: Computational Fluid Dynamics

ME33 : Fluid Flow

155

Overlapping Unstructured Meshes

Simple 2D transient example

Chapter 15: Computational Fluid Dynamics

ME33 : Fluid Flow

156

Gradient-based Design Optimization

Minimize Cost Function Fwith respect to design

variables v, subject to constraint R(w) = 0

F= drag, weight, cost

v= shape parameters

w= Flow variables

R(w) = 0**à**Governing Flow Equations

Gradient Based Methods approach minimum

along direction :

vF

*¶¶
*

*-
*

Chapter 15: Computational Fluid Dynamics

ME33 : Fluid Flow

157

Grid Related Issues for Gradient-based Design

Parametrization of CAD surfaces

Consistency across disciplines

eg. CFD, structures,…

Surface grid motion

Interior grid motion

Grid sensitivities

Automation / Parallelization

Chapter 15: Computational Fluid Dynamics

ME33 : Fluid Flow

158

Preliminary Design Geometry

X34 CAD Model

23,555 curves and surfaces

c/o J. Samareh, NASA Langley

Chapter 15: Computational Fluid Dynamics

ME33 : Fluid Flow

159

**Launch Vehicle Shape Parameterization
**

c/o J. Samareh, NASA

Langley

Chapter 15: Computational Fluid Dynamics

ME33 : Fluid Flow

160

Sensitivity Analysis

•Manual differentiation

•Automatic differentiation tools (e.g., ADIFOR and ADIC)

•Complex variables

•Finite-difference approximations

analysis code

field grid generator

geometry modeler (CAD)

surface grid generator

Grid

v

Grid

Ge

Geometry

v

Grid

Gr

my

id

oetr

*f
*

*f
*

*s
*

*s
*

*F
*

*x
*

*x
*

*x
*

*F
*

*¶
*

*¶
*

*¶
*

*¶
*

*=
*

*¶
*

*¶
*

*¶
*

*¶
*

*¶
*

*¶
*

14243

1424

1

1

424

3

3 4243

v design variables

(e.g., span, camber)

objective function

(e.g., Stress, CD)

c/o J. Samareh, NASA Langley

Chapter 15: Computational Fluid Dynamics

ME33 : Fluid Flow

161

Finite-Difference Approximation Error for Sensitivity Derivatives

**Parameterized
HSCT Model
**

c/o J. Samareh, NASA Langley

Chapter 15: Computational Fluid Dynamics

ME33 : Fluid Flow

162

Grid Sensitivities

Ideally should be available from grid/cad

software

Analytical formulation most desirable

Burden on grid / CAD software

Discontinous operations present extra challenges

Face-edge swapping

Point addition / removal

Mesh regeneration

v

Geometry

Geometry

Grid

Grid

Grid

v

Grid

*¶
*

*¶
*

*¶ ¶
*

*¶¶
*

*=
*

*¶
*

*¶
*

*x
*

*x
*

*s
*

*s
*

*f
*

*f
*

Chapter 15: Computational Fluid Dynamics

ME33 : Fluid Flow

163

High-Order Accurate Discretizations

Uniform X2 refinement of 3D mesh:

Work increase = factor of 8

2nd

order accurate method: accuracy increase = 4

4th

order accurate method: accuracy increase = 16

For smooth solutions

Potential for large efficiency gains

Spectral element methods

Discontinuous Galerkin (DG)

Streamwise Upwind Petrov Galerkin (SUPG)

Chapter 15: Computational Fluid Dynamics

ME33 : Fluid Flow

164

Higher-Order Accurate Discretizations

Transfers burden from grid generation to Discretization

Chapter 15: Computational Fluid Dynamics

ME33 : Fluid Flow

165

Spectral Element Solution of Maxwell’s Equations

**J. Hesthavenand T.
Warburton
(Brown University)
**

Chapter 15: Computational Fluid Dynamics

ME33 : Fluid Flow

166

High-Order Discretizations

Require more complete surface

definition

Curved surface elements

Additional element points

Surface definition (for high p)

Chapter 15: Computational Fluid Dynamics

ME33 : Fluid Flow

167

Combined H-P Refinement

Adaptive meshing (h-ref) yields constant factor

improvement

After error equidistribution, no further benefit

Order refinement (p-ref) yields asymptotic

improvement

Only for smooth functions

Ineffective for inadequate h-resolution of feature

Cannot treat shocks

H-P refinement optimal (exponential convergence)

Requires accurate CAD surface representation

168

Modeling Turbulent Flows

**u
**

Unsteady, aperiodic motion in which all three velocity components

fluctuate **Õ**mixing matter, momentum, and energy.

**u
**

Decompose velocity into mean and fluctuating parts:

*Ui(t) º Ui + ui(t)
*

**u
**

Similar fluctuations for pressure, temperature, and species

concentration values.

What is Turbulence?

Time

*U i (t)
*

*Ui
*

*ui(t)
*

Why Model Turbulence?

**u
**

Direct numerical simulation of governing equations is only possible for

simple low-*Re*flows.

**u
**

Instead, we solve Reynolds Averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS)

equations:

where (Reynolds stresses)

(steady, incompressible flow

w/o body forces)

*j
*

*i
*

*ij
*

*u
*

*u
*

*R r
*

*-
*

*=
*

*j
*

*ij
*

*j
*

*j
*

*i
*

*i
*

*k
*

*i
*

*k
*

*xR
*

*x
*

*x U
*

*xp
*

*xU
*

*U
*

*¶¶
*

*+
*

*¶
*

*¶¶
*

*+
*

*¶¶
*

*-
*

*=
*

*¶¶
*

2

*m
*

*r
*

Is the Flow Turbulent?

**External Flows
**

**Internal Flows
**

**Natural Convection
**

5

10

5*´
*

*³
*

*x
*

*Re
*

along a surface

around an obstacle

where

*m
*

*rUL
*

*ReL º
*

where

Other factors such as free-stream

turbulence, surface conditions, and

disturbances may cause earlier

transition to turbulent flow.

*L*= *x*, *D*, *Dh*, etc.

,300

2

*³h
*

*D
*

*Re
*

10

8

10

10* -
*

*³
*

*Ra
*

*mar
*

*b*3

Pr* TL
*

*g
*

*Gr
Ra x
*

*D
*

*º
*

*=
*

20,000

*³
*

*D
*

*Re
*

*¥
*

*-
*

*=
*

*D
*

*T
*

*T
T s
*

Ts= temperatureofthewall

T∞= fluidtemperaturefarfromthesurfaceoftheobject

Grashof Prandtl

How Complex is the Flow?

**u
**

Extra strain rates

**l
**

Streamline curvature

**l
**

Lateral divergence

**l
**

Acceleration or deceleration

**l
**

Swirl

**l
**

Recirculation (or separation)

**l
**

Secondary flow

**u
**

3D perturbations

**u
**

Transpiration (blowing/suction)

**u
**

Free-stream turbulence

**u
**

Interacting shear layers

Choices to be Made

**Turbulence Model
&
Near-Wall Treatment
**

Flow

Physics

Accuracy

Required

Computational

Resources

Turnaround

Time

Constraints

**Computational
Grid
**

**Zero-Equation Models
**

**One-Equation Models
**

**Spalart-Allmaras
**

**Two-Equation Models
**

**Standard k-e**

RNG k-e

Realizable k-e

**Reynolds-Stress Model
**

**Large-Eddy Simulation
**

**Direct Numerical Simulation
**

Turbulence Modeling Approaches

**Include
More
Physics
**

**Increase
Computational
Cost
Per Iteration
**

Available

in FLUENT

RANS-based

models

**u
**

RANS equations require closure for Reynolds stresses.

**u
**

Turbulent viscosity is indirectly solved for from single transport

equation of modified viscosity for One-Equation model.

**u
**

For Two-Equation models, turbulent viscosity correlated with turbulent

kinetic energy (TKE) and the dissipation rate of TKE.

**u
**

Transport equations for turbulent kinetic energy and dissipation rate are

solved so that turbulent viscosity can be computed for RANS equations.

Reynolds Stress Terms in RANS-based Models

Turbulent

Kinetic Energy:

Dissipation Rate of

Turbulent Kinetic Energy:

*e
*

*r
m m*2

*k
*

*C
*

*t º
*

Turbulent Viscosity:

Boussinesq Hypothesis:

(isotropic stresses)

*÷÷
øö
*

*çç
èæ
*

*¶¶
*

*+
*

*¶¶
*

*+
*

*-
*

*=
*

*-
*

*=
*

*i
*

*j
*

*j
*

*i
*

*t
*

*ij
*

*j
*

*i
*

*ij
*

*xU
*

*xU
*

*k
*

*u
*

*u
*

*R
*

*m
*

*d
*

*r
*

*r
*

32

2

/

*i
iu
*

*u
*

*kº
*

*÷÷
øö
*

*çç
èæ
*

*¶¶
*

*+
*

*¶¶
*

*¶¶
*

*º
*

*i
*

*j
*

*j
*

*i
*

*j
*

*i
*

*xu
*

*xu
*

*xu
*

*n
*

*e
*

**u
**

Turbulent viscosity is determined from:

**u
**

is determined from the modified viscosity transport equation:

**u
**

The additional variables are functions of the modified turbulent

viscosity and velocity gradients.

One Equation Model: Spalart-Allmaras

*( )
*

2

1

2

2

~

1

~

~

~

~

1

~

~

~

*d
*

*f
*

*c
*

*x
*

*c
*

*x
*

*x
*

*S
*

*c
*

*Dt
*

*D
*

*w
*

*w
*

*j
*

*b
*

*j
*

*j
*

*b
*

*n
*

*r
*

*n
*

*r
*

*n
*

*n
*

*r
*

*m
*

*s
*

*n
*

*r
*

*n
*

*r
*

*n
*

*-
*

*úú
û
*

*ù
*

*êê
ë
*

*é
*

*÷÷
øö
*

*çç
èæ
*

*¶¶
*

*+
*

*ïþï
*

*ýü
*

*ïîï
*

*íì
*

*¶¶
*

*+
*

*¶¶
*

*+
*

*=
*

*( )
( ) ú
ûù
*

*ê
ëé
*

*+
*

*=
*

3

1

3

3

/

~/

~

~

*n
*

*n
n n
*

*n
*

*n
*

*r
*

*m
*

*c
*

*t
*

*n*~

Generation

Diffusion

Destruction

One-Equation Model: Spalart-Allmaras

**u
**

Designed specifically for aerospace applications involving wall-

bounded flows.

**l
**

Boundary layers with adverse pressure gradients

**l
**

turbomachinery

**u
**

Can use coarse or fine mesh at wall

**l
**

Designed to be used with fine mesh as a “low-Re” model, i.e., throughout

the viscous-affected region.

**l
**

Sufficiently robust for relatively crude simulations on coarse meshes.

Two Equation Model: Standard *k-e*Model

**Turbulent Kinetic Energy
**

**Dissipation Rate
**

*e
*

*e
*

*e
*

*s
*

*s
*

2

1

,

,

,* C
C
*

*k
*

are empirical constants

(equations written for steady, incompressible flow w/o body forces)

Convection

Generation

Diffusion

Destruction

{*re
*

*s
*

*m
*

*m
*

*r
*

*-
*

*þýü
*

*îíì
*

*¶¶
*

*¶¶
*

*+
*

*¶¶
*

*÷÷
øö
*

*çç
èæ
*

*¶¶
*

*+
*

*¶¶
*

*=
*

*¶¶
*

4

4

4 3

4

4

4 2

1

4

4

4 3

4

4

4 2

1

43

42

1

*i
*

*k
*

*t
*

*i
*

*i
*

*j
*

*j
*

*i
*

*i
*

*j
*

*t
*

*i
*

*i
*

*xk
*

*x
*

*xU
*

*xU
*

*xU
*

*xk
*

*U
*

)

(

Destruction

Convection

Generation

Diffusion

43

42

1

4

4

4 3

4

4

4 2

1

4

4

4

4

4

3

4

4

4

4

4

2

1

43

42

1

*÷÷
øö
*

*çç
èæ
*

*-
*

*þýü
*

*îíì
*

*¶¶
*

*¶¶
*

*+
*

*¶¶
*

*÷÷
øö
*

*çç
èæ
*

*¶¶
*

*+
*

*¶¶
*

*÷
øö
*

*ç
èæ
*

*=
*

*¶¶
*

*k
*

*C
*

*x
*

*x
*

*xU
*

*xU
*

*xU
*

*k
*

*C
*

*x
*

*U
*

*i
*

*t
*

*i
*

*i
*

*j
*

*j
*

*i
*

*i
*

*j
*

*t
*

*i
*

*i
*

2

2

1

)

(

*e
*

*r
*

*e
*

*s
*

*m
*

*m
*

*e
*

*e
*

*r
*

*e
*

*e
*

*e
*

Two Equation Model: Standard *k-e*Model

**u
**

“Baseline model” (Two-equation)

**l
**

Most widely used model in industry

**l
**

Strength and weaknesses well documented

**u
**

Semi-empirical

**l
**

k equation derived by subtracting the instantaneous mechanical energy

equation from its time-averaged value

**l*** e*equation formed from physical reasoning

**u
**

Valid only for fully turbulent flows

**u
**

Reasonable accuracy for wide range of turbulent flows

**l
**

industrial flows

**l
**

heat transfer

Two Equation Model: Realizable k-*e
*

**u
**

Distinctions from Standard k-*e*model:

**l
**

Alternative formulation for turbulent viscosity

where is now variable

**n**(A0, As, and U* are functions of velocity gradients)

**n**Ensures positivity of normal stresses;

**n**Ensures Schwarz’s inequality;

**l
**

New transport equation for dissipation rate, *e*:

*e
*

*r
*

*m
*

*m*2

*k
*

*C
*

*t º
*

*e
*

*m
*

*k
*

*U
*

*A
*

*A
*

*C
*

*s
*

*o
*

*

1

*+
*

*=
*

0

u2

i* ³
*

2

j

2

i

2

j

i

u

u

)

u

u

(* £
*

*b
*

*j
*

*t
*

*j
*

*G
*

*c
*

*k
*

*c
*

*k
*

*c
*

*S
*

*c
*

*x
*

*x
*

*Dt
*

*D
*

*e
*

*e
*

*e
*

*e
*

*ne
*

*e
*

*r
*

*e
*

*r
*

*e
*

*sm
*

*m
*

*e
*

*r
*

3

1

2

2

1

*+
*

*+
*

*-
*

*+
*

*úú
ûù
*

*êê
ëé
*

*¶¶
*

*÷÷
øö
*

*çç
èæ
*

*+
*

*¶¶
*

*=
*

Generation

Diffusion

Destruction

Buoyancy

**u
**

Shares the same turbulent kinetic energy equation as Standard k-*e
*

**u
**

Superior performance for flows involving:

**l
**

planar and round jets

**l
**

boundary layers under strong adverse pressure gradients, separation

**l
**

rotation, recirculation

**l
**

strong streamline curvature

Two Equation Model: Realizable k-*e
*

Two Equation Model: RNG *k-e
*

**Turbulent Kinetic Energy
**

**Dissipation Rate
**

Convection

Diffusion

Dissipation

{

{*re
*

*m
*

*a
*

*m
*

*r
*

*-
*

*÷÷
øö
*

*çç
èæ
*

*¶¶
*

*¶¶
*

*+
*

*=
*

*¶¶
*

4

4 3

4

4 2

1

43

42

1

*i
*

*k
*

*i
*

*t
*

*i
*

*i
*

*xk
*

*x
*

*S
*

*xk
*

*U
*

eff

2

Generation

*÷÷
øö
*

*çç
èæ
*

*¶¶
*

*+
*

*¶¶
*

*º
*

*º
*

*j
*

*i
*

*i
*

*j
*

*ij
*

*ij
*

*ij
*

*xU
*

*xU
*

*S
*

*S
*

*S
*

*S
*

21

,

2

where

are derived using RNG theory

*e
*

*e
*

*e
*

*a
*

*a
*

2

1

,

,

,* C
C
*

*k
*

(equations written for steady, incompressible flow w/o body forces)

Additional term

related to mean strain

& turbulence quantities

Convection

Generation

Diffusion

Destruction

{*R
*

*k
*

*C
*

*x
*

*x
*

*S
*

*k
*

*C
*

*x
*

*U
*

*i
*

*i
*

*t
*

*i
*

*i
*

*-
*

*÷÷
øö
*

*çç
èæ
*

*-
*

*÷÷
øö
*

*çç
èæ
*

*¶¶
*

*¶¶
*

*+
*

*÷
øö
*

*ç
èæ
*

*=
*

*¶¶
*

43

42

1

4

4 3

4

4 2

1

4

43

4

42

1

43

42

1

2

2

eff

2

1

*e
*

*r
*

*e
*

*m
*

*a
*

*m
*

*e
*

*e
*

*r
*

*e
*

*e
*

*e
*

Two Equation Model: RNG *k-e
*

**u
**

k-*e*equations are derived from the application of a rigorous statistical

technique (Renormalization Group Method) to the instantaneous Navier-

Stokes equations.

**u
**

Similar in form to the standard k-*e*equations but includes:

**l
**

additional term in *e*equation that improves analysis of rapidly strained flows

**l
**

the effect of swirl on turbulence

**l
**

analytical formula for turbulent Prandtl number

**l
**

differential formula for effective viscosity

**u
**

Improved predictions for:

**l
**

high streamline curvature and strain rate

**l
**

transitional flows

**l
**

wall heat and mass transfer

Reynolds Stress Model

*k
*

*ijk
*

*ij
*

*ij
*

*ij
*

*k
*

*j
*

*i
*

*k
*

*xJ
*

*P
*

*xu
*

*u
*

*U
*

*¶¶
*

*+
*

*-
*

*F
*

*+
*

*=
*

*¶
*

*¶
*

*e
*

*r
*

**Generation
**

*k
*

*i
*

*k
*

*j
*

*k
*

*j
*

*k
*

*i
*

*ij
*

*xU
*

*u
*

*u
*

*xU
*

*u
*

*u
*

*P
*

*¶¶
*

*+
*

*¶¶
*

*º
*

*÷÷
øö
*

*çç
èæ
*

*¶¶
*

*+
*

*¶¶
*

*¢
*

*-
*

*º
*

*F
*

*i
*

*j
*

*j
*

*i
*

*ij
*

*xu
*

*xu
*

*p
*

*k
*

*j
*

*k
*

*i
*

*ij
*

*xu
*

*xu
*

*¶¶
*

*¶¶
*

*º m
*

*e
*

2

**Pressure-Strain
Redistribution
**

**Dissipation
**

**Turbulent
Diffusion
**

(modeled)

(related to *e*)

(modeled)

(computed)

(equations written for steady, incompressible flow w/o body forces)

**Reynolds Stress
Transport Eqns.
**

Pressure/velocity

fluctuations

Turbulent

transport

)

(

*j
*

*ik
*

*i
*

*jk
*

*k
*

*j
*

*i
*

*ijk
*

*u
*

*u
*

*p
*

*u
*

*u
*

*u
*

*J
*

*d
*

*d +
*

*¢
*

*+
*

*=
*

Reynolds Stress Model

**u
**

RSM closes the Reynolds-Averaged Navier-Stokes equations by

solving additional transport equations for the Reynolds stresses.

**l
**

Transport equations derived by Reynolds averaging the product of the

momentum equations with a fluctuating property

**l
**

Closure also requires one equation for turbulent dissipation

**l
**

Isotropic eddy viscosity assumption is avoided

**u
**

Resulting equations contain terms that need to be modeled.

**u
**

RSM has high potential for accurately predicting complex flows.

**l
**

Accounts for streamline curvature, swirl, rotation and high strain rates

**n**Cyclone flows, swirling combustor flows

**n**Rotating flow passages, secondary flows

Large Eddy Simulation

**u
**

Large eddies:

**l
**

Mainly responsible for transport of momentum, energy, and other scalars,

directly affecting the mean fields.

**l
**

Anisotropic, subjected to history effects, and flow-dependent, i.e., strongly

dependent on flow configuration, boundary conditions, and flow parameters.

**u
**

Small eddies:

**l
**

Tend to be more isotropic and less flow-dependent

**l
**

More likely to be easier to model than large eddies.

**u
**

LES directly computes (resolves) large eddies and models only small

eddies (Subgrid-Scale Modeling).

**u
**

Large computational effort

**l
**

Number of grid points, NLES* µ
*

**l
**

Unsteady calculation

2

Re* tu
*

Comparison of RANS Turbulence Models

**Model
**

**Strengths
**

**Weaknesses
**

**Spalart-
Allmaras**Economical (1-eq.); good track record

for mildly complex B.L. type of flowsNot very widely tested yet; lack of

submodels (e.g. combustion,

buoyancy)

**STD k-e
**

Robust, economical, reasonably

accurate; long accumulated

performance data

Mediocre results for complex flows

involving severe pressure gradients,

strong streamline curvature, swirl

and rotation

**RNG k-e**Good for moderately complex

behavior like jet impingement,

separating flows, swirling flows, and

secondary flows

Subjected to limitations due to

isotropic eddy viscosity

assumption

**Realizable
k- e
**

Offers largely the same benefits as

RNG; resolves round-jet anomaly

Subjected to limitations due to

isotropic eddy viscosity

assumption

**Reynolds
Stress
Model
**

Physically most complete model

(history, transport, and anisotropy of

turbulent stresses are all accounted

for)

Requires more cpu effort (2-3x);

tightly coupled momentum and

turbulence equations

Near-Wall Treatments

**u
**

Most *k-e*and RSM turbulence

models will not predict correct

near-wall behavior if integrated

down to the wall.

**u
**

Special near-wall treatment is

required.

**l
**

Standard wall functions

**l
**

Nonequilibrium wall functions

**l
**

Two-layer zonal model

Boundary layer structure

Standard Wall Functions

*r
*

*t m
*

/

2/

1

4/

1

*w
*

*P
*

*P k
*

*C
*

*U
*

*U º
*

**
*

*( )
*

*ï
î
*

*ï
íì
*

*>
*

*ú
ûù
*

*ê
ëé
*

*+
*

*<
*

*=
*

**
*

**
*

**
*

)

(

ln

1

Pr

)

(

Pr

*

*

*

*

*T
*

*t
*

*T
*

*y
*

*y
*

*P
*

*Ey
*

*y
*

*y
*

*y
*

*T
*

*k
*

*m
*

*r m P
P y
*

*k
*

*C
*

*y
*

2

/

1

4

/

1

*º
*

**
*

*q k
*

*C
*

*c
*

*T
*

*T
*

*T
*

*P
*

*p
*

*P
*

*w
*

*¢¢
*

*-
*

*º
*

&

2/

1

4/

1

)

(

*

*m
*

*r
*

**Mean Velocity
**

**Temperature
**

where

where

and *P*is a function of the fluid

and turbulent Prandtl numbers.

thermal sublayer thickness

*( )
*

**
*

**
*

*= Ey
*

*U
*

ln

1

*k
*

NonequilibriumWall Functions

**u
**

Log-law is sensitized to pressure gradient for

better prediction of adverse pressure gradient

flows and separation.

**u
**

Relaxed local equilibrium assumptions for

TKE in wall-neighboring cells.

**u
**

Thermal law-of-wall unchanged

*÷÷
øö
*

*çç
èæ
*

*=
*

*m
*

*r
*

*k
*

*r
*

*t
*

*m
*

*m
*

*y
*

*k
*

*C
*

*E
*

*k
*

*C
*

*U
*

*w
*

2

/

1

4

/

1

2/

1

4/

1

ln

1

/

~

*ú
ûù
*

*ê
ëé
*

*+
*

*-
*

*+
*

*÷
øö
*

*ç
èæ
*

*-
*

*=
*

**
*

**
*

*m
*

*rk
*

*rk
*

*y
*

*ky
*

*y
*

*yy
*

*k
*

*y
*

*dx
*

*dp
*

*U
*

*U
*

*v
*

*v
*

*v
*

*v
*

2

2/

1

2/

1

ln

21

~

where

Two-Layer Zonal Model

**u
**

Used for low-*Re*flows or

flows with complex near-wall

phenomena.

**u
**

Zones distinguished by a wall-

distance-based turbulent

Reynolds number

**u
**

High-*Re k-e*models are used in the turbulent core region.

**u
**

Only *k*equation is solved in the viscosity-affected region.

**u*** e*is computed from the correlation for length scale.

**u
**

Zoning is dynamic and solution adaptive.

*m
*

*r y
k
*

*Rey º
*

200

*>
*

*y
*

*Re
*

200

*<
*

*y
*

*Re
*

Comparison of Near Wall Treatments

**Strengths
**

**Weaknesses
**

**Standard wall
Functions
**

Robust, economical,

reasonably accurate

Empirically based on simple

high-*Re* flows; poor for low-*Re
*effects, massive transpiration,

3D flows

**Nonequilibrium
wall functions
**

Accounts for *Ñ*p effects,

allows nonequilibrium:

-separation

-reattachment

-impingement

Poor for low-*Re* effects, massive

transpiration, severe *Ñ*p, strong

body forces, highly 3D flows

**Two-layer zonal
model
**

Does not rely on law-of-the-

wall, good for complex

flows, especially applicable

to low-*Re* flows

Requires finer mesh resolution

and therefore larger cpu and

memory resources

Computational Grid Guidelines

Wall Function

Approach

Two-Layer Zonal

Model Approach

**l**First grid point in log-law region

**l**At least ten points in the BL.

**l**Better to use stretched quad/hex

cells for economy.

**l**First grid point at *y*+

*»*1.

**l**At least ten grid points within

buffer & sublayers.

**l**Better to use stretched quad/hex

cells for economy.

500

50* £
£ +
*

*y
*

Estimating Placement of First Grid Point

**u
**

Estimate the skin friction coefficient based on correlations either

approximate or empirical:

**l
**

Flat Plate-

**l
**

Pipe Flow-

**u
**

Compute the friction velocity:

**u
**

Back out required distance from wall:

**l
**

Wall functions

•Two-layer model

**u
**

Use post-processing to confirm near-wall mesh resolution

2.

0

Re

0359

.

0

2

/

*-
*

*»
*

*L
*

*f
*

*c
*

2.

0

Re

039

.

0

2

/

*-
*

*»
*

*D
*

*f
*

*c
*

2

/

/

*f
*

*e
*

*w
*

*c
*

*U
*

*u
*

*=
*

*º r
t
*

*t
*

y1 = 50*n*/u*t
*

y1 = *n*/ u*t
*

Setting Boundary Conditions

**u
**

Characterize turbulence at inlets & outlets (potential backflow)

**l*** k*-*e*models require *k*and *e
*

**l
**

Reynolds stress model requires *Rij*and *e
*

**u
**

Several options allow input using more familiar parameters

**l
**

Turbulence intensity and length scale

**n**length scale is related to size of large eddies that contain most of energy.

**n**For boundary layer flows:* l »*0.4*d*99

**n**For flows downstream of grids /perforated plates:* l »*opening size

**l
**

Turbulence intensity and hydraulic diameter

**n**Ideally suited for duct and pipe flows

**l
**

Turbulence intensity and turbulent viscosity ratio

**n**For external flows:

**u
**

Input of *k*and *e*explicitly allowed (non-uniform profiles possible).

10

/

1

*<
*

*< m
mt
*

GUI for Turbulence Models

Define**Õ**Models**Õ**Viscous...

Turbulence Model options

Near Wall Treatments

Inviscid, Laminar, or Turbulent

Additional Turbulence options

Example: Channel Flow with Conjugate Heat Transfer

adiabatic wall

cold air

V = 50 fpm

T = 0 °F

constant temperature wall T = 100 °F

insulation

1 ft

1 ft

10 ft

P

Predict the temperature at point P in the solid insulation

Turbulence Modeling Approach

**u
**

Check if turbulent **Õ***ReDh*= 5,980

**u
**

Developing turbulent flow at relatively low Reynolds number and

BLs on walls will give pressure gradient **Õ**use RNG *k-e*with

nonequilibrium wall functions.

**u
**

Develop strategy for the grid

**l
**

Simple geometry **Õ**quadrilateral cells

**l
**

Expect large gradients in normal direction to horizontal walls **Õ
**fine mesh near walls with first cell in log-law region.

**l
**

Vary streamwise grid spacing so that BL growth is captured.

**l
**

Use solution-based grid adaption to further resolve temperature

gradients.

Velocity

contours

Temperature

contours

BLs on upper & lower surfaces accelerate the core flow

**Prediction of Momentum & Thermal
Boundary Layers
**

Important that thermal BL was accurately resolved as well

**P
**

Example: Flow Around a Cylinder

wall

wall

1 ft

2 ft

2 ft

air

V = 4 fps

Compute drag coefficient of the cylinder

5 ft

14.5 ft

**u
**

Check if turbulent **Õ***ReD*= 24,600

**u
**

Flow over an object, unsteady vortex shedding is expected,

difficult to predict separation on downstream side, and close

proximity of side walls may influence flow around cylinder

**Õ**use RNG *k-e*with 2-layer zonal model.

**u
**

Develop strategy for the grid

**l
**

Simple geometry & BLs **Õ**quadrilateral cells.

**l
**

Large gradients near surface of cylinder & 2-layer model

**Õ**fine mesh near surface & first cell at *y+
*

= 1.

Turbulence Modeling Approach

Grid for Flow Over a Cylinder

Prediction of Turbulent Vortex Shedding

Contours of effective viscosity *m*eff= *m*+ *mt
*

*CD*= 0.53

Strouhal Number = 0.297

*UD
*

*St
*

*t
*

*º
*

where

Summary: Turbulence Modeling Guidelines

**u
**

Successful turbulence modeling requires engineering judgement of:

**l
**

Flow physics

**l
**

Computer resources available

**l
**

Project requirements

**n**Accuracy

**n**Turnaround time

**l
**

Turbulence models & near-wall treatments that are available

**u
**

Begin with standard *k-e*and change to RNG or Realizable *k-e*if

needed.

**u
**

Use RSM for highly swirling flows.

**u
**

Use wall functions unless low-*Re*flow and/or complex near-wall

physics are present.

2013-2014 LTRC Annual Report

2012-2013 LTRC Annual Report

2012-2013 ltrc annual report

2011-2012 ltrc annual report

2010-2011 ltrc annual report

2009-2010 ltrc annual report

2008-2009 ltrc annual report

2007-2008 ltrc annual report

Real Solutions Seminar 012711

Real Solutions Presentation 2008 09

Real Solutions Presentation 2008 07

Real Solutions Presentation 2008 05

Real Solutions Presentation 2008 04

Real Solutions Presentation 2008 03

ltrc project capsule_13_3st efects of hydrokinetic turbines on mississippi river infrastructure

ltrc project capsule_13_8ss the impact of modifying jones act on us domestic shipping

ltrc project capsule_13_8gt bayou corne sinkhole

ltrc project capsule_13_6ss economic impact analysis of short line railroads

ltrc project capsule_13_2sa developing a highway safety fundamentals course

ltrc project capsule_13_2p a comprehensive study on pavement edge line implementation

ltrc project capsule_13_2gt implementation of slag stabilized blended calcium sulfate (bsc) in a pavement structure

ltrc project capsuke 13_7ss use of containers to carry bulk and break bulk commodities

ltrc project 13_5ss improving freight crash incident management

ltrc project capsule_13_2p a comprehensive study on pavement edge line implementation

ltrc project capsule_13_2sa developing a highway safety fundamentals course

- Read and print without ads
- Download to keep your version
- Edit, email or read offline

Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

CANCEL

OK

You've been reading!

NO, THANKS

OK

scribd

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->