You are on page 1of 14

Buice 2D Diuser

http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/wind/valid/buice/buice01/buice01.html

NPARC Alliance V&V Archive


Validation Home > Archive > Buice Diuser > Study #1

Buice 2D Diuser
Introduction
This validation study examines the separated ow through a 2D asymmetric diuser using the Menter SST,
Chien k-e, and Spalart-Allmaras turbulence models. It was completed in order to investigate WIND's ability
to predict the correct separation behaviors with smooth walls and adverse pressure gradients. The inlet
ow is two-dimensional, incompressible, turbulent, and fully-developed channel ow with a Reynolds
number of 20,000 based on the centerline velocity and the channel height. The prediction of the separation
and reattachment points and the extent of the recirculation in these types of problems is particularly
challenging for computational models. This ow has been experimentally studied at least by two dierent
research groups: Obi et al at Keio University in Japan, and Buice & Eaton at Stanford University. In this
study, numerical results are compared with experimental data in the form of axial velocity plots and skin
friction data.

Please Note: This webpage has been optimized to be viewed with Microsoft Internet Explorer.

1 of 14

14-11-16 01:12 PM

Buice 2D Diuser

http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/wind/valid/buice/buice01/buice01.html

Figure 1. The geometrical description of the diuser from Buice and Eaton.

Download tar File


The runtime les for the SST model case are contained in the Unix compressed tar le buice.tar.gz. The
les can then be extracted by the unix command
uncompress -c buice.tar.gz | tar xvof The les buice.x, buice.cgd, buice.c and buice.dat are the grid le in plot3d format, grid le in WIND
common le format, WIND solution le, and WIND input le, respectively. The original experimental data
2 of 14

14-11-16 01:12 PM

Buice 2D Diuser

http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/wind/valid/buice/buice01/buice01.html

points can be found here.

Grid and Diuser Geometry


The 2D grid is contained in a PLOT3D grid le (unformatted, single-zone, whole, three-dimensional) named
buice.x. It consists a single zone with grid dimensions 473 x 141 (Figure 2 left). The x- and y-axes are taken
in the streamwise and straight-wall normal directions, respectively. The origin of the x-axis is located at the
intersection of the tangents to the straight and inclined wall, as shown in Figure 1. The y-axis originates
from the bottom wall of the downstream channel. The I1 surface is the inow. The IMAX surface is the
outow. The J1 surface is the diuser. The JMAX surface is the upper viscous wall. The common grid le is
buice.cgd. Walls were clustered such that average y+ values were 1. The height H of the inow domain is
0.591 inches. The grid was created with Pointwise, Inc's GRIDGEN software. The inow region is 110H
long. The lower wall of the diuser section is at y = 0, and the section is 4.7H high and extends 56H
downstream (of the ramp). Grid sequencing was used at 2 levels (118x35) and 1 level (236x70) to get an
initial solution. Solutions obtained on a 1st level grid sequencing were very similar to solutions obtained on
the full grid. All solutions presented here are with the full, unsequenced grid. A comparison of skin friction
along the lower wall for the three grid levels using the SST model can be seen in Figure 2 (right). From
this, it can be seen that the ne grid is sucient to capture the ow eects especially in the diuser region
(x/H > 0).

3 of 14

14-11-16 01:12 PM

Buice 2D Diuser

http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/wind/valid/buice/buice01/buice01.html

Figure 2. Zoomed view of computationl grid (left) and grid sequencing study for three grid levels
(right).

Initial Conditions
The initial ow conditions are simply the conditions of the freestream keyword as presented in Table 1.

Table 1. Static Freestream conditions.

4 of 14

14-11-16 01:12 PM

Buice 2D Diuser

Mach
0.06

http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/wind/valid/buice/buice01/buice01.html

Pressure (psia)

Temperature (R)

Angle-of-Attack (deg)

Angle-of-Sideslip (deg)

14.7

530.0

0.0

0.0

The bulk ow velocity Ub in the channel is 65 ft/sec, and the upstream channel centerline velocity is 1.14
Ub (=74.1 ft/sec). The static pressure was specied at the outow BC (back pressure), and was adjusted
slightly in order to obtain the correct Ub just upstream of the diuser. The nal pressure value for the SST
model was 14.669 psi. This back pressure value was modied during the run cycle in order to obtain the
same bulk ow velocity as the experiment just upstream of the diuser. Another run was performed to
investigate WIND's massow specication option, and in order to conserve mass, WIND calculated and
used a pressure of 14.6801 psi at the exit plane. About a 0.042 psi increase in back pressure was required
for the SST model (compared with the S-A model). Assuming a static inow temperature and pressure for
normal wind tunnel conditions, and using the given Reynolds number of 20,000 and channel height H, the
inlet Mach number (or ow velocity) of 0.06 was extrapolated and used to initialize the solution. From this,
the bulk velocity just upstream of the diuser was ne-tuned to match experimental conditions by slightly
adjusting the back pressure (exit static pressure) while keeping the inow static temperature and pressure
specied in Table 1. The inow conditions set with the arbitrary inow keyword were the same as the
reference conditions set with the freestream keyword.

Boundary Conditions
The I1 inow boundary is specied with a ARBITRARY INFLOW boundary condition (BC). Static values
with hold totals were specied uniformily across the inow plane. The IMAX boundary is specied with
an OUTFLOW boundary condition. The J1 and JMAX boundaries are specied with an VISCOUS WALL
boundary condition. These are set in GRIDGEN. This problem was initially tried with a freestream BC
specifying both total and static values (using hold totals) which presented unacceptable results and
sluggish convergence. Proles upstream of the diuser were correct but axial velocity proles in the
diuser itself were not matching experimental data (although, qualitatively, the solution looked correct).
Using the arbitrary inow BC corrected this problem. It is believed that the FREESTREAM BC only works
for inow boundaries where the ow conditions are uniform and do not change a lot from one point to

5 of 14

14-11-16 01:12 PM

Buice 2D Diuser

http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/wind/valid/buice/buice01/buice01.html

another. For airfoil calculations, the freestream conditions are far enough away from the airfoil itself that
the airfoil does not aect the freestream ow. At the inow plane of a diuser or nozzle, ow downstream
in the nozzle will aect the freestream boundary (for subsonic ow), so this BC is not valid in this case.
Using it will introduce errors downstream. The ARBITRARY INFLOW BC handles this situation properly.
As a corollary exercise to unserstand this better, the Buice diuser was run inviscid in the form of two
sub-cases, one utilizing the Freestream BC and one using the Arbitrary Inow BC. Both solutions gave very
similar results. This conrms that having uniform conditions at the freestream should give similar results
to using the Airbitrary inow BC (for duct or channel ows).

Computational Strategy
The computation is performed using the time-marching capabilities of WIND to march to a steady-state
(time asymptotic) solution. Local time stepping is used at each iteration. The time-marching is performed
until convergence criteria is achieved. The solution was started on a sequenced grid with the SpalartAllmaras turbulence model and switched to the Menter SST and Chien k-e models after a eddy viscosity
eld was developed (after about 20,000 iterations). It was noticed in earlier runs that mostly laminar
boundary layers resulted if the solution was started from scratch with the SST model (not enough eddy
viscosity in the oweld). Upon restart, the SST and k-e models use the eddy viscosity values from the S-A
model, resulting in a more realistic level of turbulence in the oweld. Default turbulence model options
were used with the SST and k-e models in this study.

Input Parameters and Files


The WIND input data le for this case is buice.dat. The arbitrary inow keyword indicates that the static
ow conditions are specied as Mach number, pressure (psia), temperature (R), angle-of-attack (degrees),
and angle-of-sideslip (degrees). Total pressure and total temperature are held contant at the inow
boundary. The turbulence model keyword indicates that the SST turbulence model is to be used. The
cycles keyword indicates that a maximum of 20000 cycles will be run. The iterations per cycle keyword
indicates that 5 iterations will be run per cycle. The c# keyword indicates that a CFL number of 2.0 is
used. By default, WIND uses local maximum allowable time-step based on the specied CFL number. The
converge level keyword indicates that the computation will stop if the L2 norm of the solution drops to

6 of 14

14-11-16 01:12 PM

Buice 2D Diuser

http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/wind/valid/buice/buice01/buice01.html

1.0E-09.

Post-Processing
The CFPOST utility was used to get axial velocity proles across the diuser. The bulk velocity is used to
normalize certain quantities. It was obtained by integrating the axial velocities across all vertical points at
the inow plane and then dividing by the total distance. The skin friction values were obtained by nding
the dynamic viscosity and slope of the axial velocity at the wall (du/dy), and then normalizing by the
freestream density and bulk velocity.

Comparisons of the Results


Axial velocity contours (u-component of velocity) for the SST solution are shown in Figure 3. The S-A and
k-e solutions gave similar quallitative results and are not shown here. Mean velocity proles vs
experimental data are shown in Figure 4 for dierent stations downstream (left to right) for the SST, S-A
with curvature correction ON, S-A with curvature correction OFF, and k-e models. Both axis are normalized
by the inow height H (0.591 inches). Curve #1 (to the far left in each of the images) represents the fully
developed channel ow. The downward slope of the diuser ramp starts at x/H of 0. The separation region
can be seen in Figure 5.
Figure 6 shows the lower and upper wall skin friction vs experimental data on the ne grid for all models.
Analysis of the WIND's skin friction coecient indicates that separation starts at an x/H of 1.9168, and the
ow appears to reattach at an x/H of 30.67934 for the SST model. Separation starts at an x/H of 4.0377,
and the ow appears to reattach at an x/H of 32.680 with the Spalart-Allmaras rotation correction OFF.
Separation starts at an x/H of 3.6051, and the ow appears to reattach at an x/H of 33.044 with the
Spalart-Allmaras rotation correction ON. The S-A solution with the curvature correction ON is not
signicantly dierent than with it OFF, other than the correction slightly improves the solution on the
upper wall near an x/H of 0. For the Chien k-e model, separation starts at an x/H of 0.7583, and the ow
appears to reattach at an x/H of 20.943. The S-A solutions produce a slightly higher Cf value (compared
with the SST solution) along the upper wall of the diuser. It underpredicts Cf at x/H of 0 compared with
the SST model.

7 of 14

14-11-16 01:12 PM

Buice 2D Diuser

8 of 14

http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/wind/valid/buice/buice01/buice01.html

14-11-16 01:12 PM

Buice 2D Diuser

http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/wind/valid/buice/buice01/buice01.html

Figure 3. Axial velocity contours (zoomed and unzoomed) for the Buice subsonic 2D diuser with
the SST model. The rst image is unzoomed showing the entire computational domain and the
second is zoomed near the diuser ramp area highlighting the separation region.

9 of 14

14-11-16 01:12 PM

Buice 2D Diuser

10 of 14

http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/wind/valid/buice/buice01/buice01.html

14-11-16 01:12 PM

Buice 2D Diuser

http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/wind/valid/buice/buice01/buice01.html

Figure 4. Axial velocity for experimental data at various stations downstream. From left to right:
SST, S-A with curvature correction ON, S-A with curvature correction OFF, and the k-e model.

11 of 14

14-11-16 01:12 PM

Buice 2D Diuser

http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/wind/valid/buice/buice01/buice01.html

Figure 5. The separation region as highlighted by streamlines for the SST model. The black lines
show the upper and lower walls.

Figure 6. Skin friction coecient along the lower and upper walls of the diuser vs experimental
data.

Convergence
The L2 Norm of the residual for the SST model can be seen in Figure 7. Note that this residual is for the
2nd level grid sequencing (118 axial by 35 vertically). Other grid levels and turbulence models showed
similar responses.

Figure 7. L2 Norm of the residual indicating convergence to the steady-state solution. 2 nd level
sequenced grid for the SST model (left) and ne grid for the k-e model (right).

12 of 14

14-11-16 01:12 PM

Buice 2D Diuser

http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/wind/valid/buice/buice01/buice01.html

Sensitivity Studies
No sensitivity studies were performed.

Performance
The computations were performed on a Silicon Graphics Origin 2000.
Lessons Learned: Conclusions
1. This solution would not develop properly if the inow plane boundary condition was freestream.
Using instead the arbitrary inow produced reasonable results. This was so even when specifying
identical inow conditions. Non-uniform ow properties across the inow are believed to contaminate
the solution when using the Freestream BC for duct ows.
2. Starting the solution from scratch using the SST model resulted in a very laminar oweld resulting in
too little separation inside the diuser. This has to do with how SST initializes the oweld when it
starts from scratch. Starting the solution with the S-A model and switching to the SST model solved
this problem.
3. The backpressure (outow pressure) required at the exit (in order to get nearly the same ow speed
just upstream of the diuser) is dependent on the turbulence model used. The SST model required a
higher backpressure than the S-A model. This means that for the same backpressure, the S-A model
produced higher owspeeds through the channel (prior to entering the diuser).
4. Qualitative and quantitative results for the S-A and SST models were very similar overall. However, the
SST model better predicted the skin friction distribution on the upper wall. The k-e model showed the
largest deviations from experiment.
5. Specifying the massow at the exit plane resulted in very similar results to specifying the pressure
manually using the downstream pressure keyword. However, specifying the massow (if known)
eliminates the guesswork for the right backpressure since WIND computes it automatically.

13 of 14

14-11-16 01:12 PM

Buice 2D Diuser

http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/wind/valid/buice/buice01/buice01.html

6. The S-A curvature correction does not signicantly alter the results for this problem.
7. The Chien k-e model failed to predict the separation and reattachment points and proper skin friction
prole along the upper and lower walls compared with the S-A and SST models.

References
Buice, C.U. & Eaton, J.K., "Experimental Investigation of Flow Through an Asymmetric Plane Diuser,
Journal of Fluids Engineering, Vol. 122, pp. 433-435, June 2000.
Obi, S., Aoki, K., & Masuda, S., Experimental and Computational Study of Turbluent Separating Flow in
an Asymmetric Plane Diuser, Ninth Symposium on Turbulent Shear Flows, Kyoto, Japan, August 16-19,
1993, p. 305.
More information on this case can be found at this site or by doing this search in Google. Raw
experimental data can be found here.

Contact Information
This study was created on August 11, 2003 by Teryn DalBello, who may be contacted at:
NASA John H. Glenn Research Center, MS 86-7
21000 Brookpark Road
Cleveland, Ohio 44135
Phone: (216) 433-8412
e-mail: teryn@grc.nasa.gov
Last Updated: Tuesday, 15-Jul-2008 08:35:02 EDT
Responsible NASA Ocial/Curator: John W. Slater
Web Policies: Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices
Adobe Reader Download: Adobe Reader

14 of 14

14-11-16 01:12 PM