Memorandum
102847
_
A OneEquationTurbulenceTransport
Model for High Reynolds Number
WallBounded Flows
Barrett S. Baldwin and Timothy J. Barth
August
1990
NQII0252
" (NA_ATMIOZG4/)
A ONEEgUAT_C]N
:_oR_ULFNCE
TRANSPORT
MOu_L
FnR t_IGH REYNOLDS
N!JM_ER
WALL_OUNOED
FLOWS
(NASA)
23 P
CSCL
200
_3/54
National Aeronautics and
Space Administratbn
uncl,_s
O310m31
_L
K_
NASA Technical
Memorandum
102847
A OneEquationTurbulenceTransport
Model for High ReynoldsNumber
WallBounded Flows
Barrett S. Baldwin
August
and Timothy
1990
National Aeronautics and
Space AcIministratbn
Ames Research Center
Moffett Field, California 940351000
J. Barth, Ames Research
Center,
Moffett
Field, California
SUMMARY
A oneequation
is derived
based
from
on well
other
flows
the
turbulence
a simplified
form
established
has
that
of the
properties
are compared
model
model
with
predictive
avoids
standard
of the
experiment.
and
investigation
and refinement.
robust
solution
methods
are
need
for
an algebraic
k  c model
equations.
over
plate,
flow
The
numerical
the
a flat
preliminary
properties
model
After
is also
of several
presented
interest
indicate
to merit
analyzed
scale
calibration
predictions
results
of sufficient
The oneequation
presented.
length
that
further
numerically
and
INTRODUCTION
One
motivation
for
of wellestablished
predict
several
shopt.
These
reported
flows
turbulence
verified
and
model,
such
From
our
Sugavanum
_ equations.
was
found
limited
that
also
of difficult
The
model.
a degree
phasis
was placed
methods
ical
avoids
solvers.
t Held
flows.
analysis
oneequation
in conjunction
The
from
model.
Numerical
model
the
has
show
layers
and
Jespersen,
to avoid
un
algebraic
models.
reports
by
others
(e.g.,
to investigate
the
overall
incorporate
implemented
Aerospace
oneequation
The
main
applicability
of the
and
behind
the
design
extremely
section
the
to a
development
of the
one
to demon
equation,
numerical
some
is
of the
wake
model
robust
gives
cases
improvement
oneequation
Sciences
of this
model
two troublesome
turbulent
in a number
model
purpose
of the
significant
for a selfsimilar
so that
25th
shear
by Pulliam,
need
and
scales.
the
reported
Implementation
AIAA
one
5) and
is cumbersome
a selfconsistent
rationale
In the
been
The
computations
are
to properly
reported
(ref.
multiple
be worthwhile
length
and
considerations
needed
with
model
the solution
of the
on numerical
it would
for algebraic
the
(ref.
by only
King
twoequation
models
investigation,
explain
contains
were
than the basic physical
variables
in an effort
that
occur in the solution
of the standard
Workshop
sections
by
scales
blowing.
_ or related
that
Results
Airfoil
next
be used.
and
The
two
the need
were
predicted
computed
twoequation
of that
Work
results
code
in which
length
surface
apparent
oneequation
of generality
could
theory
the
The
strate
with
Airfoil
poor
ARC2D
adequately
configuration
of k 
to adequately
code.
of algebraic
airfoil
inability
of BaldwinLomax
4) as reported
flow problems
to variables
other
numerical
difficulties
course
were
(ref.
uniformly
the
the
Transonic
models
by
cases
King
tangential
it became
Transonic
following
equation
Two
to treat
Coanda
exploits
turbulent
in the Viscous
achieved.
predicted
and
determination
In the
flow and
was
models
Viscous
turbulence
an independent
experience
8))
is to present
range
the
is the
of transforming
the wellknown
k 
3.)
to a consideration
(ref.
possibility
to avoid
in ref.
6) using
7) which
leads
results
report
turbulence
in the
separated
algebraic
is the need
that
(ref.
scales
report
(ref.
An example
Barth
(The
of Johnson
motivation
present
reliable.
length
PuUiam
by Coakley
Another
2).
the
in this
algebraic
contained
significant
using
that
using
flow fields
contained
(ref.
documented
solvers
turbulent
by all participants
by Maksymiuk
and
developments
NavierStokes
of the
1) or CebeciSmith
are
the
of the
model
em
solution
numerinto
flow
of centraldifference
Meeting
(January
1987).
and upwind finitevolume NavierStokessolversin both two and three spacedimensions
and generalized coordinates. The computer code for these implementations can be obtained by contacting
the second
author
(barth@prandtl.nas.nasa.gov).
Finally
in the
appendix,
we completely
The
and
authors
summarize
are grateful
for reviewing
the
the
to Drs.
oneequation
P.R.
with
Spalart
and
T.J.
k
RT
for compressible
Coakley
flow.
for useful
discussions
report.
DERIVATION
We begin
model
a standard
OF
form
Dk
THE
of the k  ¢ equations
vt
 V.(v+)Vk
Dt
MODEL
(see
Patel
et al. (ref.
9)):
+P
6r k
(1)
D_
_2
D/=V.(_ + V*)W + c,,_Pc,,£
where
D
denotes
form
a third
form
equivalent
discussion
the
by considering
systems
in a later
Reynolds
substantive
number,"

"_vt
linear
and
which
section.
derivative,
have
Dt
D

From
nonlinear
improved
In particular,
at
8
4V"
these
V
two
combinations.
numerical
we consider
and
P
the
equations
In our
properties.
production
we are
case,
free
to
we do this
to
We will return
a field equation
for the
to this
"turbulence
RT
k 2
RT
= 
(turbulence
Reynolds
number)
(2)
V_
The
field
RT
of RT,
of k and
RT
the
certain
is obtained
= 2 d k/k
e as well
transforming
omit
equation
dRT/RT
as their
diffusion
terms

from
k 
source
(which
the
the
It should
respective
terms
arising
from
d e/e.
e equations
be clear
terms
are
transform
modeled
transformation
that
in both
to obtain
by
considering
differentials
the
substantive
derivatives
without
the
a new
approximation.
k and
In
e equations),
diffusion
model
we
for the
equation.
vRT
D(vRT)
Dt
,_,
(2c¢*}Tr
+ (c¢' 
vt
2)k + (v +)V2(vRT)_r_
1__
_r,(Vvt)"
V(VRT)
(3)
where
v_ = c.(vRr)
Note
that
VRT
= k2/e
since
Equation
vt should
rather
than
not
depend
on v at large
RT,
the
appropriate
field
variable
is
RT.
(2) can be rearranged
in the
k2
= vRT
form
(k! + k2) 2
=
vRT
2
(4)
Without loss of generality, we can assign
k2a = vRTP
In regions
where
k2 <<
(at
kl this will result
k s =(kl+ks)
large
(5)
RT)
in P .._ e. Note
that
the
k_s =vRTP(I+
s =k_(l+_)
relation
ks)s
kl
or
ks
(6)
k=_(l+K)
is still completely
leads to
general.
Substitution
of equation
(6) into equation
(3) and
rearrangement
D(vRT)
Dt
(7)
(2
The syste_a
ks
_+ ks
c,,)kl
can be closed
by substituting
Dk
Dt
ks = k 
but in a way
available.
THE
that
the
is of interest
oneequation
oneequation
purpose,
RT
to note
of shear
portion
further
k equation
to obtain
V_)vk
o'1¢
that
model
layers.
model
all of the
The
that
previous
comment.
resulting
procedures
ONEEQUATION
major
that
(5) requires
approximation
rational
selfconsistent
to this
(6) in the
24/
P___p__k2_ k________2
+V.(v+
VvRT
vRT
(4) and
for exploiting
It
equation
(S)
V"_gTP.
Use of equations
means
(2 c.)ks
for
from
departures
MODEL
by
is obtained
main
relations
RT. To arrive at a model that is applicable
number
RT is split into two factors
last
that
should
two
can
be viewed
taken
in nearwall
in equation
approximation
is to develop
in all parts
regions,
the
functions
f3 is a damping
commonly
function
used
such
that
in k  e models
RT
(ref.
a = _c./.Rr
,'_ RT
a
over
a
of a shear
layer.
at sufficiently
turbulence
For
large
Reynolds
(o)
at
large
9) are introduced
= c././3Rr
3
(7),
modifications
nr = _rf3(RT)
where
remain
FLOWS
terms
to be applicable
as a
to dissipation,
approximation
be a valid
of this report
it to be used
are
steps
production
WALLBOUNDED
the
that
objective
will allow
from
FOR
neglecting
These
equating
RT.
In addition,
damping
so that
(lO)
and
k2
d=eD
(kl + kz) 2
YRT
The
definition
of kl applicable
at small
(and
RT
(11)
vf3RT
all RT)
at
is taken
to be
k_ = V.RTP
This
will
allow
function
kl
to be the
f3 is designed
dominant
part
to accomplish
that
O(vRT>
Dt
suitable
approximation
over
a flat
functions
is used
purpose.
nearwall
The
so that
plate
and
the
with
to help
2
field equation
gradient
model.
P is approximated
(thin
shear
dam_ing
for RT
is used
The
thin
is
(13)
(Vv,).V(vRT)
pressure
the
if the
¼

calibrate
production
P = vt(u_)
zero
region
resulting
+ (v + )V2(v._T)
flow
damping
of k in the
v,
(c,,fzc,,)
Incompressible
mine
(12)
to
deter
shear
layer
by
layer assumption)
(14)
Then
vkrP = c.(.kru_)2/.y3
and
the
model
equation
reduces
to
_,, cX/__]J"f3RTu_
+(v+ _)(RT)_
DRTDt
(c"f2c")
At sufficiently
layer
to the
occurs
high
momentum
in a region
shear
negligible,
stress
the
where
at the
the
wall.
zmomentum
thickness
total
shear
In the
equation
v <<
u_vt,
is the friction
and
velocity
vt = vc_,RT
stress
log region
becomes
2
(_,+ _',)_y = _,_
where
Reynolds
1 ,_',V_
_ ,__ _
_,
number
the
beginning
is approximately
and
below,
where
constant
advective
(15)
of the
and
log
equal
terms
are
simply
(log
x/rw,,u/pw,,u.
region
and
In the
log
(16)
below)
region where % = u_/(,cy),
we have
2
vt 

lcu,.y
(log
region)
Uy
where
t¢ is the
Karman
constant
RT
and
=
vt
__ _
VCg
In this
unity
case
and
(RT)v_
advection
= 0 and
terms
substitution
zero
produces
1
u,y
C$_
(log
in equation
the
(c,,
region)
V
following
(15)
with
damping
functions
set
to
formula:
_,,)v,_;/,¢_
(17)
In the re,on
definitions
of RT
below the
and ]3(RT).
log layer an additional
After a study of the
.RT
t¢ u,y
C/_
We can ensure
requiring
procedure
that
this
relation
(log
relation
is needed
to determine
consequences,
we have imposed
region
and
the
below)
(18)
V
is consistent
with
the
field equation
that the damping
function
f2 (Y+) be adjusted
that will be described,
the following
damping
for RT
(eqn.
(15))
by
to accomplish
that purpose.
By a
functions
have been determined:
where
DI=Iezp(y+/A+),
D2=
03
where
y+
that
does
functions
it occurs.
. From
neither
implementation
and
these
+/A +),
A + =10
require
than
f_, nor
Substitution
model
fa, it is convenient
(c,,fa
(17)
and
(16)
to replace
(18)
1
the
=
D1D2.
It
However,
it will
the evaluation
of the
Since
product
in equation
= (c',
to remove
c¢ 1
only
f_,fa
f3 individually.
 c,,)v/%DIDayu)j
of equation
that
to D1 or D2.
requires
of f_, and
of equations
we have
f3 is equal
knowledge
f_, and
B3 = 5.2, A + = 15
expressions
of the oneequation
not
Substitution
produces
lezp(y
= 1 + B3ezp(y+/A+)[1exp(y+/A+)],
= u,y/v
emphasized
A + =26
(15)
 c,,,
uv
and
equations
D1D2
)(
Dv/D_I
D_
D1
f_,f3
with
_2
and
D2
with
should
be
be seen
that
product
fg fa
are
simpler
D1 D2 wherever
DRT/Dt
= 0 yields
and
to remove
,
(10)
(18)
vt
(19)
+ D,/NN D
For small
y+ we have
the
following
lira
limit
f2(y +) = c¢z_
+(1
y+ =*0
After
assignment
damping
y+.
function
For our
choice
of the
C(e2
parameters
f2(y +)
when
of constants
value:
c¢____
)
C(_
c¢1, c¢ 2, to, equation
the
combination
we have
a limit
5
(19)
can
ft, f3 = D_D2
value
of f2(0)
be used
is known
_ 0.781
.
to determine
as a function
the
of
From equation (18) it is seenthat
y+ in the
y+ = c.
so that
the
damping
functions
the turbulence
Reynolds
pressure
gradients,
the
determine
whether
In this
recommend
results
this
from
prediction
the
be expressed
functional
dependence
for simplicity,
as a final
(inner)
of vt from
(when
functions
can be replaced
in terms
choice.
adhered
We have
calibrated
CebeciSmith
that
model
on RT
we have
model
(20)
of RT
or (implicitly)
in the
log region
in terms
of
involve nonzero
Experience
will
or y+ is preferable.
to dependence
(ref.
by
= 0)
number
RT = RTf3(RT).
For general
flows that
dependence
on RT or y+ is no__ttinterchangeable.
the
report,
can
damping
on y+,
these
functions
2) using
equation
and
below
is
D1) 2 
1]
by
but
we do not
comparison
(16).
The
with
resulting
V
(vt)cs
For the
present
model,
= _ [V/1 + (41¢y+
substitution
of equation
(20)
in equation
vt = v ft, f3 tc y+ = v DiD2
For either
model
u + is obtained
by the
integration
u+ =
Figure
ment
1 shows
of the
designed
for that
From
inner
a comparison
two models
of equation
variations
because
(10),
(12),
(14),
(16),
_D_ID2
the
and
(18)
explicit
(log
p+
was
realistic
paid
of vt/v
damping
and
u +. The
functions
close
D1 and
agree
D2 were
formulas
for k + and
P+ in the
i¢ y+
I+DID_
A plot of the
(16):
are obtained
1
more
toy+
dY +
_o _+ 1 + vt/v
predicted
surprising
yields
purpose.
equations
region
of the
is not
(10)
=
k + variation
turbulent
to that
purpose
ny+D1 D2
(l+ny+
D1 D2) 2
is shown
energy
in the
region
and
below)
(log region
and
below)
toy+
in Figure
distribution
design
2. It is somewhat
than
of D1 and
6
several
D_.
ke
surprising
models,
that
although
kl provides
no attention
a
4O
V
4 ..........
;".z::."
..........
_...............
i...............
_...............
........ [
30
Or reequation modal
[ .................
I o u"
I
[_
t: COrgiSmith)
I
I
20 _ ........
o
vt
I ....
I
o
..a._'._................
__>r
09,_i
_
"_'_.2
i
_ [.....
/........
i...............
i::_::::_::::
"
i
_
.
"
:
Vt (Cebeci" Smith ) I 0,0'•"_""........ _ ....................
•
!

:
_
: [DneequaUon
il_._ k+
mode_
l
+_2
...._..........
! i...............
q _:
:
!
J_..............
!
i
I0
i
0
25
50
75
0;
100
i
0
20
40
y+
Figure
1.
Comparison
vt between
CebeciSmith
equation
Since
been
introduced,
function
was
although
complete
neither
e nor
the definition
calibrated
Mansour,
For
the
although,
sake
e distribution
The
found
Kim,
from
realistic
f.
Moin
that
a reasonable
(ref.
of completeness,
was
necessary
evaluated
they
direct
of e in the
based on our
D in equation
Energy
(f2)
distribu
The
above
nearwall
oneequation
(11) is taken
of RT,RT,
f3,
for implementation
that
reported
is a byproduct
defined.
not needed
k _ kl,
D3 was designed
simulations
distribution
are
assuming
function
I00
D3
region,
model.
To
to be uk_
10)).
plots
earlier,
function
it be fully
variation
80
y+
Turbulent Kinetic
2.
and damping
tions.
D3 is needed
in calculations
of RT and RT, the quantity
and
damping
the
it seems
to produce
as mentioned
below.
of U + and
and the one
model.
f3 has
(from
Figure
6O
f_, and
(i.e.,
to make
in reference
that
e are
k2 <<
the
kl)
shown
in figures
of our
in the
e distribution
10.
However
the
35,
model.
The
log region
and
resemble
that
resulting
rather
was not anticipated.
800'
...................
1.75
.......... t..........
.......
I.... g; _
I
i
..........
1.50]"
1.25"
I y....
2
i .........
'"
i
1.000.75 t e
0.50
...............
.rf
.......
_ ........................................................
s r
20001 :_A'"
0
...............i!............................
50
100
150
0.25
..... y
t ........................................................................
0.0_
0
50
y+
y+
Figure
3.
RT,
RT
distributions.
100
Figure
4.
Damping
functions.
150
0"25I
.............................
• ............................
0.20 l ............................
"_
._,
0.15
_,
0.10
+
W
0.05 
0.0t3
0
50
1O0
150
y+
Figure
To
complete
i¢,c_,,c,l,c,
2 are
0.41, c_ = 0.09
zero.
calibration
needed.
and
We have
ible flow over
the
the
set
The
value
is not the
level
_ in the
of RT
an airfoil)
used
on record,
to impose
a relatively
that a constant
value
k and
will not
the
free
the
last
in Hopkins
Reo
is 1.2, which
be large
compared
adopted
that
the
and
+ 6.012
that
Inouye
(ref.
(Karman
report,
r't in the
free
molecular
8
low value
equation
production
we adhere
stream
viscosity.
t¢ =
for incompress
(and
by
11):
"standard"
to our
values
is well represented
 Schoenherr
outer flow. From
in regions
where
in this
used
parameters
(7) will be identically
coefficient
data
the
of the
widely
in equation
is well below
to the
values
skin friction
9. An alternative
However,
such
model,
of experimental
larg£ value of RT in the
of RT is selfpreserving
stream
distribution.
term
calculated
see reference
k  _ equations).
in the
we have
Reo) _ + 25.111og10
of c,1 currently
lowest
report
so that
given
epsilon
oneequation
to a compilation
formula
= 17.08(log10
this
c, 1 to match
plate
KarmanSchoenherr
1
C!
In
of the
c,2 = 2.0,
adjusted
a flat
Nearwall
5.
formula)
value
of 1.44 but
of c,,
would
13 it can be seen
is zero (unlike
to c,_ = 1.2 and
at the
be
leading
a low
edge
of
5'
4O
i
i
i
t+
.............
35 "'I
One,..equat[on
model
+
I .... u..i,_,,,.,b,_.
I_
"IN4  Log l_er
$_..........
_
_,v I o _,_.=32._._o(M=o.t) li
._
25
J
I.!_
Re0=29'700_ = 2.0)
÷
+
..............
4
,{
"it
....
_............. i............. _..............
5t.............
_
10 i
10 2
.............
10 4
_ .... Theory (M=O.l)
i I_
Calculation
(M=2.O)
6.
In this
has
been
0
10000
20000
Re 0
Figure
we extend
for algebraic
to compressible
flow with
the
model
models
6 graphs
2).
(ref.
Mach
lawofthewall
numbers
where
by Hopkins
and
an empirically
Inouye
(ref.
formula
11)
plate.
a practice
which
relations
apply
above
with
(u + = u*/u,(see,
versus
for example,
y+)
Rubesin
for
and
subsonic
Horstman
momentum
Finally,
temperature
thickness
value
the
pressible
friction
v/F/pwo, d u
to the conventional
several
to compressible
determined
compressible
U
contains
Too = Tedge(1
alternative
flow.
In the
law of the wall.
procedures
procedure
is good.
was
Figure
several
for applying
by Sommer
and
paper
the
Short
+ 0.035M_dge)
Reynolds
number
+ 0.45(T,_,tt
Reo
is then
T_dg_)
adjusted
to a corresponding
in
Reo:
resulting
Mach
The
Ts_ is defined:
C/
from
Reo
= Reo#(T,
dg,)/l_(T,,)
the
KarmanSchoenherr
formula
is adjusted
value by multiplying
by the temperature
ratio Tedg_/T,o.
Figure
for compressible
flow over a fiat plate with the foregoing
"theory"
supersonic
using
solutions
flow this plot corresponds
KarmanSchoenherr
model
all the
on fiat
12)):
For incompressible
bers
friction
pl; t
u* is defined
u* =
The
that
v and
_
Skin
flow following
We assume
a temperaturedependent
computed
and supersonic
7.
to compressible
(ref.
[.l t
Figure
30000
10 5
Lawofthewall.
report,
used
I
/
<>,,=_.0)t....
y+
Figure
[
[ ....
..............
...........
........
"i...........
10 3
Oneequation model
Calcultion (MO.I)
x.,iel""_
/
O,l :...:.,'". .......[ ........[ ................ :, ........
10 °
:
3 _'_i_e_
.............
.
I
?"1 v
""*( ...............
............
+.............
i..............
i............. ,L"......
'+1.............
+__.
10 i
_
i
numbers.
The
excellent
calibrated
in the
8 contains
values
The
agreement
agreement
at low
incompressible
lawofthewall
of
for both
freestream
Mach
and
numbers
was
comskin
and
supersonic
expected
Mach
because
numthe
limit.
plots
RT"
subsonic
to the
7 compares
at subsonic
Note
for
that
flat
plate
vt/v
boundarylayer
= c, RT
= 0.09RT
flow
when
computed
damping
functions
are at unity.
free stream
RT tested,
unity
in the
free
The plotsindicate
except
(RT)¢¢
insensitivity
to freestream
= 100 which is the only value
values for all values of
at which vt/v exceeds
stream.
30
....
1
:,
_
i
/ I __,,,_=_,
251 "I ....
,_,,,
_b'.m
/
_
I
•
204'""'1
•
/
I *
_
li
_ ._/
I .................
_'"_ll_
.....
Log t._
I"
Et
P_= o.I (fteetu_un)
I :"
.dt"
_ffi 1.o (tttt_)
[.l.....'""_'"i
................
I%ffi lO.O (ftets_tun)]
i ._"
!
151................
_................
_"/""I"i
.................
_................
10l................
::
ii................
_i................
i.............
i_.
/
OJe_:_r,,,,;........
; ........
l ........
', ........
I0 I
100
101
102
10 3
I0"
y+
Figure
To further
formed
assess
show
M_
= 0.75,
the
coefficients
mesh
solution
distribution
to values
oneequation
in the
Viscous
for viscous
model
The
layer
of the
a Reynolds
solution
CD = 0.0279.
coefficient
cases
oneequation
BaldwinLomax
of CL = 0.895,
pressure
and
a = 2.72 °, and
for the
the
of boundary
the performance
for two of the troublesome
911
with
Sensitivity
8.
flow
number
were
9.
RAE
2822
model,
Transonic
over
the
RAE
CL = 0.771,
plotted)
which
shock
position
is substantially
is in much
better
0.75).
mesh.
10
produced
agreement
2822
airfoil
Computed
This
lift and
10.
per
Figures
geometry
lift
drag
improved
with
were
Workshop.
CD = 0.0352.
(also
RT.
computations
Airfoil
of 6.2 million.
Figure
Figure
of freestream
and
and
at
drag
is compared
coefficients
the
overall
experiment.
Mach
contours
(Moo
=
1.5
1.0
...........
!
0.5 ........... 
0.0........... d
I
0.5 .......... •

1.0 ........... 
1.5
0.2
0.6
o.i
0.i ol
oi
16
x/e
Figure
The
turbulence
,_ext
geometry
modeling.
a = 2.26 °, and
at
(CL
these
flow
= 0.340,
oneequation
flow only
Pressure
flow
conditions
The
geometry
a Reynolds
number
conditions.
Figure
CD = 0.035),
model
(CL
and
11.
the
with
= 0.589,
provide
standard
of 9 million.
14 plots
comparison.
a much
NACA
Figures
1214
12.
NACA
show
model
= 0.531,
removed
from
(CL
the
model
severe
computed
for
the
the
test
grid
and
oneequation
CD = 0.048),
equation
case
for
at Moo = 0.799,
on
solution
model
and
the
uppersurface
= 0.048).
Figure
Figure
more
0012
Gp distributions
BaldwinLomax
advection
(70
is the
coefficient
0012
0.8).
mesh.
11
13.
Mach
contours
(Moo
=
1.51
_
/
1.o]
: '_
.....7_
::
:
:
io,
•.............................
i
[ 
OReequation
Model
[
1.0...........
r "l ....B,t_int.om,x
1.5
• .2 0.0 0.2 0._ 0.i
I........
0.i
1.6 1.2
x/c
Figure
The
improvement
wave
is moved
in the
forward
full
that
(ae,:p
we
have
2.86°).
used
The
Pressure
model
20 percent
with and without
influences
obtained
the
corrected
discrepancy
wake
the
In this
section
flow.
Following
z momentum
simplified
aT
we examine
pressure
and
viscosity
by
the
FREE
model
arguments
the
effect
does
SHEAR
for the
of Tennekes
model
shock
with
experi
advection
clearly
indicates
terms in this separated
flow.
correction
FOR
RT
uppersurface
agreement
suggested
angleofattack
MODEL
calculation
experimenters
of uppersurface
not
adequately
LAYERS
selfsimilar
turbulent
and
(ref.
Lumley
reduces
to the
13),
following
form:
UU_
Using
of attack
the oneequation
for an eddy
The
is in good
uppersurface
via advective
angle
the orderofmagnitude
equation
and
in lowersurface
ONEEQUATION
comparison.
is dramatic.
chord
shock location
seems to indicate
that this
account
for wind tunnel wall interference.
TH_
coefficient
oneequation
almost
ment.
The solution
obtained
the importance
of upstream
Note
14.
similar
arguments,
equation
= (vtUv)
(7) reduces


v
(21)
to
+
[v't(RT)vv

(vt)v(RT)v]
(22)
(2  c,1)kl k2
+ k2 _P
where
two
that
vt = r,c,RT,
P = vt(U v)2,
We are interested
terms
of equation
approximation
dissipation.
Wake
and
kl :
(2 
V/g_.
in the oneequation
model
that
(22).
However,
it is worthwhile
can
flows
apply
provide
more
c,2) k2
generally
an interesting
than
in regions
example.
12
results
from neglecting
to gain an appreciation
where
In this flow,
the last
of how
production
equals
production
is zero
at the centerline,
that
but
production
dissipation
is equal
is not.
to dissipation
of a wake flow we can rationalize
the centerline
of a wake the first
vanishes
there.
the last
Also
term
wake,
and
analyze
the
for wake
becomes
that
many
The
primary
k 
from
valid.
¢ modelers
question
in a simple
situation
flows,
away
the
centerline,
Fortunately,
the assumption
even
at the
centerline
neglecting
the last two terms in equation
(22). Clearly at
of these two terms is identically
zero because
production
approximation
we can
Lumley
note
identically.
the oneequation
Moving
c,2 = 2, which
still remains
wake.
in detail.
choose
as to the
Assuming
Following
the
would
overall
self similarity
scaling
remove
validity
of
of a turbulent
procedure
of Tennekes
we set
U: Vo + V.f(_)
(23)
RT = U'lh(_)
(24)
V
(25)
v, = vc,,RT = U.lc,,h(_)
where
_ = y/l,
equations
(21)
Uo = Ax 1/2,
and
(22)
I = Bx 1/2,
(with
the
last
fl(f
two
+ _f,)
and
U,
terms
<<
of eqn.
omitted)
in
we obtain
 (h_) 2] +
If_lh
_;2
+ 
[hh_
= 0
(27)
0"_
where
UoB
flnumerical
on the
value
definitions
centerline
such
If h(_)
of/9
was
Us = [U that
]V 
is a known
evaluated
2A
from
U0 ],,_az, and
Uo]/]U

function,
=.08
U0]maz
equation
expression
be expressed
is then
in the
differentiated
following
experiment
is linear
in h_ and
and
I as the
Lumley,
distance
based
from
the
= exp(1/2).
(26)
can be evaluated
in the
form
_ a_
(29)
Ire Ih with/9_f/ct,.
to replace
+
) h_ = P,(O
_
by Tennekes
a length
Equation
(27)
can then
form:
h_
where/91
(28)
by choosing
/ = exp _
This
Substituting
assumed.
(26)
= 0
O"c
The
(22)
+ c_,(hf_)_
Cp
fl_h_
[To are
/92 = fl
With
the solution
h_ =
P1 and
(30)
Q,(O
Q, considered
known,
is
Ql(_)ezp[PlI(_)
13
 Pl/(_)ld_"
the
resulting
equation
where
can
Plx
= f:
P1 d_.
be obtained
compare
By iterating
the
10 steps.
In figure
in about
it with
results
from
the
quadratures
constant
for
15 we plot
eddy
f
and
the
viscosity
h, a numerical
solution
of this
solution
as well
solution
equation
and
as results
from
experiment.
1.0
0.8
.................X'""? ......I•_
\
_
i
az_.c_=la
[
 .... _2=i._1=1.,_
t ....... c,_,_t nu_t
I
I
0.6
¢
.........................
°
l
0.4
iiii
iiiiiiiiiii
iiiii
iiiiiiii ....?
...............
0.2
•
O
;"..
0£
1
Figure
The
our
15.
data
Comparison
points
oneequation
model.
for
The
the
curve
used
are
model
solid
wallbounded
from
the
(in wakes)
Townsend
the
is based
flows
data
of experiment,
from
with
curve
values
eddy
viscosity
In this
section
Current
we consider
implementations
numerical
which
might
where
Rij
As
we will
produces
the
vRT(zi,j,
=
c,2 from
[_1,1,
see,
a system
_1,2,
our
...,
the
original
that
sections.
dotted
was
computed
using
"standard"
provide
The
curve,
flow.
the
departure
which
k 
best
results
of the
is from
the
solid
widely
IMPLEMENTATION
of the
oneequation
model
in two
and
solver for the scalar equation
analysis,
implicit
unfactored
system
model.
operators
for the
is a prerequisite
We begin
for discrete
oneequation
threespace
in a
systems.
model.
dimensions
(decoupled
from the mean
schemes
will be considered.
for the
more
general
situation
factorization.
solution
Yi,j)
curve
wake
approximation.
oneequation
of this
matrix
define
_
of the
discretization
of the
behavior
include
We first
dashed
setting
by introducing
the notion of positive
us to construct
extremely
robust
algorithms
employ
an implicit
factored
ADI
flow equations).
In the following
Good
for selfsimilar
of parameters
in previous
NUMERICAL
rather
abstract
This will allow
The
of c,1 and
that
3
theory
14).
values
considered
than
and
(ref.
on the
is no worse
constant
2
vector
77. on a twodimensional,
logically
rectangular
mesh
with
7_1 ,M,
oneequation
of ordinary
_2,1,
_2,2,
model
differential
_t+
...,
with
_2,M,..,
discretized
equations
M(_)_=
14
AN,l,
"_N,2,
advection
..,
and
"_N,M]
T.
diffusion
terms
of the form
D_
(31)
where M(_)
advection
source
is a matrix
and
term.
diffusion
operator
and
We can
(possibly
construct
implicit
......¢ _
[I + AtOm(
or after
diffusion
1. M(_)
2.
with
explicit
schemes
the
positive
discretization
entries
of the
of
representing
the
form
)1( _
4_7¢
_) = At(m(x')"_ " + D)'/_
'_'*
_
(32)
rearrangement
for all 0 E [0,1].
onally
and
representing
matrix
__.+n+l
7_
[I + AtOM(R'_)]_
and
nonlinear)
D is a diagonal
As we will show,
which
guarantee
is a diagonally
dominant
M(_)
"+'
has
zero
we can
the
with
row
This
will
be due
'_
(33)
approximations
for advection
of M(R'_):
(Mtype)
diagonal
'_) + AtD]_
numerical
properties
monotone
positive
sum.
design
following
dominant
matrices
= [I  (1  O)AtM(R
matrix.
entries
and
to the
use
Mtype
matrices
negative
of the
are diag
offdiagonal
chain
rule
entries.
form
of the
equation_
A wellknown
elements
matrix
property
of the
of Mtype
inverse
are
matrices
nonnegative.
is that
is an Mtype
matrix
and
nonnegative
1 that
inverses,
the
i.e.,
lefthandside
righthandside
R'_)]
consequently
[I+
matrix
AtOM(_n)]
1 > O,
is also unconditionally
nonnegative
for 1 > 0 > 0. Assuming
__,_+1
positivity
We
of _,_+1
now
2, it is a simple
_0
> 0, from
is guaranteed
the
whenever
stability
matter
properties
(see,
'_) +AtD]
for 0 = 1 and
= [I + AtOM(_'_)]'[I
investigate
0 > 0
of (33)
[I  (1  O)AtM(_
and
have
property
of (33)
[I + AtOM(
The
they
We see from
(34)
nonnegative
solution
update
under
for example,
numerical
Barth
II[/+ AtOM(_=)]'[Io_
15
'_) + AtD]_
is a nonnegative
of the
and
condition
equation
 (1  O)AtM(_
(34)
a CFLlike
operator.
scheme.
Lomax
< 1
'_
(ref.
Given
15))
properties
to show
that
1
We alsohave that
[[[I under
the
source
term
CFLlike
condition
(D = 0) and
like condition
(1  O)AtM(_)][[oo
for
positivity.
Dirichlet
< 1
If we first
boundary
consider
conditions,
the
we have
system
stability
without
under
the
the
CFL
for nonnegativity
ll_"+Xl]=
=II[1
+ AtOM(_")]_[I
 (1 O)AtM(_)]_"II=
.._+_
_<11[I
+ AtOM(_")]_[I= I1[I (1 O)AtM(_)]I[=]IT_
11=
_<lf_"ll=
In the presence
estimate:
of the
linear
source
term
with
D > 0, we obtain
11_"÷111=< (1 + AtllOll=)lt_"ll_
the
following
stability
_ (1 + At m_(Oj¢))]l_'_ll_
3
This
result
is expected
because
the
differential
equation
admits
presence
of the source
term (with positive
coefficient).
We now turn to the actual
discretization
of the individual
rewrite
the
diffusion
terms
(v + )v_(._T)
vt
Using
this
0(_Rr)
ot
We first
identity,
(assuming
1
equation
= 2(_+ _)v_(._r)
(13)
approximate
the
advective
(u + = (u + N[)/2,v
v • v(_r)~
sort
in the
For convenience
terms
±v.
O"c
by using
a standard,
firstorder
accurate
upwind
+ = (v + Ivl)/2):
_
.._ct_,_j+l,k
_
+ fl._j,k
Y
+a_7_i,k+l
+ fl._j,k
+ %7_j_,k
.
+ "/_'R.j,k1
where

1
a_AzUj,
_1
Note
that
this
discretization
 k,
we
(S 2 = \ 0_j + 0_ ] 0_, J
+V.V(._)=2(.+_)V_(.Rr)lv
approximation
terms.
of this
v is constant)
(vv,). v(_r)
we rewrite
growth
1
7_ = u+
Az
_
automatically
J'_'
lv+
satisfies
previously.
16
both
properties
1 and
2 mentioned
The diffusive/antidiffusive terms are approximated by central differencing:
[
+
1 r(vt)j+l/2,k
O"
(7_j+1,_
 7_j,k)
O" L
these
two

(r't)jll2,k
(7_j,k
 _jl,k)
h;_2
+
By combining
J
Ay 2
J
Ay 2
expressions
we obtain
where
_ A_1 2
vt
_)j,
[2 (v+
a_  Ay1 _ [2(t,+_)
(_)
_+1/5,4]
J,k (_)j,k+_/2]
_
7d
1
Az2
[2 (t,+_)
7:
Ay1 _ [2(v+_)
j,k (_)j1/2,k]
_,_ (_)j,___/_.]
_=(a_+_)
_: = _ (_ + _)
.Note
require
that
in this
that
both
It is important
result
a and
to realize
of poor
in a Taylor
form
we do not
7 be positive
that
grid resolution.
series.
have
if these
automatic
coe_cients
coe_cients
To see this,
For example
we have
assume
satisfaction
(property
become
of property
1 which
2 is automatically
negative
a smooth
this
variation
effect
of t't and
would
satisfied).
is entirely
expand
a
t't
that
(_,)_+1/:,_ = (_,)_,_+ O(A_)
and
1
Ay_
a_From
Az.
this
equation
If we assume
it is clear
that
vt >>
that
this
2v + (_)
coefficient
v, we obtain
the
J,_ + O(Ax)
is guaranteed
following
positive
restriction
a and 7:
(v_)_+_,_< 3(_)s,_, (_)___,_ <__
3(_)_,_
(_,)s,_+_< 3(v,)s,_, (_,)_,__ < 3(_,)s,_
17
for small
enough
for nonnegativity
of
In our implementation
conditions
are violated
positivity.
Keep
of the algorithm
we limit the
in mind
that
We conclude
this section
for the oneequation
model.
the
nearwall
Figure
to the
wall
region
3 and
BaldwinLomax
shear
functions.
which
which
This
This
meshes
pressure
model
(y+
in the
removes
from
the
which
must
be used
wall
flow
remark
variable
solver
This
over
require
limit
much
of the
plot the law of the wall for the flat plate
to demonstrate
the solution
independence
grid
(as
previously
shown
wall
spacing
comparable
for accurately
estimating
formulations
y+ in the
of the
y+ = 0.2 as mentioned
stiffness
in
layers
to determine
resulting
formulations
from
in
damping
k  e equations
in reference
the
of the k  e model.
using several mesh wall spacings
with wall spacing.
i
refinement.
a mesh
is required
nearwall
less than
nearwall
3°1
boundary
implementation
spacing
in the
is usually
concerning
gridresolution
requirements
RT was designed
to behave
linearly
only
< 3.5).
present
improvement
mesh
however,
gradient
we typically
is used
require
remedy,
(18)),
is a drastic
typically
better
with a final
Because
the
for zero
equation
the
we strictly
enforce this condition.
Whenever
these
amount
of antidiffusion
added so as to maintain
9.
extremely
fine
In figure
16 we
+
0.5 < Yw,,tt
< 3.1
:
251.._
I
o,._q..,_,,_.,I._
................
i._
/ I .... L.mi_,_.us_yer
I _
__
I
/1:?._oo.,
/i
J"
I I° r(..,,)._.,
l_J_ i
204"
*
y'(x,ndl)=l.2
i'_........
"a_";
I
i
...............
l
.................
................
................

"'__,
r
"_F_'!
.................
..............
i
................
i...............
1
0 '"" :,:.2.....
,_ ........
_ ................
I0I
I0°
I01
102
lO_
I04
y÷
Figure
16.
Sensitivity
of boundary
layer
to wall
spacing.
CONCLUSIONS
A oneequation
finding
an algebraic
has predictive
and refinement.
and
turbulence
length
numerical
model
scale.
The
properties
has
been
preliminary
of sufficient
18
introduced
results
that
presented
interest
avoids
the
indicate
to merit
further
necessity
that
for
the model
investigation
APPENDIX
This
the field
In this
appendix
 SUMMARY
gives
equation
OF
a complete
THE
summary
ONEEQUATION
of the
oneequation
MODEL
model.
We begin
for RT:
equation,
we use
the following
functions:
1 =(c,,  c,,)jc;/,d
0,"c
vt =%(VfiT)DID2
#t =pvt
D1 =1  exp (y+/A
+)
D_ =1
+)
exp(y+/A
P =r,t
\ Ozj
+ cgzi ] Oxj
For all calculations
1
we have
used
1
) D2 +exp(y+/A
A+
the
constants:
%=0.09,
1. Solid
2. Inflow
3. Outflow
Wails:
(V.n
(V
the
following
Specify
< 0):
RT
Specify
n > 0):
+ D, D,)(J_, D,
exp(_y+/A+
t¢ =0.41,
We also recommend
J
1
c_,
f_(v+) =c,_
+(1  _)(y
d_ 2
y+
+ _(AT
3 v' \_
following
c_
= 1.2,
A +=26,
boundary
c_
= 2.0
A2+ =10
conditions
for (35):
= 0.
RT = (RT)oo
Extrapolate
< 1.
RT from
19
interior
values.
+) D,))
with
REFERENCES
1. Baldwin,
B.S.;
Separated
2.
Cebeci,
Mass
3.
T.:
AIAA
Maksymiuk,
AIAA
Johnson,
5.
and
pp.
L.S.:
AIAA
6. Coakley,
870416,
7.
Pulliam,
Reynolds
vol.
Hopkins,
870415,
January
1987.
L.S.:
A Mathematically
Turbulent
Boundary
870418,
Numerical
and
Algebraic
BoundaryLayers
pp.
Model
for
1978.
with
Heat
and
10911097.
Transonic
Airfoil
Simple
Layers.
Workshop
Turbulence
AIAA
Results
Closure
Journal,
vol.
Model
23, no.
11,
Flows.
W.;
N.N.;
E.J.;
M.W.;
J.; and
8, 1989,
and
Flows
about
Airfoil
AIAA
Paper
Flows.
and
Stanford
Tennekes,
H.;
Mass.
Townsend,
University
Press,
15. Barth,
T.J.;
G.:
M.:
An
9, no.
Horstman,
Lilley,
eds.,
and
A.A.:
Lumley,
London,
The
1985.
Turbulence
Turbulence
Models
vol.
NearWall
23, no.
k 
Evaluation
on Flat
Plates
6, June
1971,
C.C.:
University,
and
Models
for Attached
for NearWall
and
9, 1985,
_ Turbulence
pp.
Lomax,
Low
13081319.
Modeling.
pp.
AIAA
Flow
on Complex
Thermo
J.L.:
England,
over
Turbulent
Sciences
California,
A First
for
Predicting
and
Turbu
Hypersonic
Mach
Plate.
1980
9931003.
Supersonic
Stanford,
Structure
of Theories
at Supersonic
a Flat
Flows,
vol.
Division,
Mechanical
1981,
369377.
Course
pp.
in Turbulence.
The
1, S.J.
H.L.:
Kline,
Engineering
The
MIT
Press,
1972.
of Turbulent
Shear
Flow.
Second
ed.,
Cambridge
1976.
and
for
1985.
Journal,
P.:
Conference
G.M.
Number
Computations
10681073.
Transfer
vol.
81 AFOSRHTTMStanford
Cambridge,
for Transonic
NavierStokes
July
January
AIAA
Moin,
pp.
Inouye,
Heat
and
850375,
Scheurer,
T.J.:
851587,
Reynolds
A Review.
Kim,
27, no.
Paper
and
Flows:
Journal,
Department,
Models
Transonic
Barth,
Paper
of Low
AIAA
Rodi,
and
AIAA
A.: Evaluation
AIAA
Cantwell,
of Viscous
D.J.;
Airfoils.
and
Rubesin,
Closure
1987.
Simulation
Jespersen,
Friction
Numbers.
14.
Viscous
January
Number
Skin
13.
T.H.:
of Turbulence
V.C.;
11.
B.
Pulliam,
King,
Controlled
lent
12.
6, 1971,
A Comparsion
T.H.;
10. Mansour,
Journal,
January
1987.
Separated
Patel,
Approximation
Turbulent
9, no.
Paper
T.J.:
8. Sugavanum,
9.
vol.
Separated
January
Circulation
and
Layer
78257,
16841692.
King,
Airfoils.
and
and
Thin
Paper
of Compressible
Paper
D.A.;
for Attached
H.L.:
AIAA
Journal,
C.M.;
Arc2D.
1985,
Lomax,
Flows.
Calculation
Transfer.
Using
4.
and
Turbulent
Algorithm
Development.
20
NASA
CP2454,
1987.
Nalo_l!
Al,lOn_kll
S,l_Oe AdmtnlU
Report Documentation
v,d
Page
_io,',
2. Government Ac,oession No.
1. Report No.
NASA
3. Recipient's Catalog No.
TM 102847
5. Report Date
4. Title and Subtitle
A OneEquation
Turbulence
High Reynolds
Number
Transport
Model
WallBounded
August
for
Flows
Code
8. Performing Organization Report No.
7. Author(s)
Barrett
1990
6. Performing Organization
S. Baldwin
and Timothy
A90231
J. Barth
10. Work Unit No.
50560
9. Performing Organization Name and Address
Ames
Research
Moffett
Field,
11. Contract or Grant No.
Center
CA 94035
13. Type of Report and Period Covered
Technical
12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address
National
Aeronautics
Washington,
DC
and Space Administration
Memorandum
t4. Sponsoring Agency Code
205460001
15. Supplementary Notes
Point of Contact:
Barrett
S. Baldwin,
(415) 6045072
MS 202A1,
Moffett
Field,
CA 940351000
or FTS 4645072
=
o
16. Abstract
A oneequation
turbulence
model that avoids
the need for an algebraic
length
scale is
derived from a simplified form of the standard k e
model equations. After calibration
based
on well established
properties of the flow over a flat plate, predictions
of several other flows are
compared
dictive
with experiment.
and numerical
ment. The oneequation
The preliminary
properties
model
results
of sufficient
is also analyzed
presented
interest
to merit
numerically
indicate
that the model
further
investigation
and robust
solution
has pre
and refinemethods
are
presented.
18. Distribution Statement
17, Key Words (Suggested by Author(s))
UnclassifiedUnlimited
Turbulence
Computational
fluid dynamics
Fluid mechanics
19, Security Classif. (of this report)
Unclassified
Subject
20. Security Classif. (of this page)
Unclassified
Category34
21. No. of Pages
23
NASA FORM 1626 OCT_
For sale by the National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161
22. Price
A02