thank you very much for the introduction

so as this is mentioned I'll be talking

about some of the applications a little

bit about the methodology mostly about

the applications for some of the

simulations we've done have separated

flows so I know this is a very diverse

audience so I gonna start try to start

with very something very basic about

trying to explain flow separation if you

are familiar with fluid mechanics I ask

you to forgive me if this seems too

simplistic but I'll try to illustrate

flow separation with just some pictures

so this is a smoke visualization of just

some flow around this airfoil now this

is a 2d cross-section that's shown and

what we refer to as attach you have a

free stream flow that's traveling in

this case from left to right and the you

can see from the streamlines that the

flow continues in this predominant left

to right fashion now if you take the

same airfoil and you give it an angle of

attack and we incline the the nose

relative to the free stream here then

for the most part you see that the

streamlines are still pointing in the

same direction except in this back

region close to the trailing edge of

this airfoil and so if you were to look

at the vectors of where the velocity

field is going up here it's still going

in what is the downstream direction but

if you look close to the boundary and

the boundary layer you'll find that

there is flow that is moving upstream

and so this this is a separated regime

and so generally speaking this

separation point denotes the boundary

between where you have flow that's

traveling downstream versus flow that's

going in a nominally upstream direction

and so why do you care about flow

separation so flow separation can often

indicate performance losses in many

different engineering applications so

one of them that you could talk about is

in gas turbine engine so many of you

flew here so this is just a schematic of

Pratt & Whitney turbofan so this is the

if you were to sit on the

aircraft you're the wing you'd be able

to see the fan there's a multi-stage

compressor behind it fuel is injected in

this combustion and the combustor here

and then expanded in the in the turbine

in the back obviously you can't see most

of this if you look at a zoom of the

combustor region so this is downstream

of the compressor fuel is injected here

there is a diffuser that lives in

between the compressor and the combustor

and the reason that this diffuser is

there is because you use the diffuser to

try to increase the pressure even

further after the compressor and this is

done too to try to increase the thermal

efficiency of your gas turbine engine if

you were you remember your undergraduate

thermodynamics classes is idealized as a

Brayton cycle but separation in the

diffuser will reduce the amount of

pressure rise that you can you can get

and perhaps more catastrophic is that if

you have a lot of unsteadiness in your

diffuser that can actually interact with

the flame in in the combustor so I'll

spend just a couple minutes to talk

about the methodology and the formalism

that we've introduced it to solve these

problems so all of this is done in the

context of a large Eddy simulation so

these are we're looking for weak

solutions to the to the narrator Stokes

equations and the reason that we look

for weak solutions is because the

resolution requirements of small-scale

turbulence
they're just computationally prohibitive

to to fully resolve so mathematically we

we low-pass spatially filter the NS

equations and we try to solve for this

filtered velocity field and this

filtered velocity field is usually based

on some idea of what you can afford to

resolve so that's some some length scale

here Delta and if you apply this so that

I'm showing this most of what I'll show

you our low speed flow so this in the

context of incompressible flow equations

you recover terms that look like your

standard

now we're Stokes equations there are a

few additional terms that arise and

these terms represent interactions

between things that you've resolved and

things that you don't resolve but in

practice typically this is not always

true but it's peculiar because although

you derive this equation from some

low-pass filtering of ENS equations this

filter is is not specified during

simulation nor is this idea of the

filter what filter you use used in the

model development or the way you derive

what models you should use for these

these unclose terms and the reason the

the standard practice is that you assume

that when you discretize these equations

that that discretization acts as this

low pass filter to do the job for you so

I won't belabor these points but the the

methodology that we have taken is to to

leverage a formal filter definition to

try to give us an ID insights into

building some new models so you know we

could start with some specification of

the filter but I'm going to discuss two

applications of what what we can use

this filter definition for so one is to

estimate this is sub-grid scale

fluctuation energy so this is how much

energy is contained in scales emotions

that we aren't resolving in our

simulations and we'll try to use that to

drive local mesh refinement and the the

general idea is that if you have regions

of your simulation domain which have

large estimates for this energy then you

will try to locally increase some

resolution and this has been well

behaved in a in a very in a variety of

different flow configurations for us

particularly because you can show from

this formalism that there is an upper

bound so you won't refine spurious lis

in regions where there's nothing

interesting happening in the flow the

other application that I'll show you is

derive from from this statement you can

actually derive formal boundary

conditions for your

velocity field which is what you're

solving for and this becomes important

if you cannot resolve your wall

turbulence and this is often the case in

external aerodynamics for instance flow

around air foils that I have shown in

the original slide and so this gives you

a slip boundary condition that you can

drive so I'm going to describe these

ideas with two validation cases so for

the local mesh refinement I'll discuss

it in the context of this stalled of the

stalled diffuser and then for the weak

boundary conditions I'll discuss a

airfoil that said near stall so I'll

just have one one brief mention of the

software infrastructure so we're using

the Charles suite of solvers this is

developed at cascade technologies where

I'm now one of the developers of the the

software suite

it's an unstructured finite volume le s

solver formally second-order on good

meshes we can get a little bit better

accuracy than that we also have some

local and isotropic mesh adaptation

tools that work on almost all polyhedra

almost so I'm showing just some strong

scalability for some of the low-speed

calculations that we've done so this is

for some of the cases that I'll show

these are truly incompressible

calculations so that we have reasonable

strong scaling efficiencies here of

about eighty percent or so and recently

we've gone to were exploring a formally

low mach formulation so that we can

avoid solving a Poisson equation to get

a little bit better scalability so the

the first case that I mentioned before

is this 3d asymmetric diffuser so this

diffuser has an inclined bottom wall

which you see here if you look at it

from the side and this one of the side

walls is slightly inclined so that's

this side wall the reason that this

particular geometry is chosen is that

there is a companion

experiment done at Stanford with their

measurements of this this particular

geometry that are done you wouldn't find

this geometry in in practical

engineering configurations one of the

peculiarities of this this geometry so

what we what's visualized in this plot

is the instantaneous separation in the

diffuser so that the separation starts

in the corner between the inclined

bottom and sidewalls and then that

slowly expands throughout the volume of

the diffuser and the the real enabling

piece that we had was to use this local

refinement technology based on our

estimates so this is what what that

local refinement looks like so if you

look at the this bottom image

these are log scale contours of where we

estimate estimate that our resolution is

insufficient because energy of our

unresolved scales is high and you find

that it's mostly concentrated if this is

a separated shear layer off of the

bottom wall of the diffuser and so if

you we take statistics of this quantity

from a course le s we can use that to

drive to drive a local mesh refinement

within this band so there's a dark black

band here is the increased cell count or

the increased resolution and this is a

relatively efficient process for us to

increase resolution without too much

cost so for this particular case this

additional resolution only increase the

total count by about 15 percent so this

is a visualization of a plane so this is

a half way in between the the two side

walls this is one of the explains that

the experimentalists characterized and

so you can see the formation this faint

blue line is the the boundary of the the

separation bubbles of flow here is

moving upstream the additional

resolution that we had is is packed you

can see that there's some

kelvin-helmholtz like structure in the

shear layer and you can compare that

against this is on the same color

contour of what of course elías looks

like there's very little structure to

speak of and

this separated shear layer so as I

mentioned the the primary quantity of

interest for diffusers is to be able to

capture what type of pressure rise you

get as you march further downstream in

the diffuser so this is the the pressure

coefficient to describe that pressurized

these red symbols are the experimental

measurements in that mid plane on the

bottom wall the black is our le s

calculation so we agree well and this

thin blue dotted line is this is the

Envisat approximation of what you would

expect an ideal pressure rise to look

like in this diffuser just as accounting

for the geometry and so the the true

efficiency of this diffuser is actually

much less than what what you'd expect in

this ideal limit you can do finer scale

comparison so these are stream-wise mean

velocity profiles in that same bid plane

and you can see that you these are at

different stations as you march further

downstream and the diffuser and you can

you can see that eventually the close to

the wall the flow it's is actually

traveling upstream so there is a mean

separation bubble so we accurately

predict the separation locations I'm

showing the midplane there's an off

plane measurement look closer to one of

the sidewalls the experiment makes that

we're able to capture that separation

location as well so a second example

that I'll take you through is the issue

of stall on an airfoil so in takeoff and

landing configurations it's not

surprising that you want to drive as

much lift out of your wings as possible

in order to at least an intake off to

get you off the ground and so the way

you usually do this is you you increase

the angle of attack of your airfoil and

so these are this is the lift

coefficient against that angle of attack

measured experimentally for this NACA

4412 and as you increase the angle of

attack the amount of lift that you get

is increasing up to a certain point and

then beyond this point the lift you get

is actually

decreasing and actually this falls off

very dramatically if you were to

continue to take data on this side now

what's happening is that close to this

trailing edge there is a separation

bubble that's forming some separation is

okay but if the separation is too severe

then you say that you are stalled this

has potentially catastrophic impacts so

the this particular experiment measures

a trailing edge separation at about 85

to 86 percent of the court so that this

is the just a view of that airfoil so

that's about here and so this has been

difficult to predict with at least

steady ran so these are lower fidelity

techniques the nasty langley research

turbulence modeling group they use this

as a benchmark case to assess how well

their Ran's models do for this case so

if you look at these are mean velocity

profiles at these dots are the

experimental measurements this line is

one particular Ran's model that they use

and this is the one of the last

measurement locations close to the edge

you can clearly see that the experiment

has predicted a separated flow and this

Ran's model is barely it's still

attached or maybe there's a very very

small separation bubble and so the

enabling piece for this calculation is

that the slip boundary conditions that

we derive from the le s equations really

make make a calculation like this

possible so what's visualized here is

the surface slip velocity that we have

for this airfoil and I've removed the

contours anywhere that this stream Y

slip velocity is less than or equal to

zero and so that indicates either

separation or that the boundary layer is

fully resolved and so you can clearly

see that we predict an unsteady trailing

edge separation I'll skip ahead so if

you if you try to figure out exactly how

close you are to the experiment so these

are some

stations at 70% 90% 95% of the court of

our le s compared against the

experimental measurements we do predict

a separation so these are negative

velocities less than zero and the size

of the separation bubble is actually

well captured by our le s if you look at

the exact separation location as I

mentioned the experiment has separation

at about 85 86 % of the cord were

slightly delayed at 87 percent of the

court but we still predict that that

trailing edge separation so just to

conclude I entered some results from new

models and solution methodologies and

these are really developed from

revisiting underlie the underlying

formalism of le s I just presented those

two test cases validated against

experimental data and I'd like to

emphasize that the le s results here

shown they do constitute predictions the

there are no a priority specified

coefficients or calibrations and these

models there's usually a multi

resolution piece to help determine what

those coefficients should be during

runtime and those that are adapted

during each time steps and just a few

acknowledgments though this work is is

really Department of Energy sponsored

and and I'm very thankful for the CSG F

for my support this work was also done

in in collaboration with the the P SAP

program at Stanford and some of the most

these calculations that you I've shown

are really enabled by an a LCC compute

allocation and so between the PISA

program in this al-sisi allocation

really enabled this work so thank you