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

# Computers & Fluids 42 (2011) 13–25

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Computers & Fluids

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/compﬂuid

**An efﬁcient solver for the RANS equations and a one-equation turbulence model
**

R.C. Swanson ⇑,1, C.-C. Rossow

DLR, Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt, Lilienthalplatz 7, D-38108 Braunschweig, Germany

a r t i c l e

i n f o

a b s t r a c t

A three-stage Runge-Kutta (RK) scheme with multigrid and an implicit preconditioner has been shown to be an effective solver for the ﬂuid dynamic equations. Using the algebraic turbulence model of Baldwin and Lomax, this scheme has been used to solve the compressible Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes (RANS) equations for transonic and low-speed ﬂows. In this paper we focus on the convergence of the RK/Implicit scheme when the effects of turbulence are represented by the one-equation model of Spalart and Allmaras. With the present scheme the RANS equations and the partial differential equation of the turbulence model are solved in a loosely coupled manner. This approach allows the convergence behavior of each system to be examined. Point symmetric Gauss-Seidel supplemented with local line relaxation is used to approximate the inverse of the implicit operator of the RANS solver. To solve the turbulence equation we consider three alternative methods: diagonally dominant alternating direction implicit (DDADI), symmetric line Gauss-Seidel (SLGS), and a two-stage RK scheme with implicit preconditioning. Computational results are presented for airfoil ﬂows, and comparisons are made with experimental data. We demonstrate that the two-dimensional RANS equations and a transport-type equation for turbulence modeling can be efﬁciently solved with an indirectly coupled algorithm that uses RK/Implicit schemes. Ó 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Article history: Received 23 October 2009 Received in revised form 13 July 2010 Accepted 19 October 2010 Available online 28 October 2010 Keywords: Runge-Kutta Implicit preconditioner Multigrid Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes equations SA turbulence model

1. Introduction Reliable and sufﬁcient convergence for steady-state computations of turbulent ﬂows continues to be a challenge in computational ﬂuid dynamics. Here sufﬁcient convergence means that the residuals of the ﬂuid dynamic equations and the equation set of a turbulence model are reduced to the level of the truncation error of the numerical scheme. In many applications a turbulence model has one or more partial differential equations (PDEs) which have a transport form and represent the effects of turbulence on the ﬂow. When solving the transport-type equations of turbulence models, either directly or indirectly coupled to the ﬂow equations, the residuals are frequently reduced only two orders of magnitude. In addition, the poor convergence of these transport-type equations adversely affects the convergence of the ﬂow equations. Of course, when adequate convergence is not achieved, there is no assurance that the results obtained represent an acceptable approximation of the solution even from an engineering perspective. Thus, there is a strong need for improved numerical methods for not only obtaining steady-state solutions but also unsteady solutions when using a dual time-stepping scheme.

⇑ Corresponding author.

E-mail addresses: r.c.swanson10@gmail.com (R.C. Swanson), cord.rossow@dlr.de (C.-C. Rossow). 1 Corresponding author was visiting scientist at the Center for Computer Applications in AeroSpace Science and Engineering (C2A2S2E), DLR, Braunschweig, Germany. 0045-7930/$ - see front matter Ó 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.compﬂuid.2010.10.010

When developing an improved numerical method for solving the Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes (RANS) equations, a necessary consideration is the coupling of the RANS equations and the equation or equations of the turbulence model being applied. If both the ﬂuid dynamic and turbulence equations are directly coupled, then the characterization of the discrete system can change. That is, with appropriate discretization the ﬂuid dynamic equations are positive deﬁnite (sometimes called a vector positive system [1]), making them amenable to relaxation, but the directly coupled system may not be, due to the equation set for the turbulence model [2]. The numerical stiffness of the entire system is also much higher due to the source terms of the turbulence model. An alternative is to use indirect coupling of the two equation sets. Generally, in an iterative solution process with this approach the ﬂow variables are updated while the turbulence variables are frozen; and then, the turbulence variables are updated while the ﬂow variables are treated as ﬁxed quantities. Strategies for implementing indirect coupling depend on the algorithm being used. For example, when applying multigrid methods, there are two principal strategies for indirect coupling. The ﬁrst approach [3,4] is to solve the mean ﬂow and turbulence equations in sequence on each grid level. This can augment the coupling effects, which may be beneﬁcial for certain types of problems. The second strategy [5,6] is to use the eddy viscosity determined on the ﬁnest grid on all coarser grids in the multigrid procedure for the mean ﬂow equations. Then, the turbulence model equation set is solved with multigrid or another algorithm. This method can provide an

In addition. Rossow / Computers & Fluids 42 (2011) 13–25 advantage in ﬂexibility for independent evaluations of the schemes for solving the two equation sets. The main purpose of this work was to initiate an effort to satisfy the need to signiﬁcantly augment the effectiveness (as measured by reliability and efﬁciency) of algorithms for solving the RANS equations and the PDEs of turbulence models. À C w1 fw À 2 ft2 j d ð2:2Þ where t is time. [10] is written as m ~ ~ @m @m ¼ C b1 ð1 À ft2 Þem S~ þ uj @t @xj & ! ' ~ ~ ~ 1 @ @m @m @m ~ þ C b2 þ ðm þ m Þ r @xj @xj @xj @xj 2 ~ C b1 m þ S. (3) suitable for stiff discrete systems. for the purposes of grouping terms similar in form and numerical implementation. Swanson. r ~ m : ej2 d2 S ð2:6Þ For large values of r the function fw goes to a constant. 2.C. we assess the performance of an efﬁcient RANS solver (i. These requirements are as follows: (1) high Courant–Friedrichs–Lewy (CFL) limit.-C. Preconditioning with a fully implicit operator. which is deﬁned by S ¼ ft1 DU 2 . Furthermore. and e Sþ S ~ m j 2 d2 fv 2 . m ð2:1Þ where m is the kinematic viscosity. The operator of the discrete implicit system can be approximately inverted with symmetric Gauss-Seidel (SGS). diffusion. (2. and the speciﬁcs of its implementation are given. second. symmetric line Gauss-Seidel (SLGS). RK3/Implicit scheme with multigrid) when the turbulent viscosity ﬁeld is generated by solving a transport-type equation. There are common design criteria for the algorithms of both equation sets. [11]). we rewrite (after some algebra and rearranging of terms). Then three approaches for solving the SA equation are considered. t 2 ft1 ¼ C t1 g t exp ÀC t2 x2 t DU ð2:8Þ where dt is the distance from the ﬁeld point to the boundary-layer trip (where trip refers to a known location for transition). By indirectly coupling the equations one can focus on the speciﬁc properties of each equation set to obtain the best possible convergence of the two systems of equations. In addition.14 R. Eq. demonstrate that this scheme is more than 10 times faster than a welltuned standard RK scheme with scalar implicit residual smoothing and multigrid. The underlying three-stage RK scheme of this algorithm is important for clustering of the eigenvalues associated with the error components of the iterative process. In the present implementation of the model we do not include the trip function. To represent the effects of turbulence we use the Spalart–Allmaras (SA) model. xj and uj are Cartesian coordinates and velocity components. we show that the convergence of the RK3/Implicit scheme with the SA model is similar to that obtained with the BL model. Previously. Let mt be the eddy viscosity. In the ﬁrst section of this paper this turbulence model is described. In the results section the convergence behavior of the methods for solving the RANS equations and the SA equation is examined. Modiﬁcations of the RK3/Implicit scheme that have produced improved efﬁciency and robustness are emphasized. The last term is a source term. A candidate for the ﬂow solver of the loosely coupled system is an RK/Implicit scheme with three stages and three evaluations of the numerical dissipation. The transport-type equation for e given in Ref. Next the numerical schemes for solving the mean ﬂow and turbulence equations are presented and discussed. g t min ½0:1.2) as . The function ft2 is deﬁned as ft2 ¼ C t3 expðÀC t4 v2 Þ: Spalart includes the transition function given by ð2:7Þ ! 2 2 ðd þ g 2 dt Þ . which allows a CFL number of 1000. which is deﬁned by ~ mt ¼ mfv 1 . the essential properties of an algorithm for efﬁciently solving the directly coupled system can be identiﬁed. and destruction terms. Since establishing a highly effective scheme in two dimensions is a prerequisite for constructing an efﬁcient scheme in three dimensions. The effectiveness of the loosely coupled algorithm at high Reynolds numbers and low Mach number is presented. These methods are as follows: diagonally dominant alternating direction implicit (DDADI). and a two-stage RK scheme (RK2/Implicit) with implicit preconditioning. DU=ðxt Dxt Þ: ð2:9Þ and Dxt is the grid spacing along the wall at the trip. and a value of 10 is appropriate. The function fw in Eq. this scheme is designated as the RK3/Implicit scheme. Swanson et al. (2. ð2:4Þ where DU is the norm of the difference between the velocity at the transition location and that at a ﬁeld point being considered. Rossow [7] and Swanson et al. Ref.. which is usually neglected when applying the model (e. xt is the wall vorticity at the trip. the focus of the present effort is on a 2-D scheme. one can also investigate methods to enhance the coupling effects.. d delineating the distance to the closest wall boundary. ð2:5Þ where g and r are deﬁned by g ¼ r þ C w2 ðr6 À rÞ. and j denoting the von Kármán constant.e. ð2:3Þ with S being the magnitude of the vorticity (jXj). respectively.2) represent the production. for the equation set of the turbulence model there must also be appropriate treatment of any source terms so that convergence is not adversely affected. since there is latitude in choosing the iterative scheme and update procedure for the turbulence quantities. and third terms on the righthand side of Eq. (2) convergence with weak dependency on mesh density. C.g. ~ m v . [8] demonstrated that fast convergence can be obtained for both the two-dimensional (2-D) and three dimensional (3-D) RANS equations with the RK3/Implicit scheme with multigrid when using the Baldwin-Lomax (BL) algebraic eddy viscosity model [9]. Moreover. Although there is some slowdown in the convergence rate of the 3-D scheme relative to the 2-D scheme.2) is given by fw ¼ g 1 þ C6 w3 g6 þ C6 w3 !1=6 . Spalart–Allmaras turbulence model Here we provide a sufﬁcient description of the SA model to allow implementation. which is a transport-type equation model that is frequently used in solving a variety of ﬂuid dynamics problems. f v2 ¼ 1 À v 1 þ vfv 1 . f v 1 ¼ v3 v þ Cv1 3 3 . (2. respectively. treats the discrete stiffness problem associated with viscous-layer resolution. Rapid evolution of global quantities such as lift and drag coefﬁcients is demonstrated. The ﬁrst. Subsequently. A detail discussion explaining the modeling of the physical terms in the single transport-type equation is given in the paper by Spalart and Allmaras [10]. Furthermore. In addition.

and when e = 0. The viscous terms are discretized with a second-order central difference approximation. for the original scheme we chose e = 0. [14]. (3. Then the three methods considered for solving the SA equation are described. (3. where the change in the solution vector W is ð3:1Þ dWðqÞ ¼ WðqÞ À Wð0Þ ¼ Àaq Dt LWðqÀ1Þ . The change dWðqÞ replaces the explicit update appearing in Eq. (3. C w3 ¼ 2. C b2 ¼ 0:622. SD is the destruction term. Thus. SLGS. V all faces V all faces n ð3:5Þ where the matrix An is the ﬂux Jacobian associated with Fn at a cell b face. It is sufﬁcient to approximate the inverse of the implicit operator. V all faces n V all faces n ð3:7Þ WðqÞ ¼ Wð0Þ þ dWðqÞ . To solve the implicit system of Eq. Originally. a2 .1). the free-stream va~ lue of m is set to 3m1.5) affects the high-frequency damping of the scheme. its effectiveness as a smoother for multigrid.R. Dt is the time step. the free-stream m was set to 1. V all faces n ð3:4Þ C b1 ¼ 0:1355. with each complete sweep followed by one local (boundary layer and near wake) symmetric line sweep. (3. Thus.6). The matrix An can be decomposed into Aþ and AÀ . The SA turbulence model requires the solution of one transport-type equation. Fig.3). Applying the smoothing technique of Ref. j) indicate the cell of interest. The update for the qth stage of the RK scheme is given by # Dt X Dt X ðqÀ1Þ b Iþe An S dWðqÞ ¼ Àaq F S ¼ R ðqÀ1Þ . each stage in the RK scheme is preconditioned by an implicit operator. To solve the transport-type equation of the SA turbulence model we consider the DDADI. and D is the diffusion term. To derive this operator one treats the spatial discretization terms in the ﬂow equations implicitly and applies linearization. To initialize the iterative process the unknowns are set to zero. C t1 ¼ 1. By approximately inverting the operator Li we obtain dWðqÞ ¼ Àaq Dt PL. we have demonstrated that line relaxation can be used to efﬁciently approximate the inverse. Fn is the normal ﬂux density vector at the cell face. 1:0 from Ref. C t3 ¼ 1:2. where the indices (i. (3. Swanson.8] with variation of e. È É m 2 ~ ~ ~ . then the implicit scheme can be written as " # Dt X þ Dt X À ðqÞ ðqÞ b ðqÀ1Þ Iþe A S dWi. and thus. where m1 is the free-stream kinematic viscosity. þ uj @t @xj ð2:10Þ where SP1 and SP2 are the two contributions to the production term. A ﬁrst-order upwind approximation based on the Roe scheme is used for the convective derivatives in the implicit operator. which is proportional to frequency. weighting . Complete details of the scheme are presented in the papers of Rossow [7] and Swanson et al. and RK2/Implicit schemes. and V is the volume of the mesh cell being considered. In the ﬁrst part of this section the essential elements of the RK3/ Implicit scheme are presented. For the three-stage scheme we use the coefﬁcients ½a1 .j . In the present work we do not directly couple the solution of the ﬂuid dynamic equations with the additional equation of the turbulence model. (3. The g was determined with the one-dimensional Fourier analysis of Swanson et al.4. ð3:3Þ ~ ~ SP1 ðmÞ ¼ C b1 ð1 À ft2 ÞjXjm. a3 ¼ ½0:15. 0:4.6. Based on analysis and numerical testing. C w1 ¼ C b1 r ¼ . C t2 ¼ 2.j À e A dWNB S. For a detailed derivation see Rossow [7].7) for the changes in conðqÞ servative variables dWi. C. we make the scheme amenable to application on unstructured grids. C t4 ¼ 0:5: where P is a preconditioner deﬁned by the approximate inverse e L À1 . [8].C.1. Here. In order to avoid the possibility of a delayed transition. the scheme is unstable.-C. 2 3 ð2:11Þ j þ 1 þ C b2 C w2 ¼ 0:3. V WðqÀ1Þ ¼ Àaq X ðqÀ1Þ Dt P F S. 2 AÀ ¼ n 1 ðAn À jAn jÞ: 2 ð3:6Þ If we substitute for An in Eq. [8] and is a function of the phase angle hx. 3. as suggested by Rumsey [12]. r . an adequate approximate inverse is obtained with two pointwise symmetric Gauss-Seidel (SGS) sweeps. C v 1 ¼ 7:1. The choice of the implicit parameter e in Eq. and S is i the area of the cell face. Numerical schemes To solve the two-dimensional RANS equations we use the RK3/ Implicit scheme. 1a shows the ampliﬁcation factor g of the original RK3/Implicit scheme [7.342m1. At e = 0. Here aq is the RK coefﬁcient of the qth stage. the implicit operator must be inverted. To obtain an explicit update to the solution vector for the ﬂow equations we use a three-stage RK scheme. 3. we obtain for the qth stage of the RK scheme " ~ ~ On a solid boundary m ¼ 0. the lower bound on e can be decreased.j ¼ R i. By using local line relaxation. which will be deﬁned later in this section. which are n n associated with the positive and negative eigenvalues of An and deﬁned by Aþ ¼ n 1 ðAn þ jAn jÞ. R ðqÀ1Þ represents the residual function for the (qÀ1)th stage. Substituting for the implicit operator in Eq. V ð3:2Þ and L is the complete difference operator for the system of equations. Rossow / Computers & Fluids 42 (2011) 13–25 15 Â Ã ~ ~ @m @m ~ ~ ~ ~ ¼ SP1 ðmÞ þ SP2 ðmÞ þ SD ðmÞ þ DðmÞ. RK/implicit scheme We apply a ﬁnite-volume approach to discretize the ﬂuid dynamic equations and use the approximate Riemann solver of Roe [13] to obtain a second-order discretization of the convective terms.5 there is a signiﬁcant increase in g at the highest frequencies. and they are given by To extend the support of the difference scheme we consider implicit residual smoothing. [15] we have the following: Li dWðqÞ ¼ dWðqÞ .5) using the deﬁnitions of Eq. and NB refers to all the direct neighbors of the cell being considered. By introducing non-standard weighting of the explicit numerical dissipation on stages of the RK scheme. Previously [16]. Recent enhancements of the original RK3/Implicit scheme are also introduced. which results in faster convergence. SP2 ðmÞ þ SD ðmÞ ¼ C b1 ½ð1 À ft2 Þfv 2 þ ft2 jÀ2 À C w1 fw d ! ~ ~ 1 @ @m C b2 @ 2 m ~ ~ ~ À ðm þ ð1 þ C b2 ÞmÞ m 2: DðmÞ ¼ r @xj @xj r @xj The constants of the model are as follows: where Li is an implicit operator. and e is an implicit parameter. j ¼ 0:41.

c20 ¼ 1 À c3 .8 ε = 0. If h = 1/2.4 g 0. [19]) is used to execute the multigrid. A detailed discussion of dissipation weighting is given in Jameson [17] and Swanson and Turkel [18]. 0. Although we have used lexicographic ordering in applying Gauss-Seidel. [21. for stability. good damping of the highest frequencies. Coarse meshes are created by eliminating every other mesh line in each coordinate direction (i. With a different data structure such as that employed for unstructured grids. and ~ RðmÞ is the residual function. this would also be true for red-black (odd-even) Gauss-Seidel on a structured mesh. of the numerical dissipation means that the dissipation in the residual function on a given RK stage q (q > 1) is weighted with that from a previous stage.5 1 1. A W-type cycle (see Ref. The number of colors required to build independent sets is a function of the number of points in the stencil.5 3 0 0 0. The hyperbolic tangent function deﬁned in applied eigensystem analysis to show that the RK/ Implicit scheme with a Gauss-Seidel preconditioner and red-black ordering is an effective smoother for multigrid.2 0. the red-black ordering must be replaced by a multicolor ordering to ensure that each point of a particular color only directly connects to points of a different color. First. For example. In general.5 ε = 0. ð3:11Þ n o CFL ¼ 1000 tanh½ð0:005Þ2NÀ1 .5. In updating the solution points of the initial color. the lexicographic ordering of the solution points can be replaced with red-black ordering. d is a standard central difference operator. Schemes for SA equation After discretizing Eq. then the time . (b) modiﬁed weighting of dissipation. full coarsening).5 3 θx θx Fig. ð3:10Þ where Lx and Ly are the linear discrete operators for the terms of the transport-type equation. The parameter h indicates temporal accuracy. and numerical dissipative terms. and the coefﬁcients b1. V i Dt h u Ly ¼ h dy À ðdy b1 þ b2 dy Þdy .6 ε = 0. we consider the implicit form ~ ~ ðI þ Lx þ Ly þ S J ÞDm ¼ ÀRðmÞ.. Rossow / Computers & Fluids 42 (2011) 13–25 (a) 1 ε = 1.4 0. all points of a particular color on all subdomains are updated in parallel. c3 are [1. With this weighting there is a shift in the intersection of the locus of the residual eigenvalues to the left along the negative real axis of the complex plane. which increases the parabolic stability limit of the basic RK scheme by more than a factor of two. The coefﬁcients cqr are the weights of the viscous and dissipative terms on each stage. Details of the multigrid method are given in the paper by Swanson et al. Fig. c10 ¼ 1 À c2 . [8]. and Ld relate to the convective. and thus. c22 ¼ c3 : ð3:9Þ When the weights ½c1 .2) is deﬁned by LW ðqÞ " # q q X X 1 ðqÞ ðrÞ ðrÞ ¼ cqr Lv W þ cqr Ld W . In the application of the RK3/Implicit scheme as the smoother of a full approximation storage (FAS) multigrid method. Lv .5 ε = 0. an alternative ordering can be more convenient to implement and even lead to a more robust iterative method. However.4 0. Next.5 2 2. 3. C. c11 ¼ c2 . another set of points of a different color is updated. the CFL number is increased to 1000 after 10 multigrid cycles.8 0. c00 ¼ c1 . V ð3:12Þ where du is a ﬁrst-order upwind operator for the convective term. viscous. Based upon analysis and numerical testing we have determined that the modiﬁed weights [1. this is called standard weighting.5 1 1. and for the 3-stage scheme.5 2 2.5. 1b shows the effect on g due to weighting of the dissipation on the second and third stages by a factor of 0. The modiﬁed scheme is now stable when e = 0. 1].4. there is weighting of both the numerical dissipative and physical diffusive terms. This procedure is continued until all points have been updated.16 R. Then.5] lead to improved robustness of the smoother. c2 . each solution point is only directly connected to points with a different color.8 ε = 0. using the latest information available.e.0 ε = 0.2.6 g 0. Due to the larger stencils that are produced on unstructured grids when approximating the spatial derivatives of the governing equations.10). and the convergence rate is the same as for sequential processing. (2. The operators for the two coordinate directions are as follows: where N is the number of cycles. alternative ordering strategies can also be used. Jacobi relaxation is used since no updated points are available.0 ε = 0. The operators Lc . 0.C. S J is a Jacobian of the source term containing the production and destruction of turbulence contributions.5. 1. c21 ¼ 0.6 0.2 0 0 0. Swanson. However. Roberts and Swanson [20] have Lx ¼ Ã Dt Â u h dx À ðdx b1 þ b2 dx Þdx . (3. obtain a Gauss-Seidel type scheme. Lc W þ V r¼0 r¼0 ð3:8Þ P with cqr ¼ 1 for consistency. (a) Standard weighting of numerical dissipation. in practice. b2 are deﬁned by the diffusion term of the turbulence model.-C. and best convergence the parameter e is taken to be 0. We can deﬁne each color in the multicoloring ordering as a member of an independent set.4 (b) 1 ε = 1. By using multicoloring the algorithm can be highly parallelized (see Refs. Effect on ampliﬁcation factor of RK3/Implicit scheme (applied to 1-D Euler equations) due to variation of implicit parameter e (3-stage scheme).6 ε = 0.22]). and the operator L in Eq. 1.8 0. is used to smoothly increase the CFL number.

13)).676 0.2) the three different solution strategies. we solve the sequence of onedimensional systems corresponding to the two coordinate directions. and we have a fully (an Euler) implicit scheme. which is secondorder accurate (i. One issue that can arise in solving the turbulence equation is ~ the unbounded growth of the solution. [28].C. An appropriate linearization of the source term is extremely important to allow the use of large CFL numbers.. respectively. These factors have contributed to the increased reliability of the solver. The rate of development of the turbulence ﬁeld can signﬁcantly affect the convergence of the ﬂow solver. Computational results Computations for turbulent.11) as D ¼ I þ Dx þ Dy þ S J . A ﬁrst-order approximation of convective terms is frequently applied in the implementation of turbulence models to promote positivity of the turbulence variables. Cases Case 1 Case 9 M1 0. In the evaluation we also considered the effect of mesh density on the number of relaxation sweeps for solving the turbulence equation.79 Rec 5. The airfoil solutions were primarily calculated with the Cases 1 and 9 ﬂow conditions given in Table 1 from the experimental investigation of Cook et al. viscous ﬂow over the RAE 2822 airfoil were performed to evaluate the convergence behavior of the RK3/Implicit scheme when applying the SA turbulence model. and it is the same type of scheme used to solve the mean ﬂow equations. (2. Rec represents the Reynolds number based on chord length. When solving the mean ﬂow equations. The source term Jacobian and the residual function are deﬁned by ½a1 . which are similar to the ones reported by Walsh and Pulliam [25]. In general. this is a consequence of the Jacobian of the production and destruction terms becoming positive. Over a range of mesh densities a h between 1. (3. C. Conversely. SLGS. Rossow / Computers & Fluids 42 (2011) 13–25 17 derivative is approximated by a central difference. a2 ¼ ½0:25.5 Â 106 xtr/c 0. the effectiveness and reliability of the DDADI scheme depends on the convergence behavior of the subiterative process and on the magnitude of the implicit parameter h. an essential requirement for an effective total algorithm is that the numerical solution vector of each equation set exhibits a similar evolution rate. (3. Additional discussion of the present implementation is given in Swanson and Rossow [16]. (3. Then. One is the form of the weak coupling used. To achieve favorable convergence rates the turbulence equation is solved on each stage of the RK/Implicit smoothing scheme for the mean ﬂow equations. Crank–Nicolson type scheme). and RKI-SGS. During the course of this work we have made the following convergence behavior observations. solution of the turbulence equation is performed on the ﬁne mesh only. 1:0: Subsequently this method is designated as the RKI-SGS scheme. There is also the potential beneﬁt from reducing the positive contribution to the Jacobian of the production and destruction terms (see Eq. where the multigrid scheme for the turbulence equation is separate from that of the mean ﬂow equations. For additional enhancement of efﬁciency and robustness when solving Eq. respectively. Currently we use four subiterations when performing one outer iteration. respectively (to see this consider the effect of h for large Dt). so usually there is also limiting (clipping) of the turbulence quantities and/or certain terms (e. Due to the strong nonlinearities of the source terms.0 works well. In Pulliam et al. are supported by a V-cycle multigrid algorithm. obtaining Â Ã Â Ã ~ ~ I þ Ly þ Dx þ S J DÀ1 I þ Lx þ Dy þ S J Dm ¼ ÀRðmÞ: ð3:15Þ To invert this implicit operator. Exponential growth of m can occur when there is a sufﬁciently large imbalance of the production and destruction terms so as to produce an instability. [23]. Using Fourier analysis and some applications of the iterative DDADI scheme (also called the modiﬁed approximate factorization (MAF) scheme) MacCormack and Pulliam [24] and Walsh and Pulliam [25] have demonstrated that a few subiterations (e. and xtr/c is the transition SJ ¼ Ã Dt @ Â ~ ~ h S ðmÞ þ SD ðmÞ . ð3:14Þ where Dx and Dy are the diagonal parts of Lx and Ly. production term) in the set of turbulence ﬁeld equations.e. and the eddy viscosity is frozen on the coarser meshes.730 a (deg.11) is to factor the implicit (left-hand side) operator and apply the DDADI scheme.R.93 2.g. As pointed out by Allmaras [27]. Moreover.11) is approximately inverted in each iteration with two symmetric Gauss-Seidel line relaxation sweeps (line solves performed in radial direction only). we factor the resulting operator. The RK2/Implicit scheme involves two RK stages and an implicit preconditioner. we have employed numerical evaluation to determine an appropriate number of relaxation sweeps for the SLGS and RKI-SGS schemes.7 Â 106 6. The CFL number for all solvers of the SA equation is 1000.g.) 1. Deﬁne the diagonal contribution in Eq.11 0. Another reason is that the preconditioner is updated on each stage of the RK scheme. namely DDADI. By numerical testing we have found that four subiterations produces reliable convergence and best performance when DDADI is used by itself or as a smoother for multigrid. One point SGS sweep and one local (boundary layer + near wake) symmetric line relaxation sweep are applied twice to obtain an approximate inversion of the implicit preconditioner. when the RANS and turbulence equations are being solved in a loosely coupled manner. Certainly. how well the ﬂow solver converges can have an impact on the effectiveness of the scheme for solving the equation set of the turbulence model. (3. In the table M1 is the free-stream Mach number.2 and 2.-C. this is not sufﬁcient to ensure positivity.03 . Swanson.. In the current formulation we do not observe this type of problem. The coefﬁcients for the twostage scheme are Table 1 Flow conditions for RAE 2822 airfoil. Such a behavior can become a signiﬁcant problem especially when using multistage (e. There are several possible reasons for this. Convergence with iteration and subiteration can be enhanced by choosing an appropriate implicit parameter. after factoring out D. RK) relaxation and only updating the preconditioner on the zeroth stage. With the SLGS scheme the implicit operator of Eq. we use the subiterative procedure described by Klopfer et al. 4. two to four) makes the DDADI scheme unconditionally stable and improves the damping properties. [26] best performance for a diagonalized DDADI was obtained with three to six iterations. The multigrid algorithm is called at each stage of the ﬁne mesh RK/ Implicit scheme when solving the mean ﬂow equations.g. When h = 1 the approximation is a ﬁrst-order backward difference.. a denotes the angle of attack.. To prevent deterioration in the allowable CFL number and damping behavior of the DDADI scheme due to the factorization error and possible boundary condition lagging error. and three iterations were recommended. The parameter h may also be viewed as a measure of implicitness with h > 1 and 0 < h < 1 indicating under-relaxation and over-relaxation. One approach for solving Eq. ~ P V @m 2 ~ RðmÞ ¼ Dt ~ RðmÞ: V ð3:13Þ For the convective and diffusive terms of the residual function we use ﬁrst-order upwind difference and central difference approximations.

to elimnate the possibility of convergence effects due to limiting. Swanson. For these three results on the 320 Â 64 grid the SA equation was solved with DDADI. In the computations two types of initial conditions were considered.4 0. Re = 6. With each scheme the residual of the mean ﬂow equations is reduced 13 orders of magnitude in less than 75 multigrid cycles (for an average reduction rate of about 0.000 cells.66 GHz. Clearly there is a signiﬁcant improvement in convergence with the second order. One type uses the free-stream values of the dependent variables.6 100 120 Cycles Cycles Fig. The effect of mesh reﬁnement on convergence for Case 1 is shown Fig.73. Furthermore. [18]. 4. At the outer boundary Riemann invariants were used. On the surface the no-slip condition was applied.79 .001) airfoil ﬂow calculation was made with a = 2. SA Model. the computational time is included. For Case 1 the ﬂow is primarily subsonic with a relatively small region of supersonic ﬂow. We primarily considered three mesh densities. SA equation solved with three different methods: DDADI.6. Rossow / Computers & Fluids 42 (2011) 13–25 location divided by the chord length. grid: 320 Â 64). For these reasons we use the RKI-SGS scheme to solve the SA equation.5 x o ∞ 6 2 Grid: 320 x 64 Log (||Res tur||2) Log (||Res|| 2) -4 -6 -8 -10 -12 -14 0 20 40 60 0. 2 shows convergence histories for Case 9 of the schemes for the RANS and turbulence equations. RAE 2822: Case 9 M ∞ = 0. it is amenable to application in an unstructured ﬂow solver. All computations were performed on a Fujitsu computer with an Intel core two duo CPU 6750 processor at 2. Convergence histories for solvers of ﬂow and turbulence equations (Case 9.6. RAE 2822: 2. This is not surprising since for all schemes the residuals of the turbulence equation are reduced between seven and eight orders. Fig. no limiter is applied.73. Usually. the computational times required on other computers can be determined.2 80 100 120 CL 0. This also applies to comparisons that are made with a frequently used scheme for solving the RANS equations.1. with a shock wave occurring on the upper surface at approximately the 55% chord location. 3 the effect on convergence behavior when using a second-order approximation is shown. These computing times provide a reasonable estimate of performance since all solvers were programmed in Fortran 77 by the same person using the same coding practices. and RKI-SGS schemes. RKI-SGS. To investigate the RANS solver for a range of Reynolds (Re) numbers we used a set of meshes (adapted to the Re of the ﬂow [29]) containing 368 Â 88 cells. In Fig. There is clustering of the grids at the leading and trailing edges of the airfoil and also at the surface in the radial direction. As revealed in Table 3 the convergence rate in solving the mean ﬂow equations is approximately 0. The outer boundary is located at 20 chords away from the airfoil. The ﬁnest mesh has 1024 cells on the airfoil and a minimum normal mesh spacing of 3 Â 10À6. SLGS. Successively coarser grids (640 Â 128 and 320 Â 64) were generated with half as many cells as the next ﬁner grid in each coordinate direction. allowing the possibility of constructing a fully coupled solver. as seen in Table 2. The RKI-SGS scheme has the advantage of being compatible with the solver of the mean ﬂow equations. with the ﬁnest having 1280 cells around the airfoil and 256 cells in the radial direction. The DDADI scheme requires less CPU time than the other two schemes. since it does not require lines across the entire domain for the solution algorithm. In all subsequent results for subcritical ﬂows the second-order approximation is used. the residual is reduced about an order of magnitude more with the RKI-SGS scheme than the DDADI scheme.C. 9. by providing a description of the processor used.65). For Case 9 the ﬂow is transonic. an incompressible (M1 = 0. In solving the ﬂow equations structured meshes with a C-type topology were used. Furthermore. In addition. The L2 norm of the residual of the continuity equation is used as a measure of convergence for the ﬂow equations. (b) SA equation.79 and Rec = 6.5 x 10 o 6 1 Case 64 (b) 4 SA Model. only ﬁrst-order accurate spatial discretization is used for these terms. . On the airfoil surface the maximum cell aspect ratio is 2032. With FMG a grid sequencing process is used to generate an initial solution on successively ﬁner meshes. Similar convergence behavior is obtained on all grids for both the mean ﬂow and turbulence equations. and the CPU time is increased by about a factor of four as the number of mesh points is doubled in each coordinate direction. SLGS. (a) Flow equations. C. However. Essentially subsonic ﬂow For Case 1 we ﬁrst consider the effect of the approximation order for the convective terms of the mean ﬂow equations on the coarse grids in the multigrid method. 2. 320 x 10 M = 0.5 Â 106. A far-ﬁeld vortex effect was included to specify the velocity for an inﬂow condition at the outer boundary.79 . Multigrid is used to solve the discrete problem on each grid in the sequence. as the number of multigrid cycles to reduce the residual of the ﬂow equations 13 orders is decreased from 82 cycles to 65 cycles. When comparing the computational performance of the RK3/ Implicit scheme for different turbulence model solvers and for different mesh densities. α = Re . The other one uses an initial solution determined by applying full multigrid (FMG).-C.18 R. In addition. The residual of the SA equation (using the RKI-SGS scheme) is reduced to almost the same level (exceeding nine orders) in both calculations. A detailed discussion of the boundary conditions is given in Ref. 4. indicating convergence without mesh (a) 0 -2 RK3/Implicit. α = 2. The ﬁnest mesh (1280 Â 256) contains over 300. In fact. the residual histories for the mean ﬂow equations essentially coincide. In all the applications the same boundary conditions were imposed for the ﬂuid dynamic equations.8 0 -2 -4 -6 -8 -10 -12 0 20 40 60 80 DDADI SLGS RKI-SGS DDADI CL SLGS CL RKI-SGS CL 0.

7 x 10 o 6 Log (||Res||2) 320 x 64 CL 640 x 128 CL 1280 x 256 CL 0. 5.6 relative to that with the BL model. -2 -4 -6 -8 SA Model.6 (b) 4 2 RKI-SGS. SA Model. Scheme RK3/I SLGS RK3/I SLGS RK5/S Turb. . α = 1. Convergence histories with the BL model are given in Fig.4 0. SA equation solved with RKI-SGS.917 0. Swanson. Re = 5.93 .604 dependency. Re .= SA Model.7 0. Case 1 on the 320 Â 64 grid. The BL model was used when applying the RK5/S algorithm. 4.7Case 1 M 0.-C. In Table 4 a comparison is made of the computational efﬁciency of the current RK3/Implicit scheme (denoted by RK3/I) with the SA and BL turbulence models. Case 1.7 x 10 o 6 ∞ -2 Grid: 320 x 64 Log (||Res tur||2) Log (||Res|| 2) -4 -6 -8 -10 -12 0 -2 -4 -6 -8 -10 -12 0 20 40 60 Grid: 320 x 64 0. The computing time with the SA model is increased by roughly a factor of 1.983 To provide an additional perspective on the efﬁciency of the RK/Implicit algorithm Table 4 also includes a comparison with the SLGS scheme when used to solve both the mean ﬂow and SA RAE 2822: (a) 0 RK3/Implicit. (b) SA equation. 3.C. (a) Flow equations.5. In addition.5 Log (||Restur||2) 0 -2 -4 -6 -8 -10 -12 0 20 40 60 80 320 x 64 640x 128 1280 x 256 0. and multigrid is given. Effect on convergence of approximation order of convective terms in the mean ﬂow equations on coarse grids of the multigrid method (SA model.93 . Convergence histories for solvers of ﬂow and turbulence equations for Case 1 on three grids.93 . Table 4 Comparison of computational efﬁciency of RK3/Implicit scheme with that of SLGS and tuned RK5/S schemes. Rossow / Computers & Fluids 42 (2011) 13–25 Table 2 Comparison for Case 9 of solution strategies for solving the turbulence equation of the SA model (grid: 320 Â 64).676. α = x 10 o 6 0.7 0.1. With the BL model the RK3/Implicit scheme is about four times faster than the RK5/S scheme. the RK3/ Implicit scheme is still about two times faster than the RK5/S scheme.R.5 0. SA model solved with RKI-SGS scheme.624 0.918 0.629 0. grid density: 320 Â 64).676.2 -10 -12 -14 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 CL 100 120 Cycles Cycles Fig.676.4 0.3 0. scalar implicit residual smoothing. Method DDADI SLGS RKI-SGS CPU time (s) 63 65 75 MG cycles 69 70 69 19 Table 3 Effect of mesh density on convergence of RK3/Implicit scheme (Case 1). α = 1. (a) 0 RK3/Implicit.5. (a) Flow equations. RAE 2822: Case 1 M ∞ = 0. Re . Re = 5. RAE 2822: Case 1 M ∞ = 0.619 0. C.676. SA Model. RAE 2822: Case 1 o M ∞ = 0.629 0.3 0. model SA SA BL BL BL CPU time (s) 71 152 44 128 181 MG cycles 65 344 64 351 1792 Convergence rate 0.2 1st order CL 2nd order CL 1st order 2nd order -14 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 CL 80 100 120 Cycles Cycles Fig. Even with the additional computing time required by the SA model. α = 1.93 . (b) SA equation. the computational effort required by a highly tuned standard ﬁve stage RK scheme (RK5/S) with three evaluations of numerical dissipative and physical diffusive terms. Mesh size 320 Â 64 640 Â 128 1280 Â 256 CPU time (s) 71 299 1242 MG cycles 65 63 60 Convergence rate 0.6 (b) 4 2 RKI-SGS.7 x 10 6 0.

3 0.6 Table 5 Effect of mesh density on computed lift and drag coefﬁcients for Case 1. SA Model. Mesh size 160 Â 32 320 Â 64 640 Â 128 1280 Â 256 640 Â 128 640 Â 128 640 Â 128 1280 Â 256 1280 Â 256 1280 Â 256 Cycles (FMG) 50 50 50 50 3 5 10 3 5 10 CL 0. due to stability. In Fig. there is only a factor of about two increase in computational effort.002669 0. The development of these coefﬁcients after three.2 Log (||Restur||2) Log (||Res||2) CL -12 0 50 100 150 200 Cycles Cycles Fig. (b) SA equation. Furthermore.5915 0.8]). 9 exhibits the residual histories. Re = 5.002480 0.004012 0. Fig.5 0. There is insufﬁcient data in the region to verify this behavior.93 .005777 Log (||Res|| 2) -4 -6 -8 -10 -12 -14 0 20 40 60 80 100 320 x 64 CL 640 x 128 CL 0.3 Residual CL 0 50 100 150 200 0. 7 shows a comparison of the computed surface pressure and skin-friction distributions on the 1280 Â 256 grid with experimental data.005802 0. For these results the limiter was activated. As a multigrid smoother for the mean ﬂow. C.002501 0.-C. Second-order approximation of convective terms on coarse grids.002497 0.1%. Here the density residual is decreased by only nine orders of magnitude to avoid round-off errors [7].5884 CD 0.005775 0. 6. A comparison of the RK3/Implicit and RK5/S schemes (with the SA and BL models.005777 0. When solving the SA equation. Fig. ﬁve.676. 4. Fig. required a reduced CFL of 100 and underrelaxation on the coarse grids.5901 0.002484 0.005802 0. Rossow / Computers & Fluids 42 (2011) 13–25 0 -2 RK3/Implicit.005800 0. Swanson. The two contributions to the total drag coefﬁcient.5885 0. RAE 2822: Case 1 160 x 32 320 x 64 640 x 128 1280 x 256 0.3. pressure drag (CD)p and skin-friction drag (CD)f coefﬁcients. except for the 1280 Â 256 level.7 x 10 o 6 0. and ﬁrstorder differencing was used for coarse-grid convective terms. are also given. The beneﬁt of the FMG in accelerating the convergence of a global quantity such as lift coefﬁcient (CL) is evident. BL Model.5903 0.7 Â 106 to 100 Â 106).5 0.6 0. the RK3/Implicit scheme requires less than half the computer time of the SLGS scheme. In Table 5 the computed CL and drag coefﬁcient (CD) are presented for each grid level. α = 1.005872 0.005770 0. 8 shows the residual histories for Case 1 when the Re number is varied by more than an order of magnitude (from 5.5840 0.008261 (CD)p 0.008298 0.20 R. Transonic ﬂow In Fig. The SA equation was solved with the RKI-SGS scheme. RAE 2822: Case 1 M ∞ = 0.002497 0. Despite a Reynolds number increase exceeding an order of magnitude.008254 0.002503 0. The computational pressure distribution does exhibit a weak shock on the upper surface of the airfoil in the transition region (11% chord location).5887 0. starting on a 160 Â 32 grid.7 (b) 4 2 0 -2 -4 -6 -8 -10 RKI-SGS.C.006023 0.4 0.005798 0. (a) Flow equations. which used ﬁve grids.5903 0.008298 0.002484 0. Four grids were used on all levels of grid reﬁnement. 6 convergence plots with FMG. Even at a Re = 100 Â 106 a good convergence rate (0. So far we have presented results for grids with moderately high aspect ratio cells. similar convergence behavior is obtained on all grids.008261 0. [7. SA Model.008254 0.001.5884 0. 5.008541 0. . Removal of round-off errors at low Mach number can be achieved by introducing a gauge pressure [30].5900 0.7 0. 10 the convergence histories on three grids is presented for Case 9. and 10 multigrid cycles on each level are included in the table as well.4 0. are displayed.2 120 CL Cycles Fig. respectively) reveals that the RK3/Implicit method is more than ﬁve times faster when Re = 100 Â 106.751) is still obtained for the RK3/Implicit scheme. In general. with just three cycles on each level of the FMG the error in these quantities is less than 0.008300 0. the dissipation can be scaled appropriately for low-speed ﬂows. 4. Convergence histories with BL model for Case 1. As for Case 1. To demonstrate the effectiveness of the present algorithm at a low Mach number we consider an incompressible airfoil ﬂow. the SLGS scheme. (a) 0 -2 -4 -6 -8 -10 -12 -14 RK3/Implicit. Except for the free-stream Mach number of M1 = 0. SA equation solved with RKI-SGS.002484 (CD)f 0. Incompressible ﬂow Since the numerical dissipation matrix of the present scheme is written as a function of Mach number (see Refs.010030 0. RAE 2822: Case 1 160 x 32 320 x 64 640 x 128 1280 x 256 0. Convergence histories with FMG for solvers of ﬂow and turbulence equations (Case 1). equations.008303 0. In 10 cycles the CL and CD are obtained to at least four signiﬁcant digits.2. there is very good agreement with the data. the ﬂow conditions are the same as for Case 9.

2 0 -2 -4 -6 -8 SA Model. o 6 M ∞ = 0. Re = 5.4 0. RAE 2822: Case 1 o 6 M ∞ = 0.002 Exp. 1280 x 256 0. α = 1.6 0.6.2 0. Rossow / Computers & Fluids 42 (2011) 13–25 21 (a) RK3/Implicit.676. grid: 368 Â 88).5 (b) 4 RKI-SGS.7 x 10 (b) 4 RKI-SGS.7 x 106 20 x 106 6 57 x 10 100 x 106 20 40 60 80 100 120 Cycles Cycles Fig. Effect of Reynolds number variation on convergence of solvers for RANS and turbulence equations (Case 1.79 . Re .5 SA Model.5 1 0 0.79 . Comparison of computed surface pressures and skin friction with experimental data (Case 1.93 . (a) Flow equations. The rate of convergence on the three grids is between 0.65. RAE 2822: Case 1 o 6 M ∞ = 0. C. (b) SA equation.C.8 1 Cf 0.93 . 8.5 x 10 0.676. (a) 0 RK3/Implicit.4 0. o 6 M ∞ = 0.4 0.002 0 0. Case 1 (b) 0. (b) surface skin friction.7 m 20 m 57 m 100 m 40 60 80 100 Log (||Res tur||2) Log (||Res|| 2) 5.3 0.8 1 x/c x/c Fig. RKI-SGS scheme used to solve SA equation. 7. (a) 0 RK3/Implicit.63 and 0. 2 0 -2 -4 -6 -8 -10 120 -12 0 SA Model.2 0.001. 9. (b) SA equation. SA equation solved with RKI-SGS.5 x 10 -4 -6 320 x 64 CL 640 x 128 CL 0.006 RK3/Implicit. which suggests a weak dependence of convergence .6 0. Incomp. grid: 1280 Â 256). Re = 6.001. Convergence histories for solvers of ﬂow and turbulence equations for incompressible case on two grids.004 Cp 0 0.2 -8 Log (||Res tur||2) Log (||Res||2) 320 x 64 640 x 128 CL -10 0 20 40 60 80 -10 0 20 40 60 80 Cycles Cycles Fig. -2 SA Model. α = 1. α = 2. Swanson. From Table 6 we see that the increase in CPU time in going from the 640 Â 128 grid to the 1280 Â 256 grid is slightly greater than a factor of four.6 0. 1280 x 256 0 -0. -2 -4 -6 -8 -10 -12 -14 0 20 SA Model.7 0.R. (a) Surface pressures.-C.7 x 10 Grid: 368 x 88 5.5 -1 -0. (a) Flow equations. α = 2.008 0. SA Model. Re = 5. Incomp. Case 1 Exp. -1.

C. Convergence histories for solvers of ﬂow and turbulence equations for Case 9 on three grids. For this case the computer time of the RK3/Implicit scheme is approximately a factor of 3.5 smaller than that of the SLGS scheme.22 R. 12.4 0.5 x 10 o 6 1 Log (||Res||2) 0. BL Model. Convergence history for Case 9 using the BL model.730. As in Case 1. Even for this transonic case these coefﬁcients are obtained to four (a) 0 RK3/Implicit.6 . RAE 2822: Case 9 M ∞ = 0.6 Cycles Fig. Table 6 Effect of mesh density on convergence of RK3/Implicit scheme (Case 9). 11. (b) SA equation.626 0.5 x o ∞ 6 2 0. Re 6. Rossow / Computers & Fluids 42 (2011) 13–25 (a) 0 RK3/Implicit. α = 2.2 120 Cycles Fig. model SA SA BL BL BL CPU time (s) 75 268 44 211 191 MG cycles 69 632 62 599 1891 Convergence rate 0. (a) Flow equations.79 . Re = 6.2 40 60 80 100 120 CL 100 120 Cycles Cycles Fig. Re = 6. as revealed in the convergence plots of Fig.8 0 -2 -4 -6 -8 -10 -12 0 50 100 150 200 -10 -12 -14 0 50 Residual CL 0.8 320 x 64 CL 640 x 128 CL 1280 x 256 CL Log (||Res tur||2) 0 -2 -4 -6 -8 -10 -12 0 20 40 60 80 Log (||Res|| 2) 320 x 64 640 x 128 1280 x 256 0. The convergence behavior with FMG for Case 9 is displayed in Fig. 10.2 150 200 100 Cycles CL 0.M SA0.79 . Scheme RK3/I SLGS RK3/I SLGS RK5/S Turb. RAE 2822: Case 9 M ∞ = 0. 2 160 x 32 SA Model.5 x 10 6 1 Model 9 (b) 4 RKI-SGS. ﬁve. Convergence histories with FMG for solvers of ﬂow and turbulence equations (Case 9).648 0. SA equation solved with RKI-SGS.79 o. The computational efﬁciency of the RK3/Implicit scheme with both the SA and BL models is given in Table 7. and 50 multigrid cycles. on mesh density. SA model solved with RKI-SGS scheme. Mesh size 320 Â 64 640 Â 128 1280 Â 256 CPU time (s) 75 308 1307 MG cycles 69 64 66 Convergence rate 0 -2 RK3/Implicit. CL 0.-C. RAE 2822: Case 9 320 x 64 640 x 128 1280 x 256 Log (||Res tur||2) Log (||Res||2) -4 -6 -8 0. 10. α RAE 2822:-Case 10 = = 2. 12. SA equation solved with RKI-SGS.984 -10 -12 -14 0 20 40 60 80 100 0.616 0.8 Table 7 Comparison of computational efﬁciency of RK3/Implicit scheme with that of SLGS and tuned RK5/S schemes. Case 9 on 320 Â 64 grid. Again.4 0. The convergence of the RK3/Implicit scheme with the BL model is similar to that obtained with the SA model. (b) SA equation.951 0.632 -4 -6 -8 320 x 64 CL 640 x 128 CL 0. RAE 2822: Case 9 320 x 64 640 x 128 1280 x 256 1 (b) 4 RKI-SGS. the RK3/Implicit scheme with the SA model is about two times faster than the standard scheme RK5/S with the BL model.4 0.73.954 0. Table 8 gives the CL and CD after three. -2 160 x 32 SA Model. -2 -4 -6 -8 -10 -12 -14 0 20 SA Model.730. (a) Flow equations. we observe a rapid evolution of the CL. 11. Swanson.648 0.6 0.C. α = 2.

Although the indirectly coupled algorithm uses local line solves (in boundary layer and wake) rather than line solves extending across the entire domain.25% of their ﬁnal values.8235 0.8227 0. it has been shown that the algorithm can also effectively solve a low-speed ﬂow. 14.01192 0.005474 23 signiﬁcant digits in just 10 cycles.2%.5 1 0 0. grid: 1280 Â 256). Mesh size 160 Â 32 320 Â 64 640 Â 128 1280 Â 256 640 Â 128 640 Â 128 640 Â 128 1280 Â 256 1280 Â 256 1280 Â 256 Cycles (FMG) 50 50 50 50 3 5 10 3 5 10 CL 0. 13 a comparison is made of the calculated surface pressure and skin-friction variations on the ﬁnest grid at three. and scalar implicit residual smoothing. we have observed rapid development of the aerodynamic (a) -1.005510 0.2 0.004 Cp 0 0. Case 9.6 0.01113 0. In addition.01108 0.01650 0. The convergence is only slightly faster by doubling the number of points in the normal direction.-C. the present loosely coupled algorithm is based on RK/Implicit schemes.01661 0. 13.01665 0.4 Cf 0.5 -1 -0. In addition.01108 (CD)f 0. (a) Surface pressures. and local line implicit relaxation. Although the computational effort required with the RKI-SGS scheme is somewhat larger than that needed with the other two schemes.C. Rossow / Computers & Fluids 42 (2011) 13–25 Table 8 Effect of mesh density on computed lift and drag coefﬁcients for Case 9.005471 0.006 3 cycles 5 cycles 50 cycles 0. it provides important advantages. depending on the ﬂow conditions. a smooth initial increase of the CFL number. even with the SA model. Concluding remarks In this work the ﬂuid dynamic (RANS) equations and the transport-type equation of the SA turbulence model have been solved in a loosely coupled manner.5 times faster than the SLGS scheme. For both the ﬂuid dynamic and turbulence equations a CFL of 1000 has been used. This scheme has been enhanced by weighting the numerical dissipative and physical diffusive terms. 1280 x 256 0.005563 0. there is no signiﬁcant deterioration in convergence. 15 the effect of varying the number of points in the line solves is shown.01748 0.R. We have demonstrated that there is no signiﬁcant slowdown in convergence of the RK/Implicit scheme when the SA model is used instead of the algebraic model of Baldwin and Lomax.005474 0.8 1 x/c x/c Fig. SA Model. It should be emphasized that the RK5/S scheme includes three evaluations of the dissipative and diffusive terms. C. Similar convergence behavior has been observed for the three schemes evaluated for solving the turbulence model equation.005500 0.8222 0.5 RK3/Implicit. Effect of number of cycles in each level of FMG on computed surface pressures and skin friction (Case 9. Furthermore. depending on the Reynolds number. are obtained to within about 0. With appropriate ordering for Gauss-Seidel. and thus. With just three cycles on each level there are bearly discernible differences on the upper airfoil surface and at the shock.01655 (CD)p 0. The distributions on the ﬁnest grid are compared with the experimental data in Fig.8238 0.005471 0.7955 0. The RK/Implicit algorithm has also been compared to the SLGS scheme when applied to both the mean ﬂow and SA equations.8213 0. the performance of the 3-D scheme for the SA model will be similar to that observed for the BL model. and 10 cycles. It is between two and 3. In Fig. than the highly tuned standard RK scheme (RK5/S) with the BL model.002 3 cycles 5 cycles 50 cycles 0 0. 1280 x 256 (b) 0.008 RK3/Implicit. this method can be implemented in an unstructured grid algorithm.01120 0.005576 0. In Fig.01654 0. symmetric line Gauss-Seidel (SLGS).8 1 -0. Thus.01655 0. By using FMG to generate the initial conditions on the solution grid. This algorithm also has the advantage that it can be readily incorporated into many existing codes that employ RK smoothers for multigrid methods.005510 0. (b) Surface skin friction.01665 0.8152 0.8227 0. 5.01103 0. For all the computations the local line solves of the RKI-SGS scheme were terminated at the jl/4 location.002 0 0. multigrid. the loosely coupled algorithm is approximately two to ﬁve times faster. On the ﬁnest grid with three cycles on each reﬁnement level the coefﬁcients have an error of less than 0. ﬁve.4 0. To enhance efﬁciency and robustness of these schemes multigrid acceleration has also been applied. the analytical stiffness due to disparity in wave speeds has been removed. and a RK2/Implicit with local line solves (RKI-SGS). where jl is the number of cells in the normal direction to the airfoil. The performance of the loosely coupled algorithm (RK3/I + RKI-SGS schemes) has been investigated by computing solutions to subsonic and transonic airfoil ﬂows. The RK/Implicit schemes applied to the mean ﬂow and turbulence equations have exhibited a low sensitivity to discrete stiffness associated with large aspect ratio mesh cells.8238 CD 0.6 0.01107 0. Three different methods have been considered for solving the SA equation: diagonally dominant alternating direction implicit (DDADI). . This is quite important since it suggests that for at least similar 3-D problems. The RANS equations have been solved with a RK3/Implicit scheme (RK3/I) and multigrid. on both the 640 Â 128 and 1280 Â 256 grids. There is fairly good agreement with the data. Swanson.2 0.01108 0. such as wing ﬂows. Case 9.01678 0.01111 0. it allows for the possibility to solve the mean ﬂow and turbulence equations in a fully coupled manner.01655 0.005474 0. SA Model.01113 0. After ﬁve cycles the computed CL and CD.8185 0.

2008.226:1784–807. RAE 2822: Case 9 o 6 M ∞ = 0.2 0. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer. 515. Turkel E. Comput Fluids 1995. Giles MB. June 1998.8 jl/4 CL jl/2 CL jl CL 0.0%. In: Sixteenth international conference on numerical methods in ﬂuid dynamics. [23] Klopfer GH. Hung CM. 409–14.5 RK3/Implicit.004 Cp 0 0. (a) Surface pressures. editors. AIAA paper 2001-1018. Koren B.4 0. Simon HD. [4] Pierce NA. A ﬂux-vector splitting method for steady Navier–Stokes equations. 1998. A survey of parallelization techniques for multigrid solvers. Lomax H. Int J Heat Fluid Flow 2007. parameter vectors and difference schemes.006 Exp. June 2005. Parallel Processing for Scientiﬁc Computing. 2006. Re = 6.6 0. p.224:365–88. [10] Spalart PR. grid: 1280 Â 256). [26] Pulliam TH. Venkatakrishnan V. 2 0 -2 -4 -6 -8 -10 -12 0 SA Model. [9] Baldwin BS.73. Brezina M.1:5–21. Improved convergence of compressible Navier–Stokes solvers. SA Model.136:425–45. Pulliam TH. Assessment of a new numerical procedure for ﬂuid dynamics. The evolution of computational methods in aerodynamics. [5] Jespersen DC. January 1978. (b) Surface skin friction. Academic Press. p. [24] MacCormack RW. Falgout RD.79 . 14. 2001. December 1983. 1280 x 256 0 -0. Pulliam T.008 RK3/Implicit. Design of optimally smoothing multi-stage schemes for the Euler equations. Tuminaro RS.188(2):593–610. MAE report 1643. Princeton. SIAM. Moreover.5 x 10 0. [18] Swanson RC. (a) 0 RK3/Implicit. [14] Van Leer B. Multigrid solution method for the steady RANS equations. Pulliam TH. Biedron RT. Numerical solution of the Euler equation for compressible inviscid ﬂuids. [2] Wackers J. Onufer JT.50(4b):1052–70. SA Model. Recent enhancements to overﬂow. CFL3D user’s manual.4 0. 1280 x 256 0. Buning PG. Convergence characteristics of approximate factorization methods. Int J Numer Methods Fluids 1988. Powell KG.6. Swanson. AIAA paper 89-1933. AIAA paper 97-0644.8:317–26. 179–201 [chapter 10]. α = 2. α = 2. Thin layer approximation and algebraic model for separated ﬂows. January 1997.24(5):553–70. New Jersey. Venkateswaran S. Tuminaro R. J Comput Phys 2007. Case 9 (b) 0. Van der Wijngaart RF. vol.73. AIAA paper 98-2824. -2 -4 -6 -8 -10 -12 -14 0 20 SA Model. NASA TM 1998-208444. [6] Venkatakrishnan V. The effect of turbulence model solution on viscous ﬂow problems.43:357–72. 15. [17] Jameson A. June 1998. J Comput Phys 2007. A study of multigrid preconditioners using eigensystem analysis. Schüller A. Apparent transition behavior of widely-used turbulence models. NASATM-2008215342. January 2001. [7] Rossow C-C.C. Turkel E. [25] Walsh PC. (a) Flow equations. Rossow / Computers & Fluids 42 (2011) 13–25 (a) -1. Parallel multigrid smoothing: polynomial versus Gauss-Seidel.002 Exp.220:879–99. AIAA paper 78-257. Agglomeration multigrid for two dimensional viscous ﬂows.8 1 Cf 0. [22] Chow E. Approximate Riemann solvers.-C. Hu J. Effect of number of points in line solves on convergence (Case 9. in just three cycles on each reﬁnement level of the FMG.4 0. J Appl Mech 1983. Rumsey CL.6 0. J Comput Phys 2007. C. Yang UM. Raghaven P. Swanson RC. Re . coefﬁcients for turbulent viscous ﬂows at both subsonic and transonic speeds. (b) SA equation. Efﬁcient computation of compressible and incompressible ﬂows. Tai C-H. A one-equation turbulence model for aerodynamic ﬂows. In: Heroux MA. Allmaras SR. MacCormack RW. J Comput Phys 2003.28:1460–71. [13] Roe PL. Case 9 0. AIAA paper 98-2821. grid: 640 Â 128). [20] Roberts TW.5 -1 -0. 1997. [8] Swanson RC.2 40 60 80 100 120 Log (||Restur||2) Log (||Res|| 2) jl/4 jl/2 jl CL 20 40 60 80 100 120 Cycles Cycles Fig. Preconditioned multigrid methods for compressible ﬂow calculations on stretched meshes. [16] Swanson RC. A diagonalized diagonal dominant alternating direction implicit (D3ADI) scheme and subiteration correction. RAE 2822: Case 9 o 6 M ∞ = 0.6 0.24 R. [11] Krist SL. Multistage schemes with multigrid for Euler and Navier–Stokes equations. June 1998. Princeton University. J Comput Phys 1997. NASA TP 3631. [15] Jameson A. An initial investigation of the effects of turbulence models on the convergence of the RK/Implicit scheme. [3] Mavriplis DJ.79 . [21] Adams M. Comparison of computed surface pressures and skin friction with experimental data. . Rossow C-C. J Comput Phys 1981. [19] Trottenberg U.5 x 10 1 (b) 4 RKI-SGS. Multigrid. Hu JJ.2 0. June 1998. Lecture notes in physics. (Case 9. Convergence acceleration of Runge-Kutta schemes for solving the Navier–Stokes equations. the lift and drag coefﬁcents for both the subsonic and transonic cases have an error less than 1. La Recherche Aerospatiale 1994. AIAA paper 2005-5229. June 1989. Oosterlee CW. References [1] Dick E. AIAA paper 98-2967.002 0 0. [12] Rumsey CL.8 1 x/c x/c Fig.5 1 0 0. Rossow C-C.

thesis. Technical University of Braunschweig. July 1999. McDonald MA. Merkle CL. Germany. [28] Cook PH. Firmin MCP. AGARD-AR138. AIAA paper 90-0016.C. AIAA paper 99-3336.R. Evaluation of preconditioning methods for time-marching systems. January 1990. Multigrid for the 2-D compressible Navier–Stokes equations. Swanson.D. . 2004. C. [30] Feng J. Rossow / Computers & Fluids 42 (2011) 13–25 [27] Allmaras SR. 25 [29] Faßbender J. Improved robustness of numerical simulation of turbulent ﬂows around civil transport aircraft at ﬂight Reynolds numbers. Ph.-C. Braunschweig. 1979. Aerofoil RAE 2822 pressure distributions and boundary layer and wake measurements.