Computational Fluid Dynamics

• Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) is a powerful

analytical tool.
• Is a third approach for analysis besides experimental
approach and theoretical approach.
• CFD compliments theory and experiments and is not
primarily intended to replace these.
• CFD is currently a commonly used research tool.
• CFD is an essential component of the design, analysis
and optimization cycle.
 Computational Fluid Dynamics
• There are various levels of CFD analysis
• Simple Euler (potential flow) solutions
• 2-D/axisymmetric Navier-Stokes solution
• 3-D Navier-Stokes solution
• Reynolds Averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) and Unsteady
RANS (URANS)
• Large Eddy Simulation (LES)
• Direct Numerical Simulation (DNS)
• CFD analysis could also be
• Steady or unsteady
• Incompressible or compressible
• Laminar or turbulent
• Internal or external flow
 Computational Fluid Dynamics

• CFD involves solving the fundamental

governing equations of fluid flow:
• Conservation of mass
• Conservation of momentum
• Conservation of energy
• Equation of state
• Species conservation (reacting flows)
3D Navier-Stokes Equations

https://www.grc.nasa.gov/www/k12/airplane/nseqs.html
 Computational Fluid Dynamics

• Steps in CFD solution

• CAD model
• Setting up the domain
• Discretisation of the domain in space and time (for
unsteady solution)
• Defining boundary conditions
• Solving the appropriate governing equations for the
domain on the discretised points
• Post-processing and analysis of the converged
solution.
 Computational Fluid Dynamics

• Turbomachinery: complex shear flows

• Shear layers on rotating surfaces
• Shear layers developing on curved surfaces
• Separated flows: shock-boundary layer interaction,
corner separation…
• Swirling flows and vortices
• Interacting boundary layers
Computational Fluid Dynamics

Tucker, Prog. Aero Sc. 2011

Computational Fluid Dynamics

LES of turbine cooling zones

Tucker, Prog. Aero Sc. 2011

 Computational Fluid Dynamics

• Challenges in turbomachinery CFD

• Grid generation
• Complex geometry
• Rotating domain
• Flow is 3-D, highly unsteady, rotating,
and turbulent
• Capturing the losses and other
viscous effects
• Turbulence modelling
• Fluid-structure interactions
 Computational Fluid Dynamics

• Types of simulations
• 2D, quasi-3D, 3D
• 2D
• Conceptual design phase
• Long blades/vanes (LP turbines)
• Reasonable results
• Quasi-3D
• Area of flow path changes
• Extra source terms for acceleration/deceleration or
boundary layer growth
 Computational Fluid Dynamics

• Types of simulations
• 3D
• True geometry required
• Simulate secondary flows, shock locations
• End wall boundary layers
• Transient or stationery
• Stationery simulations more common
• Transient: flow unsteadiness, vortex
shedding, wake interaction with rotors
Computational Fluid Dynamics

Tucker, Prog. Aero Sc. 2011

Computational Fluid Dynamics
 Single passage domain

Typical flow domain with the boundaries

Full annulus domain and grids
 Grid Generation

• Grid/mesh
• Structured, unstructured and hybrid grids
• Structured grid
• More suited for well-defined geometries
• More difficult to generate
• Easier to control near-wall clustering of cells
• Unstructured grid
• Primarily intended for complex geometries
• Easier to generate
• Not much control over the near-wall clustering of cells
• Easily automated
 Grid Generation

Blocks

Structured grid with multiple blocks

Grid Generation

Unstructured grid
 Grid Generation

• Multi-block structured grid

• In order to generate structured grid over curved
surfaces, multiple blocks need to be defined.
• Interface of the blocks need to be carefully
managed.
• Grid topology needs to be appropriately defined.
• The grid topology also needs to account for the
change in geometry of the blade from hub to tip.
 Grid Generation

• Topology
• Is a structure off blocks that acts as a framework
for placing mesh elements.
• Blocks are laid out without gaps with shared edges
and corners.
• Blocks contain same number of elements along
each side.
• Is usually invariant from hub to tip.
• Can be edited on 2-D layers from hub to tip
sections.
• Number of blocks will dictate the skewness of the
grid elements.
 Grid Generation

• Grid topology schemes

• O-grid:
• Usually used around the blade by
forming a continuous loop around it
• Yields excellent boundary layer
resolution
• Gives good control over the y+
values that needs to be tightly
monitored
• Provides near orthogonal elements
on the blades
Grid Generation

O-grid topology
 Grid Generation

• J-grid:
• Usually used near leading and trailing
edges
• Wraps up in opposite directions at the
leading and trailing edges
• H-grid:
• Tends to complete the meshing by
adding some blocks in an unstructured
manner
• The structured blocks extend from
upstream of the LE, downstream of
the TE and between the blades and
the periodic surface.
 Grid Generation

J-grid topology H-grid topology

 Grid Generation

• Other topology options include C-grid and L-grid.

• These are also often used at the leading and trailing
edges.
• All the above grid topologies are used along with an
O-grid for proper resolution of the boundary layer.
• Proper resolution of the leading and trailing edge radii
are important.
• Establishing grid-independence or grid-insensitivity of
the results is now a standard practice.
 Let-38

Grid Generation

L-grid topology C-grid topology

 Boundary conditions

• To capture the flow physics correctly, the

boundary conditions must be set
appropriately.
• Quality of the solutions is a strong
function of the boundary conditions.
• Turbomachinery flows
• Inlet boundary
• Exit boundary
• Periodic boundary
• Walls or surfaces
 Boundary conditions

Typical flow domain with the boundaries

 Boundary conditions
• Inlet boundary conditions
• Depends upon the application
• Flow conditions (incompressible or
compressible)
• Total pressure, total temperature,
velocity components/profile (most
commonly used)
• There are other forms of specifying
the inlet boundary conditions: velocity
inlet, mass flow inlet etc.: not
commonly used due to several
limitations.
 Boundary conditions
• Exit boundary conditions
• Exit static pressure to achieve the required mass
flow
• It is also possible to specify a static pressure
distribution at the exit domain.
• Alternatively, mass flow can be directly specified at
the exit.
• For incompressible flows, using either of the two
does not affect the results.
• However, for compressible flows, static pressure
outlet condition yields better results.
 Boundary conditions

• For single passage simulations, periodic boundary

conditions are used for simulating the effect of a blade
row.
• The domain must be appropriately chosen to ensure
that periodic boundary conditions are indeed valid.
• On surfaces (blade, hub and shroud), no-slip and
adiabatic conditions are usually used.
• In turbines with hot gases present, the adiabatic
condition may be replaced by constant heat flux
condition.
 Turbulence models

• Reynolds averaging of the Navier-Stokes equation can

be expressed as time, space or ensemble.
• The main idea of Reynolds averaging is to decompose
the mean and fluctuating components: Reynolds
decomposition.
• However this introduces additional variables for which
there are no available relations: closure problem.
• Modelling this is a major challenge in CFD even today.
 Turbulence Models

• Zero equation or algebraic eddy viscosity model

• Use an algebraic form for the turbulent
stresses
• Valid for simple 2D shear flows
• Mild pressure gradient
• 3D boundary layers with small cross flows
• Not accurate for flows with pressure or
turbulence driven secondary flows
• Cannot predict shock-induced separated flows
 Turbulence Models

• One equation model: Spalart Allmaras

• Employs an additional PDE for a turbulence
velocity scale
• Usually used in design-iteration type
simulations
• Popular in recent times due to inherent
problems with more refined models
• Very robust models, rarely produce
completely unphysical results
 Turbulence Models

• Two equation models:Κ-ε,Κ-ω models

• One PDE for turbulence length scale and one PDE for
velocity scale
• Good for 2D flows with moderate pressure gradients
• Not satisfactory for flows with rotation, strong swirl,
and separated flows
• Modified two equation models: improved results
• Modified via ARSM
• Coupled Κ-ε/ARSM
• Realizable Κ-ε
 Turbulence Models

• Near wall treatment

• On-design flows without large separated regions,
wall function model close to the wall
• Off-design, low Re model, over production of
turbulent KE must be checked
• Menter’s SST Κ-ω and Durbin’s v2f
• Works well for adverse pressure gradients and
separating flows
 Transition prediction

• Natural and by-pass transition

• Turbomachinery flows usually involve by-pass
transitions: wakes, vortices etc
• Separate transition model may be required
• Common models: Abu-Ghannam and Shaw (1980),
Mayle (1991), Menter (2003)
Hah and Romeo, ISABE 2017
Instantaneous axial velocity distribution at mid-span from URANS, 100% rotor speed

Hah and Romeo, ISABE 2017

Instantaneous axial velocity distribution at mid-span from LES, 100% rotor speed
Hah and Romeo, ISABE 2017
Comparison of time-averaged wake profile at mid-span, 61.7% rotor speed

Hah and Romeo, ISABE 2017

Comparison of vorticity distribution at mid-span, 61.7% rotor speed

Hah and Romeo, ISABE 2017

 Aeroelasticity

• Blade flutter, inflow distortion effect on fan

blades
• Fluid structure coupling
• Calls for real-time FEM-CFD interface
– Grid interpolation between FEM and CFD
– Grid deformation under aerodynamic loads
– Efficient transfer to data between FEM and CFD
 Computing requirements

• 3D compute requirements
• Steady computations
• 1 blade 0.5 – 1 M cells (1-2 CPU hours)
• 1 stage 1-2 M cells (3 CPU hours)
• Unsteady computations
• 1 stage 50 – 100 M cells (20000 CPU hours)
• 1 component (5 stages) 500 M cells (0.1 M CPU hours)!
 Errors and uncertainties

• Sources
– Type of simulation Systematic
procedure for
– Geometry errors
estimating these
– Modeling errors errors like say the
– Boundary ASME / AIAA
conditions standards for
– Numerical errors experimental
• Discretization uncertainty
• Round-off analysis
• Convergence