Evaluation of Turbulence Models in Unsteady Separation

IF 1.8 Q3 MECHANICS
Fluids Pub Date : 2023-10-07 DOI:10.3390/fluids8100273
Claire Yeo MacDougall, Ugo Piomelli, Francesco Ambrogi
{"title":"Evaluation of Turbulence Models in Unsteady Separation","authors":"Claire Yeo MacDougall, Ugo Piomelli, Francesco Ambrogi","doi":"10.3390/fluids8100273","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Unsteady separation is a phenomenon that occurs in many flows and results in increased drag, decreased lift, noise emission, and loss of efficiency or failure in flow devices. Turbulence models for the steady or unsteady Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes equations (RANS and URANS, respectively) are commonly used in industry; however, their performance is often unsatisfactory. The comparison of RANS results with experimental data does not clearly isolate the modeling errors, since differences with the data may be due to a combination of modeling and numerical errors, and also to possible differences in the boundary conditions. In the present study, we use high-fidelity large-eddy simulation (LES) results to carry out a consistent evaluation of the turbulence models. By using the same numerical scheme and boundary conditions as the LES, and a grid on which grid convergence was achieved, we can isolate modeling errors. The calculations (both LES and RANS) are carried out using a well-validated, second-order-accurate code. Separation is generated by imposing a freestream velocity distribution, that is modulated in time. We examined three frequencies (a rapid, flutter-like oscillation, an intermediate one in which the forcing and the flow have the same timescales, and a quasi-steady one). We also considered three different pressure distributions, one with alternating favorable and adverse pressure gradients (FPGs and APGs, respectively), one oscillating between an APG and a zero-pressure gradient (ZPG), and one with an oscillating APG. All turbulence models capture the general features of this complex unsteady flow as well or better than in similar steady cases. The presence, during the cycle, of times in which the freestream pressure-gradient is close to zero affects significantly the model performance. Comparing our results with those in the literature indicates that numerical errors due to the type of discretization and the grid resolution are as significant as those due to the turbulence model.","PeriodicalId":12397,"journal":{"name":"Fluids","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Fluids","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/fluids8100273","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MECHANICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Unsteady separation is a phenomenon that occurs in many flows and results in increased drag, decreased lift, noise emission, and loss of efficiency or failure in flow devices. Turbulence models for the steady or unsteady Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes equations (RANS and URANS, respectively) are commonly used in industry; however, their performance is often unsatisfactory. The comparison of RANS results with experimental data does not clearly isolate the modeling errors, since differences with the data may be due to a combination of modeling and numerical errors, and also to possible differences in the boundary conditions. In the present study, we use high-fidelity large-eddy simulation (LES) results to carry out a consistent evaluation of the turbulence models. By using the same numerical scheme and boundary conditions as the LES, and a grid on which grid convergence was achieved, we can isolate modeling errors. The calculations (both LES and RANS) are carried out using a well-validated, second-order-accurate code. Separation is generated by imposing a freestream velocity distribution, that is modulated in time. We examined three frequencies (a rapid, flutter-like oscillation, an intermediate one in which the forcing and the flow have the same timescales, and a quasi-steady one). We also considered three different pressure distributions, one with alternating favorable and adverse pressure gradients (FPGs and APGs, respectively), one oscillating between an APG and a zero-pressure gradient (ZPG), and one with an oscillating APG. All turbulence models capture the general features of this complex unsteady flow as well or better than in similar steady cases. The presence, during the cycle, of times in which the freestream pressure-gradient is close to zero affects significantly the model performance. Comparing our results with those in the literature indicates that numerical errors due to the type of discretization and the grid resolution are as significant as those due to the turbulence model.
非定常分离湍流模型的评价
非定常分离是许多流动中都会出现的一种现象,它会导致阻力增加、升力降低、噪声排放、流动装置效率降低或失效。紊流模型用于定常或非定常reynolds -average Navier-Stokes方程(分别为RANS和URANS)。然而,他们的表现往往不令人满意。RANS结果与实验数据的比较并不能清楚地隔离建模误差,因为与数据的差异可能是由于建模和数值误差的结合,也可能是由于边界条件的差异。在本研究中,我们使用高保真大涡模拟(LES)结果对湍流模型进行一致性评估。通过使用与LES相同的数值格式和边界条件,以及实现网格收敛的网格,可以隔离建模误差。计算(LES和RANS)使用经过良好验证的二阶精确代码进行。分离是通过施加随时间调制的自由流速度分布而产生的。我们研究了三种频率(一种是快速的、像颤振一样的振荡,一种是强迫和流动具有相同时间尺度的中间振荡,还有一种是准稳定的振荡)。我们还考虑了三种不同的压力分布,一种是交替的有利压力梯度和不利压力梯度(分别为FPGs和APGs),一种是在APG和零压力梯度(ZPG)之间振荡,一种是振荡的APG。所有湍流模型都能捕捉到这种复杂的非定常流的一般特征,或者比类似的稳定情况更好。在循环过程中,自由流压力梯度接近于零的时间对模型性能有显著影响。将我们的结果与文献中的结果进行比较表明,由于离散化类型和网格分辨率引起的数值误差与湍流模型引起的误差一样显著。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Fluids
Fluids Engineering-Mechanical Engineering
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
10.50%
发文量
326
审稿时长
12 weeks
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信