1 / 129

Large Eddy Simulation in Aid of RANS Modelling

NUS Turbulence Workshop, Aug. ‘04. Large Eddy Simulation in Aid of RANS Modelling. M A Leschziner Imperial College London. RANS/LES simulation of flow around a highly-swept wing. Collaborators. Lionel Temmerman Anne Dejoan Sylvain Lardeau Chen Wang Ning Li Fabrizio Tessicini

ania
Download Presentation

Large Eddy Simulation in Aid of RANS Modelling

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. NUS Turbulence Workshop, Aug. ‘04 Large Eddy Simulation in Aid of RANS Modelling M A Leschziner Imperial College London RANS/LES simulation of flow around a highly-swept wing

  2. Collaborators Lionel Temmerman Anne Dejoan Sylvain Lardeau Chen Wang Ning Li Fabrizio Tessicini Yong-Jun Jang Ken-ichi Abe Kemo Hanjalic

  3. The Case for RANS • RANS may be something of a ‘can of worms’, but is here to stay • Decisive advantages: • Economy, especially in • statistical homogeneous 2d flows • when turbulence is dominated by small, less energetic scales • in the absence of periodic instabilities • Good performance in thin shear and mildly-separated flows, especially near walls • Predictive capabilities depend greatly on • appropriateness of closure type and details relative to flow characteristics • quality of boundary conditions • user competence

  4. Challenges to RANS • Dynamics of large-scale unsteadiness and associated non-locality • Massive separation – large energetic vortices • Unsteady separation from curved surfaces • Reattachment (always highly unsteady) • Unsteady instabilities and interaction with turbulence • Strong non-equilibrium conditions • Interaction between disparate flow regions • post reattachment recovery • wall-shear / free-shear layers • Highly 3d straining – skewing, strong streamwise vorticity

  5. Separation from Curved Surfaces - Tall Order for RANS? LES instantaneous realisations Reverse flow RANS

  6. Dynamics of Separated Flow Steady Unsteady Separation

  7. Dynamics of Separated Flow Steady Reattachment Attached Recovery

  8. RANS Developments • Desire to extent generality drives RANS research • Non-linear eddy-viscosity models • Explicit algebraic Reynolds-stress models • Full second-moment closure • Structure-tensor models • multi-scale models… • Simulation plays important role in aiding development and validation • Traditionally, DNS for homogeneous and channel flow at low Re used • Increasingly, LES exploited for complex flow

  9. The Argument for Resolving Anisotropy • Generalised eddy-viscosity hypothesis: • Wrongly implies that eigenvalues of stress and strain tensors aligned • Wrong even in thin-shear flow: Channel flow Which is wrong

  10. The Argument for Resolving Anisotropy • Exact equations imply complex stress-strain linkage • Analogous linkage between scalar fluxes and production • Can be used to demonstrate • Origin of anisotropy in shear and normal straining • Experimentally observed high sensitivity of turbulence to curvature, rotation, swirl, buoyancy and and body forces • Low generation of turbulence in normal straining • Inapplicability of Fourier-Fick law for scalar/heat transport • Inertial damping of near-wall turbulence by wall blocking

  11. Reynolds-Stress-Transport Modelling • Closure of exact stress-transport equations • Modern closure aims at realisability, 2-component limit, coping with strong inhomogeneity and compressibility • Additional equations for dissipation tensor • At least 7 equations in 3D • Numerically difficult in complex geometries and flow • Can be costly • Motivated algebraic simplifications

  12. Homogeneous Straining • Axisymmetric expansion

  13. Homogeneous Straining • Homogeneous shear and plain strain

  14. Near-Wall Shear • Channel flow

  15. Explicit Algebraic Reynolds-Stress Modelling • Arise from the explicit inversion of • Transport of anisotropy (and shear stress) ignored • Redistribution model linear in stress tensor • Lead to algebraic equations of the form • Most recent variant: Wallin & Johansson (2000) • Recent modification (Wallin & Johansson (2002/3)): approximation of anisotropy transport by reference to streamline-oriented frame of reference 0

  16. Non-linear EVM • Constitutive equation • Transport equation for turbulence energy and length-scale surrogate (ε, ω…) • Coefficients determined by calibration Quadratic Quasi-cubic Cubic (=0 in 2d)

  17. Large Eddy Simulation – An alternative? • Superior in wall-remote regions • Resolution requirements rise only with • Near wall, resolution requirement rise with • Near-wall resolution can have strong effect on separation process • Sensitivity to subgrid-scale modelling • At high Re, increasing reliance on approximate near-wall treatments • Wall functions • Hybrid RANS-LES strategies • DES • Immersed boundary method • Zonal schemes • Spectral content of inlet conditions Achilles heal of LES

  18. Realism of LES – Channel Constriction • Effects of Resolution – no-slip condition x=2h x=6h Re=21900 Distance of nodes closest to wall

  19. Sensitivity of Reattachment to Separation Δxreat=7 Δxsep 0.4 0.05

  20. Realism of LES – Channel Constriction • Effects of near-wall treatment (WFs) on 0.6M mesh

  21. Realism of LES – Channel Constriction • Sensitivity to SGS modelling

  22. Realism of LES – Stalled Aerofoil • High-lift aerofoil – an illustration of the resolution problem Re=2.2M Experiments

  23. Realism of LES – Stalled Aerofoil • High-lift aerofoil

  24. Realism of LES – Stalled Aerofoil • Effect of the spanwise extent

  25. Realism of LES – Stalled Aerofoil • Mesh 1: 320 x 64 x 32 = 6.6 • 105 cells • Mesh 2: 768 x 128 x 64 = 6.3 • 106 cells • Mesh 3: 640 x 96 x 64 = 3.9 • 106 cells • Mesh 4: 1280 x 96 x 64 = 7.8 • 106 cells • Effect of the mesh Streamwise velocity at x/c = 0.96 Prediction of the friction coefficient

  26. High-Lift Aerofoil - RSTM & NLEVM RSTM NLEVM

  27. The Case for LES for RANS Studies • Experiments traditionally used for validation • Very limited data resolution • Boundary conditions often difficult to extract • Errors – eg 3d contamination in ‘2d’ flow • Reliance on wind-tunnel corrections • Example: 3d hill flow (Simpson and Longe, 2003)

  28. New Experimental Information • Flow visualisation vs. LDV x/H  0.18 separation in oilflow x/H 0.7 attachment in oilflow x/H  2.0 attachment in oilflow Large bump#3 Separation in CCLDV data x/H  1.5 separation in oilflow

  29. The Case for LES for RANS Studies • Well-resolved LES a superior alternative • Close control on periodicity and homogeneity • Reliable assessment of accuracy • SGS viscosity and stresses relative to resolved • Spectra and correlations • Ratio of Kolmogorov to grid scales • Balance of budgets (eg zero pressure-strain in k-eq.) • Reliable extraction of boundary conditions • Second and possibly third moments available • Budgets available • Attention to resolution and detail essential

  30. LES for RANS Studies • Considered are five LES studies contributing to RANS • 2d separation from curved surfaces • 3d separation from curved surfaces • Wall-jet • Separation control with periodic perturbations • Bypass transition

  31. Study of Non-Linear EVMs for Separation Constitutive equation Quadratic Quasi-cubic Cubic (=0 in 2d)

  32. 2C-Limit Non-linear EVM • Recent forms aim to adhere to wall-asymptotic behaviour • Example: NLEVM/EASM of Abe, Jang & Leschziner (2002) • Anisotropy cannot be represented by functions of alone • Thus, addition of near-wall-anisotropy term, calibrated by reference to channel-flow DNS • Involve “wall-direction indicators”, , Kolmogorov as well as macro time scales and viscous-damping function ld

  33. 2C-Limit Non-Linear EVM • Performance of AJL model in channel flow ( and  variants) by reference to DNS

  34. 2C-Limit Non-linear EVM Performance of AJL model in channel flow ( and  variants) Turbulence energy budget  

  35. A-priori Study of Non-Linear EVMs • Quadratic terms represent anisotropy • ‘cubic’ terms represent curvature effects • Example: • Streamwise normal stress across separated zone • Accurate simulation data used for model investigation • Modelled stresses determined from constitutive equation with mean-flow solution inserted • Comparison with simulated stresses • Linear, quadratic and cubic contributions can be examined separately 2d periodic hill, Re=21500 Jang et al, FTC, 2002

  36. Highly-Resoved LES Data • Two independent simulations of 5M mesh

  37. Highly-Resolved LES Data Near-wall velocity profiles at 3 streamwise locations (wall units) Turbulence-energy budget at x/h = 2.0 IJHFF (2003), JFM (2005)

  38. Highly-Resolved LES Data - Animations U-velocity W-velocity Q-criterion Pressure

  39. Streamlines LES k- Abe et al

  40. Velocity Profiles

  41. Shear-Stress Profiles

  42. A-priori Study – modelled vs. simulated stresses Linear EVM uv uu Quadratic 2c limit EVMAbe,Jang &Leschziner, 2003 uu (quadr) uu (linear)

  43. A-priori Study – modelled vs. simulated stresses Linear EVM uu uv Cubic EVMCraft, Launder & Suga, 2003 uu (linear) uu (‘cubic’) uu (quadr)

  44. A-priori Study – modelled vs. simulated stresses Linear EVM uu uv Explicit ASM Wallin &Johansson, 2000 uu (linear) uu (quadr.)

  45. 3D-Hill - Motivation Efforts to predict flow around 3d hill with anisotropy-resolving closures LDA Experiments by Simpson et al (2002) Re=130,000, boundary-layer thickness = 0.5xh Computations with up to 170x135x140 (=3.3 M) nodes Several NLEVMs and RSTMs

  46. Topology – Experiment vs. NLEVM Computation Chen et al, IJHFF, 2004

  47. Pressure and Skin Friction on Centreline

  48. Corrected Experimental Information

  49. 3D Hill - LES • Can origin of discrepancies be understood? • Wall-resolved LES at Re=130,000 deemed too costly • LES and RSTM computations undertaken at Re=13,000 • Identical inlet conditions as at Re=130,000 • Grid: 192 x 96 x 192 = 3.5M cells (y+=O(1)) • LES scheme • Second-order + ‘wiggle-detection’, fractional-step, Adams- Bashforth • Solves pressure equation with SLOR + MG • Fully parallelised • WF and LES/RANS hybrid near-wall approximations • SGS models: Smag + damping, WALE Temmerman et al, ECCOMAS, 2004

  50. Computational Aspects - LES Re=13000 128 x 64 x 128 cells CFL=0.2 d=0.003 CPU cost: 32 x 30 CPUh on Itanium2 cluster Statistics connected over 10 flow-through times, after initial 6 initial sweeps Near-wall grid:

More Related