Reynolds Stress Relaxation Turbulence Modeling Applied to a Wingtip Vortex Flow

AIAA Journal ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 51 (11) ◽  
pp. 2643-2655 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew J. Churchfield ◽  
Gregory A. Blaisdell
Keyword(s):  
Stress Relaxation ◽  
Reynolds Stress ◽  
Vortex Flow ◽  
Turbulence Modeling ◽  
Wingtip Vortex

A Robust Implementation of a Reynolds Stress Model for Turbomachinery Applications in a Coupled Solver Environment

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Roos Launchbury ◽  
Luca Mangani ◽  
Ernesto Casartelli ◽  
Francesco Del Citto
Keyword(s):  
Reynolds Stress ◽  
Turbulence Modeling ◽  
Computational Cost ◽  
Reynolds Stress Model ◽  
Tip Vortex ◽  
Stability And Convergence ◽  
Stress Model ◽  
Robust Implementation ◽  
Flow Phenomena ◽  
The Stability

Abstract In the industrial simulation of flow phenomena, turbulence modeling is of prime importance. Due to their low computational cost, Reynolds-averaged methods (RANS) are predominantly used for this purpose. However, eddy viscosity RANS models are often unable to adequately capture important flow physics, specifically when strongly anisotropic turbulence and vortex structures are present. In such cases the more costly 7-equation Reynolds stress models often lead to significantly better results. Unfortunately, these models are not widely used in the industry. The reason for this is not mainly the increased computational cost, but the stability and convergence issues such models usually exhibit. In this paper we present a robust implementation of a Reynolds stress model that is solved in a coupled manner, increasing stability and convergence speed significantly compared to segregated implementations. In addition, the decoupling of the velocity and Reynolds stress fields is addressed for the coupled equation formulation. A special wall function is presented that conserves the anisotropic properties of the model near the walls on coarser meshes. The presented Reynolds stress model is validated on a series of semi-academic test cases and then applied to two industrially relevant situations, namely the tip vortex of a NACA0012 profile and the Aachen Radiver radial compressor case.

A ROBUST IMPLEMENTATION OF A REYNOLDS STRESS MODEL FOR TURBOMACHINERY APPLICATIONS IN A COUPLED SOLVER ENVIRONMENT

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-31
Author(s):  
David Roos Launchbury ◽  
Luca Mangani ◽  
Ernesto Casartelli ◽  
Francesco Del Citto
Keyword(s):  
Reynolds Stress ◽  
Turbulence Modeling ◽  
Computational Cost ◽  
Reynolds Stress Model ◽  
Tip Vortex ◽  
Stability And Convergence ◽  
Stress Model ◽  
Robust Implementation ◽  
Flow Phenomena ◽  
The Stability

Abstract In the industrial simulation of flow phenomena, turbulence modeling is of prime importance. Due to their low computational cost, Reynolds-averaged methods (RANS) are predominantly used for this purpose. However, eddy viscosity RANS models are often unable to adequately capture important flow physics, specifically when strongly anisotropic turbulence and vortex structures are present. In such cases the more costly 7-equation Reynolds stress models often lead to significantly better results. Unfortunately, these models are not widely used in the industry. The reason for this is not mainly the increased computational cost, but the stability and convergence issues such models usually exhibit. In this paper we present a robust implementation of a Reynolds stress model that is solved in a coupled manner, increasing stability and convergence speed significantly compared to segregated implementations. In addition, the decoupling of the velocity and Reynolds stress fields is addressed for the coupled equation formulation. A special wall function is presented that conserves the anisotropic properties of the model near the walls on coarser meshes. The presented Reynolds stress model is validated on a series of semi-academic test cases and then applied to two industrially relevant situations, namely the tip vortex of a NACA0012 profile and the Aachen Radiver radial compressor case.

Comparison of DDES and URANS for Unsteady Tip Leakage Flow in an Axial Compressor Rotor

2019 ◽  
Vol 141 (12) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yangwei Liu ◽  
Luyang Zhong ◽  
Lipeng Lu
Keyword(s):  
Reynolds Stress ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Turbulence Modeling ◽  
Axial Compressor ◽  
Small Time ◽  
Detached Eddy Simulation ◽  
Tip Leakage Flow ◽  
Time Step ◽  
Tip Leakage ◽  
Eddy Simulation

Tip leakage vortex (TLV) has a large impact on compressor performance and should be accurately predicted by computational fluid dynamics (CFD) methods. New approaches of turbulence modeling, such as delayed detached eddy simulation (DDES), have been proposed, the computational resources of which can be reduced much more than for large eddy simulation (LES). In this paper, the numerical simulations of the rotor in a low-speed large-scale axial compressor based on DDES and unsteady Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes (URANS) are performed, thus improving our understanding of the TLV dynamic mechanisms and discrepancy of these two methods. We compared the influence of different time steps in the URANS simulation. The widely used large time-step makes the unsteadiness extremely weak. The small time-step shows a better result close to DDES. The time-step scale is related to the URANS unsteadiness and should be carefully selected. In the time-averaged flow, the TLV in DDES dissipates faster, which has a more similar structure to the experiment. Then, the time-averaged and instantaneous results are compared to divide the TLV into three parts. URANS cannot give the loss of stability and evolution details of TLV. The fluctuation velocity spectra show that the amplitude of high frequencies becomes obvious downstream from the TLV, where it becomes unstable. Last, the anisotropy of the Reynolds stress of these two methods is analyzed through the Lumley triangle to see the distinction between the methods and obtain the Reynolds stress. The results indicate that the TLV latter part in DDES is anisotropic, while in URANS it is isotropic.

Passive Wingtip Vortex Control by Using Tip-Mounted Half Delta Wings in Ground Effect

2019 ◽  
Vol 142 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Anan Lu ◽  
Tim Lee
Keyword(s):  
Vortex Flow ◽  
Ground Effect ◽  
Tip Vortex ◽  
Secondary Vortex ◽  
Flow Properties ◽  
Delta Wings ◽  
Vortex Control ◽  
Physical Mechanisms ◽  
Induced Drag ◽  
Wingtip Vortex

Abstract The ground effect on the wingtip vortex generated by a rectangular semiwing equipped with tip-mounted regular and reverse half delta wings was investigated experimentally. The passive tip vortex control always led to a reduced lift-induced drag as the ground was approached. In close ground proximity, the presence of the corotating ground vortex (GV) added vorticity to the tip vortex while the counter-rotating secondary vortex (SV) negated its vorticity level. The interaction of the GV and SV with the tip vortex and their impact on the lift-induced drag were discussed. Physical mechanisms responsible for the change in the vortex flow properties in ground effect were also provided.

Turbulent Scalar Flux Models for the Mixing of Hot Gases in the Swirling Flow of High-Temperature Reactor Lower Plenums

2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dominik von Lavante ◽  
Eckart Laurien
Keyword(s):  
High Temperature ◽  
Reynolds Stress ◽  
Turbulence Modeling ◽  
Swirling Flow ◽  
Turbulence Models ◽  
Operating Conditions ◽  
Vortical Flow ◽  
Mixing Efficiency ◽  
Scalar Flux ◽  
Flux Transport

With recent progress in high-temperature pebble-bed reactor programs research focus has started to include more ancillary engineering issues. One very important aspect for the realisability is the mixing of hot and colder helium in the reactor lower plenum. Under nominal operating conditions, depending on core design, the temperature of hot gas leaving the core can locally differ up to 210° C. Due to material limitations, these temperature differences have to be reduced to at least ±15° C. Several reduced-size air experiments have been performed on this problem, but their applicability to modern commercially sized reactors is not certain. With the rise in computing power CFD simulations can be performed in addition, but advanced turbulence modeling is necessary due to the highly swirling and turbulent nature of this flow. The presented work uses the geometry of the German HTR-Modul which consists of an annular mixing channel and radially arranged ribs. Using the commercial CFD code ANSYS CFX, we have made detailed analyses of the complex 3D vortical flow phenomena within this geometry. Several momentum transport turbulence models, e.g. the classical k-e model, advanced two-equation models and Reynolds-Stress Models were compared with respect to their accuracy for this particular flow. In addition, the full set of turbulent scalar flux transport equations was implemented for modeling the three components of turbulent transport of enthalpy seperately and were compared with the standard turbulent Prandtl number approach. As expected from previous work in related fields of turbulence modeling, the differences in predicting the mixing performance between models were significant. Only the full Reynolds-Stress model coupled with the scalar flux equations was able to reproduce the experimentally observed reduction of mixing efficiency with increasing Reynolds number. The correct scaling of mixing efficiencies demonstrates that the utilized turbulence models are able to reproduce the physics of the underlying flow. Hence they could be employed for the scaling and optimization of the lower plenum geometry. The results also showed that the original geometry used for the HTR-Modul is insufficient to provide adequate mixing, and that hence a not sufficiently mixed coolant for future reactor designs might be an issue. Based on this work, an optimization for future lower plenum geometries has become feasible.

scholarly journals A Second-Order Turbulence Model Based on a Reynolds Stress Approach for Two-Phase Flow—Part I: Adiabatic Cases

2009 ◽  
Vol 2009 ◽  
pp. 1-14 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Mimouni ◽  
F. Archambeau ◽  
M. Boucker ◽  
J. Laviéville ◽  
C. Morel
Keyword(s):  
Liquid Phase ◽  
Reynolds Stress ◽  
Turbulence Model ◽  
Two Phase Flow ◽  
Turbulence Modeling ◽  
Transport Model ◽  
Phase Flow ◽  
Two Phase ◽  
Model Based ◽  
Reynolds Stress Transport Model

In our work in 2008, we evaluated the aptitude of the code Neptune_CFD to reproduce the incidence of a structure topped by vanes on a boiling layer, within the framework of the Neptune project. The objective was to reproduce the main effects of the spacer grids. The turbulence of the liquid phase was modeled by a first-orderK-εmodel. We show in this paper that this model is unable to describe the turbulence of rotating flows, in accordance with the theory. The objective of this paper is to improve the turbulence modeling of the liquid phase by a second turbulence model based on aRij-εapproach. Results obtained on typical single-phase cases highlight the improvement of the prediction for all computed values. We tested the turbulence modelRij-εimplemented in the code versus typical adiabatic two-phase flow experiments. We check that the simulations with the Reynolds stress transport model (RSTM) give satisfactory results in a simple geometry as compared to aK-εmodel: this point is crucial before calculating rod bundle geometries where theK-εmodel may fail.

Two-equation turbulence modeling of an oscillatory boundary layer under steep pressure gradient

2010 ◽  
Vol 37 (4) ◽  
pp. 648-656 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ahmad Sana ◽  
Hitoshi Tanaka
Keyword(s):  
Boundary Layer ◽  
Kinetic Energy ◽  
Pressure Gradient ◽  
Turbulent Kinetic Energy ◽  
Reynolds Stress ◽  
Turbulence Modeling ◽  
Turbulence Models ◽  
Detailed Comparison ◽  
Stream Velocity ◽  
Oscillatory Boundary Layer

A total of seven versions of two-equation turbulence models (four versions of low Reynolds number k–ε model, one k–ω model and two versions of k–ε / k–ω blended models) are tested against the direct numerical simulation (DNS) data of a one-dimensional oscillatory boundary layer with flat crested free-stream velocity that results from a steep pressure gradient. A detailed comparison has been made for cross-stream velocity, turbulent kinetic energy (TKE), Reynolds stress, and ratio of Reynolds stress and turbulent kinetic energy. It is observed that the newer versions of k–ε model perform very well in predicting the velocity, turbulent kinetic energy, and Reynolds stress. The k–ω model and blended models underestimate the peak value of turbulent kinetic energy that may be explained by the Reynolds stress to TKE ratio in the logarithmic zone. The maximum bottom shear stress is well predicted by the k–ε model proposed by Sana et al. and the original k–ω model.

scholarly journals Reynolds' Turbulence Solution

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bohua Sun
Keyword(s):  
Stress Tensor ◽  
Reynolds Stress ◽  
Velocity Fluctuation ◽  
Turbulence Modeling ◽  
Stokes Equations ◽  
Symmetric Tensor ◽  
Navier Stokes ◽  
Difficult Situation ◽  
Velocity Fluctuations ◽  
Reynolds Stress Tensor

This study revisits the Reynolds-averaged Navier--Stokes equations (RANS) and finds that the existing literature is erroneous regarding the primary unknowns and the number of independent unknowns in the RANS. The literature claims that the Reynolds stress tensor has six independent unknowns, but in fact the six unknowns can be reduced to three that are functions of the three velocity fluctuation components, because the Reynolds stress tensor is simply an integration of a second-order dyadic tensor of flow velocity fluctuations rather than a general symmetric tensor. This difficult situation is resolved by returning to the time of Reynolds in 1895 and revisiting Reynolds' averaging formulation of turbulence. The study of turbulence modeling could focus on the velocity fluctuations instead of on the Reynolds stress. An advantage of modeling the velocity fluctuations is, from both physical and experimental perspectives, that the velocity fluctuation components are observable whereas the Reynolds stress tensor is not.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document