A geometry independent near-wall Reynolds-stress closure

So, R. M. C.; Yuan, Shouqi

doi:10.1016/s0020-7225(98)00027-5

Cited by 23 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The sensitivity of the results on the turbulence model used, for this particular test case, has been highlighted by several previous studies on turbulence modelling [25,82,95]. These studies have not only confirmed the inadequacy of closures using the Boussinesq assumption, but have also highlighted the importance of both redistribution ( i j ;…”

Section: Application To 3-d Developing Anisotropy-driven Turbulent Flowsupporting

confidence: 52%

“…The experimental configuration [83,95] consists of a square duct, with quasi-incompressible (inlet Mach number at centerline M CL i = 0.0516) developing turbulent flow at bulk Reynolds number Re B = 250 000 (Re B =ū B D h˘ −1 , whereū B is the bulk velocity, D h = 2a is the hydraulic diameter of the duct and˘ is the kinematic viscosity). Preliminary tests showed that very fine grids were needed to obtain grid-converged results.…”

Section: Application To 3-d Developing Anisotropy-driven Turbulent Flowmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Implicit meanflow–multigrid algorithms for Reynolds stress model computation of 3‐D anisotropy‐driven and compressible flows

Gerolymos

Vallet

2008

Numerical Methods in Fluids

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARYThe present paper investigates the multigrid (MG) acceleration of compressible Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes computations using Reynolds-stress model 7-equation turbulence closures, as well as lowerlevel 2-equation models. The basic single-grid SG algorithm combines upwind-biased discretization with a subiterative local-dual-time-stepping time-integration procedure. MG acceleration, using characteristic MG restriction and prolongation operators, is applied on meanflow variables only (MF-MG), turbulence variables being simply injected onto coarser grids. A previously developed non-time-consistent (for steady flows) full-approximation-multigrid (s-MG) is assessed for 3-D anisotropy-driven and/or separated flows, which are dominated by the convergence of turbulence variables. Even for these difficult test cases CPU-speed-ups r CPUSUP ∈[3, 5] are obtained. Alternative, potentially time-consistent approaches (unsteady u-MG), where MG acceleration is applied at each subiteration, are also examined, using different subiterative strategies, MG cycles, and turbulence models. For 2-D shock wave/turbulent boundary layer interaction, the fastest s-MG approach, with a V(2, 0) sawtooth cycle, systematically yields CPU-speed-ups of 5± 1 2 , quasi-independent of the particular turbulence closure used.

show abstract

Section: Application To 3-d Developing Anisotropy-driven Turbulent Flowsupporting

confidence: 52%

Section: Application To 3-d Developing Anisotropy-driven Turbulent Flowmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implicit meanflow–multigrid algorithms for Reynolds stress model computation of 3‐D anisotropy‐driven and compressible flows

Gerolymos

Vallet

2008

Numerical Methods in Fluids

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several authors [48,[56][57][58] have shown, using DNS data [59], that these two terms ( i j1 and ε i j ) require separate closures especially close to the wall. However, this simplified form (Equation (17)) is numerically very stable at the wall.…”

Section: The Launder-shima-sharma Rsm (Lss Rsm)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thus, the anisotropic part of the dissipation tensor is taken into account through the coefficient C 1 , which is a function of the turbulent Reynolds-number Re T and the anisotropy tensor invariants A 2 and A 3 (Equation (18)). Several authors [48,[56][57][58] have shown, using DNS data [59], that these two terms ( i j1 and ε i j ) require separate closures especially close to the wall. However, this simplified form (Equation (17)) is numerically very stable at the wall.…”

Section: The Launder-shima-sharma Rsm (Lss Rsm)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Reynolds‐stress modelling of M = 2.25 shock‐wave/turbulent boundary‐layer interaction

Vallet

2007

Numerical Methods in Fluids

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARY M = 2.25 shock-wave/turbulent-boundary-layer interactions over a compression ramp for several angles (8, 13 and 18 • ) at Reynolds-number Re 0 = 7 × 10 3 were simulated with three low-Reynolds secondmoment closures and a linear low-Reynolds standard k-ε model. A detailed assessment of the turbulence closures by comparison with both mean-flow and turbulent experimental quantities is presented. The Reynolds-stress model which is wall-topology free and which uses an optimized redistribution closure, is in good agreement with experimental data both for wall-pressure and mean-velocity profiles. Detailed analysis of three components of the Reynolds-stress tensor (comparison with measurements and transport-equation budgets) provides a critical evaluation of full Reynolds-stress models for the separated supersonic compression ramp. The discrepancy observed in the shock-wave foot region, between computations and measurements for the Reynolds-stresses profiles, could be explained by considering the experimental shock-wave oscillation and directions for future modelling work are indicated.

show abstract

“…The Gessner and Emery [39] test-case is further complicated by the streamwise evolution of the very thin inflow boundary-layers, on the duct walls, which grow streamwise, until they interact and fill the entire duct, resulting in fully-developed (streamwise-invariant in the mean) flow. Previous RSM computations of this flow [65,24,69] illustrated the difficulty to correctly predict the streamwise development of the centerline velocityū CL , but also, near the duct's exit where the flow reaches a fully-developed state, the underestimation of the secondary velocity along the corner bisector (diagonal); this underestimation of the secondary-flow velocities is also observed in fully-developed flow predictions [57]. Notice that, in fully-developed turbulent square-duct flow, secondary "velocities · · · are found to be smaller than the root-mean-square turbulent velocity" [7, p. 376], and, furthermore, "secondaryflow velocities, when nondimensionalized with either the bulk velocity (ū B ) or the axial mean-flow velocity at the channel centerline (ū CL ) decrease for an increase in Reynolds number" [40, p. 689].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%