Direct and Large-Eddy Simulation VIII

Kuerten, Johannes G.M.; Geurts, Bernardus J.; Armenio, Vincenzo; Fröhlich, Jochen

doi:10.1007/978-94-007-2482-2

Cited by 10 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…of viscosity, boundary conditions, and large-scale structures are not important. Also, in wall-bounded flows without buoyancy effects, a production range should also be present, following a power-law scaling of −1 (Gioia et al, 2010;Katul et al, 2012;Calaf et al, 2013). Figure 9 shows the energy spectra of the streamwise velocity obtained using the different dealiasing methods.…”

Section: Sgs Stressmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of dealiasing schemes in large-eddy simulation of neutrally stratified atmospheric flows

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Aliasing errors arise in the multiplication of partial sums, such as those encountered when numerically solving the Navier–Stokes equations, and can be detrimental to the accuracy of a numerical solution. In this work, a performance and cost analysis is proposed for widely used dealiasing schemes in large-eddy simulation, focusing on a neutrally stratified, pressure-driven atmospheric boundary-layer flow. Specifically, the exact 3∕2 rule, the Fourier truncation method, and a high-order Fourier smoothing method are intercompared. Tests are performed within a newly developed mixed pseudo-spectral finite differences large-eddy simulation code, parallelized using a two-dimensional pencil decomposition. A series of simulations are performed at varying resolution, and key flow statistics are intercompared among the considered runs and dealiasing schemes. The three dealiasing methods compare well in terms of first- and second-order statistics for the considered cases, with modest local departures that decrease as the grid stencil is reduced. Computed velocity spectra using the 3∕2 rule and the FS method are in good agreement, whereas the FT method yields a spurious energy redistribution across wavenumbers that compromises both the energy-containing and inertial sublayer trends. The main advantage of the FS and FT methods when compared to the 3∕2 rule is a notable reduction in computational cost, with larger savings as the resolution is increased (15 % for a resolution of 1283, up to a theoretical 30 % for a resolution of 20483).

show abstract

Section: Sgs Stressmentioning

confidence: 99%