2014
DOI: 10.1115/1.4027610
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Large Eddy Simulation of Transitional Flow in an Idealized Stenotic Blood Vessel: Evaluation of Subgrid Scale Models

Abstract: In the present study, we performed large eddy simulation (LES) of axisymmetric, and 75% stenosed, eccentric arterial models with steady inflow conditions at a Reynolds number of 1000. The results obtained are compared with the direct numerical simulation (DNS) data (Varghese et al., 2007, "Direct

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
15
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
0
15
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Using fully structured Cartesian meshes and a very low Courant–Friedrich–Lewy (CFL) number ( C F L < 0.1), results were slightly overpredicting turbulence for the R e t h =3500 case and more largely in turbulent R e t h =5000. In the follow‐up of this work , the same group evaluated two contemporary SGS models against the classical Smagorinsky on an idealized stenotic flow model. In this work, a counter‐intuitive conclusion is drawn, endorsing the Smagorinsky model known for its many drawbacks, including too large dissipation and wrong near wall behaviour, over the advanced SGS models like the so‐called Vreman model and σ –model .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Using fully structured Cartesian meshes and a very low Courant–Friedrich–Lewy (CFL) number ( C F L < 0.1), results were slightly overpredicting turbulence for the R e t h =3500 case and more largely in turbulent R e t h =5000. In the follow‐up of this work , the same group evaluated two contemporary SGS models against the classical Smagorinsky on an idealized stenotic flow model. In this work, a counter‐intuitive conclusion is drawn, endorsing the Smagorinsky model known for its many drawbacks, including too large dissipation and wrong near wall behaviour, over the advanced SGS models like the so‐called Vreman model and σ –model .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Underprediction of both temporal and spatial transition has been the main disadvantage of the Smagorinsky SGS model. This has been discussed by Pal et al [50] where they note that at laminar flow regions there is damping of flow instabilities, which results in a delay in transition to turbulence.…”
Section: Recirculation Zone Developmentmentioning
confidence: 85%
“…Temporal discretization is based on a mode splitting of barotropic and baroclinic pressure gradients (Backhaus, 1985). Vertical mixing is computed with a second-order k-ε closure scheme that is extended by two prognostic equations for the turbulent kinetic energy k and the dissipation rate ε (Umlauf and Burchard, 2005), and horizontal mixing using the scheme of Smagorinsky (1963). Further details are given in Holtermann et al (2014).…”
Section: The Circulation Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%