Continuous Eddy Simulation (CES) of Transonic Shock-Induced Flow Separation
Source abstract
Abstract
Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes (RANS), large eddy simulation (LES), and hybrid RANS-LES, first of all wall-modeled LES (WMLES) and detached eddy simulation (DES) methods, are regularly applied for wall-bounded turbulent flow simulations. Their characteristic advantages and disadvantages are well known: significant challenges arise from simulation performance, computational cost, and functionality issues. This paper describes the application of a new simulation approach: continuous eddy simulation (CES). CES is based on exact mathematics, and it is a minimal error method. Its functionality is different from currently applied simulation concepts. Knowledge of the actual amount of flow resolution enables the model to properly adjust to simulations by increasing or decreasing its contribution. The flow considered is a high Reynolds number complex flow, the Bachalo–Johnson axisymmetric transonic bump flow, which is often applied to evaluate the performance of turbulence models. A thorough analysis of simulation performance, computational cost, and functionality features of the CES model applied is presented in comparison with corresponding features of RANS, DES, WMLES, and wall-resolved LES (WRLES). We conclude that CES performs better than RANS, DES, WMLES, and even WRLES at a little fraction of computational cost applied for the latter methods. CES is independent of usual functionality requirements of other methods, which offers relevant additional advantages.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Fluid Dynamics and Turbulent Flows · Computational Fluid Dynamics and Aerodynamics · Aerodynamics and Fluid Dynamics Research
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Wyoming, Laramie, WY 82071, USA
References (60)
Show source-provided references
1. Runchal, A. (2020). 50 Years of CFD in Engineering Sciences, Springer Nature.10.1007/978-981-15-2670-1 ↗
2. Pope, S.B. (2000). Turbulent Flows, Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511840531 ↗
3. Sagaut, P. (2002). Large Eddy Simulation for Incompressible Flows: An Introduction, Springer.10.1007/978-3-662-04695-1 ↗
4. Lesieur, M., Metais, O., and Comte, P. (2005). Large-Eddy Simulations of Turbulence, Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511755507 ↗
5. Large-eddy simulation: Achievements and challenges10.1016/S0376-0421(98)00014-1 ↗
6. Scale-invariance and turbulence models for large-eddy simulation10.1146/annurev.fluid.32.1.1 ↗
7. A review of hybrid RANS-LES methods for turbulent flows: Concepts and applications10.1016/j.paerosci.2019.100597 ↗
8. Turbulence modeling for time-dependent RANS and VLES: A review10.2514/2.7499 ↗
9. Properties of the hybrid RANS/LES filter10.1007/s00162-004-0116-6 ↗
10. Will RANS survive LES?: A view of perspectives10.1115/1.2037084 ↗
11. Hybrid LES-RANS techniques Reynolds-averaged based on a one-equation near-wall model10.1007/s00162-007-0067-9 ↗
12. Hybrid LES/RANS methods for the simulation of turbulent flows10.1016/j.paerosci.2008.05.001 ↗
13. Progress in DES for wall-modelled LES of complex internal flows10.1016/j.compfluid.2012.03.014 ↗
14. The state of the art of hybrid RANS/LES modeling for the simulation of turbulent flows10.1007/s10494-017-9828-8 ↗
15. Menter, F., Hüppe, A., Matyushenko, A., and Kolmogorov, D. (2021). An overview of hybrid RANS–LES models developed for industrial CFD. Appl. Sci., 11.10.3390/app11062459 ↗
16. Detached-Eddy Simulation10.1146/annurev.fluid.010908.165130 ↗
17. A hybrid RANS-LES approach with delayed-DES and wall-modelled LES capabilities10.1016/j.ijheatfluidflow.2008.07.001 ↗
18. A new version of detached-eddy simulation, resistant to ambiguous grid densities10.1007/s00162-006-0015-0 ↗
19. Ten years of industrial experience with SST turbulence model
20. Wall-modeled large eddy simulation for complex turbulent flow10.1146/annurev-fluid-122316-045241 ↗
21. Large eddy simulation with modeled wall-stress: Recent progress and future directions10.1299/mer.15-00418 ↗
22. Iyer, P.S., and Malik, M.R. (2016, January 13–17). Wall-modeled large eddy simulation of flow over a wallmounted hump. Proceedings of the AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, AIAA SciTech Forum, Washington, DC, USA.10.2514/6.2016-3186 ↗
23. Toward numerical modeling in the “Terra Incognita”10.1175/1520-0469(2004)061<1816:TNMITT>2.0.CO;2 ↗
24. “Gray Zone” simulations using a three-dimensional planetary boundary layer parameterization in the Weather Research and Forecasting Model10.1175/MWR-D-21-0164.1 ↗
25. Fagbade, A., and Heinz, S. (2024). Continuous eddy simulation vs. resolution-imposing simulation methods for turbulent flows. Fluids, 9.10.3390/fluids9010022 ↗
26. Heinz, S. (2023). A mathematical solution to the Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) dilemma. Mathematics, 11.10.3390/math11143199 ↗
27. Minimal error partially resolving simulation methods for turbulent flows: A dynamic machine learning approach10.1063/5.0095592 ↗
28. Heinz, S. (2022). From two-equation turbulence models to minimal error resolving simulation methods for complex turbulent flows. Fluids, 7.10.3390/fluids7120368 ↗
29. Remarks on energy partitioning control in the PITM hybrid RANS/LES method for the simulation of turbulent flows10.1007/s10494-021-00302-w ↗
30. The continuous eddy simulation capability of velocity and scalar probability density function equations for turbulent flows10.1063/5.0039163 ↗
31. Theory-based Reynolds-Averaged Navier-Stokes equations with large eddy simulation capability for separated turbulent flow simulations10.1063/5.0006660 ↗
32. The large eddy simulation capability of Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes equations: Analytical results10.1063/1.5085435 ↗
33. Transonic, turbulent boundary-layer separation generated on an axisymmetric flow model10.2514/3.9286 ↗
34. Large-eddy and direct numerical simulations of the Bachalo-Johnson flow with shock-induced separation10.1007/s10494-017-9832-z ↗
35. Ten questions concerning the large-eddy simulation of turbulent flows10.1088/1367-2630/6/1/035 ↗
36. Comment on “A dynamic nonlinear subgrid-scale stress model” [Phys. Fluid 17, 035109 (2005)]10.1063/1.2033107 ↗
37. An improved k-ω turbulence model applied to recirculating flows10.1016/S0142-727X(02)00148-0 ↗
38. Bredberg, J. (2001). On Two-Equation Eddy-Viscosity Models, Department of Thermo and Fluid Dynamics, Chalmers University of Technology.
39. Wilcox, D. (1998). Turbulence Modeling for CFD, DCW Industries. [2nd ed.].
40. Dynamics unified RANS-LES simulations of high Reynolds number separated flows10.1063/1.4961254 ↗
41. Ren, X., Su, H., Yu, H.H., and Yan, Z. (2022). Wall-modeled large eddy simulation and detached eddy simulation of wall-mounted separated flow via OpenFOAM. Aerospace, 9.10.3390/aerospace9120759 ↗
42. Wall-resolved large-eddy simulations of transonic shock-induced flow separation10.2514/1.J057850 ↗
43. On eddy viscosity transport models with elliptic relaxation10.1080/14685248.2016.1272758 ↗
44. Lynch, K.P., Lance, B., Lee, G.S., Naughton, J.W., Miller, N.E., Barone, M.F., Beresh, S.J., Spillers, R., and Soehnel, M. (2020, January 6–10). A CFD validation challenge for transonic, shock-induced separated flow: Experimental characterization. Proceedings of the AIAA Scitech 2020 Forum, Orlando, FL, USA.10.2514/6.2020-1309.c1 ↗
45. Openfoam Documentation (2020, January 01). Technical Report. Available online: www.openfoam.org.
46. Elnahhas, A., Agrawal, R., and Moin, P. (2022). Wall-modeled large-eddy simulation of the Sandia axisymmetric transonic bump. Cent. Turbul. Res. Annu. Res. Briefs, 31–42.10.2514/6.2023-3972 ↗
47. AUFSR+: Low Mach number enhancement of the AUFSR scheme10.1016/j.compfluid.2016.06.015 ↗
48. Reynolds number effects in wall-bounded turbulent flows10.1115/1.3111083 ↗
49. On the fluctuating wall-shear stress in zero pressure-gradient turbulent boundary layer flows10.1063/1.3555191 ↗
50. Han, X., Wray, T., and Agarwal, R.K. (2017, January 5–9). Application of a new DES model based on Wray-Agarwal turbulence model for simulation of wall-bounded flows with separation. Proceedings of the 47th AIAA Fluid Dynamics Conference, Denver, CO, USA.10.2514/6.2017-3966 ↗
51. Abdol-Hamild, K. Development of kL-based linear, nonlinear, and full Reynolds stress turbulence models, In Proceedings of the AIAA SciTech Forum 2019, San Diego, CA, USA, 7–11 January 2019.10.2514/6.2019-1878 ↗
52. A new low Reynolds number one equation turbulence model based on a k-ω closure10.2514/1.J053632 ↗
53. The scale-adaptive simulation method for unsteady turbulent flow predictions. Part 2: Application to complex flows10.1007/s10494-010-9265-4 ↗
54. Assessments of k-kl turbulence model based on Menter’s modification to Rotta’s two-equation model
55. Abdol-Hamid, K.S., Carlson, J., and Rumsey, C.L. (2016, January 13–17). Verification and Validation of the k-kL Turbulence Model in FUN3D and CFL3D Codes. Proceedings of the 46th AIAA Fluid Dynamics Conference, Washington, DC, USA.10.2514/6.2016-3941 ↗
56. Investigation of flux formulae in transonic shock wave: Turbulent boundary layer interaction10.1002/fld.1650180405 ↗
57. Navier–Stokes computations of transonic flows with a two-equation turbulence model10.2514/3.9519 ↗
58. Grid-point and time-step requirements for direct numerical simulation and large-eddy simulation10.1063/5.0036515 ↗
59. Lei, D., Yang, H., Zheng, Y., Gao, Q., and Jin, X. (2023). A modified shielding and rapid transition DDES model for separated flows. Entropy, 25.10.3390/e25040613 ↗
60. High-fidelity simulation of turbulent flow past Gaussian bump10.2514/1.J060760 ↗