Prediction Capability of Cartesian Cut-Cell Method with a Wall-Stress Model Applied to High Reynolds Number Flows
Source abstract
Abstract
The Cartesian cut-cell method is one of the most promising methods for computational fluid dynamics due to its sharp interface treatment. However, the Cartesian cut-cell method and other Cartesian mesh solvers have difficulty with concentrating grid to boundary layers. The wall-modelling of shear stress is one of the most effective methods to reduce computational grids in boundary layers. This study investigated the applicability of a wall-stress model to the Cartesian cut-cell method. In the numerical simulations of the flow around a triangular column, Cartesian cut-cell simulation with the wall-stress model adequately predicted the drag coefficient. In the numerical simulations of the flow around a 30P30N high-lift airfoil configuration, the Cartesian cut-cell simulation with the wall-stress model adequately predicts the lift coefficient. The intermittent vortex structure of the outer layer of the turbulent boundary layer was observed on the suction side of the main element and the flap. The Cartesian cut-cell method with a wall-stress model is useful for predicting high Reynolds number flows at R e ∼ 10 6 .
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Fluid Dynamics and Turbulent Flows · Computational Fluid Dynamics and Aerodynamics · Plasma and Flow Control in Aerodynamics
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Faculty of Science and Engineering Iwate University, 4-3-5 Ueda, Morioka, Iwate 020-8551, Japan
Graduate School of Science and Engineering Iwate University, 4-3-5 Ueda, Morioka, Iwate 020-8551, Japan
References (26)
Show source-provided references
1. Grid-point requirements for large eddy simulation: Chapman’s estimates revisited10.1063/1.3676783 ↗
2. Erratum: Hybrid Simulation Approach for Cavity Flows: Blending, Algorithm, and Boundary Treatment Issues10.2514/2.2129 ↗
3. An approach to wall modeling in large-eddy simulations10.1063/1.870414 ↗
4. Large eddy simulation wall-modelling based on suboptimal control theory and linear stochastic estimation10.1063/1.1389286 ↗
5. Wall-modeling in large eddy simulation: Length scales, grid resolution, and accuracy10.1063/1.3678331 ↗
6. Bose, S.T., and Moin, P. (2014). A dynamic slip boundary condition for wall-modeled large-eddy simulation. Phys. Fluids, 26.10.1063/1.4849535 ↗
7. Large eddy simulation with modeled wall-stress: Recent progress and future directions10.1299/mer.15-00418 ↗
8. Wall-modeled large-eddy simulation of transonic airfoil buffet at high reynolds number10.2514/1.J056537 ↗
9. Euler calculations for multielement airfoils using Cartesian grids10.2514/3.9273 ↗
10. Calculation of compressible flows about complex moving geometries using a three-dimensional Cartesian cut cell method10.1002/1097-0363(20000830)33:8<1121::AID-FLD45>3.0.CO;2-H ↗
11. Comparison of Immersed Boundary Method and Cut-Cell Method on Cartesian Grids—Validation of Pressure and Shear Stress Distributions on Near-Wall Region
12. Numerical Study of Oscillating Melt Flows and Its Solute Transport Driven by Electromagnetic Force around Dendrite10.2355/tetsutohagane.TETSU-2015-091 ↗
13. Takeda, Y., Ueno, K., Matsuyama, S., and Tanno, H. (2020). Coupled Numerical Analysis of Three-Dimensional Unsteady Flow with Pitching Motion of Reentry Capsule. Trans. Jpn. Soc. Aeronaut. Space Sci., in press.10.2322/tjsass.63.249 ↗
14. Numerical analysis of blood flow in the heart10.1016/0021-9991(77)90100-0 ↗
15. Immersed boundary technique for turbulent flow simulations10.1115/1.1563627 ↗
16. Immersed Boundary Methods10.1146/annurev.fluid.37.061903.175743 ↗
17. Shima, E., and Kitamura, K. (2009, January 5–8). On New Simple Low-Dissipation Scheme of AUSM-Family for All Speeds. Proceedings of the 47th AIAA Aerospace Science Meeting Including New Horizons Forum Aerospace Exposition, Reston, VA, USA.10.2514/6.2009-136 ↗
18. Accurate, efficient and monotonic numerical methods for multi-dimensional compressible flows. Part II: Multi-dimensional limiting process10.1016/j.jcp.2005.02.022 ↗
19. An improved reconstruction method for compressible flows with low Mach number features10.1016/j.jcp.2008.01.036 ↗
20. Efficient implementation of essentially non-oscillatory shock-capturing schemes10.1016/0021-9991(88)90177-5 ↗
21. Jameson, A., and Baker, T. (1983, January 13–15). Solution of the Euler equations for complex configurations. Proceedings of the 6th Computational Fluid Dynamics Conference Danvers, Danvers, MA, USA.10.2514/6.1983-1929 ↗
22. Lindsey, W.F. (1937). Drag of Cylinders of Simple Shapes, NACA Langley Aeronautical Lab.. NACA Report 619.
23. Murayama, M., Yokokawa, Y., Ura, H., Nakakita, K., Yamamoto, K., Ito, Y., Takaishi, T., Sakai, R., Shimoda, K., and Kato, T. (2018, January 25–29). Experimental Study of Slat Noise from 30P30N Three-Element High-Lift Airfoil in JAXA Kevlar-Wall Low-Speed Wind Tunnel. Proceedings of the 2018 AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference, Reston, VA, USA.10.2514/6.2018-3460 ↗
24. Pascioni, K., Cattafesta, L.N., and Choudhari, M.M. (2014, January 16–20). An Experimental Investigation of the 30P30N Multi-Element High-Lift Airfoil. Proceedings of the 20th AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference, Reston, VA, USA.10.2514/6.2014-3062 ↗
25. Sakai, R., Ihida, T., Murayama, M., Ito, Y., and Yamamoto, K. (2019, January 1). Aerodynamic Simulation of 30P30N Airfoil using Second-Order Low-Dissipation Scheme on Cartesian Hybrid Grid. Proceedings of the Fifth Aerodynamics Prediction Challenge, Tokyo, Japan.
26. Ueno, Y. (2019, January 1). Validation of Aerodynamic Noise from 3-Element High-Lift Airfoil Configulation using Cflow. Proceedings of the Fifth Aerodynamics Prediction Challenge, Tokyo, Japan.