Comparative Study of Turbulent Inflow Techniques for High-Fidelity Simulations

被引:0
|
作者
Schwartz, Matthew J. [1 ]
Garmann, Daniel J. [1 ]
机构
[1] US Air Force, Aerodynam Technol Branch, Res Lab, Wright Patterson AFB, OH 45433 USA
关键词
Signal Processing; Freestream Mach Number; Skin Friction Coefficient; Compressible Flow; Reynolds Averaged Navier Stokes; Computational Fluid Dynamics; Supersonic Boundary Layers; Wave Number; Fluid Flow Properties; Friction Coefficient; LARGE-EDDY SIMULATION; DIRECT NUMERICAL-SIMULATION; FINITE-DIFFERENCE SCHEMES; BOUNDARY-LAYER; GENERATION; IMPLICIT; LENGTH;
D O I
10.2514/1.J064785
中图分类号
V [航空、航天];
学科分类号
08 ; 0825 ;
摘要
Turbulence generation has received considerable attention as high-fidelity simulations have become more tractable for a widening range of applications. Many inflow strategies have emerged to reduce the numerical expense of generating equilibrium turbulent profiles, but ambiguity exists in the appropriate turbulent-inflow condition for each use case. This work aids in properly selecting turbulent inflows by comparing two common techniques: a synthetic digital filtering method and a body-force-based trip. The inflows are rigorously compared to identify parameters sensitive to the turbulence generation. A supersonic case with a Mach number of 1.5 and a subsonic case with a Mach number of 0.2 are considered. For both flow regimes, the skin-friction coefficient using the trip recovers faster than the digital filter. Conversely, the shape factor predictions recover faster for the digital filter than the trip. The results indicate that selecting the optimal inflow turbulence strategy is a multifaceted problem with many interrelated effects of flow conditions and desired target parameters. The numerical framework in which the technique is embedded is equally important. Therefore, code-specific comparisons like those provided here are a crucial benchmark for informed selection and guidance of turbulent inflows.
引用
收藏
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] HPC Requirements of High-Fidelity Flow Simulations for Aerodynamic Applications
    Probst, Axel
    Knopp, Tobias
    Grabe, Cornelia
    Jaegerskuepper, Jens
    EURO-PAR 2019: PARALLEL PROCESSING WORKSHOPS, 2020, 11997 : 375 - 387
  • [32] Enabling High-Fidelity Neutron Transport Simulations on Petascale Architectures
    Kaushik, Dinesh
    Smith, Micheal
    Wollaber, Allan
    Smith, Barry
    Siegel, Andrew
    Yang, Won Sik
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE CONFERENCE ON HIGH PERFORMANCE COMPUTING NETWORKING, STORAGE AND ANALYSIS, 2009,
  • [33] A formulation for high-fidelity simulations of pool boiling in low gravity
    Dhruv, Akash
    Balaras, Elias
    Riaz, Amir
    Kim, Jungho
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MULTIPHASE FLOW, 2019, 120
  • [34] High-fidelity simulations of submerged turbulence interacting with a free surface
    Calado, Andre
    Balaras, Elias
    PHYSICAL REVIEW FLUIDS, 2024, 9 (11):
  • [35] HPC-enabling technologies for high-fidelity combustion simulations
    Mira, Daniel
    Perez-Sanchez, Eduardo J.
    Borrell, Ricard
    Houzeaux, Guillaume
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMBUSTION INSTITUTE, 2023, 39 (04) : 5091 - 5125
  • [36] High-fidelity simulations of unsteady flow through turbopumps and flowliners
    Kiris, Cetin C.
    Kwak, Dochan
    Chan, William
    Housman, Jeffrey A.
    COMPUTERS & FLUIDS, 2008, 37 (05) : 536 - 546
  • [37] Challenges of Fully-Coupled High-Fidelity Ditching Simulations
    Mueller, Maximilian
    Woidt, Malte
    Haupt, Matthias
    Horst, Peter
    AEROSPACE, 2019, 6 (02)
  • [38] Editorial: Data-driven modelling and high-fidelity simulations
    Michelassi, Vittorio
    He, Li
    JOURNAL OF THE GLOBAL POWER AND PROPULSION SOCIETY, 2021,
  • [39] Applying social norms to high-fidelity pedestrian and traffic simulations
    Robol, Marco
    Giorgini, Paolo
    Busetta, Paolo
    IEEE SECOND INTERNATIONAL SMART CITIES CONFERENCE (ISC2 2016), 2016, : 426 - 431
  • [40] EXTRACTION OF DROPLET GENEALOGIES FROM HIGH-FIDELITY ATOMIZATION SIMULATIONS
    Rubel, Clark
    Owkes, Mark
    ATOMIZATION AND SPRAYS, 2019, 29 (08) : 709 - 739