UFR 2-11 Description: Difference between revisions

From KBwiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 11: Line 11:
== Introduction ==
== Introduction ==
The high Reynolds number flow around airfoils at large  (beyond  stall)
The high Reynolds number flow around airfoils at large  (beyond  stall)
    angles of attack is a challenging CFD problem of significant importance
angles of attack is a challenging CFD problem of significant importance
    for the aerospace industry. Nonetheless, up to the late 90s of the last
for the aerospace industry. Nonetheless, up to the late 90s of the last
    century, the studies providing quantitative data on this type  of  flow
century, the studies providing quantitative data on this type  of  flow
    were, first, exclusively experimental and, second, rather limited.  The
were, first, exclusively experimental and, second, rather limited.  The
    lack of CFD studies was caused by  the  inability  of  RANS  turbulence
lack of CFD studies was caused by  the  inability  of  RANS  turbulence
    models of any level of complexity to represent such massively separated
models of any level of complexity to represent such massively separated
    flows, on one hand, and by an unaffordable computational cost of LES of
flows, on one hand, and by an unaffordable computational cost of LES of
    such flows, on the other hand.  The  limited  character  of  the  early
such flows, on the other hand.  The  limited  character  of  the  early
    experimental studies is explained  by  the  difficulties  of  measuring
experimental studies is explained  by  the  difficulties  of  measuring
    unsteady flow characteristics. For instance, the  textbook  of  Hoerner
unsteady flow characteristics. For instance, the  textbook  of  Hoerner
    [6] provides only the mean lift and drag coefficients. The same is to a
[6] provides only the mean lift and drag coefficients. The same is to a
    considerable extent true for the  later  experiments  of  Sheldahl  and
considerable extent true for the  later  experiments  of  Sheldahl  and
    Klimas (1981) [20] and of Raghunathan et al. (1988) [16] (see Table 1).
Klimas (1981) [20] and of Raghunathan et al. (1988) [16] (see Table 1).


    More systematic studies of the considered UFR, both  computational  and
More systematic studies of the considered UFR, both  computational  and
    experimental, were started towards the end of the  last  century,  when
experimental, were started towards the end of the  last  century,  when
    the growth of the computer power and emergence of appropriate modelling
the growth of the computer power and emergence of appropriate modelling
    approaches (e.g., Detached-Eddy Simulation (DES) [24,  26]  and  Scale-
approaches (e.g., Detached-Eddy Simulation (DES) [24,  26]  and  Scale-
    Adaptive Simulation (SAS) [10, 11]) and measurement techniques  capable
Adaptive Simulation (SAS) [10, 11]) and measurement techniques  capable
    of capturing unsteady flow features made this possible.
of capturing unsteady flow features made this possible.


    The key physics of this  UFR  is  predominantly  characterised  by  the
The key physics of this  UFR  is  predominantly  characterised  by  the
    unsteady,  three-dimensional,  massively-separated  wake  region.  This
unsteady,  three-dimensional,  massively-separated  wake  region.  This
    takes the form  of  a  nominally  periodic  shedding  of  large  scale,
takes the form  of  a  nominally  periodic  shedding  of  large  scale,
    coherent vortices in a vortex street pattern, which  is  overlaid  with
coherent vortices in a vortex street pattern, which  is  overlaid  with
    finer random turbulent fluctuations at higher  frequencies  and  random
finer random turbulent fluctuations at higher  frequencies  and  random
    modulation and intermittency  at  frequencies  lower  than  the  vortex
modulation and intermittency  at  frequencies  lower  than  the  vortex
    shedding frequency. A visual impression of these features is  given  in
shedding frequency. A visual impression of these features is  given  in
    Figure 1. It has been found that it is necessary to capture  these  key
Figure 1. It has been found that it is necessary to capture  these  key
    physical features in a simulation,  not  just  for  the  prediction  of
physical features in a simulation,  not  just  for  the  prediction  of
    unsteady quantities but even in order to reliably predict  steady-state
unsteady quantities but even in order to reliably predict  steady-state
    parameters such as the mean force coefficients.
parameters such as the mean force coefficients.


== Review of UFR studies and choice of test case ==
== Review of UFR studies and choice of test case ==

Revision as of 10:30, 5 September 2011

High Reynolds Number Flow around Airfoil in Deep Stall

Front Page

Description

Test Case Studies

Evaluation

Best Practice Advice

References

Flows Around Bodies

Underlying Flow Regime 2-11

Description

Introduction

The high Reynolds number flow around airfoils at large (beyond stall) angles of attack is a challenging CFD problem of significant importance for the aerospace industry. Nonetheless, up to the late 90s of the last century, the studies providing quantitative data on this type of flow were, first, exclusively experimental and, second, rather limited. The lack of CFD studies was caused by the inability of RANS turbulence models of any level of complexity to represent such massively separated flows, on one hand, and by an unaffordable computational cost of LES of such flows, on the other hand. The limited character of the early experimental studies is explained by the difficulties of measuring unsteady flow characteristics. For instance, the textbook of Hoerner [6] provides only the mean lift and drag coefficients. The same is to a considerable extent true for the later experiments of Sheldahl and Klimas (1981) [20] and of Raghunathan et al. (1988) [16] (see Table 1).

More systematic studies of the considered UFR, both computational and experimental, were started towards the end of the last century, when the growth of the computer power and emergence of appropriate modelling approaches (e.g., Detached-Eddy Simulation (DES) [24, 26] and Scale- Adaptive Simulation (SAS) [10, 11]) and measurement techniques capable of capturing unsteady flow features made this possible.

The key physics of this UFR is predominantly characterised by the unsteady, three-dimensional, massively-separated wake region. This takes the form of a nominally periodic shedding of large scale, coherent vortices in a vortex street pattern, which is overlaid with finer random turbulent fluctuations at higher frequencies and random modulation and intermittency at frequencies lower than the vortex shedding frequency. A visual impression of these features is given in Figure 1. It has been found that it is necessary to capture these key physical features in a simulation, not just for the prediction of unsteady quantities but even in order to reliably predict steady-state parameters such as the mean force coefficients.

Review of UFR studies and choice of test case

Provide a brief review of past studies of this UFR which have included test case comparisons of experimental measurements with CFD results. Identify your chosen study (or studies) on which the document will focus. State the test-case underlying the study and briefly explain how well this represents the UFR? Give reasons for this choice (e.g a well constructed test case, a recognised international comparison exercise, accurate measurements, good quality control, a rich variety of turbulence or physical models assessed etc.) . If possible, the study should be taken from established data bases. Indicate whether of not the experiments have been designed for the purpose of CFD validation (desirable but not mandatory)?



Contributed by: Charles Mockett; Misha Strelets — CFD Software GmbH and Technische Universitaet Berlin; New Technologies and Services LLC (NTS) and Saint-Petersburg State University

Front Page

Description

Test Case Studies

Evaluation

Best Practice Advice

References


© copyright ERCOFTAC 2024