Revision as of 08:58, 29 October 2012

Turbulent Flow Past Two-Body Configurations

Flows Around Bodies

Underlying Flow Regime 2-12

Evaluation

Comparison of CFD Calculations with Experiments

This section is organized as follows. First (Section 6.1), results of some sensitivity studies are presented and briefly discussed. These include evaluation of such effects as span-size of the domain, compressibility, time sample used for computing the mean flow and turbulent statistics, and numerical dissipation of the method used. Then, in Section 6.2, a comparison with the experimental data is shown for the main body of simulations carried out within the ATAAC project with the use of the physical and computational problem setups outlined in Section 5.

RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY STUDIES

Effect of span size of domain

As mentioned in Section 4, the aspect ratio of the CT configuration L_z/ D in the BART facility is equal to 12.4. Strictly speaking this demands carrying out simulations exactly at this value of L_z/ D and imposing no-slip boundary conditions on the floor and ceiling of the test section (see Figure 2). However such simulations would be very expensive. Considering this and, also, recommendations of the BANC-I Workshop based on simulations at different L_z/ D with periodic boundary conditions in the spanwise directions, most of the simulations in the ATAAC project were performed at L_z/ D = 3 assuming spanwise periodicity. In order to get an idea on how strong the effect of such a simplification could be, NTS conducted a series of simulations at different L_z/ D. Some results of these simulations are presented below [3].

Figure 4 compares flow visualisations from the SA DDES carried out in the "mandatory" (L_z/ D = 3) and the widest of the considered domains (L_z/ D = 16) in the form of instantaneous isosurface of the magnitude of the second eigenvalue of the velocity gradient tensor or "swirl" quantity, λ₂. The figure is reassuring in the sense that it visibly displays that the narrow-domain simulation resolves not only fine-grained turbulent eddies but also large, nearly coherent, structures and exhibits all the complex flow features observed in the visualization of the wide-domain simulation, except for the initial region of the free shear-layer separated from the upstream cylinder, where a noticeable difference between the two flow-visualizations is observed.


Figure 4: Isosurface of λ₂ = 4.0(U₀ /D ) from incompressible SA DDES at L_z = 3D and 16D.

As a result, sensitivity of predictions of the major characteristics of the flow in the wake of the downstream cylinder to the value of L_z/D turns out to be marginal (see Figure 5 and Table 4). At the same time, as seen in Figure 6, the flow features directly related to the

   details of the flow past the upstream  cylinder  (its  boundary  layers
   separation and shear-layers roll-up) vary with  /L/z//D/  variation  rather
   significantly. Other than that, Figures 5, 6 suggest that the effect of
   /L/z//D/ within different turbulence modelling approaches is different  and
   is stronger pronounced for IDDES than for DDES. These  findings  should
   be kept in mind when analyzing agreement with  the  experiment  of  the
   simulations carried out at /L/z//D/=3 with the use of different  approaches
   to turbulence representation presented in the next section.

Contributed by: A. Garbaruk, M. Shur and M. Strelets — New Technologies and Services LLC (NTS) and St.-Petersburg State Polytechnic University