Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T13:25:01.657Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Assessment of turbulence models using DNS data of compressible plane free shear layer flow

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 November 2021

D. Li Open the ORCID record for D. Li [Opens in a new window] ,
J. Komperda Open the ORCID record for J. Komperda [Opens in a new window] ,
A. Peyvan Open the ORCID record for A. Peyvan [Opens in a new window] ,
Z. Ghiasi Open the ORCID record for Z. Ghiasi [Opens in a new window]  and
F. Mashayek Open the ORCID record for F. Mashayek [Opens in a new window]
D. Li
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL60607, USA
J. Komperda
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL60607, USA
A. Peyvan
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL60607, USA
Z. Ghiasi
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL60607, USA
F. Mashayek*
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL60607, USA
*
†Email address for correspondence: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The present paper uses the detailed flow data produced by direct numerical simulation (DNS) of a three-dimensional, spatially developing plane free shear layer to assess several commonly used turbulence models in compressible flows. The free shear layer is generated by two parallel streams separated by a splitter plate, with a naturally developing inflow condition. The DNS is conducted using a high-order discontinuous spectral element method (DSEM) for various convective Mach numbers. The DNS results are employed to provide insights into turbulence modelling. The analyses show that with the knowledge of the Reynolds velocity fluctuations and averages, the considered strong Reynolds analogy models can accurately predict temperature fluctuations and Favre velocity averages, while the extended strong Reynolds analogy models can correctly estimate the Favre velocity fluctuations and the Favre shear stress. The pressure–dilatation correlation and dilatational dissipation models overestimate the corresponding DNS results, especially with high compressibility. The pressure–strain correlation models perform excellently for most pressure–strain correlation components, while the compressibility modification model gives poor predictions. The results of an a priori test for subgrid-scale (SGS) models are also reported. The scale similarity and gradient models, which are non-eddy viscosity models, can accurately reproduce SGS stresses in terms of structure and magnitude. The dynamic Smagorinsky model, an eddy viscosity model but based on the scale similarity concept, shows acceptable correlation coefficients between the DNS and modelled SGS stresses. Finally, the Smagorinsky model, a purely dissipative model, yields low correlation coefficients and unacceptable accumulated errors.

JFM classification

Boundary Layers: Free shear layers Turbulent Flows: Compressible turbulence Turbulent Flows: Shear layer turbulence
Type
JFM Papers
Information
Journal of Fluid Mechanics , Volume 931 , 25 January 2022 , A10
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Bardina, J., Ferziger, J.H. & Reynolds, W.C. 1980 Improved subgrid scale models for large eddy simulation. AIAA Paper 80-1357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barre, S. & Bonnet, J.P. 2015 Detailed experimental study of a highly compressible supersonic turbulent plane mixing layer and comparison with most recent DNS results: “towards an accurate description of compressibility effects in supersonic free shear flows”. Intl J. Heat Fluid Flow 51, 324–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barre, S., Quine, C. & Dussauge, J.P. 1994 Compressibility effects on the structure of supersonic mixing layers: experimental results. J. Fluid Mech. 259, 47–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bogdanoff, D.W. 1983 Compressibility effects in turbulent shear layers. AIAA J. 21, 926–927.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bouffanais, R., Deville, M.O., Fischer, P.F., Leriche, E. & Weill, D. 2006 Large-eddy simulation of the lid-driven cubic cavity flow by the spectral element method. J. Sci. Comput. 27, 151–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bradshaw, P. 1966 The effect of initial conditions on the development of a free shear layer. J. Fluid Mech. 26, 225–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bradshaw, P. 1977 Compressible turbulent shear layers. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 9, 33–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, C.S., Shaver, D.R., Lahey, R.T. & Bolotnov, I.A. 2017 Wall-resolved spectral cascade-transport turbulence model. Nucl. Sci. Engng 320, 309–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burton, G.C. & Dahm, W.J.A. 2005 Multifractal subgrid-scale modeling for large-eddy simulation. I. Model development and a priori testing. Phys. Fluids 17, 075111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carlson, J. 2005 Assessment of an explicit algebraic Reynolds stress model. NASA, Langley Research Center, Hampton, Virginia TM–2005–213771.Google Scholar
Carpenter, M.H. & Kennedy, C.A. 1994 Fourth-order 2N-storage Runge–Kutta schemes. NASA TM 109112.Google Scholar
Cebeci, T. & Smith, A.M.O. 1974 Analysis of Turbulent Boundary Layers. Academic Press, Inc.Google Scholar
Cecora, R.D., Eisfeld, B., Probst, A., Crippa, S. & Radespiel, R. 2012 Differential Reynolds stress modeling for aeronautics. AIAA Paper 2012-0465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, R.A., Ferziger, J.H. & Reynolds, W.C. 1979 Evaluation of subgrid-scale models using an accurately simulated turbulent flow. J. Fluid Mech. 91, 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daly, B.J. & Harlow, F.H. 1970 Transport equations of turbulence. Phys. Fluids 13, 2634–2649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deardroff, J.W. 1970 A numerical study of three-dimensional turbulence channel flow at large Reynolds number. J. Fluid Mech. 41, 452–456.Google Scholar
Duan, L. & Martin, M.P. 2011 Direct numerical simulation of hypersonic turbulent boundary layers. Part 4. Effect of high enthalpy. J. Fluid Mech. 684, 25–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dudek, J.C. & Carlson, J. 2017 Evaluation of full Reynolds stress turbulence models in FUN3D. NASA, Langley Research Center, Hampton, Virginia TM-2017-219468.Google Scholar
El Baz, A.M.E.L. & Launder, B.E. 1993 Second-moment modelling of compressible mixing layers. In Engineering Turbulence Modelling and Experiments, pp. 63–72. Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Favre, A. 1965 The equations of compressible turbulent gases. Annual Summary Report AD0622097.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Favre, A. 1969 Statistical equations of turbulent gases. In Problems of Hydrodynamics and Continuum Mechanics, pp. 231–266. SIAM.Google Scholar
Favre, A. 1983 Turbulence: space-time statistical properties and behavior in supersonic flows. Phys. Fluids 26, 2851–2863.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fujiwara, H., Matsuo, Y. & Arakawa, C. 2000 A turbulence model for the pressure-strain correlation term accounting for compressibility effects. Intl J. Heat Fluid Flow 21, 354–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaviglio, J. 1987 Reynolds analogies and experimental study of heat transfer in the supersonic boundary layer. Intl J. Heat Mass Transfer 30, 911–926.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Germano, M., Piomelli, U., Moin, P. & Cabot, W.H. 1991 A dynamic subgrid scale eddy viscosity model. Phys. Fluids A 3 (7), 1760–1765.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ghiasi, Z., Komperda, J., Li, D., Peyvan, A., Nicholls, D. & Mashayek, F. 2019 Modal explicit filtering for large eddy simulation in discontinuous spectral element method. J. Comput. Phys.: X 3, 100024.Google Scholar
Ghosal, S., Lund, T., Moin, P. & Akselvol, K. 1995 A dynamic localisation model for large-eddy simulation of turbulent flows. J. Fluid Mech. 286, 229–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ghosal, S. & Moin, P. 1995 The basic equations for the large eddy simulation of turbulent flows in complex geometry. J. Comput. Phys. 118, 24–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Girimaji, S.S. 2000 Pressure-strain correlation modelling of complex turbulent flows. J. Fluid Mech. 422, 91–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goebel, S.G. & Dutton, J.C. 1991 Experimental study of compressible turbulent mixing layers. AIAA J. 29, 538–546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gross, N., Blaisdell, G.A. & Lyrintzis, A.S. 2011 Analysis of modified compressibility corrections for turbulence models. AIAA Paper 2011-279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gruber, M.R., Messersmith, N.L. & Dutton, J.C. 1993 Three-dimensional velocity field in a compressible mixing layer. AIAA J. 31, 2061–2067.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gullbrand, J. & Chow, F.K. 2003 The effect of numerical errors and turbulence models in large-eddy simulations of channel flow, with and without explicit filtering. J. Fluid Mech. 495, 323–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haase, W., Aupoix, B., Bunge, U. & Schwamborn, D. 2006 FLOMANIA – a European initiative on flow physics modelling. In Notes on Numerical Fluid Mechanics and Multidisiplinary Design, vol. 218. Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanjalic, K. & Launder, B.E. 1976 Contribution towards a Reynolds-stress closure for low-Reynolds- number turbulence. J. Fluid Mech. 74, 593–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huang, P.G., Coleman, G.N. & Bradshaw, P. 1995 Compressible turbulent channel flows: DNS results and modelling. J. Fluid Mech. 305, 185–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hwang, R.R. & Jaw, S.Y. 1998 Second-order closure turbulence models: their achievements and limitations. Proc. Natl Sci. Counc. ROC(A) 22, 703–722.Google Scholar
Jacobs, G.B. 2003 Numerical simulation of two-phase turbulent compressible flows with a multidomain spectral method. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
Jacobs, G.B., Kopriva, D.A. & Mashayek, F. 2003 A comparison of outflow boundary conditions for the multidomain staggered-grid spectral method. Numer. Heat Transfer B 44 (3), 225–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacobs, G.B., Kopriva, D.A. & Mashayek, F. 2005 Validation study of a multidomain spectral code for simulation of turbulent flows. AIAA J. 43, 1256–1264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jaw, S.Y. & Chen, C.J. 1998 a Present status of second-order closure turbulence models. I: overview. J. Engng Mech. 124, 485–501.Google Scholar
Jaw, S.Y. & Chen, C.J. 1998 b Present status of second order closure turbulence models. II: applications. J. Engng Mech. 124, 502–512.Google Scholar
Jiménez, J. 2004 Turbulence and vortex dynamics. Notes for the Polytechnic Course on Turbulence. École Polytechnique, Paris.Google Scholar
Komperda, J., Ghiasi, Z., Li, D., Peyvan, A., Jaberi, F. & Mashayek, F. 2020 A hybrid discontinuous spectral element method and filtered mass density function solver for turbulent reacting flows. Numer. Heat Transfer B-Fund. 78, 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kopriva, D.A. 1998 A staggered-grid multidomain spectral method for the compressible Navier–Stokes equations. J. Comput. Phys. 143, 125–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kopriva, D.A. & Kolias, J.H. 1996 A conservative staggerd-grid Chebyshev multidomain method for compressible flows. J. Comput. Phys. 125, 244–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Launder, B.E. 1989 Second-moment closure: present $\cdots$ and future? Intl J. Heat Fluid Flow 10, 282–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Launder, B.E., Reece, G.J. & Rodi, W. 1975 Progress in the development of Reynolds stress turbulence closure. J. Fluid Mech. 68, 537–566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lele, S.K. 1994 Compressibility effects on turbulence. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 26, 211–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leonard, A. 1975 Energy cascade in large eddy simulation of turbulent fluid flow. Adv. Geophys. 18, 237–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leonard, A. 1997 Large eddy simulation of chaotic convection and beyond. AIAA Paper 97-0204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, D., Komperda, J., Ghiasi, Z., Peyvan, A. & Mashayek, F. 2019 Compressibility effects on the transition to turbulence in spatially developing plane free shear layer. Theor. Comput. Fluid Dyn. 33, 577–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, D., Peyvan, A., Ghiasi, Z., Komperda, J. & Mashayek, F. 2021 Compressibility effects on energy exchange mechanisms in a spatially developing plane free shear layer. J. Fluid Mech. 910, A9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lilly, D.K. 1966 On the application of the eddy viscosity concept in the inertial sub-range of turbulence. NCAR Manuscript 123.Google Scholar
Lilly, D.K. 1992 A proposed modification of the Germano subgrid-scale closure method. Phys. Fluids A 4, 633–635.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, S., Meneveau, C. & Katz, J. 1994 On the properties of similarity subgrid-scale models as deduced from measurements in a turbulent jet. J. Fluid Mech. 275, 83–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Love, M.D. 1980 Subgrid modelling studies with Burgers’ equation. J. Fluid Mech. 100, 87–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lu, H., Rutland, C.J. & Smith, L.M. 2007 Correlation and causation. J. Turbul. 8, 1–27.Google Scholar
Moin, P., Squires, K., Cabot, W. & Lee, S. 1991 A dynamic subgrid model for compressible turbulence and scalar transport. Phys. Fluids A 3, 2746–2757.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morkovin, M.V. 1962 Effects of compressibility on turbulent flows. In Mécanique de la Turbulence (ed. A.J. Favre), pp. 367–380. CNRS.Google Scholar
Nicoud, F. & Ducros, F. 1999 Subgrid-scale stress modelling based on the square of the velocity gradient. Flow Turbul. Combust. 62, 183–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nicoud, F., Toda, H.B., Cabrit, O., Bose, S. & Lee, J. 2011 Using singular values to build a subgrid-scale model for large eddy simulation. Phys. Fluids 23, 085106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Okong'o, N. & Bellan, J. 2004 Consistent large-eddy simulation of a temporal mixing layer laden with evaporating drops. Part 1. Direct numerical simulation, formulation and a priori analysis. J. Fluid Mech. 499, 1–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pantano, C. & Sarkar, S. 2002 A study of compressibility effects in the high-speed turbulent shear layer using direct simulation. J. Fluid Mech. 451, 329–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Piomelli, U., Cabot, W.H., Moin, P. & Lee, S. 1990 Subgrid-scale backscatter in transitional and turbulent flows. In Proceedings of the 1990 Summer Program, pp. 19–30. Center for Turbulence Research.Google Scholar
Piomelli, U., Cabot, W.H., Moin, P. & Lee, S. 1991 Subgrid-scale backscatter in turbulent and transitional flows. Phys. Fluids A 3 (7), 1766–1771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Piomelli, U. & Zang, T.A. 1991 Large-eddy simulation of transitional channel flow. Comput. Phys. Commun. 65, 224–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pope, S.B. 2000 Turbulent Flows. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reynolds, O. 1895 On the dynamical theory of incompressible viscous fluids and the determination of the criterion. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A 186, 123–164.Google Scholar
Ristorcelli, J.R., Lumley, J.L. & Abid, R. 1995 A rapid-pressure covariance representation consistent with the Taylor–Proudman theorem materially frame indifferent in two-dimensional limit. J. Fluid Mech. 298, 211–248.Google Scholar
Sarkar, S., Erlebacher, G. & Hussaini, M.Y. 1992 Compressible homogeneous shear: simulation and modeling. NASA, Langley Research Center, Hampton, Virginia NAS1-18605.Google Scholar
Sarkar, S., Erlebacher, G., Hussaini, M.Y. & Kreiss, H.O. 1989 The analysis and modeling of dilatational terms in compressible turbulence. NASA, Langley Research Center, Hampton, Virginia NAS1-18605.Google Scholar
Sarkar, S., Erlebacher, G., Hussaini, M.Y. & Kreiss, H.O. 1991 The analysis and modelling of dilatational terms in compressible turbulence. J. Fluid Mech. 227, 473–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scheffel, J. 2001 On analytical solution of the Navier–Stokes equations. Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden TRITA-ALE-2001-01.Google Scholar
Schmidt, H. & Schumann, U. 1989 Coherent structure of the convective boundary layer derived from large-eddy simulations. J. Fluid Mech. 200, 511–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Selle, L., Okong'o, N., Bellan, J. & Harstad, K. 2007 Modelling of subgrid-scale phenomena in supercritical transitional mixing layers: an a priori study. J. Fluid Mech. 593, 57–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smagorinsky, J. 1963 General circulation experiments with the primitive equations: I. The basic equations. Mon. Weath. Rev. 91, 99.2.3.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smits, A.J. & Dussauge, J.P. 2006 Turbulent Shear Layers in Supersonic Flow. Springer Science.Google Scholar
Smyth, W.D. & Moum, J.N. 2000 Anisotropy of turbulence in stably stratified mixing layers. Phys. Fluids 12, 1343–1362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Speziale, C.G. 1985 Galiean invariance of subgrid-scale stress models in the large-eddy simulation of turbulence. J. Fluid Mech. 156, 55–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Speziale, C.G., Sarkar, S. & Gatski, T.B. 1991 Modelling the pressure-strain correlation of turbulence: an invariant dynamical systems approach. J. Fluid Mech. 227, 245–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, K.W. 1987 Time dependent boundary conditions for hyperbolic systems. J. Comput. Phys. 68, 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vreman, B., Geurts, B. & Kuerten, H. 1995 a A priori tests of large eddy simulation of the compressible plane mixing layer. J. Engng Maths 29, 299–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vreman, B., Geurts, B.J. & Kuerten, H. 1995 b Subgrid-modeling in LES of compressible flow. Appl. Sci. Res. 54, 191–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vreman, B., Geurts, B. & Kuerten, H. 1997 Large-eddy simulation of the turbulent mixing layer. J. Fluid Mech. 339, 357–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vreman, A.W., Sandham, N.D. & Luo, K.H. 1996 Compressible mixing layer growth rate and turbulence characteristics. J. Fluid Mech. 320, 235–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilcox, D.C. 1992 Dilatation-dissipation corrections for advanced turbulence models. AIAA J. 30, 2639–2646.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilcox, D.C. 2006 Turbulence Modeling for CFD, 3rd edn. DCW Industries.Google Scholar
Wright, S. 1921 Correlation and causation. J. Agric. Res. 20, 557–585.Google Scholar
Xu, X. 2003 Large eddy simulation of compressible turbulent pipe flow with heat transfer. PhD Thesis, Iowa State University, Iowa.Google Scholar
Yoder, D.A. 2003 Initial evaluation of an algebraic Reynolds stress model for compressible turbulent shear flows. AIAA Paper 2003-548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zang, T.A., Dahlburg, R.B. & Dahlburg, J.P. 1992 Direct and large-eddy simulations of three-dimensional compressible Navier–Stokes turbulence. Phys. Fluids A 4, 127–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zeman, O. 1990 Dilatation dissipation: the concept and application in modeling compressible mixing layers. Phys. Fluids A 2, 178–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, Y.S., Bi, W.T., Hussain, F. & She, Z.S. 2014 A generalized Reynolds analogy for compressible wall-bounded turbulent fows. J. Fluid Mech. 739, 392–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar