Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-5r2nc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-09T21:56:14.806Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Explicit algebraic subgrid stress models with application to rotating channel flow

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 October 2009

LINUS MARSTORP ,
GEERT BRETHOUWER ,
OLOF GRUNDESTAM  and
ARNE V. JOHANSSON
LINUS MARSTORP
Affiliation:
Linné Flow Centre, Department of Mechanics, KTH, SE-100 44 Stockholm, Sweden
GEERT BRETHOUWER*
Affiliation:
Linné Flow Centre, Department of Mechanics, KTH, SE-100 44 Stockholm, Sweden
OLOF GRUNDESTAM
Affiliation:
Linné Flow Centre, Department of Mechanics, KTH, SE-100 44 Stockholm, Sweden
ARNE V. JOHANSSON
Affiliation:
Linné Flow Centre, Department of Mechanics, KTH, SE-100 44 Stockholm, Sweden
*
†Email address for correspondence: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

New explicit subgrid stress models are proposed involving the strain rate and rotation rate tensor, which can account for rotation in a natural way. The new models are based on the same methodology that leads to the explicit algebraic Reynolds stress model formulation for Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes simulations. One dynamic model and one non-dynamic model are proposed. The non-dynamic model represents a computationally efficient subgrid scale (SGS) stress model, whereas the dynamic model is the most accurate. The models are validated through large eddy simulations (LESs) of spanwise and streamwise rotating channel flow and are compared with the standard and dynamic Smagorinsky models. The proposed explicit dependence on the system rotation improves the description of the mean velocity profiles and the turbulent kinetic energy at high rotation rates. Comparison with the dynamic Smagorinsky model shows that not using the eddy-viscosity assumption improves the description of both the Reynolds stress anisotropy and the SGS stress anisotropy. LESs of rotating channel flow at Reτ = 950 have been carried out as well. These reveal some significant Reynolds number influences on the turbulence statistics. LESs of non-rotating turbulent channel flow at Reτ = 950 show that the new explicit model especially at coarse resolutions significantly better predicts the mean velocity, wall shear and Reynolds stresses than the dynamic Smagorinsky model, which is probably the result of a better prediction of the anisotropy of the subgrid dissipation.

Type
Papers
Information
Journal of Fluid Mechanics , Volume 639 , 25 November 2009 , pp. 403 - 432
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

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

del Álamo, J. C., Jiménez, J., Zandonade, P. & Moser, R. D. 2004 Scaling of the energy spectra of turbulent channels. J. Fluid Mech. 500, 135–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alvelius, K. 1999 Studies of turbulence and its modelling through large eddy and direct numerical simulation. PhD thesis, Department of Mechanics, KTH, Sweden.Google Scholar
Bardina, J., Ferziger, J. H. & Reynolds, W. C. 1983 Improved turbulence models based on large eddy simulation of homogeneous incompressible flow. Tech Rep. TF-19, Stanford University.Google Scholar
Brethouwer, G. 2005 The effect of rotation on rapidly sheared homogeneous turbulence and passive scalar transport: linear theory and direct numerical simulations. J. Fluid Mech. 542, 305–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chevalier, M., Schlatter, P., Lundbladh, A. & Henningson, D. S. 2007 SIMPSON–a pseudo-spectral solver for incompressible boundary layer flows. Tech Rep. TRITA MEK 2007:07. KTH.Google 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
Fureby, C. & Tabor, G. 1997 Mathematical and physical constraints on large-eddy simulations. Theoret. Comput. Fluid Dyn. 9, 85–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gatski, T. B. & Wallin, S. 2004 Extending the weak-equilibrium condition for algebraic Reynolds stress models to rotating and curved flows. J. Fluid Mech. 518, 147–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Germano, M. 1992 Turbulence: the filtering approach. J. Fluid Mech. 238, 325–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ghosal, S., Lund, T. S., Moin, P. & Akselvoll, K. 1995 A dynamic localization model for large-eddy simulation of turbulent flows. J. Fluid Mech. 286, 229–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grundestam, O., Wallin, S. & Johansson, A. V. 2008 Direct numerical simulations of rotating turbulent channel flow. J. Fluid Mech. 598, 177–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horiuti, K. 2002 Alignment of eigenvectors for strain rate and subgrid-scale stress tensors. In Direct and Large-Eddy Simulation IV (Geurts, B. J., Friedrich, R., Métais, O.) ERCOFTAC Series 8, pp. 67–72. Kluwer.Google Scholar
Jeong, J. & Hussain, F. 1995 On the identification of a vortex. J. Fluid Mech. 285, 69–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kang, H. S. & Meneveau, C. 2001 Passive scalar anisotropy in a heated turbulent wake: new observations and implications for large eddy simulations. J. Fluid Mech. 442, 161–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kosović, B. 1997 Subgrid-scale stress modelling for the large-eddy simulation of high-Reynolds-number boundary layers. J. Fluid Mech. 336, 151–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kristoffersen, R. & Andersson, H. I. 1993 Direct simulations of low-Reynolds-number turbulent flow in a rotating channel. J. Fluid Mech. 256, 163–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lamballais, E., Métais, O. & Lesieur, M. 1998 Spectral-dynamic model for large-eddy simulations of turbulent rotating channel flow. Theoret. Comput. Fluid Dyn. 12, 149–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Launder, B. E., Reece, G. J. & Rodi, W. 1975 Progress in the development of a Reynolds-stress turbulence closure. J. Fluid Mech. 68, 537–566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lilly, D. K. 1992 A proposed modification of the Germano subgrid scale closure method. Phys. Fluids A 4, 633–635.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lund, T. S. & Novikov, E. A. 1992 Parameterization of subgrid-scale stress by the velocity gradient tensor. In Annual Research Briefs, pp. 27–43. Center for Turbulence Research, NASA Ames.Google Scholar
Marstorp, L., Brethouwer, G. & Johansson, A. V. 2007 A stochastic subgrid model with application to turbulent flow and scalar mixing. Phys. Fluids 19, 035107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meneveau, C., Lund, T. S. & Moin, P. 1992 Search for subgrid scale parametrization by projection pursuit regression. In Proceedings of Summer Program, pp. 61–81. Center for Turbulence Research, NASA Ames.Google Scholar
Oberlack, M., Cabot, W., Petterson Reif, B. A. & Weller, T. 2006 Group analysis, direct numerical simulation and modelling of a turbulent channel flow with streamwise rotation. J. Fluid Mech. 562, 383–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pope, S. B. 2000 Turbulent Flows. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schlatter, P., Stolz, S. & Kleiser, L. 2004 LES of transitional flows using the approximate deconvolution model. Intl J. Heat Fluid Flow 25, 549–558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sjögren, T. & Johansson, A. V. 2000 Development and calibration of algebraic nonlinear models for terms in the Reynolds stress transport equations. Phys. Fluids 12, 1554–1572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Speziale, C. G. 1985 Subgrid scale stress models for the large-eddy simulation of rotating turbulent flows. Geophys. Astrophys. Fluid Dyn. 33, 199–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tao, B., Katz, J. & Meneveau, C. 2002 Statistical geometry of subgrid-scale stresses determined from holographic particle image velocimetry measurements. J. Fluid Mech. 457, 35–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsubokura, M., Kobayashi, T., Taniguchi, N. & Kogaki, T. 1999 Subgrid scale modelling for turbulence in rotating reference frames. J. Wind Engng Ind. Aerodyn. 81, 361–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vreman, B., Geurts, B. & Kuerten, H. 1994 On the formulation of the dynamic mixed subgrid-scale model. Phys. Fluids 6, 4057–4059.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallin, S. & Johansson, A. V. 2000 An explicit algebraic Reynolds stress model for incompressible and compressible turbulent flows. J. Fluid Mech. 403, 89–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, B. C. & Bergstrom, D. J. 2005 A dynamic nonlinear subgrid-scale stress model. Phys. Fluids 17, 035109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winckelmans, G. S., Jeanmart, H. & Carati, D. 2002 On the comparison of turbulence intensities from large-eddy simulation with those from experiment or direct numerical simulation. Phys. Fluids 14, 1809–1811.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wong, V. C. 1992 A proposed statistical-dynamic closure method for the linear or nonlinear subgrid-scale stresses. Phys. Fluids A 4, 1080–1082.CrossRefGoogle Scholar