Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T13:27:45.540Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Numerical Investigation of Flow Around a Multi-Element Airfoil with Hybrid RANS-LES Approaches Based on SST Model

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 July 2017

L. Zhang ,
J. Li ,
Y. F. Mou ,
H. Zhang ,
W. B. Shi  and
J. Jin
L. Zhang
Affiliation:
School of AeronauticsNorthwestern Polytechnical UniversityXi'an, China
J. Li*
Affiliation:
School of AeronauticsNorthwestern Polytechnical UniversityXi'an, China
Y. F. Mou
Affiliation:
School of AeronauticsNorthwestern Polytechnical UniversityXi'an, China
H. Zhang
Affiliation:
School of AeronauticsNorthwestern Polytechnical UniversityXi'an, China
W. B. Shi
Affiliation:
School of AeronauticsNorthwestern Polytechnical UniversityXi'an, China
J. Jin
Affiliation:
School of AeronauticsNorthwestern Polytechnical UniversityXi'an, China
*
*Corresponding author ([email protected])
Get access

Abstract

Accurate prediction of the flow around multi-element airfoil is a prerequisite for improving aerodynamic performance, but its complex flow features impose high demands on turbulence modeling. In this work, delayed detached-eddy-simulation (DDES) and zonal detached-eddy-simulation (ZDES) was applied to simulate the flow past a three-element airfoil. To investigate the effects of numerical dissipation of spatial schemes, the third-order MUSCL and the fifth-order interpolation based on modified Roe scheme were implemented. From the comparisons between the calculations and the available experimental result, third-order MUSCL-Roe can provide satisfactory mean velocity profiles, but the excessive dissipation suppresses the velocity fluctuations level and eliminates the small-scale structures; DDES cannot reproduce the separation near the trailing edge of the flap which lead to the discrepancy in mean pressure coefficients, while ZDES result has better tally with the experiment.

Keywords

Multi-element airfoilNumerical dissipationZonal DESHybrid RANS-LES approach
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Mechanics , Volume 34 , Issue 2 , April 2018 , pp. 123 - 134
Copyright
Copyright © The Society of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics 2018 

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

1. Choudhari, M. and Lockard, D. P., “Assessment of Slat Noise Predictions for 30P30N High-Lift Configuration from BANC-III Workshop,” 21st AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference, Dallas, USA (2015).Google Scholar
2. Peng, S. H., “Lessons Learned from Hybrid RANS-LES Computations of a Three-Element Airfoil Flow,” 21st AIAA Computational Fluid Dynamics Conference, San Diego, USA (2013).Google Scholar
3. Deck, S., “Zonal-Detached-Eddy Simulation of the Flow Around a High-lift Configuration,” AIAA Journal, 43, pp. 2372–2384 (2005).Google Scholar
4. Deck, S. and Laraufie, R., “Numerical Investigation of the Flow Dynamics Past a Three-Element Aerofoil,” Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 732, pp. 401–444 (2013).Google Scholar
5. Rumsey, C. L. and Ying, S. X., “Prediction of High Lift: Review of Present CFD Capability,” Progress in Aerospace Sciences, 38, pp. 145–180 (2002).Google Scholar
6. Meyer, M., Hickel, S., Breitsamter, C. and Adams, N., “Wall-Modelled Implicit Large-Eddy Simulation of the RA16SC1 Highlift Configuration,” 31st AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference, San Diego, USA (2013).Google Scholar
7. Terracol, M. and Manoha, E., “Wall-Resolved Large Eddy Simulation of a High-Lift Airfoil: Detailed Flow Analysis and Noise Generation Study,” 20th AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference, Atlanta, USA (2014).Google Scholar
8. Imamura, T., Enomoto, S., Yokokawa, Y. and Yamamoto, K., “Three-Dimensional Unsteady Flow Computations Around a Conventional Slat of High-Lift Devices,” AIAA Journal, 46, pp. 1045–1053 (2008).Google Scholar
9. Terracol, M., Manoha, E. and Lemoine, B., “Investigation of the Unsteady Flow and Noise Generation in a Slat Cove,” AIAA Journal, 54, pp. 469–489 (2016).Google Scholar
10. Spalart, P. R., Jou, W. H., Strelets, M. and Allmaras, S. R., “Comments on the Feasibility of LES for Wings, and on a Hybrid RANS/LES Approach,” Proceeding of the First AFOSR International Conference on DNS/LES, Reston, USA (1997).Google Scholar
11. Spalart, P. R. et al., “A New Version of Detached-Eddy Simulation, Resistant to Ambiguous Grid Densities,” Theoretical and Computational Fluid Dynamics, 20, pp. 181–195 (2006).Google Scholar
12. Menter, F. R. and Kuntz, M., “Adaptation of Eddy Viscosity Turbulence Models to Unsteady Separated Flow Behind Vehicles,” The Aerodynamics of Heavy Vehicles: Trucks, Buses and Trains, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 339–352 (2004).Google Scholar
13. Travin, A., Shur, M., Strelets, M. M. and Spalart, P. R., “Physical and Numerical Upgrades in the Detached-Eddy Simulation of Complex Turbulent Flows,” Advances in LES of Complex Flows, Springer Netherlands, pp. 239–254 (2002).Google Scholar
14. Shur, M. L., Spalart, P. R., Strelets, M. and Travin, A. K., “A Hybrid RANS-LES Approach with Delayed-DES and Wall-Modeled LES Capabilities,” International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow, 29, pp. 1638–1649 (2008).Google Scholar
15. Deck, S., “Recent Improvements in the Zonal Detached Eddy Simulation (ZDES) Formulation,” Theoretical and Computational Fluid Dynamics, 26, pp. 523–550 (2012).Google Scholar
16. Menter, F. R., “Two-Equation Eddy Viscosity Turbulence Models for Engineering Applications,” AIAA Journal, 32, pp. 1598–1605 (1994).Google Scholar
17. Godin, P., Zingg, D. and Nelson, T., “High-Lift Aerodynamic Computations with One- and Two-Equation Turbulence Models,” AIAA Journal, 35, pp. 237–243 (1997).Google Scholar
18. Xiao, Z. X., Liu, J., Huang, J. B. and Fu, S., “Numerical Dissipation Effect on the Massive Separation around Tandem Cylinders,” AIAA Journal, 55, pp. 1119–1136 (2012).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19. Chauvet, N., Deck, S. and Jacquin, L., “Zonal Detached Eddy Simulation of a Controlled Propulsive Jet,” AIAA Journal, 45, pp. 2458–2473 (2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20. Durrani, N. and Qin, N., “Behavior of Detached-Eddy Simulations for Mild Airfoil Trailing-Edge Separation,” Journal of Aircraft, 48, pp. 193–202 (2011).Google Scholar
21. Bui, T. T., A Parallel, Finite-Volume Algorithm for Large-Eddy Simulation of Turbulent Flows, NASA/TM-1999-206570 (1999).Google Scholar
22. Van Leer, B., “Towards the Ultimate Conservative Difference Scheme V: A Second Order Sequel to Godunov's Method,” Journal of Computational Physics, 32, pp. 101–136 (1979).Google Scholar
23. Jiang, G. and Shu, C. W., “Efficient Implementation of Weighted ENO Schemes,” Journal of Computational Physics, 126, pp. 202–228 (1996).Google Scholar
24. Arnott, A. D. et al., “Detailed Characterisation, Using PIV, of the Flow around an Airfoil in High-Lift Configuration,” EUROPIV2 Workshop on Particle Image Velocimetry, Springer, Berlin (2003).Google Scholar
25. Jeong, J. and Hussain, F., “On the Identification of a Vortex,” Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 285, pp. 69–94 (1995).Google Scholar
26. Choudhari, M. M. and Khorrami, M. R., “Effect of Three-Dimensional Shear-Layer Structures on Slat Cove Unsteadiness,” AIAA Journal, 45, pp. 2174–2186 (2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
27. Khorrami, M. R., Singer, B. R. and Berkman, M. E., “Time-Accurate Simulations and Acoustic Analysis of Slat Free Shear Layer,” AIAA Journal, 45, pp. 1284–1291 (2002).Google Scholar
28. Zhong, B., Scheurich, F., Titarev, V. and Drikakis, D., “Turbulent Flow Simulations around a Multi-Element Airfoil Using URANS, DES and ILES Approaches,” 19th AIAA Computational Fluid Dynamics, San Antonio, USA (2009).Google Scholar
29. Guo, Y. P., Joshi, M. C., Bent, P. H. and Yamamoto, K. J., “Surface Pressure Fluctuations on Aircraft Flaps and Their Correlation with Far-Field Noise,” Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 415, pp. 175–202 (2000).Google Scholar