Journal article Open Access

Evaluating the Capability of the Flux-Limiter Schemes in Capturing the Turbulence Structures in a Fully Developed Channel Flow

Mohamed Elghorab; Vendra C. Madhav Rao; Jennifer X. Wen

Turbulence modelling is still evolving, and efforts are on to improve and develop numerical methods to simulate the real turbulence structures by using the empirical and experimental information. The monotonically integrated large eddy simulation (MILES) is an attractive approach for modelling turbulence in high Re flows, which is based on the solving of the unfiltered flow equations with no explicit sub-grid scale (SGS) model. In the current work, this approach has been used, and the action of the SGS model has been included implicitly by intrinsic nonlinear high-frequency filters built into the convection discretization schemes. The MILES solver is developed using the opensource CFD OpenFOAM libraries. The role of flux limiters schemes namely, Gamma, superBee, van-Albada and van-Leer, is studied in predicting turbulent statistical quantities for a fully developed channel flow with a friction Reynolds number, ReT = 180, and compared the numerical predictions with the well-established Direct Numerical Simulation (DNS) results for studying the wall generated turbulence. It is inferred from the numerical predictions that Gamma, van-Leer and van-Albada limiters produced more diffusion and overpredicted the velocity profiles, while superBee scheme reproduced velocity profiles and turbulence statistical quantities in good agreement with the reference DNS data in the streamwise direction although it deviated slightly in the spanwise and normal to the wall directions. The simulation results are further discussed in terms of the turbulence intensities and Reynolds stresses averaged in time and space to draw conclusion on the flux limiter schemes performance in OpenFOAM context.

Files (927.6 kB)
Name Size
10008641.pdf
md5:986eb8bc83f634c0bbe8e241f53345fd
927.6 kB Download
  • Abe, H., H. Kawamura, and Y. Matsuo, Direct numerical simulation of a fully developed turbulent channel flow with respect to the Reynolds number dependence. Journal of fluids Engineering, 2001. 123(2): p. 382-393.

  • Adedoyin, A.A., D.K. Walters, and S. Bhushan, Investigation of turbulence model and numerical scheme combinations for practical finite-volume large eddy simulations. Engineering Applications of Computational Fluid Mechanics, 2015. 9(1): p. 324-342.

  • Boris, J., et al., New insights into large eddy simulation. Fluid dynamics research, 1992. 10(4-6): p. 199-228.

  • Fureby, C. and F.F. Grinstein, Large eddy simulation of high-Reynolds-number free and wall-bounded flows. Journal of Computational Physics, 2002. 181(1): p. 68-97.

  • Grinstein, F. F. and C. Fureby, On monotonically integrated large eddy simulation of turbulent flows based on FCT algorithms, in Flux-Corrected Transport. 2005, Springer. p. 79-104.

  • Grinstein, F. F. and C. Fureby. Recent progress on flux-limiting based implicit Large Eddy Simulation. in European Conference on Computational Fluid Dynamics, ECCOMAS CFD. 2006.

  • Kim, J., P. Moin, and R. Moser, Turbulence statistics in fully developed channel flow at low Reynolds number. Journal of fluid mechanics, 1987. 177: p. 133-166.

  • Lee, M. and R. D. Moser, Direct numerical simulation of turbulent channel flow up to $\mathit {Re} _ {{\it\tau}}\approx 5200$. Journal of fluid mechanics, 2015. 774: p. 395-415.

  • Van Leer, B., Towards the ultimate conservative difference scheme. II. Monotonicity and conservation combined in a second-order scheme. Journal of Computational Physics, 1974. 14(4): p. 361-370. [10] Roe, P. L., Characteristic-based schemes for the Euler equations. Annual review of fluid mechanics, 1986. 18(1): p. 337-365. [11] Hussain, A. and W. Reynolds, Measurements in fully developed turbulent channel flow. Journal of fluids Engineering, 1975. 97(4): p. 568-578. [12] Harimi, I. and A. R. Pishevar, Evaluating the capability of the flux-limiter schemes in capturing strong shocks and discontinuities. Shock and Vibration, 2013. 20(2): p. 287-296.

18
13
views
downloads
All versions This version
Views 1818
Downloads 1313
Data volume 12.1 MB12.1 MB
Unique views 1818
Unique downloads 1212

Share

Cite as