Advertisement

Analysis of a Synthetic Turbulence Generation Method for Periodic Configurations

  • C. MorsbachEmail author
  • M. Franke
Conference paper
Part of the ERCOFTAC Series book series (ERCO, volume 25)

Abstract

With increasingly available computational resources, scale-resolving simulations are beginning to become affordable for industrially relevant flows in turbomachinery. While full Large Eddy Simulations (LES) may still be out of reach, the combination of Reynolds-Averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) and LES methods is a promising approach. Both LES and zonal RANS-LES methods require the prescription of resolved velocity fluctuations at the inflow or the RANS-LES interfaces. To save computational resources, the flow in a turbomachinery configuration is usually assumed to be periodic in the spanwise or blade-to-blade directions. Synthetic turbulence generators based on Fourier reconstruction of the fluctuating velocity field using random wave number vectors are, by definition, not periodic in a given direction. This leads to a violation of continuity at periodic boundaries of the computational domain and can, in turn, result in abnormal turbulence statistics downstream. Motivated by this deficiency, a simple correction, which restores periodicity, is proposed and its performance with respect to statistical properties of turbulence such as Reynolds stresses, two-point correlations and energy spectra is evaluated.

References

  1. 1.
    Becker, K., Heitkamp, K., Kügeler, E.K.: Recent progress in a hybrid-grid CFD solver for turbomachinery flows. In: V European Conference on Computational Fluid Dynamics ECCOMAS CFD 2010, Lisbon, Portugal (2010)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Keating, A., Piomelli, U., Balaras, E., Kaltenbach, H.-J.: A priori and a posteriori tests of inflow conditions for large-eddy simulation. Phys. Fluids 16(12), 4696–4712 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Roe, P.L.: Approximate Riemann solvers, parameter vectors, and difference schemes. J. Comput. Phys. 43(2), 357–372 (1981)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Shur, M.L., Spalart, P.R., Strelets, M.K., Travin, A.K.: Synthetic turbulence generators for RANS-LES interfaces in zonal simulations of aerodynamic and aeroacoustic problems. Flow Turbul. Combus. 93(1), 63–92 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Smagorinsky, J.: General circulation experiments with the primitive equations. Mon. Weather. Rev. 91, 99–164 (1963)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Tabor, G., Baba-Ahmadi, M.: Inlet conditions for large eddy simulation: a review. Comput. Fluids 39(4), 553–567 (2010)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    van Leer, B.: Towards the ultimate conservative difference scheme. V. A second-order sequel to Godunov’s method. J. Comput. Phys. 32(1), 101–136 (1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Numerical MethodsInstitute of Propulsion Technology, German Aerospace Center (DLR)CologneGermany

Personalised recommendations