Advertisement

Partially-Averaged Navier-Stokes (PANS) Simulations of Lid-Driven Cavity Flow—Part 1: Comparison with URANS and LES

  • Bhanesh Akula
  • Pratanu Roy
  • Pooyan Razi
  • Steven Anderson
  • Sharath GirimajiEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Notes on Numerical Fluid Mechanics and Multidisciplinary Design book series (NNFM, volume 130)

Abstract

Multiple-resolution simulations of lid-driven cavity flows at Reynolds number of 10,000 are performed at two cavity aspect ratios (SAR) of 3:1:1 and 1:1:1. The objective is to assess the LES (Large eddy simulations), URANS (unsteady Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes) and PANS (partially-averaged Navier-Stokes) results against available experimental data. All of the approaches reasonably capture the mean flow velocity field for this low Reynolds number case. It is also shown that the second moments are rather small. Therefore, turbulence, while present, does not profoundly affect the mean flow statistics. It is shown that much of the flow unsteadiness is due to large scale structures that are reasonably resolved even in the URANS computation. It is expected that the distinction between the computations of different degrees of fidelity will be evident only at much higher Reynolds numbers.

Keywords

Turbulent Kinetic Energy Smagorinsky Model Turbulent Shear Stress Shear Stress Profile Total Turbulent Kinetic Energy 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Kyle Knox for his assistance in the initial phase of this project. The Texas A&M Supercomputing Facility (http://sc.tamu.edu/) is gratefully acknowledged for providing computing resources useful in conducting the research reported in this paper. The work was supported by NASA NRA #NNXA161A.

References

  1. 1.
    Koseff, J.R., Street, R.L.: The lid-driven cavity flow: a synthesis of qualitative and quantitative comparisons. Trans. ASME 106, 390–398 (1984)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Prasad, A.K., Koseff, J.R.: Reynolds number and end-wall effects on a lid-driven cavity flow. Phys. Fluids 1(2), 208–218 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Piomelli, U.: Large-eddy simulation: achievements and challenges. Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 35(4), 335–362 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Razi P., Venugopal, V., Jagannathan, S., Girimaji, S.: Partially-averaged Navier-Stokes (PANS) simulations of lid-driven cavity flow—part ii: flow structures. In: 5th Symposium on Hybrid RANS-LES Methods (2014)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lakshmipathy, S., Girimaji, S.S.: Partially-averaged Navier-Stokes method for turbulent flows: k-\(\omega \) model implementation. AIAA Paper 119:2006 (2006)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Germano, M.: Turbulence: the filtering approach. J. Fluid Mech. 238, 325–336 (1992)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Murthi, A., Reyes, D., Girimaji, S., Basara, B: Turbulent transport modelling for pans and other bridging closure approaches. In: Proceedings of V European Conference on CFD, ECCOMAS CFD (2010)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lakshmipathy, S.: Partially averaged Navier-Stokes method for turbulence closures: characterization of fluctuations and extension to wall bounded flows. Ph.D. dissertation, Texas A&M University (2009)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Germano, M., Piomelli, U., Moin, P., Cabot, W.H: A dynamic subgrid-scale eddy viscosity model. Phys. Fluids A: Fluid Dyn. (1989–1993), 3(7), 1760–1765 (1991)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ghosal, S., Lund, T.S., Moin, P., Akselvoll, K.: A dynamic localization model for large-eddy simulation of turbulent flows. J. Fluid Mech. 286, 229–255 (1995)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Girimaji, S.S., Abdol-Hamid, K.S.: Partially-averaged Navier-Stokes model for turbulence: implementation and validation. Number 0502. AIAA (2005)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Girimaji, S.S.: Partially-averaged Navier-Stokes model for turbulence: a Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes to direct numerical simulation bridging method. J. Appl. Mech. 73(3), 413–421 (2006)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Girimaji, S.S., Suman, S.: Partially averaged Navier Stokes (PANS) method for turbulence simulations: theory and practice. In: Progress in Hybrid RANS-LES Modelling, pp. 29–43. Springer, New York (2012)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    OpenCFD: OpenFOAM—The Open Source CFD Toolbox—User’s Guide, 1.4 edn. OpenCFD Ltd., Bracknell (2007)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jordan, S.A., Ragab, S.A.: On the unsteady and turbulent characteristics of the three-dimensional shear-driven cavity flow. J. Fluids Eng. 106, 386–389 (1984)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Shankar, P.N., Deshpande, M.D.: Fluid mechanics in the driven cavity. Ann. Rev. Fluid Mech. 32, 93–136 (2000)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bhanesh Akula
    • 1
  • Pratanu Roy
    • 1
  • Pooyan Razi
    • 1
  • Steven Anderson
    • 1
  • Sharath Girimaji
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Texas A&M UniversityCollege StationUSA

Personalised recommendations