Application of a Stochastic Backscatter Model for Grey-Area Mitigation in Detached Eddy Simulations

  • Johan C. KokEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Notes on Numerical Fluid Mechanics and Multidisciplinary Design book series (NNFM, volume 137)


Detached eddy simulations may suffer from so-called grey areas where the model is in LES mode but resolved turbulence is still lacking. A new stochastic backscatter model has recently been proposed and shown to be effective in grey-area mitigation for basic test cases in combination with a high-pass filtered subgrid-scale model. Here, this approach is applied to two cases with more complex flow patterns: a delta wing at high angle of attack showing vortex breakdown and a three-element airfoil. For both cases, significant grey areas are effectively prevented.



The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Union Seventh Framework Programme FP7/2007-2013 within the project Go4Hybrid (‘Grey Area Mitigation for Hybrid RANS–LES Methods’) under grant agreement no. 605361 and from NLR’s programmatic research ‘Kennis als Vermogen’.


  1. 1.
    Chu, J., Luckring, J.M.: Experimental surface pressure data obtained on \(65^{\circ }\) delta wing across Reynolds number and Mach number ranges. TM 4645, NASA (1996)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Deck, S.: Recent improvements in the zonal detached eddy simulation (ZDES) formulation. Theor. Comput. Fluid Dyn. (2011).
  3. 3.
    Furman, A., Breitsamter, C.: Experimental investigations on the VFE-2 configuration at TU Munich. In: Understanding and Modeling Vortical Flows to Improve the Technology Readiness Level for Military Aircraft, Chap. 21. NATO RTO (2009). RTO-TR-AVT-113Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kok, J.C.: A high-order low-dispersion symmetry-preserving finite-volume method for compressible flow on curvilinear grids. J. Comput. Phys. 228, 6811–6832 (2009). (NLR TP 2008-775)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kok, J.C.: A stochastic backscatter model for grey-area mitigation in detached eddy simulations. TP 2016-233, NLR (2016). (Submitted to Flow, Turbulence and Combustion.)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kok, J.C., Dol, H.S., Oskam, B., van der Ven, H.: Extra-large eddy simulation of massively separated flows. In: 42nd AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting. Reno (NV), USA (2004). (AIAA paper 2004-264)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kok, J.C., van der Ven, H.: Destabilizing free shear layers in X-LES using a stochastic subgrid-scale model. In: Peng, S.H., Doerffer, P.,  Haase, W. (eds.) Progress in Hybrid RANS–LES Modelling. Notes on Numerical Fluid Mechanics and Multidisciplinary Design, vol. 111, pp. 179–189. Springer (2009). (NLR TP 2009-327)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kok, J.C., van der Ven, H.: Capturing free shear layers in hybrid RANS–LES simulations of separated flow. In: Third Symposium Simulation of Wing and Nacelle Stall. Braunschweig, Germany (2012). (NLR TP 2012-333)
  9. 9.
    Kok, J.C., van der Ven, H., Tangermann, E., Sanchi, S., Probst, A., Weinman, K.A., Temmerman, L.: Vortex breakdown above a delta wing with sharp leading edge. ERCOFTAC QNET-CFD Wiki (2015).
  10. 10.
    Leith, C.E.: Stochastic backscatter in a subgrid-scale model: plane shear mixing layer. Phys. Fluids A 2(3), 297–299 (1990)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mockett, C., Fuchs, M., Garbaruk, A., Shur, M., Spalart, P., Strelets, M., Thiele, F., Travin, A.: Two non-zonal approaches to accelerate RANS to LES transition of free shear layers in DES. In: Girimaji, S., Haase, W., Peng, S.H., Schwamborn, D. (eds.) Progress in Hybrid RANS–LES Modelling. Notes on Numerical Fluid Mechanics and Multidisciplinary Design, vol. 130, pp. 187–201. Springer (2015)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Probst, A., Reuß, S., Schwamborn, D.: The 3-element airfoil. In: Mockett, C., Haase, W., Schwamborn, D. (eds.) Go4Hybrid—Grey Area Mitigation for Hybrid RANS–LES Methods. Notes on Numerical Fluid Mechanics and Multidisciplinary Design, Chap. 4.3. Springer (2017). (To appear)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Schumann, U.: Stochastic backscatter of turbulence energy and scalar variance by random subgrid-scale fluxes. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. A 451, 293–318 (1995)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Shur, M.L., Spalart, P.R., Strelets, M.K., Travin, A.K.: An enhanced version of DES with rapid transition from RANS to LES in separated flows. Flow Turbul. Combust. 95(4), 709–737 (2015)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Travin, A.K., Shur, M.L., Spalart, P.R., Strelets, M.K.: Improvement of delayed detached-eddy simulation for LES with wall modelling. In: Wesseling, P., Oñate, E., Périaux, J. (eds.) ECCOMAS CFD 2006. Egmond aan Zee, The Netherlands (2006)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wild, J., Pott-Pollenske, M., Nagel, B.: An integrated design approach for low noise exposing high-lift devices. In: 3rd AIAA Flow Control Conference (2006). (AIAA 2006-2843)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.NLRAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations