Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
th
The 12 International Conference on Fluid Flow Technologies
Budapest, Hungary, September 3 - 6, 2003
ABSTRACT
An new turbulence model for Very Large Eddy 1. INTRODUCTION
Simulation, based on the extended k-ε model of Industrial calculations are usually based on the
Kim and Chen is developed. Introducing an Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS)
adaptive filtering technique the model can equations. This means that the complete turbulence
distinguish between numerically resolved and behavior is expressed by means of an appropriate
unresolved parts of flow. The model is applied to turbulence model. The necessary turbulence model
the unstable vortex motion in a pipe trifurcation. has to take into account all the turbulent scales
This flow phenomenon could not be predicted with ranging from the largest turbulent eddies down to
classical RANS methods and usually used the Kolmogorov scale. Consequently the model has
turbulence models. By applying the VLES method to be very sophisticated and it is impossible to
with the new turbulence model the phenomenon define a model suitable for all flow phenomena,
was well predicted and the results agree quite especially for unsteady vortex motions.
reasonable with measurement data. A direct numerical simulation (DNS), where all
Key Words: Adaptive turbulence model, Pipe scales down to the Kolmogorov scale are resolved
trifurcation, Very Large Eddy Simulation. by the computation is impossible. As the smallest
scales strongly decrease with increasing Reynolds
NOMENCLATURE number, extremely high computational effort (i.e.
f filter function large grid size) is required for high Reynolds
hmax local grid size number flows. Therefore DNS cannot be applied for
k turbulent kinetic energy flow of practical relevance in the foreseeable future.
L Kolmogorov length scale A promising compromise is the Large Eddy
Pk production term Simulation (LES). In a “real” LES (from the
U local velocity turbulence research point of view) all anisotropic
α model constant
turbulence structures are resolved in the
∆ resolved length scale
computation and only the smallest isotropic scales
∆t time step
are modeled. Therefore the used turbulence models
ε dissipation rate
can be simpler compared to RANS models, since
ν kinematic viscosity
they only have to describe the influence of the
νt turbulent viscosity
isotropic scales on the resolved anisotropic flow
field. Unfortunately with increasing Reynolds
numbers the anisotropic scales decreases and cannot the turbulent spectrum. It has an adaptive
be resolved in the computation of flow of practical characteristic, in such a way that it can be applied
relevance, although there are many “LES” for the whole range of approaches from RANS up
applications in the literature. However from the to DNS.
turbulence research point of view these simulations The presented application of the new adaptive
are mostly unsteady RANS (URANS), since they turbulence model is the flow in a pipe trifurcation of
only resolve the unsteady mean flow but do not a water power plant. In the spherical geometry an
resolve any turbulence structures. unsteady not periodic vortex motion has been
In order to apply a “classical” URANS there observed. This phenomenon is predicted by the
must be a gap in the turbulence spectrum between adaptive model.
the unsteady mean flow and the turbulent flow.
Only then the classical turbulence models (e.g. k-ε) 2. SIMULATION METHOD
can be applied, as they are developed for modeling
the whole range of turbulent scales. If it is not 2.1 Very large Eddy Simulation (VLES)
possible to distinguish between mean flow and “Real” Large Eddy Simulation (LES) from the
turbulence these models cannot be applied properly. turbulence research point of view require an
In this case a Very Large Eddy Simulation enormous computational effort since all anisotropic
(VLES) can be applied. Contrary to URANS there turbulence structures have to be resolved in the
is a requirement for the turbulence model, that it can computation and only the smallest isotropic scales
distinguish between numerically resolved unsteady are modeled. Consequently this method also can not
movement and not resolved turbulent fluctuations be applied for industrial problems today.
which have to be modeled. VLES is similar to LES, Today’s calculations of flows of practical
only that a smaller part of the turbulence spectrum relevance (characterized by complex geometry and
is resolved in the unsteady simulation. The model high Reynolds number) are usually based on the
must express the influence of a greater part of the Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS)
spectrum and therefore it has to be more equations. This means that the influence of the
sophisticated. complete turbulence behavior is expressed by
As mentioned above DNS and LES requires a means of an appropriate turbulence model. To find a
much too high computational effort for complex turbulence model, which is able to capture a wide
industrial problems. RANS is not suitable for range of complex flow effects quite accurate is
unsteady vortex phenomena. For this type of impossible. Especially for unsteady flow behavior
problem today VLES seems to be a promising way. this method often leads to rather poor results. The
In Table 1 the availability of the different RANS and LES approach can schematically be seen
approaches for the simulation of the flow around an in Figure 1, where a typical turbulent spectrum and
aircraft is summarized. This data apply similarly for its division in resolved and modeled parts is shown.
other complex flow problems.
4. APPLICATION
Figure 10: Computational grid. Due to the strong swirl at the inlet to the side
branch, in which the vortex is located, the inlet
Applying VLES with the adaptive turbulence losses into this branch are much higher compared to
model the unstable vortex movement can be the others. Consequently the discharge through this
predicted. In Figure 12 the flow at a certain time branch is reduced. In Figure 14 the discharge
step is presented. In this time step the vortex characteristic is shown. It is obvious, that the
extends into the first side branch. It starts at the top discharge varies alternatively between the two side
of the sphere. The vortex is prescribed by an iso- branches. Low discharge corresponds with the
pressure surface and by instantaneous streamlines. location of the vortex in this branch. If the vortex is
Some time later, Figure 13, the vortex has located in the other side branch the discharge is
“jumped” to the opposite side branch. Since the high. The discharge in the middle branch only
geometry is not completely symmetric the vortex shows much smaller oscillations.
stays longer in branch 3 than in branch 1. This is
shown in the simulation as well as in model tests. Left
Middle
Discharge in %
Right
Time in s
Figure 11: Vortex structure obtained by URANS Figure 14: Discharge through the different
with k-ε turbulence model. branches.
Loss coefficient ζ
right
left
middle
Time in s
Figure 15: Loss coefficients of the three branches Figure 16: Test rig at ASTRÖ, Graz.