UFR 2-11 Best Practice Advice: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
= Best Practice Advice = | = Best Practice Advice = | ||
== Key Physics == | == Key Physics == | ||
The key physics of this UFR is predominantly characterised by the | |||
unsteady, three-dimensional, massively-separated wake region. This | |||
takes the form of a nominally periodic shedding of large scale, | |||
coherent vortices in a vortex street pattern, which is overlaid with | |||
finer random turbulent fluctuations at higher frequencies and random | |||
modulation and intermittency at frequencies lower than the vortex | |||
shedding frequency. It has been found that it is necessary to capture | |||
these key physical features in a simulation in order to reliably | |||
predict the assessment parameters. Whether this is achieved or not in a | |||
simulation should be checked by: | |||
*Obtaining a visual impression of the range of spatial scales present in the wake using e.g. a snapshot of the vorticity magnitude | |||
*Confirming the mixed tonal and broadband nature of the force coefficient time histories by e.g. visual inspection or spectral analysis of time histories. | |||
== Numerical Modelling == | == Numerical Modelling == | ||
{{Demo_UFR_BPA2}} | {{Demo_UFR_BPA2}} |
Revision as of 10:44, 15 September 2011
High Reynolds Number Flow around Airfoil in Deep Stall
Flows Around Bodies
Underlying Flow Regime 2-11
Best Practice Advice
Key Physics
The key physics of this UFR is predominantly characterised by the unsteady, three-dimensional, massively-separated wake region. This takes the form of a nominally periodic shedding of large scale, coherent vortices in a vortex street pattern, which is overlaid with finer random turbulent fluctuations at higher frequencies and random modulation and intermittency at frequencies lower than the vortex shedding frequency. It has been found that it is necessary to capture these key physical features in a simulation in order to reliably predict the assessment parameters. Whether this is achieved or not in a simulation should be checked by:
- Obtaining a visual impression of the range of spatial scales present in the wake using e.g. a snapshot of the vorticity magnitude
- Confirming the mixed tonal and broadband nature of the force coefficient time histories by e.g. visual inspection or spectral analysis of time histories.
Numerical Modelling
- Discretisation method
- Grids and grid resolution
Physical Modelling
- Turbulence modelling
- Transition modelling
- Near-wall modelling
- Other modelling
Application Uncertainties
Summarise any aspects of the UFR model set-up which are subject to uncertainty and to which the assessment parameters are particularly sensitive (e.g location and nature of transition to turbulence; specification of turbulence quantities at inlet; flow leakage through gaps etc.)
Recommendations for Future Work
Propose further studies which will improve the
quality or scope of the BPA and perhaps bring it up to date. For example,
perhaps further calculations of the test-case should be performed
employing more recent, highly promising models of turbulence (e.g Spalart
and Allmaras, Durbin's v2f, etc.). Or perhaps new experiments should be
undertaken for which the values of key parameters (e.g. pressure gradient
or streamline curvature) are much closer to those encountered in real
application challenges.
Contributed by: Charles Mockett; Misha Strelets — CFD Software GmbH and Technische Universitaet Berlin; New Technologies and Services LLC (NTS) and Saint-Petersburg State University
© copyright ERCOFTAC 2024