DNS 1-3 Description: Difference between revisions
(New article page for DNS_1-3_description) |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
__TOC__ | __TOC__ | ||
= Introduction = | = Introduction = | ||
The diffuser studied is the [[UFR_4-16_Test_Case]], Diffuser 1 provided in the ERCOFTAC database. Further details can be found there. | |||
Give a brief overview of the test case. Describe the main characteristics of the flow. In particular, what are the underlying flow physics which must be captured by the computations ? Give reasons for this choice (e.g. poorly understood flow physics, difficulty to predict the flow with standard turbulence models, ...). Detail any case-specific data that needs to be generated. | Give a brief overview of the test case. Describe the main characteristics of the flow. In particular, what are the underlying flow physics which must be captured by the computations ? Give reasons for this choice (e.g. poorly understood flow physics, difficulty to predict the flow with standard turbulence models, ...). Detail any case-specific data that needs to be generated. | ||
= Review of previous studies = | = Review of previous studies = | ||
| Line 22: | Line 25: | ||
---- | ---- | ||
{{ACContribs | {{ACContribs | ||
| authors= | | authors= Oriol Lehmkuhl, Arnau Miro | ||
| organisation= | | organisation= BSC | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{DNSHeaderLib | {{DNSHeaderLib | ||
Revision as of 13:36, 12 February 2021
Introduction
The diffuser studied is the UFR_4-16_Test_Case, Diffuser 1 provided in the ERCOFTAC database. Further details can be found there.
Give a brief overview of the test case. Describe the main characteristics of the flow. In particular, what are the underlying flow physics which must be captured by the computations ? Give reasons for this choice (e.g. poorly understood flow physics, difficulty to predict the flow with standard turbulence models, ...). Detail any case-specific data that needs to be generated.
Review of previous studies
Provide a brief review of related past studies, either experimental or computational. Identify the configuration chosen for the present study and position it with respect to previous studies. If the test case is geared on a certain experiment, explain what simplifications ( e.g. concern- ing geometry, boundary conditions) have been introduced with respect to the experiment in the computational setup to make the computations feasible and avoid uncertainty or ambiguity.
Description of the test case
A detailed self-contained description should be provided. It can be kept fairly short if a link can be made to an external data base where details are given. Then only the differences should be clearly indicated.
Geometry and flow parameters
Describe the general set up of the test case and provide a sketch of the geometry, clearly identifying location and type of boundaries. Specify the non-dimensional flow parameters which define the flow regime (e.g. Reynolds number, Rayleigh number, angle of incidence etc), including the scales on which they are based. Provide a detailed geometrical description, by preference in form of a CAD, or alternatively as lists of points and a description of the interpolation.
Boundary conditions
Specify the prescribed boundary conditions, as well as the means to verify the initial flow development. In particular describe the procedure for determining the in flow conditions comprising the instantaneous (mean and fluctuating) velocity components and other quantities. Provide reference profiles for the mean flow and fluctuations at in flow - these quantities must be supplied separately as part of the statistical data as they are essential as input for turbulence-model calculations. For checking purposes, these profiles should ideally also be given downstream where transients have disappeared; the location and nature of these cuts should be specified, as well as the reference result.
Contributed by: Oriol Lehmkuhl, Arnau Miro — BSC
© copyright ERCOFTAC 2024