ALBERT

Description: In response to the fourth AIAA CFD Drag Prediction Workshop (DPW-IV), the NASA Common Research Model (CRM) wing-body and wing-body-tail configurations are analyzed using the Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) flow solvers CFL3D and OVERFLOW. Two families of structured, overset grids are built for DPW-IV. Grid Family 1 (GF1) consists of a coarse (7.2 million), medium (16.9 million), fine (56.5 million), and extra-fine (189.4 million) mesh. Grid Family 2 (GF2) is an extension of the first and includes a superfine (714.2 million) and an ultra-fine (2.4 billion) mesh. The medium grid anchors both families with an established build process for accurate cruise drag prediction studies. This base mesh is coarsened and enhanced to form a set of parametrically equivalent grids that increase in size by a factor of roughly 3.4 from one level to the next denser level. Both CFL3D and OVERFLOW are run on GF1 using a consistent numerical approach. Additional OVERFLOW runs are made to study effects of differencing scheme and turbulence model on GF1 and to obtain results for GF2. All CFD results are post-processed using Richardson extrapolation, and approximate grid-converged values of drag are compared. The medium grid is also used to compute a trimmed drag polar for both codes.

Description: The turbulent flows through a plane channel and a channel with a constriction (2-D hill) are numerically simulated using DNS and RANS calculations. The Navier-Stokes equations in the DNS are solved using a higher order kinetic energy preserving central schemes and a fifth order accurate upwind biased WENO scheme for the space discretization. RANS calculations are performed using the NASA code CFL3D with the komega SST two-equation model and a full Reynolds stress model. Using DNS, the magnitudes of different terms that appear in the enstrophy equation are evaluated. The results show that the dissipation and the diffusion terms reach large values at the wall. All the vortex stretching terms have similar magnitudes within the buffer region. Beyond that the triple correlation among the vorticity and strain rate fluctuations becomes the important kinematic term in the enstrophy equation. This term is balanced by the viscous dissipation. In the separated flow, the triple correlation term and the viscous dissipation term peak locally and balance each other near the separated shear layer region. These findings concur with the analysis of Tennekes and Lumley, confirming that the energy transfer terms associated with the small-scale dissipation and the fluctuations of the vortex stretching essentially cancel each other, leaving an equation for the dissipation that is governed by the large-scale motion.

Description: Numerical simulations of decaying homogeneous isotropic turbulence are performed with both low-order and high-order spatial discretization schemes. The turbulent Mach and Reynolds numbers for the simulations are 0.2 and 250, respectively. For the low-order schemes we use either second-order central or third-order upwind biased differencing. For higher order approximations we apply weighted essentially non-oscillatory (WENO) schemes, both with linear and nonlinear weights. There are two objectives in this preliminary effort to investigate possible schemes for large eddy simulation (LES). One is to explore the capability of a widely used low-order computational fluid dynamics (CFD) code to perform LES computations. The other is to determine the effect of higher order accuracy (fifth, seventh, and ninth order) achieved with high-order upwind biased WENO-based schemes. Turbulence statistics, such as kinetic energy, dissipation, and skewness, along with the energy spectra from simulations of the decaying turbulence problem are used to assess and compare the various numerical schemes. In addition, results from the best performing schemes are compared with those from a spectral scheme. The effects of grid density, ranging from 32 cubed to 192 cubed, on the computations are also examined. The fifth-order WENO-based scheme is found to be too dissipative, especially on the coarser grids. However, with the seventh-order and ninth-order WENO-based schemes we observe a significant improvement in accuracy relative to the lower order LES schemes, as revealed by the computed peak in the energy dissipation and by the energy spectrum.

Description: The CFD General Notation System (CGNS) - a general, portable, and extensible standard for the storage and retrieval of computational fluid dynamics (CFD) analysis data has been in existence for more than a decade (Version 1.0 was released in May 1998). Both structured and unstructured CFD data are covered by the standard, and CGNS can be easily extended to cover any sort of data imaginable, while retaining backward compatibility with existing CGNS data files and software. Although originally designed for CFD, it is readily extendable to any field of computational analysis. In early 2011, CGNS Version 3.1 was released, which added significant capabilities. This paper describes these recent enhancements and highlights the continued usefulness of the CGNS methodology.

Description: A numerical study over a nominally two-dimensional circulation control airfoil is performed using a large-eddy simulation code and two Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes codes. Different Coanda jet blowing conditions are investigated. In addition to investigating the influence of grid density, a comparison is made between incompressible and compressible flow solvers. The incompressible equations are found to yield negligible differences from the compressible equations up to at least a jet exit Mach number of 0.64. The effects of different turbulence models are also studied. Models that do not account for streamline curvature effects tend to predict jet separation from the Coanda surface too late, and can produce non-physical solutions at high blowing rates. Three different turbulence models that account for streamline curvature are compared with each other and with large eddy simulation solutions. All three models are found to predict the Coanda jet separation location reasonably well, but one of the models predicts specific flow field details near the Coanda surface prior to separation much better than the other two. All Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes computations produce higher circulation than large eddy simulation computations, with different stagnation point location and greater flow acceleration around the nose onto the upper surface. The precise reasons for the higher circulation are not clear, although it is not solely a function of predicting the jet separation location correctly.

Description: This manual describes the installation and execution of FUN3D version 12.4, including optional dependent packages. FUN3D is a suite of computational fluid dynamics simulation and design tools that uses mixedelement unstructured grids in a large number of formats, including structured multiblock and overset grid systems. A discretely-exact adjoint solver enables efficient gradient-based design and grid adaptation to reduce estimated discretization error. FUN3D is available with and without a reacting, real-gas capability. This generic gas option is available only for those persons that qualify for its beta release status.

Description: This manual describes the installation and execution of FUN3D version 12.5, including optional dependent packages. FUN3D is a suite of computational uid dynamics simulation and design tools that uses mixed-element unstructured grids in a large number of formats, including structured multiblock and overset grid systems. A discretely-exact adjoint solver enables ecient gradient-based design and grid adaptation to reduce estimated discretization error. FUN3D is available with and without a reacting, real-gas capability. This generic gas option is available only for those persons that qualify for its beta release status.

Description: The second AIAA CFD High-Lift Prediction Workshop was held in San Diego, California, in June 2013. The goals of the workshop continued in the tradition of the first high-lift workshop: to assess the numerical prediction capability of current-generation computational fluid dynamics (CFD) technology for swept, medium/high-aspect-ratio wings in landing/takeoff (high-lift) configurations. This workshop analyzed the flow over the DLR-F11 model in landing configuration at two different Reynolds numbers. Twenty-six participants submitted a total of 48 data sets of CFD results. A variety of grid systems (both structured and unstructured) were used. Trends due to grid density and Reynolds number were analyzed, and effects of support brackets were also included. This paper analyzes the combined results from all workshop participants. Comparisons with experimental data are made. A statistical summary of the CFD results is also included.

Description: Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) software that solves the Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) equations has been in routine use for more than a quarter of a century. It is currently employed not only for basic research in fluid dynamics, but also for the analysis and design processes in many industries worldwide, including aerospace, automotive, power generation, chemical manufacturing, polymer processing, and petroleum exploration. A key feature of RANS CFD is the turbulence model. Because the RANS equations are unclosed, a model is necessary to describe the effects of the turbulence on the mean flow, through the Reynolds stress terms. The turbulence model is one of the largest sources of uncertainty in RANS CFD, and most models are known to be flawed in one way or another. Alternative methods such as direct numerical simulations (DNS) and large eddy simulations (LES) rely less on modeling and hence include more physics than RANS. In DNS all turbulent scales are resolved, and in LES the large scales are resolved and the effects of the smallest turbulence scales are modeled. However, both DNS and LES are too expensive for most routine industrial usage on today's computers. Hybrid RANS-LES, which blends RANS near walls with LES away from walls, helps to moderate the cost while still retaining some of the scale-resolving capability of LES, but for some applications it can still be too expensive. Even considering its associated uncertainties, RANS turbulence modeling has proved to be very useful for a wide variety of applications. For example, in the aerospace field, many RANS models are considered to be reliable for computing attached flows. However, existing turbulence models are known to be inaccurate for many flows involving separation. Research has been ongoing for decades in an attempt to improve turbulence models for separated and other nonequilibrium flows. When developing or improving turbulence models, both verification and validation are important steps in the process. Verification insures that the CFD code is solving the equations as intended (no errors in the implementation). This is typically done either through the method of manufactured solutions (MMS) or through careful step-by-step comparisons with other verified codes. After the verification step is concluded, validation is performed to document the ability of the turbulence model to represent different types of flow physics. Validation can involve a large number of test case comparisons with experiments, theory, or DNS. Organized workshops have proved to be valuable resources for the turbulence modeling community in its pursuit of turbulence modeling verification and validation. Workshop contributors using different CFD codes run the same cases, often according to strict guidelines, and compare results. Through these comparisons, it is often possible to (1) identify codes that have likely implementation errors, and (2) gain insight into the capabilities and shortcomings of different turbulence models to predict the flow physics associated with particular types of flows. These are valuable lessons because they help bring consistency to CFD codes by encouraging the correction of faulty programming and facilitating the adoption of better models. They also sometimes point to specific areas needed for improvement in the models. In this paper, several recent workshops are summarized primarily from the point of view of turbulence modeling verification and validation. Furthermore, the NASA Langley Turbulence Modeling Resource website is described. The purpose of this site is to provide a central location where RANS turbulence models are documented, and test cases, grids, and data are provided. The goal of this paper is to provide an abbreviated survey of turbulence modeling verification and validation efforts, summarize some of the outcomes, and give some ideas for future endeavors in this area.