Ciclo di seminari

Universit degli studi di Roma Tor Vergata

May, 2013

Introduction to fundamentals of Turbulence,

Large Eddy Simulation and subgrid-scale modeling

Charles Meneveau
Johns Hopkins University
Baltimore, USA

Additional reference:
http://www.scholarpedia.org/article/Turbulence:_Subgrid-Scale_Modeling

JHU Mechanical Engineering

 Ciclo di seminari
Universita degli studi di Roma, Tor Vergata
May, 2013

OVERVIEW:
Mercoled:

Introduction to fundamentals of Turbulence

Intro to Large Eddy Simulation (LES)
Intro to Subgrid-scale (SGS) modeling
The dynamic SGS model
Some sample applications from our group

Venerd:

Dynamic model for LES over rough multiscale surfaces

LES studies of large wind farms

JHU Mechanical Engineering

Turbulence = eddies of many sizes

From: Multimedia Fluid Mechanics, Cambridge Univ. Press

Turbulence = eddies of many sizes
+ large-scale vortices

From: Multimedia Fluid Mechanics, Cambridge Univ. Press

Turbulence in aerospace systems:

Jets and eddies during shuttle launch

Large Eddy Simulation of flow in

thrust-reversers
Blin, Hadjadi & Vervisch (2002)
J. of Turbulence.
 Turbulence in reacting flows:

Premixed flame in I.C.

engine, combustion

Numerical simulation of flame

propagation in decaying
isotropic turbulence
Turbulence in environment and geophysics
 Turbulence in renewable energy

From J.N. Srensen, Annual Rev. Fluid Mech. 2011:"

Turbulence in astrophysics
Turbulence in astrophysics
 Simplest turbulence: Isotropic turbulence
Corrsin wind tunnel
at the Johns Hopkins University

Active Grid M = 6 "

Test Section
Contractions
Flow

Decaying turbulence
Johns Hopkins University: Baltimore, Maryland USA
JHU: Latrobe Hall
(Mechanical Engineering)

Downtown
Baltimore

Maryland Hall Corrsin wind

tunnel at JHU Stan Corrsin
1920-1986
Turbulence is:

multiscale,
mixing,
dissipative,
chaotic,
vortical
well-defined statistics,
important in practice
Physical quantities describing fluid flow
Density field
Velocity vector field
Pressure field
Temperature field (or internal energy, or enthalpy etc..)

Physical laws governing fluid flow

Conservation of mass
Newtons second law (linear momentum)
First law of thermodynamics (energy)
Equation of state
Some constraints in closure relations from second law of TD

Navier Stokes equations for a Newtonian, incompressible fluid

Navier-Stokes equations, incompressible, Newtonian

u j
=0
x j
u j uk u j 1 p
+ = + 2u j + g j
t xk x j

Fj
aj =
m
Traditional approach: Reynolds decomposition
u j
=0
x j
u j uk u j 1 p
+ = + 2u j + g j
t xk x j

t
 Traditional approach: Reynolds decomposition
u j
=0
x j
u j uk u j 1 p
+ = + 2u j + g j
t xk x j

Reynolds equations:
u j
=0
x j t

( )
u j u j uk 1 p
+ = + u j + g j
2
u j uk u j uk
t xk x j xk

Reynolds stress tensor: u j uk

Requires closure (turbulence problem)
Turbulence physics: the energy cascade
(Richardson 1922, Kolmogorov 1941)

Rate of energy cascade and dissipation !

L

E(k) k 5 / 3

K
 Turbulence problem:
last unsolved problem in classical physics
(e.g. Feynman 1979)

Sample challenges (unsolved)

Reynolds stress tensor: u j u k

Requires closure (turbulence problem)

First-principles derivation of
Kolmogorovsk-5/3 spectrum

With turbulence, it's not just "

a case of physical theory " E(k) k 5 / 3
being able to handle only "
simple caseswe can't do any."
We have no good fundamental "
theory at all. (Feynman, 1979,"
Omni Magazine, Vol. 1, No.8)."
 Direct Numerical Simulation (DNS):

N-S equations:
u j u k u j p u j
+ = + 2 u j + g j =0
t xk x j x j

Moderate Re (~ 103), High Re (~ 107),

DNS possible DNS impossible
 DNS - pseudo-spectral calculation method
(Orszag 1971: for isotropic turbulence - triply periodic boundary conditions)
u(k,t) = FFT [u(x,t)]

u(k,t)
k u(k,t) = 0, = P(k) (u
)(k) k 2 u(k,t) + P(k) f(k,t)
t
(u
)(k) = FFT [u(x,t) u(x,t)]

x2 FFT k2
u(k,t)
u(x,t)

x1 k1
 DNS - pseudo-spectral calculation method
(Orszag 1971: for isotropic turbulence - triply periodic boundary conditions)

x2 FFT k2
u(k,t)
u(x,t)

x1 k1

Computational state-of-the-art:

1283 - 2563: Routine, can be run on small

PC with (2563 x 12 x 4) Bytes = 100 MB of RAM
10243 : needs cluster with O(100) nodes and O(64 GB) RAM
40963 : world record (Earth Simulator, Japan, 2003, 30 - TFlops), 4 TB RAM
 1,0243 DNS: iso-velocity filled contours
(data from: JHU public database cluster, Claire Verhulst & Jason Graham Matlab visualization)

Energetic signature of the large, intermediate u1 (x, y, z0 ,t 0 )

(and some smaller) turbulent eddies:

~ 40 grid
points

1,024 grid
points

1,024 grid
points
1,024 grid points
 Take 10243 DNS of forced isotropic turbulence
(standard pseudo-spectral Navier-Stokes simulation, dealiased):

10244 space-time history

27 Tbytes, Rel~ 430

http://turbulence.pha.jhu.edu

Y. Li, E. Perlman, M. Wan, Y. Yang, R. Burns, C.M., R.

Burns, S. Chen, A. Szalay & G. Eyink:
A public turbulence database cluster and applications to study
Lagrangian evolution of velocity increments in turbulence.
Journal of Turbulence 9, No 31, 2008.

So far 12 papers published using data from public database

 Take 10243 DNS of forced isotropic turbulence
(standard pseudo-spectral Navier-Stokes simulation, dealiased):

Running Manual query

Running
Fortran or C Matlab On web-browser 10244 space-time history
27 Tbytes, Rel~ 430

http://turbulence.pha.jhu.edu

Y. Li, E. Perlman, M. Wan, Y. Yang, R. Burns, C.M., R.

Burns, S. Chen, A. Szalay & G. Eyink:
A public turbulence database cluster and applications to study
Lagrangian evolution of velocity increments in turbulence.
Journal of Turbulence 9, No 31, 2008.

So far 12 papers published using data from public database

 New paradigm:

Client computer (e.g. my

laptop) runs the analysis
using Fortran, C, Matlab
codes, fetching data as
needed from databases
through a web-service

we adapted Fortran,
C and Matlab to
surf the web
for data

Y. Li, E. Perlman, M. Wan, Y. Yang, R.

Burns, C. Meneveau, R. Burns, S. Chen,
A. Szalay & G. Eyink: Journal of
Turbulence 9, No 31, 2008.
 Coupling GPUs with databases:
material surfaces (24 million particles) advected in turbulent 1,0243 field
Real-time flow-viz (download 1 snapshot at fixed t, animated on GPU)

Dr. Kai Buerger (TUM, summer 2011)

M. Karweit (MS Thesis, & Album of Fluid Motion, CUP)

 iso-vorticity surfaces
(JHU database, Dr. Kai Buerger visualization ) Fi
ai =
Vortical signature of the smallest turbulent eddies: ( u)2 m
Data mining: high-intensity vorticity event associated with vortex reconnections

Colors: surfaces of iso-vorticity magnitude

1024

64

Video generated by Dr. Jonathan P. Graham

using VAPOR software (NCAR)
 Basic (and applied) research challenge:
Coarse-graining - Large-Eddy-Simulation (LES):
Coarse-graining for more affordable simulations
u1 (x, y, z0 ,t 0 ) u1 (x, y, z0 ,t 0 )

4x109 105
d.o.f. d.o.f.

Ongoing Research Questions:

How do small-scales affect large scale motions (and vice-versa)?

How can we replace the effects of small scales on large
scales (SGS modeling)?
 Large-eddy-simulation (LES) and filtering:

N-S equations: G(x): Filter

u j uk u j p u j
t
+
x k
=
x j
+ 2 u j
x j
=0
u1 (x, y, z0 ,t 0 )
ui (x,t) = G * ui = G (x x ')ui (x ')d 3x '

D
 Large-eddy-simulation (LES) and filtering:

N-S equations: G(x): Filter

u j uk u j p u j
t
+
x k
=
x j
+ 2 u j
x j
=0
Filtered N-S equations: u1 (x, y, z0 ,t 0 )

u j
u p
ku j
+ = + 2u j
t xk x j
D
 Large-eddy-simulation (LES) and filtering:

N-S equations: G(x): Filter

u j uk u j p u j
t
+
x k
=
x j
+ 2 u j
x j
=0
Filtered N-S equations: u1 (x, y, z0 ,t 0 )

u j
u p
ku j
+ = + 2u j
t xk x j
u u D
j j p
+ uk = + u j
2

t x k x j x k jk

where SGS stress tensor is:

ij = uiu j ui u j
Most common modeling approach: eddy-viscosity

ui u j
= sgs
d
+ = 2 sgs Sij
x j xi
ij

Functional form in analogy to kinetic theory

of gases (Chapman-Enskog expansions, etc..)
Eddies ~ molecules (???)

sgs = (c s) | S |
2

cs: Smagorinsky coefficient

Detour: some remarks on eddy-viscosity

ui u j
= sgs
d
+ = 2 sgs Sij
x j xi
ij

Functional form in analogy to kinetic theory

of gases (Chapman-Enskog expansions, etc..
Eddies ~ molecules (???)
 Limitations of basic eddy-viscosity:

ui u j
= sgs
d
+ = 2 sgs Sij
x j xi
ij

Turbulence is not like a can of sand

 Limitations of basic eddy-viscosity:

ui u j
= sgs
d
+ = 2 sgs Sij
x j xi
ij

Turbulence is not like a can of sand

but more like a

can of worms
Visualizations of multi-scale vortices in turbulence
 Limitations of basic eddy-viscosity:

ui u j
= sgs
d
+ = 2 sgs Sij
x j xi
ij

Turbulence is not like a can of sand

but more like a

can of worms

Still, in LES eddy-viscosity seems to work better than it should

Also, many models need eddy-viscosity additions in ad-hoc regularizations
Next slides: an excuse for eddy-viscosity via fluid dynamics arguments
A fluid-mechanical rationale for basic eddy-viscosity:

( ) ( )
d d
u
d
ij i u j ui u j
u
iu
A fluid-mechanical rationale for basic eddy-viscosity:

( ) ( )
d d
u
d
ij i u j ui u j
u
iu

(ui + ui) (ui + ui)

+ (u k + uk ) = forces
t xk
u(0)
u(t)

A
A fluid-mechanical rationale for basic eddy-viscosity:

( ) ( )
d d
u
d
ij i u j ui u j
u
iu

(ui + ui) (ui + ui)

+ (u k + uk ) = forces
t xk
u(0)
u(t)
dui ui
= uk + [ forces ' (u 'u ')]
dt xk

A
A fluid-mechanical rationale for basic eddy-viscosity:

( ) ( )
d d
u
d
ij i u j ui u j
u
iu

(ui + ui) (ui + ui)

+ (u k + uk ) = forces
t xk
u(0)
u(t)
dui ui
= uk + [ forces ' (u 'u ')]
dt xk

A
du u, Li, Chevillard, Eyink & CM
Production-only approximation: Ai Phys Rev. E, 2009.
dt
(stretching and tilting of vel.
ui
fluctuation by large-scale velocity gradients Aik =
- consistent with vortex stretching)
xk
A fluid-mechanical rationale for basic eddy-viscosity:

du u
Ai
dt

u(0)
u(t)

A
A fluid-mechanical rationale for basic eddy-viscosity:

i u(0)
u(t) = exp( At)
du u
Ai
dt

u(0)
u(t)

A
A fluid-mechanical rationale for basic eddy-viscosity:

i u(0)
u(t) = exp( At)
du u 1 2
Ai u(t) I At + (At) ... iu(0)
dt 2

u(0)
u(t)

A
A fluid-mechanical rationale for basic eddy-viscosity:

du u 1 2
Ai u(t) I At + (At) ... iu(0)
dt 2

( ) (
i u(0) uT (0) i I A
u u = uuT I At )
Tt

u(0)
u(t)

A
A fluid-mechanical rationale for basic eddy-viscosity:

du u 1 2
Ai u(t) I At + (At) ... iu(0)
dt 2

( ) (
i u(0) uT (0) i I A
u u = uuT I At
Tt
)
u(0)
u(t)
u u T A ( )
I At
i u u T A

t =0
( Tt
i IA )
A
A fluid-mechanical rationale for basic eddy-viscosity:

du u 1 2
Ai u(t) I At + (At) ... iu(0)
dt 2

( )
i u(0) uT (0) i I A
u u = uuT I At
Tt
( )
u(0)
u(t)
u u T A (
I At )
i u u T A

t =0
( Tt
i IA )
A
( )I
2
isotropy : ce S
A fluid-mechanical rationale for basic eddy-viscosity:

du u 1 2
Ai u(t) I At + (At) ... iu(0)
dt 2

( )
i u(0) uT (0) i I A
u u = uuT I At
Tt
( )
u(0)
u(t)
u u T A (
I At )
i u u T A

t =0
( Tt
i IA )
A
( )I
2
isotropy : ce S

( ) ( ) I (A + A ) t
2 2

u u A
T
ce S A )i(I A
(I At T t A ) ce S T
+ O(t 2 )
tA A

2 S
A fluid-mechanical rationale for basic eddy-viscosity:

du u 1 2
Ai u(t) I At + (At) ... iu(0)
dt 2

( )
i u(0) uT (0) i I A
u u = uuT I At
Tt
( )
u(0)
u(t)
u u T A (
I At )
i u u T A

t =0
( Tt
i IA )
A
( )I
2
isotropy : ce S

( ) ( ) I (A + A ) t
2 2

u u A
T
ce S A )i(I A
(I At T t A ) ce S T
+ O(t 2 )
tA A

2 S
( )t
d 2
= uu A
d
ij
T
2 ce S A S
tA

sgs
A fluid-mechanical rationale for basic eddy-viscosity:

( )t
2
= u u
d
ij
T d
tA
2 ce S A S

sgs
1
choosing tA
S

sgs = (c s) | S | cs: Smagorinsky coefficient

2
Effects of tij upon resolved motions: Energetics (kinetic energy):
12 u j u j 12 u j u j
t
+ u k
x k
=

x j
(
(....) 2S jk S jk jk S jk )
1 u u j
Sij = i +
2 x j xi

u1 (x, y, z0 ,t 0 )
= jk S jk
u 3
= Inertial-range flux
L


E(k)

k
LES resolved SGS
Theoretical calibration of cs (D.K. Lilly, 1967): u 3 E(k) = cK 2 / 3 k 5 / 3
=
L
= = ij Sij ij = 2(cs )2 | S | Sij

= cs2 2 2 | S | Sij Sij E(k)
3/2
c 2 2
s
2 3/2
Sij Sij

1 ui ui u j k
Sij Sij = + = LES resolved SGS

2 x j x j xi

1 1 2 E(k) k2
= [k j ii (k) + ki k j ij (k)]d k = [k (
2 3
( )) + 0]d 3
k
4 k 2
ii
2 |k|< / 2 |k|< / k2
/ /
31 2/3 3
4/3
2/3 1
= cK k 5 / 3+ 2 4 k 2 dk = cK 2 / 3 k dk = cK
1/ 3

2 0
4 k 2
0
4

3/2
3

4/3
3/2 3/ 4
cs 2 cK
2 2 3/2 2/3
3c 3c
4 1 cs2 2 K cs = K 1
2 2
cK = 1.6 cs 0.16
Theoretical calibration of cs (D.K. Lilly, 1967): u 3 E(k) = cK 2 / 3 k 5 / 3
=
L
= = ij Sij ij = 2(cs )2 | S | Sij

= cs2 2 2 | S | Sij Sij E(k)
3/2
c 2 2
s
2 3/2
Sij Sij

1 ui ui u j k
Sij Sij = + = LES resolved SGS

2 x j x j xi

1 1 2 E(k) k2
= [k j ii (k) + ki k j ij (k)]d k = [k (
2 3
( )) + 0]d 3
k
4 k 2
ii
2 |k|< / 2 |k|< / k2
/ /
31 2/3 3
4/3
2/3 1
= cK k 5 / 3+ 2 4 k 2 dk = cK 2 / 3 k dk = cK
1/ 3

2 0
4 k 2
0
4

3/2
3

4/3
3/2 3/ 4
cs 2 cK
2 2 3/2 2/3
3c 3c
4 1 cs2 2 K cs = K 1
2 2
cK = 1.6 cs 0.16
Theoretical calibration of cs (D.K. Lilly, 1967): u 3 E(k) = cK 2 / 3 k 5 / 3
=
L
= = ij Sij ij = 2(cs )2 | S | Sij

= cs2 2 2 | S | Sij Sij E(k)
3/2
c 2 2
s
2 3/2
Sij Sij

1 ui ui u j k
Sij Sij = + = LES resolved SGS

2 x j x j xi

1 1 2 E(k) k2
= [k j ii (k) + ki k j ij (k)]d k = [k (
2 3
( )) + 0]d 3
k
4 k 2
ii
2 |k|< / 2 |k|< / k2
/ /
31 2/3 3
4/3
2/3 1
= cK k 5 / 3+ 2 4 k 2 dk = cK 2 / 3 k dk = cK
1/ 3

2 0
4 k 2
0
4

3/2
3

4/3
3/2 3/ 4
cs 2 cK
2 2 3/2 2/3
3c 3c
4 1 cs2 2 K cs = K 1
2 2
cK = 1.6 cs 0.16
Theoretical calibration of cs (D.K. Lilly, 1967): u 3 E(k) = cK 2 / 3 k 5 / 3
=
L
= = ij Sij ij = 2(cs )2 | S | Sij

= cs2 2 2 | S | Sij Sij E(k)
3/2
c 2 2
s
2 3/2
Sij Sij

1 ui ui u j k
Sij Sij = + = LES resolved SGS

2 x j x j xi

1 1 2 E(k) k2
= [k j ii (k) + ki k j ij (k)]d k = [k (
2 3
( )) + 0]d 3
k
4 k 2
ii
2 |k|< / 2 |k|< / k2
/ /
31 2/3 3
4/3
2/3 1
= cK k 5 / 3+ 2 4 k 2 dk = cK 2 / 3 k dk = cK
1/ 3

2 0
4 k 2
0
4

3/2
3

4/3
3/2 3/ 4
cs 2 cK
2 2 3/2 2/3
3c 3c
4 1 cs2 2 K cs = K 1
2 2
cK = 1.6 cs 0.16
 cs=0.16 works well for isotropic,
high Reynolds number turbulence

But in practice
(complex flows)

c s = c s (x,t)
Ad-hoc tuning?

Examples: Transitional pipe flow: from 0 to 0.16

Near wall damping for wall boundary layers (Piomelli et al 1989)

y
cs = 0.16

cs = cs (y)
 How does cs vary under realistic conditions?
Interrogate data:

Measure: = jk S jk

Measure: Smag

2 = 22
| S | Sij Sij
cs

Obtainempirical Smagorinsky coefficient = f(x,conditions):

S 1/ 2

jk jk
cs = 2

2 | S | Sij Sij

An example result from atmospheric turbulence:

Measure empirical Smagorinsky coefficient for atmospheric surface layer
as function of height and stability (thermal forcing or damping):

HATS - 2000
(with NCAR
researchers:
Horst, Sullivan) S 1/ 2
Kettleman City
(Central Valley, CA) cs = jk jk

22 | S | S S
ij ij

Example result: effect of atmospheric

stability on coefficient from sonic Stable stratification
anemometer measurements in
atmospheric surface layer

Neutral stratification
(Kleissl et al., J. Atmos. Sci. 2003)

c s = c s (x,t)
How to avoid tuning and case-by-case
adjustments of model coefficient in LES?

The Dynamic Model

(Germano et al. Physics of Fluids, 1991)
Germano identity and dynamic model
(Germano et al. 1991):

Exact (rare in turbulence):

ui u j ui u j = uiu j u iu j E(k)

! k

LES resolved SGS

Germano identity and dynamic model
(Germano et al. 1991):

Exact (rare in turbulence):

ui u j ui u j = uiu j - u iu j + u iu j u iu j E(k)

! k

LES resolved SGS

Germano identity and dynamic model
(Germano et al. 1991):

Exact (rare in turbulence):

ui u j ui u j = uiu j - u iu j + u iu j u iu j E(k)

Tij = ij + Lij
Lij (Tij ij ) = 0
L ! k
T

LES resolved SGS

Germano identity and dynamic model
(Germano et al. 1991):

Exact (rare in turbulence):

ui u j ui u j = uiu j - u iu j + u iu j u iu j E(k)

Tij = ij + Lij
Lij (Tij ij ) = 0
2 (c s 2 ) | S | Sij
2
2 (c s ) | S | Sij
2
L ! k
T

Assumes scale-invariance:
LES resolved SGS
Lij c Mij = 0
2
s

(
where M ij = 2 | S | Sij 4 | S | Sij
2
)
Germano identity and dynamic model
(Germano et al. 1991):

Lij c s Mij = 0
2

Over-determined system:
solve in some average sense
(minimize error, Lilly 1992):
= (Lij c Mij )
2 2
s
Averaging over regions of
Minimized when: statistical homogeneity
or fluid trajectories
Lij Mij
c =
2
s
Mij Mij
Germano identity and dynamic model
(Germano et al. 1991):

Lij c s Mij = 0
2

Over-determined system:
solve in some average sense
(minimize error, Lilly 1992):
= (Lij c Mij )
2 2
s
Averaging over regions of
Minimized when: statistical homogeneity
or fluid trajectories
Lij Mij
c =
2
s
Mij Mij

Homework:
(a) Prove the above equation, and
qi = u
i T ui T
(b) repeat entire formulation for the SGS heat flux vector
T
qi = Cscalar | S |
2
modeled using an SGS diffusivity (find Cscalar) xi
Similarity, tensor eddy-viscosity, and mixed models

u~ u~ ~~
ijmnl = Cnl 2 i
j
2(CS ) 2 S Sij
xk xk

Two-parameter dynamic mixed Lij Tij ij = u~iu~j u~i u~j

model ~ ~
~~ 2 ui u j
Tij = 2(CS 2) S Sij + Cnl (2 )
2

xk xk
Mixed tensor Eddy Viscosity Model:
Taylor-series expansion of similarity (Bardina 1980) model
(Clark 1980, Liu, Katz & Meneveau (1994), )
Deconvolution:
(Leonard 1997, Geurts et al, Stolz & Adams, Winckelmans etc..)
Significant direct empirical evidence, experiments:
Liu et al. (JFM 1999, 2-D PIV) dij
Tao, Katz & CM (J. Fluid Mech. 2002): Sij
tensor alignments from 3-D HPIV data
Higgins, Parlange & CM (Bound Layer Met. 2003):
tensor alignments from ABL data
From DNS: Horiuti 2002, Vreman et al (LES), etc
Reality check:

Do simulations with these closures produce

realistic statistics of ui(x,t)?

Need good data

Need good simulations

Next: Summary of results from Kang et al. (JFM 2003)

Smagorinsky model,
Dynamic Smagorinsky model,
Dynamic 2-parameter mixed model
 Remake of Comte-Bellot & Corrsin (1967)
decaying isotropic turbulence experiment
at high Reynolds number
Active Grid
M=6" Test Section
u2 X-wire probe array
Contractions x2 u1 D1 = 0.01m
Flow D2 = 0.02m
x1 D3 = 0.04m 0.91m
D4 = 0.08m

20M 30M 40M 48M

h1 = 0.005m
D1 = 0.01m h3 = 0.02m D
D3 = 0.04m
 u2
x2 u1 Flow
x1

20 M 30 M 40 M 48M

Initial condition for LES

0
10
(m3s-2)
10-1
Results

x /M=20
-2 1
10

x /M=48
10-3 1

E()
10-4

10-5

10-6

10-7
100 101 102 103 104
(m-1)
 LES of Temporally Decaying Turbulence

Experiment Taylor Hypothesis LES

Spatially Decaying Grid Turbulence Temporally Decaying Turbulence
2-D Box Filter x1 = u1 t 3-D Filter

Pseudo-spectral code: 1283 nodes, carefully dealiased (3/2N)

All parameters are equivalent to those of experiments.
Initial energy distribution: 3-D energy spectrum at x1/M = 20

LES Models: standard Smagorinsky-Lilly model,

dynamic Smagorinsky and
dynamic mixed tensor eddy-visc. model
 Results: Dynamic Model Coefficients

Dynamic Smagorinsky Dynamic Mixed tensor eddy visc:

~
dyn Smag
= 2
Lij M ij
S Sij
2 u~i u j ~~
ij M ij M ij mnnl
ij = Cnl 2
2(CS ) 2 S Sij
xk xk
0.2 0.2

0.15 C 0.15
s C C
nl nl

C
s
C 0.1 0.1 C
s C C s
nl s
1/12 from the first order
0.05 0.05 approximation of Lij

0 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 0 10 20 30 40 50
x /M x /M
1 1
3-D Energy Spectra (LES vs experiment)
Dynamic Smagorinsky
0
10

-1
10 x /M=20
1

-2
10 x /M=48 Exp.
1

E()
-3
10
cutoff grid filter
-4
(D = 0.04 m)
10
cutoff test filter
at 2D
-5
10
0 1 2 3
10 10 10 10

3-D Energy Spectra (LES vs experiment)
Dynamic Mixed tensor eddy-visc. model
0
10

-1
10 x /M=20
1

-2
10 x /M=48
1

E()
-3
10
cutoff grid filter
(D = 0.04 m)
10
-4
cutoff test filter
at 2D
-5
10
0 1 2 3
10 10 10 10

PDF of SGS Stress (LES vs experiment)
SGS Stress ~ ~
12 u1u2 u1u2
25
x /M=48
1
20
Smagorisnky

15 Dynamic
Smagorisnky
PDF
Dynamic Mixed Dynamic mixed tensor
10
Nonlinear eddy-visc model predicts
PDF of the SGS stress
5
accurately.
Exp.
0
-0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
12 / u~12rms
Germano identity and dynamic model
(Germano et al. 1991):

Exact (rare in turbulence):

ui u j ui u j = uiu j - u iu j + u iu j u iu j E(k)

Tij = ij + Lij
Lij (Tij ij ) = 0
2 (c s 2 ) | S | Sij
2
2 (c s ) | S | Sij
2
L ! k
T

Assumes scale-invariance:
LES resolved SGS
Lij c Mij = 0
2
s

(
where M ij = 2 | S | Sij 4 | S | Sij
2
)
Germano identity and dynamic model
(Germano et al. 1991):

Lij c s Mij = 0
2

Over-determined system:
solve in some average sense
(minimize error, Lilly 1992):
= (Lij c Mij )
2 2
s
Averaging over regions of
Minimized when: statistical homogeneity
or fluid trajectories
Lij Mij
c =
2
s
Mij Mij

Problem: what to do for non-homogeneous

flows without directions over which to
average (learn, or assimilate larger-
scale statistics?)
Lagrangian dynamic model (M, Lund & Cabot, JFM 1996):
Average in time, following fluid particles for Galilean invariance:

t
1 (t T-t')
(L )
2
E = ij C M ij
2
s e dt'

T
Lagrangian dynamic model (M, Lund & Cabot, JFM 1996):
Average in time, following fluid particles for Galilean invariance:

t
1 (t T-t')
(L )
2
E = ij C M ij
2
s e dt'

T
t
1 (tT-t')
LM = Lij M ij e
t (t -t' )
1 dt'
Lij M ij
T
e dt'T

T
E =0 Cs =
2
t (t -t' )
1 T
Mij Mij T e dt'
t
1 (t -t'
)

MM = Mij Mij e T dt'

T
Lagrangian dynamic model (M, Lund & Cabot, JFM 1996):
Average in time, following fluid particles for Galilean invariance:

t
1 (t T-t')
(L )
2
E = ij C M ij
2
s e dt'

T
t
1 (tT-t')
LM = Lij M ij e
t (t -t' )
1 dt'
Lij M ij
T
e dt'T

T
E =0 Cs =
2
t (t -t' )
1 T
Mij Mij T e dt'
t
1 (t -t'
)

MM = Mij Mij e T dt'

T

With exponential weight-function, equivalent to relaxation forward equations:

LM 1
t
+ uk LM = (Lij M ij LM )
xk LM (x,t)
c =
T 2

MM 1
s
MM (x,t)
+ uk MM = (Mij Mij MM )
t x k T
Lagrangian dynamic model has allowed applying the Germano-
identity to a number of complex-geometry engineering problems

LES of flows in internal combustion

engines:
Haworth & Jansen (2000)
Computers & Fluids 29.
Examples:
LES of flow over wavy walls
Armenio & Piomelli (2000)
Flow, Turb. & Combustion.
LES of structure of impinging jets:
Tsubokura et al. (2003)
Int Heat Fluid Flow 24.
Examples:
LES of flow in thrust-reversers
Blin, Hadjadi & Vervisch (2002)
J. of Turbulence.
Examples:

LES of flow in turbomachinery

Zou, Wang, Moin, Mittal. (2007)
Journal of Fluid Mechanics.
Examples:
Human swimming flow structures (Rajat Mittal, 2008)

Michael Phelps
local Baltimore boy
 Ciclo di seminari
Universita degli studi di Roma, Tor Vergata
May, 2013

OVERVIEW:
Mercoled:

Introduction to fundamentals of Turbulence

Intro to Large Eddy Simulation (LES)
Intro to Subgrid-scale (SGS) modeling
The dynamic SGS model
Some sample applications from our group

Venerd:

Dynamic model for LES over rough multiscale surfaces

LES studies of large wind farms

JHU Mechanical Engineering

Examples:

LES of convective atmospheric boundary layer:

Kumar, M. & Parlange (Water Resources Research 42, 2006)

Transport equation for temperature

Boussinesq approximation
Coriolis forcing
Lagrangian dynamic model with assumed b=Cs(2 D)/Cs(D)
Constant (non-dynamic) SGS Prandtl number Prsgs=0.4
Imposed surface flux of sensible heat on ground
Diurnal cycle: start stably stratified, then heating.

Imposed ground
heat flux during day:
Examples:

Diurnal cycle: start stably stratified, then heating.

Resulting dynamic
coefficient (averaged):

Consistent with HATS

field measurements:
Large-eddy-Simulation of atmospheric flow over fractal trees:
Chester, M & Parlange
(J. Comp. Phys. 225, 2007; J. Env. Fluid Mech. 7, 2007)
 Urban contamination and Transport
Tseng, M. & Parlange, Env. Sci & Tech. 40, 2006

Downtown Baltimore:
wind

Momentum and scalar transport equations solved using LES and Lagrangian dynamic
subgrid model. Buildings are simulated using immersed boundary method.
Agriculture: What is the isolation distance to avoid cross-polination?

Collaboration with Marcelo Chamecki (Penn State U)

Deposition flux?

Liso
LES:
Eulerian approach C(x,y,z,t)
Vertical settling velocity ws
C
t (( )
+ ( u ws e 3 ) i C = i Csdyn Scsgs
2 1
| S | C )
Scale-dep dynamic eddy-viscosity eddy-diffusivity SGS
Log-law type boundary condition
For C, log-law, corrected by settling velocity

Low ws

emitter field

High ws

Deposition flux?

Liso
LES results:
Downstream evolution of concentration profiles

Downstream evolution of
deposition flux
1-D reduction (back to early 1900s) - vertical profile

Similarity solution
for any eta (Rouse #)
Deposition downstream of field:

Sc ws
=
u*

deltaL is proper length-scale for

deposition flux, not L
Comparison with LES: Sc ws
= = 0.125
u*

Over field

Downstream
Scaling of deposition flux: field edge delta instead of L

Sc ws
= = 0.313
u* Traditional approach
(current rules)
Sc ws
= =0
u*
deltaL

Different L
L

Sc ws
Scaling with deltaL
= = 0.313
u*

Sc ws
= =0
u*

Collapse for
different L
 Isolation distance as function of flux threshold:

Sc ws
E.g., ws=0.06 m/s (d=40 micro-m), u*=0.5 m/s, Sc=1, k=0.4, = = 0.3
u*

L=500m -> deltaL=30m, E.g., Phi=10-3 -> ID/deltaL ~150

ID = 4.5km !!
Useful references on LES and SGS modeling:

P. Sagaut: Large Eddy Simulation of Incompressible

Flow (Springer, 3rd ed., 2006)

U. Piomelli, Progr. Aerospace Sci., 1999

C. Meneveau & J. Katz, Annu Rev. Fluid Mech., 2000