Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
166 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
42 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

A comparative study of explicit and implicit Large Eddy Simulations using a high-order discontinuous Galerkin solver: application to a Formula 1 front wing (2402.10913v1)

Published 15 Jan 2024 in math.NA, cs.CE, and cs.NA

Abstract: This paper explores two Large Eddy Simulation (LES) approaches within the framework of the high-order discontinuous Galerkin solver, Horses3D. The investigation focuses on an Inverted Multi-element Wing in Ground Effect (i.e. 2.5D Imperial Front Wing section) representing a Formula 1 front wing, and compares the strengths and limitations of the two LES methods. The explicit LES formulation relies on the Vreman model, that adapts to laminar, transitional and turbulent regimes. The numerical formulation uses nodal basis functions and Gauss points. The implicit LES formulation, does not require explicit turbulence modeling but relies in the discretization scheme. We use the Kennedy-Gruber entropy stable formulation to enhance stability in under resolved simulations, since we recover the continuous properties such as entropy conservation at a discrete level. This formulation employs Gauss-Lobatto points, which downgrades the accuracy of integration but allows for larger time steps in explicit time integration. We compare our results to Nektar++ [1] showing that both LES techniques provide results that agree well with the reference values. The implicit LES shows to better capture transition and allows for larger time steps at a similar cost per iteration. We conclude that this implicit LES formulation is very attractive for complex simulations.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (29)
  1. Large Eddy Simulation of an Inverted Multi-Element Wing in Ground Effect. Flow, Turbulence and Combustion. 2023;110(4):917-44.
  2. HORSES3D: A high-order discontinuous Galerkin solver for flow simulations and multi-physics applications. Computer Physics Communications. 2023;287:108700. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010465523000450.
  3. Smagorinsky J. General circulation experiments with the primitive equations: I. The basic experiment. Monthly weather review. 1963;91(3):99-164.
  4. Lilly DK. On the computational stability of numerical solutions of time-dependent non-linear geophysical fluid dynamics problems. Monthly Weather Review. 1965;93(1):11-25.
  5. Nicoud F, Ducros F. Subgrid-scale stress modelling based on the square of the velocity gradient tensor. Flow, turbulence and Combustion. 1999;62(3):183-200.
  6. Vreman A. An eddy-viscosity subgrid-scale model for turbulent shear flow: Algebraic theory and applications. Physics of fluids. 2004;16(10):3670-81.
  7. Computational study on an Ahmed Body equipped with simplified underbody diffuser. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics. 2021;209:104411. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. Available from: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10494-023-00404-7.
  8. Fisher TC, Carpenter MH. High-order entropy stable finite difference schemes for nonlinear conservation laws: Finite domains. Journal of Computational Physics. 2013;252:518-57.
  9. Kopriva DA, Gassner GJ. An energy stable discontinuous Galerkin spectral element discretization for variable coefficient advection problems. SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing. 2014;36(4):A2076-99.
  10. Split form nodal discontinuous Galerkin schemes with summation-by-parts property for the compressible Euler equations. Journal of Computational Physics. 2016;327:39-66.
  11. The BR1 scheme is stable for the compressible Navier–Stokes equations. Journal of Scientific Computing. 2018;77(1):154-200.
  12. Entropy–stable discontinuous Galerkin approximation with summation–by–parts property for the incompressible Navier–Stokes/Cahn–Hilliard system. Journal of Computational Physics. 2020:109363.
  13. Chen T, Shu CW. Entropy stable high order discontinuous Galerkin methods with suitable quadrature rules for hyperbolic conservation laws. Journal of Computational Physics. 2017;345:427-61.
  14. A comparative study on polynomial dealiasing and split form discontinuous Galerkin schemes for under-resolved turbulence computations. Journal of Computational Physics. 2018;372:1-21.
  15. Gassner GJ. A skew-symmetric discontinuous Galerkin spectral element discretization and its relation to SBP-SAT finite difference methods. SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing. 2013;35(3):A1233-53.
  16. High-Reynolds-number wall-modelled large eddy simulations of turbulent pipe flows using explicit and implicit subgrid stress treatments within a spectral element solver. Computers & Fluids. 2019;191:104239. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0045793018305875.
  17. Jump penalty stabilization techniques for under-resolved turbulence in discontinuous Galerkin schemes. Journal of Computational Physics. 2023;491:112399. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0021999123004941.
  18. Construction of modern robust nodal discontinuous Galerkin spectral element methods for the compressible Navier–Stokes equations. In: Efficient High-Order Discretizations for Computational Fluid Dynamics. Springer; 2021. p. 117-96.
  19. Chen T, Shu CW. Review of entropy stable discontinuous Galerkin methods for systems of conservation laws on unstructured simplex meshes. CSIAM Trans Appl Math. 2020;1(1):1-52.
  20. Kennedy CA, Gruber A. Reduced aliasing formulations of the convective terms within the Navier–Stokes equations for a compressible fluid. Journal of Computational Physics. 2008;227(3):1676-700.
  21. Entropy stable spectral collocation schemes for the Navier–Stokes equations: Discontinuous interfaces. SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing. 2014;36(5):B835-67.
  22. Insights on Aliasing Driven Instabilities for Advection Equations with Application to Gauss-Lobatto Discontinuous Galerkin Methods. J Sci Comput. 2018;75(3):1262-81. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10915-017-0585-6.
  23. Kopriva DA, Gassner G. On the quadrature and weak form choices in collocation type discontinuous Galerkin spectral element methods. Journal of Scientific Computing. 2010;44:136-55.
  24. Siemens Digital Industries Software. Simcenter STAR-CCM+, version 2022.1; Siemens 2022. Available from: https://www.plm.automation.siemens.com/global/en/products/simcenter/STAR-CCM.html.
  25. Mesh Curving Techniques for High Order Discontinuous Galerkin Simulations. In: IDIHOM: Industrialization of High-Order Methods-A Top-Down Approach. Springer; 2015. p. 133-52.
  26. Nektar++: An open-source spectral/hp element framework. Computer physics communications. 2015;192:205-19.
  27. Nektar++: Enhancing the capability and application of high-fidelity spectral/hp element methods. Computer Physics Communications. 2020;249:107110.
  28. Gassner G, Kopriva DA. A Comparison of the Dispersion and Dissipation Errors of Gauss and Gauss–Lobatto Discontinuous Galerkin Spectral Element Methods. SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing. 2011;33(5):2560-79. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1137/100807211.
  29. Taylor GI, Green AE. Mechanism of the Production of Small Eddies from Large Ones. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series A. 1937 Feb;158(895):499-521.

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.