Abstract

Data-driven turbulence modelling is becoming common practice in the field of fluid mechanics. Complex machine learning methods are applied to large high fidelity data sets in an attempt to discover relationships between mean flow features and turbulence model parameters. However, a clear discrepancy is emerging between complex models that appear to fit the high fidelity data well a priori and simpler models which subsequently hold up in a posteriori testing through CFD simulations. With this in mind, a novel error quantification technique is proposed consisting of an upper and lower bound, against which data-driven turbulence models can be systematically assessed. At the lower bound is models that are linear in either the full set or a subset of the input features, where feature selection is used to determine the best model. Any machine learning technique must be able to improve on this performance for the extra complexity in training to be of practical use. The upper bound is found by the stable insertion of the high fidelity data for the Reynolds stresses into CFD simulation. Three machine learning methods, Gene Expression Programming, Deep Neural Networks and Gaussian Mixtures Models are presented and assessed on this error quantification technique. We further show that for the simple canonical cases often used to develop data-driven methods, lower bound linear models can provide very satisfactory accuracy and stability with limited scope for substantial improvement through more complex machine learning methods.

Highlights

  • Turbulence modelling has seen renewed interest over the past decade with the growing availability of high fidelity Direct Numerical and Large Eddy Simulation (DNS/LES) flow data (Durbin 2018)

  • The techniques assessed in this work are: (1) Gene Expression Programming (GEP); (2) Deep Neural Networks (DNN) and (3) a novel mixture model that regresses a sum of multivariate Gaussians, merging the gradient based optimisation of DNNs with the ability to obtain an explicit model, which is one of the key advantages of GEP

  • This is achieved through discovery of the exact basis coefficients, which are fully consistent with the data-driven framework

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Turbulence modelling has seen renewed interest over the past decade with the growing availability of high fidelity Direct Numerical and Large Eddy Simulation (DNS/LES) flow data (Durbin 2018). Many data-driven turbulence models are currently developed and tested on a set of just a few canonical flow cases given the availability of validated high fidelity data for these cases They include: (1) backward-facing step, (2) periodic hills, (3) curved backward-facing step, (4) converging diverging channel, (5) family of bumps, (6) square duct (Brener et al 2021; Wu et al 2018; Duraisamy et al 2015). Even in these simple test cases, a trend is appearing that models accurately fitting the high fidelity data a priori bare little correlation to improved velocity predictions a posteriori (Wu et al 2017). The developed models are applied to the periodic hills case to assess the viability of each technique in an unseen predictive case

Governing Equations and Data Preparation
Data‐Driven Closure Framework
Consistent Frozen RANS
Upper Bound
Optimal Basis Coefficients
Stabilising Basis Coefficients
Basis Selection
Training Data Extraction
Model‐Selection Procedure
Lower Bound
Assessment of Machine Learning Techniques
Gene Expression Programming
Deep Neural Networks
Mixtures Models
Summary of Machine Learning Techniques
Application to Periodic Hills
Findings
Conclusions
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call