Abstract

Despite advances in turbulence modelling, the Smagorinsky model remains a popular choice for large eddy simulation (LES) due to its simplicity and ease of use. The dissipation in turbulence energy that the model introduces, is proportional to the Smagorinsky constant, of which many different values have been proposed. These values have been derived for certain simulated test-cases while using a specific set of numerical schemes, to obtain the correct dissipation in energy simply because an incorrect value of the Smagorinsky constant would lead to an incorrect dissipation. However, it is important to bear in mind that numerical codes may suffer from numerical or artificial dissipation, which occurs spuriously through a combination of spatio-temporal and iterative errors. The latter can be controlled through more iterations, the former however, depends on the grid resolution and the time step. Recent research suggests that a complete energy-conserving (EC) spatio-temporal discretisation guarantees zero numerical dissipation for any grid resolution and time step. Therefore, using an EC scheme would ensure that dissipation occurs primarily through the Smagorinsky model (and errors in its implementation) than through the discretisation of the Navier-Stokes (NS) equations. To evaluate the efficacy of these schemes for engineering applications, the article first discusses the use of an EC temporal discretisation as regards to accuracy and computational effort, to ascertain whether EC time advancement is advantageous or not. It was noticed that a simple non-EC explicit method with a smaller time step not only reduces the numerical dissipation to an acceptable level but is computationally cheaper than an implicit-EC scheme for wide range of time steps. Secondly, in terms of spatial discretisation on uniform grids (popular in LES), a simple central-difference scheme is as accurate as an EC spatial discretisation. Finally, following the removal of numerical dissipation with any of the methods mentioned above, one is able to choose a Smagorinsky constant that is nearly independent of the grid resolution (within realistic bounds, for OpenFOAM and an in-house code). This article provides impetus to the efficient use of the Smagorinsky model for LES in fields such as wind farm aerodynamics and atmospheric simulations, instead of more comprehensive and computationally demanding turbulence models.

Highlights

  • Large eddy simulation (LES) is a fine alternative for simulating high Reynolds number flows as compared to the computationally demanding direct numerical simulation (DNS)

  • With regards to an implicit EC time integration scheme, one may conclude that it is capable of averting numerical dissipation at large time steps, while remaining stable and leading to an accurate solution

  • Using a 2nd order explicit non-EC scheme may not be favourable as even an implicit EC 2nd order scheme requires a reasonably small time step for accuracy

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Large eddy simulation (LES) is a fine alternative for simulating high Reynolds number flows as compared to the computationally demanding direct numerical simulation (DNS). These were combinations of 2nd and 4th order discretisation of the convective and diffusive terms of the NS equations, advanced in time with a 2nd order explicit Runge-Kutta scheme They commented mostly on the effect of spatial discretisation and the resulting numerical dissipation on the overall accuracy of LES. A central difference scheme is based on arithmetic means on a collocated grid As a result, both schemes do not have a dissipative error per se. The tests described in this article are simulated using the simple central difference scheme on collocated grids available in the open source field operation and manipulation (OpenFOAM) toolbox [8] and the EC schemes within the Energy-Conserving Navier-Stokes (ECNS) code [9] owned by the Energy research Centre of the Netherlands (ECN, TNO). It is important to emphasise that this article is aimed solely at assessing how effectively the Smagorinsky model can be adapted to simulate flows with the EC schemes, towards ascertaining if such an approach could find its way into practical applications in engineering

LES and the Smagorinsky Model
Dissipation in a Numerical Scheme
ECNS and OpenFOAM
OpenFOAM
Grid-Generated Turbulence
Effect of Time Step and Time Integration
Stability
Error Analysis
Accuracy
Efficiency
Effect of Spatial Discretisation Schemes
Tuning the Smagorinsky Model
OpenFOAM and the Influence of Numerical Dissipation
Simulation of the ABL with the ECNS
Findings
Conclusions
Full Text
Paper version not known

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