4.5 Article

Validation of OpenFOAM numerical methods and turbulence models for incompressible bluff body flows

期刊

COMPUTERS & FLUIDS
卷 123, 期 -, 页码 122-145

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.compfluid.2015.09.010

关键词

OpenFOAM; Verification and validation; Numerical methods; Turbulence models

资金

  1. NASA [NNX10AN06A]
  2. Engineering Research & Development Center [W912HZ-15-2-0004]
  3. NASA [NNX10AN06A, 127927] Funding Source: Federal RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A verification and validation study was performed using the open source computational fluid dynamics solver OpenFOAM version 2.0.0 for incompressible bluff body fluid flows. This includes flow over a backward facing step, a sphere in the subcritical regime, and delta wing with sharp leading edge. The study investigates solver scalability, and accuracy of numerical methods and turbulence models available in the solver. Grid verification study shows mostly monotonic convergence with averaged grid uncertainty <5% for integral quantities and up to 10% for local variables. The solver shows good strong scalability up to 192 processors on a mesh with 11M cells. The study identifies that the 2nd order linear upwind scheme is most efficient and accurate for Reynolds Averaged Navier Stokes (RANS) simulations, while the lst/2nd order blended limited linear scheme is best for simulations employing hybrid RANS/Large Eddy Simulation (HRL). PIMPLE and SIMPLE pressure velocity coupling methods are identified to be best for HRL and RANS simulations, respectively. The validation study showed that drag and mean velocity predictions compared within 5% of the experimental data, whereas larger errors were predicted for turbulent kinetic energy and instability frequency predictions. OpenFOAM predictions compared within 6% of FLUENT results for backward facing step and sphere cases, and performed better than the latter for the delta wing vortex breakdown predictions. Overall, OpenFOAM is found to be a reliable research solver; however, it is more sensitivity to grid quality than FLUENT, which needs to be further investigated. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据