APPLICABILITY OF LES MODELS FOR PREDICTION OF TRANSITIONAL FLOWSTRUCTURES

  • Philipp Schlatter
  • Steffen Stolz
  • Leonhard Kleiser
Conference paper
Part of the Fluid Mechanics and Its Applications book series (FMIA, volume 78)

Abstract

Instantaneous transitional flow structures of standard K-type transition in in-compressible plane channel flow predicted by large-eddy simulations (LES) arecompared to fully-resolved DNS data. For the LES different subgrid-scale (SGS) models are compared. It is investigated how well the SGS models on coarse grids are able to predict the physically relevant mechanisms at successive stages of transition: Λ-vortices, rollup of shear layers, hairpin vortices. Additionally, results for the exact subgrid-scale dissipation are computed from the DNS data. The results suggest that SGS models including a three-dimensional relaxation regularization show similar transitional structures as present in the DNS, whereas the dynamic Smagorinsky model does not show hairpin vortices for the chosen coarse resolution.

Keywords

Shear Layer Direct Numerical Simulation Direct Numerical Simulation Data Hairpin Vortex Direct Numerical Simulation Result 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. [1]
    M. Germano, U. Piomelli, P. Moin, and W. H. Cabot. A dynamic subgrid-scale eddy viscosity model. Phys. Fluids A, 3(7):1760–1765, 1991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    N. Gilbert and L. Kleiser. Near-wall phenomena in transition to turbulence. In S. J. Klineć and N. H. Afgan, editors, Near-Wall Turbulence - 1988 Zoran Zarić Memorial Conference, pages 7–27. Hemisphere, New York, USA, 1990.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    J. Jeong and F. Hussain. On the identification of a vortex. J. Fluid Mech., 285:69–94, 1995.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    M. Nishioka, S. Iida, and Y. Ichikawa. An experimental investigation of the stability of plane Poiseuille flow. J. Fluid Mech., 72:731–751, 1975.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    N. D. Sandham and L. Kleiser. The late stages of transition to turbulence in channel flow. J. Fluid Mech., 245:319–348, 1992.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    P. Schlatter, S. Stolz, and L. Kleiser. LES of transitional flows using the approximate deconvolution model. Int. J. Heat Fluid Flow, 25(3):549–558, 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    S. Stolz, N. A. Adams, and L. Kleiser. An approximate deconvolution model for large-eddy simulation with application to incompressible wall-bounded flows. Phys. Fluids, 13(4):997–1015, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Philipp Schlatter
    • 1
  • Steffen Stolz
    • 1
  • Leonhard Kleiser
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Fluid DynamicsSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations