Numerical Study of Transonic Shock/Boundary Layer Interactions on an Oscillating Airfoil Using a Third-Order Scheme and Nonlinear Turbulence Models
The understanding and the prediction of unsteady shock/turbulent boundary layer interactions is of great importance for many external and internal aerodynamic applications, notably when the shock is strong enough to produce massive boundary layer separation. This kind of phenomena represents a really challenging CFD problem, both for turbulence models and numerical methods. The modeling difficulties are related to the simultaneous occurrence of compressibility effects, strong pressure gradients, boundary layer separation, streamline curvature, all of which give rise to unequal normal Reynolds stresses. In such cases, standard eddy viscosity models generally show all their deficiencies, inherent to the linear description chosen for the Reynolds stress tensor. Additional difficulties are due to flow unsteadiness: as pointed out in , standard transport equation models, by their nature, are not completely suitable for time-dependent calculations; on the other hand more sofisticated approaches are still not reliable enough and too much expensive to be used in such extremely complex unsteady flow fields. It is then necessary to look for some compromise solution: an ”optimal” turbulence model for transonic separated unsteady flows should account for more flow physics than standard Boussinesq models and, at the same time, have good numerical robustness and moderate computational cost. ¿From this point of view, the new generation of algebraic Reynolds stress closures seems to be quite promising.
KeywordsCompressibility Nite Acoustics RANS
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 3.S.S. Davis: ‘NACA64A010 Oscillatory Pitching’. AGARD R-702 (1982)Google Scholar
- 4.P. Cinnella, A. Lerat: CFD J. 9, 1 (2000)Google Scholar
- 5.Y. Huang, P. Cinnella, A. Lerat: ‘A Third-Order Accurate Centered Scheme for Turbulent Compressible Flow Calculations in Aerodynamics’. In: Numerical Meth. Fluid Dynam. VI, (Will Print 1998) pp. 355–3Google Scholar
- 6.A. Rezgui, P. Cinnella, A. Lerat: ‘Third-Order Finite Volume Scheme for Euler Computations on Curvilinear Meshes’, to appear (2000)Google Scholar
- 7.P. Cinnella, A. Lerat: ‘A Fully Implicit Third-Order Scheme in Time and Space for Unsteady Turbulent Compressible Flow Simulations’. To be published in: EC-COMAS 2000, Barcelona, Spain, September 2000 Google Scholar
- 10.P.R. Spalart, S.R. Allmaras: ‘A One-Equation Turbulence Model for Aerodynamic Flows’. AIAA Paper 92-0439Google Scholar
- 12.B.R. Smith: ‘A Near Wall Model for the k-l Two-Equation Turbulence Model’. AIAA Paper 84-2386Google Scholar
- 13.A. Jameson, W. Schmidt, E. Turkei: ‘Numerical Solutions of the Euler Equations by Finite Volume Methods Using Runge-Kutta Time Stepping’. AIAA Paper 81-1259Google Scholar
- 14.A. Lerat, J. Sidès, V. Daru: ‘An Implicit Finite-Volume Method for Solving the Euler Equations’. In: Lecture Notes in Physics 110 (Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg 1982) pp. 343–349Google Scholar
- 15.A. Jameson: ‘Time-Dependent Calculations Using Multigrid, with Applications to Unsteady Flows Past Airfoils and Wings’. AIAA Paper 91-1596Google Scholar
- 16.A.M. Vuillot, V. Couailler: ‘3D Turbomachinery Euler and Navier-Stokes Calculations with a Multidomain Cell-Centered Approach’. AIAA Paper 93-2576Google Scholar