Skip to main content
Log in

Application of deep learning method to Reynolds stress models of channel flow based on reduced-order modeling of DNS data

  • Articles
  • Published:
Journal of Hydrodynamics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Recently, the methodology of deep learning is used to improve the calculation accuracy of the Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) model. In this paper, a neural network is designed to predict the Reynolds stress of a channel flow of different Reynolds numbers. The rationality and the high efficiency of the neural network is validated by comparing with the results of the direct numerical simulation (DNS), the large eddy simulation (LES), and the deep neural network (DNN) of other studies. To further enhance the prediction accuracy, three methods are developed by using several algorithms and simplified models in the neural network. In the method 1, the regularization is introduced and it is found that the oscillation and the overfitting of the results are effectively prevented. In the method 2, y+ is embedded in the input variable while the combination of the invariants is simplified in the method 3. From the predicted results, it can be seen that by using the first two methods, the errors are reduced. Moreover, the method 3 shows considerable advantages in the DNS trend and the smoothness of a curve. Consequently, it is concluded that the DNNs can predict effectively the anisotropic Reynolds stress and is a promising technique of the computational fluid dynamics.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Vandriest E. R. On turbulent flow near a wall [J]. Journal of the Aeronautical Sciences, 1956, 23(11): 1007–1011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Feiereisen W. J. Numerical simulation of a compressible homogeneous, turbulent shear flow [D]. Doctoral Thesis, Stanford, USA: Stanford University, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Benzi R., Patarnello S., Santangelo P. On the statistical properties of two-dimensional decaying turbulence [J]. Europhysics Letters, 1987, 3(7): 811–818.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Brachet M. E., Meneguzzi M., Sulem P. L. Small-scale dynamics of high-reynolds-number two-dimensional turbulence [J]. Physical Review Letters, 1986, 57(6): 683–686.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Gilbert A. D. Spiral structures and spectra in two-dimensional turbulence [J]. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 1988, 193: 475–497.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Pope S. B. Turbulent flows [M]. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2001.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  7. Rodi W. On the simulation of turbulent flow past bluff bodies [J]. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 1993, 46-47: 3–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Speziale C. G. A review of Reynolds stress models for turbulent shear flows [C]. 20th Symposium on Naval Hydrodynamics, Washington DC, USA, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Spalart P. R. Philosophies and fallacies in turbulence modeling [J]. Progress in Aerospace Sciences, 2015, 74: 1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Dutta R., Xing T. Five-equation and robust three-equation method for solution verification of large eddy simulations [J]. Journal of Hydrodynamics, 2018, 30(1): 23–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Cheng H. Y., Long X. P., Liang Y. Z. et al. URANS simulations of the tip-leakage cavitating flow with verification and validation procedures [J]. Journal of Hydrodynamics, 2018, 30(3): 531–534.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Wang C. C., Huang B., Wang G. Y. et al. Numerical simulation of transient turbulent cavitating flows with special emphasis on shock wave dynamics considering the water/vapor compressibility [J]. Journal of Hydrodynamics, 2018, 30(4): 573–591.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Hinton G., Salakhutdinov R. Reducing the dimensionality of data with neural networks [J]. Science, 2006, 313(5786): 504–507.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Tracey B., Duraisamy K., Alonso J. Application of supervised learning to quantify uncertainties in turbulence and combustion modeling [C]. 51st AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting Including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition, Texas, USA, 2013, 2013–0259.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Ling J., Ruiz A., Lacaze G. et al. Uncertainty analysis and data-driven model advances for a jet-in-crossflow [J]. Journal of Turbomachinery, 2016, 139(2): 021008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Ling J., Kurzawski A., Templeton J. Reynolds averaged turbulence modelling using deep neural networks with embedded invariance [J]. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 2016, 807: 155–166.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Kutz J. N. Deep earning in fluid dynamics [J]. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 2017, 814: 1–4.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Wang J. X., Wu J. L., Xiao H. Physics-informed machine learning approach for reconstructing Reynolds stress modeling discrepancies based on DNS data [J]. Physical Review Fluids, 2017, 2(3): 1–22.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Xiao H., Wu J. L., Wang J. X. et al. Quantifying and reducing model-form uncertainties in Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes simulations: A data-driven, physics-informed Bayesian approach [J]. Journal of Computational Physics, 2016, 324(C): 115–136.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Lecun Y., Bengio Y., Hinton G. Deep learning [J]. Nature, 2015, 521(7553): 436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Jarrett K., Kavukcuoglu K., Ranzato M. et al. What is the best multi-stage architecture for object recognition? [C]. International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), Kyoto, Japan, 2009, 2146–2153.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Krizhevsky A., Sutskever I., Hinton G. E. ImageNet classification with deep convolutional neural networks [C]. 25th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, Nevada, USA, 2012, 1097–1105.

    Google Scholar 

  23. He K., Zhang X., Ren S. et al. Deep residual learning for image recognition [C]. International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), Santiago, Chile, 2015, 1026–1034.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Maas A. L., Hannun A. Y., Ng A. Y. Rectifier nonlinearities improve neural network acoustic models [C]. International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), Atlanta, USA, 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Pope S. B. A more general effective-viscosity hypothesis [J]. Journal of Fluid Mechanics Digital Archive, 1975, 72(2): 331–340.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  26. Jones R., Templeton J., Ling J. Machine learning strategies for systems with invariance properties [J]. Journal of Computational Physics, 2016, 318(8): 22–35.

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  27. Moser R. D., Kim J., Mansour N. N. Direct numerical simulation of turbulent channel flow up to Re = 590 ? [J]. Physics of Fluids, 1999, 11(4): 943–945.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  28. Krogh A., Hertz J. A. A simple weight decay can improve generalization [C]. International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems. San Mateo, California, USA, 1992, 950–957.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yi-wei Wang.

Additional information

Project supported by the National Key R&D Program (Grant No. 2016YFC0301601).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhang, Z., Song, Xd., Ye, Sr. et al. Application of deep learning method to Reynolds stress models of channel flow based on reduced-order modeling of DNS data. J Hydrodyn 31, 58–65 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42241-018-0156-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42241-018-0156-9

Key words

Navigation