CFD Online Logo CFD Online URL
www.cfd-online.com
[Sponsors]
Home > Forums > Main CFD Forum

exlpicit/implicit filtering LES discussion

Register Blogs Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   October 13, 2015, 11:46
Default exlpicit/implicit filtering LES discussion
  #1
Member
 
Kaya Onur Dag
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 57
Rep Power: 4
kaya is on a distinguished road
In an LES simulation with a spectral solver (dealiased convective), we explicitly model SGS viscosity.

However if we were to approximate our derivatives with finite differences, we would introduce some numerical dissipation. If we say that numerical dissipation in our system is equal to the energy dissipation, we don't add an explicit filter. This happens to be implicit LES.-correct me if I am wrong.

My first question is, when should a user consider applying an explicit filter and by using which evidence? In other words, how to make such an argument like my "numerical dissipation is not enough"? By looking at the energy spectrum?

In my mind, numerical dissipation would act on the the smallest structure that the grid could resolve. If so, how correct is to assume that "the smallest structure could be resolved, is the only one that would transfer the energy to smaller scales if it was a DNS" ?
kaya is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   October 13, 2015, 11:55
Default
  #2
Senior Member
 
Filippo Maria Denaro
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,004
Rep Power: 27
FMDenaro will become famous soon enoughFMDenaro will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaya View Post
In an LES simulation with a spectral solver (dealiased convective), we explicitly model SGS viscosity.

However if we were to approximate our derivatives with finite differences, we would introduce some numerical dissipation. If we say that numerical dissipation in our system is equal to the energy dissipation, we don't add an explicit filter. This happens to be implicit LES.-correct me if I am wrong.

My first question is, when should a user consider applying an explicit filter and by using which evidence? In other words, how to make such an argument like my "numerical dissipation is not enough"? By looking at the energy spectrum?

In my mind, numerical dissipation would act on the the smallest structure that the grid could resolve. If so, how correct is to assume that "the smallest structure could be resolved, is the only one that would transfer the energy to smaller scales if it was a DNS" ?

be careful, a Finite Difference formula does not necessarily introduce a dissipative-like truncation error... central formulas are an example, their truncation error does not act as numerical dissipation. For that reason, the SGS is introduced with the aim of mimicking the effect of the smallest scales that are not resolved by the LES grid.

On the other hand, upwind discretization introduce dissipation by the truncation error. Such effect only mimics the real physical dissipation, is not necessarily exactly the same. Using schemes with numerical dissipation without using an explicit SGS model is often referred as to Implicit LES (ILES). But that has nothing to do with implicit/explicit filtering
FMDenaro is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   October 13, 2015, 12:15
Default
  #3
Member
 
Kaya Onur Dag
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 57
Rep Power: 4
kaya is on a distinguished road
Why? Isn't implicit/explicit filtering is explicit filtered NS equations with numerically dissipative schemes applied in the solving stage?

Since characteristic lengths of the filters are different their effect should be considered on different areas (in frequency space) with different magnitudes. To me this is very confusing especially when you add these two up.
kaya is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   October 13, 2015, 12:26
Default
  #4
Senior Member
 
Filippo Maria Denaro
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,004
Rep Power: 27
FMDenaro will become famous soon enoughFMDenaro will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaya View Post
Why? Isn't implicit/explicit filtering is explicit filtered NS equations with numerically dissipative schemes applied in the solving stage?

Since characteristic lengths of the filters are different their effect should be considered on different areas (in frequency space) with different magnitudes. To me this is very confusing especially when you add these two up.

no, nothing to do between explicit filtering and numerically dissipative schemes...explicit filtering is a technique you can apply on all discretizations, spectral methods included.
FMDenaro is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   October 13, 2015, 12:39
Default
  #5
Member
 
Kaya Onur Dag
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 57
Rep Power: 4
kaya is on a distinguished road
I don't agree with you, I think there are affecting each other (incase of implicit+explicit filtering) and one should know which one is doing what but perhaps there is more chances me being wrong then you.

Thanks
kaya is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   October 13, 2015, 12:48
Default
  #6
Senior Member
 
Filippo Maria Denaro
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,004
Rep Power: 27
FMDenaro will become famous soon enoughFMDenaro will become famous soon enough
ok, no problem
FMDenaro is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
LES Filtering: how are the small and large scales equations solved? atmcfd Main CFD Forum 37 January 4, 2016 04:29
implicit and explicit filtering in LES kkpal OpenFOAM 0 February 19, 2014 03:27
LES filtering question martyn88 OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 1 October 18, 2012 03:08
Dynamic filtering for LES Takuya TSUJI Main CFD Forum 1 July 14, 1999 02:17
Channel LES and explicit filtering Luca Liberti Main CFD Forum 0 January 17, 1999 11:07


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 14:20.