LES Compressible Smagorinsky Model

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

January 29, 2013, 16:40
#21
Senior Member

Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 168
Rep Power: 7
Quote:
 Originally Posted by gregor Hi H take Eq. 5 and divide it by k^(1/2) and you get: - c_B*rho*k*Delta^(-1) = 2/3 rho*k^(1/2)*trace(D)-2*c_k*Delta*D^2 now substitute k by k=K^2, this yields - c_B*rho*K^2*Delta^(-1) = 2/3 rho*K*trace(D)-2*c_k*Delta*D^2 solve for K and resubstitute K=sqrt(k). That is at least my opinion of whats happening
Dear Gregor and other openfoam users,

Thank you for your reply. About the Smagorinksy model (for compressible flows) in openfoam, I still have three questions:

1, The compressible form of Smagorinksy model use the equation B.D + epsilon =0, this is discussed in the paper (but the models in this paper are for incompressible models):
http://pof.aip.org/resource/1/phfle6...sAuthorized=no

But they did not the normal form, Eq. (4), and instead they use B.D + epsilon =0, which can be derived from Eq. (5) when the local equilibrium assumption is introduced.

In fact, there is another paper by the same author and this paper discussed the compressible LES models:

http://pof.aip.org/resource/1/phfle6...sAuthorized=no

In compressible Openfoam, they do not use the Smagorinsky model from this paper. Does any one know what is the reason?

2, Return to the first paper, it was mentioned that B.D + epsilon =0 can make model B1 reduce to A1 model. Actually in Openfoam, for TKE k, a algebraic equation is solved. Thus, how B1 can be reduced to A1?

3, I also found that it is difficult to relate these model constants ck and ce in compressible Openfoam to the standard Smagorinky model: nusgs=(Cs*delta)**2*||S||.

January 31, 2013, 05:32
#22
Member

Gregor Olenik
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: http://greole.github.io/
Posts: 80
Rep Power: 10
Quote:
 Originally Posted by hz283 2, Return to the first paper, it was mentioned that B.D + epsilon =0 can make model B1 reduce to A1 model. Actually in Openfoam, for TKE k, a algebraic equation is solved. Thus, how B1 can be reduced to A1?
this is thr algebraic equation for TKE k:
- c_B*rho*K^2*Delta^(-1) = 2/3 rho*K*trace(D)-2*c_k*Delta*D^2

in the incompressible case:

2/3 rho*K*trace(D) = 0 (continuity)

thus k=c_B/c_K Delta^(2) D^2

which gives with

nu_t = c_k Delta sqrt(k) = sqrt(c_k^3/c_e)Delta^2 D

Quote:
 Originally Posted by hz283 3, I also found that it is difficult to relate these model constants ck and ce in compressible Openfoam to the standard Smagorinky model: nusgs=(Cs*delta)**2*||S||.
yes excactly, the "compressible" smagorinsky reduces to the standard smagorinsky model in the incompressible case and you can recover the smagorinsky constant. but i am not certain if it makes sense to look for a smagorinsky constant in the compressible case.

I dont know if i am getting Q1 ?!

 June 19, 2013, 14:52 #23 New Member   Rajesh Kumar Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 24 Rep Power: 10 Hi Mr. Gregor Please throw some light on why k is defined in two ways in the smagorinsky model. // Member Functions //- Return SGS kinetic energy // calculated from the given velocity gradient tmp k(const tmp& gradU) const { volSymmTensorField D(symm(gradU)); volScalarField a(ce_/delta()); volScalarField b((2.0/3.0)*tr(D)); volScalarField c(2*ck_*delta()*(dev(D) && D)); return sqr((-b + sqrt(sqr(b) + 4*a*c))/(2*a)); } //- Return SGS kinetic energy virtual tmp k() const { return k(fvc::grad(U())); }

 June 26, 2013, 05:32 #24 Member   Gregor Olenik Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: http://greole.github.io/ Posts: 80 Rep Power: 10 well if you have a close look you'll see that the second function Code: `virtual tmp k() const` only calls the first function Code: `tmp k(const tmp& gradU) const` thus the second function is some kind of an alias which is needed because of inheritance.

 June 28, 2013, 19:21 #25 New Member   Rajesh Kumar Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 24 Rep Power: 10 Thanx Gregor for the explanation. I observed a peculiar thing in the Smagorinsky Model. For compressible Smagorinsky Ck = 0.02 For Incompressible Smagorinsky Ck = 0.094 I think this is wrong.

November 16, 2013, 13:12
#26
Senior Member

Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 344
Rep Power: 8
Hi All,

In Openfoam, the model constants for compressible Smagorisnky model are:

Ck=0.01
Ce=1.048

I checked the following paper:

Fureby, C

On subgrid scale modelling in large eddy simulation of compressible fluid flow.
Physics of Fluid, 8(5) 1996.

In this paper, there are four models for the subgrid scale modelling, but I found that no models exactly correspond to the one used in the Openfoam code (compressible).

Actually, in openfoam, the compressible Smagorisnky model is not a standard. I did not found how the two model constant (ck and Ce) come from and if there are validated by the experimental data. Does anybody know how these two constants come from? Thank you.

Quote:
 Originally Posted by rajeshkunwar Thanx Gregor for the explanation. I observed a peculiar thing in the Smagorinsky Model. For compressible Smagorinsky Ck = 0.02 For Incompressible Smagorinsky Ck = 0.094 I think this is wrong.

 September 9, 2014, 07:22 #27 New Member   Hans Barósz Join Date: May 2014 Posts: 22 Rep Power: 5 Hi openfoammaofnepo, have you found an answer to your question about the coefficients? I find it very difficult to resolve the OpenFoam coefficients c_k and c_e from the compressible smagorinsky model, and I wasnt able to do so yet. I would appreciate any help. From what gregor already posted (I think there is a mistake in it), I was able to derive the quadratic equation for k, which is solved in the model. But I cant figure out the relationship between the OpenFOAM smagorinsky and the one published by Fureby (1996). Fureby says: muSgs = rho*c_d*delta^2*D with the coefficient c_d = 0.038 OpenFoam says: muSgs = ck*rho*sqrt(k)*delta with ck = 0,02. There are of course coefficients in sqrt(k), but my main problem is that I cant calculate the resulting coefficient! In http://croccolab.umd.edu/publication...FD00_vol13.pdf on page 5 it is said that the final coefficient should be the square of the standard smagorinsky coefficient Ck = 0.16. I am very confused now. Please dont hesitate to give me your hints.

 Thread Tools Display Modes Linear Mode

 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 OffTrackbacks are On Pingbacks are On Refbacks are On Forum Rules

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post CFDUSERIN CFX 5 August 28, 2008 00:43 sylvain91 OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 0 June 22, 2006 06:29 Craig Johansen CFX 1 October 13, 2004 03:10 Jimmy FLUENT 0 December 18, 2002 05:33 Tim Main CFD Forum 7 May 29, 2002 07:37

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 19:04.