CFD Online Logo CFD Online URL
www.cfd-online.com
[Sponsors]
Home > Forums > Software User Forums > OpenFOAM > OpenFOAM Verification & Validation

NASA Turbulence Modeling Resource

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

Like Tree1Likes
  • 1 Post By alexeym

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old   May 1, 2015, 18:05
Default NASA Turbulence Modeling Resource
  #1
Senior Member
 
Alexey Matveichev
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Nancy, France
Posts: 1,930
Rep Power: 36
alexeym has a spectacular aura aboutalexeym has a spectacular aura about
Send a message via Skype™ to alexeym
Dear all,

During preparation of the OpenFOAM validation cases based upon http://turbmodels.larc.nasa.gov, I came across http://turbmodels.larc.nasa.gov/openfoam_issues.html (http://turbmodels.larc.nasa.gov/ChangesToOpenFOAM.pdf).

To be short, OpenFOAM's implementations of SA, SST, and Wilcox models are not quite correct (or "...did not match the equations given on this website").

And my question is: should it be reported as a bug? Was not able to find any discussion on this topic. Or maybe bug report should just contain patch with code corrections?
alexeym is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   May 1, 2015, 19:41
Default
  #2
Retired Super Moderator
 
Bruno Santos
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Lisbon, Portugal
Posts: 10,962
Blog Entries: 45
Rep Power: 125
wyldckat is a name known to allwyldckat is a name known to allwyldckat is a name known to allwyldckat is a name known to allwyldckat is a name known to allwyldckat is a name known to all
Hi Alexey,

I know that sometime ago there was a report about a 6.0 or 60 factor... it's this one: http://www.openfoam.org/mantisbt/view.php?id=1245

And I know there was a fix done a few weeks... er, months ago? Related to f23 or f31... ah, here it is: https://github.com/OpenFOAM/OpenFOAM...7bf8ad06b280ba
But this is odd, because I remember another similar change done more recently... it might have been this: https://github.com/OpenFOAM/OpenFOAM...23b343f30465d4

Either way, there are two details that come to mind:
  1. It's necessary to diagnose which fixes have already been implemented.
  2. It's necessary to validate what these changes affect, if anything at all.
Reporting this as a bug is probably a good idea, at the very least for keeping it on record.
The problem might then be if and how these issues can be fixed or new code can/should be added with these specific implementations.

The other detail that I'm find very strange is that the PDF file does not specify which OpenFOAM version it was tested with...

Best regards,
Bruno
wyldckat is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   May 2, 2015, 04:37
Default
  #3
Senior Member
 
Alexey Matveichev
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Nancy, France
Posts: 1,930
Rep Power: 36
alexeym has a spectacular aura aboutalexeym has a spectacular aura about
Send a message via Skype™ to alexeym
Hi Bruno,

Thank for the reply. Guess, I should start with verification/validation cases and through comparison of the sources code (let's say 2.3.x branch) and proposed corrections. And after file a bug report.

Quick look at Spalart-Allmaras implementation revealed that the first correction in PDF is already in the code

Code:
tmp<volScalarField> SpalartAllmaras::fv2
(
    const volScalarField& chi,
    const volScalarField& fv1
) const
{
    if (ashfordCorrection_)
    {
        return 1.0/pow3(scalar(1) + chi/Cv2_);
    }
    else
    {
        return 1.0 - chi/(1.0 + chi*fv1);
    }
}
But default value of ashfordCorrection_ is true, so, I think, correction proposed in PDF is usually ignored.
wyldckat likes this.
alexeym is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   July 24, 2020, 17:35
Default Was this fixed?
  #4
New Member
 
Sócrates Fernández
Join Date: Mar 2020
Location: Cádiz, Spain
Posts: 10
Rep Power: 3
sfernaferna is on a distinguished road
Send a message via Skype™ to sfernaferna
Hi,

Does anyone know if by OpenFOAM 7 these issues were fixed? Thanks!
sfernaferna is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 12, 2020, 17:46
Default
  #5
New Member
 
Dustin Weaver
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 3
Rep Power: 6
dweaver123 is on a distinguished road
I'm not sure about Spalart but for k-omega SST it seems they have not been changed and I'm not sure why. I have changed them to match the original papers [1] along with the updates[2]. and can send you the files if you'd like.

As for the k-omega Wilcox model: It seems the 1988 model is implemented instead of the most recent model which has some developments that make it less sensitive to freestream conditions. I personally haven't had success with even the newest k-omega Wilcox model [3] because of the sensitivity to free stream conditions[maybe check: 4].

All this being said, if you're not limited on the size of your mesh or restrictions because of multi-phase flows then I'd suggest you use a fine grid with LES .


[1]Menter, F. R., 1994, “Two-Equation Eddy-Viscosity Turbulence Models for Engineering Applications,” AIAA Journal, 32(8), pp. 1598–1605.
[2]Menter, F. R., Kuntz, M., and Langtry, R., “Ten Years of Industrial Experience with the SST Turbulence Model,” Heat and Mass Transfer, p. 8.
[3]Wilcox, D. C., 2008, “Formulation of the K-w Turbulence Model Revisited,” AIAA Journal, 46(11), pp. 2823–2838.
[4]Menter, F. R., 1992, “Influence of Freestream Values on K-Omega Turbulence Model Predictions,” AIAA Journal, 30(6), pp. 1657–1659.
dweaver123 is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
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 Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Turbulence Modeling RAJURAMAIAH Main CFD Forum 11 October 17, 2017 09:27
Turbulence Modeling meshkati FLUENT 1 October 3, 2016 07:11
Which Turbulence modeling???? Yapoo FLUENT 2 October 2, 2016 03:29
May Focus Area: Turbulence Modeling Jonas Larsson CFD-Wiki 0 May 2, 2006 12:48
turbulence modeling questions llowen Main CFD Forum 3 September 11, 1998 05:24


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 18:53.