[GA_Onera]

Hi,
I am currently computing the flow on the CERAS aircraft using SU2.
The flow is computed in RANS (SA model) at a Mach number of 0.78 and a target lift coefficient CL = 0,6.

I have achieved a first computation using a “coarse” mesh close to the wall as illustrated in the figure Coarse_Mesh.png and considering SU v7.0.6.
I have defined 2 boundary conditions : “Farfield” and “Heat Flux wall”.
The numerical parameters are very close to the turbulent flat plate tutorial except for the spatial discretization scheme, which is Jameson-Schmidt-Turkel (JST) instead of ROE.

The computation did converge and loose 4 order of magnitude on the rho residual. However, I was surprised by the conical shape of the viscous contour in the symmetry plane, as illustrated in the figure (Viscosity_v706.png). The contour shown is the ratio of Eddy_Viscosity over Laminar_Viscosity.

After this first computation, I also achieved a simulation considering SU2 v6.2.0 with the same mesh.
I did plot the viscous ratio contour in the symmetry plane, and this time it appears to be confined close to the wall, as illustrated in figure (Viscosity_v620.png).
However, the convergence is much slower and the residuals do not decrease as much as with SU2 v7.0.6.

Finally, I did increase the number of cells close to the wall, as illustrated in figure (Fine_Mesh.png), and I ran the simulation with SU2 v7.0.6 until 9 orders of magnitude in the residuals are lost.
This time the viscous ratio contour is confined as expected to the wall and does not develop following the conical shape shown before (Viscosity_v706_FineMesh.png). However, the value of the viscous ratio in the boundary layer seems to be very high (several thousands) while I was expecting several hundred at most.


With this additional computation, I was able to compare the profiles of the boundary layer between v6.2.0 and v7.0.6 along the fuselage (illustrated in figures BL_X_5d0m.png to BL_X_25d0m.png in the following message).

As it is shown, the turbulent content is much higher in the profiles taken from v7.6.0 while the boundary layer appears to be “closer to a laminar profile”.

(I also ran the turbulent flat plate with both versions of SU2 and plotted the profiles of the boundary layer, which where exactly the same)

Could you help me with these simulations.
Maybe I do not have a look at the right quantities or the numerical parameters are not suitable for this simulation? (I did also enclosed the configuration file I did use for the v7.6.0 simulation)

Thank you in advance!

[GA_Onera]

Here are the boundary layer profiles I could not attach the the preceding message.


I also copy here the configuration file I used for the computation with SU2 v7.0.6.



Thank you in advance




---------------------------------------------------
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
% %
% SU2 configuration file %
% Case description: Turbulent flow over flat plate with zero pressure gradient %
% Author: Thomas D. Economon %
% Institution: Stanford University %
% Date: 2011.11.10 %
% File Version 5.0.0 "Raven" %
% %
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

% ------------- DIRECT, ADJOINT, AND LINEARIZED PROBLEM DEFINITION ------------%
%
% Physical governing equations (EULER, NAVIER_STOKES,
% WAVE_EQUATION, HEAT_EQUATION, FEM_ELASTICITY,
% POISSON_EQUATION)
SOLVER= RANS
%
% If Navier-Stokes, kind of turbulent model (NONE, SA, SA_NEG, SST)
KIND_TURB_MODEL= SA
%
% Mathematical problem (DIRECT, CONTINUOUS_ADJOINT)
MATH_PROBLEM= DIRECT
%
% Restart solution (NO, YES)
RESTART_SOL= YES

% ----------- COMPRESSIBLE AND INCOMPRESSIBLE FREE-STREAM DEFINITION ----------%
%
% Mach number (non-dimensional, based on the free-stream values)
MACH_NUMBER= 0.78
%
% Angle of attack (degrees)
AOA= 0.0
%
% Side-slip angle (degrees)
SIDESLIP_ANGLE= 0.0
%
% Free-stream temperature (288.15 K by default)
FREESTREAM_TEMPERATURE= 288.15
%
% Reynolds number (non-dimensional, based on the free-stream values)
REYNOLDS_NUMBER= 6.500000e+06
%
% Reynolds length (in meters)
REYNOLDS_LENGTH= 1.0
%
% ---------------------- REFERENCE VALUE DEFINITION ---------------------------%
%
% Reference origin for moment computation
REF_ORIGIN_MOMENT_X = 0.00
REF_ORIGIN_MOMENT_Y = 0.00
REF_ORIGIN_MOMENT_Z = 0.00
%
% Reference length for pitching, rolling, and yawing non-dimensional moment
REF_LENGTH= 34.07
%
% Reference area for force coefficients (0 implies automatic calculation)
REF_AREA= 122.41

% ----------------------------- CL DRIVER DEFINITION ---------------------------%
%
% Activate fixed lift mode (specify a CL instead of AoA, NO/YES)
FIXED_CL_MODE= YES
%
% Target coefficient of lift for fixed lift mode (0.80 by default)
TARGET_CL= 0.600000
%
% Estimation of dCL/dAlpha (0.2 per degree by default)
%DCL_DALPHA= 0.2
%
% Maximum number of iterations between AoA updates
UPDATE_AOA_ITER_LIMIT= 250
%
% Number of iterations to evaluate dCL_dAlpha by using finite differences (500 by default)
ITER_DCL_DALPHA= 200

% -------------------- BOUNDARY CONDITION DEFINITION --------------------------%
%
% Navier-Stokes wall boundary marker(s) (NONE = no marker)
MARKER_HEATFLUX= ( Wingbodytail, 0.0 )
%
% Symmetry boundary marker(s) (NONE = no marker)
MARKER_SYM= ( NONE )
%
% Far-field boundary marker(s) (NONE = no marker)
MARKER_FAR= ( Farfield )
%
% Marker(s) of the surface to be plotted or designed
MARKER_PLOTTING= ( Wingbodytail )
%
% Marker(s) of the surface where the functional (Cd, Cl, etc.) will be evaluated
MARKER_MONITORING= ( Wingbodytail )

% ------------- COMMON PARAMETERS DEFINING THE NUMERICAL METHOD ---------------%
%
% Numerical method for spatial gradients (GREEN_GAUSS, LEAST_SQUARES,
% WEIGHTED_LEAST_SQUARES)
NUM_METHOD_GRAD= GREEN_GAUSS
%
% Courant-Friedrichs-Lewy condition of the finest grid
CFL_NUMBER= 10.0
%
% Adaptive CFL number (NO, YES)
CFL_ADAPT= NO
%
% Parameters of the adaptive CFL number (factor down, factor up, CFL min value,
% CFL max value )
CFL_ADAPT_PARAM= ( 0.1, 2.0, 100.0, 1e5 )
%
% Runge-Kutta alpha coefficients
RK_ALPHA_COEFF= ( 0.66667, 0.66667, 1.000000 )
%
% Number of total iterations
ITER= 10000

% ----------------------- SLOPE LIMITER DEFINITION ----------------------------%
%
% Coefficient for the limiter
VENKAT_LIMITER_COEFF= 0.1
%
% Coefficient for the sharp edges limiter
ADJ_SHARP_LIMITER_COEFF= 3.0
%
% Reference coefficient (sensitivity) for detecting sharp edges.
REF_SHARP_EDGES= 3.0
%
% Remove sharp edges from the sensitivity evaluation (NO, YES)
SENS_REMOVE_SHARP= NO

% -------------------------- MULTIGRID PARAMETERS -----------------------------%
%
% Multi-Grid Levels (0 = no multi-grid)
MGLEVEL= 3
%
% Multi-grid cycle (V_CYCLE, W_CYCLE, FULLMG_CYCLE)
MGCYCLE= V_CYCLE
%
% Multi-grid pre-smoothing level
MG_PRE_SMOOTH= ( 1, 2, 3, 3 )
%
% Multi-grid post-smoothing level
MG_POST_SMOOTH= ( 2, 2, 2, 2)
%
% Jacobi implicit smoothing of the correction
MG_CORRECTION_SMOOTH= ( 0, 0, 0, 0 )
%
% Damping factor for the residual restriction
MG_DAMP_RESTRICTION= 0.8
%
% Damping factor for the correction prolongation
MG_DAMP_PROLONGATION= 0.8

% -------------------- FLOW NUMERICAL METHOD DEFINITION -----------------------%
%
% Convective numerical method (JST, LAX-FRIEDRICH, CUSP, ROE, AUSM, HLLC,
% TURKEL_PREC, MSW)
CONV_NUM_METHOD_FLOW= JST
%
% Monotonic Upwind Scheme for Conservation Laws (TVD) in the flow equations.
% Required for 2nd order upwind schemes (NO, YES)
MUSCL_FLOW= YES
%
% Slope limiter (NONE, VENKATAKRISHNAN, VENKATAKRISHNAN_WANG,
% BARTH_JESPERSEN, VAN_ALBADA_EDGE)
SLOPE_LIMITER_FLOW= NONE
%
% 2nd and 4th order artificial dissipation coefficients
JST_SENSOR_COEFF= ( 0.5, 0.02 )
%
% Time discretization (RUNGE-KUTTA_EXPLICIT, EULER_IMPLICIT, EULER_EXPLICIT)
TIME_DISCRE_FLOW= EULER_IMPLICIT

% -------------------- TURBULENT NUMERICAL METHOD DEFINITION ------------------%
%
% Convective numerical method (SCALAR_UPWIND)
CONV_NUM_METHOD_TURB= SCALAR_UPWIND
%
% Monotonic Upwind Scheme for Conservation Laws (TVD) in the turbulence equations.
% Required for 2nd order upwind schemes (NO, YES)
MUSCL_TURB= NO
%
% Slope limiter (VENKATAKRISHNAN, MINMOD)
SLOPE_LIMITER_TURB= VENKATAKRISHNAN
%
% Time discretization (EULER_IMPLICIT)
TIME_DISCRE_TURB= EULER_IMPLICIT

% --------------------------- CONVERGENCE PARAMETERS --------------------------%
%
% Convergence criteria (CAUCHY, RESIDUAL)
CONV_FIELD= RMS_DENSITY
%
% Min value of the residual (log10 of the residual)
CONV_RESIDUAL_MINVAL= -14
%
% Start convergence criteria at iteration number
CONV_STARTITER= 10
%
% Number of elements to apply the criteria
CONV_CAUCHY_ELEMS= 100
%
% Epsilon to control the series convergence
CONV_CAUCHY_EPS= 1E-6
%

% ------------------------- INPUT/OUTPUT INFORMATION --------------------------%
%
% Mesh input file
MESH_FILENAME= Test_raffinementV7.su2
%
% Mesh input file format (SU2, CGNS, NETCDF_ASCII)
MESH_FORMAT= SU2
%
% Mesh output file
MESH_OUT_FILENAME= pyCAPS_SU2.su2
%
% Restart flow input file
SOLUTION_FILENAME= solution_flow.dat
%
% Restart adjoint input file
SOLUTION_ADJ_FILENAME= solution_adj.dat
%
% Output file format (PARAVIEW, TECPLOT, SLT)
TABULAR_FORMAT= TECPLOT
%
% Output file convergence history (w/o extension)
CONV_FILENAME= history
%
% Output file restart flow
RESTART_FILENAME= restart_flow_pyCAPS_SU2.dat
%
% Output file restart adjoint
RESTART_ADJ_FILENAME= restart_adj.dat
%
% Output file flow (w/o extension) variables
VOLUME_FILENAME= flow_pyCAPS_SU2_Point5
%
% Output file adjoint (w/o extension) variables
VOLUME_ADJ_FILENAME= adjoint
%
% Output objective function gradient (using continuous adjoint)
GRAD_OBJFUNC_FILENAME= of_grad.dat
%
% Output file surface flow coefficient (w/o extension)
SURFACE_FILENAME= surface_flow_pyCAPS_SU2_Point5
%
% Output file surface adjoint coefficient (w/o extension)
SURFACE_ADJ_FILENAME= surface_adjoint
%
% Writing solution file frequency
OUTPUT_WRT_FREQ= 1000
%
%
% Screen output
SCREEN_OUTPUT= (INNER_ITER, WALL_TIME, RMS_DENSITY, RMS_NU_TILDE, LIFT, DRAG)
HISTORY_OUTPUT=(ITER,REL_RMS_RES,RMS_RES, AERO_COEFF)

[pcg]

Hi,

We seem to have an on-going problem with JST at symmetry planes (but not other schemes) possibly because of a slight inconsistency between the discretization of internal fluxes and boundary fluxes.
https://github.com/su2code/SU2/issues/1125

You are missing out on many fixes, improvements, and features by not using the most recent version of the code.

[GA_Onera]

Hi,

Thank you for your answer, I did ask the IT support for an installation of the most recent version of SU2.

But to clarify on my ongoing computations, I did compute the whole aircraft, not only the half (sorry, my statement was not clear in the above messages). Anyway, I will give a try to the computation with the most recent version of SU2.

I did extract the quantities in the symetry plane but it is not a boundary condition.
I did also try to run the simulation with the ROE scheme but it diverges really quickly, leading to CL and CD of 10**6.

I hope it helps to understand my issue, anyway I come back to you when I am able to run the simulation with the latest version.

Thank you again

[GA_Onera]

Hi,


I am now able to run SU2 v7.1.1 simulations and I tried to achieve the simulation I presented before, consisting of a full aircraft configuration. In the following, the figures are extracted in the symetry plane during the post-processing of the calculations.



Firstly, I did achieve the simulation with the fine mesh I showed you before and considering the JST scheme.
The visosity ratio (show in figure "Viscosity_Fine_JST.png") presents the same characteristics as before. The value of the ratio of viscosity is still very high (several thousands close to the boundary layer).



Secondly, I did run the simulation on the coarse mesh I showed in the first message. However, with this mesh, the conical shape of the viscosity ratio appears again, as illustrated in "Viscosity_Coarse_JST.png".



Finally, I did try to use the Roe scheme in combination with the coarse mesh. I was forced to initialize the simulation from the result obtained after a JST computation. But, as shown in the onvergence plot in figure "Convergence_Roe.png", the calculation diverges instead of converging and crashed afte 200 iterations.


I also join after a copy of the configuration file for the Roe simulation.


Could you help me with these calculations? I was hoping to find a viscosity contour close to the one obtained with SU2 v6.2.0


Thank you in advance




%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%



%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
% %
% SU2 configuration file %
% Case description: Turbulent flow over flat plate with zero pressure gradient %
% Author: Thomas D. Economon %
% Institution: Stanford University %
% Date: 2011.11.10 %
% File Version 5.0.0 "Raven" %
% %
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

% ------------- DIRECT, ADJOINT, AND LINEARIZED PROBLEM DEFINITION ------------%
%
% Physical governing equations (EULER, NAVIER_STOKES,
% WAVE_EQUATION, HEAT_EQUATION, FEM_ELASTICITY,
% POISSON_EQUATION)
SOLVER= RANS
%
% If Navier-Stokes, kind of turbulent model (NONE, SA, SA_NEG, SST)
KIND_TURB_MODEL= SA
%
% Mathematical problem (DIRECT, CONTINUOUS_ADJOINT)
MATH_PROBLEM= DIRECT
%
% Restart solution (NO, YES)
RESTART_SOL= YES

% ----------- COMPRESSIBLE AND INCOMPRESSIBLE FREE-STREAM DEFINITION ----------%
%
% Mach number (non-dimensional, based on the free-stream values)
MACH_NUMBER= 0.78
%
% Angle of attack (degrees)
AOA= 0.0
%
% Side-slip angle (degrees)
SIDESLIP_ANGLE= 0.0
%
% Free-stream temperature (288.15 K by default)
FREESTREAM_TEMPERATURE= 288.15
%
% Reynolds number (non-dimensional, based on the free-stream values)
REYNOLDS_NUMBER= 6.500000e+06
%
% Reynolds length (in meters)
REYNOLDS_LENGTH= 1.0
%
% ---------------------- REFERENCE VALUE DEFINITION ---------------------------%
%
% Reference origin for moment computation
REF_ORIGIN_MOMENT_X = 0.00
REF_ORIGIN_MOMENT_Y = 0.00
REF_ORIGIN_MOMENT_Z = 0.00
%
% Reference length for pitching, rolling, and yawing non-dimensional moment
REF_LENGTH= 34.07
%
% Reference area for force coefficients (0 implies automatic calculation)
REF_AREA= 122.41

% ----------------------------- CL DRIVER DEFINITION ---------------------------%
%
% Activate fixed lift mode (specify a CL instead of AoA, NO/YES)
FIXED_CL_MODE= YES
%
% Target coefficient of lift for fixed lift mode (0.80 by default)
TARGET_CL= 0.600000
%
% Estimation of dCL/dAlpha (0.2 per degree by default)
%DCL_DALPHA= 0.2
%
% Maximum number of iterations between AoA updates
UPDATE_AOA_ITER_LIMIT= 250
%
% Number of iterations to evaluate dCL_dAlpha by using finite differences (500 by default)
ITER_DCL_DALPHA= 200

% -------------------- BOUNDARY CONDITION DEFINITION --------------------------%
%
% Navier-Stokes wall boundary marker(s) (NONE = no marker)
MARKER_HEATFLUX= ( 1, 0.0 )
%
% Symmetry boundary marker(s) (NONE = no marker)
MARKER_SYM= ( NONE )
%
% Far-field boundary marker(s) (NONE = no marker)
MARKER_FAR= ( 2 )
%
% Marker(s) of the surface to be plotted or designed
MARKER_PLOTTING= ( 1 )
%
% Marker(s) of the surface where the functional (Cd, Cl, etc.) will be evaluated
MARKER_MONITORING= ( 1 )

% ------------- COMMON PARAMETERS DEFINING THE NUMERICAL METHOD ---------------%
%
% Numerical method for spatial gradients (GREEN_GAUSS, LEAST_SQUARES,
% WEIGHTED_LEAST_SQUARES)
NUM_METHOD_GRAD= GREEN_GAUSS
%
% Courant-Friedrichs-Lewy condition of the finest grid
CFL_NUMBER= 10.0
%
% Adaptive CFL number (NO, YES)
CFL_ADAPT= NO
%
% Parameters of the adaptive CFL number (factor down, factor up, CFL min value,
% CFL max value )
CFL_ADAPT_PARAM= ( 0.1, 2.0, 100.0, 1e5 )
%
% Runge-Kutta alpha coefficients
RK_ALPHA_COEFF= ( 0.66667, 0.66667, 1.000000 )
%
% Number of total iterations
ITER= 10000

% ----------------------- SLOPE LIMITER DEFINITION ----------------------------%
%
% Coefficient for the limiter
VENKAT_LIMITER_COEFF= 0.1
%
% Coefficient for the sharp edges limiter
ADJ_SHARP_LIMITER_COEFF= 3.0
%
% Reference coefficient (sensitivity) for detecting sharp edges.
REF_SHARP_EDGES= 3.0
%
% Remove sharp edges from the sensitivity evaluation (NO, YES)
SENS_REMOVE_SHARP= NO

% -------------------------- MULTIGRID PARAMETERS -----------------------------%
%
% Multi-Grid Levels (0 = no multi-grid)
MGLEVEL= 3
%
% Multi-grid cycle (V_CYCLE, W_CYCLE, FULLMG_CYCLE)
MGCYCLE= V_CYCLE
%
% Multi-grid pre-smoothing level
MG_PRE_SMOOTH= ( 1, 2, 3, 3 )
%
% Multi-grid post-smoothing level
MG_POST_SMOOTH= ( 2, 2, 2, 2)
%
% Jacobi implicit smoothing of the correction
MG_CORRECTION_SMOOTH= ( 0, 0, 0, 0 )
%
% Damping factor for the residual restriction
MG_DAMP_RESTRICTION= 0.8
%
% Damping factor for the correction prolongation
MG_DAMP_PROLONGATION= 0.8

% -------------------- FLOW NUMERICAL METHOD DEFINITION -----------------------%
%
% Convective numerical method (JST, LAX-FRIEDRICH, CUSP, ROE, AUSM, HLLC,
% TURKEL_PREC, MSW)
CONV_NUM_METHOD_FLOW= ROE
%
% Monotonic Upwind Scheme for Conservation Laws (TVD) in the flow equations.
% Required for 2nd order upwind schemes (NO, YES)
MUSCL_FLOW= YES
%
% Slope limiter (NONE, VENKATAKRISHNAN, VENKATAKRISHNAN_WANG,
% BARTH_JESPERSEN, VAN_ALBADA_EDGE)
SLOPE_LIMITER_FLOW= NONE
%
% 2nd and 4th order artificial dissipation coefficients
JST_SENSOR_COEFF= ( 0.5, 0.02 )
%
% Time discretization (RUNGE-KUTTA_EXPLICIT, EULER_IMPLICIT, EULER_EXPLICIT)
TIME_DISCRE_FLOW= EULER_IMPLICIT

% -------------------- TURBULENT NUMERICAL METHOD DEFINITION ------------------%
%
% Convective numerical method (SCALAR_UPWIND)
CONV_NUM_METHOD_TURB= SCALAR_UPWIND
%
% Monotonic Upwind Scheme for Conservation Laws (TVD) in the turbulence equations.
% Required for 2nd order upwind schemes (NO, YES)
MUSCL_TURB= NO
%
% Slope limiter (VENKATAKRISHNAN, MINMOD)
SLOPE_LIMITER_TURB= VENKATAKRISHNAN
%
% Time discretization (EULER_IMPLICIT)
TIME_DISCRE_TURB= EULER_IMPLICIT

% --------------------------- CONVERGENCE PARAMETERS --------------------------%
%
% Convergence criteria (CAUCHY, RESIDUAL)
CONV_FIELD= RMS_DENSITY
%
% Min value of the residual (log10 of the residual)
CONV_RESIDUAL_MINVAL= -14
%
% Start convergence criteria at iteration number
CONV_STARTITER= 10
%
% Number of elements to apply the criteria
CONV_CAUCHY_ELEMS= 100
%
% Epsilon to control the series convergence
CONV_CAUCHY_EPS= 1E-6
%

% ------------------------- INPUT/OUTPUT INFORMATION --------------------------%
%
% Mesh input file
MESH_FILENAME= pyCAPS_SU2.su2
%
% Mesh input file format (SU2, CGNS, NETCDF_ASCII)
MESH_FORMAT= SU2
%
% Mesh output file
MESH_OUT_FILENAME= pyCAPS_SU2.su2
%
% Restart flow input file
SOLUTION_FILENAME= solution_flow.dat
%
% Restart adjoint input file
SOLUTION_ADJ_FILENAME= solution_adj.dat
%
% Output file format (PARAVIEW, TECPLOT, SLT)
TABULAR_FORMAT= TECPLOT
%
% Output file convergence history (w/o extension)
CONV_FILENAME= history
%
% Output file restart flow
RESTART_FILENAME= restart_flow_pyCAPS_SU2.dat
%
% Output file restart adjoint
RESTART_ADJ_FILENAME= restart_adj.dat
%
% Output file flow (w/o extension) variables
VOLUME_FILENAME= flow_pyCAPS_SU2_Point5
%
% Output file adjoint (w/o extension) variables
VOLUME_ADJ_FILENAME= adjoint
%
% Output objective function gradient (using continuous adjoint)
GRAD_OBJFUNC_FILENAME= of_grad.dat
%
% Output file surface flow coefficient (w/o extension)
SURFACE_FILENAME= surface_flow_pyCAPS_SU2_Point5
%
% Output file surface adjoint coefficient (w/o extension)
SURFACE_ADJ_FILENAME= surface_adjoint
%
% Writing solution file frequency
OUTPUT_WRT_FREQ= 1000
%
%
% Screen output
SCREEN_OUTPUT= (INNER_ITER, WALL_TIME, RMS_DENSITY, RMS_NU_TILDE, LIFT, DRAG)
HISTORY_OUTPUT=(ITER,REL_RMS_RES,RMS_RES, AERO_COEFF)