Physically constrained data‐driven correction for reduced‐order modeling of fluid flows

In our earlier work, we proposed a data-driven filtered reduced order model (DDF-ROM) framework for the numerical simulation of fluid flows, which can be formally written as \begin{equation*} \boxed{ \text{ DDF-ROM = Galerkin-ROM + Correction } } \end{equation*} The new DDF-ROM was constructed by using ROM spatial filtering and data-driven ROM closure modeling (for the Correction term) and was successfully tested in the numerical simulation of a 2D channel flow past a circular cylinder at Reynolds numbers $Re=100, Re=500$ and $Re=1000$. In this paper, we propose a {\it physically-constrained} DDF-ROM (CDDF-ROM), which aims at improving the physical accuracy of the DDF-ROM. The new physical constraints require that the CDDF-ROM operators satisfy the same type of physical laws (i.e., the nonlinear operator should conserve energy and the ROM closure term should be dissipative) as those satisfied by the fluid flow equations. To implement these physical constraints, in the data-driven modeling step of the DDF-ROM, we replace the unconstrained least squares problem with a constrained least squares problem. We perform a numerical investigation of the new CDDF-ROM and standard DDF-ROM for a 2D channel flow past a circular cylinder at Reynolds numbers $Re=100, Re=500$ and $Re=1000$. To this end, we consider a reproductive regime as well as a predictive (i.e., cross-validation) regime in which we use as little as $50\%$ of the original training data. The numerical investigation clearly shows that the new CDDF-ROM is significantly more accurate than the DDF-ROM in both regimes.

[1]  Leo G. Rebholz,et al.  Improved Accuracy in Algebraic Splitting Methods for Navier-Stokes Equations , 2017, SIAM J. Sci. Comput..

[2]  P. Schmid,et al.  Dynamic mode decomposition of numerical and experimental data , 2008, Journal of Fluid Mechanics.

[3]  Leo G. Rebholz,et al.  An Energy- and Helicity-Conserving Finite Element Scheme for the Navier-Stokes Equations , 2007, SIAM J. Numer. Anal..

[4]  Andrew J. Majda,et al.  DISCRETE APPROXIMATIONS WITH ADDITIONAL CONSERVED QUANTITIES: DETERMINISTIC AND STATISTICAL BEHAVIOR ∗ , 2003 .

[5]  Matthew F. Barone,et al.  Stable Galerkin reduced order models for linearized compressible flow , 2009, J. Comput. Phys..

[6]  Matthew F. Barone,et al.  On the stability and convergence of a Galerkin reduced order model (ROM) of compressible flow with solid wall and far‐field boundary treatment , 2010 .

[7]  J. Hesthaven,et al.  Certified Reduced Basis Methods for Parametrized Partial Differential Equations , 2015 .

[8]  Gilead Tadmor,et al.  Reduced-Order Modelling for Flow Control , 2013 .

[9]  Omer San,et al.  Neural network closures for nonlinear model order reduction , 2017, Adv. Comput. Math..

[10]  Dmitri Kondrashov,et al.  Multiscale Stuart-Landau Emulators: Application to Wind-Driven Ocean Gyres , 2018 .

[11]  A. Quarteroni,et al.  Reduced Basis Methods for Partial Differential Equations: An Introduction , 2015 .

[12]  Karthik Duraisamy,et al.  A priori estimation of memory effects in reduced-order models of nonlinear systems using the Mori–Zwanzig formalism , 2016, Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[13]  I. Mezić Spectral Properties of Dynamical Systems, Model Reduction and Decompositions , 2005 .

[14]  Alexandre J. Chorin,et al.  Data-based stochastic model reduction for the Kuramoto--Sivashinsky equation , 2015, 1509.09279.

[15]  Ii James P. Howard Data-Driven Modeling & Scientific Computation: Methods for Complex Systems & Big Data , 2015 .

[16]  Earl H. Dowell,et al.  Low-dimensional modelling of high-Reynolds-number shear flows incorporating constraints from the Navier–Stokes equation , 2013, Journal of Fluid Mechanics.

[17]  Bernd R. Noack,et al.  The need for a pressure-term representation in empirical Galerkin models of incompressible shear flows , 2005, Journal of Fluid Mechanics.

[18]  A. Arakawa Computational design for long-term numerical integration of the equations of fluid motion: two-dimen , 1997 .

[19]  Pierre Sagaut,et al.  Intermodal energy transfers in a proper orthogonal decomposition–Galerkin representation of a turbulent separated flow , 2003, Journal of Fluid Mechanics.

[20]  Traian Iliescu,et al.  Proper orthogonal decomposition closure models for turbulent flows: A numerical comparison , 2011, 1106.3585.

[21]  Jinlong Wu,et al.  Physics-informed machine learning approach for reconstructing Reynolds stress modeling discrepancies based on DNS data , 2016, 1606.07987.

[22]  Adrian Sandu,et al.  POD/DEIM reduced-order strategies for efficient four dimensional variational data assimilation , 2014, J. Comput. Phys..

[23]  Charbel Farhat,et al.  Stabilization of projection‐based reduced‐order models , 2012 .

[24]  C. Vogel Computational Methods for Inverse Problems , 1987 .

[25]  George J. Fix,et al.  Finite Element Models for Ocean Circulation Problems , 1975 .

[26]  S. Brunton,et al.  Discovering governing equations from data by sparse identification of nonlinear dynamical systems , 2015, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[27]  Leo G. Rebholz,et al.  A Connection Between Scott-Vogelius and Grad-Div Stabilized Taylor-Hood FE Approximations of the Navier-Stokes Equations , 2011, SIAM J. Numer. Anal..

[28]  Traian Iliescu,et al.  SUPG reduced order models for convection-dominated convection–diffusion–reaction equations , 2014 .

[29]  Earl H. Dowell,et al.  Minimal subspace rotation on the Stiefel manifold for stabilization and enhancement of projection-based reduced order models for the compressible Navier-Stokes equations , 2015, J. Comput. Phys..

[30]  Gianluigi Rozza,et al.  Fast simulations of patient-specific haemodynamics of coronary artery bypass grafts based on a POD-Galerkin method and a vascular shape parametrization , 2016, J. Comput. Phys..

[31]  Paul T. Boggs,et al.  Preserving Lagrangian Structure in Nonlinear Model Reduction with Application to Structural Dynamics , 2014, SIAM J. Sci. Comput..

[32]  Saifon Chaturantabut,et al.  Structure-preserving model reduction for nonlinear port-Hamiltonian systems , 2011, IEEE Conference on Decision and Control and European Control Conference.

[33]  B. R. Noack,et al.  Optimal nonlinear eddy viscosity in Galerkin models of turbulent flows , 2014, Journal of Fluid Mechanics.

[34]  Steven L. Brunton,et al.  Constrained sparse Galerkin regression , 2016, Journal of Fluid Mechanics.

[35]  Simona Perotto,et al.  HIGAMod: A Hierarchical IsoGeometric Approach for MODel reduction in curved pipes , 2017 .

[36]  Andrea Ferrero,et al.  A zonal Galerkin-free POD model for incompressible flows , 2018, J. Comput. Phys..

[37]  Lynne D. Talley,et al.  Generalizations of Arakawa's Jacobian , 1989 .

[38]  Jan Nordström,et al.  A new high order energy and enstrophy conserving Arakawa-like Jacobian differential operator , 2015, J. Comput. Phys..

[39]  Omer San,et al.  Learning-based robust stabilization for reduced-order models of 2D and 3D Boussinesq equations , 2017 .

[40]  Julia Ling,et al.  Machine learning strategies for systems with invariance properties , 2016, J. Comput. Phys..

[41]  Ernst Heinrich Hirschel,et al.  Flow Simulation with High-Performance Computers II , 1996 .

[42]  L. Sirovich Turbulence and the dynamics of coherent structures. I. Coherent structures , 1987 .

[43]  P. Sagaut Large Eddy Simulation for Incompressible Flows , 2001 .

[44]  B. R. Noack,et al.  On the need for a nonlinear subscale turbulence term in POD models as exemplified for a high-Reynolds-number flow over an Ahmed body , 2013, Journal of Fluid Mechanics.

[45]  I. Mezić,et al.  Spectral analysis of nonlinear flows , 2009, Journal of Fluid Mechanics.

[46]  Volker John,et al.  Reference values for drag and lift of a two‐dimensional time‐dependent flow around a cylinder , 2004 .

[47]  Zhu Wang,et al.  Structure-Preserving Galerkin POD-DEIM Reduced-Order Modeling of Hamiltonian Systems , 2016, ArXiv.

[48]  R. Murray,et al.  Model reduction for compressible flows using POD and Galerkin projection , 2004 .

[49]  Karen Willcox,et al.  A Survey of Projection-Based Model Reduction Methods for Parametric Dynamical Systems , 2015, SIAM Rev..

[50]  Gianluigi Rozza,et al.  Supremizer stabilization of POD–Galerkin approximation of parametrized steady incompressible Navier–Stokes equations , 2015 .

[51]  B. R. Noack,et al.  A Finite-Time Thermodynamics of Unsteady Fluid Flows , 2008 .

[52]  Traian Iliescu,et al.  A numerical investigation of velocity-pressure reduced order models for incompressible flows , 2014, J. Comput. Phys..

[53]  Eugenia Kalnay,et al.  Atmospheric Modeling, Data Assimilation and Predictability , 2002 .

[54]  Omer San,et al.  A neural network approach for the blind deconvolution of turbulent flows , 2017, Journal of Fluid Mechanics.

[55]  Karthik Duraisamy,et al.  Turbulence Modeling in the Age of Data , 2018, Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics.

[56]  Charles-Henri Bruneau,et al.  Accurate model reduction of transient and forced wakes , 2007 .

[57]  Zhu Wang,et al.  Approximate Deconvolution Reduced Order Modeling , 2015, 1510.02726.

[58]  Ionel Michael Navon,et al.  Computational Methods for Data Evaluation and Assimilation , 2019 .

[59]  Howard C. Elman,et al.  Reduced Basis Collocation Methods for Partial Differential Equations with Random Coefficients , 2013, SIAM/ASA J. Uncertain. Quantification.

[60]  L. Rebholz,et al.  A HIGH PHYSICAL ACCURACY METHOD FOR INCOMPRESSIBLE MAGNETOHYDRODYNAMICS , 2019 .

[61]  Steven L. Brunton,et al.  Dynamic mode decomposition - data-driven modeling of complex systems , 2016 .

[62]  Charles-Henri Bruneau,et al.  Enablers for robust POD models , 2009, J. Comput. Phys..

[63]  Benjamin Peherstorfer,et al.  Dynamic data-driven reduced-order models , 2015 .

[64]  P. Hansen Discrete Inverse Problems: Insight and Algorithms , 2010 .

[65]  Zhu Wang,et al.  Are the Snapshot Difference Quotients Needed in the Proper Orthogonal Decomposition? , 2013, SIAM J. Sci. Comput..

[66]  K. Willcox,et al.  Data-driven operator inference for nonintrusive projection-based model reduction , 2016 .

[67]  Assad A. Oberai,et al.  Approximate optimal projection for reduced‐order models , 2016 .

[68]  Jian-Guo Liu,et al.  Energy and helicity preserving schemes for hydro- and magnetohydro-dynamics flows with symmetry , 2004 .

[69]  Ramon Codina,et al.  Reduced-order subscales for POD models , 2015 .

[70]  Traian Iliescu,et al.  Data-Driven Filtered Reduced Order Modeling of Fluid Flows , 2017, SIAM J. Sci. Comput..

[71]  Max D. Gunzburger,et al.  An Ensemble-Proper Orthogonal Decomposition Method for the Nonstationary Navier-Stokes Equations , 2016, SIAM J. Numer. Anal..

[72]  James Demmel,et al.  Applied Numerical Linear Algebra , 1997 .

[73]  G. Karniadakis,et al.  A spectral viscosity method for correcting the long-term behavior of POD models , 2004 .

[74]  Michael Ghil,et al.  Data-driven non-Markovian closure models , 2014, 1411.4700.

[75]  Traian Iliescu,et al.  An evolve‐then‐filter regularized reduced order model for convection‐dominated flows , 2015, 1506.07555.

[76]  Ionel M. Navon,et al.  An improved algorithm for the shallow water equations model reduction: Dynamic Mode Decomposition vs POD , 2015 .

[77]  Traian Iliescu,et al.  Energy balance and mass conservation in reduced order models of fluid flows , 2017, J. Comput. Phys..

[78]  Harbir Antil,et al.  Galerkin v. least-squares Petrov-Galerkin projection in nonlinear model reduction , 2015, J. Comput. Phys..