Credibility analysis of computational fluid dynamic simulations for compound channel flow

In this paper, verification and validation of a turbulence closure model is performed for an experimental compound channel flow, where the velocity and turbulent fields were measured by a Laser Doppler Velocimeter (LDV). Detailed Explicit Algebraic Reynolds Stress Model (EARSM) simulations are reported. There are numerous methods and techniques available to evaluate the numerical uncertainty associated with grid resolution. The authors have adopted the Grid Convergence Index (GCI) approach. The velocity components, the turbulence kinetic energy (TKE), the dissipation rate and the Reynolds stresses were used as variables of interest. The GCI results present low values for the u velocity component, but higher values in what concerns the v velocity component and w velocity component (representing secondary flows) and for Reynolds stresses RSxy and RSyz. This indicates that the mean flow has converged but the turbulent field and secondary flows still depend on grid resolution. Based on GCI values distribution, the medium and fine meshes were further refined. In addition to GCI analysis, the authors have performed linear regression analysis for estimating the mesh quality in what concerns small value variables. Comparison of numerical and experimental results shows good agreement.

[1]  Hugh W. Coleman,et al.  Uncertainties and CFD Code Validation , 1997 .

[2]  Arne V. Johansson,et al.  An explicit algebraic Reynolds stress model for incompressible and compressible turbulent flows , 2000, Journal of Fluid Mechanics.

[3]  D. Leung,et al.  Parallel FEM LES with one-equation subgrid-scale model for incompressible flows , 2010 .

[4]  U. Ghia,et al.  Procedure for Estimation and Reporting of Uncertainty Due to Discretization in CFD Applications , 2007 .

[5]  P. Roache.  Verification of Codes and Calculations , 1998 .

[6]  Daniel R. Parsons,et al.  Assessing the credibility of a series of computational fluid dynamic simulations of open channel flow , 2003 .

[7]  Antti Hellsten,et al.  New two-equation turbulence model for aerodynamics applications , 2004 .

[8]  Timothy G. Trucano,et al.  Verification and validation. , 2005 .

[9]  C. W. Hirt,et al.  Volume of fluid (VOF) method for the dynamics of free boundaries , 1981 .

[10]  William Oberkampf.  A proposed framework for computational fluid dynamics code calibration and validation , 1993 .

[11]  P. Roache.  QUANTIFICATION OF UNCERTAINTY IN COMPUTATIONAL FLUID DYNAMICS , 1997 .

[12]  Timothy G. Trucano,et al.  Verification and Validation in Computational Fluid Dynamics , 2002 .

[13]  G. Pender,et al.  Three-Dimensional Hydrodynamics of Meandering Compound Channels , 2002 .

[14]  Herve Morvan,et al.  Bed-Shear Stress Characteristics of a Simple, Prismatic, Rectangular Channel , 2008 .

[15]  P. Bradshaw.  Turbulent secondary flows , 1987 .

[16]  H. Morvan.  Channel Shape and Turbulence Issues in Flood Flow Hydraulics , 2005 .

[17]  P. Roache.  Perspective: A Method for Uniform Reporting of Grid Refinement Studies , 1994 .

[18]  Patrick J. Roache,et al.  Verification and Validation in Computational Science and Engineering , 1998 .

[19]  K. Ghia,et al.  Editorial Policy Statement on the Control of Numerical Accuracy , 1986 .

[20]  Djamel Lakehal,et al.  Direct numerical simulation of turbulence in a sheared air–water flow with a deformable interface , 2003, Journal of Fluid Mechanics.