On the handling of turbulence equations in RANS adjoint solvers

Abstract Recent developments in numerical design tools have made practical the use of gradient-based optimization using high-fidelity computational fluid dynamic simulations. Such has been made possible with the use of adjoint solvers, that can efficiently provide gradients of functions of interest with respect to design variables. However, in the presence of flows modeled by the Reynolds-Averaged Navier–Stokes (RANS) equations, the corresponding adjoint might become too complex to be fully derived or run. This has led to the use of many simplifications in the implementation of such adjoint solvers. In this paper, the constant eddy viscosity (CEV) approximation is explained and its validity tested. Two cases are used, a two-dimensional turbine vane blade and a three-dimensional transonic compressor rotor blade. The gradients computed using both the full RANS and the CEV approximation adjoints are verified against finite-differences. It is shown that the gradients differ slightly but when used in an optimization problem, the optimal solution found is nearly identical. Therefore, the CEV approximation in RANS adjoint solvers proved to be valid for engineering design problems, bringing significant advantages, such as faster implementation and less computational resources needed in terms of CPU and memory size, when compared to the full RANS adjoint solver.

[1]  D. Wilcox.  Reassessment of the scale-determining equation for advanced turbulence models , 1988 .

[2]  Antony Jameson,et al.  Aerodynamic design via control theory , 1988, J. Sci. Comput..

[3]  D. X. Wang,et al.  Adjoint Aerodynamic Design Optimization for Blades in Multistage Turbomachines—Part I: Methodology and Verification , 2010 .

[4]  O. Pironneau.  On optimum design in fluid mechanics , 1974 .

[5]  Ivan McBean,et al.  THREE-DIMENSIONAL AERODYNAMIC DESIGN OPTIMIZATION OF A TURBINE BLADE BY USING AN ADJOINT METHOD , 2009 .

[6]  Juan J. Alonso,et al.  Toward optimally seeded airflow on hypersonic vehicles using control theory , 2010 .

[7]  Y. Saad,et al.  GMRES: a generalized minimal residual algorithm for solving nonsymmetric linear systems , 1986 .

[8]  Jens-Dominik Müller,et al.  On the performance of discrete adjoint CFD codes using automatic differentiation , 2005 .

[9]  Uwe Naumann,et al.  Automatic Differentiation: Applications, Theory, and Implementations (Lecture Notes in Computational Science and Engineering) , 2006 .

[10]  Li He,et al.  Concurrent Blade Aerodynamic-Aero-elastic Design Optimization Using Adjoint Method , 2011 .

[11]  Fernando Gisbert,et al.  Profiled End Wall Design Using an Adjoint Navier–Stokes Solver , 2008 .

[12]  R. M. Hicks,et al.  Wing Design by Numerical Optimization , 1977 .

[13]  Niles A. Pierce,et al.  An Introduction to the Adjoint Approach to Design , 2000 .

[14]  M. J. Rimlinger,et al.  Constrained Multipoint Aerodynamic Shape Optimization Using an Adjoint Formulation and Parallel Computers , 1997 .

[15]  J. Alonso,et al.  A methodology for the development of discrete adjoint solvers using automatic differentiation tools , 2007 .

[16]  Joaquim R. R. A. Martins,et al.  High-Fidelity Aerostructural Design Optimization of a Supersonic Business Jet , 2002 .

[17]  Stephen J. Wright,et al.  Numerical Optimization , 2018, Fundamental Statistical Inference.

[18]  A. Jameson,et al.  Optimum Aerodynamic Design Using the Navier–Stokes Equations , 1997 .