Machine Learning-augmented Predictive Modeling of Turbulent Separated Flows over Airfoils

A modeling paradigm is developed to augment predictive models of turbulence by effectively utilizing limited data generated from physical experiments. The key components of our approach involve inverse modeling to infer the spatial distribution of model discrepancies, and, machine learning to reconstruct discrepancy information from a large number of inverse problems into corrective model forms. We apply the methodology to turbulent flows over airfoils involving flow separation. Model augmentations are developed for the Spalart Allmaras (SA) model using adjoint-based full field inference on experimentally measured lift coefficient data. When these model forms are reconstructed using neural networks (NN) and embedded within a standard solver, we show that much improved predictions in lift can be obtained for geometries and flow conditions that were not used to train the model. The NN-augmented SA model also predicts surface pressures extremely well. Portability of this approach is demonstrated by confirming that predictive improvements are preserved when the augmentation is embedded in a different commercial finite-element solver. The broader vision is that by incorporating data that can reveal the form of the innate model discrepancy, the applicability of data-driven turbulence models can be extended to more general flows.

[1]  Shigeru Obayashi,et al.  Data Assimilation for Turbulent Flows , 2014 .

[2]  Jonathan W. Naughton,et al.  Skin-friction measurements on the NASA hump model , 2006 .

[3]  Todd A. Oliver,et al.  Bayesian uncertainty quantification applied to RANS turbulence models , 2011 .

[4]  Brendan D. Tracey,et al.  A Machine Learning Strategy to Assist Turbulence Model Development , 2015 .

[5]  B. Ripley,et al.  Pattern Recognition , 1968, Nature.

[6]  Gianluca Iaccarino,et al.  Modeling of structural uncertainties in Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes closures , 2013 .

[7]  J. Templeton Evaluation of machine learning algorithms for prediction of regions of high Reynolds averaged Navier Stokes uncertainty , 2015 .

[8]  Karthik Duraisamy,et al.  Adjoint-based estimation and control of spatial, temporal and stochastic approximation errors in unsteady flow simulations , 2015 .

[9]  Qiqi Wang,et al.  Uncertainty Quantification of Structural Uncertainties in RANS Simulations of Complex Flows , 2011 .

[10]  Eric G. Paterson,et al.  Assessment of DES Models for Separated Flow From a Hump in a Turbulent Boundary Layer , 2009 .

[11]  Emilie Sauret,et al.  Contribution to single-point closure Reynolds-stress modelling of inhomogeneous flow , 2004 .

[12]  Gianluca Iaccarino,et al.  RANS modeling of turbulent mixing for a jet in supersonic cross flow: model evaluation and uncertainty quantification , 2012 .

[13]  D. Wilcox Formulation of the k-w Turbulence Model Revisited , 2008 .

[14]  J. Templeton,et al.  Reynolds averaged turbulence modelling using deep neural networks with embedded invariance , 2016, Journal of Fluid Mechanics.

[15]  K. J. Bittorf,et al.  VALIDATING THE GALERKIN LEAST-SQUARES FINITE ELEMENT METHODS IN PREDICTING MIXING FLOWS IN STIRRED TANK REACTORS , 2002 .

[16]  P. Durbin Near-wall turbulence closure modeling without “damping functions” , 1991, Theoretical and Computational Fluid Dynamics.

[17]  D. M. Somers,et al.  Design and experimental results for the S809 airfoil , 1997 .

[18]  Sai Hung Cheung,et al.  Bayesian uncertainty analysis with applications to turbulence modeling , 2011, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[19]  P. Spalart A One-Equation Turbulence Model for Aerodynamic Flows , 1992 .

[20]  Christian Igel,et al.  Empirical evaluation of the improved Rprop learning algorithms , 2003, Neurocomputing.

[21]  Brendan D. Tracey,et al.  Application of supervised learning to quantify uncertainties in turbulence and combustion modeling , 2013 .

[22]  T. Hughes,et al.  A new finite element formulation for computational fluid dynamics. X - The compressible Euler and Navier-Stokes equations , 1991 .

[23]  Michele Milano,et al.  Neural network modeling for near wall turbulent flow , 2002 .

[24]  Ernst Heinrich Hirschel,et al.  Comparison of Eddy-Viscosity Turbulence Models in Flows with Adverse Pressure Gradient , 2006 .

[25]  P. Durbin A Reynolds stress model for near-wall turbulence , 1993, Journal of Fluid Mechanics.

[26]  Frank Thiele,et al.  Restatement of the Spalart-Allmaras Eddy-Viscosity Model in Strain-Adaptive Formulation , 2003 .

[27]  Karthik Duraisamy,et al.  Efficient Multiscale Gaussian Process Regression using Hierarchical Clustering , 2015, ArXiv.

[28]  Gianluca Iaccarino,et al.  Modeling Structural Uncertainties in Reynolds-Averaged Computations of Shock/Boundary Layer Interactions , 2011 .

[29]  Jack Weatheritt The development of data driven approaches to further turbulence closures , 2015 .

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

[31]  Christopher L. Rumsey,et al.  Prediction of high lift: review of present CFD capability , 2002 .

[32]  T. B. Gatski,et al.  Towards a rational model for the triple velocity correlations of turbulence , 1999, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[33]  Ted G. Bagwell CFD Simulation of Flow Tones from Grazing Flow past a Deep Cavity , 2006 .

[34]  Victoria Interrante,et al.  Real Time Feature Extraction for the Analysis of Turbulent Flows , 2001 .

[35]  Karthikeyan Duraisamy,et al.  Machine Learning Methods for Data-Driven Turbulence Modeling , 2015 .

[36]  Karthik Duraisamy,et al.  Computational analysis of vertical axis wind turbine arrays , 2016 .

[37]  Anand Pratap Singh,et al.  New Approaches in Turbulence and Transition Modeling Using Data-driven Techniques , 2015 .

[38]  Sai Hung Cheung,et al.  New Bayesian Updating Methodology for Model Validation and Robust Predictions Based on Data from Hierarchical Subsystem Tests , 2008 .

[39]  Srinivasan Arunajatesan,et al.  Bayesian Calibration of a RANS Model with a Complex Response Surface - A Case Study with Jet-in-Crossflow Configuration , 2015 .

[40]  Peter E. Hamlington,et al.  Autonomic subgrid-scale closure for large eddy simulations , 2015 .

[41]  T. Pulliam,et al.  A diagonal form of an implicit approximate-factorization algorithm , 1981 .

[42]  Qiqi Wang,et al.  Quantification of structural uncertainties in the k − ω turbulence model , 2010 .

[43]  D. Todd Griffith,et al.  Investigating Aeroelastic Performance of Multi-MegaWatt Wind Turbine Rotors Using CFD , 2012 .

[44]  Scott M. Murman,et al.  Velocity/Pressure-Gradient Correlations in a FORANS Approach to Turbulence Modeling , 2014 .

[45]  James D. Baeder,et al.  Analysis of Wind Tunnel Wall Interference Effects on Subsonic Unsteady Airfoil Flows , 2007 .

[46]  G. Hulbert,et al.  A generalized-α method for integrating the filtered Navier–Stokes equations with a stabilized finite element method , 2000 .

[47]  Peter E. Hamlington,et al.  A NEW AUTONOMIC CLOSURE FOR LARGE EDDY SIMULATIONS , 2015, Proceeding of Ninth International Symposium on Turbulence and Shear Flow Phenomena.

[48]  Heng Xiao,et al.  Physics-Informed Machine Learning for Predictive Turbulence Modeling: Using Data to Improve RANS Modeled Reynolds Stresses , 2016 .

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

[50]  D. M. Somers Design and experimental results for the S805 airfoil , 1997 .

[51]  Hester Bijl,et al.  Bayesian estimates of parameter variability in the k-ε turbulence model , 2014, J. Comput. Phys..

[52]  B. V. Leer,et al.  Towards the ultimate conservative difference scheme V. A second-order sequel to Godunov's method , 1979 .

[53]  William Gropp,et al.  CFD Vision 2030 Study: A Path to Revolutionary Computational Aerosciences , 2014 .

[54]  Heng Xiao,et al.  Quantifying and reducing model-form uncertainties in Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes simulations: A data-driven, physics-informed Bayesian approach , 2015, J. Comput. Phys..

[55]  J. J. Moré,et al.  Quasi-Newton Methods, Motivation and Theory , 1974 .

[56]  H. Hamann,et al.  Estimation of turbulence closure coefficients for data centers using machine learning algorithms , 2012, 13th InterSociety Conference on Thermal and Thermomechanical Phenomena in Electronic Systems.

[57]  Radford M. Neal Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning , 2007, Technometrics.

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

[59]  K. Duraisamy,et al.  Using field inversion to quantify functional errors in turbulence closures , 2016 .

[60]  P. Spalart,et al.  A New Version of Detached-eddy Simulation, Resistant to Ambiguous Grid Densities , 2006 .

[61]  D. M. Somers Design and experimental results for the S814 airfoil , 1997 .

[62]  Shivaji Medida,et al.  A Comparative Assessment of Correlation-based Transition Models for Wind Power Applications , 2016 .

[63]  Steve M. Legensky,et al.  A Comparative Aerodynamic Study of Commercial Bicycle Wheels using CFD , 2010 .

[64]  T. Hughes,et al.  The Galerkin/least-squares method for advective-diffusive equations , 1988 .

[65]  Christopher M. Bishop,et al.  Current address: Microsoft Research, , 2022 .

[66]  Laurent Hascoët,et al.  The Tapenade automatic differentiation tool: Principles, model, and specification , 2013, TOMS.

[67]  Karthik Duraisamy,et al.  A paradigm for data-driven predictive modeling using field inversion and machine learning , 2016, J. Comput. Phys..

[68]  P. Roe Approximate Riemann Solvers, Parameter Vectors, and Difference Schemes , 1997 .

[69]  F. Menter Two-equation eddy-viscosity turbulence models for engineering applications , 1994 .