CI2 – Inviscid Strong Vortex-Shock Wave Interaction

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Joint Mathematics Meetings Hynes Convention Center, Boston, MA
Advertisements

Outline Overview of Pipe Flow CFD Process ANSYS Workbench
CFD II w/Dr. Farouk By: Travis Peyton7/18/2015 Modifications to the SIMPLE Method for Non-Orthogonal, Non-Staggered Grids in k- E Turbulence Flow Model.
University of Southampton Southampton, UK
Dynamic Balance of Cloud Vertical Velcoty
Airbreathing Hypersonics Laboratory China Aerodynamics Research and Development Center Osculating Inward turning Cone Waverider/Inlet (OICWI) Design Analysis.
Youngwook Kang, Cornell University Andrei Simion, The Cooper Union
1 “CFD Analysis of Inlet and Outlet Regions of Coolant Channels in an Advanced Hydrocarbon Engine Nozzle” Dr. Kevin R. Anderson Associate Professor California.
Fatih Ecevit Max Planck Institute for Mathematics in the Sciences V í ctor Dom í nguez Ivan Graham New Galerkin Methods for High-frequency Scattering Simulations.
Cartesian Schemes Combined with a Cut-Cell Method, Evaluated with Richardson Extrapolation D.N. Vedder Prof. Dr. Ir. P. Wesseling Dr. Ir. C.Vuik Prof.
Coupled Fluid-Structural Solver CFD incompressible flow solver has been coupled with a FEA code to analyze dynamic fluid-structure coupling phenomena CFD.
1 Internal Seminar, November 14 th Effects of non conformal mesh on LES S. Rolfo The University of Manchester, M60 1QD, UK School of Mechanical,
High-Order Adaptive and Parallel Discontinuous Galerkin Methods for Hyperbolic Conservation Laws J. E. Flaherty, L. Krivodonova, J. F. Remacle, and M.
Network and Grid Computing –Modeling, Algorithms, and Software Mo Mu Joint work with Xiao Hong Zhu, Falcon Siu.
A TWO-FLUID NUMERICAL MODEL OF THE LIMPET OWC CG Mingham, L Qian, DM Causon and DM Ingram Centre for Mathematical Modelling and Flow Analysis Manchester.
© 2011 Autodesk Freely licensed for use by educational institutions. Reuse and changes require a note indicating that content has been modified from the.
Discontinuous Galerkin Methods for Solving Euler Equations
Tutorial 5: Numerical methods - buildings Q1. Identify three principal differences between a response function method and a numerical method when both.
Zhaorui Li and Farhad Jaberi Department of Mechanical Engineering Michigan State University East Lansing, Michigan Large-Scale Simulations of High Speed.
Hybrid WENO-FD and RKDG Method for Hyperbolic Conservation Laws
© 2011 Autodesk Freely licensed for use by educational institutions. Reuse and changes require a note indicating that content has been modified from the.
C M C C Centro Euro-Mediterraneo per i Cambiamenti Climatici COSMO General Meeting - September 8th, 2009 COSMO WG 2 - CDC 1 An implicit solver based on.
In-term project presentation by Kanish Jindal Modeling of chlorine contact chamber at West Lafayette treatment plant.
MA5251: Spectral Methods & Applications
CFD Pre-Lab 2 Simulation of Turbulent Flow around an Airfoil Seong Mo Yeon, and Timur Dogan 11/12/2013.
Discontinuous Galerkin Methods and Strand Mesh Generation
CFD Lab - Department of Engineering - University of Liverpool Ken Badcock & Mark Woodgate Department of Engineering University of Liverpool Liverpool L69.
A particle-gridless hybrid methods for incompressible flows
Point Source in 2D Jet: Radiation and refraction of sound waves through a 2D shear layer Model Gallery #16685 © 2014 COMSOL. All rights reserved.
Discontinuous Galerkin Methods Li, Yang FerienAkademie 2008.
Approximate Riemann Solvers for Multi-component flows Ben Thornber Academic Supervisor: D.Drikakis Industrial Mentor: D. Youngs (AWE) Aerospace Sciences.
Discontinuous Galerkin Methods for Solving Euler Equations Andrey Andreyev Advisor: James Baeder Mid.
7. Introduction to the numerical integration of PDE. As an example, we consider the following PDE with one variable; Finite difference method is one of.
1 Complex Images k’k’ k”k” k0k0 -k0-k0 branch cut   k 0 pole C1C1 C0C0 from the Sommerfeld identity, the complex exponentials must be a function.
Xianwu Ling Russell Keanini Harish Cherukuri Department of Mechanical Engineering University of North Carolina at Charlotte Presented at the 2003 IPES.
© Fluent Inc. 11/24/2015J1 Fluids Review TRN Overview of CFD Solution Methodologies.
1 Direct Numerical Simulation of Compressible Turbulent Flows with Weighted Non-Linear Compact Schemes Alfred Gessow Rotorcraft Center Aerospace Engineering.
© Saab AB Transonic store separation studies on the SAAB Gripen aircraft using CFD Ingemar Persson and Anders Lindberg Stockholm,
Modeling Electromagnetic Fields in Strongly Inhomogeneous Media
CFD Study of the Development of Vortices on a Ring Wing
Requirements of High Accuracy Computing 1) Adopted numerical scheme must resolve all physical time and length scales. 2) Numerical scheme must be neutrally.
1 Application of Weighted Essentially Non-Oscillatory Limiting to Compact Interpolation Schemes Debojyoti Ghosh Graduate Research Assistant Alfred Gessow.
School of Aerospace Engineering MITE Numerical Simulation of Centrifugal Compressor Stall and Surge Saeid NiaziAlex SteinLakshmi N. Sankar School of Aerospace.
AIAA th AIAA/ISSMO Symposium on MAO, 09/05/2002, Atlanta, GA 0 AIAA OBSERVATIONS ON CFD SIMULATION UNCERTAINTIES Serhat Hosder, Bernard.
Code verification and mesh uncertainty The goal is to verify that a computer code produces the right solution to the mathematical model underlying it.
Lecture Objectives: - Numerics. Finite Volume Method - Conservation of  for the finite volume w e w e l h n s P E W xx xx xx - Finite volume.
An Introduction to Computational Fluids Dynamics Prapared by: Chudasama Gulambhai H ( ) Azhar Damani ( ) Dave Aman ( )
Application of Compact- Reconstruction WENO Schemes to the Navier-Stokes Equations Alfred Gessow Rotorcraft Center Aerospace Engineering Department University.
Interesting papers on SIGGRAPH 2005 Korea University Computer Graphics Lab. Jin-Kyung Hong.
Date of download: 6/26/2016 Copyright © ASME. All rights reserved. From: Numerical Study of Cerebroarterial Hemodynamic Changes Following Carotid Artery.
Computational Fluid Dynamics Lecture II Numerical Methods and Criteria for CFD Dr. Ugur GUVEN Professor of Aerospace Engineering.
Chapter 4 Dynamical Behavior of Processes Homework 6 Construct an s-Function model of the interacting tank-in-series system and compare its simulation.
Chapter 4 Dynamical Behavior of Processes Homework 6 Construct an s-Function model of the interacting tank-in-series system and compare its simulation.
Chamber Dynamic Response Modeling
A TWO-FLUID NUMERICAL MODEL OF THE LIMPET OWC
ივანე ჯავახიშვილის სახელობის
of Temperature in the San Francisco Bay Area
Fluent Overview Ahmadi/Nazridoust ME 437/537/637.
Convergence in Computational Science
Spectral methods for stiff problems MATH 6646
The application of an atmospheric boundary layer to evaluate truck aerodynamics in CFD “A solution for a real-world engineering problem” Ir. Niek van.
CI2 – Inviscid Strong Vortex-Shock Wave Interaction
Fifth MIT Conference on “Advances in CFD”. June 2009
AIAA OBSERVATIONS ON CFD SIMULATION UNCERTAINITIES
AIAA OBSERVATIONS ON CFD SIMULATION UNCERTAINTIES
AIAA OBSERVATIONS ON CFD SIMULATION UNCERTAINTIES
Simulated Surface-Induced Thrombin Generation in a Flow Field
High Accuracy Schemes for Inviscid Traffic Models
Comparison of CFEM and DG methods
Presentation transcript:

CI2 – Inviscid Strong Vortex-Shock Wave Interaction Qilin Lu and Z.J.Wang University of Kansas Presented at 5th International Workshop on High-Order CFD Methods February 23, 2019

Outline Discretization Scheme Verification Case Problem Description Computational Results Conclusions Vl1:Inviscid convected Vortex CI2:Inviscid Strong Vortex-Shock Wave Interaction February 23, 2019

Discretization Scheme Space Solver: FR/CPR Time Integration: RK3 method Formulation (Conservation Laws): 𝜕𝑄 𝜕𝑡 + 𝛻 ⋅ 𝐹 𝑄 =0 𝑣 𝑖 ( 𝜕𝑄 𝜕𝑡 + 𝛻 ⋅ 𝐹 𝑄 )𝑊𝑑𝑉= 𝑣 𝑖 𝜕𝑄 𝜕𝑡 𝑊 𝑑𝑉 + 𝜕𝑉 𝑖 𝑊 𝐹 𝑄 ∙ 𝑛 𝑑𝑆− 𝑣 𝑖 𝛻 𝑊 ⋅ 𝐹 𝑄 𝑑𝑉=0 𝜕 𝑄 𝑖,𝑗 𝜕𝑡 + 𝜋 𝑗 𝛻∙ 𝐹 𝑄 𝑖 − 𝜋 𝑗 𝜈 𝛻∙ 𝐹 𝜈 𝑄 𝑖 , 𝑅 𝑖 + 1 𝑉 𝑖 𝑓∈𝜕 𝑉 𝑖 𝑙 𝛼 𝑗,𝑓,𝑙 𝐹 𝑛 𝑓,𝑙 − 𝐹 𝜈,𝑛 𝑓,𝑙 𝑆 𝑓 =0 Final Form February 23, 2019

Smooth Limiter General Form: where 𝜙 𝑖 1,𝑦 = 𝜎 𝑖 +(1− 𝜎 𝑖 ) 𝜙 𝑖 1,𝑦 𝑢 𝑖,𝑓𝑝 = 𝑢 𝑖 + 𝜙 𝑖 (1,𝑦)( 𝑢 𝑖,𝑓𝑝 − 𝑢 𝑖 ) where 𝜙 𝑖 1,𝑦 = 𝜎 𝑖 +(1− 𝜎 𝑖 ) 𝜙 𝑖 1,𝑦 𝜙 𝑖 1,𝑦 = 𝑚𝑖𝑛 1,𝑦 = − 4 27 𝑦 3 +𝑦, 𝑦<1.5 1, 𝑦≥1.5 𝜎 is determined by “smoothness indicator” 𝜎 𝑖 = 1, 𝑆 𝑖 <𝑀−ℎ 1 2 1− sin 𝜋 2 𝑆 𝑖 −𝑀 ℎ , 𝑀−ℎ< 𝑆 𝑖 <𝑀+ℎ 0, 𝑆 𝑖 >𝑀+ℎ , February 23, 2019

Smooth Limiter 𝑆 𝑖 is smoothness indicator, which is defined as 𝑆 𝑖 =𝑙𝑜𝑔10 𝑢− 𝑢 ,𝑢− 𝑢 𝑖 𝑢,𝑢 𝑖 𝑢 is one degree lower space’s L2 projection of u. M=-3.2 and h=1 are applied for all cases. For more information about limiter and scheme please refer to: Li, Yanan, and Zhi J. Wang. "A convergent and accuracy preserving limiter for the FR/CPR method." 55th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting. 2017. Yu, Meilin, Z. J. Wang, and Yen Liu. "On the accuracy and efficiency of discontinuous Galerkin, spectral difference and correction procedure via reconstruction methods." Journal of Computational Physics 259 (2014): 70-95. February 23, 2019

Verification : Vl1-Inviscid Converted Vortex P2(T=50) limiter N_cell h u_L2_error v_L2_error order_u order_v 256 0.020833333 2.8069144723934900 2.8079207977044500 1024 0.010416667 1.5102071773645600 1.4719045626825000 0.89 0.93 4096 0.005208333 0.0894953965449293 0.0726530489601594 4.08 4.34 16384 0.002604167 0.0021178532255229 0.0016970421683930 5.40 5.42 P3(T=50) limiter mesh_size u_L2_residual v_L2_residual 0.0156250000 2.1510329168290600 2.7499337777306400 0.0078125000 0.1080328621037420 0.1015299838558880 4.32 4.76 0.0039062500 0.0010576846176196 0.0008869180482861 6.67 6.84 0.0019531250 0.0000416527019559 0.0000289939246621 4.67 4.93 P2(T=50) No limiter N_cell h u_L2_error v_L2_error order_u order_v 256 0.020833333 2.8069144723934900 2.8079207977044500 1024 0.010416667 1.5102071773645600 1.4719045626825000 0.89 0.93 4096 0.005208333 0.0894953965449293 0.0726530489601594 4.08 4.34 16384 0.002604167 0.0021178532255229 0.0016970421683930 5.40 5.42 P3(T=50) No limiter mesh_size u_L2_residual v_L2_residual 0.0156250000 2.1727416920924200 2.7635931154149700 0.0078125000 0.1080328620934570 0.1015299838459960 4.33 4.77 0.0039062500 0.0010576846078093 0.0008869180388659 6.67 6.84 0.0019531250 0.0000416526926961 0.0000289939174558 4.67 4.93 February 23, 2019

Problem Description NUMERICAL BOUNDARY Inlet: Fixed all Outlet: Fixed all Wall: Slipped Wall February 23, 2019

Computational Results Five selected lines’ density distribution to evaluate solutions; Schlieren contours which cover entire domain and vortex center at t=0.7s, respectively. February 23, 2019

Selected Lines-P2 February 23, 2019

Selected Lines-P3 February 23, 2019

Schlieren Contours-P2 February 23, 2019

Schlieren Contours-P2 February 23, 2019

Schlieren Contours-P3 February 23, 2019

Schlieren Contours-P3 February 23, 2019

Movie – P2 (RQ800) February 23, 2019

Conclusions Smooth Limiter for CPR/FR has the ability to preserve high-order accuracy in smooth region; Whether high frequency oscillations behind the shock are physical or not are still uncertain; CPR/FR could capture detailed flow structures while suppressing pseudo oscillations near strong shock with proper choice of limiter parameters; We improved our limiter with this case We hope to remove user tunable parameters. February 23, 2019

Cost vortex_shock Category N_cell h work_unit machine cpu_time P2_RQ50 5000 0.0047140 9.77 gpus01 9.52E+01 P2_RQ100 20000 0.0023570 86.55 8.43E+02 P2_RQ150 45000 0.0015713 297.23 2.90E+03 P2_RQ200 80000 0.0011785 724.39 7.06E+03 P2_RQ250 125000 0.0009428 1290.41 1.26E+04 P2_RQ300 180000 0.0007857 2299.95 2.24E+04 P3_RQ50 0.0035355 27.26 2.66E+02 P3_RQ100 0.0017678 237.31 2.31E+03 P3_RQ150 779.98 7.60E+03 P3_RQ200 0.0008839 1901.28 1.85E+04 P3_RQ250 0.0007071 3589.23 3.50E+04 P3_RQ300 0.0005893 6218.68 6.06E+04 February 23, 2019