6

NASA

Technical

ICOMP-92-27;

Memorandum

105993

CMOTT-92-14

A Realizable Reynolds
Equation Model

Tsan-Hsing
Institute

Shih
for

and Jiang

Stress Algebraic

Zhu

Computational

Mechanics

in Propulsion

and Center for Modeling

of Turbulence
NASA Lewis Research
Center
Cleveland,

(NASA-TM-I05993)
REYNOLDS
STRESS
MODEL

Prepared
Kyoto,

(NASA)

A REALIZABLE
ALGEBRAIC
EQUATION
36

N93-16596

L. Lumley

Cornell
Ithaca,

Ninth

Transition

Ohio

and

John

and

llnc I a s

University
New York

0139889

for the
Symposium
Japan,

on Turbulence

August

10 -18,

Shear
1993

Flows
/',"/

* *

/ _.1 ,,.i, _,,.,_ _

\@.2
2_

\_._,
..-,=,,/oe
\%X "- _----_

A REALIZABLE
REYNOLDS

STRESS

ALGEBRAIC

Tsan-Hsing
Institute

Shih and Jiang

for Computational

and Center

for Modeling
NASA

in Propulsion

of Turbulence

Lewis

Research
Ohio

John

MODEL

Zhu

Mechanics

Cleveland,

Corneli

EQUATION

and

Transition

Center

44135

L. Luraley

University,

Ithaca,

New

York

14853

Abstract
The

invariance

Reynolds
ysis

leads

stresses
the

theory

stresses

in

to the

mean

number

constitutive

velocity

isotropic

mechanics

Reynolds

to a turbulent

classical

continuum

in high

relation

gradients

eddy" viscosity

is

just

to

flows.

that

relates

in a more

mode/is

applied

turbulent

the

general

analyze

The

Reynolds

form

the linear

anal-

in which

approximation

of the general form.

On the basis of realizabLlity
analysis,
a set of model
coeffidents
are obtained
which are functions
of the time scale ratios of the
turbulence

to the

coefficients
kinetic

will ensure

energy

satisfy.

--

ficiently
ison

capability
model
rotation

that

of each
most

based

which

and

proposal
equation

rotational

all conventional

step

models.

viscosity

finite-

in detail

addition,
shear
models

solutions

accuracy

improves
In

fail to

are taken

diffusion-free

quantities.

homogeneous

turbulent

a conservative

compared

turbulent

These

models

configurations

with

significantly

eddy

of the

of second-order
are

rate.

turbulence

and numerical
results

rotation

component

existing

schemes

mean

two

mean

are performed

calculated

present

to simulate

the

over backward-facing

for both

the

of K-e
rates

positivity

differencing

The

data
that

is able

and

Grid-independent

fine grids.

shows

rate

calculations

by using

experimental

the

flows
The

method.

are obtained

strain

realizability

Separated

as applications.
volume

mean

The
the
the
flows

on sufwith

the

comparpredictive
proposed
with

large

fail to simulate.

1.

Introduction

Numerics]

simulation

tational

fluid dynamics

without

any

flows

rectly

(CFD).

turbulence

within

the

large-eddy

of turbulence

simulation

computed

Reynolds

end

number

conditions.

most

practical

calculations
the

In turbulence

the

Reynolds

turbulence

models

equation
group

models

Reynolds
cosity

K-e

of the

most

zero-,
are

often

however,

correlations

of higher

underlying

order

mechanism)

In the

standard

termined

from

a set

turbulence

conditions

has shown

that

that
weak

the average
of a constent.
into account

(Launder

second

1980).

this set of constents

they
shear

are universal.
flows

ratio of Pie

the effect
of annular

transport

Rodi

of strearaline
and

models,

Reynolds

inaccuracy

Numerical

experience

has a broad

(1981)

improved

jets.

that

over

about

unphysical

their

results.

and axe deor isotropic

the last two decades

but this by no means

the K-e model's

by using

ability

to

C_ as a function

of

kinetic

a function

and obtained
Recently,

Reynolds

Inappropriate

equilibrium

of the turbulent
proposed

curvature

twin parallel

under

applicability,

found

stresses

turbulent

are constant

flows

(1980)

and

is one

closures

all the higher-order

coefficients

vis-

calculations.

individual

equations.

the

eddy

Second-order

of the

for simple

(P is the production
and

The

due to lack of information

model

former

in which

flow

dynamical

algebraic

in this group

the

to

treated,

The

in practical

transport

in a serious

Rodi

stress

field.

1974)

equations.

model

can be significantly

Leschziner

today

are

1980)

flow

in terms

According

models.

(Rodi,

mean

closure

(often

Reynolds

Spalding,

used

expressed

correlations)

models

moment

all the

of experiments

Therefore,

Navier-Stokes

information.

equation

to the

the

are

the

transport

second-order

result

model,

(Rodi,

groups:

and

models

correlations
could

K-e

are di-

problems

in DNS.

on averaged

moment

to consistently

in these

is the

for high

has serious

correlations

two-equation

can simulate

it is difficult

appearing

modeling

calculation

they

two

stress

own dynamical

because

to DNS

applicable

also exist

are based

number

of turbulence

and

the aid of empirical

related

called

by their

are attractive

predict

model

time

(DNS)

Reynolds

though

expensive

difficulties

into

and

turbulence

group,

very

simulation

low

scales

LES,

second-order

Reynolds
one-

the large

turbulent

with

algebraically

popular

are determined

signifies

the

end

of compu-

modeling.

unknown

(the

numerical

A compromise

modeled.

of these

be divided

two-equation

In the latter

stresses;

may

the

stresses

are

at the present

stresses

and

includes

in which

aid of turbulence

flow quantities

way the

computers.

is usually
Some

modeling,

of determinable

to simple

scales

turbulence,

boundary
with

is restricted

approach

the small

with

equations

of direct

of current

(LES)

in the development

The approach

models

capabilities

is a bottleneck

improved

Yakhot

energy)

instead

for C_ which

and

results
co-workers

takes
in the
have

developeda version of the K-_ model

Their

model

fidents

is of the same

take

model

different

(Speziale

term,

turbulent

a backward-facing

and

Thangam

gradients.
mean
the

The

flows

mean

needed

for more

terms

by algebraic

perform

better

stress

flow

turbulence-driven

secondary
ASM

its generality.

sure based
normal

stresses

merical

from

this

special

becoming

negative

of ASM
closure

numerical

care

may

general

relation

is capable

to prevent

especially

difficulties

of ASM

Leschziner,

first

example

K-e model
may

1985),

such
clo-

turbulent

and

than

three
nicely

the

the nu-

that

dimensional
resolved

is

limit

second-order

complicated

in general
was

does

order correlations,

to be taken

model,

are cal-

of generating

which

needs

be more

(1980)

model

viscosity

of the

even

Rodi

the

form,

is

and diffusion

stresses

deficiencies

and

due to

dependence

cause

(Huang

velocity

a well known

eddy

of higher

concept

linear

nature,

flows;

in the

stresses

stresses,

invariant

modeling

will also

is an

others

convection

ASM

in a tensorial

inappropriate

Moreover,

second-order

Recently,

appear

where

which

mean

the Reynolds

the isotropic

Speziale

in two-dimensional

a more

Reynolds

for certain

ducts

flow

normal

to its anisotropic

while

to a separated

that

the

in which

K-e model

motions

does not

implementation

parent

Owing

correlations,

ASM.

(ASM)

in non-circular

In addition,

as pressure-strain

model

for the

ratio

to the

suggests
that

scale

eddy-viscosity

stresses

by eliminating

equations

the isotropic

is fully-developed

However,

and

time

like many

not well for the

is insufficient

expressions.

than

shear

This

transport

an algebraic

but

In fact,

one),

K-e

of calculations.

are proportional

of the concept.

flows.

accuracy

coef-

based

length

isotropic

well for the

type,

gradients

modeled

culated

not.

does

nature

complex

Boussinesq's

stresses

boundary-layer

velocity

in the

developed

usually

isotropic

on the

uses

RNG

et M. (1978),

reattachment

based

methods.

to the production

model

by Kim

overall

the RNG

Reynolds

concept

of the

erroneous

(including
group,

the

studied

the

of the

17 is the

this

of the

(RNG)

all the model

C1, related

of 71, where

In applying

to assess

but

version

coefficient

prediction

used

model
that

the

rate.

a good

K-_ model

assumes

1992),

group

K-e model,

In the latest

experimentally

often

equation

renormalization

to be a function

step,

parameter

algebraic

values.

strain

obtained

The standard

which

is set

to mean

over

important

constant

using

as the standard

and Thangam,

of dissipation
of the

form

by

of its
flows.

Taulbee

(1992).
There
els.

are other

For example,

a two-scale
terms

esting

Yoshizawa

direct

point

and

to developing
(1984)

interaction

of the mean

Rubinstein

approaches

velocity

Barton

in these

Reynolds

derived

a relation

approximation.
gradients.

(1990)

two methods

Yokhot

is that

relation

and

Orszag's

the values

algebraic

equation

mod-

stresses

using

for the turbulent

It contains

A similar

using

stress

both

linear

and

was also derived

RNG

of the model

quadratic
recently

method.
coefficients

An

by
inter-

can all

be determined
on the

analytically.

principle

of material

tive of the mean

only
an

valid

are

strain

stress

not fully

turbulent

that

the

velocity

stresses
conditions,
of the

scale

model

shear

facing

step

flows

eta/.

(1978).

turbulence
vative

models

together

Modeling

simulated

type

sufficiently
and

free

final

studied

by Driver
has

Calculations

a second-order
fine grids,

numerical
data

the

realizability

carried

the

two

diffusion.

The

as well as with

backwardand

with

Kim

the

a conser-

differencing
solution

calculated

those

ho-

in validating

and bounded
that

they
rate.

rotational

(1985)
out

to ensure

functions

rotation

to the
and

up

In general,

Seegmiller

accurate

Reynolds

to be at least
rate.

the

is truncated

as a benchmark
are

is used

for the

to the mean

(1983)

As usual,

gradients,

form

strain

and

served

Reynolds

Using

are found

of flows

realizable

velocity

gradients.

eta/.

non-linear

relation

The

it is not

these

mechanics.

of applications

by Bardina

from

and

a constitutive

basis

hence

is

tested.

on the mean

relation

deriva-

frame-indifference

of rational

velocity

Oldroyd

In addition,

a general

theory.

based

turbulence,

to the mean

on the

with experimental

turbulent

of material

ratio of the turbulence

flows.
and

of Reynolds

Incompressible
continuity

then

turbulence

is made

method,

grid-independent

depend

expression,
the

extensively

method

invariance

scale

for complex

are compared
in detail
standard
K-e model.

2.

of the

latter

with

the

of the mean

experimentally
The

finite-volume

scheme,
both

flows

not been

in the obtained

of the time

validation

mogeneous

the

terms

ratio

scales,

contains

flows.

is to develop

stresses

by using

which

turbulent

with

Reynolds

quadratic

time

The

model

the coefficients

are also functions

study

a different

incompressible

and have

and length

is derived

to tensorial

realizable

equation

proposed

the principle

for general

of the present

algebraic

we assume

However,

of two-dimensional

constraint

The purpose

(1987)

frmne-indifference,

rates.

in the limit

appropriate

models

Speziale

is

results

obtained

using

Stresses

flows

and Nsvier-Stokes

are governed

by the following

=o
v',,,+

Reynolds

averaged

equations:

(1)
= _r,,2
P

(2)

where

Ui are the

mean

velocity

and p are the fluid kinematic

with

respect

tensor

which

The

must

oldest

nesq's

viscosity

t and

(i = 1, 2, 3), p is the

and density,

co-ordinate

zj,

Ui,, and

respectively,

mean

pressure,

U_j are derivatives

uiuj

is the

of Ui

turbulent

stress

be modeled.

and

isotropic

stresses
form

to time

components

simplest

proposal

eddy-viscosity

in laminar

flows

of this concept

for modeling

concept

and the

that

turbulent

the

turbulent

stress

assumes

an analogy

between

stresses

in turbulent

flows.

is Boussithe viscous
The

general

is
2
_iu$ = -_K 61j - 2vtSij

where

vt is called

the

eddy-viscosity

(3)

and Sij is the mean

strain

rate

defined

by

1U,
Sij = _( ,j + Uj.,)
Equation

(3)

extensively

2.1

constitutes

used

(1970)

constitutive

discussed

those
on the

mean

problem

and time

flow

so that

field

developing

mean

flows

exists

turbulent

correlation

derived

relation

memory

we can

point

effects

of view

that
the

the

velocity

energy

models

that

turbulent
and

K and

stress

length

uluj

scales

its dissipation

wall.

In other

of walls,

are

with

if it exists,

is always

expansion

of turbulence
rate

aid

of the

the

smaller

than

conditions

situations

such

as

whether

however,
relation

of such

from

for any
a formally

of experiments.

of functional

form.

we neglect

at the present

of the functional

is a function

much

under

it is questionable

of application,

the relationship

only

correlation;

The validity
the

Lumley

boundary

a "constitutive"

problem.

and consider

are
and

derive

and for convenience

exist

of initial

the

to be verified

in the time

relations

for any turbulent

the closure

correlations?

of turbulence

effect

far from

relation,

in the relation

first order approximation

assume

turbulence

turbulent

such

scales

formally

of course,

constitutive

for

that

the

relation

to solve

needs,

A turbulent
a modeling

most

or in the vicinity

such a constitutive
of view,

exist

found

the length

significant

point

kinetic

and

is not

practical

Uij,

relation

turbulence

rapidly
there

this

in which

in the

for

relation

a general

situation

basis

today.

Constitutive

Does

a common

(4)

mean

characterized

form.

From

the
time

time
as the

Therefore,

deformation
by the

we

tensor
turbulent

e, i.e.,

(5)
5

Note

that

the molecular

here only
The

to high

Reynolds

axguments

According

viscosity

number

of equation

to the lr theorem

independent

v is not included
turbulent

(5)

contain

we restrict

our attention

flows.
ten

of dimensional

non-dimensional

because

quantities

analysis,

they

bearing
may

two

dimensions.

be grouped

into eight

quantities:

(6)
By normalizing

the

turbulent

stress

as
m

uiuj

vivjequation

(5)

can be written

2--K"

(7)

as

=
The

form

invaxiance

theory

be a function
have
tensors

of the tensor

shown

(Lumley,

of other

invaxiants.

with

the

The basic

B (also
tensor

principle

and

we may

I_,j.V_2,hA_B_, V_hVj,_.A, Bj,

is that

an invariant

a set of independent
1992)

its

Following

vectors,

F_j can be determined

see Shih,
_,j

relations.

arbitrary

function

In determining

A and

Cayley-Hamilton

two non-dimensional

isotropic

1978).

in Appendices

can be formed

generalized

valued

(8)

transpose

Lumley
form

V_,,Vh_A,

that

only
_,i

(1978),

th, _. following

Bj,

by using
can only

invariants,

we

18 independent
according

to the

let A_ and

Bj be

18 invariants:

Vh2,V_.jA, Bj,

(9)

In addition,

we have

other

invariants:

5_A_B_,
where

I, II, HI

are the three

A_AI,
invarlants

BiB,

I,

II,

of the tensor

III,
]_j:

...

(10)

I "- V/,i

1
_(_,d

Zl :

V_
jj-

_,j_,_)

(11)

111 = l(_,,Vj,jVk,k
-- 3_,,_,h_a
3.
and

-..

represents

Note

that

the

in the

higher order terms

to the

invaria_ts

above

of this type

Cayley-HamUton

because

dent,

other

possible

hence

they

However,

the

invariants

in (9)

for

example,

_j_j.

we do not include

_,z_.kV;_jAiBj

they are not independent

quantities

and

according

theorem:

V_.tV_.kVh.j - I.
Any

17 tensors,

of other

llst of invariants

+ 2V,j_,_,,)

terms,

V_.kVkd + II.

for example,

V_.j - IIl&j

Vk.iVk.lV,,,.tV,,.iAiB

= 0

(12)

j, are

also not

indepen-

will not be included.

invariant
and

list

(10),

can

be extended

by

including

any

combination

of

for example,
f1(1,

VI,jAiBj"

1I,

III,

V_aVid,

...)
(13)

V_,kV_,.jA,Bj..f2(I,
where

.fa and

dependent,
(16)
As

.f2 are

but

scalar

they

are, in general,
a result,

invariants

listed

the

functions.

II,
Of course,

are useful

in explaining

functions

of various

invarlant

in (9),

v-_AiBj

_-_jAiBj

(10)

and

Ill,

Vi_iV_,i,

these

...)

types

of invariants

why the coefficients

invariants

may

in question.

as a function

VLIAiB

j,

Vi,hVhjAiBj,

Vj,kVh,iAiBj,

l_,hVj,_a_Bj, VksVk,jA,B_, V_._Vj_A_Bj,

Vi2k Vj,j, AiBj,

VI,,Vo,

Vk,iV_jAiBj,

VlyiAIBi,

V_iVk,jAIBj,

K'.,%A,

Viyk_AiBj,

Bj,

Vk,i Vh,i Vj21Ai B j , Vh,i V_l Vj_l Ai B i , V_,_, Vlyk VI_ AI B j ,

2

v,,,,v,, _v,,., v_,.,A,B_, V_,V_,V,.,,,V,.a.4,_,

6_jA_B_,

A_A_,

of the

( 13):

f(Vi,jAiBj,

B_B_,

I,

11,

111,

V_,jV_._,

not in-

in the final relation

of the tensors

be written

are

...,

above

V,jA, Bjf,, ..)

Because
the

vTv'jA_Bj

right

equation

hand
(14)

is biline_r

side
can

in axbitrary

of equation

(14)

be reduced

_A_Bj

(14)
tensors

be

also

At and

bilinear

Bj,

we must

in At

and

Bj.

require

that

Therefore,

to

= a16tjAtBj

+ a2VijA_Bj

+a4V_.h VhjAtBj

+ asVj._A_Bj

+ asVj.k Vk.iA4Bj

+ aeV_,h Vj,kAiBj

+a,V_.,V_aA,B_ + asV,._Vj_A,B_
+ _.V,;_Vj,hA,
Bi
+a,oVk,tV_,2_liBj

+ axx Y_t vc'haAtBj

+ aa2Vi.h Vz,h Vl_AiBj

+ax, V_2_,Vj2,I,AI B, + ax,t Vi,',tV_,b AtB , + a,s VI,., V_,.zVj2,A, Bj

+axeVh.t Vh_ Vj?tAtBj

+ aI,V_j, V_2_,VI_AtB

+alsV_a, VI,J,E2,,, Vj_,,,AtBj

Noting

that

At and

B_ are

the

arbitrary

+ a_t Vi.t Vi_ V,,a V,,,.jAtB_

vectors,

(15)

we obtain

= a_sq + a,v,a + _sD,t + a,v,a,v_a + ,,,,v_a,v_,,+ a_v,,_,v_a,

_t-al2Y/,ky/,hy/_

-_- a l S gk,i

.._

V:l

al3Vi_/_

g_2 ! --_ G , , Vi,&

gl2h

.31- al4Yk',tYk',j

Vl2 j

9ff al,Yk,tYk,1521

3v a l S gi,_,

Vl,I,

Vl2rn

_?ra

+,,, v,:, v...,v...j

where
III,

the

coefficients

V_jV_j

...,

al -

(16)

due

to (13),

functions

of the

invariants

I, II,

i.e.,

ai = It(I,
Equation

an, are,

(16)

is a general

lI,

III,

V_iV_z,

relationship

...),

between

i=

1,2,..-,19

two second

rank

(17)
tensors.

The normalized

turbulent

stresses

have

two

properties

_;vj = vjv;

(18)

v_v_ = 1

(19)

and

Using

the

properties

of (18)

and

(19)

in equation

(16),

we obtain

the

following

relations:

aS

a12

a2_

QlS

g 1 =

[1

aS

--

a16

a4_

a9

=" a17

2a,I

- 2a4D

0-18

as_

Qll

"--- a19

QlO

(20)

- (a6 + aT)b

2(as

+ alo)/_

= V_jVI_j

(als

+ al,)b]

where

After
form,

D = VIjVj.,

b = V_jVI.j

introducing

equations

(20)

,
into

(16)

and

converting

= V_jV_d=
3
to the

(21)

dimensional

we obtain
K=

tti_t

2K,_,j+ 2a2--(U_.j + V'_., _U,., ,.j)

K s

+2_4-_-(u,._u_
+ uj.ku_.,
- gnu,j)
K s

1-

2ae--_--(U,.kUj.k

gn6,_)

K s
2a.t--_-( Uk.iUhj

_ IISij )

K 4
+2as--_-(Ui,kU1j

. q- U_hUj,k -- gIISij)

K 4
+2alo---_(Uk.,Ul5
_k2als_s

(22)

2 :

+ U_jU_.,

(U_U_

2:
-gnu,
j)

1:

K 4

1--

q-2al4--_-(U_,iU_,

--

giI_ij)

where

n = U;,jUj,,,

_I = u,,w,,j ,

fI = v,_v2,j ,
9

fi = u.:.u.:.,_,
,_,

(23)

Equation

(22)

is the most

assumption

(5).

Interestingly

of equation

(22)

axe of the

scale

direct

method

interaction

when

smaller

however,

1990).

result

indicates

the

quadratic

form

2.2

Realizability

Reallzability

of equation

non-negativity

any

fluctuating

requirement

flow).

Lumley,

is a basic

stresses

physical

continuity

model

rate tensor

equation

(1)

from

equation

(22),

ulu---_
2K Since

the

time

scale

the

different

of equation
may

twogroup

theoretical

(22).

be sufficient,
time

from now on, we only

espescale

is

consider

defined

and

Schwarz'

requirement

inequality

mathematical
obey.

from

as the

producing

to the constitutive

between

principle

It also represents
unphysical
relation

of

that

the

a minimal
results.

(22)

In

to derive

U2,2
0
0

0
0)
0

(24)

gives

the normal

1
KUI,_
3 + 2a2--e

ratio

both

side

of the form

U2,2

and

three

the

right-hand

the renormallzatlon

of (22)

and

should

0
U1,1
0
The

at the

U_j under

is true if the turbulent

1978),

equation

a turbulence

a deformation

form

and

through

the

Therefore,

the following,
this principle
will be applied
constraints
on its coefficients.
Consider

and

the rationality

normal

model

to prevent

terms

derived

1984)

(which

(22).

of turbulent

turbulence

as those

tensorlal

1977,

quantities,

of any

five

The fact that

unity

of mean

(Schumann,

the

solution

scale

between

first

(Yoshizawa,

is less than

the time

form

a quadratic

[JU_jJiK/e

than

same

the

Barton,

lead to a similax

In practice,
clally

and

relationship

enough,

formalism

(Ruhinstein

analyses

general

of the

-=

(25)

-U1,1

stress

1
+ _(2a4

turbulent

can be written

+ a6 + aT).

to the

mean

as

( KUI,_ _ =
/e

strain

rate

is defined

(26)
by

KS
= --

(27)

where

S = (2S_jSij)

10

I/=

(28)

equation

(26)

can further

Physically,

we know

in U1,1, but

be written

2K

that

cannot

as

3 -4-827/+

(284 -4-ae -4- aT)T/=

will decrease

be driven

by a vortex

to negative

(29)

values.

stretching
Therefore,

with

an increase

we must

require

that

UI_I

2K

>

0,

0,

if

0,

if 7/--,oo

_1R1

2K
ulul
These

are

of which

called
the

the

simplest

,,.

realizability
way

if

conditions.

is perhaps

the

0 < T/< oo

7/--.

They

(30)

oo

(31)

(32)

can be satisfied

in various

ways

following:

2/3

(33)

2G 2

A1 +_/
284

2as

(34)

/(7)
C.2

(35)

/(7)
G'.3
287

where

f(T/)

simplest

is in general

form

--

a polynomial

(36)

/(7)
of _/ of order

higher

than

2.

We

take

its

as

f()
A1,A_,G.I,G.2

and

C.3 are

adjustable

= A2 + _s
constants,

A1 > 0 ,

(37)
but

they

must

satisfy

A2 > 0 ,

(38)
2C'_1 -4- C,-2 + C',-s > 0
Similar
be mentioned
strain

rate

analysis
that

on _t2u2 and
equations

_
(33)

also leads
to (38)

tensor
11

to equations

also

hold

(33)

to (38).

for a three-dimenslonal

It should
pure

0
UI,I
0
and

that

principal

any

deformation

axes

of deformation

It can be seen from

if the

model

model
and

and

in the

weak

Reynolds
Further
deformation

sense,

can be

analysis

in the

realizabillty
such

models

(1990).

is, they

that

form

only

ensure

cannot

as those

of Speziale

In fact,

of (39)

in the

these

in the

(1987),

models

the positivity

be fully

satisfy

satisfied

standard

Yoshizawa
reallzability

K-e
(1984)
only

of the sum of the normal

stresses.
constraints
on the
rate tensor

mode]

coei_cients

0
0
0
which

(39)

written

as constant,

anisotropic

Barton

that

O
0
1
Us,s

rate tensor.

are taken

recent

and

tensor

the above

coefficients

Rubinstcin

in the

rate

U,,
0
0

corresponds

0
UI.=
0

to a fully-developed

UlUl

2K
3

_3_3

flow.

In this case,

s)(2C's

- c.2

)
(41)

_'K

_K

we have

C_s)

.'K

] K + 3(A_-__

the

(40)

,/'K
+ 3(A, + ,f) (2C_,

by considering

0
0)
0

channel

2
_2_2

can be obtained

3(A2 +_7 s)(C_2+

C_s)

2,1K
3(A1 -I_7)
where
KS

Experiments

indicate

= lUl,=l

s=

(42)

that
2
UlUl

>

u2u2

<

which

requites,

from

equation

(41),

that

12

(43)

C,_2 > 2C_s

2.3

Rotation

effect

The parameter
the

mean

where

_7 represents

rotation

_,

rate

In the present

the effect

x-

ij

ijJ

the rotation

study,

T/and

_ can be easily

2.4

coefficients

justified

algebraic

By introducing

rate,

and

the

effect

of

f_j

= (U,.j

- Uj,,)/2

+ 4emjlwm

(45)

it is sufficient

to simply

include

the paxameter

a2, i.e.,

the other

Realizable

strain

of the frame.

2/3

2a2 -keeping

mean

by _:

'

we find that

in the coefficient

while

of the

can be r _presented

12 =

t:

w,_ represents

only

(44)

equation

A1 + r/+

the same.

by equation

The dependance

of the

coefficients

on

(17).

equation

model

( 33)-(37)

into

2 g_

(46)

equation

(22),

we obtain

- v,(U,,j+ Uj,_)

-t A2 C-rl
+ 77a K_ s (U,.kUko

+ U.i:,Uk,,

II6,j)
(47)

U.,

K s

C.s

K s

1-

-eA, + ,? : (Uk,iUk,_
--_u&j)
Two

quantities,

be determined
standard

the turbulent
in equation

K-e model

(47).

are used

K:

kinetic

K and its dissipation

To this end,

which

+ [U.iK

energy

the

two

transport

rate

e, remain

equations

to

in the

read:

(!., + _)Kj]j

= P -

(48)

_r K

//t

_2

_.,
+ [u:- (v + _)_.j]._
= c,-_P- c_-_
13

(49)

where
g

2/3

C_,=

(50)

A_ +_+a_

P = --u, uiUi J
The

coefficients

C1,C2,o'K

and _

C1 =1.44,
and

the

additional

C,1=-4,
These

coefficients

have

their

C2=1.92,

ag=l,

C,3=-2,

been

standard

values:

_,=1.3

(52)

assume:

C,2=13,

values

assume

(51)

found

A1=1.25,

to work

well

_=0.9,

for both

A2--1000.

test

cases

(53)

considered

in this

work.

3.

Rotating

The

Homogeneous

present

model

turbulence.

A test

by Bardina

eta/.

the

flow being

energy
0,

K/Ko

0.5,

mean
were

-0.5

starting

with

the

initial

from

"equilibrium"

order

isotropic
three

cases.

c).

seen

nonequilibrium

to simulate
gives

the

data.

the effect
the

for the effect

same

initial

used

results

from

of the

that

at

fI/S

of rotation

of turbulent

much

2(b)

and

rotation

as for the

on the evolution
14

present

0 the

better
2(c)

than
show

the

the

of turbulence.

the

cannot
very

up with

ability

case

and

model

s-K-e

was

LES results

energy

rate on turbulence.
no rotation

condition

model

present

catch

S is the

= 0.296

with

kinetic

it does

of f_/S

initial

eo/(SKo)

the

of

kinetic

energy,

are compared

However,

large

results

both

studied

The calculations

The

in LES with

to as s-K-e)

performs

Figures

rates

kinetic

on the

configuration

rotation

scheme.

was

turbulent

frame.

development

and

1 is the
of the

at the

Runge-Kutta

The

be

Figure

St,

rate

flow which

turbulent

referred

It can

shear

rotation

rate of the reference

turbulence

(hereafter

mean

the evolution

time,

K0 is the

development

model

account

nondimensional
where

of the

method.

- c) show

turbulence.

overpredicts

model

2(a

effect

homogeneous

LES

an isotropic

highly

s-K-e

the

a fourth

to the

2(a

the

f2 is the rotation

K-e model

in figures
predict

the

for all the

standard

using

respectively,

corresponding

to mimic

Figures

rate and

Flow

is the rotating

(1983)

tested.

performed

adopted

is able

case

with

strain

Shear

the

model
of the
Note

because

well
later

which
present
that

the

it cannot

4.

Backward-Facing

4.1

Step

Numerical

procedure

For computational
tions

Flows

is solved,

convenience,

the non-dimensional

form

of the governing

equa-

in which
z_

U_

<x'>=r,,---7'

<u'>-u,,,'

<P>=pu2,----7'
(54)

< K >=

_L,, l

< e >-

u2, '

where

< > refers to a non-dimensional

length

and velocity,

respectively.

< vt >=

u2,t'

quantity,

and

Accordingly,

ut

L,et,

V,,jL,,s

and

U, et are the reference

the flow Reynolds

number

is defined

by

Re-

L,,tU,

ej

(55)

12

Hereafter,

all the quantities

dropped

will be of the non-dimensional

steady-state

equations

(1),

and

(2),

two

(48)

and
1

stands
source

gradient

terms

equations
the

from

equation

same

volume

procedure.

It

mentum

usually
is handled

To ensure

both

and

associated

accuracy

are approximated
1991a),

< > will be

all the

to solve

center

with

and

terms

system

with

control

all

grid,

algorithm

(Van

of numerical

accurate

and

conventional

15

the

volume

the non-staggered

by the

and

equations,

quadratic
the

velocity

non-dimensional

of equations

(1983)

stability

(56)

counterparts,

Chow

the SIMPLEC

form

except

that

by l/Re.

grid

and

general

_. For the momentum

dimensional

of each

of Rhie

by a second-order
other

the

transport

= s.

It can be seen that

as their

the

12t

diffusion

12 is replaced

procedure

with

(47).

= y),

K and

a non-staggered

geometric

interpolation

oscillations
coupling

at the

U2),

form

used

uses

= z,xz

in the following

cross-derivative

viscosity

method

stored

can be written

V(=

arising

numerical

being

U1),
the

The

(zx

+ [v -

includes

molecular

cases

S,

axe all of the

kinematic

(49)

for 1, U(=

term

dimensional

v_

[uthe

so that

for simplicity.

In the

where

form

is used
and

solution,

central

is a finite-

dependent
(Figure

Doormal

bounded

(56)

variables
3).

The

to avoid

mo-

spurious

the pressure-velocity
and
the

Raithby,

convection

differencing
differencing

1984).
terms

scheme
scheme.

(Zhu,
As

a result,
lineexized

the discretized
form

counterpart

of equation

(56)

can be cast

into the following

A_e = A__+ Sc

(57)

where

the

coefficients

to its

neighbours

terms

of equation

the resulting
procedure

_bE(Figure
(56).

coefficient
of Stone

iterative

solution

residue

of all the

numerical
4.2

shows

scheme

matrix

is always

diagonally

is used

to solve

is considered

dependent

variables

are given

model

studied
from
the

the

relate

the

principal

discretization

of the

used

the system

is less than
eta/.

The strongly

the

(1989)

and

implicit

equations.

maximum

10 -4 . The

side

AI __ 0 so that

of algebraic

when

left-hand

that

dominant.

converged

in Rodi

ensures

unknown

The

normalized

details

of the

present

Zhu (1991b).

results

present

(1985),

from

convection

(1968)

procedure

imentally

3), result

which

The

process

Numerical

The

At (l = W, E, S, N),

by Kim,

here

flow

1 gives

the

flow

stream

velocity

is then

applied

Kline

on referred

and

parameters
and

and

Johnston

to as KKJ-

configuration

U,e!

to the two

the

for both
step

height

(1978)

and

the

taken

step

Driver

and

system

exper-

Seegmiller
Figure

used.

experimental

as the

flows

respectively.

co-ordinate

here

H0 are

and

DS-cases,

Cartesian
cases;

backward-facing

Table

reference

reference

free-

quantities

for

non-dimensionalization.

Table

case

Three
inlet,

the

types

the

L,

L_ 11. Hd U.S

DS

37423

1.5

10

40

KKJ

44737

0.6

10

40

outlet

and

of boundaries

assumption

normal

parameters

experimental

the turbulent

1. Flow

Re

data
stresses

are

present,

i.e.

inlet,

are

available

for the

streamwise

and b"_. K is calculated

from

solid

wall.

At the

mean

velocity

U and

these

_-_ and

_'_ with

that
1

_-_ = _(_
and

(58)

+ _)

e by

e =

C_I4KSl2
L

'

L = min(0.41Ay,

16

0.0856)

(59)

where

Ay is the

in Table

1.

to zero.

At the

Influences

by changing
the

the

distances

interest.

of them

outlet,

the
inlet

Shih

was found

also reported

in Avva

in this

we use the

1974)

to bridge

Two
dence

eta/.

and

and

5(b)

s-K-e model
data

for the

seen

that

present

show

the

sufficiently

This
close

have

conducted

that

quadrupling

the present
DS-case,

data

results

Cray YMP

The wall friction

wall turbulence
tested

predict

of the

near-wall

is seen

from

the negative

turbulence

figure
peak

recirculation

The computed
are determined
in Table

5(a)

that

and

those

modeling
both

of Cy, pointing

findings

were

Therefore

and

Spalding,

only

the

this

to limited

Figures
with

KKJ-case.
for the

is also

results

the

Thangam

KKJ-case.

case

for the
are not

They

Hut

(1991)

have

found

improvement.

Therefore,

as grid-independent.
model

7.1 and

8.3 minutes

of CPU

is very

low Reynolds

and present

model

accuracy

of the

time

703

on the

to the

number

However,

in the

For the
required

are presented.

sensitive

restricted

of the

grids

and

and present

that

the

It can be

on the coarse

wall functions.

is only

for the

are the experimental

the fine grid results

using

points

s-K-e

the various

s-K-e

(fine)

wall calculated
5(a)

a minimal

the

the grid depen-

for the DS-case.

Recently,

C! is a parameter

than

but none

Lai (1988).

differences

obtained

to only

with

It is Cy that

worse

Similar

for the

can be considered

In the following,

much

(1992),

(Launder

in figure

for the

took approximately

modeling.

and Shih

points

KKJ-case,

stage.

grid leads

coefficient

Launder

and 199x91

some

calculation

on the fine grids

computer.

(1981),

available

the solutions

the fine grid computations

and

of

and Bremhorst

(fine)

produce

a highly-resolved
a 166x73

(coarse)

are

in the

that

region

number

approach

also included

does

noticeable

the

cases,

Reynolds

C! at the bottom

to the grid-independent

and 805 iterations,

in the

model;

indicates

from

grids are used to examine

110x52

but no such

more

results.

in both

near the wall.

coefficient

grid refinement

are set

are examined

low

and So and

function

and 201x109

the friction

far away
severa]

given

variables

that

solutions.

(1992)

computational

and the present

model,

s-K-e

sublayer

(coarse)

DS-case,

wall

flow

found

and Yang

satisfactory

Shuen

contain

Lam

(1992),

to yield

standard

they

106x56

sufficiently
we tested

(1982),

thickness

on the solution

it has been

work,

(1990),

viscous

of the solution;

and

and Lumley

of the

conditions

already

of Chien

sets of non-uniform

KKJ-case
5(a)

the

Le,

of this

to be able

derivatives

and outlet

1 are

stage
those

(1974),

streamwise

Lo and

in Table

earlier

including

work,

the w_ll and 5 is the boundary-layer

of both

given

Sharma

from

locations

In the

K-e models
and

distance

K-e models
the

near-wall
largely

near-

influence

regions.

It

underpredict

wall function

approach

region.
and

measured

in the calculation

2 are the result

reattachment

points

from the point

of Obi et a/. (1989)

17

where

obtained

are compared

in Table

Cy goes to zero.
with the Reynolds

2. They

Also included
stress

model

(RSM)

and

that

reattachment

of Sindir

point

overall

performance

dearly

demonstrates

It is important

makes

the

that

model,

and that

a marginal

pressure

coefficient

predict

C_ along

premature

reattachment
well.

The

and

Sindir

almost

lengths,
good

The streamwise

mean

present

model

model

predicts

are

Here,

recovery

in the vicinity

recovery

also exists

say at z-20
other.
Finally,
u--Oare
perimental
and

7(a),

the comparisons
in figures

data

for the

continuously

uncertainty
some

uncertainty
other

reliable
a smaller

hand,

because

step

in the
the

unsteadiness

measured

smaller
of the

in both

works

in figures

between

quite

of Obi et a/.
present

to

of the

rises

(1989)

model

are

predictions

s-K-e,

but

results

DS-case

with

slower

such a slow

Further

downstream,
with

turbulent

stresses

u 2, v 2 and

In the
in the

KKJ-case,

of the

length.

should

also

recovery

region,
and back-

step,

This

in the

the

forward

leaving

an

points

to

region.

be considered
location,

s-K-e

results

each

no ex-

recirculation

to move

of the reattachment

As compared

The present

coincide

downstream

in the

and

nearly

experiment

quantities

s-K-e

enough,

(1989).

models

reattachment

and 7(b) at four

of the

in somewhat

Interestingly

z-locations.

heights

7(a)

flow variables.

are available

18

is seen

pressure

the results

to other

the

uncertainty
flow.

these

are shown

turbulent
data

s-K-e

static

of C,.

in the

for the

the

the improved

stresses

experimental

of the

of

stresses

measured

Again,

various

step

cases,

captures

and measured

was found

and

and ASM.

of the two

9 at

height

behavior

with its underprediction

of Obi eta/.

the results

seven

model.

of the

point.

prediction

turbulent

around

of 4-0.5

than

of predicted

point

In both

as compared

8 and

ASM
5.66

results

differences

better

in the RSM

present

The

of the reattachment

the reattachment

ward

the

flows

in figure

shown

ASM.

U profiles
the

of computed

reported

variation

not substantial,

reverse

6.44

model

and

to the

velocity

cross-sections.

7.35

is consistent

of the RSM

attributed

the

Table

of the turbulent

points
RSM

wall.

present

RMS

to those

of C_ are mainly

which

the

the

behavior

comparison

of C_ were

using

comparable

different

while

the

due to the

of reattachment
present model
5.82

bottom

rises,

predictions

(1982),

the

the

pressure

The

to assess

to it.

6.35

show

(ASM).

used

procedures.

with

is mainly

the anisotropic

model

been

obtained

this improvement

7 4-0.5
6(b)

stress

often

as well as numerical

Table 2. Comparison
experiment
s-K-e
6.1
4.99

and

has

improvement

contribution

KKJ
6(a)

significant

algebraic

which

models

to mention

case
DS

Figures

with a modified
parameter

of turbulence

O, in the present
only

(1982)

is a critical

On
more

indicating
in figures

8 and

9, it can be seen

leading
the

to significant

anisotropic

behaviours
the

the

anisotropic

improvements

terms

are

that

have

clearly

flows considered

here.

in both

little

reflected

impact

on the

v 2 results.
shear

which

also hold

obtained

decreasing

On

turbulent

(41)

The improvement

u s while

v 2,

the

other

hand,

stress

_-_.

These

qualitatively

by the present

model

for

in figure

in Cu.

Conclusions

A constitutive
ance

theory.

because

relation

analysis.

can

be expressed

classical

approximation.

The

_, which

ensure

condition

that
has

been

shear

flows

and
are

cases,

has

little

but

impact

calibrated

the LES

significant

is achieved

coefficients
the

vaiue

given

other

The

step

The

improvement

of the latter.

computed

homogeneous

flows.

at an insignificant

simplicity

This

shear

penalty

inhomogeneous

shear

the

far downstream

of the reattachment

simple

parabolic

flows,

model

for simple
region

show

and
that

K-e model,

can

as evidenced

nature.

19

point

also

that

all flow
normal

gradients.

terms

C_1 may

be further

compared

in detail

the experimental
the

The

for both

quadratic

present

data

model

does

and this improvement

efficiency

be expected

by its improved
where

homogeneous

appropriate

been

present

turbulent

velocity

have

r/ and

The

show

the

that

ap-

- a realizability

rotating

quite

to the computational

present

ratios

only

flows

over the standard

The

scale

cross-derivative

results

comparisons

time

results

up

a first-order

to satisfy.

indicates

stress

quadratic

flows:

in

of order

only

stresses

seem

to the

considered.

turbulent

the

mean

in this paper

numbers

to use

unable

that

invari-

account

gradients,

normal

and

into

of the

of the

nonlinear

of C1 related

flows.

suffice

The calculated

containing

Reynolds

constitutes

are

of C_,

by using

taken

form

two different

flows.

at high

velocity

turbulent
models

variation

to the terms

mean

functions

the

step

data for rotating

for backward-facing
provide

to calculate

on the flows

against

are

derived

not been

it may

turbulence

to the

flows

representation

of the

backward-facing

been

general

of the

coefficients

existing

sensitive

has

has

the

calculations,

positiveness

applied

of the model

test

with

the

are sensitive

the

tensor,

eddy-viscosity

model

most

model

values

rank

For practical

proximation.

stresses

a second

viscosity

as a s, ries, in terms

the

stresses

is valid only for turbulent

of the molecular

Being

to 4, while

variables

for the turbulent

The relation

the influence

the

mic

increase

u s and

in equations

8 for _T is due to the reduction

5.

terms

and

algorith-

to work

well

prediction

in

the flow tends

to be of

Acknowledgements

The

authors

are grateful

ing homogeneous

shear

of J.L.

Lumley

0226,

funded

by the

Aerospace
No.

Programs),

Shabbir

and

for may

helpful

was
U.S.

supported
Airforce

and the U.S.

F49620-92-J-0038,

(Aerospace

Aaralr

flows

contribution
jointly

to Dr.

funded

for his calculations

suggestins

in part
Office

the

U.S.

of Scientific

No.

(Control

and in part

Office

The

AFOSR

Research

Research,

Airforce

rotat-

and discussions.

by Contract

Office of Naval

by

of the

89and

by Grant

of Scientific

Research

Program).

References

R.K.

Awa,

C.E.

and low Reynolds

*

J. Bardina,
models
lent

J.H.

based

flows."

K.Y.

number

1982,

D.M.

Driver

shear

layer

P.G.

Huang

and

Cornell
.

M.A.

with

S.J. Kline

reattachment

"Features

1985,

second

turbulence

incompressible

Stanford,

flows

turbulent

pp.163-171.
of recirculating-flow

closures
on

with

pp.33-38.

of a reattaching

"Stabilization

turbu-

Ca.

J., Vol.20,

5th Svraposium

of high

90-0246.

"Improved

J., Vol.23,

moment

paper

boundary-layer

1985,

AIAA

study

and

third

Turbulent

order

Shear

dis-

Flows,

pp.5.19-5.24.
and

J.P.

of a turbulent

MD-37,

and
AIAA

flow",

of the

1983,

model",

Leschziner,

AIAA

University,

of channel

channel

"Comparative

of homogeneous

Stanford

SeegmiUer,

Proceedings

University,

J. Kim,

Rept.

and

Reynolds,

simulation

turbulence
H.L.

1990,

of K-e models",

W.C.

"Predictions

performed

cretization',

and

No.TF-19,

in divergent

computations

Singhal,

versions

Ferziger

low-Reynolds-number
.

and A.K.

on large-eddy
Rept.

Chien,

Smith

Johnston,
shear

Thermosciences

1978,

layer:

Div.,

"Investigation

Flow

Dept.

over

of Mech.

of separation

a backward-facing
Eng.,

Stanford

and
step",

Univer-

sity.
.

C.K.G.
predicting

Lam

and

K.

Bremhorst,

wall turbulence",

1981,

J. Fluids

2O

"A modified

Eng.,

Vol.103,

form

of K-e

pp.456-460.

model

for

8.

B.E.

Launder

model

9. B.E.

and Mass

Launder

M.A.

Leschziner

and

various

Eng.,

Vol.1,

1970,

"Application

of the

of a flow near

energy-dissipation

a spinning

disk",

Letters

pp.131-138.

Spalding,

1974,

Meths.

App.

W. Rodi,

1981,

discretization

Vol.103,

J.L. Lumley,
Vol.41,

"The

Mech.

numerical
Eng.,

"Calculation

schemes

computation

Vol.3,

pp.269-289.

of annular

and turbulence

of tur-

and twin parallel

model

variations",

J.

pp.352-360.

"Toward

a turbulent

constitutive

relation."

J. Fluid

Mech.,

pp.413-434.

J.L. Lumley,
Mech.,

13.

D.B.

Cornput.

Fluids

12.

and

1974,

calculation

transfer

flows",

using

Sharma,

to the

bulent

jets

11.

B.I.

of turbulence

in Heat

10.

and

1978,

Vol.18,

"Computational

modeling

of turbulent

flows",

Adv.

Appl.

pp.124-176.

S. Obi, M. Peric and G. Scheuerer,

1989, "A finite-volume
calculation
procedure for turbulent
flows with second-order
closure
and co-located
variable
arrangement",
Universit

14. R.S.

Report.

15. C.M.

276/N/89,

Lehrstuhl

ffir StrSmungsmechanik,

_it Erlangen-Nfirnberg.

Rivlin,

isotropic

LSTM

1955,

"Further

materials",

Rhie

J. Arch.

and W.L.

an isolated

airfoil

remarks

Chow,
with

Ratl.

on the
Mech.

stress

Anal.,

1983, "A numerical

trailing

edge

deformation

Vol.4,

study

separation",

relations

for

pp.681-702.

of the turbulent
AIAA

flow past

J., Vol.21,

pp.1525-

1532.
16. W.

Rodi,

state

1980,

of the art review",

Hydraulic
17. W. Rodi,

Research,

incompressible

App.

Eng. , Vo1.75,
and J.M.

the

renormalization

U.

Schumann,

Phys.

Fluids,

1977,
Vol.20,

and

Publication

flows

application

in hydraulics

of the International

- A

Association

for

1989,

with complex

"Finite-volume
boundaries",

method
Cornput.

for two
Meths.

pp.369-392.

Barton,

group",

their

the Netherlands.

and B. SchSnung,

dimensional
Mech.

models

Book

Delft,

S. Majumdar

18. R. Rubinstein

19.

"Turbulence

Phys.

1990,

"Nonlinear

Fluids

"Realizability

21

stress

models

and

A 2, pp.1472-1476.

of Reynolds

pp.721-725.

Reynolds

stress

turbulence

models",

20. T.H.

Shih,

NASA

21.

1992,

T.H.

Shih

lence

and

and J.L.

on turbulent

Lumley,

its application

Int.

J. Comput.

J.S.

Shuen,

M.

"Remarks

constitutive

relations."

to appear

in

TM.

Sindir,

Dynamics,

Private

1982,

step

behavior

modeling".

NASA

of near-wall

turbu-

TM

also in

105663,

Vol.1.

communication.

"Numerical

backward-facing

"Kolmogorov

in turbulence

Fluid

1992,

1992,

study

of separating

geometry",

Ph.D.

and

Thesis,

reattachin8

University

flows

in a

of California

at

Davis.

24.

R.M.C.

So and Y.G.

a backward-facing

25.
26.

C.G.

Speziale,

Fluid

Mech.,

C.G.

Speziale

model

27.

H.L. Stone,

30.

1987,

D.B.

"Low-Reynolds-number

J. Appl.

"On

Vo1.178,

1968,

flows",
"Iterative

1992,

nonlinear

S. Thangam

NASA

K-e

of flows

Vol.39,

models

over

pp.13-27.

of turbulence",

SIAM

"An improved
model",

and N. Hur, 1991,

J.

for predicting

G.D.

Raithby,

1984,

incompressible

No.92-3.

Vol.5,

J. Eng.

Num.

and corre-

pp.2555-2561.

study

of turbulent

Sci., Vol.29,

"Enhancements

fluid flows",

pp.530-558.

model

No.ll,

numerical

Int.

turbulence

of multidimen-

stress

A, Vol.4,

"A hlghly-resolved

Doormal

Report.

Anal.,

Reynolds

Fluids

step",

based

approximations

J. Num.

algebraic
Phys.

J.P.

and

of an RNG
ICASE

of implicit

equation",

stress

"Analysis

CR-189600,

solution

flow past a backward-facing

method

(ZAMP),

K-1 and

1992,

separated
615.
Van

Phys.

modelling

pp.459-475.

differential

Taulbee,

Math.

nonlinear

and S. Thangam,

partial

sponding

29.

step",

for separated

sional

28.

Led, 1988,

of the
Heat

pp.607-

SIMPLE

Trans.,

Vol.7,

pp.147-163.

31.

Z. Yang

and

T.H.

wall turbulence",

32.

A. Yoshizawa,
from

33.

Shih,
NASA

1984,

its eddy-viscosity

J. Zhu,

1991a,

Comm.

App.

1992,
TM

"Statistical

new time

Methods.,

scale

based

K-e

model

for near

105768.
analysis

representation",

"A low diffusive

Num.

"A

of the deriation
Phys.

Fluids,

and osciUation-free
Vol.7,
22

pp.225-232.

of the Reynolds
Vol.27,

convection

stress

pp.1377-1387.
scheme",

34.

J. Zhu,

1991b,

two-dimensional
Rept.

No.690,

"FAST-2D:

A computer

incompressible
Institute

flows

program
with

for Hydromechanics,

23

complex

for numerical

simulation

boundaries",

University

of Karlsruhe.

of

Appendix

Generalized

Cayley-Hamilton

Rivlin

(1955)

showed

that

relating

matrices

(product

matrices

of lower

extension.

ABC

+ ACB

-B(trCA
-(Be

-$rC
Repl_ing

trB

trC

trAB

Some

of them

- trA

+ CAB
C(trAB

trCBA)=

ABA=-A_B

here

+ CBA

trA

trB)

of higher
for latter

A(trBC

trB

formulas
extension

to

use.
trB

- CAB + BA)trC

trBC

B in Eq.(A.1),

Cayley-Hamilton

A, B, C ...)

are listed

+ AC)trB

trABC

generalized

matrices

+ BAC

trA)

A and

are several

of several

- (CA

trC

C with

there

+ BCA

+ UA)trA

-l(tt"A

Formulas

trC)

(A.1)

trCA
0
respectively,

BA _ +

A(trAB

we obtain
-

trA

trB)

1
+_

B(trA

z -

trA

trA)

(AB+

BA)trA

A_trB

(A.2)

1
+I[trA2B

trA

trAB

+ _trB(trA

trA-

trA2)]

B(trBA

trA)

(BA

+ AB)trB

sad
BAB=-B_A

+21 A(trB2

AB 2 +

trB

trA)

trB

B_trA

(A.3)

+X[trB'A - trB t BA + t A(t B

which

i_dieate

by polynomials

that

the

of matrices

matrices

ABA

of extension

and

BAB

2 or less.
24

t Bof extension

trB )]
3 can be expressed

Multiplying Eq.(A.2) from the leftand the right by A and Eq.(A.3)

by B, and

adding them correspondingly, we obtain following two relations:

ABA 2 + A2BA

= ABA

trA+

A 2 trAB

+ A(trASB

trA

trAB)
(A.4)

-B

detA

l detA

trB

and
BAB

s + BsAB

= BAB

trB

B s trBA

+ B(trB2A

trB

trBA)
(A.5)

-A
Replacing

detB

B with

I detB

trA

B 2 in Eq.(A.4)

ABSA

and

s + AsB_A

A with

= ABsA

A s in Eq.(A.5)

trA

A s trAB

give
s
(A.6)

+A(trA=B

_ -

trA

trAB

s)-

B s detA

I detA

trB s

and
BA2B

2 + BsAsB=

BAsB

trB

B s trBA

s
(A.7)

+B(trBSA
Replacing

B with

s -

trB

B 2 in Eq.(A.2)

AB2A=-A2B

s -

trBA
and

s)-

A s detB

A with

BSA 2 +

I detB

A s in Eq.(A.3)

A(trAB

2 -

trA

trA s

yield
trB s)

1
+_

BS(trA

+I[trA2B

= 2 -

trA
trA

trA)
trAB

(ABS+

BSA)trA

_ + ltrB2(trA

trA-

A=trB

(A.8)

trA2)]

_5

and
BA2B=-B=A

A2B 2 +

B(trBA

trA s)

(BA'

s -

trB

trA s)

1
+2

A'(trBS

+I[trBSA
Eqs.(A.8)
be expressed
hand

sides

trB

and (A.9)

2 -

trB

indicate

by polynomials
of Eqs.(A.6)

trBA
that

1
2 + _trA
the matrices

of matrices

and (A.7)

+ A=B)trB

2
(trB

trB

AB2A

of extension

are also polynomials

2 or less.

25

trBS)]

and

BASB

2 or less.

(A.9)

of extension

3 can

B2trA

Therefore,

of matrices

the

of extension

right
of

Appendix

Number

of Independent

Let

us show

tensor

A sad

Rivlin

the

number

Formed

by Two

of independent

Tensors

tensors

formed

with

two

general

B is 18.

(1955)
u

a m_trix

that

Tensors

showed

that

a polynomial

product

Luy

m,_trlx

in these

II of extension

product

matrices

in two

of extension

3 x 3 matrices

4 or less.

may

Suppose

we have

5:
II = ABASB2A

This

cam be written

C = BA=B=.

From

in A m_l

C of extension

3 so that

II may

Therefore,
byA

(B.2)

II may be viewed

2 or less.

C itself

is a matrix

by a polynomial

to consider

as a polynomial
in A and

in A and

the possible

tensors

of matrices

B of extension

B of extension

of extension

4 or less.

4 or less formed

B.

We may
possible

ACA

Eq.(A.2),

be expressed

we only need

ud

(B.1)

as
II--

where

be

show

tensors

that

there

are

of extension

only

4 are

ABA=B

two

independent

the following

2, BAB2A

tensors

of extension

4.

The

8 tensors:

2, A2BAB

=, B2ABA

2,
(B.3)

AB2A_B,
With

Eq.(AA),

Eq,(A.5),
+

...;

B=ABA=
with

A=B2AB
where

A=BAB=

...

only two

Eq.(A.6),
ABA_B
represents

tensors

BA_B2A,

can

= -BAB2A
BA2B2A
= + ...;

with

L polynomial

of extension

A2B=AB,

be expressed
= + ...;
=

by ABA_B

with

-BAB2A

Eqs.(A.4)

Eq.(A.7),
2 + ...;

and

in A and

B2A2BA.

(A.5),

with

Eqs.(A.5)

B_A=BA

B of extension
are independent,

ABA2B

BAB_A

Similarly,

AB=A=B

4 in Eq.(B.3)
2,

....

-ABA2B
and

= BAB=A=

3 or less.
and

with
=

(A.4),
...;

As a result,

we select

them

as

(B.4)

26

OF POOR

QUALITY

Now
possible

we show
tensors

ABA
Using

that

are only

of extension

2, A2BA,

Eqs.(A.4),

independent.

there

Let

BAB

3 are the following

_, B2AB,

(A.5),

(A.6)

us select

them
ABA

Furthermore,

there
AB,

and

four independent

tensors

and

two general

we have

proved

tensors

of extension

3.

The

8 tensors:

2, A2B_A,

BA2B

(A.T),

we find

2, AB2A

2, BA2B

that

=, B=A=B.
only

four

(B.5)
of them

are

as

2, BAB

are eight
BA,

AB2A

independent

AB=,

B_A,

that

tensors

A2B,

of extension
A,

Therefore,

four independent

of extension

(B.6)
2:

BA 2, A2B _, B=A=

(B.7)

1:

A s, B,

only

2.

B 2.

18 tensors

tensors.

27

(B.8)
can be formed

independently

by

Figure

lO

1. Rotating

,,,,,,,,.,,

homogeneous

shear

_,,,I,,_1

(o)o/s=o

(b)

0/S=0.5

0
",,t"

_'_1_''_1

'

(:) o/s=-o.5

'-

/
I

/
I

/
4

flow

/
J

J
v_

....

10

....

I,

10

|
i

--._

st

Figure

2. Evolution
-----:

s-K-_;

of turbulent
--:

kinetic

present

28

energy

model;

,:

with
LES.

time.

10

,.

A
i

A
_W

Figure

3. Typical

control

volume

centered

at C and

Hd

Hs

Ls

Figure

4. Backward-facing

2g

step

geometry

related

nodes

IIl"WllVV|ll.lVrlWl|f.llWll.lJlJlVl.

WWl

0
(a) DS-case

-1
-2

ltJttitlJ_ll|ttlJl|JllllllJlJJt|t|lJtJl

10

20

30

40

X
3

,IWlllllVJflWlrlll|Jg||fllllW]rlV|lVrWl

O
(D

,/

0
(b)

KKJ-case

-1
-2

A |

10

it

20

J _

30

40

Figure

5.

- --:
m

Friction

s-K-e,
__:

fine

present

coefficient
grid;
model,

C/along

_:

present

co_rse

grid;

3O

the

bottom

model,

wall.
fine

e: experiment.

grid;

.2

....

'

'

'

'

'

....

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'_

0.1

0.0

(a)

-0.1

.........

' .........

OS-case

' ..................

10

20

30

40

0.4
0.,,3
CL
(J

0.2
0.1
0.0
-0.1
0
X

Figure

6. Static

-----:

pressure

s-K-e;

--:

coe_cient
present

31

C'p along
model;

the bottom

e: experiment

wall.

X =20
3

|l
I

2
.

IJl

,,lllL

1.0-0.5

0.0

0.5

ii

1.0

X=2.667
3

X=5.333
i

''''1

....

X=6.220

i"_

rill
,,,,|,,,l_,_

''''I'''''P'_I

i,,

''.

(b) KKJ-cas4

"

tt

j-

./."

_ .

,i_lii,,l,liil,

0
-0.50.0

'

0.5

1.0-0,5

__

'lllll'lllll

0.0

li

ilia|l!

-----:

0.5

7. Streamwise
s-K-e;

||1
v

1.0-0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0-0.5

Figure

--:

mean
present

32

velocity
model;

U-profiles.
,: experiment

0.0

0.5

1.0

i|,|1,,,1|,..11,|,1

.|

v|

..

'"X=20

_1111|111111

0
3
.

X=8

w|l|,,,,ll.,.l.,,|

0
3

....,,.,.|..,.,l..

100uu

Figure
---:

'

'

'

'

'

2 -0.5

100vv

8. Turbulent
s-K-e;

'

........

'''''''''l'''''''''

_:

stress
present

33

0,0

0.5

- 100uv

profiles
model;

in DS-case.
,: experiment

1.0

''I''''I

....

I ....

..*.-,.-r'TT,,,I,,,,I,,,

''1

....

I ....

I ....
''1''''1''''1'''

'''_l''''l''''l'''

X=2.667

2
>,

lOOuu

Figure
-----:

lOOw

9. Turbulent
s-K-e;

_:

0.0

0.5
-lOOuv

stress

profiles

present

model;

34

4 -0.5

in KKJ-case.
*: experiment

1.0

1.5

Form

REPORT
Public mporth_
gathering
and

DOCUMENTATION

PAGE

but'den for this colk_tion

of information
is e6timated
1o average
1 bout
maintaining
the clara needed,
and completing
and
reviewing
the collection

per
of

collection
of information,
including
suggestions
for reducing
this burden,
to Washington
Davis
Highway,
Suite
1204,
Arlington,
VA
22202-4302,
anti to the Office
of Management
1.

AGENCY

USE

ONLY

(Leave

blank)

2.

REPORT

response,
information.

including
Send

the time
comments

for reviewing
instructions,
regarding
this burden

3.

REPORT

TYPE

AND

1993

DATES

5.

Reynolds

Stress

Algebraic

Equation

leta sources,
aspect
of this
1215 Jetferson
20503

COVERED

Technical

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE

A Realizable

searching
existing
estimate
or any other

Headquarters
Services,
Directorate
for information
Operations
and Repo_ls,
and
Budget,
Paperwork
Reduction
Project
(0704-0188).
Washington,
DC

DATE

January

Approved

OMBNo.0704-0188

Memorandum

FUNDING

NUMBERS

Model

WU-505-62-21
6.

AUTHOR(S)

Tsan-Hsing

Shih,

7. PERFORMING

Aeronautics
Research

Cleveland,

g.

Zhu,

ORGANIZATION

National
Lewis

Jiang

John

NAME(S)

and

Space

L. Lumley

AND ADDRESS(ES)

g. PERFORMING
ORGANIZATION
REPORT NUMBER

Administration

E-7525

Center

Ohio

44135-3191

SPONSORING/MONITORING

National

and

AGENCY

Aeronautics

Washington,

and

D.C.

NAMES(S)

Space

AND ADDRESS(ES)

10. SPONSORING/MONITORING
AGENCY REPORT NUMBER

Administration

NASA

20546-0001

TM-

105993

ICOMP-92-27
CMOTT-92-14

11.

SUPPLEMENTARY
Tsan-Hsing

NOTES

Shih and Jiang Zhu, Institute

Transition,

NASA

Lewis

and John

L. Lumley,

Research

Cornell

for Computational

Center

(work funded

University,

121l, _)ISTRIBIJTIONIAVAILABILI'I'Y

Ithaca,

New

Mechanics
by Space

York.

in Propulsion

Act

Agreement

Resixmsible

and Center

C-99066-G).

person,

for Modeling
Space

Tsan-Hsing

Shih,

STATEMENT

of Turbulence

Act Monitor:

(216)

and

Louis

A. Povinelli,

433-5698.

12b.

DISTRIBUTION

CODE

Unclassified-Unlimited
Subject

13.

Category

ABSTRACT

The

(Msxlmum

invariance

flows.

The

gradients
the

in continuum
leads

ratios
of

On
of

each

turbulent

form

the

the

basis

of

step

volume

Grid-independent

method.

second-order
for

both

mean

homogeneous

SUBJECT

and

capability
shear

a set

to the

strain

on

flows

rotation
that

are
and

quantities.
K-e

based

with

taken

fine

large

rate.

and
These

coefficients

existing

turbulence
The

diffusion-free

comparison

shows

rotation

rates

which

results
that

rate.

are
are

the

present
the

conventional

performed
by

eddy

model
viscosity

approximation
are

with

each

lS.

component

flows

of

over
finite-

schemes

the experimental

significantly

improves

rotational

to simulate.

NUMBER

OF PAGES

36

modeling

16- PRICE CODE

A03
17.

SECURITY

CLASSIFICATION

OF REPORT
Unclassified
NS'N 7540-01-280-5500

18.

SECURITY
OF

THIS

CLASSIFICATION
PAGE

Unclassified

19.

SECURITY
OF

CLASSIFICATION

20.

LIMITATION

OF

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT

Unclassified
StanOard

Form

Prescribed
29e-lO2

by

ANSI

298

(Rev
Std.

of
data

the

to simulate
fail

the

the

a conservative

with

models

of

ensure

differencing

is able

of

fuctions

will
of

using

turbulent

velocity

Separated

in detail

proposal

proposed

linear
which

positivity

are

TERMS

Turbulence

the

to satisfy.

compared

the

number

mean

coefficients

fail

obtained

to the

obtained

The

ensure

calculations

In addition,
all

will

is just

are

models

solutions

calculated

models.

rotation

Reynolds

stresses

model

coefficients

mean

in high

Reynolds

viscosity

model

the

stresses

the

eddy

The

equation

Reynolds

relates

of

as applications.

grids.

The
two

rate

mosl

numerical

sufficiently

turbulent
of

mean

mean

configurations

accuracy

predictive

isotropic

analysis,

realizability

backward-facing

that

classical

the

the

to analyze

relation

realizability

turbulence

energy--

is applied

constitutive

in which
of

component

kinetic

mechanics

to a turbulent

general

form.

scale

words)

theory

in a more

positivity

14.

200

analysis

general

time

the

02

Z39-18

2-89)