Comparison of GPU CABARET, RANS and RANS/ILES High Resolution Method Solutions for the CoJen Jet Noise Experiment

Markesteijn, Anton P.; Karabasov, Sergey A.; Gryazev, Vasily; Ayupov, R. Sh.; Benderskiy, Leonid; Lyubimov, D. A.

doi:10.2514/6.2019-2446

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The goal of the current investigation is to compare computational efficiency of different LESbased approaches for flow and noise modelling for the same well-documented co-axial jet case following the preliminary work presented in [20]. One of the LES methods compared is based on explicit asynchronous time-stepping scheme, which uses a hierarchy of local time steps depending on the local cell size [28].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Flow and Noise Predictions of Coaxial Jets

Markesteijn¹,

Gryazev²,

Karabasov³

et al. 2020

AIAA Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Flow and noise solutions of the two Large Eddy Simulation (LES) approaches are evaluated for the jet flow conditions corresponding to a benchmark co-axial jet case from the EU CoJeN (Computation of Coaxial Jet Noise) experiment. The jet is heated and issues for a short-cowl axi-symmetric nozzle with a central body at a transonic speed. The first LES method is based on the Compact Accurately Boundary-Adjusting high-REsolution Technique (CABARET) scheme, for which implementation features include asynchronous time stepping at an optimal Courant-Friedrichs-Lewy (CFL) number, a wall model, and a synthetic turbulence inflow boundary condition. The CABARET LES is implemented on Graphics Processing Units (GPUs). The second LES approach is based on the hybrid 2 Reynolds Averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS)/ Implicit LES method that uses a mixture of high-order Roe and WENO scheme and a wall distance model of the Improved Delayed Detached Eddy Simulation (IDDES) type. The RANS/ILES method is run on an MPI cluster. Two grid generation approaches are considered: the unstructured grid using OpenFOAM utility "snappyHexMesh" (sHM) and the conventional structured multiblock body-fitted curvilinear grid. The LES flow solutions are compared with the experiment and also with solutions obtained from the standard axi-symmetric RANS method using the k- turbulence model. For noise predictions, The LES solutions are coupled with the penetrable surface formation of the Ffowcs Williams-Hawkings method. The results of noise predictions are compared with the experiment and the effect of different LES grids and acoustic integration surfaces is discussed.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%