0
Research Papers: Techniques and Procedures

Grid Independence Via Automated Unstructured Adaptation

[+] Author and Article Information
Ronald J. Chila, Deborah A. Kaminski

 Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, 110 8th Street, Troy, NY 12180

J. Fluids Eng 130(12), 121403 (Oct 28, 2008) (7 pages) doi:10.1115/1.3001099 History: Received November 26, 2007; Revised July 04, 2008; Published October 28, 2008

Grid independence is frequently an overlooked item in computational fluid dynamics (CFD) analyses. Results obtained from grid dependent solutions may prove to be costly, in that engineering design decisions can be made using potentially faulty information. An automated method for grid independence is developed for two-dimensional unstructured wall function grids. Grid independence is achieved via successive levels of adaptive refinement. Adaptive refinement is performed in an automated manner and is based on multiple field variables. Sensors are placed at strategic locations within the flow field, which are determined by examining the CFD solution of a uniform grid. Three cases are examined, the backward-facing step, flow over an asymmetric transonic airfoil, and hydrogen combustion in a channel. Grid independent solutions are obtained for all three cases. Results for each case compare well with experimental data and/or other numerical predictions.

Copyright © 2008 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Backward-facing step geometry

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Original coarse grid for backward-facing step

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Sensor placement for backward-facing step case

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Mean error versus the adaptation cycle for backward-facing step

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Final adapted grid for backward-facing step

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Sensor point data (velocity) versus the adaptation cycle for backward-facing step

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

y+ versus the adaptation cycle for backward-facing step

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Reattachment length versus the adaptation cycle for backward-facing step

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Contours of the stream function for backward-facing step

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Reattachment length versus the adaptation cycle for various Reynolds numbers for backward-facing step

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Sensor point locations for the RAE 2822 airfoil

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Sensor point data (velocity) versus adaptation cycle for the RAE 2822 airfoil

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

Pressure coefficient prediction versus experimental data for the RAE 2822 airfoil

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 14

Pressure contour predictions of Slater (11)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 15

Pressure contour predictions for the RAE 2822 airfoil

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 16

Combustion channel geometry

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 17

Combustion channel initial grid

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 18

Sensor point locations for combustion channel (overlay on H2 mass fraction contours)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 19

Final adapted grid for the combustion channel

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 20

Results of DalBello (13)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 21

Predictions of H2 and H2O concentrations at the centerline of the combustion channel

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 22

Predictions of O2 concentrations at the centerline of the combustion channel

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In