0
Flows in Complex Systems

# URANS Calculations for Smooth Circular Cylinder Flow in a Wide Range of Reynolds Numbers: Solution Verification and Validation

[+] Author and Article Information
Guilherme F. Rosetti

Numerical Offshore Tank – TPN,
Department of Naval Architecture
and Ocean Engineering,
University of São Paulo,
São Paulo, Brazil 055080-030
e-mail: gfeitosarosetti@usp.br

Guilherme Vaz

Mem. ASME
CFD Projects,
R&D Department,
MARIN,
Wageningen, The Netherlands 6700AA
e-mail: g.vaz@marin.nl

André L. C. Fujarra

Mem. ASME
Numerical Offshore Tank – TPN,
Department of Naval Architecture
and Ocean Engineering,
University of São Paulo,
São Paulo, Brazil 055080-030
e-mail: afujarra@usp.br

For some cases here presented the authors indeed obtained results closer to the experimental values for coarse grids and time-steps. An example can be seen for Re = 1 × 103 in Fig. 7. These are, however, according to us “worst” numerical results than the ones for finer grids and time-steps which are in the numerical error asymptotic range.

This feature was not captured in these calculations.

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Fluids Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the Journal of Fluids Engineering. Manuscript received April 12, 2012; final manuscript received August 10, 2012; published online November 20, 2012. Assoc. Editor: Mark F. Tachie.

J. Fluids Eng 134(12), 121103 (Nov 20, 2012) (18 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4007571 History: Received April 12, 2012; Revised August 10, 2012

## Abstract

The flow around circular smooth fixed cylinder in a large range of Reynolds numbers is considered in this paper. In order to investigate this canonical case, we perform CFD calculations and apply verification & validation (V&V) procedures to draw conclusions regarding numerical error and, afterwards, assess the modeling errors and capabilities of this (U)RANS method to solve the problem. Eight Reynolds numbers between Re = 10 and $Re=5×105$ will be presented with, at least, four geometrically similar grids and five discretization in time for each case (when unsteady), together with strict control of iterative and round-off errors, allowing a consistent verification analysis with uncertainty estimation. Two-dimensional RANS, steady or unsteady, laminar or turbulent calculations are performed. The original 1994 $k-ω$ SST turbulence model by Menter is used to model turbulence. The validation procedure is performed by comparing the numerical results with an extensive set of experimental results compiled from the literature.

## References

Takami, H., and Keller, H., 1969, “Steady Two-Dimensional Viscous Flow of an Incompressible Fluid Past a Circular Cylinder,” Phys. Fluids, 12, pp. II-51–II-56.
Dennis, S., and Chang, G., 1970, “Numerical Solutions for Steady Flow Past a Circular Cylinder at Reynolds Numbers up to 100,” J. Fluid Mech., 42, pp. 471–489.
Dennis, S., 1973, “The Numerical Solution of the Vorticity Transport Equation,” Lect. Notes Phys., 2, pp. 120–129.
Fornberg, B., 1980, “A Numerical Study of Steady Viscous Flow Past a Circular Cylinder,” J. Fluid Mech., 98, pp. 819–855.
Fornberg, B., 1985, “Steady Viscous Flow Past a Circular Cylinders up to Reynolds Number 600,” Comput. Fluids, 61, pp. 297–320.
Tuann, S., and Olson, M., 1978, “Numerical Studies of the Flow Around a Circular Cylinder by a Finite Element Method,” Comput. Phys., 6, pp. 219–240.
Nieuwstadt, F., and Keller, H. B., 1973, “Viscous Flow Past Circular Cylinders,” Comput. Fluids, 1, pp. 59–71.
Braza, M., Chassaing, P., and Minh, H., 1986, “Numerical Study and Physical Analysis of the Pressure and Velocity Fields in the Near Wake of a Circular Cylinder,” J. Fluid Mech., 165, pp. 79–130.
Meneghini, J., and Bearman, P., 1993, “Numerical Simulation of High Amplitude Oscillatory-Flow About a Circular Cylinder Using a Discrete Vortex Method,” Proceedings of the AIAA Shear Flow Conference, Orlando, FL, AIAA Paper No. 93-3288, pp. 1–11.
He, X., and Doolen, G., 1997, “Lattice Boltzmann Method on a Curvilinear Coordinate System: Vortex Shedding Behind a Circular Cylinder,” Phys. Rev. E, 56, pp. 434–440.
Mittal, S., Kumar, V., and Raghuvanshi, A., 1997, “Unsteady Incompressible Flows Past Two Cylinders in Tandem and Staggered Arrangements,” Int. J. Numer. Meth. Fluids, 25, pp. 1315–1344.
Henderson, R., 1995, “Details of the Drag Curve Near the Onset of Vortex Shedding,” Phys. Fluids, 7, pp. 2102–2104.
Dong, S., and Karniadakis, G., 2005, “DNS of Flow Past a Stationary and Oscillating Cylinder at Re = 10,000,” J. Fluids Struct., 20, p. 519531.
de With, G., Holdo, A., and Huld, T., 2003, “The Use of Dynamic Grid Adaptation Algorithms for the Modeling of Flow Around a Circular Cylinder in Sub-Critical Flow Regime,” Int. J. Numer. Meth. Fluids, 41, pp. 789–808.
von Karman Institute, 2008, VKI Turbulence Modelling Lecture Notes.
Menter, F., Egorov, Y., and Rusch, D., 2005, “Steady and Unsteady Flow Modelling Using k-kL Model,” Turbul., Heat Mass Transfer, 5, pp. 403–406.
Travin, A., Shur, M., Strelets, M., and Spalart, P., 1999, “Detached-Eddy Simulations Past a Circular Cylinder,” Flow, Turbul. Combust., 63, pp. 293–313.
Vaz, G., Mabilat, C., van der Wal, R., and Gallagher, P., 2007, “Viscous Flow Computations on a Smooth Cylinders: A Detailed Numerical Study With Validation,” Proceedings of theOMAE2007, San Diego, CA.
Liu, C., Zheng, X., and Sung, C., 1998, “Preconditioned Multigrid Methods for Unsteady Incompressible Flows,” J. Comput. Phys., 139, pp. 35–57.
Ong, M., Utnes, T., Holmedal, L., Myrhaug, D., and Pettersen, B., 2007, “Numerical Simulation of Flow Around a Smooth Circular Cylinder at High Reynolds Numbers,” Proceedings of the International Conference on Computational Methods in Marine Engineering 200 7.
AIAA, 1998, “AIAA Guide for Verification and Validation of Computational Fluid Dynamics Simulations,” Tech. Rep. No. AIAA-G-077-1998.
ASME, 2008, “ASME Guide on Verification and Validation in Computational Fluid Dynamics and Heat Transfer,” Tech. Rep. ASME Committee No. PTC-61, ANSI Standard V&V-20.
Eça, L., Vaz, G., and Hoekstra, M., 2010, “A Verification and Validation Exercise for the Flow Over a Backward Facing Step,” Proceedings of the ECCOMAS CFD 2010, Lisbon, Portugal.
Vaz, G., Jaouen, F., and Hoekstra, M., 2009, “Free-Surface Viscous Flow Computations: Validation of URANS Code FreSCo,” Proceedings of theOMAE2009, Honolulu, HI.
Ferziger, J., and Peric, M., 2002, Computational Methods for Fluid Dynamics, 3rd ed., Springer Verlag, Berlin.
Menter, F., 1994, “Two-Equation Eddy-Viscosity Turbulence Models for Engineering Applications,” AIAA J., 32, pp. 1598–1605.
Wilcox, D., 1993, “Turbulence Modeling for CFD,” DCW Industries, Palm Drive, La Canada, CA.
Pope, S., 2000, Turbulent Flows, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Walters, D., and Leylek, J., 2004, “A New Model for Boundary Layer Transition Using a Single-Point RANS Approach,” ASME J. Turbomach., 126, pp. 193–202.
Walters, D., and Cokljat, D., 2008, “A Three-Equation Eddy-Viscosity Model for Reynolds-Averaged Navier–Stokes Simulations of Transitional Flow,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 130, p. 121401.
Smirnov, P., and Menter, F., 2009, “Sensitization of the SST Turbulence Model to Rotation and Curvature by Applying the Spalart–Shur Correction Term,” ASME J. Turbomach., 131, p. 041010.
Eça, L., Hoekstra, M., and Vaz, G., 2012, “Manufactured Solutions for Steady-Flow RANS Solvers,” Int. J. CFD. (submitted).
Eça, L., Hoekstra, M., and Vaz, G., 2012, “On the use of Method of Manufactured Solutions for Code Verification of RANS Solvers Based on Eddy-Viscosity Models,” Proceedings of the ASME V&V Conferenc e.
Eça, L., Vaz, G., and Hoekstra, M., 2012, “Assessing Convergence Properties of RANS Solvers With Manufactured Solutions,” Proceedings of ECCOMAS2012, Vienna, Austria.
Eça, L., 2009, “Evaluation of Numerical Error Estimation Based on Grid Refinement Studies With the Method of the Manufactured Solutions,” Comput. Fluids, 38, pp. 1580–1591.
Eça, L., and Hoekstra, M., 2008, “Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on CFD Uncertainty Analysis,” Instituto Superior Técnico, Lisbon, Portugal.
Eça, L., and Hoekstra, M., 2012, “A Procedure for the Estimation of the Numerical Uncertainty of CFD Calculations Based on Grid Refinement Studies,” Comput. Fluids (to be published).
Eça, L., Hoekstra, M., and Vaz, G., 2012, “Estimation of the Numerical Uncertainty in Unsteady Flows With Grid Refinement Studies,” Comput. Fluids (to be published).
Koop, A., Klaij, C., and Vaz, G., 2011, “Viscous-Flow Calculations for Model and Full-Scale Current Loads on Typical Offshore Structures,” Proceedings of the ECCOMAS Marine 2011, Lisbon, Portugal.
Toxopeus, S., 2011, “Using CFD Calculations to Improve Predictions of Ship Manoeuvres,” Proceedings of RINA-CFD2011, London, UK.
Fathi, F., Klaij, C., and Koop, A., 2010, “Predicting Loads on a LNG Carrier With CFD,” Proceedings of theOMAE2010, Shanghai, China.
Vaz, G., Toxopeus, S., and Holmes, S., 2010, “Calculation of Manoeuvring Forces on Submarines Using Two Viscous-Flow Solvers,” Proceedings of theOMAE2010, Shanghai, China.
Koop, A., Klaij, C., and Vaz, G., 2010, “Predicting Wind Loads for FPSO Tandem Offloading Using CFD,” Proceedings of theOMAE2010, Shanghai, China.
Monroy, C., 2007, “A RANSe Based Study of the Flow Behind a Cylinder. A First Step Towards Riser Flow,” M.S. thesis, Ecole Central de Nantes, Nantes, France.
Pengan, B., 2010, “Numerical Accuracy in RANS Simulations of the Flow Around a Cylinder,” M.S. thesis, ENSIETA, Brest, France.
Williamson, C., 1996, “Vortex Dynamics in the Cylinder Wake,” Ann. Rev. Fluid Mech., 28, pp. 477–539.
Karniadakis, G., and Triantafyllou, G., 1992, “Three-Dimensional Dynamics and Transition to Turbulence in the Wake of Bluff Objects,” J. Fluid Mech., 238, pp. 1–30.
Rosetti, G. F., Vaz, G., and Fujarra, A., 2012, “Verification and Validation of URANS Calculations of the Flow Around Fixed-Smooth Cylinders for a Wide Range of Reynolds,” Proceedings of OMAE2012, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
de Oliveira Costa Neto, P. L., 2005, Estatística, Edgard Blucher, Portugal (in Portuguese).
Schlichting, H., and Gersten, K., 2000, Boundary Layer Theory, 8th ed., Springer Verlag, Berlin.
ESDU, 1985, “Circular Cylindrical Structures: Dynamic Response to Vortex Shedding, Part 1: Calculation Procedures and Derivation,” Tech. Rep. Item No. 85038, Engineering Sciences Data Unit (ESDU), ESDU International, London.
Wu, M., Wen, C., Yen, R., Weng, M., and Wang, A., 2004, “Experimental and Numerical Study of the Separation Angle for Flow Around a Circular Cylinder at Low Reynolds Number,” J. Fluid Mech., 515, pp. 233–260.
Norberg, C., 2003, “Fluctuating Lift on a Circular Cylinder: Review and New Measurements,” J. Fluids Struct., 17, pp. 57–96.
Singh, S., and Mittal, S., 2005, “Flow Past a Cylinder: Shear Layer Instability and Drag Crisis,” Int. J. Numer. Meth. Fluids, 47, pp. 75–98.
Franzini, G., Gonçalves, R., Fujarra, A., and Meneghini, J., 2012, “Experimental Forces Measurements on the Flow Around a Fixed and Yawed Cylinder in the Presence of Free-Surface,” Proceedings of the ISOPE 2012 22nd International Ocean and Polar Engineering Conference (accepted ).
Mittal, R., and Balachandar, S., 1995, “Effect of Three-Dimensionality on the Lift and Drag of Nominally Two-Dimensional Cylinders,” Phys. Fluids, 8, pp. 1841–1865.
Gushchin, V., and Shchennikov, V., 1974, “A Numerical Method of Solving the Navier–Stokes Equations,” Zh. Vychisl. Mat. Mat. Fiz., 14, pp. 512–520 [USSR Comput. Math. Math. Phys., 14(2), pp. 242–250 (1974)].
Ding, H., Shu, C., Yeo, K., and Xu, D., 2004, “Simulation of Incompressible Viscous Flows Past a Circular Cylinder by Hybrid FD Scheme and Meshless Least Square Based Finite Difference Method,” Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng., 193, pp. 724–744.
Mittal, S., 2003, “Effect of a Slip Splitter Plate on Vortex Shedding From a Cylinder,” Phys. Fluids, 15, pp. 817–820.
Mittal, S., and Kumar, V., 2001, “Flow Induced Vibrations of a Light Circular Cylinder at Reynolds Numbers 103 to 104,” J. Sound Vib., 245, pp. 923–946.
Wang, M. C., Catalano, P., and Iaccarino, G., 2001, “Prediction of High Reynolds Number Flow Over a Circular Cylinder Using LES With Wall Modeling,” Center for Turbulence Research: Annual Research Briefs, pp. 45–50.
de With, G., and Holdo, A., 2005, “The Use of Solution Adaptive Grid for Modeling Small Scale Turbulent Structures,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 127, pp. 936–944.
Sampaio, P., and Coutinho, A., 2000, “Simulating Vortex Shedding at High Reynolds Numbers,” Proceedings of the 10th (2000) International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conferenc e.

## Figures

Fig. 1

Grid and domain used in the calculations

Fig. 2

Detail of the mesh close to the cylinder. The shapes seen are typical of a nested-refinement technique.

Fig. 3

Infinity and rms norms for evaluating the residuals of the flow quantities in the case Re = 40

Fig. 4

Infinity and rms norms for evaluating the residuals of the flow quantities in the case Re = 1×103. Velocities and pressure. Turbulent kinetic energy (TurbKinE) and turbulent frequency (TurbVar2).

Fig. 5

Surface fit for St and Re = 100. The size of the blocks indicate the uncertainty of each data point. The convergence orders are p = 1.0 for space and p = 1.6 for time.

Fig. 6

Surface fit for CDavg and Re = 200. The size of the blocks indicate the uncertainty of each data point. The convergence orders are p = 2.0 for space and p = 1.4 for time.

Fig. 7

Drag coefficient calculations for Re = 1×103. The size of the blocks indicate the uncertainty of each data point. In this case, the order of convergence of time and space are, respectively, p = 1.5 and p = 1.7.

Fig. 8

Time step refinement for the calculation of Strouhal numbers for Re = 5×105. Oscillatory behavior is identified in this case.

Fig. 9

Surface fit of the calculated Strouhal numbers for Re = 5×105. The size of the blocks indicate the uncertainty of each data point. In this fit, p = 1.48 for space and p = 1.95 for time.

Fig. 10

Surface fit to θsep for Re = 1×104. The size of the blocks indicate the uncertainty of each data point. In this case, p = 1 for time and space.

Fig. 11

Surface fit to Cpb for Re = 1×105. The size of the blocks indicate the uncertainty of each data point. In this case, p = 2 for space and time.

Fig. 12

Sensitivity of the drag coefficient for different space and time discretizations. Different grids with the finest time-steps. Different time step discretization with the finest grid.

Fig. 13

Drag coefficient results from laminar calculations. Experiments from Refs. [50,51-50,51].

Fig. 14

Separation angle results from laminar calculations. Experiments from Ref. [52].

Fig. 15

Base suction coefficient results from laminar calculations. Experiments from Ref. [46].

Fig. 16

Strouhal number results from laminar calculations. Experimental formulas from Ref. [53].

Fig. 17

Drag and lift time traces and power spectrum densities from calculation with finest grid and time step for Re = 100. Permanent-regime traces were used for the statistics.

Fig. 18

Time traces of separation angles and power spectrum densities from calculations with finest grid and time step for Re = 200. Both upper and lower separation angles are shown. Permanent-regime traces were used for the statistics.

Fig. 19

Field plots of normalized velocity at the point of largest lift coefficient. Re = 10. Re = 40. Re = 100. Re = 200.

Fig. 20

Drag coefficient results from turbulent calculations. Experiments from Refs. [50,51,55-51,55].

Fig. 21

Base suction coefficient results from turbulent calculations. Experiments from Ref. [46].

Fig. 22

Strouhal number results from turbulent calculations. Experimental formulas from Ref. [53].

Fig. 23

Separation angle results from turbulent calculations. Experiments from Ref. [52].

Fig. 24

Time traces of separation angles for Re = 1×103 with finest grid and time step. Permanent-regime traces were used for the statistics.

Fig. 25

Time traces of separation angles for Re = 1×104 with finest grid and time step. Permanent-regime traces were used for the statistics.

Fig. 26

Field plots of normalized vorticity, ωD/U1 at the point of largest lift coefficient. Re = 1×103. Re = 1×104. Re = 1×105. Re = 5×105.

Fig. 27

Field plots showing streamlines at the point of largest lift coefficient. Re = 1×103. Re = 1×104. Re = 1×105. Re = 5×105.

Fig. 28

Field plots of normalized eddy viscosity, νt/ν at the point of largest lift coefficient. Re = 1×103. Re = 1×104. Re = 1×105. Re = 5×105.

Fig. 29

Comparison between drag coefficients from present calculations and benchmark results. Experiments from [50,51,55-51,55]. Numerical results: FD - [2-5,57-5,57,58]; SE - [7]; FE - [11,59,60,59-11,59,60]; DNS - [8,13,13]; LES - [14,61,61-63]; RANS - [19,20-19,20].

Fig. 30

Comparison between base suction coefficients from present calculations and benchmark results. Experiments from Ref. [46].

Fig. 31

Comparison between Strouhal number from present calculations and benchmark results. Experimental formulas from Ref. [53]. Numerical results: FE - [11,59,60,59-11,59,60]; DNS - [8,13,13]; LES - [14,61,61-63]; RANS - [20].

Fig. 32

Comparison between separation angles from present calculations and benchmark results. Experimental results from Ref. [52]. Numerical results: FD - [1,2,6,58-2,6,58].

## 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 Proceedings Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections