0
Research Papers: Fundamental Issues and Canonical Flows

The Use of Dual-Number-Automatic-Differentiation With Sensitivity Analysis to Investigate Physical Models

[+] Author and Article Information
Malcolm J. Andrews

Los Alamos National Laboratory,
Los Alamos, NM 87545
e-mail: mandrews@lanl.gov

Manuscript received December 10, 2012; final manuscript received February 20, 2013; published online April 12, 2013. Assoc. Editor: Z. C. Zheng.

J. Fluids Eng 135(6), 061206 (Apr 12, 2013) (10 pages) Paper No: FE-12-1613; doi: 10.1115/1.4023788 History: Received December 10, 2012; Revised February 20, 2013

Local sensitivities are explored using dual-number-automatic-differentiation (DNAD) across three mathematical models of physical systems that have increasing complexity. The models are: (1) a model for the approach of a sphere to free fall; (2) the Taylor-analogy-breakup (TAB) model for liquid droplet atomization; and, (3) an evaluation of the BHR model of turbulence for the development of one-dimensional Rayleigh–Taylor driven material mixing. Sensitivity and functional shape parameters are developed that permit a relative study to be quickly performed for each model. Furthermore, compensating errors, measurement parameter sensitivity, and feature sensitivities are investigated. The test problems consider transient (initial condition effects), steady state (final functional forms), and measures of functional shape. Reduced model forms are explored and selected according to sensitivity. Aside from the local sensitivity studies of the models and associated results, DNAD is shown to be one of several useful, quickly implemented tools to investigate a variety of sensitivity effects in models and together with the present results may serve as a means to simplify a model or focus future model developments and associated experiments.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2013 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Saltelli, A., Chan, K., and Scott, E. M., eds., 2000, Sensitivity Analysis, Wiley, Chichester, NY.
Ilinca, F., Pelletier, D., and Borggaard, J., 2007, “A Continuous Second-Order Sensitivity Equation Method for Time-Dependent Incompressible Laminar Flows,” Int. J. Numer. Meth. Fluids, 55, pp. 565–587. [CrossRef]
Yu, W., and Blair, M., 2010, “DNAD: A Simple Tool for Automatic Differentiation of Fortran Codes Using Dual Numbers,” Proc. 35th Annual Dayton-Cincinnati Aerospace Science Symposium, Dayton, OH.
Spall, R. E., and Yu, W., “Imbedded Dual-Number Automatic Differentiation for CFD Sensitivity Analysis,” ASME J. Fluids Eng. (accepted).
Bischof, C. H., Buecker, H., and Rasch, A., 2004, “Sensitivity Analysis of Turbulence Models Using Automatic Differentiation,” SIAM J. Sci. Comput., 26(2), pp. 510–522. [CrossRef]
Bischof, C. H., Bucker, H. M., Rasch, A., Slusanschi, E., and Lang, B., 2007, “Automatic Differentiation of the General-Purpose Computational Fluid Dynamics Package FLUENT,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 129(5), pp. 652–658. [CrossRef]
Bardow, A., Bischof, C. H., Bückerc, H. M., Dietzeb, G., Kneerb, R., Leefkenb, A., Marquardta, W., Renzb, U., and Slusanschic, E., 2008, “Sensitivity-Based Analysis of the k-ε Model for the Turbulent Flow Between Two Plates,” Chem. Eng. Sci., 63, pp. 4763–4775. [CrossRef]
Atherton, R. W., Schainker, R. B., and Ducot, E. R., 1975, “On the Statistical Sensitivity Analysis of Models for Chemical Kinetics,” AIChE J., 21, pp. 441–448. [CrossRef]
Brown, N., and Revzan, K., 2005, “Comparative Sensitivity Analysis of Transport Properties and Reaction Rate Coefficients,” Int. J. Chem. Kin., 37(9), pp. 538–553. [CrossRef]
Kirkman, R. D., and Metzger, M., 2008, “Sensitivity Analysis of Low Reynolds Number Channel Flow Using the Finite Volume Method,” Int. J. Numer. Meth. Fluids, 57, pp. 1023–1045. [CrossRef]
Vaidyanathan, R., Senocak, I., Wu, J., and Shyy, W., 2003, “Sensitivity Evaluation of a Transport-Based Turbulent Cavitation Model,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 125(3), pp. 447–458. [CrossRef]
O'Rourke, P. J., and Amsden, A. A., 1987, “The TAB Method for Numerical Calculation of Spray Droplet Breakup,” Los Alamos National Laboratory, Report No. LA-UR-87-2105.
Besnard, D. C., Harlow, F. H., and Rauenzahn, R. M., 1987, “Conservation and Transport Properties of Turbulence With Large Density Variations,” Los Alamos National Laboratory, Report No. LA-10911-MS.
Banerjee, A., Gore, R., and Andrews, M. J., 2010, “Development and Validation of a Turbulent-Mix Model for Variable-Density and Compressible Flows,” Phys. Rev. E, 82(4), p. 046309. [CrossRef]
Banerjee, A., and Andrews, M. J., 2006, “Statistically Steady Measurements of Rayleigh-Taylor Mixing in a Gas Channel,” Phys. Fluids, 18(3), p. 035107. [CrossRef]
Banerjee, A., Kraft, W. N., and Andrews, M. J., 2010, “Detailed Measurements of a Statistically Steady Rayleigh-Taylor Mixing Layer From Small to High Atwood Numbers,” J. Fluid Mech., 659, pp. 127–190. [CrossRef]
Andrews, M. J., 1983, “The k-ε model Applied to the Development of Rayleigh-Taylor Instability,” Computational Fluid Dynamics Unit, Imperial College of Science and Technology, London University, Report No. CFDU/2083/13.
Snider, D. M., and Andrews, M. J., 1996, “The Simulation of Mixing Layers Driven by Compound Buoyancy and Shear,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 118(2), pp. 370–376. [CrossRef]
Steinkamp, M. J., 1996, “Spectral Analysis of the Turbulent Mixing of Two Fluids,” Ph.D. thesis, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Report No. LA-13123-T.
Ristorcelli, J. R., and Clark, T. T., 2004, “Rayleigh–Taylor Turbulence: Self-Similar Analysis and Direct Numerical Simulations,” J. Fluid Mech., 507, pp. 213–253. [CrossRef]
Andrews, M. J., 1986, “Turbulent Mixing by Rayleigh Taylor Instability,” Ph.D. thesis, Imperial College of Science and Technology, London, UK.
Andrews, M. J., and Spalding, D. B., 1990, “A Simple Experiment to Investigate Two-Dimensional Mixing by Rayleigh Taylor Instability,” Phys. Fluids A, 2, pp. 922–927. [CrossRef]
Celik, I. B., Ghia, U., Roache, P. J., Freitas, C. J., Coleman, H., and Raad, P. E., 2008, “Procedure for Estimation and Reporting of Uncertainty Due to Discretization in CFD Applications,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 130(7), p. 078001. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Velocity and normalized sensitivities for case 2 of the particle drag problem

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

1D Rayleigh–Taylor mixing

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

BHR profiles at t = 3 s using grids Nz = 1001, Nt = 1000 on the left and Nz = 2001, Nt = 2000 on the right

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Normalized sensitivity of the length scale initial condition as a function of the initial width of the mixing zone

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

α-sensitivities using parabolic initial profiles and two-fluid initial condition coefficients. Top shows the sensitivity to initial condition coefficients (Cb,Caz,Ck,CS), and bottom shows sensitivity to BHR model coefficients (C2,C4,Ca1,Cb2,Cμ).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

α-sensitivities using parabolic initial profiles and equilibrium initial condition coefficients (Cb,Caz,Ck,CS). Top shows the sensitivity to initial condition coefficients, and bottom shows sensitivity to BHR model coefficients (C2,C4,Ca1,Cb2,Cμ).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

α-sensitivities using top-hat initial profiles and equilibrium initial condition coefficients (Cb,Caz,Ck,CS). Top shows the sensitivity to initial condition coefficients, and bottom shows sensitivity to BHR model coefficients (C2,C4,Ca1,Cb2,Cμ).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Execution time as a function of the number of DNAD parameters

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