0
Research Papers: Fundamental Issues and Canonical Flows

Revisiting the Discrete Element Method for Predictions of Flows Over Rough Surfaces

[+] Author and Article Information
B. Aupoix

ONERA,
The French Aerospace Laboratory,
Toulouse F-31055, France
e-mail: bertrand.aupoix@onera.fr

Contributed by the Fluids Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF FLUIDS ENGINEERING. Manuscript received April 22, 2015; final manuscript received September 2, 2015; published online October 14, 2015. Assoc. Editor: Sharath S. Girimaji.

J. Fluids Eng 138(3), 031205 (Oct 14, 2015) (9 pages) Paper No: FE-15-1282; doi: 10.1115/1.4031558 History: Received April 22, 2015; Revised September 02, 2015

The discrete element method allows predicting the flow over rough surfaces in a way consistent with the physics, contrary to the classical equivalent sand grain approach, and without requiring the meshing of all the surface details. Up to now, its use was restricted to boundary layer solvers. This paper is an updated version of the work presented by the author 20 years ago (Aupoix, B., 1994, “Modelling of Boundary Layers Over Rough Surfaces,” Advances in Turbulence V: Proceedings of the Fifth European Turbulence Conference, R. Benzi, ed., Kluwer, Siena, Italy, pp. 16–20): the double-averaging technique, which is now a standard approach in porous media, was proposed to derive the flow equations without boundary layer assumptions. This allows extending the use of the discrete element method to Reynolds–Averaged Navier–Stokes (RANS) solvers. Differences with the standard discrete element method, i.e., different location of the blockage coefficients as well as terms omitted in the standard approach, mainly dispersive stresses and modifications of the turbulence model, are evidenced. The modeling of the different terms brought by the double-averaging procedure is discussed, in light of the knowledge gained both in the discrete element method and in the modeling of flows in porous media, pointing out some differences between the two situations. “High-resolution” RANS simulations are recommended to further improve the modeling.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2016 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Predictions of the velocity shift by the discrete element method

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Influence of parts of the model in the discrete element method—experiments of Hosni et al.—hemispheres two diameters apart

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