Research Papers: Techniques and Procedures

The Effects of Inflow Uncertainties on the Characteristics of Developing Turbulent Flow in Rectangular Pipe and Asymmetric Diffuser

[+] Author and Article Information
Saeed Salehi

Hydraulic Machinery Research Institute,
School of Mechanical Engineering,
College of Engineering,
University of Tehran,
Tehran 11155-4563, Iran
e-mail: s.salehi@ut.ac.ir

Mehrdad Raisee

Associate Professor
Hydraulic Machinery Research Institute,
School of Mechanical Engineering,
College of Engineering,
University of Tehran,
Tehran 11155-4563, Iran
e-mail: mraisee@ut.ac.ir

Michel J. Cervantes

Division of Fluid and Experimental Mechanics,
Luleå University of Technology,
Luleå 97187, Sweden;
Department of Energy and Process Engineering,
Water Power Laboratory,
Norwegian University of Science and Technology,
Trondheim 7491, Norway
e-mail: michel.cervantes@ltu.se

Ahmad Nourbakhsh

Hydraulic Machinery Research Institute,
School of Mechanical Engineering,
College of Engineering,
University of Tehran,
Tehran 11155-4563, Iran
e-mail: anour@ut.ac.ir

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Fluids Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF FLUIDS ENGINEERING. Manuscript received March 9, 2016; final manuscript received November 15, 2016; published online February 20, 2017. Assoc. Editor: Alfredo Soldati.

J. Fluids Eng 139(4), 041402 (Feb 20, 2017) (19 pages) Paper No: FE-16-1151; doi: 10.1115/1.4035302 History: Received March 09, 2016; Revised November 15, 2016

In the current paper nondeterministic computational fluid dynamics (CFD) computations of three-dimensional (3D), developing, and statistically steady turbulent flow through an asymmetric diffuser with moderate adverse pressure gradient are presented. The inflow condition is assumed to be uncertain. The inlet streamwise velocity is supposed to be a stochastic process and described by the Karhunen–Loève (KL) expansion. In addition, the inlet turbulence intensity and turbulent length scale are assumed to be uncertain. The nonintrusive polynomial chaos (NIPC) expansion is used to propagate the inflow uncertainties in the flow field. The developed code is verified using a Monte Carlo (MC) simulation with 1000 Latin Hypercube samples on a planar asymmetric diffuser. A very good agreement is observed between the results of MC and polynomial chaos expansion methods. The verified uncertainty quantification method is then applied to stochastic developing turbulent flow through a 3D asymmetric diffuser. It was observed that the eigenvalues of covariance kernel rapidly decay due to the large correlation lengths and thus a few terms in the truncated KL expansion are used to describe the stochastic inlet velocity. For the KL expansion, the mean and the standard deviation are set to those measured experimentally. The uncertain inlet condition has a significant influence on the numerical results of velocity and turbulence fields specially in the developing region before the shear layers meet. It is concluded that one of the reasons for discrepancies between experimental and deterministic CFD results is the uncertainty in inflow condition. A sensitivity analysis is also performed using the Sobol’ indices and contribution of each uncertain parameter on outputs variance is presented.

Copyright © 2017 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


Fishman, G. , 2013, Monte Carlo: Concepts, Algorithms, and Applications, Springer Science & Business Media, New York.
Ghanem, R. G. , and Spanos, P. D. , 2003, Stochastic Finite Elements: A Spectral Approach, Courier Corporation, Mineola, New York.
Wiener, N. , 1938, “ The Homogeneous Chaos,” Am. J. Math., 60(4), pp. 897–936. [CrossRef]
Ghanem, R. , and Kruger, R. M. , 1996, “ Numerical Solution of Spectral Stochastic Finite Element Systems,” Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng., 129(3), pp. 289–303. [CrossRef]
Ghanem, R. , 1999, “ Ingredients for a General Purpose Stochastic Finite Elements Implementation,” Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng., 168(1–4), pp. 19–34. [CrossRef]
Ghanem, R. , 1999, “ Stochastic Finite Elements With Multiple Random Non-Gaussian Properties,” J. Eng. Mech., 125(1), pp. 26–40. [CrossRef]
Ghanem, R. , and Red-Horse, J. , 1999, “ Propagation of Probabilistic Uncertainty in Complex Physical Systems Using a Stochastic Finite Element Approach,” Physica D, 133(1–4), pp. 137–144. [CrossRef]
Debusschere, B. J. , Najm, H. N. , Pebay, P. P. , Knio, O. M. , Ghanem, R. G. , and Maitre, O. P. L. , 2004, “ Numerical Challenges in the Use of Polynomial Chaos Representations for Stochastic Processes,” SIAM J. Sci. Comput., 26(2), pp. 698–719. [CrossRef]
Reagana, M. T. , Najm, H. N. , Ghanem, R. G. , and Knio, O. M. , 2003, “ Uncertainty Quantification in Reacting-Flow Simulations Through Non-Intrusive Spectral Projection,” Combust. Flame, 132(3), pp. 545–555. [CrossRef]
Mathelin, L. , Hussaini, M. Y. , and Zang, T. A. , 2005, “ Stochastic Approaches to Uncertainty Quantification in CFD Simulations,” Numer. Algorithms, 38(1–3), pp. 209–236. [CrossRef]
Hosder, S. , Walters, R. W. , and Perez, R. , 2006, “ A Non-Intrusive Polynomial Chaos Method for Uncertainty Propagation in CFD Simulations,” AIAA Paper No. 2006-891.
Hosder, S. , Walters, R. W. , and Balch, M. , 2008, “ Efficient Uncertainty Quantification Applied to the Aeroelastic Analysis of a Transonic Wing,” AIAA Paper No. 2008-729.
Bettis, B. R. , and Hosder, S. , 2010, “ Quantification of Uncertainty in Aerodynamic Heating of a Reentry Vehicle Due to Uncertain Wall and Freestream Conditions,” AIAA 2010-4642.
Raisee, M. , Kumar, D. , and Lacor, C. , 2015, “ A Non-Intrusive Model Reduction Approach for Polynomial Chaos Expansion Using Proper Orthogonal Decomposition,” Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng., 103(4), pp. 293–312. [CrossRef]
Najm, H. N. , 2009, “ Uncertainty Quantification and Polynomial Chaos Techniques in Computational Fluid Dynamics,” Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech., 41(1), pp. 35–52. [CrossRef]
Loeven, G. J. A. , and Bijl, H. , 2010, “ The Application of the Probabilistic Collocation Method to a Transonic Axial Flow Compressor,” AIAA Paper No. 2010-2923.
Petrone, G. , De Nicola, C. , Quagliarella, D. , Witteveen, J. , and Iaccarino, G. , 2011, “ Wind Turbine Performance Analysis Under Uncertainty,” AIAA Paper No. 2011-544.
Liu, Z. , Wang, X. , and Kang, S. , 2014, “ Stochastic Performance Evaluation of Horizontal Axis Wind Turbine Blades Using Non-Deterministic CFD Simulations,” Energy, 73, pp. 126–136. [CrossRef]
Pečnik, R. , Witteveen, J. A. , and Iaccarino, G. , 2011, “ Uncertainty Quantification for Laminar-Turbulent Transition Prediction in RANS Turbomachinery Applications,” AIAA Paper No. 2011-660.
Gopinathrao, N. P. , Mabilat, C. , and Alizadeh, S. , 2009, “ Non-Deterministic Thermo-Fluid Analysis of a Compressor Rotor-Stator Cavity,” AIAA Paper No. 2009-2278.
Han, X. , Sagaut, P. , and Lucor, D. , 2012, “ On Sensitivity of RANS Simulations to Uncertain Turbulent Inflow Conditions,” Comput. Fluids, 61, pp. 2–5. [CrossRef]
Congedo, P. M. , Duprat, C. , Balarac, G. , and Corre, C. , 2013, “ Numerical Prediction of Turbulent Flows Using Reynolds-Averaged Naiver–Stokes and Large-Eddy Simulation With Uncertain Inflow Conditions,” Int. J. Numer. Methods Fluids, 72(3), pp. 341–358. [CrossRef]
Ko, J. , Lucor, D. , and Sagaut, P. , 2008, “ Sensitivity of Two-Dimensional Spatially Developing Mixing Layers With Respect to Uncertain Inflow Conditions,” Phys. Fluids, 20(7), p. 077102. [CrossRef]
Abdelaziz, O. , and Radermacher, R. , 2010, “ Modeling Heat Exchangers Under Consideration of Manufacturing Tolerances and Uncertain Flow Distribution,” Int. J. Refrig., 33(4), pp. 815–828. [CrossRef]
Han, X. , Sagaut, P. , Lucor, D. , and Afgan, I. , 2012, “ Stochastic Response of the Laminar Flow Past a Flat Plate Under Uncertain Inflow Conditions,” Int. J. Comput. Fluid Dyn., 26(2), pp. 101–117. [CrossRef]
García-Sánchez, C. , Philips, D. , and Gorlé, C. , 2014, “ Quantifying Inflow Uncertainties for CFD Simulations of the Flow in Downtown Oklahoma City,” Build. Environ., 78, pp. 118–129. [CrossRef]
Cervantes, M. , and Engstrom, T. , 2008, “ Pulsating Turbulent Flow in a Straight Asymmetric Diffuser,” J. Hydraul. Res., 46(1), pp. 112–128. [CrossRef]
Salehi, S. , 2013, “ Computation of Developing Turbulent Flow Through a Straight Asymmetric Diffuser With Moderate Adverse Pressure Gradient,” Master's thesis, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
Durst, F. , Fischer, M. , Jovanović, J. , and Kikura, H. , 1998, “ Methods to Setup and Investigate Low Reynolds Number, Fully Developed Turbulent Plane Channel Flows,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 120(3), pp. 496–503. [CrossRef]
Kaltenback, H. , Fatica, M. , Mittal, R. , Lund, T. , and Moin, P. , 1999, “ Study of the Flow in a Planar Asymmetric Diffuser Using Large Eddy Simulations,” J. Fluid Mech., 390, pp. 151–185. [CrossRef]
Sbrizzai, F. , Verzicco, R. , and Soldati, A. , 2009, “ Turbulent Flow and Dispersion of Inertial Particles in a Confined Jet Issued by a Long Cylindrical Pipe,” Flow, Turbul. Combust., 82(1), pp. 1–23. [CrossRef]
Wang, L. , 2008, “ Karhunen–Loève Expansions and Their Applications,” Ph.D. thesis, London School of Economics and Political Science, UK.
Launder, B. , and Sharma, B. , 1974, “ Application of the Energy-Dissipation Model of Turbulence to the Calculation of Flow Near a Spinning Disc,” Lett. Heat Mass Transfer, 1(2), pp. 131–137. [CrossRef]
Weller, H. G. , Tabor, G. , Jasak, H. , and Fureby, C. , 1998, “ A Tensorial Approach to Computational Continuum Mechanics Using Object-Oriented Techniques,” Comput. Phys., 12(6), pp. 620–631. [CrossRef]
Xiu, D. , and Karniadakis, G. , 2002, “ The Wiener–Askey Polynomial Chaos for Stochastic Differential Equations,” SIAM J. Sci. Comput., 24(2), pp. 619–644. [CrossRef]
Witteveen, J. A. , and Bijl, H. , 2006, “ Modeling Arbitrary Uncertainties Using Gram–Schmidt Polynomial Chaos,” AIAA Paper No. 2006-896.
Sudret, B. , 2008, “ Global Sensitivity Analysis Using Polynomial Chaos Expansions,” Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf., 93(7), pp. 964–979. [CrossRef]
Hosder, S. , Walters, R. W. , and Balch, M. , 2007, “ Efficient Sampling for Non-Intrusive Polynomial Chaos Applications With Multiple Input Uncertain Variables,” AIAA Paper No. 2007-1939.
Sobol’, I. , 1990, “ On Sensitivity Estimation for Nonlinear Mathematical Models,” Mat. Model., 2(1), pp. 112–118.
Obi, S. , Aoki, K. , and Masuda, S. , 1993, “ Experimental and Computational Study of Turbulent Separating Flow in an Asymmetric Plane Diffuser,” Ninth Symposium on Turbulent Shear Flows, Kyoto, Japan, Aug. 16–18, pp. 305.1–305.4.
Buice, C. , and Eaton, J. , 2000, “ Experimental Investigation of Flow Through an Asymmetric Plane Diffuser,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 122(2), pp. 433–435. [CrossRef]
Iaccarino, G. , 2001, “ Prediction of a Turbulent Separated Flow Using Commercial CFD Codes,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 123(4), pp. 819–828. [CrossRef]
El-Behery, S. M. , and Hamed, M. H. , 2011, “ A Comparative Study of Turbulence Models Performance for Separating Flow in a Planar Asymmetric Diffuser,” Comput. Fluids, 44(1), pp. 248–257. [CrossRef]
Durbin, P. A. , 1995, “ Separated Flow Computations With the kεv2 Model,” AIAA J., 33(4), pp. 659–664. [CrossRef]
Loh, W. L. , 1996, “ On Latin Hypercube Sampling,” Ann. Stat., 24(5), pp. 2058–2080. [CrossRef]


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

(a) Experimental setup used by Cervantes and Engström [27] (dimensions in mm) and (b) 2D view of the computational domain

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

(a) The locations of available experimental data at section x = 100 mm, (b) and (c) 3D surfaces fitted to the experimental data (in (b) and (c) nodes represent the experimental data)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Contours of mean and standard deviation of the streamwise velocity on the symmetry plane: (a) mean and (b) standard deviation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Contours of mean and standard deviation of the Reynolds stresses on the symmetry plane: (a) u2¯ mean, (b) u2¯ standard deviation, (c) v2¯ mean, (d) v2¯ standard deviation, (e) uv¯ mean, and (f) uv¯ standard deviation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Contours of mean and standard deviation of the static pressure on the symmetry plane: (a) mean and (b) standard deviation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Eigenvalues for the exponential kernel

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Eigenfunctions corresponding to the first six terms in KL expansion for the exponential kernel

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Comparison of NIPC and MC results (mean and ±2σ range) for stochastic turbulent flow through Obi diffuser: (a) streamwise velocity profiles and (b) streamwise normal Reynolds stress

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

PDF of Reynolds number for Obi diffuser

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

(a) Schematic of Obi diffuser, Buice and Eaton [41] and (b) computational grid

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Effect of polynomial order (p) on accuracy of results: (a) PDF of streamwise velocity and (b) PDF of streamwise component of normal Reynolds stress

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Results of grid independency study, (a) U, (b) u2¯, and (c) v2¯

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Contours of mean and standard deviation of normalized streamwise velocity: (a) mean and (b) standard deviation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

PDF and CDF of pressure coefficient at two points on lower wall of diffuser (point 1 at x/H = 0 and point 2 at x/H = 21): (a) point 1 and (b) point 2

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Comparison of NIPC and MC results (mean and ±2σ range) of skin friction and pressure coefficients on the diffuser walls: (a) skin friction coefficient on upper wall, (b) skin friction coefficient on lower wall, (c) pressure coefficient on upper wall, and (d) pressure coefficient on lower wall

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Development of the pressure coefficient along upper wall with ±2σ bounds

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Sobol’ indices of centerline velocity and Reynolds stresses: (a) U, (b) u2¯, and (c) v2¯

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Contours of Sobol’ indices on symmetry plane: (a) S1 of U, (b) S5 of U, (c) S6 of U, (d) S1 of u2¯, (e) S5 of u2¯, and (f) S6 of u2¯

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

Profiles of (a) streamwise and (b) normal velocity in three sections of diffuser

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 21

Contours of streamwise velocity in three section of diffuser: (a) mean in section 2082 mm, (b) standard deviation in section 2082 mm, (c) mean in section 2357 mm, (d) standard deviation in section 2357 mm, (e) mean in section 2632 mm, and (f) standard deviation in section 2632 mm

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 22

Profiles of Reynolds stresses in three sections of diffuser: (a) u2¯, (b) v2¯, and (c) uv¯

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Development of (a) streamwise velocity, (b) u2¯, and (c) v2¯ along centerline with ±2σ bounds



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