两种湍流模型在跨声速绕流中的比较分析
|
摘要
通过求解雷诺平均Navier-Stokes(NS)方程,对比分析Spalart-Allmaras(SA)和Menter's k-ωSST(SST)两种湍流模型在跨声速绕流中的模拟精度及特性.实验结果表明:两种模型预测的压力系数分布与实验结果相差不大; SA模型比SST模型的计算效率高,但SST模型的计算精度和稳定性略高于SA模型;湍流模型对阻力特别是黏性阻力的影响最大,SA模型的气动力特性要略好一些.
The reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes(NS) equation were solved to compare the simulation accuracy and characteristics of two turbulent models of Spalart-Allmaras(SA) and menter's k-ω SST(SST)in the transonic flow. The calculating results showed that in the two turbulent models the pressure coefficient distribution with different positions were almost same to the influence of the wind tunnel experiment on the wing surface. The calculation speed of SA model was higher than the SST model. However,the calculation accuracy and stability of SST model were slightly higher than that of SA model. The two turbulence models had the greatest influence on drag,especially viscous drag. In comparison,the aerodynamic characteristics of SA model were slightly better.
The reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes(NS) equation were solved to compare the simulation accuracy and characteristics of two turbulent models of Spalart-Allmaras(SA) and menter's k-ω SST(SST)in the transonic flow. The calculating results showed that in the two turbulent models the pressure coefficient distribution with different positions were almost same to the influence of the wind tunnel experiment on the wing surface. The calculation speed of SA model was higher than the SST model. However,the calculation accuracy and stability of SST model were slightly higher than that of SA model. The two turbulence models had the greatest influence on drag,especially viscous drag. In comparison,the aerodynamic characteristics of SA model were slightly better.
引文
[1]朱自强.应用计算流体力学[M].北京:北京航空航天大学出版社,1998.
[2]郑秋亚.基于Navier-Stokes方程的复杂流动数值模拟精度与并行计算研究[D].西安:西安电子科技大学,2011.
[3] ROE P L. Approximate riemann solvers,parameter vectors,and difference schemes[J]. Journal of computational physics,1981,43:357-372.
[4]涂国华,燕振国,赵晓慧,等. SA和SST湍流模型对高超声速边界层强制转捩的适应性[J].航空学报,2015,36(5):1471-1479.
[5] SPALART P,ALLMARAS S. An one-equation turbulent model for aerodynamic flows[C]∥30th Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit. Reno,NV,1992:439.
[6] MENTER F,RUMSEY L. Assessment of two-equation turbulent models for transonic flows[C]∥Fluid Dynamics Conference1994. Colorado Springs,CO,1994:2326.
[7]石磊,杨云军,周伟江.两种湍流模型在高速旋转翼身组合弹箭中的对比研究[J].力学学报,2017,49(1):85-92.
[8]刘景源. SST湍流模型在高超声速绕流中的改进[J].航空学报,2012,33(12):2192-2201.
[9]韩涛.湍流模型在民机跨声速绕流计算的应用研究[J].航空计算技术,2013,43(3):77-79.
[10]唐雨萌,柳阳威,陆利蓬.高升力翼型复杂流动模拟型性能评估[J].航空动力学报,2016,31(12):2860-2869.
[11]尹翔,冯金福,张俊祥.一种典型翼型在湍流模型中的数值仿真分析[J].计算机仿真,2013,30(4):116-141.
[2]郑秋亚.基于Navier-Stokes方程的复杂流动数值模拟精度与并行计算研究[D].西安:西安电子科技大学,2011.
[3] ROE P L. Approximate riemann solvers,parameter vectors,and difference schemes[J]. Journal of computational physics,1981,43:357-372.
[4]涂国华,燕振国,赵晓慧,等. SA和SST湍流模型对高超声速边界层强制转捩的适应性[J].航空学报,2015,36(5):1471-1479.
[5] SPALART P,ALLMARAS S. An one-equation turbulent model for aerodynamic flows[C]∥30th Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit. Reno,NV,1992:439.
[6] MENTER F,RUMSEY L. Assessment of two-equation turbulent models for transonic flows[C]∥Fluid Dynamics Conference1994. Colorado Springs,CO,1994:2326.
[7]石磊,杨云军,周伟江.两种湍流模型在高速旋转翼身组合弹箭中的对比研究[J].力学学报,2017,49(1):85-92.
[8]刘景源. SST湍流模型在高超声速绕流中的改进[J].航空学报,2012,33(12):2192-2201.
[9]韩涛.湍流模型在民机跨声速绕流计算的应用研究[J].航空计算技术,2013,43(3):77-79.
[10]唐雨萌,柳阳威,陆利蓬.高升力翼型复杂流动模拟型性能评估[J].航空动力学报,2016,31(12):2860-2869.
[11]尹翔,冯金福,张俊祥.一种典型翼型在湍流模型中的数值仿真分析[J].计算机仿真,2013,30(4):116-141.