- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine
Access Provided by Xinjiang University

Physical Review Fluids

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Access by Xinjiang University

Sensitivity gradients of surface geometry modifications based on stability analysis of compressible flows

Alejandro Martinez-Cava1,*, Miguel Chávez-Modena1, Eusebio Valero1,2, Javier de Vicente1,2, and Esteban Ferrer1,2

  • 1ETSIAE-UPM, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Plaza Cardenal Cisneros 3, E-28040 Madrid, Spain
  • 2CCS-UPM - Centre for Computational Simulation - Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Boadilla del Monte, E-28660 Madrid, Spain

  • *Corresponding author: alejandro.martinezcava@upm.es
PDF

Phys. Rev. Fluids 5, 063902 – Published 18 June, 2020

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevFluids.5.063902

Abstract

We derive a discrete framework for the calculation of eigenvalue sensitivity to geometric deformations. We apply the technique to the steady compressible Navier-Stokes and Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) flows. The analysis enables one to control (reduce or increase) the amplification rate or frequency associated to the least stable global mode, which is identified using stability analysis. A methodology using a discrete framework is proposed, allowing one to recover the gradients in compressible and turbulent flows. The potential of the resulting shape gradients is evaluated on the well-known circular cylinder flow problem and on a RANS turbulent flow scenario to control the buffet onset on a NACA0012 airfoil. The predicted deformations show excellent performance on the stabilization or excitation, and frequency control, of the global modes and for the two cases tested.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (56)

  1. V. Heuveline and F. Strauß, Shape optimization towards stability in constrained hydrodynamic systems, J. Comput. Phys. 228, 938 (2009).
  2. Y. Kiriyama, E. Katamine, and H. Azegami, Shape optimisation problem for stability of Navier–Stokes flow field, Int. J. Comput. Fluid Dynam. 32, 68 (2018).
  3. Y. Wang, E. Ferrer, A. Martínez-Cava, Y. Zheng, and E. Valero, Enhanced stability of flows through contraction channels: Combining shape optimization and linear stability analysis, Phys. Fluids 31, 074109 (2019).
  4. E. Boujo and F. Gallaire, Controlled reattachment in separated flows: A variational approach to recirculation length reduction, J. Fluid Mech. 742, 618 (2014).
  5. S. Camarri, Flow control design inspired by linear stability analysis, Acta Mech. 226, 979 (2015).
  6. K. Taira, M. S. Hemati, S. L. Brunton, Y. Sun, K. Duraisamy, S. Bagheri, S. T. M. Dawson, and C.-A. Yeh, Modal analysis of fluid flows: Applications and outlook, AIAA J. 58, 998 (2019).
  7. P. J. Schmid and L. Brandt, Analysis of fluid systems: Stability, receptivity, sensitivity, Appl. Mech. Rev. 66, 024803 (2014).
  8. F. Giannetti and P. Luchini, Structural sensitivity of the first instability of the cylinder wake, J. Fluid Mech. 581, 167 (2007).
  9. P. J. Strykowski and K. R. Sreenivasan, On the formation and suppression of vortex ‘shedding’ at low Reynolds numbers, J. Fluid Mech. 218, 71 (1990).
  10. O. Marquet, D. Sipp, and L. Jacquin, Sensitivity analysis and passive control of cylinder flow, J. Fluid Mech. 615, 221 (2008).
  11. C. Mettot, F. Renac, and D. Sipp, Computation of eigenvalue sensitivity to base flow modifications in a discrete framework: Application to open-loop control, J. Comput. Phys. 269, 234 (2014).
  12. O. M. F. Browne, G. Rubio, E. Ferrer, and E. Valero, Sensitivity analysis to unsteady perturbations of complex flows: A discrete approach, Int. J. Numer. Methods Fluids 76, 1088 (2014).
  13. P. Meliga, D. Sipp, and J.-M. Chomaz, Open-loop control of compressible afterbody flows using adjoint methods, Phys. Fluids 22, 054109 (2010).
  14. P. Meliga, J.-M. Chomaz, and D. Sipp, Unsteadiness in the wake of disks and spheres: Instability, receptivity and control using direct and adjoint global stability analyses, J. Fluids Struct. 25, 601 (2009).
  15. E. Ferrer, O. M. Browne, and E. Valero, Sensitivity analysis to control the far-wake unsteadiness behind turbines, Energies 10, 1599 (2017).
  16. I. Lashgari, O. Tammisola, V. Citro, M. P. Juniper, and L. Brandt, The planar X-junction flow: Stability analysis and control, J. Fluid Mech. 753, 1 (2014).
  17. P. Luchini and A. Bottaro, Adjoint equations in stability analysis, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 46, 493 (2014).
  18. D. Sipp, O. Marquet, P. Meliga, and A. Barbagallo, Dynamics and control of global instabilities in open-flows: A linearized approach, Appl. Mech. Rev. 63, 030801 (2010).
  19. T. Nakazawa and H. Azegami, Shape optimization of flow field improving hydrodynamic stability, Japan J. Indust. Appl. Math. 33, 167 (2016).
  20. O. Tammisola, Optimal wavy surface to suppress vortex shedding using second-order sensitivity to shape changes, Eur. J. Mech. B Fluids 62, 139 (2017).
  21. O. Tammisola, F. Giannetti, V. Citro, and M. P. Juniper, Second-order perturbation of global modes and implications for spanwise wavy actuation, J. Fluid Mech. 755, 314 (2014).
  22. E. Boujo, A. Fani, and F. Gallaire, Second-order sensitivity of parallel shear flows and optimal spanwise-periodic flow modifications, J. Fluid Mech. 782, 491 (2015).
  23. E. Boujo, A. Fani, and F. Gallaire, Second-order sensitivity in the cylinder wake: Optimal spanwise-periodic wall actuation and wall deformation, Phys. Rev. Fluids 4, 053901 (2019).
  24. J. Brewster and M. P. Juniper, Shape sensitivity of eigenvalues in hydrodynamic stability, with physical interpretation for the flow around a cylinder, Eur. J. Mech. B Fluids 80, 80 (2020).
  25. D. Barkley and R. Henderson, Three-dimensional Floquet stability analysis of the wake of a circular cylinder, J. Fluid Mech. 322, 215 (1996).
  26. J. B. McDevitt and A. F. Okuno, Static and dynamic pressure measurements on a naca 0012 airfoil in the Ames high Reynolds number facility, NASA Technical Paper, Technical Report No. 2485 (National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), Ames Research Center, United States, 1985).
  27. P. R. Spalart, Trends in turbulence treatments, in Fluids 2000 Conference and Exhibit (American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Denver, CO, 2000).
  28. M. P. Juniper, Sensitivity analysis of thermoacoustic instability with adjoint Helmholtz solvers, Phys. Rev. Fluids 3, 110509 (2018).
  29. F. Giannetti, S. Camarri, and V. Citro, Sensitivity analysis and passive control of the secondary instability in the wake of a cylinder, J. Fluid Mech. 864, 45 (2019).
  30. D. Schwamborn, T. Gerhold, and R. Heinrich, The DLR Tau-code: Recent applications in research and industry, in Proceedings of the European Conference on Computational Fluid Dynamics, ECCOMAS CFD 2006 (Delft University of Technology, Netherlands, 2006).
  31. R. P. Dwight, Efficiency improvements on RANS-based analysis and optimization using implicit and adjoint methods on unstructured grids, Ph.D. thesis, University of Manchester, 2006.
  32. P. R. Amestoy, I. S. Duff, J.-Y. L'Excellent, and J. Koster, A fully asynchronous multifrontal solver using distributed dynamic scheduling, SIAM J. Matrix Anal. Appl. 23, 15 (2001).
  33. A. Martinez-Cava, Y. Wang, J. de Vicente, and E. Valero, Pressure bifurcation phenomenon on supersonic blowing trailing edges, AIAA J. 57, 153 (2019).
  34. L. M. González, E. Ferrer, and H. R. Díaz-Ojeda, Onset of three-dimensional flow instabilities in lid-driven circular, Phys. Fluids 29, 064102 (2017).
  35. C. Mettot, D. Sipp, and H. Bézard, Quasi-laminar stability and sensitivity analyses for turbulent flows: Prediction of low-frequency unsteadiness and passive control, Phys. Fluids 26, 045112 (2014).
  36. V. Hernandez, J. E. Roman, and V. Vidal, SLEPc: A scalable and flexible toolkit for the solution of eigenvalue problems, ACM Trans. Math. Software 31, 351 (2005).
  37. V. Theofilis, Global linear instability, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 43, 319 (2011).
  38. M. C. Iorio, L. M. González, and E. Ferrer, Direct and adjoint global stability analysis of turbulent transonic flows over a naca0012 profile, Int. J. Numer. Methods Fluids 76, 147 (2014).
  39. S. Sanvido, J. Garicano-Mena, J. de Vicente, and E. Valero, Domain reduction strategy for the stability analysis of complex aerodynamic flows, Int. J. Numer. Methods Fluids 92, 727 (2020).
  40. R. Thormann and M. Widhalm, Linear-frequency-domain predictions of dynamic-response data for viscous transonic flows, AIAA J. 51, 2540 (2013).
  41. B. R. Noack and H. Eckelmann, A global stability analysis of the steady and periodic cylinder wake, J. Fluid Mech. 270, 297 (1994).
  42. D. Canuto and K. Taira, Two-dimensional compressible viscous flow around a circular cylinder, J. Fluid Mech. 785, 349 (2015).
  43. J. H. Gerrard, The mechanics of the formation of vortices behind bluff bodies, J. Fluid Mech. 25, 401 (1966).
  44. D. Caruana, A. Mignosi, M. Corrège, A. Le Pourhiet, and A. M. Rodde, Buffet and buffeting control in transonic flow, Aerospace Sci. Technol. 9, 605 (2005).
  45. G. Barakos and D. Drikakis, Numerical simulation of transonic buffet flows using various turbulence closures, Int. J. Heat Fluid Flow 21, 620 (2000).
  46. J. D. Crouch, A. Garbaruk, and D. Magidov, Predicting the onset of flow unsteadiness based on global instability, J. Comput. Phys. 224, 924 (2007).
  47. F. Sartor, C. Mettot, and D. Sipp, Stability, receptivity, and sensitivity analyses of buffeting transonic flow over a profile, AIAA J. 53, 1980 (2015).
  48. J. D. Crouch, A. Garbaruk, and M. Strelets, Global instability analysis of unswept- and swept-wing transonic buffet onset, in 2018 Fluid Dynamics Conference (American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Atlanta, GA, 2018).
  49. F. Plante, J. Dandois, S. Beneddine, D. Sipp, and É. Laurendeau, Numerical simulations and global stability analyses of transonic buffet and subsonic stall, 54th 3AF International Conference on Applied Aerodynamics (AAAF Aero 2019) (Association Aéronautique et Astronautique de France, Paris, France, 2019).
  50. E. Paladini, S. Beneddine, J. Dandois, D. Sipp, and J.-C. Robinet, Transonic buffet instability: From two-dimensional airfoils to three-dimensional swept wings, Phys. Rev. Fluids 4, 103906 (2019).
  51. J. Kou, S. Le Clainche, and W. Zhang, A reduced-order model for compressible flows with buffeting condition using higher order dynamic mode decomposition with a mode selection criterion, Phys. Fluids 30, 016103 (2018).
  52. S. Timme, Global instability of wing shock-buffet onset, J. Fluid Mech. 885, A37 (2020).
  53. J. D. Crouch, A. Garbaruk, D. Magidov, and A. Travin, Origin of transonic buffet on aerofoils, J. Fluid Mech. 628, 357 (2009).
  54. M. Thiery and E. Coustols, Numerical prediction of shock induced oscillations over a 2D airfoil: Influence of turbulence modeling and test section walls, Int. J. Heat Fluid Flow 27, 661 (2006).
  55. A. Jameson, L. Martinelli, and N. A. Pierce, Optimum aerodynamic design using the Navier-Stokes equations, Theor. Comput. Fluid Dynam. 10, 213 (1998).
  56. P. J. Bruce and S. P. Colliss, Review of research into shock control bumps, Shock Waves 25, 451 (2015).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Fluids 5, 063902– Published 18 June, 2020
  • Received 24 October 2019
  • Accepted 28 May 2020
Crossmark - Check for updates button

©2020 American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation