Advanced turbulence models for turbomachinery

Development and assessment of the single-time-scale k-epsilon turbulence model with different near-wall treatments and the multi-scale turbulence model for rotating flows are presented. These turbulence models are coded as self contained module decks that can be interfaced with a number of CFD main flow solvers. For each model, a stand-alone module deck with its own formulation, discretization scheme, solver and boundary condition implementations is presented. These satellite decks will take as input (from a main flow solver) the velocity field, grid, boundary condition specifications and will deliver turbulent quantities as output. These modules were tested as separate entities and, although many logical and programming problems were overcome, only wider use and further testing can render the modules sufficiently 'fool proof'

Criteria for evaluation of grid generation systems

Many CFD grid generation systems are in use nationally, but few comparative studies have been performed to quantify their relative merits. A study was undertaken to systematically evaluate and select the best CFD grid generation codes available. Detailed evaluation criteria were established as the basis for the evaluation conducted. Descriptions of thirty-four separate criteria, grouped into eight general categories are provided. Benchmark test cases, developed to test basic features of selected codes, are described in detail. Scoring guidelines were generated to establish standards for measuring code capabilities, ensuring uniformity of ratings, and minimizing personal bias among the three code evaluators. Ten candidate codes were identified from government, industry, universities, and commercial software companies. A three phase evaluation was conducted. In Phase 1, ten codes identified were screened through conversations with code authors and other industry experts. Seven codes were carried forward into a Phase 2 evaluation in which all codes were scored according to the predefined criteria. Two codes emerged as being significantly better than the others: RAGGS and GRIDGEN. Finally, these two codes were carried forward into a Phase 3 evaluation in which complex 3-D multizone grids were generated to verify capability