基于S-A与SSG/LRR-<i>ω</i>两种湍流模型的CHN-T1标模计算与分析

聂胜阳; 王垠; 刘志强; 金朋; 焦瑾

doi:10.7638/kqdlxxb-2018.0207

欢迎来到能源电力期刊网！

English Version 期刊登录

您当前的位置：

首页 >

文章列表页 >

基于S-A与SSG/LRR-ω两种湍流模型的CHN-T1标模计算与分析

专栏——CFD验证与确认 | 更新时间：2026-05-28

- 基于S-A与SSG/LRR-ω两种湍流模型的CHN-T1标模计算与分析
- Numerical inverstigation and discussion on CHN-T1 benchmark model using Spalart-Allmaras model and SSG/LRR-ω model
- 空气动力学学报 2019年37卷第2期页码：310-319,328
- 作者机构：
  
  1. 西安理工大学土木建筑工程学院,西安,710058
  2. 西安航空学院飞行器学院,西安,710077
- 作者简介：
  
  聂胜阳(1986-), 男, 河南信阳人, 讲师, 研究方向:湍流-转捩模型建模, 流固耦合, 流动控制.E-mail:niesynpu@hotmail.com
- 基金信息：
  
  国家自然科学基金项目（11802234）
- DOI：10.7638/kqdlxxb-2018.0207
  中图分类号： V211.3
- 纸质出版：2019
- 稿件说明：
移动端阅览
聂胜阳, 王垠, 刘志强, 金朋, 焦瑾. 基于S-A与SSG/LRR-ω两种湍流模型的CHN-T1标模计算与分析[J]. 空气动力学学报, 2019, 37(2): 310-319,328.

NIE Shengyang, WANG Yin, LIU Zhiqiang, et al. Numerical inverstigation and discussion on CHN-T1 benchmark model using Spalart-Allmaras model and SSG/LRR-ω model[J]. 2019, 37(2): 310-319,328. DOI: 10.7638/kqdlxxb-2018.0207.
聂胜阳, 王垠, 刘志强, 金朋, 焦瑾. 基于S-A与SSG/LRR-ω两种湍流模型的CHN-T1标模计算与分析[J]. 空气动力学学报, 2019, 37(2): 310-319,328. DOI： 10.7638/kqdlxxb-2018.0207.

NIE Shengyang, WANG Yin, LIU Zhiqiang, et al. Numerical inverstigation and discussion on CHN-T1 benchmark model using Spalart-Allmaras model and SSG/LRR-ω model[J]. 2019, 37(2): 310-319,328. DOI: 10.7638/kqdlxxb-2018.0207. DOI：

摘要

通过求解雷诺平均Navier-Stokes方程，对第一届AeCW-1研讨会上要求的所有工况进行了计算，着重研究S-A湍流模型和雷诺应力模型在CHN-T1标模上的表现，评估两种湍流模型的网格收敛性，对抖振特性的模拟能力以及对雷诺数的敏感性。根据与实验数据的对比分析，得出主要结论如下：两种湍流模型都能趋向于网格收敛，雷诺应力模型的网格收敛更快。在较大迎角的工况，两种湍流模型对机翼上激波诱导的分离流有较大的差别。CHN-T1标模的尾撑，改变了飞机平尾的压力分布，并且在飞机机尾上产生复杂的三维分离流动，对俯仰力矩系数的准确计算产生了较大的影响。考虑静气弹效应，两种湍流模型计算的力矩系数比不考虑静气弹效应更大，雷诺应力模型的偏差更大。在高雷诺数工况，两种湍流模型的计算结果趋于一致。

Abstract

By solving Reynolds averaged Navier-Stokes equations

all cases of the CHN-T1 benchmark aircraft configuration from the first AeCW-1 conference were investigated in detail using Spalart-Allmaras model and Reynolds stress model

respectively. The behaviors of the two models on this test case were specifically discussed and investigated

in order to evaluate the ability regarding approach the grid convergence

the accuracy for the prediction of the aircraft operating near the buffeting envelop

as well as the sensitivity of the two models to Reynolds number. After comparing the computations with the experimental data

the main conclusions are organized as the following:Both turbulence models can achieve final grid convergence

and the RSM can faster grid convergence than the S-A model. For the cases with high angles of attack

where shock-induced separation can occur

the computations using the two models significantly differ to each other. The tail-supporting string of the CHN-T1 model has a great impact on the pressure distribution of the horizontal tail. The present of the tail-supporting string induces a complex turbulence separation on the tail of the fuselage

which is difficult to be predicted accurately. The computations with the static aeroelastic deformation yield poor agreement of the moment coefficient with the experimental data

especially for the RSM model. For cases operating at higher Reynolds number

the results predicted by the two models are closer.

关键词

Keywords

references

YU Y G, ZHOU Z, HUANG J T, et al. Aerodynamic design of a standard model CHN-T1 for single-aisle passenger aircraft[J]. Acta Aerodynamica Sinica, 2018, 36(3):505-513. (in Chinese)

LI Q, LIU D, XU X, et al. Experimental study of aerodynamic characteristic of CHN-T1 standard model in 2.4m transonic wind tunnel[J]. Acta Aerodynamica Sinica, 2019, 37(2):337-344. (in Chinese)

SPALART P, ALLMARA S. One-equation turbulence model for aerodynamic flows[C]. 30th Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Aerospace Sciences Meetings, AIAA 1992-439, 1992.

MENTER F R. Two-equation eddy-viscosity turbulence models for engineering applications[J]. AIAA Journal, 1994, 32(8):1598-1605.

SHUR M L, STRELETS M K, TRAVIN A K, et al. Turbulence modeling in rotating and curved channels:assessing the spalart-shur correction[J]. AIAA Journal, 2000, 38(5):784-792

MANI M, LADD J A, BOWER W W. Rotation and curvature correction assessment for one and two-equation turbulence models[J] Journal of Aircraft, 2004, 41(2):268-273.

SPALART P R. Strategies for turbulence modeling and simulation[J]. International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow, 2000, 21(3):252-263.

MANI M, BABCOCK D A, WINKLER C M, et al. Predictions of a supersonic turbulent flow in a square duct[C]. 51st AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition, AIAA 2013-0860, January 2013.

YAMAMOTO K, TABAKA K, MURAYAMA M. Comparison study of drag prediction for the 4th CFD drag prediction workshop using structured and unstructured mesh methods[C]. 28th AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference, AIAA 2010-4222, June 2010.

YAMAMOTO K, TANAKA K, MURAYAMA M. Effect of a nonlinear constitutive relation for turbulence modeling on predicting flow separation at wing-body juncture of transonic commercial aircraft[C]. 30th AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference, AIAA 2012-2895, June 2012.

KEYE S, TOGITI V, EISFELD B, et al. Investigation of fluid-structure-coupling and turbulence model effects on the DLR results of the fifth AIAA CFD drag prediction workshop[C]. 31st AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference, AIAA 2013-2509, June 2013.

EISFELD B. Implementation of Reynolds stress models into the DLR-FLOWer code[R]. Institutsbericht, DLR-IB 124-2004/31, Report of the Institute of Aerodynamics and Flow Technology, Braunschweig, ISSN 1614-7790, 2004.

CECORA R D, EISFELD B, PROBST A, et al. Differential Reynolds stress modeling for aeronautics[J]. AIAA Journal, 2015, 53(3):739-755.

EISFELD B, BRODERSEN O. Advanced turbulence modeling and stress analysis for the DLR-F6 configuration[C]. 23rd AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference, AIAA 2005-4727, June 2005.

WILCOX D C. Turbulence modeling for CFD[M]. 3rd ed., DCW Industries, Inc., 2006.

LEE-RAUSCH E M, RUMSEY C L, EISFELD B. Application of a full Reynolds stress model to high lift flows[C]. 46th AIAA Fluid Dynamics Conference. AIAA 2016-3944, June 2016.

RUMSEY C L. Application of Reynolds stress models to separated aerodynamic flows[M]. Differential Reynolds Stress Modeling for Separating Flows in Industrial Aerodynamics. Springer International Publishing, 2015: 19-37.

DUDEK J, CARLSON J R. Evaluation of full Reynolds stress turbulence models in Fun3D[C]. AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting. 2017.

SLOTNICK J, KHODADOUST A, ALONSO J, et al. CFD vision 2030 study: a path to revolutionary computational aerosciences[R]. NASA CR-2014-218178, 2014.

TOGITI V K. EISFELD B. Assessment of g-equation formulation for a second-moment Reynolds stress turbulence model (Invited)[C]. 22nd AIAA Computational Fluid Dynamics Conference, AIAA 2015-2925, June 2015.

NIE S Y, KRIEMMELBEIN N, KRUMBEIN A, et al. Coupling of a Reynolds stress model with the γ -Re θt transition model[J ] . AIAA Journal, 2018, 56(1):146-157.

NIE S Y, KRIMMELBEIN N, KRUMBEIN A, et al. Extension of a Reynolds-stress-based transition transport model for crossflow transition[J]. Journal of Aircraft, 2018, 55)(4):1641-1654.

NIE S Y, GAO Z H, HUANG J T. Application of EARSM and DRSM in subsonic vortex flow[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Mechanics, 2011, 28(6):602-607.(in Chinese)

NIE S Y, GAO Z H, HUANG J T. Differential Reynolds stress model for shock separated flow[J]. Acta Aerodynamica Sinica, 2012, 30(1):52-56. (in Chinese)

DONG Y D, WANG D F, WANG G X, et al. Preliminary application of Reynbolds stress model[J]. Journal of National University of Defense Technology, 2016, 38(4):46-53. (in Chinese)

WANG N H, CHANG X H, ZHAO Z, et al. Aerodynamic performance prediction and credibility study of the transport model CHN-T1 based on HyperFLOW solver[J]. Acta Aerodynamica Sinica, 2019, 37(2):301-309. (in Chinese)

ZHANG Y B, TANG J, CHEN J T, et al. Aerodynamic characteristics prediction of CHN-T1 standard model with unstructured grid[J]. Acta Aerodynamica Sinica, 2019, 37(2):262-271. (in Chinese)

LI W, WANG Y T, HONG J W, et al. Aerodynamic characteristics simulation of CHN-T1 model with TRIP3.0[J]. Acta Aerodynamica Sinica, 2019, 37(2):272-279. (in Chinese)

浏览量

下载量

CSCD

文章被引用时，请邮件提醒。

提交

工具集

关联资源

热防护材料动态烧蚀形貌结构光视觉测量技术

基于神经网络与遗传算法的热气防冰结构优化

交错型CPR方法的保正实现策略及其对比研究

水滴撞击运动超疏水表面特性及其调控

类HyTRV升力体阻尼/交叉动导数特性分析

基于S-A与SSG/LRR-ω两种湍流模型的CHN-T1标模计算与分析

Numerical inverstigation and discussion on CHN-T1 benchmark model using Spalart-Allmaras model and SSG/LRR-ω model

DOI：10.7638/kqdlxxb-2018.0207

摘要

Abstract

关键词

Keywords

references