Reynolds stresses turbulent-viscosity model

The Reynolds stress model requires the solution of transport equations for each of the Reynolds stress components as well as for dissipation transport without the necessity to calculate an isotropic turbulent viscosity field. The Reynolds stress turbulence model yield an accurate prediction on swirl flow pattern, axial velocity, tangential velocity and pressure drop on cyclone simulation [7,6,13,10],... 

These contain what is known as Reynolds stress R as an additional term describing turbulence. To complete the system of equations, Reynolds stress is usually determined by an heuristic turbulence model. To do so, FLUENT provides one-equation models (Sparlat-Allmaras), two-equation models k—e model, k—a> model), and the closure approaches k—kl—a> transition model, SST transition model, v —f model, and the Reynolds stress model (RSM) [32, 36]. A two-equation model widely used in practice is the standard k—e model, which is a turbulence viscosity model and represents a good compromise between accuracy and computational cost The flow turbulence is described here by the turbulent kinetic energy k and its degree of dissipation e. In accordance with Eq. (25.1), these two variables are determined using two additional conservation equations. 

In the RANS-approach, turbulence or turbulent momentum transport models are required to calculate the Reynolds-stresses. This can be done starting from additional transport equations, the so-called Reynolds-stress models. Alternatively, the Reynolds-stresses can be modeled in terms of the mean values of the variables and the turbulent kinetic energy, the so-called turbulent viscosity based models. In either way, the turbulence dissipation rate has to be calculated also, as it contains essential information on the overall decay time of the velocity fluctuations. In what follows, the more popular models based on the turbulent viscosity are focused on. A detailed description of the Reynolds-stress models is given in Annex 12.5.l.A which can be downloaded from the Wiley web-page. 

Turbulent viscosity model in which a postulate is applied to simply the Reynolds stress Eq. (1.5) ... 

Reynolds Stress Models. Eddy viscosity is a useful concept from a computational perspective, but it has questionable physical basis. Models employing eddy viscosity assume that the turbulence is isotropic, ie, u u = u u = and u[ u = u u = u[ = 0. Another limitation is that the... 

Closure Models Many closure models have been proposed. A few of the more important ones are introduced here. Many employ the Boussinesq approximation, simphfied here for incompressible flow, which treats the Reynolds stresses as analogous to viscous stresses, introducing a scalar quantity called the turbulent or eddy viscosity... 

Turbulence modeling capability (range of models). Eddy viscosity k-1, k-e, and Reynolds stress. k-e and Algebraic stress. Reynolds stress and renormalization group theory (RNG) V. 4.2 k-e. low Reynolds No.. Algebraic stress. Reynolds stress and Reynolds flux. k- Mixing length (user subroutine) and k-e. 

More advanced models, for example the algebraic stress model (ASM) and the Reynolds stress model (RSM), are not based on the eddy-viscosity concept and can thus account for anisotropic turbulence thereby giving still better predictions of flows. In addition to the transport equations, however, the algebraic equations for the Reynolds stress tensor also have to be solved. These models are therefore computationally far more complex than simple closure models (Kuipers and van Swaaij, 1997). 

Ekambra etal. [21] compared the results from ID, 2D, and 3D simulations of a bubble column with experimental results. They obtained similar results for holdup and axial velocity, while eddy viscosity, Reynolds stresses, and energy dissipation were very different in the three simulations as shown in Figure 15.7. This example also illustrates the importance of selecting the right variables for model vahdation. A 2D model will yield good results for velocity but will predict all variables based on turbulent characteristics poorly. 

The Reynolds-averaged approach is widely used for engineering calculations, and typically includes models such as Spalart-Allmaras, k-e and its variants, k-co, and the Reynolds stress model (RSM). The Boussinesq hypothesis, which assumes pt to be an isotropic scalar quantity, is used in the Spalart-Allmaras model, the k-s models, and the k-co models. The advantage of this approach is the relatively low computational cost associated with the computation of the turbulent viscosity, fit. For the Spalart-Allmaras model, one additional transport equation representing turbulent viscosity is solved. In the case of the k-e and k-co models, two additional transport equations for the turbulence kinetic energy, k, and either the turbulence dissipation rate, s, or the specific dissipation rate, co, are solved, and pt is computed as a function of k and either e or co. Alternatively, in the RSM approach, transport equations can be solved for each of the terms in the Reynolds stress tensor. An additional scale-determining equation (usually for s) is also required. This means that seven additional transport equations must be solved in 3D flows. 

RANS turbulence models are the workhorse of CFD applications for complex flow geometries. Moreover, due to the relatively high cost of LES, this situation is not expected to change in the near future. For turbulent reacting flows, the additional cost of dealing with complex chemistry will extend the life of RANS models even further. For this reason, the chemical-source-term closures discussed in Chapter 5 have all been formulated with RANS turbulence models in mind. The focus of this section will thus be on RANS turbulence models based on the turbulent viscosity hypothesis and on second-order models for the Reynolds stresses. 

In order to use this equation for CFD simulations, the unclosed term involving the Reynolds stresses ((u, u j)) must be modeled. Turbulent-viscosity-based models rely on the following... 

The last term on the right-hand side is unclosed and represents scalar transport due to velocity fluctuations. The turbulent scalar flux ( , varies on length scales on the order of the turbulence integral scales Lu, and hence is independent of molecular properties (i.e., v and T).17 In a CFD calculation, this implies that the grid size needed to resolve (4.70) must be proportional to the integral scale, and not the Batchelor scale as required in DNS. In this section, we look at two types of models for the scalar flux. The first is an extension of turbulent-viscosity-based models to describe the scalar field, while the second is a second-order model that is used in conjunction with Reynolds-stress models. 

Authors efforts in this part of the work have been concentrated on developing turbulence closures for the statistical description of two-phase turbulent flows. The primary emphasis is on development of models which are more rigorous, but can be more easily employed. The main subjects of the modeling are the Reynolds stresses (in both phases), the cross-correlation between the velocities of the two phases, and the turbulent fluxes of the void fraction. Transport of an incompressible fluid (the carrier gas) laden with monosize particles (the dispersed phase) is considered. The Stokes drag relation is used for phase interactions and there is no mass transfer between the two phases. The particle-particle interactions are neglected the dispersed phase viscosity and pressure do not appear in the particle momentum equation. 

For nonisotropic turbulent flows such as strong swirling flows or buoyant flows, the turbulent viscosity is a tensor instead of a scalar. Therefore, all six components of the Reynolds stress need to be modeled individually. 

All of these models require some form of empirical input information, which implies that they are not general applicable to any type of turbulent flow problem. However, in general it can be stated that the most complex models such as the ASM and RSM models offer the greatest predictive power. Many of the older turbulence models are based on Boussinesq s (1877) eddy-viscosity concept, which assumes that, in analogy with the viscous stresses in laminar flows, the Reynolds stresses are proportional to the gradients of the time-averaged velocity components ... 

Computational experience has revealed that the two-equation models, employing transport equations for the velocity and length scales of the fluctuating motion, often offer the best compromise between width of application and computational economy. There are, however, certain types of flows where the k-e model fails, such as complex swirling flows, and in such situations more advanced turbulence models (ASM or RSM) are required that do not involve the eddy-viscosity concept (Launder, 1991). According to the ASM and the RSM the six components of the Reynolds stress tensor are obtained from a complete set of algebraic equations and a complete set of transport equations. These models are conceptually superior with respect to the older turbulence models such as the k-e model but computationally they are also (much) more involved. 

Turbulent flows with simple closure models (eddy viscosity, mixing length, k-e) or complex closure models (ASM, RSM, RNG) for the Reynolds stresses... 

A large proportion of the models of Reynolds stress use an eddy viscosity hypothesis based on an analogy between molecular and turbulent motions. Accordingly, turbulent eddies are visualized as molecules, colliding and exchanging momentum and obeying laws similar to the kinetic theory of gases. This allows the description of Reynolds stresses ... 

The two-equation models (especially, the k-s model) discussed above have been used to simulate a wide range of complex turbulent flows with adequate accuracy, for many engineering applications. However, the k-s model employs an isotropic description of turbulence and therefore may not be well suited to flows in which the anisotropy of turbulence significantly affects the mean flow. It is possible to encounter a boundary layer flow in which shear stress may vanish where the mean velocity gradient is nonzero and vice versa. This phenomenon cannot be predicted by the turbulent viscosity concept employed by the k-s model. In order to rectify this and some other limitations of eddy viscosity models, several models have been proposed to predict the turbulent or Reynolds stresses directly from their governing equations, without using the eddy viscosity concept. 

Standard k-s The most widely used model, it is robust, economical, and time tested. The Reynolds stresses are not calculated directly, but are modeled in a simplified way by adding a so-called turbulent viscosity to the molecular viscosity. Its main advantages are a rapid, stable calculation, and reasonable results for many flows, especially those with a high Reynolds number. It is not recommended for highly swirling flows, round jets, or flows with strong flow separation... 

The first-order closure models are all based on the Boussinesq hypothesis [19, 20] parameterizing the Reynolds stresses. Therefore, for fully developed turbulent bulk flow, i.e., flows far away from any solid boundaries, the turbulent kinetic energy production term is modeled based on the generalized eddy viscosity hypothesis , defined by (1.380). The modeled fc-equation is... 

---