See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/286216890

Computational fluid dynamic; Wall functions for turbulence industries

Article · January 2010

CITATIONS READS

0 465

2 authors, including:

I Gede Adi Susila

Udayana University
11 PUBLICATIONS   7 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

I Gede Adi Susila View project

Jimmy Tan View project

All content following this page was uploaded by I Gede Adi Susila on 01 July 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 ∗
CFD: Modified Robin-type wall functions for turbulence industries

Adi Susila G.†, Utyuzhnikov S.V.‡

University of Manchester, Manchester M60 1QD, UK

Dec , 2010

Abstract
CFD is the systematic analysis of computer based simulation to determine dynamic fluid flow, heat
transfer and other fluid properties. Airbus researchers have found that commercial airliners commonly
encounter physical problems with friction drag, 40% of which are caused by a turbulent boundary layer,
which is a thin layer of air located just above the skin of a wing/airfoil and body of an aircraft. Drag
habitually happens in various instances of fluid flow. It is sometime necessary; however, the disturbance
caused by this friction should be optimized for the use of industrial requirement. This has resulted in
constant challenge to find appropriate solutions to reduce and ultimately eliminate this effect altogether.
This challenge promotes the need for extra emphasize on the importance of further boundaries to
treat the near the wall areas in fluid mechanics. Studies on wall functions (mathematical profile) for
turbulence modelling has been carried out and improved. Channel flow test case has been tested for
turbulent flow model. To accomplish this, the finite difference method along with the computational
code-simulation was implemented. For a fully developed turbulent channel flow, Cabot Moin’s turbulent
viscosity was used, characterized by Low & High Reynolds numbers, Ret = 395 up to 10950, respectively.

Keywords: CFD, Finite Difference Method, Robin type Wall Function, Turbulent Viscosity.

1 Introduction
Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) is one of major strides for turbulent fluid currently under inves-
tigation. It is a very powerful technique encompassing a wide range of industrial and non-industrial
areas of application. In the engineering area, for example, it covers aerodynamics of aircraft and vehi-
cles, hydrodynamics of ships, power plant and turbo-machinery, electrical/electronic application, chemical
process, biomedical, external/internal environment building, marine and environment, including hydrol-
ogy/oceanography, meteorology as shown in figure 1 and many other fluid flow field.
Turbulence occurs in various aspects provided there is a flow of energy distribution, such as in the turbulent
layer of an aircraft wing, combustion processes in jet streams, chemical reactions within gas or liquid mixed,
etc [1]. Richard E. Klabune of cardiovascular physiology has pointed out that in the operation of human
body, turbulence can be seen in both large and narrow (stenotic) arteries at branch points, in the arteries
disease. Reduced arteries flow area due to the disease will leads unbalance flow pressure along the arteries
couses unstable blood pressure.
For years studies have been conducted on the friction drag by a boundary wall. Related approaches have also
been developed to suit each unique physical surface, while several analytical solutions have been generated
to eliminate such drag on the surface/skin. However, turbulence model problems still exist. The main
hitches are the flow problem near by the wall, i.e the thin viscous layer and the thin near-wall viscosity
affected by the sub-layer which is predominantly due to affected by molecular diffusion. Figures 23 are
illustrated sample cases for pressure distribution (load coefficient).
CFD consists of pre-processor, solver and post-processor which are mostly the numerical algorithms. The
accuracy of the solutions will depend on the design of number of cells in the grid to simulate flow problems
such as velocity, pressure, temperature, etc. The numerical simulations used to review turbulent flow are
then listed in three ways through which the phenomenon is predicted. They are:
∗ An preliminary study of CFD for Large Edy Simulation
† (PhD program) - Univesity of Udayana, Bali, Indonesia,
‡ (Former supervisor) - Mechanical. Aerospace & Civil Engineering School, Univesity of Manchester, UK,

1
2 LATEX- iGede

Figure 1: Schematic fluid flow of the 3D model of aircraft wing, efflux smoke (chimney) and wind pressure
around the building.[10]

1. RANS (Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes): Under RANS, average or even small scales only are
modelled. This approach is averaged to all the unsteadiness of the non-linear Navier-Stokes equations.
This gave rise to the Reynolds stress term within the equations which is the lowest in term of cost
and time consumed.

2. LES (Large Eddy Simulation) Under this approach the largest scale of motions is explicitly presented
while the small scales are modelled. This is regarded as the middle ground between the DNS and
RANS in term of cost and time.

3. DNS (Direct Numerical Simulation) This approach employs techniques in which all scales of turbulent
flow motions are computed from large contained energy (integral scales) to the dissipative scales
(viscous or Kormogorof scales) [3].

Figure 2: Turbulent flow (LES) resulted pressure coefficient (Cp) on Cooling tower model and Dynamic
Pressure distribution on sphere model using CFD (Fluent) [9]

The result of LES was compared with those turbulent models based on RANS and experimental work shown
in figure 23
The problem near by the wall is still highlighted as the thin viscous layer close to the wall is crucially
important, which often causes the turbulent layer located away from it to be significantly affected. Numerical
studies were revisited to investigate the pattern of this thin layer using wall function (mathematical profile).
Previous wall functions [12] were modified using Cabot Moins turbulent viscosity profile in order to find more
robust solutions close to the wall phenomenon. This kind of a logarithmic profile is needed to change the
piecewise profile to match with the benchmark profile, i.e Reichardt profile. The finite differential method
was also used to simulate the mathematical problems along with the computational code as the way CFD
works. Channel flow cases were then carried out to check if the modified wall function solution is working
properly or not.
LATEX- iGede 3

Figure 3: (Top) Plan view: pressure coefficients for y/d = hemisphere [8] (1966), (Left) Plan view of
pressure coefficient contour y/d=h/D=1/2 [9] & (Right) Mean pressure coefficient LES result on a sphere
[9]

2 Problem Description
There are two broad strategies to resolve those problems, namely:

1. Employing smooth/fine numerical meshes where the viscous influences are involved,
2. Employing wall function by taking into account the overall resistance of the sub-layer (momentum
and heat transfer).

The RANS is particularly chosen to avoid wasting time during the numerical process of turbulent model. The
method assumes a solution under which the vicinity of the wall is replaced by some appropriate boundary
conditions.
Such wall functions are widely used in industrial applications already. The turbulence modelling used was
the eddy/turbulent viscosity on the layer as the major study which tackles the problems described. In this
occasion, turbulent modelling would be prioritized to modify the Robin-type wall function. This type of
boundary method has been modified properly by involving Cabot Moin profile turbulent viscosity to take
into account the near-wall turbulence problem.

2.1 Wall Functions - (WF)

Professor Launder (1960); in Chieng and Launder (1980) undertook the first effort to incorporate dissipation
in the viscous sub-layer into a treatment for wall-function. This earlier attempt refined the conventional ap-
proach of wall function and has ever since become the basic procedure for average generation and dissipation
rates of k over the near wall-cell.
The underlying turbulence energy is used as the developed procedure for averaged generation rate in which
a cell near wall extending to the height of the wall yn , at the following [7]:
Z yn
1 dU
P = uv dy (1)
yn 0 dy
4 LATEX- iGede

In [6], the WF are analytically obtained with constant assumptions on all variables apart from diffusivity.
This analysis has adopted integration of boundary-layer-type equations in the vicinity of a wall. The cell
nearest to the wall can be rebuilt by the near-wall solution using analytical profiles of an effective viscosity.

2.2 Standard WF
In most cases, the WF are semi-empirical and have very limited application [6]. First wall-function is based
on the log-law profile for velocity [4],[1]. The main disadvantage of this wall-function is strong dependence
towards the mesh point closest to the wall where the wall-function is taking place. This has particularly
created a problem if the first mesh point is located in the viscous sub-layer. In order to avoid this problem,
the scalable wall approach and pressure gradient must be taken into account in Gotjans, H. paper in 1998,
[2]. To satisfy the turbulent approach of WF, there is a set of WF by[2] in the inertial sub-layer as follow:
 
1  uτ y 
U = uτ ln +B (2)
K v
or written as
1
U+ = ln Ey +


K
u2 uτ
κ = √ τ∗ ; ω = 1 ; vτ = uτ κy (3)
β (β ∗ ) 2 κy

Figure 4: The law of the wall [1] & result of Robin Type WF combined with Cabot Moin turbulent viscosity
profile at Re=5950 in log law representing high Reynolds number

These WF are regarded as the standard method. In the turbulent boundary layer, the strongest velocity
gradient is found near by the wall. Based on these wall functions for a turbulence model in which coarse
mesh utilized relatively, it is impossible to resolve these near wall gradients[4].

2.3 Transfer of the wall boundary condition (Robin Type WF)

The previous study requires separate WF for both low and high Reynolds number. However, [11] suggested
that the new numerical wall function method can be used in either the high or the low Reynolds number
model directly. This Robin-type boundary condition in a differential form was introduced which transmitted
the boundary implied, i.e. from the intermediate range of boundary to the near wall area.
The WF can be used as an analytical easy-to-implement form which does not necessarily need to be placed
at the first point of nearest location. The method of conveying boundary condition is described in [11]: a
transporting boundary can be either approximate (analytically) or exact (numerically) which is influenced
by the source in governing equations.
Analytical WF are evolved by integrating boundary layer-type equations under some simplicity assumption.
The model equation is written below [12]:
(µuy )y + y n uy = C or Lu ≡ (µuy )y = Rh (y) ; 0 ≤ y ≤ y∗ (4)
LATEX- iGede 5

Defined in a domain Ω = [0, 1], where;

h −y
i2
µt = µl Ky + 1 − e A ; A = 19.0 ; K = 0.41 ; R  1 ; n > 0 (5)

equation 4 described; the first term simulates the dissipative in the Navier-Stokes equations, the second term
is a model of the contribution of convective term and the right hand side represents pressure gradient term
or source in the transport equations. The corresponds to the effective viscosity coefficient. The coefficient
h −y
i2
is rapidly changed from a relatively small value (laminar viscosity) to µt = µl Ky + 1 − e A (turbulent
viscosity, [5]). 1st Integration of equation 4:
du du
µ = Ry + C1 : µ − Ry = τw ; C1 = τw (6)
dy dy
and index w of mean value y=0 (at wall). The 2nd Integration;
Z y Z y
dξ ξ
uy = u0 + τw + Rh dξ (7)
0 µ 0 µ

Considering equation 6 & 7

 Z y Z y
du dξ ξ
uy = u0 + µ − Rh + Rh dξ ; 0<y
dy 0 µ 0 µ
Block in parenthesis is an intermediate term (y ∗ ).
du ∗ Rh
u∗y = u0 + F1 (y ) − F2 (8)
dy µ( y∗)
y∗ y∗
µ(y∗ ) µ(y∗ ) ∗
Z Z
F1 = dy ; F2 = (y − y) dy (9)
0 µ(y) 0 µ(y)
Implementation of Robin-Type condition from: 1. Finite Difference and 2. Finite Volume. If Rh = Rh (y),
then;
Z y∗ !
du F2
u∗y = u0 + F1 (y ∗ ) − Rh(y) ∗ µ y∗ )
dy 0 y (
Z y∗ Z y∗ R y∗ !
µ(y∗ ) µ(y∗ ) Rh dy
F1 = dy ; F2 = 1 − R0y∗ dy (10)
0 µ ∗
(y ) 0 µ ∗
(y ) Rh dy 0


µw if 0 ≤ y ≤ y
µ= (11)
µw + (µ∗ − µw ) yy−y v
∗ −y if yv ≤ y ≤ y ∗
Intermediate boundary condition at y = y ∗
 R y∗ 
du ∗ τw + 0 Rh dy
(y ) = (12)
dy µ∗
For the use of the high-Reynolds-number RANS model, the intermediate Robin boundary conditions are
introduced. They represent an approximate transfer of the boundary conditions from the wall to the inter-
mediate boundary usually situated outside the viscous sub-layer. The previous Robin-type wall functions
[12] have been modified to take into account the near-wall turbulent viscosity profile more fittingly in viscous
layer as shown in figure 6.
The aim is to change the piecewise linear profile shown into an exponential profile described in the in figure5.
h −y
i2
The turbulent viscosity implementation: [5]; µt = µl Ky + 1 − e A followed by solution:
h −Cy
i2
y 1−e A
µef f = µl + (µ∗ − µl ) h i2 if 0 ≤ y ∗ , [10] (13)
−Cy
y∗ 1 − e A

Effective /efficient viscosity µef f are combined viscosity between turbulent and the laminar (µef f = µ∗t + µl ).
For this study, trade off has also been introduced in which effective viscosity is defined as (µef f = µ∗t + 0.2125µl ).
6 LATEX- iGede

Figure 5: Hypothetic figure of Piecewise linear profile & Exponential Cabot-Moin’s profile

2.4 Turbulent Boundary Layer

To resolve the gradient near the wall, a law should be specified that correlates the outer flow (the velocity
at first grid point) and the shear stress at the wall, when the grid is not fine enough. This allows us to place
the first node at y + ≈ 30 − 200 .
The law of the wall assumes that, for attached flow, the logarithmic portion of the boundary layer behaves
according to:
u∗
u+ ≡ = f y+


(14)
U
The non-dimensional characteristic wall coordinate, y + , is defined by:
yu∗ ρw
y+ = (15)
µw

Where y is the dimensional distance between the wall and the first grid point of the wall, µ is the absolute
viscosity obtained from Sutherlands law, and ρ is the density. The wall friction velocity, µ∗ , thus defined
as:
r
τw
u∗ = ; u∗ = uτ (16)
ρw

The turbulent boundary layer near the wall is characterized by the following quantities in a two dimensional
flow where the x direction is the predominant flow direction, with flow velocity u, and the wall is facing the
y direction. Here,τw is the wall shear stress and the quantity uτ or u∗ is called the friction velocity.

3 Finite Difference Methods: Boundary Value Problem Solver

The understanding of the numerical solution algorithms is crucially important in solving the mathematical
concept. There are three main deciding notions in determining the success of such algorithms concepts, i.e
convergence, consistency & stability. For these three, confirmations are needed in terms of: the property of
numerical methods to produce a clear approach to the exact solution, produced system of algebraic equation
within which the developed numerical scheme is demonstrated as equivalent to the original equation and
associated damping with error as numerical method process.

3.1 Two-equation Model

This model describes the transport of two scalars of kinetic energy (k) and the dissipation  where the
Reynolds tensor-stress computed by using the variable into the velocity gradient and an eddy viscosity. The
value of (k) and come directly from the differential transport equations for turbulence kinetic and turbulence
dissipation rate. The typical transport equation solved for kinetic energy k typically taken as one-equation
model:
  
Dk ∂ µt ∂k
= Pk −  + µ+ (17)
Dt ∂xj σk ∂xj
LATEX- iGede 7

3
The generating rate is given by Pk = −ui vj dU
dxj , while dissipation rate  =
i k2
l and turbulent viscosity
1
µt = cµ k lµ . Both length scales lµ and l are prescribed as increasing in linear with distance from the
2
3
k2
wall. In two-equation model a second variable for  = is solved as the following:
l

2
  
D  ∂ µt ∂
= C1 Pk − C2  + µ+ (18)
Dt k k ∂xj σ ∂xj
−u0 v 0 
cµ = ∂u k 2
; σk = 1.0 ; σ = 1.3 ; cµ = 0.09 ; C1 = 1.44 ; C2 = 1.92 (19)
∂y

Governing equations correspond to the Reynolds averaged Navier-Stokes equations (RANS) closed by the
HRk− (High Reynolds number) model. There are diffusion parallel to the wall, the momentum, enthalpy
and kinetic energy transport equations that can be written in the Cartesian coordinate system (x,y); This
is easy to confirm by the equation 21
 
∂ ∂u
(µuy )y = Rh (y) or µ = Rh (y) (20)
∂y ∂y
   
∂ ∂U ∂U ∂U ∂P ∂ ∂V ∂V ∂V ∂P
(µl + µt ) = ρU + ρV + ; (µl + µt ) = ρU + ρV +
∂y ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂y
    
∂ ∂U ∂U ∂U ∂P ∂ µl µt ∂U ∂U ∂U ∂P
(µl + µt ) = ρU + ρV + ; + = ρU + ρV +
∂y ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y Pr Prt ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂x
    
∂ ∂U ∂T ∂T ∂ µt ∂k ∂k ∂k
(µl + µt ) = ρU + ρV ; µl + = ρU + ρV − Pk + ρ (21)
∂y ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂y Prk ∂y ∂x ∂y
µl and µt are the laminar and turbulent viscosities; Pr ,Prt and Pr k are Prandtl number; U and V are velocity
components in the (x, y) coordinate system; ρ is density and P is the pressure; T is the temperature; k is
the turbulent kinetic energy; Pk is its production; is the dissipation of k.
Upon substitution of U, V, T or k instead of u in equation 21, we obtained Robin type WF for this function.
Rh , from to be evaluated at y = y ∗ by the right-hand side as follows [12]:
   
∂U ∗ ∂U ∗ ∂P ∗ ∂V ∗ ∂V ∗ ∂P ∗
Rh = Rhu ≡ ρ U (y ) + V (y ) + (y ) ; Rh = Rhv ≡ ρ U (y ) + V (y ) + (y )
∂x ∂y ∂x ∂x ∂y ∂x
     2
∂T ∗ ∂T ∗ ∂k ∗ ∂k ∗ ∂U
Rh = Rht ≡ ρ U (y ) + V (y ) ; Rh = Rhk ≡ ρ U (y ) + V (y ) + ρ − µt
∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂y
(22)
By the Convective term evaluation, the following expression for RHS (right hand side) of Rh obtained:
∂U [(µl + µ∗t ) U (y ∗ ) + F2 Rhu ]
(µl + µt ) = + (y − y ∗ )Rhu (23)
∂y F1

0 if 0 ≤ y ≤ yv
µt = (24)
µ∗t yy−y v
∗ −y
v
if yv ≤ y ≤ y ∗

( 3
(k∗ ) 2
(y) = C1 yd if y < yd (25)
µ∗t yy−y v
∗ −y
v
if else

The equation 23, 24 is replaced by introducing equation 13 as the result of replacement the piece-wise
linear with the Cabot Moin’s turbulent viscosity (exponential profile). This approach is effort to improve
prediction turbulent near the wall by using WF combined with the Cabot Moin’s viscosity profile.

3.2 Turbulent Channel Flow

As in the case of the channel flow, the uniform pressure or velocity profile of fluid would come into the
channel, figure 6. As the fluid flow enters the channel, the wall will retract the velocity and development of
a boundary layer will occur. The velocity will turn to zero close/near to the wall due to the appearance of
viscosity resistance along the wall.
8 LATEX- iGede

Figure 6: Test case of Channel Flow with Wall Function implementation (reproduced figure),[2] & Viscous
layer grid illustration near wall

4 Result and Conclusion

The near wall regions of the flow are resolved by coarse mesh and fine mesh spacing with varied time
scale, using numerical methods. In such case, piecewise linear profile (eddy-viscosity) has been changed by
introducing the exponential (Cabot Moin’s - turbulent viscosity) profile.

Figure 7: Comparison of turbulent viscosity profile between piece-wise linear and exponential profile as the
result of simulation [10]

The eddy-viscosity has been modified which a wall damping function is included on Cabot Moin’s profile.
The exponential term was damped turbulent viscosity near the wall region. The result is considerable
improved then the previous profile. Fully developed turbulent motion occurs beyond a distance sufficiently
remote from the wall that a very smooth eddy is not damped by the vicinity to the wall. The distance
that is very close to the wall e.g. y + = 1, gives over prediction of a velocity profile. It is due to turbulent
viscosity profile that cannot fully dumped beyond the viscous sub-layer distance y + < 5. This case is very
sensitive as it means that the turbulent viscosity is not sensitive enough to predict areas very close to the
wall which is fully laminar flow region.
1
The laminar viscosity is dominantly referred to the Re times
h theidistance y + < 5. Automatically, the tur-
−y
bulent viscosity profile which is includes damping factor 1 − e A will predict turbulent viscosity relatively
close to laminar viscosity. Then, it will change rapidly when the distance away from the wall y + > 50. The
turbulent viscosity will be much greater. It will occurs, however, due to the damping function has taken
into account, the velocity profile can be predicted closer to the benchmark (LR). The result of the velocity
profile can be sheen in figures 8 and 9
All the results in the case were generated on Fortran-code to approach stream wise velocity, Reynolds
stress, eddy viscosity, k-epsilon, flow rate, etc. It is expected to result in clear difference between the
previous turbulent viscosity (linear profile) and Cabot Moin’s profile.
The form of the latter profile was relatively more sophisticated since the involvement of the damping factor
LATEX- iGede 9

Figure 8: Velocity Profile Re = 395 and 3950 with Cabot Moin profile [10]

Figure 9: Velocity Profile Re = 5950 and 10950 with Cabot Moin profile [10]

Figure 10: Velocity Profile Re = 395 (exponential ”Cabot Moin’s” profile-updated uτ ) and the trade off
profile model) [10]
10 LATEX- iGede

h −y
i
1 − e A which control is much closer to the log law profile as well as control prediction with regard to
mean velocity fluctuation. The curve produced by the exponential profile is bending at the initial stage
slightly bigger than the linear profile more than yδ =0.15-0.2 (distance of the total region). This was expected
since the assumption to change the linear into the exponential profile was confirmed between figure 5 and
figure7.

Figure 11: Eddy-viscosity distribution in pipe flow according to the measurements of Laufer (circle), Nunner
(box) and turbulent viscosity distribution using the exponential profile [10]

It has concluded that modified Robin-type WF by introducing the Cabot Moin’s/exponential profile has
provided turbulent modelling prediction in considerably with better solution and agreement with the bench-
mark profile (LR) for the velocity profile. The modification has been observed by providing more robust
solution due to the fact that coarse mesh and time scale sensitivity were the main concern for computational
strategy (avoid time consuming). Result for flow rate and strain rate in which the fluid is flew along the
length of the channel flow can be seen in the appendix. Relevant future works: Fluid-structure interaction
(low-rise structure)

Acknowledgments
The author conveys his sincere gratitude to Dr. Sergei Utyuzhnikov as the former supervisor of this paper for
his insightful ideas. I wish to express tremendous appreciation to National Education Council of Republic of
Indonesia and Udayana University Bali, for their financial assistance under the Batch 2 Scholarship DIKTI,
without which this paper would not have been possible.

References
[1] The First Course in Turbulence. MIT Press, 1972.

[2] Turbulence Modeling for CFD. DWC Industries, Inc., 1994.

[3] Simulation and Modeling of Turbulent Flows. Oxford University Press, 1996.

[4] J. Bredberg. On the wall boundary condition for turbulence models. Technical report, Chalmers
University of Technology, Goteborg Sweden, 2000.

[5] . M. P. Cabot, W. Approximate wall boundary conditions in the large-eddy simulation of high reynolds
number flow. Flow Turbulence Combustion, 2000.

[6] A. V. G. e. a. Craft, T. J. Progress in the generalization of wall-function treatments. International

Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow, 2002.

[7] S. E. G. e. a. Craft, T. J. Development and application of wall-function treatments for turbulent forced
and mixed convection flows. Fluid Dynamics Research, 2006.
 LATEX- iGede 11

[8] F. J. Maher. Wind loads on dome-cylinders and dome-cone shapes. Journal of Structural, 1966.
[9] I. G. A. Susila. Predicting pressure distribution on surface of arbitrary geometry from cfd sructural
engineering. Master’s thesis, Civil Engineering Department , Newcastle Upon Tyne, 2001.
[10] I. G. A. Susila. Wall functions for large eddy simulation (les). Technical report, University of Manchester
, UK, 2009.
[11] S. V. Utyuzhnikov. Generalized wall functions and their application for simulation of turbulent flows.
International Journal for Numerical Methods in Fluids, 2005.
[12] S. V. Utyuzhnikov. Robin-type wall functions and their numerical implementation. Applied Numerical
Mathematics, 2008.

Appendix

Figure 12: Eddy-viscosity distribution in pipe flow according to the measurements of Laufer (circle), Nunner
(box) and turbulent viscosity distribution using the exponential profile

View publication stats