Research Papers

Adaptation of Phase-Lagged Boundary Conditions to Large Eddy Simulation in Turbomachinery Configurations

[+] Author and Article Information
Gaelle Mouret

CFD Team,
Villaroche 77550, France;
CFD Team,
Toulouse 31100, France
e-mail: gaelle.mouret@cerfacs.fr

Nicolas Gourdain

DAEP Team,
Toulouse 31055, France
e-mail: nicolas.gourdain@isae.fr

Lionel Castillon

DAAP Team,
Meudon 92190, France
e-mail: lionel.castillon@onera.fr

1Corresponding author.

Manuscript received October 8, 2015; final manuscript received November 2, 2015; published online December 29, 2015. Editor: Kenneth C. Hall.

J. Turbomach 138(4), 041003 (Dec 29, 2015) (11 pages) Paper No: TURBO-15-1222; doi: 10.1115/1.4032044 History: Received October 08, 2015; Revised November 02, 2015

With the increase in computing power, large eddy simulation (LES) emerges as a promising technique to improve both knowledge of complex physics and reliability of turbomachinery flow predictions. However, these simulations are very expensive for industrial applications, especially when a 360deg configuration should be considered. The objective of this paper is thus to adapt the well-known phase-lagged conditions to the LES approach by replacing the traditional Fourier series decomposition (FSD) with a compression method that does not make any assumptions on the spectrum of the flow. Several methods are reviewed, and the proper orthogonal decomposition (POD) is retained. This new method is first validated on a flow around a circular cylinder with rotating downstream blocks. The results show significant improvements with respect to the FSD. It is then applied to unsteady Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes (URANS) simulations of a single-stage compressor in 2.5D and 3D as a first validation step toward single-passage LES of turbomachinery configuration.

Copyright © 2016 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


Hah, C. , 2009, “ Large Eddy Simulation of Transonic Flow Field in NASA Rotor 37,” 47th Aerospace Sciences Meeting, Orlando, FL, Jan. 5–8, Report No. NASA/TM–2009-215627.
McMullan, W. , and Page, G. , 2012, “ Towards Large Eddy Simulation of Gas Turbine Compressors,” Prog. Aerosp. Sci., 52, pp. 30–47. [CrossRef]
You, D. , Wang, M. , Moin, P. , and Mittal, R. , 2007, “ Large-Eddy Simulation Analysis of Mechanisms for Viscous Losses in a Turbomachinery Tip-Clearance Flow,” J. Fluid Mech., 586, pp. 177–204. [CrossRef]
Duchaine, F. , Corpron, A. , Moureau, V. , Nicoud, F. , and Poinsot, T. , 2009, “ Development and Assessment of a Coupled Strategy for Conjugate Heat Transfer With Large Eddy Simulation. Application to a Cooled Turbine Blade,” Int. J. Heat Fluid Flow, 30(6), pp. 1129–1141. [CrossRef]
Gourdain, N. , Gicquel, L. , and Collado, E. , 2012, “ Comparison of RANS Simulation and LES for the Prediction of Heat Transfer in a Highly Loaded Turbine Guide Vane,” J. Propul. Power, 28(2), pp. 423–433. [CrossRef]
Greschner, B. , and Thiele, F. , 2011. “ Wall Modeled LES Simulation of Rotor-Stator-Cascade Broadband Noise,” AIAA Paper No. 2011-2873.
Gourdain, N. , Sicot, F. , Duchaine, F. , and Gicquel, L. , 2014, “ Large Eddy Simulation of Flows in Industrial Compressors: A Path From 2015 to 2035,” Philos. Trans. R. Soc. A., 372(2022), p. 20130323. [CrossRef]
Erdos, J. , and Alzner, E. , 1977, “ Computation of Unsteady Transonic Flows Through Rotating and Stationary Cascades. I—Method of Analysis,” NASA Lewis Research Center, Cleveland, OH, NASA Technical Report No. NASA-CR-2900.
Gerolymos, G. , and Chapin, V. , 1991, “ Generalized Expression of Chorochronic Periodicity in Turbomachinery Blade-Row Interaction,” Rech. Aérosp., 1991(5), pp. 69–73.
Gerolymos, G. , Michon, G. , and Neubauer, J. , 2002, “ Analysis and Application of Chorochronic Periodicity in Turbomachinery Rotor/Stator Interaction Computations,” J. Propul. Power, 18(6), pp. 1139–1152. [CrossRef]
Giles, M. B. , 1988, “ Calculation of Unsteady Wake/Rotor Interaction,” J. Propul. Power, 4(4), pp. 356–362. [CrossRef]
He, L. , 1989, “ An Euler Solution for Unsteady Flows Around Oscillating Blades,” ASME Paper No. 89-GT-279.
Cambier, L. , Heib, S. , and Plot, S. , 2013, “ The ONERA elsA CFD Software: Input From Research and Feedback From Industry,” Mech. Ind., 14(3), pp. 159–174. [CrossRef]
Jameson, A. , Schmidt, W. , and Turkel, E. , 1981, “ Numerical Solutions of the Euler Equations by Finite Volume Methods Using Runge–Kutta Time Stepping Schemes,” AIAA Paper No. 81-1259.
Spalart, P. R. , and Allmaras, S. R. , 1992, “ A One-Equation Turbulence Model for Aerodynamic Flows,” AIAA Paper No. 92-0439.
Nicoud, F. , and Ducros, F. , 1999, “ Subgrid-Scale Stress Modelling Based on the Square of the Velocity Gradient,” Flow, Turbul. Combust., 62(3), pp. 183–200. [CrossRef]
Im, H.-S. , and Zha, G.-C. , 2013, “ Prediction of a Transonic Rotor Fluid/Structure Interaction With a Traveling Wave Using a Phase-Lag Boundary Condition,” AIAA Paper No. 2013-0422.
Salvadori, S. , Martelli, F. , and Adami, P. , 2010, “ Development of a Phase Lag Approach for the Numerical Evaluation of Unsteady Flows,” Tenth International Congress of Fluid Dynamics (ICFD), Ain Soukhna, Red Sea, Egypt, Dec. 16–19, Paper No. EG-3702.
Daubechies, I. , 1992, Ten Lectures on Wavelet (CBMS-NSF Regional Conference Series in Applied Mathematics), Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia, PA.
Lumley, J. , 1967, “ The Structure of Inhomogeneous Turbulent Flows,” Atmospheric Turbulence and Radio Wave Propagation, A. Iaglom and V. Tatarski , eds., Nauka, Moscow, pp. 221–227.
Andrews, C. , Davies, J. , and Schwarz, G. , 1967, “ Adaptive Data Compression,” Proc. IEEE, 55(3), pp. 267–277. [CrossRef]
Brand, M. , 2006, “ Fast Low-Rank Modifications of the Thin Singular Value Decomposition,” Linear Algebra Appl., 415(1), pp. 20–30. [CrossRef]
Braconnier, T. , Ferrier, M. , Jouhaud, J.-C. , Montagnac, M. , and Sagaut, P. , 2011, “ Towards and Adaptive POD/SVD Surrogate Model for Aeronautic Design,” Comput. Fluids, 40(1), pp. 195–209. [CrossRef]
Faure, T. , Michon, G.-J. , Miton, H. , and Vassilieff, N. , 2001, “ Laser Doppler Anemometry Measurement in an Axial Compressor Stage,” J. Propul. Power, 17(3), pp. 481–491. [CrossRef]
Fourmaux, A. , 1994, “ Assessment of a Low Storage Technique for Multistage Turbomachinery Navier Stokes Computations,” ASME Winter Annual Meeting, Chicago, Nov. 6–11.
Gourdain, N. , 2013, “ Validation of Large Eddy Simulation for the Prediction of Compressible Flow in an Axial Compressor Stages,” ASME Paper No. GT2013-94550.


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Compression with the POD of a square wave. Signal and its PSD for (a) and (b) 50, (c) and (d) 100, (e) and (f) 200, and (g) and (h) 270 modes kept over 300.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Configurations of the two simulations and position of the probe: (a) sliding no-match and (b) phase-lagged

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

PSD of velocity fluctuation of an LES simulation around a cylinder for sliding no-match and phase-lagged simulations. The gray lines correspond to the BPF and its first 32 harmonics. VS stands for vortex shedding.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

TKE at the rotor–stator interface for (a) sliding no-match and (b) phase-lagged simulations

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Influence of the compression algorithms on an axial velocity signal: (a) temporal signal and Fourier transforms of signals with (b) no compression, (c) DFT, (d) DCT, (e) DWT, and (f) POD

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Evolution of the compression rate of the relative error of (a) the mean and (b) the standard deviation of a signal caused by it is compression–decompression by FSD and POD

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Reconstructed sector of 2π/10 obtained with POD-based phase-lagged conditions with (a) 2, (b) 3, (c) 5, and (d) 7 modes, (e) with FSD-based phase-lagged conditions, and (f) for sector simulation. Shaded with entropy.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

(a) Static pressure and (b) axial velocity in stator passage for sector, Fourier-based, and POD-based phase-lagged conditions at nominal operating conditions

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Axial velocity signals in stator passage for POD-based phase-lagged conditions with different numbers of modes kept at nominal operating conditions

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Operating line for sector, POD with one mode kept, and converged POD- and FSD-based simulations

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

(a) Static pressure and (b) axial velocity in stator passage for sector and Fourier-based and POD-based phase-lagged conditions for a normalized mass flow rate of 0.74

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Entropy snapshot: (a) and (b) near hub, (c) and (d) at midspan, and (e) and (f) near casing for Fourier-based (left) and POD-based (right) phase-lagged simulation of the 3D case

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Axial velocity (a) at midspan and (b) near casing for sector and phase-lagged computations




Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In