(Created blank page) |
m (Move page script moved page Hamadache et al 1970a to Hamadache et al 2022a) |
||
| (4 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==Summary== | ||
| + | In this paper, academic and industrial test cases have been conducted in order to validate the approach of using a Penalized Direct Forcing method coupled with an immersed turbulent wall model. Good results are obtained compared to a body fitted mesh with the Werner & Wengle wall model. In a shortcoming second step, we can project the coupling between the immersed wall law and a K-epsilon model, as well as obstacle shape optimization during the flow computation. | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Abstract == | ||
| + | <pdf>Media:Draft_Sanchez Pinedo_4053400301605_abstract.pdf</pdf> | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Full Paper == | ||
| + | <pdf>Media:Draft_Sanchez Pinedo_4053400301605_paper.pdf</pdf> | ||
Latest revision as of 16:06, 25 November 2022
Summary
In this paper, academic and industrial test cases have been conducted in order to validate the approach of using a Penalized Direct Forcing method coupled with an immersed turbulent wall model. Good results are obtained compared to a body fitted mesh with the Werner & Wengle wall model. In a shortcoming second step, we can project the coupling between the immersed wall law and a K-epsilon model, as well as obstacle shape optimization during the flow computation.
Abstract
Full Paper
Back to Top
GET PDF
Document information
Published on 24/11/22
Accepted on 24/11/22
Submitted on 24/11/22
Volume Science Computing, 2022
DOI: 10.23967/eccomas.2022.218
Licence: CC BY-NC-SA license
Share this document
claim authorship
Are you one of the authors of this document?