000255335 001__ 255335
000255335 005__ 20190812210022.0
000255335 0247_ $$a10.1088/1755-1315/12/1/012070$$2doi
000255335 02470 $$a10.1088/1755-1315/12/1/012070$$2DOI
000255335 037__ $$aCONF
000255335 245__ $$aTurbulence modeling for Francis turbine water passages simulation
000255335 260__ $$c2010$$bInternational Association For Hydraulic Research
000255335 269__ $$a2010
000255335 300__ $$a10
000255335 336__ $$aConference Papers
000255335 490__ $$aFrancis Turbines$$v4A.5
000255335 520__ $$aThe applications of Computational Fluid Dynamics, CFD, to hydraulic machines life require the ability to handle turbulent flows and to take into account the effects of turbulence on the mean flow. Nowadays, Direct Numerical Simulation, DNS, is still not a good candidate for hydraulic machines simulations due to an expensive computational time consuming. Large Eddy Simulation, LES, even, is of the same category of DNS, could be an alternative whereby only the small scale turbulent fluctuations are modeled and the larger scale fluctuations are computed directly. Nevertheless, the Reynolds-Averaged Navier-Stokes, RANS, model have become the widespread standard base for numerous hydraulic machine design procedures. However, for many applications involving wall-bounded flows and attached boundary layers, various hybrid combinations of LES and RANS are being considered, such as Detached Eddy Simulation, DES, whereby the RANS approximation is kept in the regions where the boundary layers are attached to the solid walls. Furthermore, the accuracy of CFD simulations is highly dependent on the grid quality, in terms of grid uniformity in complex configurations. Moreover any successful structured and unstructured CFD codes have to offer a wide range to the variety of classic RANS model to hybrid complex model. The aim of this study is to compare the behavior of turbulent simulations for both structured and unstructured grids topology with two different CFD codes which used the same Francis turbine. Hence, the study is intended to outline the encountered discrepancy for predicting the wake of turbine blades by using either the standard k-ε model, or the standard k-ε model or the SST shear stress model in a steady CFD simulation. Finally, comparisons are made with experimental data from the EPFL Laboratory for Hydraulic Machines reduced scale model measurements.
000255335 542__ $$fCC BY
000255335 700__ $$aMaruzewski, P
000255335 700__ $$aHayashi, H
000255335 700__ $$aMunch, C
000255335 700__ $$aYamaishi, K
000255335 700__ $$aHashii, T
000255335 700__ $$aMombelli, H P
000255335 700__ $$aSugow, Y
000255335 700__ $$aAvellan, F
000255335 7112_ $$dSeptember 20-24, 2010$$cTimişoara, Romania$$a25th Symposium on Hydraulic Machinery and Systems
000255335 773__ $$q1-10$$j1$$tProceedings of the 25th Symposium on Hydraulic Machinery and Systems
000255335 8560_ $$femilie.reynaud@epfl.ch
000255335 8564_ $$uhttps://infoscience.epfl.ch/record/255335/files/Turbulence%20modeling%20for%20Francis%20turbine%20water%20passages%20simulation.pdf$$s1233407
000255335 8564_ $$xpdfa$$uhttps://infoscience.epfl.ch/record/255335/files/Turbulence%20modeling%20for%20Francis%20turbine%20water%20passages%20simulation.pdf?subformat=pdfa$$s1906002
000255335 909C0 $$xU10309$$pLMH$$mfrancois.avellan@epfl.ch$$0252135
000255335 909CO $$qGLOBAL_SET$$pconf$$pSTI$$ooai:infoscience.epfl.ch:255335
000255335 960__ $$aemilie.reynaud@epfl.ch
000255335 961__ $$alaurence.gauvin@epfl.ch
000255335 973__ $$aEPFL$$rREVIEWED
000255335 980__ $$aCONF
000255335 981__ $$aoverwrite