 |
Langley Research CenterTurbulence Modeling Resource |
Jump to: SA Results,
SA-RC Results,
SSTm Results,
SST-2003m Results,
SST-RCm Results,
SSG/LRR-RSM-w2012 Results,
Wilcox2006-klim-m Results
K-kL-MEAH2015m Results
Return to: Axisymmetric Transonic Bump Validation Intro Page Return to: Turbulence Modeling Resource Home Page Axisymmetric Transonic Bump
Validation Case
BSLm Model Results
Link to BSLm equations
Previously on this page the results were reported as BSL solutions, but more properly they should be referred
to as BSLm. Essentially no difference is expected.
Note that thorough
grid studies were not performed for validation cases such as this one.
Some effort was made to ensure reasonable grid resolutions, but there may still be
small noticeable discretization errors. Therefore, these validation results shown should be considered
representative, but not "truth."
The plots compare the BSLm results from
CFL3D and FUN3D with experimental data.
The CFD codes predict the flow separation to occur at x/c = 0.69 and the reattachment at x/c = 1.07
(in experiment these were 0.7 and 1.1, respectively). Both codes used
freestream turbulence intensity=0.0089% and freestream turbulent viscosity (relative to laminar)=0.009
(additional details can be found in the CFL3D User's Manual, Appendix H).
Please read note 5 on Notes on running CFD page.
These results are from the second-finest grid (721x321).
The data files from CFL3D are given here:
axibump_cfl3d_cp_bsl.dat,
axibump_cfl3d_cf_bsl.dat,
axibump_cfl3d_u_bsl.dat,
axibump_cfl3d_uv_bsl.dat.
(Note: the profiles have been interpolated using Tecplot software onto pre-set points, that may or may
not correspond to the actual grid points or grid cells used in the computation.)
A typical CFL3D input file is:
axibump_cfl3d_typical_bsl.inp.
A typical FUN3D input file is:
fun3d.nml_typical_bsl_2.
As for other two-equation model cases posted on the TMR website, the
Note that this model is currently assigned
MRR Level 2 for the purposes of this website.
This is because at this time the TMBWG has results for this model
from two different codes from the same home organization.
The results on this page are therefore not necessarily
reliable until additional independent code(s) can be used to verify the model implementation.
In this case CFL3D
was run on a version of the 3-D grid that was centered around the x-z plane, rather
than on the posted grid that has one plane aligned with the x-z
plane (1 deg. still separated the two planes).
Jump to: SA Results,
SA-RC Results,
SSTm Results,
SST-2003m Results,
SST-RCm Results,
SSG/LRR-RSM-w2012 Results,
Wilcox2006-klim-m Results
K-kL-MEAH2015m Results
Return to: Axisymmetric Transonic Bump Validation Intro Page Return to: Turbulence Modeling Resource Home Page
Recent significant updates: Responsible NASA Official:
Ethan Vogel
term in the turbulence production was ignored (often the default for codes whose predominant applications are low-speed
or transonic cases; see notes 4 and 7 on the Notes on Running the Cases with CFD page).
This approximation makes only a very small difference in results for this case, as demonstrated in the plots below.
01/28/2019 - mentioned that CFL3D version of grid is centered about x-z plane
02/23/2018 - added effects of including k term in turbulence production
01/13/2016 - added link to SA-RC results
02/19/2015 - added Cf, plus minor update to all CFL3D data files
Page Curator:
Clark Pederson
Last Updated: 03/06/2025