Computational Fluid Dynamics

Past, Present and Future

Prof. Antony Jameson

Department of Aeronautics & Astronautics
– Aerospace Computing Laboratory –
Stanford University
[email protected]

SciTech 2015
January 7, 2015

1
Outline
I. The History of CFD V.Overview of Numerical Methods
• Van Leer’s View • Typical Requirements of CFD
• Emergence of CFD • A Review of the Literature
• Multi-disciplinary Nature of CFD • DG and related Discontinuous Finite
• Hierarchy of Governing Equations Element methods
• 50 Years of CFD VI. Research on the FR Methodology
• Advances in Computer Power • ESFR
II. Author’s Experience • OFR
• CFD Code Development • Shock detection
• FLO and SYN Codes • Non-linear stabilization via Filtering
• Wing Optimization Using SYN107 VII. Applications
III.Usage of CFD • Transitional Flow over SD7003 Airfoil
• Boeing’s Experience • Study of Flapping Wing Sections
• Airbus’s Experience • Flapping Wing Aerodynamics
IV. Current & Future Trends • Flow Over Spheres
• The Current Status of CFD VIII. LES Computations
• The Future of CFD (?) • Taylor-Green Vortex
• Large-Eddy Simulation • Flow past a Square Cylinder
IX.Summary and Conclusions

2 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

Context

“When I die and go to Heaven there are two matters

on which I hope enlightenment. One is quantum
electrodynamics and the other is turbulence.
About the former, I am really rather optimistic.”

Sources: Wikipedia.org; NASA.gov; Hubblesite.org; et al.; H. Lamb (1932)

3 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

Outline

I. The History of CFD VI. Research on the FR Methodology

• Van Leer’s View VII. Applications
• Emergence of CFD VIII. LES Computations
• Multi-disciplinary Nature of CFD IX. Summary and Conclusions
• Hierarchy of Governing Equations
• 50 Years of CFD
• Advances in Computer Power
II. Author’s Experience
III. Usage of CFD
IV. Current & Future Trends
V. Overview of Numerical Methods

4 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

 The History of CFD

History of CFD in Van Leer’s View

5 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

 The History of CFD

Emergence of CFD
• In 1960 the underlying principles of fluid dynamics and the formulation of the
governing equations (potential flow, Euler, RANS) were well established
• The new element was the emergence of powerful enough computers to make
numerical solution possible – to carry this out required new algorithms
• The emergence of CFD in the 1965–2005 period depended on a combination of
advances in computer power and algorithms.
Some significant developments in the ‘60s:
• birth of commercial jet transport – B707 & DC-8
• intense interest in transonic drag rise phenomena
• lack of analytical treatment of transonic aerodynamics
• birth of supercomputers – CDC6600
Sonic line

Shock wave
M<1 M>1

Boundary layer

DC-8 Transonic Flow CDC6600

6 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

 The History of CFD

Multi-Disciplinary Nature of CFD

7 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

 The History of CFD

Hierarchy of Governing Equations

8 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

 The History of CFD

50 Years of CFD
• 1960–1970: Early Developments
Riemann-based schemes for gas dynamics (Godunov), 2nd-order dissipative schemes for
hyperbolic equations (Lax-Wendroff), efficient explicit methods for Navier-Stokes
(MacCormack), panel method (Hess-Smith)

• 1970–1980: Potential Flow Equations

type-dependent differencing (Murman-Cole), complex characteristics (Garabedian),
rotated difference (Jameson), multigrids (Brandt), complete airplane solution
(Glowinsky)

• 1980–1990: Euler and Navier-Stokes Equations

oscillation control via limiters (Boris-Book), high-order Godunov scheme (van Leer),
flux splitting (Steger-Warming), shock capturing via controlled diffusion (Jameson-
Schmit-Turkel), approximate Riemann solver (Roe), total variation diminishing
(Harten), multigrids (Jameson, Ni), solution of complete airplane (Jameson-Baker-
Weatherill)

• 1990–2000: Aerodynamic Shape Optimization

adjoint based control theory

• 2000–2010: Discontinuous Finite Element Methods

Discontinuous Galerkin, Spectral Difference, Flux Reconstruction, etc.
9 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015
 The History of CFD

Advances in Computer Power

1970 CDC6600 1 Megaflops 106

Cray 1
1980 100 Megaflops 108
Vector Computer
IBM SP2
1994 10 Gigaflops 1010
Parallel Computer
2007 Linux Clusters 100 Teraflops 1014
(affordable) Box Cluster in my house
2007 Four 3 GHz dual core CPUs (24 Gigaflops peak) 2.5 Gigaflops 2.5×109
$10,000
HP Pavilion Quadcore Notebook
2009 1 Gigaflops 109
$1,099
MacBook Pro Quadcore Laptop
2011 2.5 Gigaflops 2.5×109
$2,099

10 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

Outline

I. The History of CFD VIII. LES Computations

II. Author’s Experience IX. Summary and Conclusions
• CFD Code Development
• FLO and SYN Codes
• Wing Optimization Using SYN107
III. Usage of CFD
IV. Current & Future Trends
V. Overview of Numerical Methods
VI. Research on the FR Methodology
VII. Applications

11 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

 Author’s Experience

CFD Code Development

• 1970–1980: Potential Flows
solution of inverse problem by conformal mapping (SYN1), solution of 2D potential
flow by conformal mapping (FLO1), 2D transonic potential flow using rotated difference
scheme (FLO6), first transonic potential flow solution for a swept wing (FLO22), 3D
potential flow in general grid with trilinear isoparametric elements (FLO27), multigrid
solution of 2D transonic potential flow (FLO36)

• 1980–1990: Euler & Navier-Stokes Equations

solution of 3D Euler (FLO57), multigrid solution of 3D Euler (FLO67), multigrid
solution of 2D Euler (FLO82), first solution of Euler equations for a complete aircraf
with tetrahedral meshes (FLOPLANE), cell-vertex and cell-centered schemes for 3D
Navier-Stokes (FLO107)

• 1990–2000: Aerodynamic Shape Optimization

airfoil design via control theory using 2D Euler (SYN83), wing design using 3D Euler
(SYN88), airfoil design using 2D Navier-Stokes (SYN103), wing design using 3D
Navier-Stokes (SYN107), aerodynamic design of complete aircraft with tetrahedral
mesh (SYNPLANE), viscous flow solution on arbitrary polyhedral meshes (FLO3XX)

• 2000–2010: High-order Methods for Navier-Stokes Equations

high-order discontinuous finite element methods for unsteady compressible Navier-
Stokes equations on unstructured meshes (Spectral Difference Method, Energy Stable
Flux Reconstruction Method)
12 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015
 Author’s Experience

Wing Optimization Using SYN107

State of the Art Wing Design

Process in 2 Stages, starting
from Garabedian-Korn Airfoil and
NASA Common Research Model

13 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

Outline

I. The History of CFD IX. Summary and Conclusions

II. Author’s Experience
III. Usage of CFD
• Boeing’s Experience
• Airbus’s Experience
IV. Current & Future Trends
V. Overview of Numerical Methods
VI. Research on the FR Methodology
VII. Applications
VIII. LES Computations

14 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

 Usage of CFD – Boeing's Experience

Impact of CFD on Configuration Lines & Wind Tunnel Testing

15 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

 Usage of CFD – Boeing's Experience

Impact of CFD on B737-300 Program

16 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

 Usage of CFD – Boeing's Experience

Computational Methods at Boeing

TRANAIR:
• Full Potential with directly coupled Boundary Layer
• Cartesian solution adaptive grid
• Drela lag-dissipation turbulence model
• Multi-point design/optimization

Navier-Stokes Codes:
• CFL3D – Structured Multiblock Grid
• TLNS3D – Structured Multiblock Grid, Thin Layer
• OVERFLOW – Overset Grid

N-S Turbulence Models:

• S-A Spalart-Allmaras
• Menter’s k-ω SST

17 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

 Usage of CFD – Boeing's Experience

CFD Contributions to B787

18 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

 Usage of CFD – Airbus' Experience

CFD Development for Aircraft Design

19 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

 Usage of CFD – Airbus' Experience

Block-Structured RANS Capability: FLOWer

20 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

 Usage of CFD – Airbus' Experience

Unstructured RANS Capability: TAU

21 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

 Usage of CFD – Airbus' Experience

Numerical Flow Simulation

22 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

 Usage of CFD – Airbus' Experience

CFD Contribution to A380

23 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

Outline

I. The History of CFD VIII. LES Computations

II. Author’s Experience IX. Summary and Conclusions
III. Usage of CFD
IV. Current & Future Trends
• The Current Status of CFD
• The Future of CFD (?)
• Large-Eddy Simulation
V. Overview of Numerical Methods
VI. Research on the FR Methodology
VII. Applications

24 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

 Current Status & Future Trends

The Current Status of CFD

• Worldwide commercial and government codes are based on

algorithms developed in the ‘80s and ‘90s

• These codes can handle complex geometry but are generally

limited to 2nd order accuracy

• They cannot handle turbulence without modeling

• Unsteady simulations are very expensive, and questions over
accuracy remain

25 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

 Current Status & Future Trends

The Future of CFD (?)

CFD has been on a plateau for the past 15 years

• Representations of current state of the art:

‣ Formula 1 cars
‣ Complete aircrafts
• The majority of current CFD methods are not adequate for vortex
dominated and transitional flows:
‣ Rotorcraft
‣ High-lift systems
‣ Formation flying

26 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

 Current Status & Future Trends

Large-Eddy Simulation

The number of DoF for an LES of turbulent flow over an airfoil scales as
Rec1.8 (resp. Rec0.4) if the inner layer is resolved (resp. modeled)

Rapid advances in computer hardware should make LES feasible

within the foreseeable future for industrial problems at high
Reynolds numbers. To realize this goal requires

• high-order algorithms for unstructured meshes (complex geometries)

• Sub-Grid Scale models applicable to wall bounded flows
• massively parallel implementation

Chapman (1979), AIAA J. 17(12)

27 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

Outline

I. The History of CFD VII. Applications

II. Author’s Experience VIII. LES Computations
III. Usage of CFD IX. Summary and Conclusions
IV. Current & Future Trends
V. Overview of Numerical Methods
• Typical Requirements of CFD
• A Review of the Literature
• Discontinuous Galerkin and related
discontinuous Finite Element methods
VI. Research on the FR Methodology

28 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

 Overview of Numerical Methods

Typical Requirements of CFD

Traditional numerical schemes for engineering problems

are too dissipative and do not provide sufficient
accuracy for LES and DNS

• Accuracy: solution must be right

• Small numerical dissipation: unsteady flow features
• Unstructured grids: complex geometries
• Numerical flux: wave propagation problems
• High resolution capabilities: transitional and turbulent flows
• Efficiency: code parallelism
• ...

29 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

 Overview of Numerical Methods

A Review of the Literature

Past Research on DG Schemes:

• Modern development of DG schemes for hyperbolic conservation laws stems
from the work of Cockburn & Shu [1989a,1989b,1990,1998,2001]

Recent Research:
Attempts to reduce complexity and avoid quadrature:
• Spectral Difference (SD) scheme by Kopriva & Kolias [1996], Liu, Vinokur &
Wang [2006]
• Nodal Discontinuous Galerkin (NDG) scheme by Atkins & Shu [1998],
Hesthaven & Warburton [2007]
• Flux Reconstruction (FR) scheme by Huynh [2007,2009]

Cockburn, et al. (1989). J. Comput. Phys., 84(1); Cockburn, Shu (1989). Math. Comput., 52; Cockburn, et al. (1990). Math.
Comput., 54(190); Cockburn, Shu (1998). J. Comput. Phys., 141; Cockburn, Shu (2001). J. Sci. Comput., 16; Kopriva, Kolias
(1996). J. Comput. Phys., 125(1); Liu, et al. (2006). J. Comput. Phys., 216(2); Atkins, Shu (1998). AIAA J., 36(5); Hesthaven,
Warburton, (Springer Verlag, 2007); Huynh, (2007). AIAA P., 2007-4079; Huynh, (2009) AIAA P., 2009-403

30 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

 Overview of Numerical Methods

DG, NDG, SD, FR

Main Similarities Between Schemes:
• Local discretization with element-wise polynomials
• Inter-element communication achieved through Riemann solver across interfaces

Main Differences Between Schemes:

• Discontinuous Galerkin: weak formulation requires the use of high-order quadrature
rules to find flux discretization
• Nodal DG: discretizes flux in the same way solution is discretized: element-wise
polynomials. Flux and solution points are coincident and located at the Gauss-Lobatto
points
• Spectral Difference: uses differential formulation. Flux is discretized with element-wise
polynomials one order higher than those used to discretize the solution. Solution and
flux points are collocated.
• Flux Reconstruction: uses differential formulation. Flux and solution discretized with
element-wise polynomials of the same order. Correction functions correct the flux and
are polynomials of one order higher. Flux and solution points are coincident. Recovers
previous schemes, hence facilitating analysis and comparison.

31 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

Outline

I. The History of CFD VII. Applications

II. Author’s Experience VIII. LES Computations
III. Usage of CFD IX. Summary and Conclusions
IV. Current & Future Trends
V. Overview of Numerical Methods
VI. Research on the FR Methodology
• Energy stability
• Optimality of dispersion and dissipation
properties
• Shock detection
• Filtering for non-linear stabilization

32 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

 The FR Methodology

Linear Energy Stability

• Energy stability analysis versus Fourier stability analysis

‣ Energy method is more general and rigorous
‣ Energy method enables stability proofs for all orders of accuracy
‣ Energy method applies to non-uniform meshes
‣ Fourier analysis provides more detailed information about the distribution
of dispersive and diffusive errors
‣ Fourier analysis identifies super accuracy for linear problems

• There exists a family of Flux Reconstruction schemes that are

guaranteed to be linearly stable
‣ Parameterized with a constant c
‣ Recover NDG, SD, plus other previously-found energy-stable FR schemes
‣ c changes the scheme, hence dispersion and dissipation properties too

33 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

 The FR Methodology

Optimal Flux Reconstruction (OFR)

Effective wavenumber

OESFR - optimized by varying c

OFR - optimized by modifying
zeros of correction function

Imaginary part of numerical

wavespeed

Asthana et al. (2014). J. Comput. Phys.

34 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

 The FR Methodology

Optimal Flux Reconstruction (OFR)

Advection of a Gaussian
bump, P = 5
- DG, OESFR: 61 elements
- OFR: 45 elements
- c+: 76 elements

OESFR - optimized by varying c

OFR - optimized by modifying
zeros of correction function

Asthana et al. (2014). J. Comput. Phys.

35 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

 The FR Methodology

Shock Detection with the Concentration Method

Based on concentration
method by Gelb, Gates,
and Tadmore. Adapted
to polynomials by
Sheshadri.
Steps:
1. Find polynomial
modal decomposition
(coefficients of Jacobi
or Chebyshev bases)
2. “Enhance”
decomposition via
convolution with Kernel
3. If magnitude of
coefficients is above a
selected threshold, a
discontinuity is present
Sheshadri, (2014) AIAA P., 2014-2688

36 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

 The FR Methodology

Filtering for non-linear stabilization

Dissipation can
stabilize FR
schemes.
Filtering can be
posed as
dissipation.

Local Fourier-
Spectral (LFS)
filters developed Burgers Equation, N = 3, P = 119 Shu-Osher shock-turbulence interaction, N = 56, P = 8
by Asthana et
al. perform
exact
convolution
locally and take
neighboring
information into
account.
Double Mach reflection, N = 56x224, P = 8 Asthana et al., (2014) submitted to JCP

37 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

Outline

I. The History of CFD VIII. LES Computations

II. Author’s Experience IX. Summary and Conclusions
III. Usage of CFD
IV. Current & Future Trends
V. Overview of Numerical Methods
VI. Research on the FR Methodology
VII. Applications
• Transitional Flow over SD7003 Airfoil
• Study of Flapping Wing Sections
• Flapping Wing Aerodynamics
• Flow Over Spheres

38 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

 Applications

Transitional Flow over SD7003 Airfoil

SD scheme, N=4
Freestream Separation Transition Reattach.
Turbulence xsep/c xtr/c xr/c
Radespiel
et al.
0.08% 0.30 0.53 0.64

Ol et al. 0.10% 0.18 0.47 0.58

Galbraith
Visbal
0% 0.23 0.55 0.65
Uranga
et al.
0% 0.23 0.51 0.60
Present
ILES*
0% 0.23 0.53 0.64

Experiments in green

Iso-Q colored by Ma

Re=6×104, AoA=4°, 2.2×107 DoF

*1.7×106 DoF

Castonguay, et al. (2010). AIAA P., 2010-4626; Radespiel, et al. (2007). AIAA J., 45(6); Ol, et al. (2005). AIAA P., 2005-5149;
Galbraith, Visbal (2008). AIAA P., 2008-225; Uranga, et al. (2009). AIAA P., 2009-4131;

39 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

 Applications

Study of Flapping Wing Sections

Experiment (Jones, et al.)

NACA0012, Re=1850, Ma=0.2,

SD, 2D, N=5 on deforming grid St=1.5, ω=2.46, h=0.12c

Jones, et al. (1998). AIAA J., 36(7)

40 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

 Applications

Flapping Wing Aerodynamics

Iso-Entropy colored by Ma Iso-Entropy colored by Ma

Flapping NACA0012, Re=2000, Wing-Body, Re=5000,

SD N=5, 4.7×106 DoF SD N=4, 2.1×107 DoF

Ou, et al. (2011). AIAA P., 2011-1316; Ou, Jameson (2011). AIAA P., 2011-3068

41 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

 Applications

Flow Over Spheres

Mach contours + streamlines Iso-Vorticity colored by Mach

Flow over a spinning sphere, Flow over a sphere,

Re=300, Ma=0.2 Re=10000, Ma=0.2

Ou, et al. (2011). AIAA P., 2011-3668

42 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

Outline

I. The History of CFD VIII. LES Computations

II. Author’s Experience • Taylor-Green Vortex
III. Usage of CFD • Flow past a Square Cylinder
IX. Summary and Conclusions
IV. Current & Future Trends
V. Overview of Numerical Methods
VI. Research on the FR Methodology
VII. Applications

43 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

 LES Computations

Taylor Green Vortex: ReD = 21400

Energy spectra for different FR-
derived schemes, compared to a
spectral method on a 5123 grid,
at t = 9 sec

Dissipation rate over time of FR-

derived SD scheme compared to a
13-point Dispersion-Relation-
Preserving (DRP) Finite
Difference scheme on a 5123 grid.
The number of degrees of
freedom remain constant in the
different schemes. 8th order
scheme becomes unstable because
of aliasing.

Iso-Q colored by velocity magnitude

44 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015
 LES Computations

Flow past a Square Cylinder: ReD = 21400

3

iso-Q colored by velocity

x/D = 1.0

x/D = 1.5

x/D = 2.0

x/D = 2.5

x/D = 3.0
2

y/D
-1

-2

-3
hui/Ub
0 1 2 3 4 5
3

x/D = 1.0

x/D = 1.5

x/D = 2.0

x/D = 2.5

x/D = 3.0
2

y/D
-1

-2

-3
hu0 u0 i/Ub2
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6
3

x/D = 1.0

x/D = 1.5

x/D = 2.0

x/D = 2.5

x/D = 3.0
2

y/D
-1

-2

-3
hu0 v 0 i/Ub2
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8

45 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

Outline

I. The History of CFD VIII. LES Computations

II. Author’s Experience IX. Summary and Conclusions
III. Usage of CFD
IV. Current & Future Trends
V. Overview of Numerical Methods
VI. Research on the FR Methodology
VII. Applications

46 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

Summary and Conclusions
Predicting the future is generally ill advised.
However, the following are the author’s opinions:

• The early development of CFD in the Aerospace Industry was primarily driven by the
need to calculate steady transonic flows: this problem is quite well solved
• CFD has been on a plateau for the last 15 years with 2nd-order accurate FV methods for
the RANS equations almost universally used in both commercial and government codes
which can treat complex configurations. These methods cannot reliably predict complex
separated, unsteady and vortex dominated flows
• Ongoing advances in both numerical algorithms and computer hardware and software
should enable an advance to LES for industrial applications within the foreseeable future
• Research should focus on high-order methods with minimal numerical dissipation for
unstructured meshes to enable the treatment of complex configurations

47 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

Summary and Conclusions
Current obstacles to the wider adoption of high-order methods which call for
further research include:

• slow convergence for steady state problems - this might be alleviated by a better design
of a multi-hp convergence acceleration scheme
• the need for a more efficient implicit time stepping scheme for unsteady problems
• more robust high-order schemes for nonlinear problems such as are encountered in high
speed gas dynamics
• more efficient and user friendly mesh generation techniques

48 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

Summary and Conclusions
Current issues in LES include:

• the need for wall models to enable simulations of wall bounded flows at affordable
computational costs
• the need for further research on subgrid filtering techniques on unstructured meshes
• the need for continuing research on subgrid models, including approximate deconvolution
and exact SGS models, and a careful evaluation of implicit LES methods

Automatic shape design methods based on control theory or other optimization

methods will be increasingly used in aerospace design

Design problems in unsteady flow, such as turbomachinery, rotorcraft, or unsteady

separated flows are particularly challenging

49 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

Summary and Conclusions

Eventually DNS may become feasible for high Reynolds number flows

hopefully with a smaller power requirement than a wind tunnel

50 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

 The Aerospace Computing Laboratory

Acknowledgement
The current research is a combined effort by
• Postdocs: Jonathan Bull, Guido Lodato
• Ph.D. students: Manuel López, Kartikey Asthana, Abhishek Sheshadri,
Jacob Cabrill, Joshua Romero, Jerry Watkins, David Manosalvas

It is made possible by the support of

• the Air Force Office of Scientific Research under grants FA9550-10-1-0418
and FA9550-14-1-0186 monitored by Dr. Fariba Fahroo
• the National Science Foundation under grants 0708071 and 0915006
monitored by Dr. Leland Jameson
• Stanford Graduate Fellowship

51 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015

Questions & Anwers

Thank you for listening

52 A. Jameson SciTech, January 7, 2015