Accuracy and comparison of standard k-ϵ with two variants of k-ω turbulence models in fluvial applications. Issue 1 (1st January 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Farhadi, Alireza; Mayrhofer, Arno; Tritthart, Michael; Glas, Martin; Habersack, Helmut
• Is Part Of: Engineering applications of computational fluid mechanics. Volume 12:Issue 1(2018)
• Page Start: 216
• Page End: 235
• Publication Date: 2018-01-01
• Subjects: Racetrack flume -- two-equation closure -- RANS -- turbulent kinetic energy -- field experiments -- computational expenses; Computational fluid dynamics -- Periodicals; 620.10640285
• DOI: 10.1080/19942060.2017.1393006
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1994-2060

Abstract

ABSTRACT: Racetrack flumes are established experimental settings in ecohydraulics and sediment studies. Their experimental results are often coupled with numerical simulations. The two-equation turbulence closures of the Reynolds-Averaged Navier-Stokes equations are applied widely in such engineering applications. They are preferred for their ease of use and low computational costs compared with more sophisticated turbulence models involving large-scale fluvial simulations. Here, three variants of two-equation models, i.e. the standard k-ϵ model and two variants of k-ω models, were applied to tackle mean flow and turbulence in a racetrack flume and a river reach. Regarding model performances, we found an overall reasonable agreement between simulated and measured mean velocity values. Nonetheless, the simulated turbulent kinetic energy exhibited discrepancies to the measured values. The computational costs of all investigated model variants are comparable. Therefore, there is no significant preference among models. The findings confirm the application of these model approaches for mean flow-related investigations (e.g. habitat modeling) but suggest exercising caution for applications sensitive to turbulent processes.