Experiments with explicit filtering for LES using a finite-difference method
The equations for large-eddy simulation (LES) are derived formally by applying a spatial filter to the Navier-Stokes equations. The filter width as well as the details of the filter shape are free parameters in LES, and these can be used both to control the effective resolution of the simulation and to establish the relative importance of different portions of the resolved spectrum. An analogous, but less well justified, approach to filtering is more or less universally used in conjunction with LES using finite-difference methods. In this approach, the finite support provided by the computational mesh as well as the wavenumber-dependent truncation errors associated with the finite-difference operators are assumed to define the filter operation. This approach has the advantage that it is also 'automatic' in the sense that no explicit filtering: operations need to be performed. While it is certainly convenient to avoid the explicit filtering operation, there are some practical considerations associated with finite-difference methods that favor the use of an explicit filter. Foremost among these considerations is the issue of truncation error. All finite-difference approximations have an associated truncation error that increases with increasing wavenumber. These errors can be quite severe for the smallest resolved scales, and these errors will interfere with the dynamics of the small eddies if no corrective action is taken. Years of experience at CTR with a second-order finite-difference scheme for high Reynolds number LES has repeatedly indicated that truncation errors must be minimized in order to obtain acceptable simulation results. While the potential advantages of explicit filtering are rather clear, there is a significant cost associated with its implementation. In particular, explicit filtering reduces the effective resolution of the simulation compared with that afforded by the mesh. The resolution requirements for LES are usually set by the need to capture most of the energy-containing eddies, and if explicit filtering is used, the mesh must be enlarged so that these motions are passed by the filter. Given the high cost of explicit filtering, the following interesting question arises. Since the mesh must be expanded in order to perform the explicit filter, might it be better to take advantage of the increased resolution and simply perform an unfiltered simulation on the larger mesh? The cost of the two approaches is roughly the same, but the philosophy is rather different. In the filtered simulation, resolution is sacrificed in order to minimize the various forms of numerical error. In the unfiltered simulation, the errors are left intact, but they are concentrated at very small scales that could be dynamically unimportant from a LES perspective. Very little is known about this tradeoff and the objective of this work is to study this relationship in high Reynolds number channel flow simulations using a second-order finite-difference method.