CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 733Model Reduction and Neural NetworksFluid Dynamics and Turbulent FlowsComputational Fluid Dynamics and Aerodynamics

The DOI matches its DataCite record.

A Physics Informed Machine Learning Approach for Reconstructing Reynolds Stress Modeling Discrepancies Based on DNS Data

Open access
Wang, Jian-Xun, Wu, Jin-Long, Xiao, Heng·2016·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.1606.07987arXiv 1606.07987
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Turbulence modeling is a critical component in numerical simulations of industrial flows based on Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) equations. However, after decades of efforts in the turbulence modeling community, universally applicable RANS models with predictive capabilities are still lacking. Recently, data-driven methods have been proposed as a promising alternative to the traditional approaches of turbulence model development. In this work we propose a data-driven, physics-informed machine learning approach for predicting discrepancies in RANS modeled Reynolds stresses. The discrepancies are formulated as functions of the mean flow features. By using a modern machine learning technique based on random forests, the discrepancy functions are first trained with benchmark flow data and then used to predict Reynolds stresses discrepancies in new flows. The method is used to predict the Reynolds stresses in the flow over periodic hills by using two training flow scenarios of increasing difficulties: (1) the flow in the same periodic hills geometry yet at a lower Reynolds number, and (2) the flow in a different hill geometry with a similar recirculation zone. Excellent predictive performances were observed in both scenarios, demonstrating the merits of the proposed method. Improvement of RANS modeled Reynolds stresses enabled by the proposed method is an important step towards predictive turbulence modeling, where the ultimate goal is to predict the quantities of interest (e.g., velocity field, drag, lift) more accurately by solving RANS equations with the Reynolds stresses obtained therefrom.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.1606.07987

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Still being checked.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Wang, J.-X., Wu, J.-L., & Xiao, H.
ORCID
Xiao, Heng
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2016
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.1606.07987
arXiv
1606.07987
OpenAlex
W6891823180
Cited by
1
References
0
Citations by year
2024: 1
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Licence
arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
Locations
arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Statistical and Nonlinear Physics › Model Reduction and Neural Networks
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Computational Mechanics › Fluid Dynamics and Turbulent Flows
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Computational Mechanics › Computational Fluid Dynamics and Aerodynamics
Keywords
Reynolds stress model, RANS turbulence models, physics-informed machine learning, data-driven turbulence modeling, direct numerical simulation data, random forest, recirculation zone, low Reynolds number flow

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review