PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
June 3, 2026Flow Turbulence and Combustion0 citationsOpen Access

A surrogate-based Bayesian framework for parametric calibration of URANS turbulence models informed by anisotropic pressure fluctuations

AEAli EidiRDRichard P. Dwight

Key Points

  • This work aims to improve the predictive reliability of URANS turbulence models by calibrating key parameters.
  • Developed a surrogate-based Bayesian framework for parameter calibration.
  • Conducted global Sobol’ sensitivity analysis to identify influential model parameters.
  • Applied the framework to various flow configurations including turbulent channel and annular flows.
  • The specific dissipation-rate coefficient αω1 and turbulent kinetic-energy dissipation coefficient β* were identified as dominant in variability.
  • Bayesian calibration constrained these parameters effectively in the admissible space.
  • Discrepancies with reference data primarily stemmed from structural turbulence model limitations.

Abstract

Abstract Flow-induced vibrations in wall-bounded flows remain a major challenge in many engineering applications. While fully predictive turbulence-induced vibration simulations generally require scale-resolving approaches, unsteady Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes (URANS) methods are employed in practice due to their favorable computational cost. However, their predictive reliability is limited by uncertainty in turbulence-model parameters, structural model–form error, and deficiencies in representing turbulent fluctuations. This work presents a surrogate-based Bayesian calibration framework for the SST k – model, incorporating anisotropic pressure-fluctuation reconstruction to quantify and reduce model uncertainty. Global Sobol’ sensitivity analysis, surrogate modeling, and Bayesian inference are combined to identify influential parameters and assimilate high-fidelity reference data. The framework is applied to turbulent channel flow, turbulent annular flow, and a blunt-end cantilevered-rod configuration. Across all cases, the specific dissipation-rate coefficient ₁ and the turbulent kinetic-energy dissipation coefficient ^* consistently dominate variability in mean-flow quantities and reconstructed fluctuation statistics. Bayesian calibration constrains these parameters to consistent regions of the admissible space, while less influential coefficients remain weakly informed. Gaussian process regression and polynomial chaos expansion surrogates yield nearly identical posterior and predictive distributions, demonstrating robustness to surrogate choice. Remaining discrepancies with reference data are attributed primarily to structural turbulence model limitations rather than parametric uncertainty.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Eidi et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a1fc6f7dee9eb8c0dce7d8ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10494-026-00763-x
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1An Adaptive Metropolis Algorithm2001 · 2,775 citations
  2. 2A Comparison of Three Methods for Selecting Values of Input Variables in the Analysis of Output From a Computer Code2000 · 2,816 citations
  3. 3Uncertainty Analysis of Turbulence Model Closure Coefficients for Shock Wave-Boundary Layer Interaction Simulations2018 · 13 citations
  4. 4Bayesian Calibration of Computer Models2001 · 4,273 citations
  5. 5Spectral Stochastic Finite‐Element Formulation for Reliability Analysis1991 · 267 citations