Articles | Volume 14, issue 6
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3769-2021
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3769-2021
Development and technical paper
 | 
24 Jun 2021
Development and technical paper |  | 24 Jun 2021

Development of a large-eddy simulation subgrid model based on artificial neural networks: a case study of turbulent channel flow

Robin Stoffer, Caspar M. van Leeuwen, Damian Podareanu, Valeriu Codreanu, Menno A. Veerman, Martin Janssens, Oscar K. Hartogensis, and Chiel C. van Heerwaarden

Related authors

Understanding wind-driven melt of patchy snow cover
Luuk D. van der Valk, Adriaan J. Teuling, Luc Girod, Norbert Pirk, Robin Stoffer, and Chiel C. van Heerwaarden
The Cryosphere, 16, 4319–4341, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-16-4319-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-16-4319-2022, 2022
Short summary

Related subject area

Atmospheric sciences
Accurate space-based NOx emission estimates with the flux divergence approach require fine-scale model information on local oxidation chemistry and profile shapes
Felipe Cifuentes, Henk Eskes, Enrico Dammers, Charlotte Bryan, and Folkert Boersma
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 621–649, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-621-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-621-2025, 2025
Short summary
Exploring a high-level programming model for the NWP domain using ECMWF microphysics schemes
Stefano Ubbiali, Christian Kühnlein, Christoph Schär, Linda Schlemmer, Thomas C. Schulthess, Michael Staneker, and Heini Wernli
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 529–546, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-529-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-529-2025, 2025
Short summary
Quantifying uncertainties in satellite NO2 superobservations for data assimilation and model evaluation
Pieter Rijsdijk, Henk Eskes, Arlene Dingemans, K. Folkert Boersma, Takashi Sekiya, Kazuyuki Miyazaki, and Sander Houweling
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 483–509, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-483-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-483-2025, 2025
Short summary
ML-AMPSIT: Machine Learning-based Automated Multi-method Parameter Sensitivity and Importance analysis Tool
Dario Di Santo, Cenlin He, Fei Chen, and Lorenzo Giovannini
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 433–459, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-433-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-433-2025, 2025
Short summary
Coupling the urban canopy model TEB (SURFEXv9.0) with the radiation model SPARTACUS-Urbanv0.6.1 for more realistic urban radiative exchange calculation
Robert Schoetter, Robin James Hogan, Cyril Caliot, and Valéry Masson
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 405–431, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-405-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-405-2025, 2025
Short summary

Cited articles

Bardina, J., Ferziger, J., and Reynolds, W.: Improved subgrid-scale models for large-eddy simulation, in: 13th fluid and plasmadynamics conference, 1357, https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1980-1357, 1980. a
Beck, A., Flad, D., and Munz, C.: Deep neural networks for data-driven LES closure models, J. Comput. Phys., 398, 108910, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2019.108910, 2019. a, b, c, d, e, f
Bolton, T. and Zanna, L.: Applications of deep learning to ocean data inference and subgrid parameterization, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 11, 376–399, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018MS001472, 2019. a
Bou-Zeid, E., Meneveau, C., and Parlange, M.: A scale-dependent Lagrangian dynamic model for large eddy simulation of complex turbulent flows, Phys. Fluids, 17, 025105, https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1839152, 2005. a
Download
Short summary
Turbulent flows are often simulated with the large-eddy simulation (LES) technique, which requires subgrid models to account for the smallest scales. Current subgrid models often require strong simplifying assumptions. We therefore developed a subgrid model based on artificial neural networks, which requires fewer assumptions. Our data-driven SGS model showed high potential in accurately representing the smallest scales but still introduced instability when incorporated into an actual LES.
Share