DrivAer: AutoCFD4 Case 2 (DDES)

Flagship benchmark showcase

Instantaneous velocity-magnitude field
Instantaneous velocity-magnitude field (0–50 m/s) on the symmetry plane of the DrivAer, showing the separated wake resolved by the DDES.

Overview

The Automotive CFD Prediction Workshop series benchmarks CFD predictions of road-vehicle aerodynamics using the DrivAer model, a generic passenger-car geometry with detailed underbody, wheels and mirrors that is widely used as a community reference for automotive external aerodynamics. The fourth workshop (AutoCFD4, 2024) included a scale-resolving test case for the DrivAer notchback in which time-accurate, eddy-resolving methods are compared against wind-tunnel surveys.

This is a flagship benchmark. Luminary entered the workshop with a Delayed Detached Eddy Simulation (DDES). The results reproduced here are taken from Luminary's public AutoCFD4 presentation and resource page; they are not recomputed in this repository. The case is a hybrid RANS-LES transient simulation of a full vehicle.

Problem Setup

The geometry is the DrivAer notchback in two Case 2 configurations: 2a (baseline) and 2b (with a front wheel deflector). The flow is solved with the ideal-gas coupled solver using a second-order finite-volume discretization (arbitrary-polyhedral capable) on the AutoCFD4 committee-supplied 157-million-cell mesh.

Turbulence is treated with Spalart–Allmaras DDES, a hybrid RANS-LES model in which near-wall regions are modeled in RANS mode and detached, separated regions resolve the large turbulent eddies. The formulation adds a shear-layer-adapted length scale and a vortex-tilting measure for grey-area mitigation, a shielding function to protect attached boundary layers from premature switching, and a blended centered/upwind convective scheme to limit dissipation in the LES regions; an SA-QCR2000 variant is also available.

The unsteady simulation is initialized from a steady-state RANS solution. The time step is ramped down through startup and then held fixed at Δt=2×104 s for 20,000 steps, giving 6.25 s of physical time; forces are time-averaged over the final 3.6 s. The full Case 2a run completed in 93 minutes on 48 NVIDIA A100 GPUs, and in 44 minutes on 64 H100 GPUs.

Quantities of Interest

The primary quantities are the time-averaged aerodynamic force coefficients, drag CD, lift CL, and the front and rear lift split CL,f and CL,r, for both configurations, and the increment from adding the front wheel deflector (the 2b−2a delta) compared against the measured increment. For Case 2a, CD=0.2768 and CL=0.0276; for Case 2b, CD=0.2669 and CL=0.0352. The DDES CD increment is −0.0099, compared with a measured increment of −0.0122. Field quantities include the upper-body centerline surface pressure coefficient Cp and underbody and wake velocity-magnitude profiles |V|/V at a set of survey stations, compared to the Ford wind-tunnel data.

Sources

T. D. Economon et al., "Luminary Contribution to the AutoCFD4 Workshop," 4th Automotive CFD Prediction Workshop, 2024 (DrivAer Case 2, SA-DDES).: https://autocfd4.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/presentations/HPC-Website/Thomas_Economon_Economon-SRS.pdf
Luminary's AutoCFD4 presentation: SA-DDES setup, time-averaged forces for Cases 2a/2b, surface Cp and wake velocity profiles vs the Ford experiment, and GPU performance (48 A100s in 93 min; 64 H100s in 44 min).
Luminary Cloud, "Luminary Cloud highlighted as the fastest CFD solver at AutoCFD4": resource page.: https://luminary.ai/resources/luminary-cloud-highlighted-as-the-fastest-cfd-solver-at-autocfd4/
Summary of the DrivAer Case 2a/2b DDES submission, force coefficients, and GPU-based performance results.
4th Automotive CFD Prediction Workshop (AutoCFD4), 2024: DrivAer test case.: https://autocfd.org/
Workshop test-case definitions, the committee-provided DrivAer meshes, and the Ford wind-tunnel reference data.

Results

These results are reproduced from Luminary's published workshop submission (see Sources).

Time-averaged force coefficients and 2b−2a deltas

ConfigurationCDCLCL,fCL,r
Luminary 2a 0.27680.0276-0.069480.097209
Luminary 2b 0.26690.0352-0.062120.097355
Luminary Δ (2b−2a) -0.0099+0.0076+0.0074+0.00015
Experiment Δ (2b−2a) -0.0122-0.0056+0.0038-0.0094

Time-averaged drag, lift and front/rear lift coefficients for the DrivAer Cases 2a and 2b, with the front-wheel-deflector increment (2b−2a) listed beside the measured increment.

Reference: T. D. Economon et al., "Luminary Contribution to the AutoCFD4 Workshop," 4th Automotive CFD Prediction Workshop, 2024 (DrivAer Case 2, SA-DDES). (time-averaged force coefficients and 2b−2a deltas): https://autocfd4.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/presentations/HPC-Website/Thomas_Economon_Economon-SRS.pdf

Upper-body centerline surface pressure Cp

Upper-body centerline surface pressure \( C_p \)
Time-averaged surface pressure coefficient along the DrivAer upper-body centerline (Case 2a): Luminary SA-DDES versus the Ford wind-tunnel measurements.

Reference: T. D. Economon et al., "Luminary Contribution to the AutoCFD4 Workshop," 4th Automotive CFD Prediction Workshop, 2024 (DrivAer Case 2, SA-DDES). (upper-body centerline surface Cp): https://autocfd4.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/presentations/HPC-Website/Thomas_Economon_Economon-SRS.pdf

Wake velocity profile at station V3

Wake velocity profile at station V3
Time-averaged velocity-magnitude profile |V|/V in the wake at station V3 for Cases 2a and 2b, versus the Ford experiment.

Reference: T. D. Economon et al., "Luminary Contribution to the AutoCFD4 Workshop," 4th Automotive CFD Prediction Workshop, 2024 (DrivAer Case 2, SA-DDES). (wake velocity-magnitude profile at station V3): https://autocfd4.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/presentations/HPC-Website/Thomas_Economon_Economon-SRS.pdf

Wake velocity profile at station V5

Wake velocity profile at station V5
Time-averaged velocity-magnitude profile |V|/V at station V5, further downstream in the wake, for Cases 2a and 2b versus the Ford experiment.

Reference: T. D. Economon et al., "Luminary Contribution to the AutoCFD4 Workshop," 4th Automotive CFD Prediction Workshop, 2024 (DrivAer Case 2, SA-DDES). (wake velocity-magnitude profile at station V5): https://autocfd4.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/presentations/HPC-Website/Thomas_Economon_Economon-SRS.pdf

Underbody velocity profile at station U2

Underbody velocity profile at station U2
Time-averaged velocity-magnitude profile |V|/V across the underbody at station U2 for Cases 2a and 2b versus the Ford experiment; the deficits mark the front-wheel wake.

Reference: T. D. Economon et al., "Luminary Contribution to the AutoCFD4 Workshop," 4th Automotive CFD Prediction Workshop, 2024 (DrivAer Case 2, SA-DDES). (underbody velocity-magnitude profile at station U2): https://autocfd4.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/presentations/HPC-Website/Thomas_Economon_Economon-SRS.pdf

Underbody centerline velocity profile (line L1)

Underbody centerline velocity profile (line L1)
Time-averaged velocity-magnitude profile |V|/V along the underbody centerline (line L1) for Cases 2a and 2b versus the Ford experiment.

Reference: T. D. Economon et al., "Luminary Contribution to the AutoCFD4 Workshop," 4th Automotive CFD Prediction Workshop, 2024 (DrivAer Case 2, SA-DDES). (underbody centerline velocity-magnitude profile at line L1): https://autocfd4.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/presentations/HPC-Website/Thomas_Economon_Economon-SRS.pdf

Solver configuration

features exercised
VerificationValidation3DDES/LESSpalart–AllmarasIdeal gasUnsteadyEnergy equation