|
[Sponsors] |
Calculation time : SAS model vs kEpsilon model |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
February 1, 2018, 17:47 |
Calculation time : SAS model vs kEpsilon model
|
#1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 160
Rep Power: 12 |
All other things of the simulation being equal, if I use the k-epsilon model instead of the SAS model, does the simulation run faster?
Thanks |
|
February 2, 2018, 01:03 |
|
#2 |
Super Moderator
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 17,819
Rep Power: 144 |
Your initial assumption that all other things are equal is not valid. A k-e model will be run using RANS, so will have a mesh and time step to capture the mean flow field only. Also k-e models can be run steady state. The SAS model needs to have a mesh and time step to capture the large scale turbulent fluctuations - which will require a finer mesh and finer time step. The SAS model is transient by definition and cannot be properly run steady state.
So a properly validated k-e model should be much faster than a properly validated SAS model, but mainly because the mesh and time steps are finer and it is steady state versus transient.
__________________
Note: I do not answer CFD questions by PM. CFD questions should be posted on the forum. |
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
How to export time series of variables for one point? | mary mor | OpenFOAM Post-Processing | 8 | July 19, 2017 10:54 |
Stuck in a Rut- interDyMFoam! | xoitx | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 14 | March 25, 2016 07:09 |
pimpleFoam: turbulence->correct(); is not executed when using residualControl | hfs | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 3 | October 29, 2013 08:35 |
Water subcooled boiling | Attesz | CFX | 7 | January 5, 2013 03:32 |
Warning 097- | AB | Siemens | 6 | November 15, 2004 04:41 |