|
[Sponsors] |
![]() |
![]() |
#1 |
New Member
Alex Ji
Join Date: Oct 2023
Posts: 8
Rep Power: 2 ![]() |
In cfx, there is an inherent homogeneous classical condensation equation. I can use it normally following the instructions in the tutorial. But I am preparing to proceed with the next step by writing a new condensation equation. So I first tried to write an equation that is the same as the built-in equation of CFX for simulation. This way, I can know if the equation I wrote myself is correct. Unfortunately, the equation I wrote did not calculate the correct result.The correct result is approximately 1e26, while my result is only around 1e6. I carefully checked my equations but didn't find any problems. May I ask if anyone knows where I went wrong? If the information I have submitted is not enough, please let me know and I will add some more. Thank you very much.
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Super Moderator
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 17,816
Rep Power: 144 ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
I suspect the built-in equations are linearised and have other numerical treatments so they converge better. You do not get that when you write your own equation in CEL. So it is possible the difference is just numerical.
Have you tried things which will give you better numerical accuracy, like: * tighter convergence * finer mesh * double precision numerics * More accurate discretisation schemes (both space and time - if relevant)
__________________
Note: I do not answer CFD questions by PM. CFD questions should be posted on the forum. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 | |
New Member
Alex Ji
Join Date: Oct 2023
Posts: 8
Rep Power: 2 ![]() |
Quote:
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Super Moderator
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 17,816
Rep Power: 144 ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
If you are matching the literature results with the CFX model that sounds like your model is accurate which is good.
The equation you show on your first post - where did you get that from? Is it from the CFX documentation? If so, which equation number? Also, which version of CFX are you using?
__________________
Note: I do not answer CFD questions by PM. CFD questions should be posted on the forum. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,850
Rep Power: 33 ![]() |
Quote:
Typically, unit consistency or scaling of a variable (normalized?)
__________________
Note: I do not answer CFD questions by PM. CFD questions should be posted on the forum. |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
New Member
Alex Ji
Join Date: Oct 2023
Posts: 8
Rep Power: 2 ![]() |
This sounds like a very effective suggestion, I will give it a try. Thank you for your reply
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 | |
New Member
Alex Ji
Join Date: Oct 2023
Posts: 8
Rep Power: 2 ![]() |
Quote:
best wishes |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
Super Moderator
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 17,816
Rep Power: 144 ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
The equation you quoted in post #1 looks quite different to eqn 5-280 in the theory manual. Eqn 5-280 is J = A.exp(-(delta)G*/k.Tg).
I do not have time to check your equation in detail, but are you sure the leading terms in your equation are equivalent to A in 5-280? And (delta)G* is in eqn 5-272 and does not look like your exponential function. Are you sure the exponential term is correct?
__________________
Note: I do not answer CFD questions by PM. CFD questions should be posted on the forum. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Tags |
condensing, non-equilibrium |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Ask for help: CFX solution error | novice_han | CFX | 3 | December 6, 2021 07:10 |
Ansys CFX condensing flows | maheshchamarti | CFX | 3 | August 28, 2019 11:22 |
Modify SST kw model in CFX | Tingyun YIN | CFX | 6 | May 12, 2017 06:44 |
CFX pressure in Simulations problem | nasdak | CFX | 1 | April 14, 2010 13:22 |
PhD using CFX | Rui | CFX | 9 | May 28, 2007 05:59 |