|
[Sponsors] |
March 30, 2009, 06:10 |
Boundary Conditions
|
#1 |
New Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 9
Rep Power: 17 |
Dear All,
We have run some diffuser passage simulations with different boundary conditions, all other parameters being the same, just to compare effects of boundary conds. We used 2 setups:
The problem is when we compare results with these two combinations we get almost 30% difference in pressure drop through the passage. I expected negligible difference. ANSYS were asked if they could explain but we didn't really get to the bottom of it. Maybe we didn't ask properly. Could anyone offer a reason for this? Many thanks in anticipation. Ianto. P.S. The second combination above was found to give better convergence on an earlier run which is why we looked at these different set-ups to check if there was a difference. |
|
April 2, 2009, 08:31 |
|
#2 |
New Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Berlin
Posts: 21
Rep Power: 17 |
in one case your are "blowing" through your geometry and in the other one you are "sucking", arenīt you?! maybe this could explain the difference.
|
|
April 2, 2009, 08:50 |
|
#3 |
New Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 9
Rep Power: 17 |
Thanks for your reply Adam.
Physically yes, but I'm not sure what the difference is numerically. I thought since the same mass is moving through the passage at the same velocity in each case, pressure drop should be the same but it seems I'm wrong. Symptomatic of my only partially understanding what the solver is doing I guess. Any further suggestions would be much appreciated! Kind regards, Ianto |
|
April 2, 2009, 09:46 |
|
#4 |
New Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Berlin
Posts: 21
Rep Power: 17 |
if you are sucking through a diffusor the boundary layer normaly should be attached, if you are blowing it can easily detach. so compare your flow field and not only the pressure change.
|
|
April 29, 2009, 15:02 |
|
#5 |
New Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 9
Rep Power: 17 |
Adam,
Sorry for the delay I didn't realise you'd replied a second time, there was no email notification, I was just browsing old posts. That explanation makes perfect sense it's seems very obvious with hindsight. Thanks again! Ianto |
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Impinging Jet Boundary Conditions | Anindya | Main CFD Forum | 25 | February 27, 2016 13:58 |
Problems with boundary conditions for a lowRekOmegaSST turbulence model | cfdmarkus | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 16 | November 14, 2011 05:44 |
Pressure boundary conditions | Lionel S. | Main CFD Forum | 1 | August 24, 2007 19:03 |
[Commercial meshers] Trimmed cell and embedded refinement mesh conversion issues | michele | OpenFOAM Meshing & Mesh Conversion | 2 | July 15, 2005 05:15 |
periodic boundary conditions | Ahmed Abdelwahab | FLUENT | 4 | March 9, 2000 17:36 |