|
[Sponsors] |
February 15, 2010, 16:50 |
Velocity field problem
|
#1 |
Senior Member
|
hi. i work with cfx 12 and i'm trying to simulate a free surface flow in a rectanular channel with ssg turbulance model. but there is something rong with the velocity field. i use homogeneous multiphase flow. the max velocity is about 0.9 y from bottom of channel. i attached a pic of velocity field. does anybody know how can i correct it?
|
|
February 16, 2010, 01:48 |
|
#2 |
Senior Member
|
does anybody know what's the reason of this problem??????
|
|
February 16, 2010, 04:04 |
|
#3 |
Senior Member
Fatema Zandi Goharrizi
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 158
Rep Power: 17 |
salam
i couldn't undrestand what's problem. could you explain it more. is the place of the highest velocity point wrong or value of it. it changes from zero to max from boundary to near the surface, seems to be right. |
|
February 16, 2010, 09:01 |
|
#4 |
Senior Member
|
it's not correct because the max velocity occures at .9 y (depth) from bottom of the channel
|
|
February 16, 2010, 18:28 |
|
#5 |
Super Moderator
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 17,854
Rep Power: 144 |
I assume you mean the problem is the max velocity does not occur at the free surface.
Have you done a mesh sensitivity study? |
|
February 17, 2010, 06:46 |
|
#6 |
Senior Member
Fatema Zandi Goharrizi
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 158
Rep Power: 17 |
if you mean the water surface and
if you have done mesh study just near the boundary or whole domain, did you ever note the water surface. about mesh adaption, did you ever test it for Air at 25 C.Volume Fraction ? |
|
February 18, 2010, 02:28 |
|
#7 |
Senior Member
|
||
February 18, 2010, 02:51 |
|
#8 |
Senior Member
|
the channel is toward the Z direction and i use hexa mesh. the hexa meshes have .2 m long in Z direction and in the XY plane have a shape like attached picture. the finer mesh is around the free surface. what do you think of mesh. is it too large
Last edited by feizaghaee; February 18, 2010 at 03:12. |
|
February 18, 2010, 17:46 |
|
#9 |
Super Moderator
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 17,854
Rep Power: 144 |
I must have said this a thousand times, but here goes again.
The only way to be sure your mesh is OK is by a mesh sensitivity check. Run increasingly fine meshes until the parameter of interest converges to a tolerance you can accept. You cannot just look at a mesh and know whether it is fine enough without extensive experience in that field of modelling. So that means that in this case, yes, almost certainly the mesh is too coarse. |
|
February 19, 2010, 04:52 |
|
#10 |
Senior Member
|
but i've checked with different size and the results was same. i've worked with .85 m long meshes but the result was exactly as same as meshes with .19 m long. the turbulence did'nt affect the results.
|
|
February 20, 2010, 06:06 |
|
#11 |
Super Moderator
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 17,854
Rep Power: 144 |
What makes the maximum velocity not occur at the top of the heavy fluid? Can you explain what you are modelling a bit?
|
|
February 20, 2010, 13:47 |
|
#12 |
Senior Member
|
i'm modeling a channel with water and air flow. the secondary flows cause max velocity dosen't occur at top of the flow.
|
|
February 20, 2010, 15:43 |
|
#13 |
Senior Member
Fatema Zandi Goharrizi
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 158
Rep Power: 17 |
how the secondonary flow force the max velocity in z direction occur in 0.7y not in near the surface?not sure but may be it is right for the y or x direction not for the main flow direction.
|
|
February 21, 2010, 18:37 |
|
#14 |
Super Moderator
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 17,854
Rep Power: 144 |
Where do the secondary flows come from? Is the channel curved?
|
|
February 22, 2010, 04:01 |
|
#15 |
Senior Member
|
i finally understand the reason of this problem. the secondary flows in velocity field are exactly inverse (attached pic). does any body know what's the problem?
|
|
February 22, 2010, 20:35 |
|
#16 |
Super Moderator
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 17,854
Rep Power: 144 |
Is your simulation fully converged?
I assume the secondary flows are coming from the Reynolds Stresses in the RSM model. These are tricky things to get right, you may need to tweak some model constants - if you are brave. |
|
February 23, 2010, 05:05 |
|
#17 |
Senior Member
Fatema Zandi Goharrizi
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 158
Rep Power: 17 |
||
February 23, 2010, 07:22 |
|
#18 | |
Senior Member
|
Quote:
what do you mean by "These are tricky things to get right, you may need to tweak some model constants" ? |
||
February 23, 2010, 17:42 |
|
#19 |
Super Moderator
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 17,854
Rep Power: 144 |
I mean exactly that - secondary flows are tricky to get right. Are you sure RSM will adequately capture it? You may need an LES approach. I don't know, this is not my field.
Zandi - Google search "secondary flow". Wikipedia probably has a good description. That will explain what a secondary flow is. |
|
February 24, 2010, 04:59 |
|
#20 |
Senior Member
|
diffrerences between Reynolds stresses result in this scondary flows but CFX calculates these flows inversely i don't know why.
|
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Problem Interface Solid Fluid with wall velocity Solver v12 | hills1 | CFX | 2 | October 12, 2009 06:36 |
Extract velocity field in certain time step to MATLAB | spatialtime | CFX | 3 | September 9, 2009 19:30 |
Convergence problem with thermal phase change model under low velocity conditions | pitisrisuk | CFX | 0 | July 21, 2009 12:21 |
Streamline superimposed on velocity field | allamarein | FLUENT | 0 | July 9, 2009 21:51 |
velocity problem | phy | FLUENT | 1 | February 8, 2008 18:12 |