|
[Sponsors] |
February 20, 2010, 22:23 |
experiment and simulation comparison
|
#1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 125
Rep Power: 17 |
Dear all,
I've been designing a cooling jacket for an electrical machine, and i'm now comparing experimental and simulation results from a fluid analysis point of view. At the same inlet flowrate and the same outlet static pressure with respect to 1atm, the pressure difference between inlet and outlet from simulation is 30% higher than the experimental measurement [(simulation delta_p - experiment delta_p)/experiment delta_p]. No roughness was applied to simulation. could the fluid properties such as viscosity, density account for this difference? Any experience/comments shared will be very helpful. Thank you for your kind attention.
__________________
Thank you for your kind attention. Kind regards, mactech001 Currently using: ANSYS v13 |
|
February 21, 2010, 04:36 |
|
#2 |
Senior Member
|
have you checked mesh sensitivity?
|
|
February 21, 2010, 05:27 |
RE: mesh sensitivity
|
#3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 125
Rep Power: 17 |
Hi feizaghaee, thank you for your reply.
my cooling jacket has coolant channel of a helical configuration. should i concentrate more mesh on the corners on the fluid part please?
__________________
Thank you for your kind attention. Kind regards, mactech001 Currently using: ANSYS v13 |
|
February 21, 2010, 05:36 |
|
#4 |
Senior Member
|
it depends on your geometery and other effective factors. you should refine the mesh until it dosen't chang anymore. i can't tell you it's enough or not!
|
|
February 23, 2010, 22:12 |
|
#5 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 125
Rep Power: 17 |
i've increased the mesh sizing of the fluid from 1.5e-3 to 0.8e-3
No significant difference in calculated pressure difference. Calculated pressure difference is still about 30% higher than measured pressure difference. I've used WB mesh, not CFX-mesh..... will this bring any difference if i switched to CFX-mesh with inflation?
__________________
Thank you for your kind attention. Kind regards, mactech001 Currently using: ANSYS v13 |
|
February 25, 2010, 08:19 |
|
#6 |
Senior Member
Fatema Zandi Goharrizi
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 158
Rep Power: 17 |
Could you tell how you use WB mesh in cfx without changing it to cfx mesh?
I thought it's impossible!! test all the thing you think. but how about the turbulent modeling method? I'm not profession in your field but one of other reasons that can affect result to be different from real data is turbulent method. in literature survey we find methods suitable for our case or we find it ourself with testing them. |
|
March 1, 2010, 03:48 |
|
#7 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 125
Rep Power: 17 |
Hi zandi, thank you for your reply and suggestions.
i've tried using Shear Stress Transport Model and the BSL Reynolds Stress model in the fluid Domain> Fluid Models page > Turbulence Option. Results using both options have made the calculated pressure difference closer to the experimental pressure difference. A few more enquiries: 1) what is the difference between changing the turbulence model in the Domain and in the Boundary please? 2) how do i choose which turbulence model to use in the early stages of design when i don't have a prototype for experiments? Hope to hear of any comments/suggestions again. Thank you!
__________________
Thank you for your kind attention. Kind regards, mactech001 Currently using: ANSYS v13 |
|
March 1, 2010, 17:44 |
|
#8 |
Senior Member
Fatema Zandi Goharrizi
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 158
Rep Power: 17 |
Hi
1)The turbulent model that we use in the domain is the main turbulent model, if I’m right. In the boundary due to conditions we choose T M. For example if we use k-epsilon for domain because of abilities and our reasons then we could not use it in the boundary, why?! Because of not having k and epsilon values. In the cfx guide read the topic for inlet (subsonic), part of turbulence: ANSYS CFX-Solver Modeling Guide | Boundary Condition Modeling | Inlet | 2) you should have a literature survey. See which models have been applied before in your field problems. See the ability of each model and disabilities (in CFD texts, or CFX guide) and match them with the characteristics that your problem needs. The SST Model have high abilities and accuracy and is a good choose, and it’s the cfx powerful solution model instead of k-e and …, as the experts and cfx guide say. but it’s better to read the CFX help in turbulent models first if you don’t have any overview of T M. |
|
March 4, 2010, 03:57 |
|
#9 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 125
Rep Power: 17 |
Is it true that, changing the turbulence model, will not have the slightest effect on the heat transfer from solid to fluid please?
__________________
Thank you for your kind attention. Kind regards, mactech001 Currently using: ANSYS v13 |
|
March 4, 2010, 06:43 |
|
#10 |
Super Moderator
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 17,854
Rep Power: 144 |
Different turbulence models mean different heat transfer models. So if turbulent heat transfer is significant in your model then different turbulence models will result in different heat transfer.
|
|
March 9, 2010, 22:34 |
|
#11 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 125
Rep Power: 17 |
Hi all,
i'm facing another problem: i think one turbulence model for a certain flowrate doesn't work for another flowrate..... is it true??? My comparisons on inlet/outlet pressure difference between experiment and simulation results using BSL Reynolds Stress model have been very good at flowrate of 12L/min, but not for 8.4L/min and 16.6L/min. any comments/suggestions will be appreciated.
__________________
Thank you for your kind attention. Kind regards, mactech001 Currently using: ANSYS v13 |
|
March 10, 2010, 07:23 |
|
#12 |
Super Moderator
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 17,854
Rep Power: 144 |
It could be lots of things, including merely luck.
|
|
March 10, 2010, 13:02 |
|
#13 | ||
Senior Member
Fatema Zandi Goharrizi
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 158
Rep Power: 17 |
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
March 11, 2010, 03:31 |
|
#14 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 125
Rep Power: 17 |
Yes, the solution all converges to RMS residual 1e-5
__________________
Thank you for your kind attention. Kind regards, mactech001 Currently using: ANSYS v13 Last edited by mactech001; March 11, 2010 at 04:09. |
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Comparison OpenFOAM Fluent Experiment | andras | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 20 | June 20, 2011 16:06 |
Atmospheric dispersion simulation vs. experiment | Pavel | Main CFD Forum | 0 | March 1, 2007 10:03 |
Comparison with experiment | CFD_curious_guy | Main CFD Forum | 1 | September 8, 2006 03:14 |
Ventilation Simulation & Experiment Data | Luo Shengping | FLUENT | 2 | November 30, 2000 05:00 |
Ventilation Simulation & Experiment Data | Luo Shengping | Main CFD Forum | 2 | November 29, 2000 11:29 |