[johnp]

Hello,

I would like to turn off the wall functions in the new Transition SST turbulence model in FLUENT. Most of my experience has been with the SST k-omega model. When I turn off the wall functions, I use the command:

(rpsetvar 'kw-set-wall-w? #t)

Is there a similar command to turn off the wall functions for the transition model? I can't seem to track down the source for the command for the k-omega (but it works).

The flow problem I am looking at is the impingement of a submerged circular jet on a normal, flat plate (jet height/nozzle diameter = 15). The fluid is water and the jet Reynolds number is roughly 40,000. Since this problem should contain both laminar and turbulent flow, I am curious how the transition model will compare with the SST k-omega. The main quantity of interest is the wall shear stress in the impingement region. any suggestions are welcome. Thanks,

john

[Far]

Yes. Use y+ below 1 and wall function will be turned off!!!


PS. Transition model works only for Y+ < 1

[johnp]

Thanks for the reply. I'm glad to hear that the wall functions turn off automatically. I was surprised when I found that FLUENT will use wall functions with the SST k-omega regardless of y+.

[Far]

http://www.ansys.com/Products/Simula...lence+Modeling

4.13.6.*Enhanced Wall Treatment ω-Equation (EWT-ω)


Unlike the standard epsilon-equation, the omega-equation can be integrated through the viscous sublayer without the need for a two-layer approach. This feature can be utilized for a y*-insensitive wall treatment by blending the viscous sublayer formulation and the logarithmic layer formulation based on y*. This formulation is the default for all omega-equation based models.

[Bionico]

Hello!
I'd want to try SST Transitional model, but my system has y+ ≈ 2.5 in some zones: does this situation hardly affect the results? or can I use this model anyway? (I think that's impossible to refine more the mesh because of memory limits...)

Thanks in advance!

[Far]

No need to refine the mesh. Just put the first node below Y+< 1. This is mandatory. There are other restrictions are also there e.g. stream-wise refinement

[wanna88]

Hi

May I know,

a) For transition SST 4 equations, in what conditions we should use the "Roughness correlation" as well as " Curvature Correction"?
b) Besides, how to calculate/specify for Geometry roughness height?

Thank you

Naima

[AmiN.D]

Originally Posted by Far

Yes. Use y+ below 1 and wall function will be turned off!!!


PS. Transition model works only for Y+ < 1

You mean if our mesh is that fine than we get yPlus<1 and use K-e model the wall functions are automatically off? then what is the boundary condition for k,e at walls?

I have to simulate a plate with yPlus>30 and yPlus<1 with k-e Model in OpenFOAM
for yPlus>30 i set the boundary condition at walls " kRewallFunction and epsilonWallFunction
but when I fine the mesh to get yPlus<1 then it doesn't seem right to set them like i mentioned. I tried to put the zerogradient which i thought it's more reasonable[is it?]
+and my case didn't converge after 10000 steps. the Re Number is 1e+6.


any thoughts on this?

[vinerm]

A value of lesser than 1 has no meaning; nor is it required by any model. It would be akin to saying that turbulence is important even when Re is lesser than transition Re. Transition models also require . Wall treatment does not get disabled automatically based on , at least, not in Fluent, though EWT kind of does something similar. But for any CFD tool, use SWF only if , else, the results would be completely unrealistic. And for any simulation, maintain , else, convergence would be difficult.

[AmiN.D]

Originally Posted by vinerm

A value of lesser than 1 has no meaning; nor is it required by any model. It would be akin to saying that turbulence is important even when Re is lesser than transition Re. Transition models also require . Wall treatment does not get disabled automatically based on , at least, not in Fluent, though EWT kind of does something similar. But for any CFD tool, use SWF only if , else, the results would be completely unrealistic. And for any simulation, maintain , else, convergence would be difficult.

That's the problem i've been given and can not decide about yPlus. Although we know that K-e model is just introduced to get faster result [because of the bigger mesh] near the wall, so I think y=<1 can be meaningful because we want to resolve the B.L completely and dont use the approximation.


anyways I got the case converged but i'm not still sure about the e,k B.C in case of y<5 .
Any help would be appreciated

[vinerm]

That's a wrong notion that RANS or EVM models are introduced to get faster results or are expected to be used with coarse mesh. There is no such assumption behind development of these models. The only assumption in EVM is that the turbulence is isotropic and non-EVM RANS, such as, RSM don't even have that assumption.

And when it comes to wall treatment, it is not directly linked with turbulence model; even LES requires wall treatment. is a non-dimensional (Reynolds) number and for almost all industrial fluids, theoretically as well as experimentally, it is found that up to of 5. And if it is linear within this limit, it does not matter if you have 10 points or just 1 point, the line would be same. So, being smaller than 1 is an overkill and does not help within anything.

Boundary conditions for both k and at the wall is 0.

[AmiN.D]

Originally Posted by vinerm

That's a wrong notion that RANS or EVM models are introduced to get faster results or are expected to be used with coarse mesh. There is no such assumption behind development of these models. The only assumption in EVM is that the turbulence is isotropic and non-EVM RANS, such as, RSM don't even have that assumption.

And when it comes to wall treatment, it is not directly linked with turbulence model; even LES requires wall treatment. is a non-dimensional (Reynolds) number and for almost all industrial fluids, theoretically as well as experimentally, it is found that up to of 5. And if it is linear within this limit, it does not matter if you have 10 points or just 1 point, the line would be same. So, being smaller than 1 is an overkill and does not help within anything.

Boundary conditions for both k and at the wall is 0.

thank you
I would try also to discuss this with my prof. maybe there is a reason is just to test us!