CFD Online Logo CFD Online URL
www.cfd-online.com
[Sponsors]
Home > Forums > Software User Forums > ANSYS > FLUENT

Boundary condition for supesonic nozzle simulation

Register Blogs Community New Posts Updated Threads Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old   March 19, 2008, 16:55
Default Boundary condition for supesonic nozzle simulation
  #1
Abhinav Choudhari
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Hi all, I am doing 3d simulation of convergence-divergence nozzle with supersonic flow. Mach no. around 2. I am using std K-e model. I would appreciate if someone can suggest me what would be the proper wall conditions for the nozzle. The average thickness of my nozzle is 0.1 inch. I went to couple of research paper, some have used adiabatic wall and some as constant temperature wall. Since this is supersonic flow simulation, I am not sure what to use as wall condition. I will really appreciate any suggestion on this. Thank you in advance. Abhinav
  Reply With Quote

Old   March 19, 2008, 19:56
Default Re: Boundary condition for supesonic nozzle simula
  #2
Hirdesh
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Both wall conditions are right. A adiabatic wall can be maintained at constant temp.
  Reply With Quote

Old   March 19, 2008, 20:28
Default Re: Boundary condition for supesonic nozzle simula
  #3
Abhinav Choudhari
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Hi Hirdesh, Thank for replying so quick. What you say adiabatic wall will be good or convective wall with specific heat transfer coefficient will be the good option for me. As flow is supersonic and mtl of nozzle is steel with 0.1 inch thickness.

Once again thank you very much for reply. Abhinav
  Reply With Quote

Old   March 19, 2008, 21:53
Default Re: Boundary condition for supesonic nozzle simula
  #4
Hirdesh
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Hi, I think solid wall can't be convective. So better to take adiabatic wall.

Hirdesh
  Reply With Quote

Old   March 26, 2008, 04:31
Default Re: Boundary condition for supesonic nozzle simula
  #5
Ramesh. K
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
What exactly do u need at the wall are u planning to study the flow properties or the heat transfer across the wall. if your interest is only flow you can have only no slip condition at the wall and leave the default options of wall boundary condition as it is or if u need to study the heat transfer coefficient then u need to bother about it as maintaining the wall at constant temp or adiabatic

it entirely depends on ur problem definiton

  Reply With Quote

Old   March 28, 2008, 15:06
Default Re: Boundary condition for supesonic nozzle simula
  #6
Abhinav Choudhari
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
My main aim to analyze flow and in particular shock waves ... So I wanted to keep boundary condition simple still realistic ... What you suggest I should use as Boundary condition, as boundary condition is important for realistic results. Thank you.
  Reply With Quote

Old   September 26, 2009, 05:31
Default
  #7
zaw
New Member
 
tunzaw
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3
Rep Power: 17
zaw is on a distinguished road
Dear Abhinav and all
I am also trying to simulate 3d CD nozzle flow. But I am very bad in grid generation. I use GAMBIT for grid generation. If you have any example of 3d CD nozzle grid generation and FLUENT simulation, help me please. I wonder if you make reply to me. my email is tunzawcn@gmail.com
zaw is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
nozzle boundary condition Shuo Main CFD Forum 4 September 28, 2007 08:28
boundary condition at nozzle exit Akbar FLUENT 1 June 30, 2005 06:46
Boundary condition, UDF, Wave simulation hm FLUENT 0 August 2, 2004 22:45
boundary condition for fan simulation Mark Main CFD Forum 2 March 31, 2004 12:46
2D simulation as boundary condition for 3D problem Jan De smet FLUENT 1 October 11, 2002 03:02


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 18:19.