|
[Sponsors] |
March 12, 2009, 06:48 |
Buoyant turbulent flows
|
#1 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
for buoyant turbulent flows which model is better ? k-omega, RSM are not converging even after 30000 iteration minimum face area (m2): 1.000000e-004 maximum face area (m2): 2.500730e-004 is this fine ??
|
|
March 12, 2009, 08:44 |
Re: Buoyant turbulent flows
|
#2 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
one more question as i am using boundary layer mesh cell size will depend on 1st cell and b/a ratio, so what can be possible size of first cell taking decision based on no of cells and change in Nu no. may not be correct because of no of bl steps (am using ratio 1.2)
is there any way by which i can say grid is fine based on results of simulations ? i am getting max Y+ value 0.14 (RSM MODEL) thanks in advance |
|
March 15, 2009, 22:21 |
|
#3 |
Senior Member
Micael
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 157
Rep Power: 18 |
Hi Sudhir,
I am just experienced with k-epsilon yet. Here are some strategies I successfully used to converge turbulent flow in mixed convection. - first, converge without gravity - use "coupled" for pressure-velocity coupling - use "PRESTO" for pressure discretization (second order upwind for others) - reduce under-relaxation factor, slowly and by increment between some hundred iterations, especially turbulence properties (like k and epsilon) - reduce momentum explicit relaxation factors of the coupled algoritm Before reducing any relaxation factor, wait for stagnation during iterations. Reducing those factors also reduce convergence rate, so it is better to apply it only when there are stagnation or instability in residuals. Mesh quality is very important. y+ = 0.14 is very fine. However, free convection is challenging the solver everywhere in the domain, not just at wall. I hope this will help you. Micael |
|
March 16, 2009, 07:52 |
|
#4 |
Senior Member
Micael
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 157
Rep Power: 18 |
I just think that if your problem is purely free convection, then is it not usefull to solve without gravity, since that will produce no flow at all. In that case, you can start with a low gravity value (like 0.98 instead of 9.8).
|
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Modeling Turbulent Horizontal Buoyant Jets | Jack Travis | Main CFD Forum | 2 | September 11, 2006 07:36 |
turbulent buoyant plume | Theo | FLUENT | 0 | February 13, 2006 10:07 |
About low Re number turbulent flows | gorka | Main CFD Forum | 13 | April 2, 2003 06:19 |
LES for buoyant flows? | George Bergantz | Phoenics | 0 | December 18, 2000 12:41 |
CFD of turbulent flows | raj calay | Main CFD Forum | 23 | April 23, 1999 06:03 |