|
[Sponsors] |
![]() |
![]() |
#1 |
Member
Burak
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 90
Rep Power: 17 ![]() |
Hi,
I am trying to analyze a NACA 6 series symmetric airfoil for drag coeff. with 5 metres chord and 25 m/s. It is about 8.000.000 Re. I know that these airfoils are laminar flow airfoils. So if I analyze them with turbulence models, do I get incorrect results even with a fine mesh? I tried k-e and k-w but the results seems more than it should be. I think the flow is laminar on most part of the NACA 6 series airfoils about this Reynolds numbers. So what viscous model should I use? Is Transition models in Fluent 12 will give me the best result among other models? Thanks in advance. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 411
Rep Power: 19 ![]() |
A turbulence model that also models the transition should in principle give you a more accurate Cd. However even with a simple turbulence model (like k-epsilon or S-A) you should catch the lift coefficient for the linear part (say from -5 to 8 degrees). If your Cl is also wrong then you should check your mesh for y+ variation.
A transition model is the way to go, especially if you have access to Fluent 12. Do |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Member
Burak
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 90
Rep Power: 17 ![]() |
Thanks Do,
By the way, it is a 3D analysis with 1.8 meters width. My problem is about drag force, lift is not so important since it is a symmetrical airfoil. I will try to make a custom airfoil which should have better drag characteristics. So which transition model do you recommend? |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Member
Burak
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 90
Rep Power: 17 ![]() |
I have been trying Transition SST and k-w SST and there is very litte difference between them !
Does Transition models behave like all the zone is a transition zone? (like turbulence models behave like all the zone is turbulence zone?) |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 148
Rep Power: 17 ![]() |
For CFX, ANSYS recommends the Gamma Theta Model developed by Langtry and Menter. The documentation says that this model is widely validated. I assume that this would be the same for FLUENT.
The Gamma Theta Model is based on two transport equations, one for intermittency and one for the transition onset criteria in terms of momentum thickness Reynolds number. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Tags |
fluent 12.1, transition |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Transition Turbulence Models | Apurva | Main CFD Forum | 3 | September 7, 2018 05:48 |
Fluent jobs through pbs | ibnkureshi | FLUENT | 5 | June 9, 2011 13:43 |
CFX vs. FLUENT in multiphase models | Hossam | CFX | 1 | November 3, 2010 06:57 |
FLUENT TRANSITION WRONG? | Rif | Main CFD Forum | 0 | March 1, 2008 21:57 |
Advanced Turbulence Modeling in Fluent, Realizable k-epsilon Model | Jonas Larsson | FLUENT | 5 | March 13, 2000 03:27 |