|
[Sponsors] |
Venturi Modelling Pressure Changes Seem Too Low |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
April 7, 2012, 18:06 |
Venturi Modelling Pressure Changes Seem Too Low
|
#1 |
New Member
Patrick Haines
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 2
Rep Power: 0 |
Hello,
I am currently trying to model the flow through a long-form venturi with a beta ratio of about 0.75 and inlet diameter of 0.0525018 m (2.067 in). I have constructed the mesh to replicate an experimental setup, the results of which I will later compare with the results of my CFD model. I am using the standard k-e model with standard wall treatment. Inlet boundary type is mass flow (6 kg/s and 220000 Pa) and outlet is a outflow boundary (flow weight ratio of 1). So far my result look good; clear differential pressure generation and pressure recovery in the divergence cone. However when I plot the pressure distribution my pressure values start at zero and go to about -12 with the units being in Pa. This pressure drop seems far to small and I would prefer if the pressure were displayed in their actual value rather than a negative. Can anyone explain why I am seeing such an unrealistically low pressure drop? Please let me know if there is any additional information I can supply which would be helpful in determining my problem. |
|
April 27, 2012, 04:11 |
|
#2 | |
New Member
wu
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 14
Rep Power: 17 |
This is because you set the reference as 1 atm. RIght?
Quote:
|
||
Tags |
pressure plot, pressure scale, venturi |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Pressure enigma. | Sara | Main CFD Forum | 22 | July 30, 2009 05:46 |
low base pressure | haykozoom | FLUENT | 0 | July 13, 2009 09:34 |
Low pressure drop with the same model | zhoubinwx | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 5 | June 16, 2009 06:10 |
Are NS equations valid at very low pressure ?? | Jiri Novak | FLUENT | 0 | August 1, 2007 11:59 |
Hydrostatic pressure in 2-phase flow modeling (CFX4.2) | HB &DS | CFX | 0 | January 9, 2000 14:19 |