|
[Sponsors] |
May 8, 2006, 20:30 |
computational domain & boundary condition
|
#1 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Dear all,
I have simulated a turbulent flame in a furnace and have obtained all the flow properties of interest. The height of the furnace is 1 meter and its diameter is 0.15 m. Instead of simulating the full domain of furnace, I used the computational domain only until axial position of 0.6 m, so I had 0.6 m x 0.15 m domain and I could reduce the computational time (this is just a trial and tentative). I used outflow boundary condition at h=0.6 m. After comparing the computation & experiment result, I had a flame height (flame length) around 0.4 m, slightly lower than the experimental flame which is 0.47 m high. Could the discrepancy be attributed to the 'cutting' of furnace height or could it be due to inappropriate outflow boundary condition, or both? Thanks for the help, novice |
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Freestream boundary condition: incompressible, circular domain (o-grid) | lordvon | FLUENT | 0 | April 29, 2011 12:47 |
2d irregular grid | Remy | Main CFD Forum | 1 | December 22, 2008 05:49 |
Airfoil boundary condition | Frank | Main CFD Forum | 1 | April 21, 2008 19:36 |
Pressure Boundary Condition | Matt Umbel | Main CFD Forum | 0 | January 11, 2002 11:06 |
The Boundary Condition about the Flat Plate | boing | Main CFD Forum | 1 | January 6, 2002 17:53 |