[vut]

Hi all,

I try to simulate the flow through a pipe (L/D=100).

I set an inlet pressure (inlet circular section of the pipe) and an outlet pressure boundary condition (outlet circular section).

Unfortunately, the mass flow rate computed does not match the one measured experimentally!!!

Have you an idea to solve it? The problem is quite fundamental, I suppose.

Thanks,

[FMDenaro]

Originally Posted by vut

Hi all,

I try to simulate the flow through a pipe (L/D=100).

I set an inlet pressure (inlet circular section of the pipe) and an outlet pressure boundary condition (outlet circular section).

Unfortunately, the mass flow rate computed does not match the one measured experimentally!!!

Have you an idea to solve it? The problem is quite fundamental, I suppose.

Thanks,

you should provide more details about your set of equations and the way in which your bc are prescribed in the system

[vut]

Dear Denaro,

The geometry considered is very simple.

A pipe Length = 100 x Diameter.

The inlet pressure is 3 bar and the outlet is atmosphere (thus, I set a pressure outlet of 0 bar).

I choosed laminar as viscous model because there is no turbulence in this configuration.

However, the computed mass flow rate does not match the experimental value.

Tell me if you need more details.

Originally Posted by FMDenaro

you should provide more details about your set of equations and the way in which your bc are prescribed in the system

[FMDenaro]

You said nothing about your computational setup.
For laminar pipe flow You have an analytical solution to check for, have You already tested?

[vut]

I compared the results given by Fluent and the analytical value. They are different!

My computational setup is simple: laminar as viscous model, second order, 10e-6 as residual.

Originally Posted by FMDenaro

You said nothing about your computational setup.
For laminar pipe flow You have an analytical solution to check for, have You already tested?

[FMDenaro]

what about the formulation you chose?

has the streamwise velocity developed a parabolic profiles? Do the other velocity components vanish?

[vut]

I understand what you mean.

In fact, the length of the tube is not long enough to obtain a fully developed Hagen-Poiseille flow. The pressure drop is almost linear. However, the mass flow rate obtained is not equal to that measured.

To go further, the configuration above is a preliminary test for a more complex geometry I have to simulate: A flow through three successive cylinders called three disks.

- The first and the third one have small diameters but the second one has a big diameter (ten times).

- I have experimental data and I realized that Fluent do not give good results in terms of mass flow rate.

- Let's consider that a bc pressure inlet (3 bar) and a bc pressure outlet (0 bar) are applied. I used a RNG k-epsilon as viscous model.

That's would be great if you have some excellent ideas

Thanks in advance

Originally Posted by FMDenaro

what about the formulation you chose?

has the streamwise velocity developed a parabolic profiles? Do the other velocity components vanish?

[FMDenaro]

I still can not understand your setup... Laminar flow and k-eps model????

[agd]

What are you using for your analytical solution? What Re are you running at?

[lovecraft22]

This is the setup (I guess):
http://www.cfd-online.com/Forums/mai...condition.html

Question: you said your inlet pressure is 3bar and your outlet pressure is the ambient pressure and you set it at 0bar. Now, actually the ambient pressure is 1bar. Your setup is ok as long as your inlet pressure is relative to ambient pressure otherwise you might be missing a bar.