CFD Online Logo CFD Online URL
www.cfd-online.com
[Sponsors]
Home > Forums > General Forums > Main CFD Forum

Turbulent Jet

Register Blogs Community New Posts Updated Threads Search

Like Tree3Likes

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old   October 13, 2017, 14:40
Default
  #41
Senior Member
 
Filippo Maria Denaro
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 6,849
Rep Power: 73
FMDenaro has a spectacular aura aboutFMDenaro has a spectacular aura aboutFMDenaro has a spectacular aura about
Quote:
Originally Posted by selig5576 View Post
Dr. Denaro,

I agree, however I believe I am already doing this when I solve the PPE at the boundary:

R_{nx-1,j} = \frac{\rho}{dt} \left(\frac{u^{n+1}_{nx,j} - uf^{*}_{nx-2,j}}{dx} + \frac{vf^{*}_{2,j} - vf^{*}_{2,j-1}}{dy} \right)

P_{nx-1,j} = (1 - \omega) P_{nx-1,j} + \frac{\omega}{\frac{1}{dx^{2}} + \frac{2}{dy{2}}} 
\left(\frac{P_{nx-2,j}}{dx^{2}} + \frac{1}{dy^{2}} \left(P_{nx-1,j+1} + P_{nx-1,j-1}\right) - R_{nx-1,j}\right)

In this case u_{nx,j}^{n+1} = u_{nx-1,j}^{n+1} as I have an outflow BC. I could be wrong, but I do not set this in the PPE, but rather when I set the boundary conditions for u^{n+1}, v^{n+1}.

Not sure about you index notation in the PPE but you should have a row of the pressure matrix modified congruently by the BC while, conversely, I see still 5 elements in the row instead of 4.
Then, while computing cont(i,j) have you already stored the physical values of the velocity in ufnew and vfnew at the boundaries?
FMDenaro is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   October 13, 2017, 15:02
Default Ppe
  #42
Senior Member
 
Selig
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 213
Rep Power: 11
selig5576 is on a distinguished road
Dr. Denaro,

The way I am handling the boundary conditions for the PPE is as outlined in the image (I did not have room in the message box.) The only thing I am doing differently, is uf^{n+1}_{1,j} = u^{n+1}_{1,j}
Attached Images
File Type: png PPE_BC.png (45.5 KB, 9 views)
selig5576 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   October 13, 2017, 15:08
Default
  #43
Senior Member
 
Filippo Maria Denaro
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 6,849
Rep Power: 73
FMDenaro has a spectacular aura aboutFMDenaro has a spectacular aura aboutFMDenaro has a spectacular aura about
Ok, that's correct, I was wrong in reading the equation
FMDenaro is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   October 13, 2017, 16:29
Default
  #44
Senior Member
 
Selig
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 213
Rep Power: 11
selig5576 is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by FMDenaro View Post
Not sure about you index notation in the PPE but you should have a row of the pressure matrix modified congruently by the BC while, conversely, I see still 5 elements in the row instead of 4.
Then, while computing cont(i,j) have you already stored the physical values of the velocity in ufnew and vfnew at the boundaries?
When calculating cont(i,j) I have it before I do the velocity update, i.e. u = un, v = vn since we don't know un and vn yet.

So with my current formulation, is my BC for my PPE correct? I.e., even for outflow BC is setting uf^{*}_{nx,j} = uf^{n+1}_{nx,j}. It illudes me why my PPE won't converge due to a simple outflow BC...
selig5576 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   October 13, 2017, 17:40
Default
  #45
Senior Member
 
Filippo Maria Denaro
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 6,849
Rep Power: 73
FMDenaro has a spectacular aura aboutFMDenaro has a spectacular aura aboutFMDenaro has a spectacular aura about
Correct for Dirichlet bc.s on the velocity but how do you work for Neuman on the velocity??
FMDenaro is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   October 14, 2017, 14:30
Default Outflow BC for PPE
  #46
Senior Member
 
Selig
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 213
Rep Power: 11
selig5576 is on a distinguished road
The way I am handling the outflow BC is as follows

Using uf^{n+1}_{i,j}, vf^{n+1}_{i,j} as defined in the previous post, I am imposing i=nx on the continuity equation that is formed from the uf^{n+1}_{i,j}, vf^{n+1}_{i,j} veleocities which gives

\frac{uf^{n+1}_{i,j} - uf^{n+1}_{i-1,j}}{dx} + \frac{vf^{n+1}_{i,j} - vf^{n+1}_{i,j-1}}{dy} = 0

Since I am interested in imposing the Neumann BC at the outlet (i=nx) I get

\frac{uf^{n+1}_{nx,j} - uf^{n+1}_{nx-1,j}}{dx} + \frac{vf^{n+1}_{nx,j} - vf^{n+1}_{nx,j-1}}{dy} = 0

I am imposing that uf^{n+1}_{nx,j} = u^{n+1}_{nx,j} = u^{n+1}_{OUT} which gives

\frac{u^{n+1}_{nx,j} - uf^{n+1}_{nx-1,j}}{dx} + \frac{vf^{n+1}_{nx,j} - vf^{n+1}_{nx,j-1}}{dy} = 0

Expanding the terms and using SOR at the boundary I get

P_{nx-1,j} = (1 - \omega) P_{nx-1,j} +D \left(\frac{1}{dx^{2}} P_{nx-2,j} + \frac{1}{dy^{2}} \left(P_{nx-1,j+1} + P_{nx-1,j-1} \right) - R_{nx-1,j}\right)
D =  \frac{\omega}{1/dx^{2} + 2/dy^{2}}
R_{nx-1,j} =\frac{\rho}{dt} \left(\frac{u^{n+1}_{nx,j} - uf^{n+1}_{nx-2,j}}{dx} + \frac{vf^{n+1}_{nx-1,j} - vf^{n+1}_{nx-1,j-1}}{dy} \right)

Now, it is only after I calculate the un, vn (the corrector step), do I set u^{n+1}_{nx,j} = u^{n+1}_{nx-1,j}

Something else to mention, if I set P(2,2) = 1.0 and using un(nx,j) = un(nx-1,j), vn(nx,j) = vn(nx-1,j), while my solver doesnt crash (because I've created a fixed point), my jet doesnt ever really form. By that I mean the jet stops growing after 200 time steps. My theory is that since my pressure BCs are not correct, its affecting the jet formation.

To further isolate any bug, I have rewritten my solver in Matlab where I am using a basic explicit euler time integration.

Code:
close all;
clear all;
  
Lx = 1;               
Ly = 1;                
  
nx = 30;              
ny = 30;              
  
dx = Lx/(nx-1);        
dy = Ly/(ny-1);       
  
dt = 0.0001;          
  
rho = 1.0;  
nu =  0.1; 
                   
omega = 1.9;
  
IterMax = 15000;        
tol = 1e-6;
tEnd = 2.00;
  
x = zeros(nx,ny);               
y = zeros(nx,ny);
  
R =  zeros(nx,ny); 
P = zeros(nx,ny);
Res = zeros(nx,ny);
  
Cx = zeros(nx,ny);              
Cy = zeros(nx,ny);              
  
Dx = zeros(nx,ny);              
Dy = zeros(nx,ny);   
  
u = zeros(nx,ny);               
v = zeros(nx,ny);
  
us = zeros(nx,ny);
vs = zeros(nx,ny);
  
un = zeros(nx,ny);
vn = zeros(nx,ny);
  
uf = zeros(nx,ny);
vf = zeros(nx,ny);
  
ufs = zeros(nx,ny);
vfs = zeros(nx,ny);
  
Qx = zeros(nx,ny);
Qy = zeros(nx,ny);
  
DivU = zeros(nx,ny);

for j=1:ny
    for i=1:nx
        u(i,j) = 0.0;
        v(i,j) = 0.0;
        P(i,j) = 0.0;
    end 
end

for j=1:ny
    for i=1:nx
        x(i,j) = (i-1)*dx;
        y(i,j) = (j-1)*dy;
    end
end
  
t = 0.0;
  
while (t < tEnd)
    for j=1:ny
        for i=1:nx-1
            uf(i,j) = 0.5*(u(i+1,j) + u(i,j));
        end
    end
      
    for j=1:ny-1
        for i=1:nx
            vf(i,j) = 0.5*(v(i,j+1) + v(i,j));
        end
    end
    
    for j=2:ny-1
        for i=2:nx-1
            Dx(i,j) = nu*(1.0/dx^2*(u(i+1,j) - 2.0*u(i,j) + u(i-1,j)) + 1.0/dy^2*(u(i,j+1) - 2*u(i,j) + u(i,j-1)));                                   
            Dy(i,j) = nu*(1.0/dx^2*(v(i+1,j) - 2.0*v(i,j) + v(i-1,j)) + 1.0/dy^2*(v(i,j+1) - 2*v(i,j) + v(i,j-1)));  
              
            Cx(i,j) = (1.0/dx)*(uf(i,j).*uf(i,j) - uf(i-1,j).*uf(i-1,j)) + (1.0/dy)*(uf(i,j).*vf(i,j) - uf(i,j-1).*vf(i,j-1));
            Cy(i,j) = (1.0/dx)*(uf(i,j).*vf(i,j) - uf(i-1,j).*vf(i-1,j)) + (1.0/dy)*(vf(i,j).*vf(i,j) - vf(i,j-1).*vf(i,j-1));
              
            Qx(i,j) = -Cx(i,j) + Dx(i,j);
            Qy(i,j) = -Cy(i,j) + Dy(i,j);
              
            us(i,j) = u(i,j) + dt*Qx(i,j);
            vs(i,j) = v(i,j) + dt*Qy(i,j);
        end
    end
 
    
    us(1,:) = un(1,:);
    us(nx,:) = un(nx,:);
    us(:,1) = un(:,1);
    us(:,ny) = un(:,ny);
    
    vs(1,:) = vn(1,:);
    vs(nx,:) = vn(1,:);
    vs(:,1) = vn(:,1);
    vs(:,ny) = vn(:,ny);
      
    for j=1:ny
        for i=1:nx-1
            ufs(i,j) = 0.5*(us(i+1,j) + us(i,j));
        end
    end
      
    for j=1:ny-1
        for i=1:nx
            vfs(i,j) = 0.5*(vs(i,j+1) + vs(i,j));
        end
    end
      
    for j=3:ny-2
        for i=3:nx-2
            R(i,j) = (rho/dt)*((1/dx)*(ufs(i,j) - ufs(i-1,j)) + (1/dy)*(vfs(i,j) - vfs(i,j-1)));
        end
    end
    
    Iter = 0;
      
    while (Iter <= IterMax)              
        for j=3:ny-2
            for i=3:nx-2
                P(i,j) = (1-omega)*P(i,j) + omega/(2/dx^2 + 2/dy^2)*((P(i+1,j) + P(i-1,j))/dx^2 + (P(i,j+1) + P(i,j-1))/dy^2 - R(i,j));
            end
        end
          
        for j=3:ny-2
            R(2,j) = (rho/dt)*((1/dx)*(ufs(2,j) - un(1,j)) + (1/dy)*(vfs(2,j) - vfs(2,j-1)));
            P(2,j) = (1-omega)*P(2,j) + omega/(1/dx^2 + 2/dy^2)*((1/dx^2)*P(3,j) + (1/dy^2)*(P(2,j+1) + P(2,j-1)) - R(2,j));
      
            %Outflow BC, point of interest
            R(nx-1,j) = (rho/dt)*((1.0/dx)*(un(nx-1,j) - ufs(nx-2,j)) + (1/dy)*(vfs(nx-1,j) - vfs(nx-1,j-1)));
            P(nx-1,j) = (1-omega)*P(nx-1,j) + omega/(1/dx^2 + 2/dy^2)*((1/dx^2)*P(nx-2,j) + (1/dy^2)*(P(nx-1,j+1) + P(nx-1,j-1)) - R(nx-1,j));
        end
  
        for i=3:nx-2
            R(i,2) = (rho/dt)*((1/dx)*(ufs(i,2) - ufs(i-1,2)) + (1/dy)*(vfs(i,2) - vn(i,1)));
            P(i,2) = (1-omega)*P(i,2) + omega/(2/dx^2 + 1/dy^2)*((1/dx^2)*(P(i+1,2) + P(i-1,2)) + (1/dy^2)*P(i,3) - R(i,2));
     
            R(i,ny-1) = (rho/dt)*((1/dx)*(ufs(i,ny-1) - ufs(i-1,ny-1)) + (1/dy)*(vn(i,ny) - vfs(i,ny-2)));
            P(i,ny-1) = (1-omega)*P(i,ny-1) + omega/(2/dx^2 + 1/dy^2)*((1/dx^2)*(P(i+1,ny-1) + P(i-1,ny-1)) + (1/dy^2)*P(i,ny-2) - R(i,ny-1));
        end
          
        R(2,ny-1) = (rho/dt)*((1/dx)*(ufs(2,ny-1) - un(1,ny-1)) + (1/dy)*(v(2,ny) - vfs(2,ny-1)));
        P(2,ny-1) = (1-omega)*P(2,ny-1) + omega/(1/dx^2 + 1/dy^2)*((1/dx^2)*P(3,ny-1) + (1/dy^2)*P(2,ny-2) - R(2,ny-1));
            
      
        R(nx-1,2) = (rho/dt)*((1/dx)*(un(nx,2) - ufs(nx-2,2)) + (1/dy)*(vfs(nx-1,2) - vn(nx-1,1)));
        P(nx-1,2) = (1-omega)*P(nx-1,2) + omega/(1/dx^2 + 1/dy^2)*((1/dx^2)*P(nx-2,2) + (1/dy^2)*P(nx-1,3) - R(nx-1,2));
            
        R(nx-1,ny-1) = (rho/dt)*((1/dx)*(un(nx,ny-1) - ufs(nx-2,ny-1)) + (1/dy)*(vn(nx-1,ny) - vfs(nx-1,ny-2)));
        P(nx-1,ny-1) = (1-omega)*P(nx-1,ny-1) + omega/(1/dx^2 + 1/dy^2)*((1/dx^2)*P(nx-2,ny-1) + (1/dy^2)*P(nx-1,ny-2) - R(nx-1,ny-1));
         
        %R(2,2) = (rho/dt)*((1.0/dx)*(ufs(2,2) - un(1,2)) + (1.0/dy)*(vfs(2,2) - vn(2,1)));
        %P(2,2) = (1-omega)*P(2,2) + omega/(1.0/dx^2 + 1.0/dy^2)*((1.0/dx^2)*P(3,2) + (1.0/dy^2)*P(2,3) - R(2,2));
       P(2,2) = 1.0;
        Res = 0.0;
         
        for j=3:ny-2
            for i=3:nx-2
                Res(i,j) = ((1.0/dx^2)*(P(i-1,j) - 2*P(i,j) + P(i+1,j)) + (1.0/dy^2)*(P(i,j-1) - 2*P(i,j) + P(i,j+1))) - R(i,j);
            end
        end
          
        error = sqrt(dx*dy*sum(sum(Res.^2)));
          
        if (error >= tol)
            Iter = Iter + 1;
        else
            fprintf("PPE has Converged")
            break;
        end
    end 
     
    P(1,:) = P(2,:) + (dx/dt)*(us(1,:) - un(1,:));
    P(nx,:) = P(nx-1,:) - (dx/dt)*(us(nx,:) - un(nx,:));
    P(:,1) = P(:,2) + (dy/dt)*(vs(:,1) - vn(:,1));
    P(:,ny) = P(:,ny-1) - (dy/dt)*(vs(:,ny) - vn(:,ny));
   
    for j=2:ny-1
        for i=2:nx-1
            un(i,j) = us(i,j) - (dt/(2.0*dx*rho))*(P(i+1,j) - P(i-1,j));
            vn(i,j) = vs(i,j) - (dt/(2.0*dy*rho))*(P(i,j+1) - P(i,j-1));
        end
    end
  
    un(:,ny) = 0.0;
    %basic inlet profile
    un(1,12:15) = 1.0;
    %outflow BC for u
    un(nx,:) = u(nx-1,j);
    un(:,1) = 0.0;
  
    %Set outflow BC for v
    vn(nx,:) = v(nx-1,j);
    vn(1,:) = 0.0; 
    vn(:,ny) = 0.0; 
    vn(:,1) = 0.0; 
      
    u = un;
    v = vn;
      
   
    t = t + dt
      
    contourf(x,y,un,20);
    colormap jet
    xlabel('x');
    ylabel('y');
    title(['t = ',num2str(t)]);
    pause(0.001);
end
selig5576 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   October 14, 2017, 14:43
Default
  #47
Senior Member
 
Filippo Maria Denaro
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 6,849
Rep Power: 73
FMDenaro has a spectacular aura aboutFMDenaro has a spectacular aura aboutFMDenaro has a spectacular aura about
"I am imposing that which gives"

This way I don't see any Neumann BC.s ... you should start from the relation

u*=u^n+1+ dP/dx - > du*/dx=d^n+1/dx+d2P/dx2 -> du*/dx=d2P/dx2
FMDenaro is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   October 15, 2017, 12:59
Default outflow BC for PPE
  #48
Senior Member
 
Selig
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 213
Rep Power: 11
selig5576 is on a distinguished road
Given the relation you provided, I have tried to formulate a BC, and this is what I have.

I consider

\frac{P_{i-1,j} - 2P_{i,j} + P_{i+1,j}}{dx^{2}} + \frac{P_{i,j-1} - 2P_{i,j} + P_{i,j+1}}{dy^{2}} = R_{i,j}
R_{i,j } = \frac{\rho}{dt} \left(\frac{uf^{*}_{i,j} - uf^{*}_{i-1,j}}{dx} + \frac{vf^{*}_{i,j} - vf^{*}_{i,j-1}}{dy} \right)
Using the relation \frac{\partial^{2} P}{\partial x^{2}} = \frac{uf^{*}_{i,j} - uf^{*}_{i-1,j}}{dx} and evaluating at the outflow I get

\frac{P_{i,j-1} - 2P_{i,j} + P_{i,j+1}}{dy^{2}} =  \frac{\rho}{dt} \left(\frac{vf^{*}_{i,j} - vf^{*}_{i,j-1}}{dy} \right)

Using SOR and evaluating at the boundary I get

P_{i,j} = (1 - \omega)P_{i,j} + \frac{\omega}{2 dy^{2}} \left(\frac{P_{i,j-1} + P_{i,j+1}}{dy^{2}} - \frac{vf^{*}_{i,j} - vf^{*}_{i,j-1}}{dy} \right)

I then evaluate at i=nx-1. Is there literature on outflow BC for PPEs on colocated grids? I was unable to find anything...
selig5576 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   October 15, 2017, 13:47
Default
  #49
Senior Member
 
Filippo Maria Denaro
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 6,849
Rep Power: 73
FMDenaro has a spectacular aura aboutFMDenaro has a spectacular aura aboutFMDenaro has a spectacular aura about
Well, we need to be careful in the index and colocation. I assume (I hope to be right) that i=nx is the index for the faces outflow. The equation for the pressure is written in the interior node shifted from the outflow face by -dx/2, right?

Therefore, the Neumann BC.s is fromally written on the faces outflow then you insert them in the PPE. However, I see that one can work in different ways. I believe that a simple way is to write the BC directly at the node of the PPE, this way you have a tridiagonal system along y
FMDenaro is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   October 15, 2017, 14:10
Default Neumann BC for PPE
  #50
Senior Member
 
Selig
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 213
Rep Power: 11
selig5576 is on a distinguished road
Quote:
The equation for the pressure is written in the interior node shifted from the outflow face by -dx/2, right?
That is correct, hence my indexing for the interior is i=3,nx-2 and j=3,ny-2. With \frac{\partial^{2} P}{\partial x^{2}} = \frac{\partial u^{*}}{\partial x}, I do get a tridiagonal matrix along y. By PPE node do you mean at i=nx? If it is not too trouble, an example would be quite helpful
selig5576 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   October 15, 2017, 14:17
Default
  #51
Senior Member
 
Filippo Maria Denaro
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 6,849
Rep Power: 73
FMDenaro has a spectacular aura aboutFMDenaro has a spectacular aura aboutFMDenaro has a spectacular aura about
Quote:
Originally Posted by selig5576 View Post
That is correct, hence my indexing for the interior is i=3,nx-2 and j=3,ny-2. With \frac{\partial^{2} P}{\partial x^{2}} = \frac{\partial u^{*}}{\partial x}, I do get a tridiagonal matrix along y. By PPE node do you mean at i=nx? If it is not too trouble, an example would be quite helpful

Maybe the pressure equation written at i=nx-1, isnt'it?
To tell the truth, at present I don't remember a textbook where you can find an example for the implementation of outflow BC.s in the pressure equation on colocated grid.
FMDenaro is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   October 15, 2017, 14:36
Default BC
  #52
Senior Member
 
Selig
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 213
Rep Power: 11
selig5576 is on a distinguished road
No problem. My mistake, it should be i=nx-1.

Quote:
"I am imposing that which gives"

This way I don't see any Neumann BC.s ... you should start from the relation

u*=u^n+1+ dP/dx - > du*/dx=d^n+1/dx+d2P/dx2 -> du*/dx=d2P/dx2
So I should evaluate the PPE at i=nx-1

\frac{P_{nx-2,j} - 2P_{nx-1,j} + P_{nx,j}}{dx^{2}} + \frac{P_{nx-1,j-1} - 2P_{nx-1,j} + P_{nx-1,j+1}}{dy^{2}} =R_{nx-1,j}

R_{nx-1,j} = \frac{\rho}{dt} \left(\frac{uf_{nx-1,j}^{*} - uf_{nx-2,j}^{*}}{dx} + \frac{vf^{*}_{nx-1,j} - vf^{*}_{nx-1,j-1}}{dy} \right)

Now since I am evaluating the PPE at the boundary I then insert

\frac{P_{nx-2,j} - 2P_{nx-1,j} + P_{nx,j}}{dx^{2}} = \frac{uf_{nx-1,j}^{*} - uf_{nx-2,j}^{*}}{dx}

Solving for P_{nx,j} I get

P_{nx,j} =- P_{nx-2,j} - 2P_{nx-1,j} +  dx^{2} \frac{uf_{nx-1,j}^{*} - uf_{nx-2,j}^{*}}{dx}

And this goes into the PPE evaluated at i=nx-1? I feel like this is not right. Pardon the foolishness.
selig5576 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   October 15, 2017, 15:03
Default
  #53
Senior Member
 
Filippo Maria Denaro
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 6,849
Rep Power: 73
FMDenaro has a spectacular aura aboutFMDenaro has a spectacular aura aboutFMDenaro has a spectacular aura about
Quote:
Originally Posted by selig5576 View Post
No problem. My mistake, it should be i=nx-1.


So I should evaluate the PPE at i=nx-1

\frac{P_{nx-2,j} - 2P_{nx-1,j} + P_{nx,j}}{dx^{2}} + \frac{P_{nx-1,j-1} - 2P_{nx-1,j} + P_{nx-1,j+1}}{dy^{2}} =R_{nx-1,j}

R_{nx-1,j} = \frac{\rho}{dt} \left(\frac{uf_{nx-1,j}^{*} - uf_{nx-2,j}^{*}}{dx} + \frac{vf^{*}_{nx-1,j} - vf^{*}_{nx-1,j-1}}{dy} \right)

Now since I am evaluating the PPE at the boundary I then insert

\frac{P_{nx-2,j} - 2P_{nx-1,j} + P_{nx,j}}{dx^{2}} = \frac{uf_{nx-1,j}^{*} - uf_{nx-2,j}^{*}}{dx}

Solving for P_{nx,j} I get

P_{nx,j} =- P_{nx-2,j} - 2P_{nx-1,j} +  dx^{2} \frac{uf_{nx-1,j}^{*} - uf_{nx-2,j}^{*}}{dx}

And this goes into the PPE evaluated at i=nx-1? I feel like this is not right. Pardon the foolishness.

First, be careful to the ratio rho/dt you missed. Then, you can totally disregard the term in x and solving only the Pyy=(rho/dt) d(v*)/dy at i=nx-1. This way, you do not need to discretize the Neumann BC.
selig5576 likes this.
FMDenaro is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   October 15, 2017, 17:24
Default Boundary condition
  #54
Senior Member
 
Selig
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 213
Rep Power: 11
selig5576 is on a distinguished road
Thanks for pointing that out, so here is what I have formulated (I think I was on the right track)

\frac{P_{nx-1,j-1} - 2P_{nx-1,j} + P_{nx-1,j+1}}{dy^{2}} = \frac{\rho}{dt} \left(\frac{vf^{*}_{nx-1,j} - vf^{*}_{nx-1,j-1}}{dy} \right)
Using SOR at the boundary we get
P_{nx-1,j} = (1 - \omega) P_{nx-1,j} + \frac{\omega}{\frac{1}{dy^{2}} }\left(\frac{1}{dy^{2}} P_{nx-1,j-1} + P_{nx-1,j+1} - R_{nx-1,j}\right)
R_{nx-1,j} = \frac{\rho}{dt} \left(\frac{vf^{*}_{nx-1,j} - vf^{*}_{nx-1,j-1}}{dy} \right)

This is using the relation \frac{\partial^{2} P}{\partial x^{2}}
 = \frac{\rho}{dt} \frac{\partial u^{*}}{\partial x}
selig5576 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   October 15, 2017, 17:32
Default
  #55
Senior Member
 
Filippo Maria Denaro
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 6,849
Rep Power: 73
FMDenaro has a spectacular aura aboutFMDenaro has a spectacular aura aboutFMDenaro has a spectacular aura about
Seems ok. Do not forget that you have in the corners to add the BC.s also for v^n+1. Generally the cycles of the SOR are programmed differently, out of the do cycles.
FMDenaro is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Problem with divergence TDK FLUENT 13 December 14, 2018 07:00
LES of Turbulent Jet knuckles OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 1 March 31, 2016 20:33
turbulent jet ramo Main CFD Forum 1 September 4, 2005 08:43
Modelling a turbulent jet and k-epsilon constants Ant Siemens 3 January 24, 2005 16:56
Turbulent Intensity good or bad for a jet Christian Main CFD Forum 0 November 19, 2003 06:47


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:31.