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

Validity of very fast boussinesq time-explicit CFD solver.

Register Blogs Community New Posts Updated Threads Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old   May 5, 2023, 19:33
Default Validity of very fast boussinesq time-explicit CFD solver.
  #1
New Member
 
Join Date: May 2023
Posts: 15
Rep Power: 3
ALVRM is on a distinguished road
Hello

First time using this forum. I have been trying to build my own CFD code from scratch and have recently been testing the concept of a very quick time explicit solver for natural convection.

In the near-zero Mach range, the buoyancy force experienced in natural convection problems dominate the total forces experienced on a discretized element. Is it reasonable to completely ignore the convection and diffusion terms for zero-Mach problems? The pressure is solved implicitly in space, and therefore, guarantees a divergence free velocity field, which makes the solution incompressible in its nature.

Does anyone have a resource or white paper on this, where someone has tried to make a quick and dirty estimation of natural convection?

I would like to know the potential errors involved in doing this, and also would like to know the time step constraint required. Currently, I am using the convection term time step constraint, but that seems unnecessary considering I'm not using that term. My approach is the pressure projection method.
ALVRM is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   May 6, 2023, 06:34
Default
  #2
Senior Member
 
sbaffini's Avatar
 
Paolo Lampitella
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Italy
Posts: 2,191
Blog Entries: 29
Rep Power: 39
sbaffini will become famous soon enoughsbaffini will become famous soon enough
Send a message via Skype™ to sbaffini
You might want to take a look at this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Froude_number

Typically, from non dimensional numbers, one can understand which terms are negligible.

Honestly, altough I rarely see applications with gravity, I've never seen an application where the pressure is just linked to the external source while convection and diffusion are both negligible. In particular, my doubts are:

1) Imagine gravity can be absorbed by the pressure as a conservative force (it can't properly with boussinesq), so you would have just the time derivative and the pressure gradient. What is the meaning here? How do you even update pressure? And why then the unsteady velocity term is relevant but not the others?

2) If convection and diffusion are not relevant in momentum, why are they in the temperature equation?

In my experience, there is always one among convection and diffusion which is relevant, otherwise they are both, and not none just because a source term is much higher. But you may want to check this better with someone who has direct experience.
sbaffini is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply

Tags
boussinesq, low-mach, pressure projection, variable density, zero-mach


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
[Other] Contribution a new utility: refine wall layer mesh based on yPlus field lakeat OpenFOAM Community Contributions 58 December 23, 2021 03:36
LES, Courant Number, Crash, Sudden Alhasan OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 5 November 22, 2019 03:05
dynamic Mesh is faster than MRF???? sharonyue OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 14 August 26, 2013 08:47
plot over time fferroni OpenFOAM Post-Processing 7 June 8, 2012 08:56
Could anybody help me see this error and give help liugx212 OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 3 January 4, 2006 19:07


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 00:38.