|
[Sponsors] |
![]() |
![]() |
#1 |
Senior Member
-
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Germany
Posts: 184
Rep Power: 14 ![]() |
Is a two-dimensional simulation able to reproduce the law of wall, especially the log-law region?
I am interested in the comparison of different models:
How do commercial tools, e.g. Fluent, handle this? Thank you for the discussion.
__________________
Check out my side project: A multiphysics discontinuous Galerkin framework: Youtube, Gitlab. Last edited by Eifoehn4; February 15, 2024 at 17:37. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Senior Member
Lucky
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Orlando, FL USA
Posts: 5,728
Rep Power: 66 ![]() ![]() ![]() |
1 & 2 There's 0 difference between 2D RANS and 3D RANS
3 It gives a law of the wall, but a 2D one and not a 3D one. So yes and simultaneously, no. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Senior Member
-
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Germany
Posts: 184
Rep Power: 14 ![]() |
Thank you LuckyTran. This was also my guess. This means (1), (2) and (3) are comparable in 3D however not in 2D.
Or in other words: A high resolved 2D simulation without turbulence model will not reproduce the log-law region. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Senior Member
Lucky
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Orlando, FL USA
Posts: 5,728
Rep Power: 66 ![]() ![]() ![]() |
It produces a law of the wall but with a different Karman constant.
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 | |
Senior Member
Arjun
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Nurenberg, Germany
Posts: 1,282
Rep Power: 34 ![]() ![]() |
I do not think commercial codes even need to worry about it. 2D equation are special approximation on 3d equations.
The point is that because in our nature we have 3d world and navier stokes are written for it. This is what commecial codes provide for. Quote:
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 | |
Senior Member
-
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Germany
Posts: 184
Rep Power: 14 ![]() |
Quote:
Do you have a reference for the different value in 2D? Currently I would expect a viscous and buffer layer, only. |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Senior Member
Filippo Maria Denaro
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 6,830
Rep Power: 73 ![]() ![]() ![]() |
A simple example is a flow around a wing. If wing is finite, you have no homogeneous direction, the flow remains 3D even in statistical sense. Of course, also the profile of velocities will change.
But if you assume a homogeneous wing, that is a 3D wing extending periodically in spanwise direction, your 3D solution is only a 2D solution repeated in that direction. The key is when you can afford the physical model with a 2D RANS ... |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 | |
Senior Member
andy
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 279
Rep Power: 18 ![]() |
Quote:
If you project a 2D geometry to form a 3D one with periodic boundary conditions on the ends then you will be able to simulate a law of the wall behaviour if the periodic conditions are far enough apart for the motion on the planes to not influence each other through the solution domain. This will depend on the length scale of the largest turbulent motion which tends to vary from flow to flow. |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 | |
Senior Member
-
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Germany
Posts: 184
Rep Power: 14 ![]() |
Quote:
My question is actually quite simple: You have a highly resolved 2D simulation of a flat plate without turbulence model and without wall function (steady or unsteady using the 2D equations). You take a line plot through the boundary. Is a logarithmic region visible? Yes or no? ![]() Edit: I meant "cannot exist in 2D" |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 |
Senior Member
Joern Beilke
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Dresden
Posts: 511
Rep Power: 20 ![]() |
Why don't you try it and tell us, what you find?
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#11 | |
Senior Member
Filippo Maria Denaro
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 6,830
Rep Power: 73 ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Quote:
are you thinking a sort of DNS or LES in 2D? or a high resolved RANS? The problem you stated has zero mean spanwise flow but in LES/DNS your 2D solution would be unsteady, even without the vortex stretching. Then you have to do the ensemble averaging of data. If the effect of the vortex stretching is disregardable in average, you could get some acceptable approximation in the averaged. Note that I am thinking to a region of fully developed turbulence. If you think to develop turbulence from a laminar BL, the transition regions is not well represented. But such a case is well suited and would be resolved very well by a 2D RANS. |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#12 |
Senior Member
-
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Germany
Posts: 184
Rep Power: 14 ![]() |
I did a test yesterday (a fast one) and could not reproduce a logarithmic region.
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#13 | |
Senior Member
-
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Germany
Posts: 184
Rep Power: 14 ![]() |
Quote:
![]() ![]() |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#14 | |
Senior Member
Filippo Maria Denaro
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 6,830
Rep Power: 73 ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Quote:
If you have a resolved grid, a high accurate method, the 2d solution will develop instability and produces a time-dependent flow even in 2D. Be sure you grid is really so fine, ensure that the lenght is chosen to be long enough and use a scheme without numerical dissipation. |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#15 |
Senior Member
Lucky
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Orlando, FL USA
Posts: 5,728
Rep Power: 66 ![]() ![]() ![]() |
I bet you have done a transient laminar calc and that's why you only see a viscous region, because that's exactly what a laminar flow is, it's viscous everywhere.
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#16 |
Senior Member
|
Don't take me wrong, you all know what I'm going to write, but I feel like a summary is needed.
A 2D unsteady Navier-Stokes simulation with no additional term (e.g. turbulence model) is laminar. Laminar in the special way of a system that can only be laminar. Laminar meaning that none of the defining features of turbulence are present. This 2D simulation, as such, can't reproduce the log-law as the underlying dynamics, <u'v'>, is different between the two. Analogously, using a proper model for <u'v'> in a steady 2D simulation is sufficient to get a log law, as any 2D RANS test will show. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#17 | |
Senior Member
-
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Germany
Posts: 184
Rep Power: 14 ![]() |
Quote:
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#18 |
Senior Member
andy
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 279
Rep Power: 18 ![]() |
Performing that simulation looks like a good idea to me if you doubt flow becomes unstable at high Reynolds numbers. Laminar 2D flow instabilities are often what initiates turbulence for example vortex streets, developing free or boundary shear layers,... What happens when motion in the 3rd direction is suppressed like in temperature inversions or strong gravity fields is interesting but of limited practical interest due to rarity.
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#19 | |
Senior Member
Filippo Maria Denaro
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 6,830
Rep Power: 73 ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Quote:
How do you define the extension of your computational domain? Are you sure you extended it at least up to Re_x=O(10^5) and the BL is resolved (apart the region near x=0)? |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#20 |
Senior Member
Lucky
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Orlando, FL USA
Posts: 5,728
Rep Power: 66 ![]() ![]() ![]() |
It's not clear to me what steps were taken to even ensure that the 2D simulation is a proper DNS. Btw, people have done 2D DNS before. I want to point out that even a 3D high resolution mesh can produce a fully laminar solution if you do not take all the proper steps to include perturbations in the initial condition and the boundary conditions. The challenges you are facing are not caused by "2D turbulence"
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Tags |
turbulence |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Can converge do two dimensional simulation? | Weiqiang Liu | CONVERGE | 2 | August 21, 2020 21:34 |
Before you post a question please read this | ghorrocks | CFX | 5 | October 23, 2019 07:44 |
Confusion choosing between static / transient simulations | TharunSK | CFX | 1 | March 15, 2019 17:53 |
Can SU2-6.0.1 do RANS + Rotating Mesh simulations for helicopter rotors? (Bug?) | adrisabate | SU2 | 0 | July 20, 2018 08:08 |
Timestepping in two - phase Simulations using RSM | challenger85 | CFX | 0 | January 4, 2010 05:00 |