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

Lattice Boltzmann: Drag and lift calculation when varying number of lattices

Register Blogs Community New Posts Updated Threads Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old   May 29, 2024, 06:11
Default Lattice Boltzmann: Drag and lift calculation when varying number of lattices
  #1
New Member
 
Anonymous
Join Date: Jan 2024
Posts: 4
Rep Power: 2
AdvancedSimulation is on a distinguished road
Dear colleagues,


I am relatively new to LBM and I have tried for more than a week to compute the lift and drag coeff in the 2D problem of a Re=100 round cylinder in a channel with a Poiseuille flow (to be validated with Schafer & Turek https://link.springer.com/chapter/10...322-89849-4_39). The reported benchmark values in Schafer & Turek are periodic oscillations witch Cd_max = 3.22 with Cd_avg =3.20 approx; Cl=+/- 0.96 approx.


For the calculation I have used LBM with SRT and the momentum exchange method with the easy-to-code bounce-back method (for cylinder and walls). I am aware the method detects my cylinder boundaries properly and does not include the channel walls in the calculation. I attach a dynamic gif which shows how each solid node is properly identified from each node of the boundary (from the i-th yellow node position, neighbouring solid nodes are plotted sequentially).



The problem is that every time I change the number of lattices in x or y direction, the lift and drag plots vary (especially in terms of the period of the oscillation, which i.e. seems to be kinda doubled if number of y-lattices is doubled, as in the attached figure). The flow velocity seems to be correct (changes may be due to the different frequency in the oscillations that change the "time" at which velocity profile is being visualised in my figure).



My deltax=deltay=deltat=1, and the proportion of the domain is kept (image attached) as so I do not understand why my Cl and Cd have such changes.


May I have a bug in my code? May I be missing anything?

May I be missing anything particularly in the post-processing? Perhaps I have to make changes in the coefficient since Fx and Fy increase with the number of lattices (my guess is no because D also increases)?



Possible relevant facts:
ly (number of nodes in y-direction) determines the channel height (H=ly-2, since the top and bottom walls nodes must be not counted). Since H/D=4.1, I compute the diameter from ly as D=H/4.1 = (ly - 2)/4.1. Thus, dimensionalisation depends on ly.

I compute force coefficients by (note U=U_mean at inlet and D is the one calculated above in the beginning of the code):
Fx./(0.5.*(U^2).*ceil(D))
Fy./(0.5.*(U^2).*ceil(D))



Any support is pretty much appreciated!!!


Many thanks in advance
Attached Images
File Type: jpg boundary-solid-detection.jpg (54.5 KB, 4 views)
File Type: png domain.png (12.9 KB, 3 views)
File Type: png ly75_vs_ly150.png (56.2 KB, 4 views)
File Type: png ly75_vs_ly150_zoom.png (42.5 KB, 2 views)
File Type: gif solid_boundary_detectionGIF.gif (175.1 KB, 10 views)

Last edited by AdvancedSimulation; May 29, 2024 at 07:36.
AdvancedSimulation 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
Lattice Boltzmann, LIFT and DRAG forces Puigar Main CFD Forum 2 May 30, 2024 07:58
RANS shape optimization all gradients are zero cfd-jg SU2 Shape Design 0 April 24, 2024 10:52
Calculation of lift and drag coefficients on airfoil CoolHersheys OpenFOAM Post-Processing 5 September 27, 2021 07:04
Drag and lift calculation in Arbitrary Mesh Interface simulation anon_q OpenFOAM 7 April 22, 2018 14:24
wrong SU2 calculation for lift and drag coefficient for NAC4421 mechy SU2 7 January 9, 2017 06:18


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 00:11.