|
[Sponsors] |
May 13, 2009, 01:08 |
need help on 3D meshing of flat-back airfoil
|
#1 |
Member
LSC
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 58
Rep Power: 17 |
The airfoil profile that I am meshing does not end with a common vertex at the trailing edge. It has a equal finite thickness for both upper and lower surface. I have followed the tutorials from Cornell. At the trailing edge, I have 3 vertex with 2 being the end points at the trailing edge and 1 at the center(y=0). My problem is with the 2 separate edges connecting the domain and the edge on the trailing edges. I tried using grid spacing with y+ =1 but encountered problems running the solver..I am actually doing 2D analysis but CFX only solves 3D..How to tackle the region?
|
|
May 16, 2009, 10:05 |
|
#2 |
Senior Member
John Chawner
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Fort Worth, Texas, USA
Posts: 275
Rep Power: 18 |
It seems to me that you need more than 3 points on the blunt trailing edge. By using only 3 points you have a huge spacing jump across the wake region thru the boundary layer mesh into the blunt-wake mesh.
My suggestion for the blunt trailing edge is to cluster points to the top and bottom using the same spacing as to the airfoil surface and put enough points on the TE to have a smooth variation in cell sizes. Hope this helps.
__________________
John Chawner / jrc@pointwise.com / www.pointwise.com Blog: http://blog.pointwise.com/ on Twitter: @jchawner |
|
May 16, 2009, 10:10 |
|
#3 |
Member
LSC
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 58
Rep Power: 17 |
Thanks a lot for the suggestion..will try it out
|
|
May 18, 2009, 06:27 |
|
#4 |
Member
Anton Lyaskin
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Samara, Russia
Posts: 66
Rep Power: 17 |
And why do you aim for y+=1 at the trailing edge? This gives you a huge spacing jump also in the flow direction. IMHO it's better to take the length of the first cell in the wake equal to the length of the last cell at the surface
|
|
May 18, 2009, 06:40 |
|
#5 |
Member
LSC
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 58
Rep Power: 17 |
I am trying to investigate whether a grid spacing corresponding to Y+=1 would give me more accurate results for Lift and Drag Coefficient.. The blunt trailing edge certainly posed a lot of problems and I am trying very hard to figure how to mesh the wake region..What I tried was to put more nodes in the wake region which grid spacing equal to the surface node which increasing grid size towards the centerline..not sure whether this is the best approach..kindly advice
|
|
May 18, 2009, 07:26 |
|
#6 |
Member
Anton Lyaskin
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Samara, Russia
Posts: 66
Rep Power: 17 |
Well, y+ at the trailing edge itself wouldn't have much influence at the results. However you'll probably see some difference for y+=1 and y+, say, 100, but just because of numerical error caused by spacing jump.
Actually from my experience I've found another tricky thing - if you have a "stripe" of fine mesh in wake, its alignment also influence the results (CL). That's because flow leaves the trailing edge more or less in the direction of airfoil midline and then it takes some distance to turn back to flow direction. This in turn means that somewhere close to the airfoil you have spacing jump in the flow direction again! To minimize the effect you have to align the mesh with the wake - make a run, find the zero streamline, align the block edges with it, probably make a couple of more iterations, and than repeat the process for the other angle of attack... |
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Airfoil Meshing Scheme in Gambit | J. Weiler | FLUENT | 6 | October 2, 2011 16:41 |
Meshing airfoil | Wason | FLUENT | 6 | November 8, 2009 12:50 |
meshing over a flat plate | bhanu kishan | Main CFD Forum | 1 | February 7, 2009 15:45 |
help! meshing on airfoil naca0015 using cosmosflo | TTS | Main CFD Forum | 0 | March 4, 2008 04:57 |
Meshing An airfoil with a simple plain flap | S. Kalam | FLUENT | 7 | January 30, 2005 21:22 |