|
[Sponsors] |
April 28, 2005, 05:46 |
timestep for time dependent RANS
|
#1 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Hi,
I wonder if there is a size limit of the smallest time step for unsteady RANS models. I read that the averaging time T should be T>> Tf , where the turbulent fluctuations have the time scale Tf. Where is the problem setting T=Tf? Maybe, someone has an explanation. Regards! fab |
|
April 28, 2005, 08:22 |
Re: timestep for time dependent RANS
|
#2 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
The problem with T=O(Tf) is that in performing the Reynolds averaging you have "averaged out" these time scales. Furthermore in oder to justify retaining the d/dt term in the averaged equations there must be scale separation (i.e. T >> Tf ). In unsteady RANS the unsteadiness should be viewed as a slow modulation of the more rapid turbulent fluctuations.
|
|
April 29, 2005, 02:41 |
Re: timestep for time dependent RANS
|
#3 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Hi,
thanks! I found for Tf: Tf= max (k/epsilon, alpha sqrt(nu/epsilon)) with alpha=6. So should the limit for T be: T > 10*Tf ? Regards! fab |
|
April 29, 2005, 04:18 |
Re: timestep for time dependent RANS
|
#4 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Read the following paper, G. Iaccarino,A.Ooi, P. A. Durbin, M. Behnia, "Reynolds averaged simulation of unsteady separated flow", International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow,Volume 24, 2003, pp.147-156. Then you can get answer for your question.
|
|
May 2, 2005, 02:29 |
Re: timestep for time dependent RANS
|
#5 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Hi,
thanks! I will try to get a copy. Greetings! fab |
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Restart 2-way FSI with different timestep? | Lance | CFX | 10 | April 17, 2013 01:37 |
RANS in integral form | siw | Main CFD Forum | 0 | August 17, 2010 04:18 |
Mapping RANS data onto an LES | christian | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 0 | April 13, 2007 06:31 |
Timestep and RANS assumption | HS | FLUENT | 2 | November 19, 2005 18:10 |
Request for truth on VLES/Unsteady RANS | Nick Georgiadis | Main CFD Forum | 16 | September 1, 1999 17:43 |