[rob3rt 0ng]

Hi All,

I think I've asked this question here, but haven't got a reply yet (or maybe I havent read carefully)

What is the difference between running scalar transport in simpleFoam under controlDict compared to when I run using the steady solution obtained from simpleFoam and then run scalarTransportFoam? And how to specify effective diffusivity if using the former method?

Kind regards,
Robert

[kingjewel1]

Originally Posted by rob3rt 0ng

Hi All,

I think I've asked this question here, but haven't got a reply yet (or maybe I havent read carefully)

What is the difference between running scalar transport in simpleFoam under controlDict using the scalcompared to when I run using the steady solution obtained from simpleFoam and then run scalarTransportFoam? And how to specify effective diffusivity if using the former method?

Kind regards,
Robert

Hi Robert,

From what I've read if you run the scalarTransportFoam in transient mode then the turbulent diffusion is important because the scalar needs to get the diffusion from the turbulent field. But if you run it post-processing then the flow field is frozen and so turbulent diffusion is not varying with time and so is fixed for each cell. From my experience the latter does not work well as it gives unbouded (wrong) values. I have not worked out how to get the Schmidt number into the solver you suggested in your previous post. What's your experience with all this?

[rob3rt 0ng]

Originally Posted by kingjewel1

Hi Robert,

From what I've read if you run the scalarTransportFoam in transient mode then the turbulent diffusion is important because the scalar needs to get the diffusion from the turbulent field. But if you run it post-processing then the flow field is frozen and so turbulent diffusion is not varying with time and so is fixed for each cell. From my experience the latter does not work well as it gives unbouded (wrong) values. I have not worked out how to get the Schmidt number into the solver you suggested in your previous post. What's your experience with all this?

I haven't tried implementing this, but I have some experience with the alphaEff and turbulent Pr number and I'm guessing they should be similar. My problem is I'm not too sure if I can run the scalar transport using the fvOptions and simpleFoam concurrently or run the scalar transport after I get converged simpleFoam values.

[vkoppejan]

I agree with what kingjewel says but it's important to review your systems and evaluate what the dominating mechanisms of transport are.

Also if your flow field reaches a good steady state you could use the frozen flowfield for scalar transport. It's important to realize that your approximating the solution in any case so think about the accuracy you need and the time you want to or can spend for obtaining this.

If you need to evaluate a lot of cases for instance, steady state calculations can help you pinpoint area's of parameter sets that yield good results, you can then use 'proper' transient simulations to get a more detailed solution.

[rob3rt 0ng]

Ah ok, thanks for the tips kingjewel and Viktor.

If I run the scalar using the fvOptions, how would I incorporate the turbulence diffusion? Does the scalarTransport from the libutilityFunctionObjects is directly related to the original scalarTransportFoam? And if so, do I specify the Schmidt number of each species variables in the transportProperties or in the controlDict?

Kind regards,
Robert

[wayne14]

Originally Posted by rob3rt 0ng

Ah ok, thanks for the tips kingjewel and Viktor.

If I run the scalar using the fvOptions, how would I incorporate the turbulence diffusion? Does the scalarTransport from the libutilityFunctionObjects is directly related to the original scalarTransportFoam? And if so, do I specify the Schmidt number of each species variables in the transportProperties or in the controlDict?

Kind regards,
Robert

Hi Robert,
Here I have implemented a passiveScalarSimpleFoam which uses the fvOptions to give a mass source, and takes turbulence diffusion as well as the Schmidt number into account. It has been validated against a wind-tunnel experiment data. You can find it with a simple test case here.

Regards,
Yan

[Juzzvy]

Good day. I wanted to know if I can implement a tracer in OpenFOAM wherein at that point it will release particles.. I am simulating urban canyon pollution, and based in what I have red on this thread, the scalartransport function and the tracer can be used. My question is, how can I specify which point is my tracer located? Thank you

[wayne14]

Use fvOptions.

Are you sure that turbulence diffusion and Schmidt number are taken care of in the scalartransport function? I would recommend the solver I posted above. It has been validated against a wind-tunnel experiment data of a 2D urban canyon pollution case.

Best
Yan

[Juzzvy]

Hi Yan,
I don't know yet, but trying to implement the solver that you've made, by the way, does it incorporate the turbulence models? I will try to vary my turbulence model to be used. And also does it work on 3d simulations? Thank you

[wayne14]

Yes. It is easy in OpenFOAM to change turbulence models and case dimensions.

[Juzzvy]

Hi sorry for the late reply.. I already ran the case you've posted. I'm just wondering how do you visualize the emission/particles in that case? Thank you again

[Juzzvy]

Hi Yan,
I just wanted to ask about the solver that you've recommend, how do you determine the concentration of pollution using that solver? is it the TS? Thank you

[rarnaunot]

Hi foamers,

I know this is an old post but I have a question about scalars/concentration at scalarTransportFoam solver. I'have seen that there are some experts at this threat so hope one of you can help me:

In my case I have two inlets (Inlet 1 and RecirculationInt) and two outlets (Outlet and RecirculationOutlet).

The flow enters the domain by the Inlet and exits through Outlet but, the flow that enters through Inlet and RecirculationInlet exits the domain through RecirculationOutlet so that the flows going in and out are:

Inlet Flow= Q1 +Q2
RecirculationInlet= Q3
Outlet= -Q1
RecirculationOutlet= -(Q2+Q3)

Now I need to introduce an scalar so that the concentration that goes out through RecirculationOutlet need to enter again in the domain in order to avoid lossing my scalar concentration.

I'm able to calculate the surface concentration of the patch throughout:

{
Recirc_T
        {

            type            surfaceFieldValue;
            operation       areaIntegrate;
            libs ("libfieldFunctionObjects.so");
            writeArea       yes;
            regionType      patch;
            surfaceFormat   foam;
            name            RecirculationOutlet;
            enabled         true;
            writeControl   writeTime;
            //writeControl   timeStep; //Output every timestep
            //writeInterval   1; //Cada timestep, guarda valor
            valueOutput     true;
            log             false;
            writeFields     no;
            fields          
            ( T)
}

But this is just for post-processing. Does anybody know how to do this?

Thanks!

[tomf]

Hi,

Just some short hints, but depending on the version you are using, maybe you can use:

expressions

Or groovyBC from swak4Foam.

Best of luck,

Tom

[rarnaunot]

Hi,

I have tried groovyBC as explained by tomf and it worked perfect for me

Originally Posted by tomf

groovyBC from swak4Foam.

Thank you very much!!!