[kerim]

Dear Foamers,
I use buoyantSimpleFoam solver for modeling of ERCORTAC test case. buoyantCavity tutorial of OpenFOAM 7 is used for this purpose. I found the wrong definition of frontAndBack and topAndBottom patches in the blockMeshDict file of buoyantCavity. Maybe because of this mistake we have nonconverging iterations – residuals remaining almost constant during 3000 iterations. Please see the attachment. The second thing that not clear for me why komegaSST model is used for modeling of buoyant low.
Kerim

[kerim]

Dear All,

After a small correction of buoyantCavity and using buoyantKE model of turbulence I had an acceptable agreement with ERCOFTAC test case 79. Please see the attached pictures.
Kerim

[HPE]

Would you please consider to share your tutorial and modification with the community, or even, with the OpenFOAM. It would be very helpful for the community.

Thank you.

[kerim]

Yes, I will share it with OpenFOAM. It will be pleasure for me,
but I don’t know how to do it. if you help i can do that. Now I have tested all next turbulence models

LRR
LaunderSharmaKE
RNGkEpsilon
buoyantKEpsilon
kEpsilon
kOmega
kOmegaSST
kOmegaSSTLM
kOmegaSSTSAS
realizableKE
v2f
for buoyantSimpleFoam solver. All results are acceptable.
I just have problems with SSG model. Main problem is boundary condition for SSG model. I did't find any SSG tutorial yet.

[HPE]

Just open an issue ticket in the OF repo: issue tracker. The rest will be taken care of, I suppose.

[john myce]

Hi !

I am doing an analysis of the same tutorial (buoyantCavity) with the version OpenFOAM v1912.

As kerim said, there is an inversion of the patches frontAndBack & topAndBottom however the results are still far from the experimental ones because these patches have the same boundary conditions.

So what did you change/correct in addition to the above-mentioned one to fit the experimental results?

Please see attached my results with OFv1912 in serial & parallel running (4 cores), OFv7 in serial and the data from the ESI documentation (https://www.openfoam.com/documentati...nt-cavity.html)



PS:
The content in both versions (v7/v1912) is the same & for the results I have kept the tutorial configuration.

[john myce]

Originally Posted by john myce

Please see attached my results with OFv1912 in serial & parallel running (4 cores), OFv7 in serial and the data from the ESI documentation (https://www.openfoam.com/documentati...nt-cavity.html)

PS:
The content in both versions (v7/v1912) is the same & for the results I have kept the tutorial configuration.

Sorry I have attached the wrong figures !

OF_vs_EXPT_T1.jpg OF_vs_EXPT_T9.jpg

OF_vs_EXPT_U1.jpg OF_vs_EXPT_U9.jpg

[gu1]

Originally Posted by kerim

Dear All,

After a small correction of buoyantCavity and using buoyantKE model of turbulence I had an acceptable agreement with ERCOFTAC test case 79. Please see the attached pictures.
Kerim

Can you share with us which modification you have made? Please. This helps the community.

[gu1]

Hi,

I did tests in the same tutorial, out of curiosity, testing the buoyantKEpsilon model and the original, KEpsilon... but there is no difference in the results. What could have led to this?! Perhaps the boundary condition of blockMesh? Or the fact that I used the same BC for both models? Can anybody help me?

* I don't know if I can rule out an error in the algorithm, since I use version 5 of OF.

[Yann]

Hello kerim,

I'm also interested in knowing what adjustments you have made on the tutorial setup to achieve a proper convergence!

I tried to play around with the numerical schemes but failed to find a good setup.

Guilherme, have you checked the residuals on your case? The default setup of the tutorial doesn't allow to get a converged solution (it stops before convergence)

If you still need help, don't hesitate to post some graphs, it will be easier to get an idea of what's going on.

Yann

[mikulo]

Hello everyone,

Any update about this problem? I am hoping to hear from you guys. I came across this problem too.

Regards,
Mike

[mikulo]

Originally Posted by kerim

Dear All,

After a small correction of buoyantCavity and using buoyantKE model of turbulence I had an acceptable agreement with ERCOFTAC test case 79. Please see the attached pictures.
Kerim

Hey,

Would you mind share to us what did you modify in the original test case?

Regards,
Mike

[kerim]

Originally Posted by mikulo

Hey,

Would you mind share to us what did you modify in the original test case?

Regards,
Mike

Dear Mike,

Please, have a look to the next paper.
Critical reviewing of OpenFOAM buoyant cavity tutorial
https://aip.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/5.0071571
Best regards,
Kerim

[mikulo]

Originally Posted by kerim

Dear Mike,

Please, have a look to the next paper.
Critical reviewing of OpenFOAM buoyant cavity tutorial
https://aip.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/5.0071571
Best regards,
Kerim

Hey,

Thanks for showing me your work. I'll check on it and see how it will help my problem. Thanks!

Regards,
Mike

[fnohpat]

Dear Kerim, please, can you send me you paper "Critical reviewing of OpenFOAM buoyant cavity tutorial", I dont have access to the publication. My mail is fnohpat@gmail.com.

Thanks in advance.

Felipe Noh

Originally Posted by kerim

Dear Mike,

Please, have a look to the next paper.
Critical reviewing of OpenFOAM buoyant cavity tutorial
https://aip.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/5.0071571
Best regards,
Kerim

[kerim]

Originally Posted by fnohpat

Dear Kerim, please, can you send me you paper "Critical reviewing of OpenFOAM buoyant cavity tutorial", I dont have access to the publication. My mail is fnohpat@gmail.com.

Thanks in advance.

Felipe Noh

Dear Felipe,


Unfortunately, I haven't permission to share. I am so sorry.