|
[Sponsors] |
Wrong lift and drag coefficients for ahmedbody simulaiton |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
March 26, 2023, 18:26 |
Wrong lift and drag coefficients for ahmedbody simulaiton
|
#1 |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2022
Posts: 31
Rep Power: 4 |
Hello,
I have to simulate external aerodynamics around a vehicle while turning using OpenFoam. Since I have never used OpenFoam before, I am trying to start from something more simple. I have been trying to simulate the flow around an Ahemdbody on a straight line. The dimensions of the domain are 15m x 1.87m x 1.4m and the Ahemdbody is placed in the middle of the channel. I have cut the domain in half in order to save computational power and time. I already managed to do this simulation on Ansys and got good results for the lift and drag coefficients but I just can't get the same results on OpenFoam. I am using the same mesh that I used in Ansys by importing it into OF using the fluent3DMeshToFoam feature. I am running the simulation using simpleFoam with realizable k-epsilon model. The residuals seem to decrease to the order of 1e-4 however the lift and drag coefficients keep oscillating in the range of 0.3-0.4 and never approach the experimental values. I ran the simulation for 1000 iterations. Below I have provided the boundary conditions that I used, also attached you can find the fvscheme, fvsolution, and the last 50 iterations of the simulation. I would appreciate any help that would guide me in the right direction and help me find where the problem is. Here is the checkMesh results which seems to be ok. Code:
Mesh stats points: 605703 internal points: 564818 faces: 6232198 internal faces: 6154064 cells: 3040478 faces per cell: 4.0737877 boundary patches: 5 point zones: 0 face zones: 1 cell zones: 1 Overall number of cells of each type: hexahedra: 0 prisms: 224350 wedges: 0 pyramids: 0 tet wedges: 0 tetrahedra: 2816128 polyhedra: 0 Checking topology... Boundary definition OK. Cell to face addressing OK. Point usage OK. Upper triangular ordering OK. Face vertices OK. Number of regions: 1 (OK). Checking patch topology for multiply connected surfaces... Patch Faces Points Surface topology inlet 130 100 ok (non-closed singly connected) outlet 132 101 ok (non-closed singly connected) ground 22220 11398 ok (non-closed singly connected) car 22650 11491 ok (non-closed singly connected) symmetry 33002 18681 ok (non-closed singly connected) Checking faceZone topology for multiply connected surfaces... FaceZone Faces Points Surface topology interior-geom-enclosure_enclosure6154064 605703 multiply connected (shared edge) <<Writing 605001 conflicting points to set nonManifoldPoints Checking basic cellZone addressing... CellZone Cells Points Volume BoundingBox geom-enclosure_enclosure 3040478 605703 19.579551 (-1.1268994 -0.7405 -7.448) (0.27310058 0.1945 7.552) Checking geometry... Overall domain bounding box (-1.1268994 -0.7405 -7.448) (0.27310058 0.1945 7.552) Mesh has 3 geometric (non-empty/wedge) directions (1 1 1) Mesh has 3 solution (non-empty) directions (1 1 1) Boundary openness (1.7931218e-15 -7.4856584e-16 4.2947788e-18) OK. Max cell openness = 3.0197195e-16 OK. Max aspect ratio = 8.2230522 OK. Minimum face area = 4.082886e-07. Maximum face area = 0.020149883. Face area magnitudes OK. Min volume = 1.09952e-10. Max volume = 0.0012024398. Total volume = 19.579551. Cell volumes OK. Mesh non-orthogonality Max: 66.847134 average: 15.459832 Non-orthogonality check OK. Face pyramids OK. Max skewness = 2.3554795 OK. Coupled point location match (average 0) OK. Mesh OK. U Code:
internalField uniform (0.0 0.0 -40.0); boundaryField { inlet { type fixedValue; value uniform ( 0.0 0.0 -40.0 ); } ground { type fixedValue; value uniform (0 0 0); } outlet { type inletOutlet; value uniform (0 0 0); inletValue uniform (0 0 0); } car { type fixedValue; value uniform (0 0 0); } symmetry { type symmetry; } } Code:
dimensions [0 2 -2 0 0 0 0]; internalField uniform 0.0; boundaryField { inlet { type zeroGradient; } ground { type zeroGradient; } outlet { type fixedValue; value uniform 0; } car { type zeroGradient; } symmetry { type symmetry; } } Code:
dimensions [0 2 -3 0 0 0 0]; internalField uniform 34.56; boundaryField { inlet { type fixedValue; value $internalField; } ground { type epsilonWallFunction; value $internalField; } outlet { type inletOutlet; inletValue $internalField; value $internalField; } car { type epsilonWallFunction; value $internalField; } symmetry { type symmetry; } } Code:
dimensions [0 2 -2 0 0 0 0]; internalField uniform 0.24; boundaryField { inlet { type fixedValue; value $internalField; } ground { type kqRWallFunction; value $internalField; } outlet { type inletOutlet; inletValue $internalField; value $internalField; } car { type kqRWallFunction; value $internalField; } symmetry { type symmetry; } } |
|
March 28, 2023, 10:35 |
|
#2 |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2022
Posts: 31
Rep Power: 4 |
Can anybody help please )
|
|
Tags |
convergance, drag and lift, openfoam, residual, simplefoam convergence |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Calculation of lift and drag coefficients on airfoil | CoolHersheys | OpenFOAM Post-Processing | 5 | September 27, 2021 07:04 |
How to not overwrite drag and lift coefficients after a simulation | Giovanni Trovato | FLUENT | 1 | August 1, 2018 01:31 |
wrong SU2 calculation for lift and drag coefficient for NAC4421 | mechy | SU2 | 7 | January 9, 2017 06:18 |
Correct lift but wrong pressure drag - possible? | zx | Main CFD Forum | 4 | July 28, 2007 00:38 |
Lift and Drag Coefficients Reliability | Luis | FLUENT | 2 | December 27, 2005 15:45 |