|
[Sponsors] |
September 29, 2008, 16:06 |
Hi All,
I need some clarifi
|
#1 |
Senior Member
Senthil Kabilan
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 113
Rep Power: 17 |
Hi All,
I need some clarification with the Kepsilon turbulence model. I have computed a steady state solution for the following geometry (Figure A) using simpleFoam with Kepsilon model. The boundary conditions include a zero pressure at the inlet and a pressure of -10 pa at all the eight outlets. There was no problem with the convergence. On investigating the results, the pressure at the cross section AA` was -3.91 pa and the mass flux was 1.77e-04 m^3/sec. I have another geometry (Figure B), which is a subset of the aforementioned model. When a pressure of -3.91 pa was applied at the two outlets with no change in any of the boundary or the solver settings, the expectation was that the massflux would be ~1.77e-04 m^3/sec (at the same location). Instead it was 1.94e-04 m^3/sec. So I fine-tuned the pressure at the outlets to match the massflux of 1.77e-04 m^3/sec. The final pressures at the two outlets which yielded a massflux of 1.77e-04 m^3/sec was – 3.47 pa. My question is… why do I see a difference of 11.03% in pressure for the same massflux and the same geometry? Am I missing something? Any thoughts or suggestions? Thanks Senthil Kabilan |
|
September 29, 2008, 18:09 |
Hi Senthil,
One guess: If y
|
#2 |
Member
Ola Widlund
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sweden
Posts: 87
Rep Power: 17 |
Hi Senthil,
One guess: If you look at the velocity distribution in the outlets of Geometry B, and compare with equivalent cross-section in Geometry A, the velocity distributions in the cross-section are probably not the same. I am not chocked by the differences you see. The mathematical properties of a boundary condition does differ from that of an arbitrary cross-section in the middle of a developing flow. As a general rule, boundary conditions should be placed some distance away from the regions you're really interested in, and/or in a zone of well-developed flow. /Ola |
|
September 29, 2008, 18:43 |
Hi Ola,
Thanks for the feed
|
#3 |
Senior Member
Senthil Kabilan
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 113
Rep Power: 17 |
Hi Ola,
Thanks for the feedback! So there is nothing wrong in what I see. It is just the way it is! Hrv: Thanks for the email. Regards, Senthil |
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
HELP NEEDED with TURBFOAM | dinonettis | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 64 | June 22, 2010 10:58 |
TurbFoam diverge | ivanyao | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 6 | January 11, 2009 08:41 |
Problem with turbFoam | sivakumar | OpenFOAM Pre-Processing | 7 | August 28, 2008 05:45 |
TurbFoam | hsieh | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 12 | July 23, 2008 08:40 |
Problem about wmake turbFoam | williamscn | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 3 | September 19, 2007 12:55 |