|
[Sponsors] |
October 10, 2006, 08:32 |
I tried running the forward st
|
#1 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
I tried running the forward step case using both sonicFoam(laminar compressible solver) and rhoSonicFoam( turbulent compressible solver) and got a very different looking detached shock ahead of the step. The shock for the latter solver is much more vertical. Is there any literature to compare these results to? Also why isn't there a turbulence model dictionary for rhoSonicFoam?
Shuo |
|
November 3, 2006, 06:36 |
Shou Li
I have also run the
|
#2 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Shou Li
I have also run the same test case the results given by SonicFoam is errornous. This is the testcase of woodward and collela which is being run. I have run the same case with rhoSonicFoam the results are corect. so if you are looking at running for larger mach numbers rhoSonicFoam may be more useful. |
|
November 6, 2006, 01:25 |
Hi Abhishek
What are planni
|
#3 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Hi Abhishek
What are planning to use OpenFOAM for? How do you know rhoSonicFOAM is correct? Shuo |
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
RhoTurbFoam sonicFoam rhoSonicFoam | mwibmer | OpenFOAM Bugs | 2 | September 1, 2008 05:28 |
BC implementation in rhoSonicFoam | srinath | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 2 | July 12, 2008 10:02 |
RhoSonicFoam errors | srinath | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 0 | June 3, 2008 08:06 |
RhoSonicFoam | srinath | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 0 | May 30, 2008 02:21 |
RhoSonicFoam | shuo | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 1 | October 9, 2006 20:57 |