|
[Sponsors] |
laminar Flow over a sphere(laminar vs KOmegaSST simulation) |
![]() |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
![]() |
![]() |
#1 |
Senior Member
Farzad Faraji
Join Date: Nov 2019
Posts: 206
Rep Power: 7 ![]() |
Hello all
I am simulating flow over a sphere at Re = 881 where Drag coefficient must be almost Cd=0.5. I simulate it using both using laminar and Turbulent models(KOmegaSST). for laminar simulation, I get Cd ~0.5 but fort the Turbulent simulation, first of all it takes very long tome to converge and even after convergence, it gives Cd~0.65(Actually it has not fully converged yet, see attached figure). Now I have two questions; 1- what happens if I use turbulent model to simulate laminar flow? 2- when should I expect convergence based on the attached figure? Thanks, Farzad |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Senior Member
Farzad Faraji
Join Date: Nov 2019
Posts: 206
Rep Power: 7 ![]() |
I did test with laminar and kOmegaSST for sphere and airfoil and as I told earlier it predict higher drag Coefficient, but flow field visually seems correct. I repeat it with airfoil with angle of attack = 30 degree and not only drag coefficient is different, but also flow field is visually seems incorrect, why?
Also, I want to test below methods too, but they fail at the very beginning of the simulation; 1) SpalartAllmaras (fails at the beginning iterations), 2) kOmegaSSTLM (fails at the beginning iterations) , 3) kOmegaSSTSAS (Selecting LES delta type vanDriest Killed) Should I change my boundary conditions when I switch from kOmegaSST to other models? Thanks, Farzad |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: Cologne, Germany
Posts: 365
Rep Power: 8 ![]() |
Quote:
2. for convergence you should always monitor the value of interest, in your case the drag coefficient. if it does not change or only oscillates between two stable extremes, you can say that based on your case setup that value is your solution. |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: Cologne, Germany
Posts: 365
Rep Power: 8 ![]() |
Quote:
i think to predict good pressure distribution for forces around bodies you want to resolve the wall boundary layer, check your BC for your chosen turbuluence model if it supports boundary resolution. if you have problems with convergence, first start your simulation with first order upwind schemes for advection terms: div(phi,u), div(phi,k) etc. you can also use higher viscosity values. after that try using lower viscosity with the previous converged solution. after that switch your div(phi,u) to second order upwind, and not change turbulence schemes. once converged change your schemes for turbulence to second order scheme also. try this step by step approach, do not rush to find a perfect solution right from your first try. |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Tags |
komegasst, laminar, openfaom, sphere |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Laminar flow and wall roughness | junbbung | FLUENT | 2 | November 26, 2022 21:22 |
SU2 NACA0012 Transitional flow simulation Convergence Issues | morgJ | SU2 | 0 | July 21, 2022 07:42 |
Different peak velocity for laminar and turbulent models of Reynolds Number-500 flow | vronti | Main CFD Forum | 2 | July 12, 2022 10:36 |
unable to run dynamic mesh(6dof) and wave UDF | shedo | Fluent UDF and Scheme Programming | 0 | July 1, 2022 17:22 |
High velocity in Laminar flow | Manojmech | FLUENT | 0 | November 3, 2016 04:37 |