Need help validating a passive scalar transport model with additional source.

RobertHB · April 19, 2018, 10:44

Dear all,
i have set up a passive scalar transport model using scalarTransportFoam. I added a source of my scalar in fvOptions using the scalarSemiImplicitSource. So far the resulting transport looks reasonable and the source certainly adds more of the scalar during the simulation.
I am looking for a validation data set of concentration/time at a give rate to validate my model against.
If anyone knows about publications that can be used to this end or can explain to me how to validate my simulation agains an analytical solution, i would be much obliged.

With best regards,
Robert

chegdan · April 20, 2018, 10:38

If the flow is laminar and has a steady velocity profile, you can validate scalarTransportFoam against a solution to the Graetz problem. If you add your linear source term there might be a variation of the "Extended" Graetz Problem to compare with.

If you want to do a simple comparison of what "tracer" enters the domain is not lost then you can do something like F-curve analysis.

RobertHB · May 25, 2018, 04:49

Hello Daniel,
thank you very much for your suggestion. The validation against the Graetz problem was a great idea, there is plenty of published data available and my model fits to published data.

Validating the source with the extended Graetz problem is a bit of a problem. For heat transfer simulations the dimensionless temperature requires the specific heat capacity to become dimensionless. I don't think there is an analogue for mass transfer, right?

I'm looking for an alternative solution now. Again, thank you very much for your recommendation.

April 19, 2018, 10:44	Need help validating a passive scalar transport model with additional source.	#1
RobertHB Senior Member Robert Join Date: May 2015 Location: Bremen, GER Posts: 292 Rep Power: 12	Dear all, i have set up a passive scalar transport model using scalarTransportFoam. I added a source of my scalar in fvOptions using the scalarSemiImplicitSource. So far the resulting transport looks reasonable and the source certainly adds more of the scalar during the simulation. I am looking for a validation data set of concentration/time at a give rate to validate my model against. If anyone knows about publications that can be used to this end or can explain to me how to validate my simulation agains an analytical solution, i would be much obliged. With best regards, Robert

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
[swak4Foam] funkyDoCalc with OF2.3 massflow	NiFl	OpenFOAM Community Contributions	14	November 25, 2020 04:30
[Other] How to use finite area method in official OpenFOAM 2.2.0?	Detian Liu	OpenFOAM Meshing & Mesh Conversion	4	November 3, 2015 04:04
[foam-extend.org] problem when installing foam-extend-1.6	Thomas pan	OpenFOAM Installation	7	September 9, 2015 22:53
Diverging solution in transonicMRFDyMFoam	tsalter	OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD	30	July 7, 2014 07:20
OpenFOAM without MPI	kokizzu	OpenFOAM Installation	4	May 26, 2014 10:17

April 20, 2018, 10:38		#2
chegdan Senior Member Daniel P. Combest Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: St. Louis, USA Posts: 621 Rep Power: 0	If the flow is laminar and has a steady velocity profile, you can validate scalarTransportFoam against a solution to the Graetz problem. If you add your linear source term there might be a variation of the "Extended" Graetz Problem to compare with. If you want to do a simple comparison of what "tracer" enters the domain is not lost then you can do something like F-curve analysis.

May 25, 2018, 04:49		#3
RobertHB Senior Member Robert Join Date: May 2015 Location: Bremen, GER Posts: 292 Rep Power: 12	Hello Daniel, thank you very much for your suggestion. The validation against the Graetz problem was a great idea, there is plenty of published data available and my model fits to published data. Validating the source with the extended Graetz problem is a bit of a problem. For heat transfer simulations the dimensionless temperature requires the specific heat capacity to become dimensionless. I don't think there is an analogue for mass transfer, right? I'm looking for an alternative solution now. Again, thank you very much for your recommendation.