|
[Sponsors] |
August 23, 2023, 07:35 |
Regarding wave Generation
|
#1 |
Member
Ajay Jatoliya
Join Date: Nov 2022
Posts: 66
Rep Power: 4 |
Hello REEF 3D Team,
I have a query regarding reduced NWT. As the author mentioned in this paper (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2021.104002), they use reduced NWT for the generation of waves. The dimension of the NWT mentioned in the paper is 4.4x2.0x0.7, whereas the wavelength is 8.8 m. As mentioned in the CFD tutorials 9.6 and 9.7, the length of the wave generation and wave absorption should be one and two times of the wavelength respectively. could you please help me how to solve the problem for generating wave in NWT? |
|
August 23, 2023, 09:03 |
|
#2 |
Super Moderator
Hans Bihs
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Trondheim, Norway
Posts: 403
Rep Power: 19 |
It depends on what you need. Reducing the NWT length is possible using active generation and absorption. Then the wave will pass through the domain. We have successfully used this for long waves and sediment transport. In case you are interested in good quality waves though and want to capture the wave transformation and hydrodynamics, a longer tank will be better.
|
|
August 24, 2023, 02:38 |
|
#3 |
Member
Ajay Jatoliya
Join Date: Nov 2022
Posts: 66
Rep Power: 4 |
Thank you sir for your reply,
I am solving the sediment transport problem due to the waves. For reduced NWT, I tried with Dirichlet wave generation (DWG) and Active wave absorption (AWA) using B 98 3 and B 99 3, but the waves were not generated properly. I have attached my control and ctrl file, Could you please suggest me, what parameter I need to change? thank you sir ## Control C 11 6 C 12 3 C 13 3 C 14 7 C 15 21 C 16 3 B 1 0.05 B 10 0.0 4.4 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.7 M 20 2 M 10 14 ## Ctrl B 10 1 B 50 0.0001 B 90 1 B 92 4 B 91 0.12 8.8 B 98 3 B 99 3 D 10 4 D 20 2 D 30 1 F 30 3 F 40 3 F 42 1.0 F 60 0.40 I 12 1 N 40 3 N 41 60.0 N 47 0.25 M 10 14 P 10 1 P 30 0.1 P 40 1 P 42 1.0 T 10 0 W 22 -9.81 P 52 0.0125 P 53 1 P 55 0.50 P 51 2.50 0.0125 P 51 5.00 0.0125 P 51 15.0 0.0125 P 51 20.0 0.0125 |
|
August 24, 2023, 06:15 |
|
#4 |
Super Moderator
Hans Bihs
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Trondheim, Norway
Posts: 403
Rep Power: 19 |
You are not using the correct wave theory for the given wave parameters. Try 5th-order cnoidal waves. Also extend the wave tank height to 0.8 or 0.9 m.
Since your waves are quite non-linear, AWA doesn't work perfectly. Best to use B 98 4, so that you also have AWA on the wave generation side. Otherwise the reflections build up quite a bit. |
|
August 24, 2023, 09:14 |
|
#5 |
Member
Ajay Jatoliya
Join Date: Nov 2022
Posts: 66
Rep Power: 4 |
Thank you, sir,
I am trying to solve the sediment transport problem using the waves-only condition. In the paper I mentioned above, the author used the 2nd-order Stoke waves theory. I am trying to replicate that. I also use the B 98 4 parameter, but unable to solve the problem Thank you sir |
|
August 24, 2023, 10:17 |
|
#6 |
Super Moderator
Hans Bihs
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Trondheim, Norway
Posts: 403
Rep Power: 19 |
It works with 5th order cnoidal waves.
|
|
August 25, 2023, 02:10 |
|
#7 |
Member
Ajay Jatoliya
Join Date: Nov 2022
Posts: 66
Rep Power: 4 |
Thank you sir your reply
In this paper (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2021.104002) the author mentions that they have used 2nd order stoke wave for reduced NWT. |
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
wave generation and active wave absorption and DEFINE_ADJUST | shedo | Fluent UDF and Scheme Programming | 3 | November 4, 2022 12:36 |
interFoam wave propagation and explosion of Courant number and residuals | ChiaraViola | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 1 | June 26, 2019 06:36 |
[waves2Foam] NWT wave generation problem | Alex song | OpenFOAM Community Contributions | 0 | April 24, 2016 05:54 |
IHFOAM - Wave generation with moving boundaries | Phicau | OpenFOAM Verification & Validation | 0 | May 18, 2015 05:53 |
Wave generation, wave height reduces as it progresses | haku88 | STAR-CCM+ | 1 | August 6, 2013 20:32 |