time dependant velocity inlet for multiphase flow

vince60270 · May 16, 2014, 06:22

hello ping,
i setted a time step of 0.01 with 9 inner iterations over 10s after several tests and the results are impressive they are quasi similar with the ones i got when i was running simulations Speed after Speed. thank you very much for all your help. :-)

uuu · August 8, 2014, 10:57

The problem seems to be solved BUT for upcoming readers:

Maybe lowering the corresponding under-relaxation-factors could lead to a solution too?!
at least it SEEMS to work for my problem which is, i think, kind of similar..

this would be much easier..

Peresvet · February 22, 2023, 16:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by ping

the normal velocity field will be zero since the water is now not moving ie it is actually more like a real hull moving in stationary water

so as I said in an earlier post you need to instead use the field called relative velocity

(DFBI) overset also works.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
same geometry,structured and unstructured mesh,different behaviour.	sharonyue	OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD	13	January 2, 2013 23:40
Steady pipe flow mean velocity higher than inlet velocity	anita	OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD	7	September 25, 2012 06:35
How to find a good time scale strategy?	StefanG	CFX	19	June 8, 2012 09:41
Orifice Plate with a fully developed flow - Problems with convergence	jonmec	OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD	3	July 28, 2011 06:24
reversed flow at velocity inlet / mass flow inlet	ib	FLUENT	1	March 26, 2007 14:11

May 16, 2014, 06:22		#21
vince60270 New Member vincent Join Date: May 2014 Posts: 24 Rep Power: 12	hello ping, i setted a time step of 0.01 with 9 inner iterations over 10s after several tests and the results are impressive they are quasi similar with the ones i got when i was running simulations Speed after Speed. thank you very much for all your help. :-)

August 8, 2014, 10:57		#22
uuu New Member Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 1 Rep Power: 0	The problem seems to be solved BUT for upcoming readers: Maybe lowering the corresponding under-relaxation-factors could lead to a solution too?! at least it SEEMS to work for my problem which is, i think, kind of similar.. this would be much easier..