CFD Online Logo CFD Online URL
www.cfd-online.com
[Sponsors]
Home > Forums > CFX

Melting and solidification with free surface problem?

Register Blogs Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   July 22, 2013, 02:45
Post Melting and solidification with free surface problem?
  #1
New Member
 
wendy
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 8
Rep Power: 3
cqlwj123 is on a distinguished road
I am model the welding process. The steel (Q235) undergoes melting and solidification under the heating arc and, at the same time, molten steel drop into the molten pool. I want to know the shape of welding bead and it is regarding two phase (air and liquid), free surface, and heating problem.

First, I modeled the steel as a liquid. There are steel and air in the domain. After adding a volumetric heating source onto the steel, there can get a right temperature field.

Then, I add General Momentum Source as following to force the steel under temperature 1753K to a velocity of 0. I have added a Continue source of Q235 to model molten steel drop into the molten pool. It is named Rongdi. But this time, the temperature is not right.
Sx=C*step(1753-Q235.T/1[K])(Q235.velocity u-0)
Sy=C*step(1753-Q235.T/1[K])(Q235.velocity v-0)
Sz=C*step(1753-Q235.T/1[K])(Q235.velocity w-0)
C=-10^7

I have enclosed the .def documents, and please give some suggestion for me. How to add a general momentum source and continum source in my case? Does my boundary wrong?

.def file download
In my domain, the steel is 3 mm in thickness (from z=-0.006mm to z=-0.003mm), others is air.

Last edited by cqlwj123; July 22, 2013 at 09:16.
cqlwj123 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   July 22, 2013, 05:44
Default
  #2
Super Moderator
 
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 9,340
Rep Power: 74
ghorrocks has a spectacular aura aboutghorrocks has a spectacular aura aboutghorrocks has a spectacular aura about
What do you mean the temperature is not right? Does it stop the fluid or not?

Have you included a source term linearisation factor?

You are not including sub cooling, latent heat and many other important processes with this approach. I would not be surprised if it does not prove veyr accurate.
ghorrocks is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   July 22, 2013, 09:27
Default
  #3
New Member
 
wendy
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 8
Rep Power: 3
cqlwj123 is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by ghorrocks View Post
Have you included a source term linearisation factor?
I have included a source coefficient C=-10e^7. Does linearisation factor mean this?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ghorrocks View Post
You are not including sub cooling, latent heat and many other important processes with this approach. I would not be surprised if it does not prove veyr accurate.
I set a large thermal capacity on the melting point to present the latent heat; add General Momentum Source to force the steel under temperature melting point (1753K) to a velocity of 0 as sub cooling. Does this settings right?
Sorry for my poor English. Many thanks.
cqlwj123 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   July 22, 2013, 09:30
Default
  #4
New Member
 
wendy
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 8
Rep Power: 3
cqlwj123 is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by ghorrocks View Post
What do you mean the temperature is not right? Does it stop the fluid or not?
the temperature distribution seems not reasonable.
cqlwj123 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   July 22, 2013, 18:44
Default
  #5
Super Moderator
 
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 9,340
Rep Power: 74
ghorrocks has a spectacular aura aboutghorrocks has a spectacular aura aboutghorrocks has a spectacular aura about
No, the source term linearisation is a different thing. Have a look in the documentation for it.

You can put a lump in the thermal capacity to represent latent heat, but be aware that it is still an approximation.

I think you will find this is because the simplifications you have used are not realistic. Read the literature to find out how other people are doing it. You will need to model the thermal conditions more accurately.
ghorrocks is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   July 24, 2013, 23:39
Default
  #6
New Member
 
wendy
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 8
Rep Power: 3
cqlwj123 is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by ghorrocks View Post
No, the source term linearisation is a different thing. Have a look in the documentation for it.
I search 'linearisation' within the documentation, only one hit. As my understand, Momentum Source Coefficient is the same with linearisation factor in this case.
cqlwj123 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   July 25, 2013, 02:46
Default
  #7
Super Moderator
 
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 9,340
Rep Power: 74
ghorrocks has a spectacular aura aboutghorrocks has a spectacular aura aboutghorrocks has a spectacular aura about
Don't forget I am Australian so I spell linearisation with an "s". ANSYS is American so they spell it as linearization.

The coefficient is the same concept for all the equations, I recall. But some applications of source terms have the linearisation built in so the user does not need to specify it.
ghorrocks is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Help on solidification and melting Lim FLUENT 5 May 2, 2014 18:58
solidification and melting slek Fluent UDF and Scheme Programming 2 November 30, 2011 11:13
solidification and melting mojtaba-azadi FLUENT 2 November 30, 2011 10:27
Looking for software for free surface flow Eric Jiang Main CFD Forum 12 December 17, 2007 23:39
what is the "free surface" ztdep Main CFD Forum 0 April 19, 2006 05:43


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:52.