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

Constrained Species in Multicomponent flow

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

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   October 17, 2003, 13:28
Default Constrained Species in Multicomponent flow
  #1
Jonathan
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Hello everyone,

I am trying to model a solid oxide fuel cell with CFX 5.6. (Is anyone else out there modelling fuel cells?) My current problem is a with how CFX deals with multiple fluid streams that are separated by a solid. I have two domains defined one solid and one liquid. The liquid domain consists of two unconnected sections. Both the anode gas and the cathode gas consist of multiple components.

I would like to set two different constraint species one for each stream. CFX only lets me use one constraint and if I use a mass sink on one side and a mass source on the other, I end up with some of the constrined gas (Nitrogen) in both streams. I don't want any Nitrogen on the anode side.

I understand why I'm only allowed one constraint species, but I'm not sure how to get around this problem. Can anyone out there suggest a solution?

I would appreciate that very much.

Jonathan

  Reply With Quote

Old   October 20, 2003, 03:46
Default Re: Constrained Species in Multicomponent flow
  #2
Bart Prast
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
As the constrained omponent is only there to "fix" the sum of all concentrations (=1), you can add a bogus component with a very small concentration to both streams that has no influence on your computations. This might work.
  Reply With Quote

Old   October 20, 2003, 13:20
Default Re: Constrained Species in Multicomponent flow
  #3
Jonathan
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Bart,

Thank you for your reply and your suggestion. I gave your suggestion a try - unfortunately too much of the bogus component shows up.

I believe the problem lies in the fact that there is no way to remove mass from the domain that is specific only to one species in a multicomponent flow. (You can sink a particular component, but it doesn't carry any mass.) A mass sink at any spot in the domain behaves much like an outlet would.

I'm not sure what to try next. Perhaps I can use additional variables for my components ...

Thanks again (and let me know if you need a clearer description of my problem.)

Jonathan
  Reply With Quote

Old   October 20, 2003, 15:36
Default Re: Constrained Species in Multicomponent flow
  #4
Robin
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Hi Jonathan,

I believe the problem lies in the fact that there is no way to remove mass from the domain that is specific only to one species in a multicomponent flow. (You can sink a particular component, but it doesn't carry any mass.) A mass sink at any spot in the domain behaves much like an outlet would.

The contraint is needed to preserve mass in the presence of round-off errors in the species calculation. Similarly, if you remove a species without removing the corresponding mass, the balance will be made up of your constraint. If you intend to remove a species entirely, you must also remove the corresponding mass from the mass equation.

This is relatively straightforward to do. If you already have an equation source for your mass fraction, say A [kg/m^3/s], then add a corresponding Continuity source equal to A [kg/m^3/s] * volcvol to get the mass source. Then enter the corresponding mass fraction and fluid properties for the continuity source(the properties are only used if mass is to be added, not removed).

Regards, Robin
  Reply With Quote

Old   October 20, 2003, 15:41
Default D'oh!
  #5
Robin
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Nevermind my previous post. I now see that you cannot remove a specific species, only introduce it.

-Robin
  Reply With Quote

Old   October 21, 2003, 03:32
Default Re: D'oh!
  #6
Bart Prast
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Still,

I you have an inert carrier gas you can make a constrained component with the same properties as this carrier gas. Should be possible. It's only about roundoff errors so you can have a very small fraction of your constrained component
  Reply With Quote

Old   October 21, 2003, 10:23
Default Re: D'oh!
  #7
Jonathan
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Bart,

Thank you for your suggestions. I think I understand what you are saying and I think what you are hitting at is part of the solution.

But a problem still remains: The sum of all component sources must be zero according to the code. Therefore, as soon as you try remove a species (to try simulate transport through an electrolyte) it is automatically replaced with the constraint component. I guess the trick is to make sure the constraint component has the correct properties. This isn't easy, but I think it is what I have to do.

Any thoughts?
  Reply With Quote

Old   October 21, 2003, 10:31
Default Re: D'oh!
  #8
Bart Prast
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I'm moving towards uncharted teritories here (for me). In CFX5 you can model chemical reactions. This would have to be done with a multicomponent simulation and thus with a constrained component. Components will be removed due to reactions and re-appear in a different species. That seems like a similar problem. My question then is how's that done in CFX? Or are mass sources treated different than chemical reactions? I'm hoping for an answer from CFX here (Robin, over to you).
  Reply With Quote

Old   October 21, 2003, 12:51
Default Re: Eureka!
  #9
Robin
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Bart,

The problem is not the reaction, it is that Jonathan wants to draw material out of the domain with a mass sink, simulating transport through an electrolyte.

He has added an equation source to remove one component, but mass conservation requires the balance to be made up of the constraint. If he adds a corresponding mass sink, the mass sink draws out mass uniformly across all components.

I suppose you could formulate expressions for all the components to give you the correct proportions of each, then add a corresponding mass sink. If the proportions are correct, it won't matter that the mass is removed uniformly.

Regards, Robin

  Reply With Quote

Old   October 21, 2003, 13:54
Default Re: Eureka!
  #10
Jonathan
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Thanks to both of you for helping me see this situation a little bit clearer. I will try adjust the fluid properties to get the proper behaviour.

One more question: Is it possible to change material properties (such as thermal diffusivity or density) using the value of an additional variable or a mass fraction?

rho = f(AV1, AV2 ...)

Is that possible using Junction Boxes?

Thanks again, Jonathan
  Reply With Quote

Old   October 22, 2003, 21:44
Default Re: Eureka!
  #11
Robin
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
You can write a CEL function for Thermal Diffusivity as a function of your additional variables, there is no need for Fortran unless you want to create a more specialized function. However, you cannot define density as a function of anything other than pressure and temperature.

-Robin
  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
Species mass flow inlet lorenz FLUENT 3 March 15, 2012 08:26
Multicomponent flow garychem Main CFD Forum 2 July 25, 2011 20:41
multiphase and multicomponent flow charles CFX 2 December 18, 2008 22:34
potential flow vs. Euler flow curious ... Main CFD Forum 23 July 21, 2006 07:40
Graphical image of a species flow Rajeev Kumar Singh FLUENT 1 September 23, 2001 04:10


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:20.