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

Is the solution trusted if Y plus is not located in the suggest value

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

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   March 21, 2009, 23:57
Red face Is the solution acceptable if Y plus is not in the suggested range
  #1
Member
 
^_^
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 36
Rep Power: 8
Jasmine is on a distinguished road
Hi guys,
I am using k-eplson turbulence model with scale wall function in CFX. I can not figure out how to make sure the Y+ is 30~100 as suggested by CFX. My y+ is 1 ~106.8. How should I do with it? Is the solution ok or not? Thanks a lot

Last edited by Jasmine; March 22, 2009 at 04:07.
Jasmine is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 22, 2009, 18:10
Default
  #2
Super Moderator
 
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 10,949
Rep Power: 85
ghorrocks has a spectacular aura aboutghorrocks has a spectacular aura aboutghorrocks has a spectacular aura about
Hi,

Do a mesh sensitivity study and work out whether the wonky y+ is affecting results. To do this generate a mesh with half and/or double the element edge length and see how much an important output parameter changes.

Glenn Horrocks
ghorrocks is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 24, 2009, 12:12
Default
  #3
New Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 9
Rep Power: 8
CycLone is on a distinguished road
Hi Jasmine,

The Y+ range is only a suggestion. Generally you need 5 to 15 nodes to be within the boundary layer in order to accurately predict the shear stress at the wall with a mesh expansion factor of 1.15 to 1.30. But the actual Y+ is Reynolds number dependant. If you have a very high Reynolds number, such as flow around a ship, a Y+ of greater than 1000 will suffice, whereas very low Reynolds numbers, such as a very small compressor blade, may require Y+ of 1 or 2.

Special "Low Reynolds Number" turbulence models were developed for these applications because it was difficult to have 5 nodes within the boundary layer and a Y+ greater than 11 (the lower limit for wall functions).

So, you can check visually to see whether you are capturing the boundary layer and also check, as Glenn suggested, that your solution is not affected by further refinement.

-CycLone
CycLone is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 24, 2009, 17:06
Default
  #4
Super Moderator
 
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 10,949
Rep Power: 85
ghorrocks has a spectacular aura aboutghorrocks has a spectacular aura aboutghorrocks has a spectacular aura about
Hi,

To expand on my previous comment - I mean to say that the boundary layer is not important for all types of simulations. For instance if you want the lift from an airfoil running nicely and well away from separations your lift result will be within a few percent regardless of what you do with the boundary layer. The drag would need accurate boundary layer modelling but the lift would not.

Glenn Horrocks
ghorrocks is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 24, 2009, 18:25
Default
  #5
Member
 
^_^
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 36
Rep Power: 8
Jasmine is on a distinguished road
Hi ghorrocks and CycLone,

Thanks you so much for your kindly explaination~

Jasmine
Jasmine is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 3, 2009, 04:56
Default
  #6
New Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 3
Rep Power: 8
anneh is on a distinguished road
hello,
i am quite new to cfx. i want to simulate the flow around an airfoil, c=1600mm, v=20-70m/s (so Re=1.8-7.8*10^6). now i am creating the mesh, wondering how big the first cell at the airfoil has to be. i read about this y+ value and found a calculator to calculate the first cell size, but therefore i need to define y+. i am interested in drag, so the boundary layer should be computed very well.
what are appropriate values for y+ for my calculations? or where can i find out more about y+? i use ansys cfx, and i have not finally decided which turbulence model to use. most likely the SST (shear stress transport) model.
can anyone help?
anneh is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 3, 2009, 07:16
Default
  #7
Super Moderator
 
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 10,949
Rep Power: 85
ghorrocks has a spectacular aura aboutghorrocks has a spectacular aura aboutghorrocks has a spectacular aura about
Hi Anneh,

As a starting point I would use traditional wall functions. Unless you can show they are not appropriate they are the best place to start. For traditional wall functions you should aim for 30>y+>100 approx, and the SST turbulence model is a good general purpose turbulence model to use.

Glenn Horrocks
ghorrocks is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 3, 2009, 07:49
Default
  #8
New Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 3
Rep Power: 8
anneh is on a distinguished road
Hey Glenn,
thanks for your reply. i will try these wall functions. on a later point of my investigation i want to examine gurney flaps (their size is about 1-2%c), so i think i have to use a finer mesh. what would be a reasonable y+ value if i do not use wall functions?
Anne
anneh is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 5, 2009, 17:10
Default
  #9
Member
 
^_^
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 36
Rep Power: 8
Jasmine is on a distinguished road
Not sure if my understanding is right or not.
There are two ways for wall treatment. One is wall function method which uses the logorithmic law. In this case, 30<Y+<100. One is Low-Re method which uses laminar equations in region close to the wall. In this case, 1<Y+<5.

Quote:
Originally Posted by anneh View Post
Hey Glenn,
thanks for your reply. i will try these wall functions. on a later point of my investigation i want to examine gurney flaps (their size is about 1-2%c), so i think i have to use a finer mesh. what would be a reasonable y+ value if i do not use wall functions?
Anne
Jasmine is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 5, 2009, 19:38
Default
  #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 516
Rep Power: 12
stumpy is on a distinguished road
That's pretty much correct. For traditional wall functions 30 < y+ < 100 (or < 300, or , 1000, depending on your case). However, CFX doesn't use traditional wall functions, it uses scalable wall functions for the k-e model. This basically removes the lower limit, so you don't need to worry if y+<30, the wall functions will still work OK. Scalable wall functions will not switch over to a low-Re formulation, they essentially just "ignore" the near wall nodes when y+ gets too small.
The omega based models (k-omega, SST) use an automatic wall treatment that will switch between wall functions and a low-Re formulation depending on the y+. These models are valid for y+ < 100 (or 300, 1000 etc), but to take full advantage of the low-Re formulation (e.g predicting separation) you need y+<=2.
Mike
stumpy is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 6, 2009, 03:11
Default
  #11
New Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 3
Rep Power: 8
anneh is on a distinguished road
Hey Jasmine and Mike,
thanks for your answers. this is very helpful information :-)
Anne
anneh 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
grid dependancy gueynard a. Main CFD Forum 19 June 27, 2014 21:22
IcoFoam parallel woes msrinath80 OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 9 July 22, 2007 02:58
Could anybody help me see this error and give help liugx212 OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 3 January 4, 2006 19:07
Discussion about Mesh independant solution Seb Main CFD Forum 13 May 22, 2001 13:37
Wall functions Abhijit Tilak Main CFD Forum 6 February 5, 1999 02:16


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:44.