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

Boundary Conditions

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

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   March 30, 2009, 05:10
Default Boundary Conditions
  #1
New Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 9
Rep Power: 7
Ianto is on a distinguished road
Dear All,

We have run some diffuser passage simulations with different boundary conditions, all other parameters being the same, just to compare effects of boundary conds.

We used 2 setups:
  • Mass flow @ inlet & opening outlet (Ave static outlet pressure = 0)
  • Opening @inlet (Ave stat inlet press = 0), mass flow at outlet
RMS residuals fell to ~ 1e-04, not good convergence so we also monitor mass flow average pressure drop through the passage. This settles down to fluctuations of 0.5% full scale, fine for our purposes.

The problem is when we compare results with these two combinations we get almost 30% difference in pressure drop through the passage. I expected negligible difference.

ANSYS were asked if they could explain but we didn't really get to the bottom of it. Maybe we didn't ask properly.

Could anyone offer a reason for this?

Many thanks in anticipation.

Ianto.

P.S. The second combination above was found to give better convergence on an earlier run which is why we looked at these different set-ups to check if there was a difference.
Ianto is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 2, 2009, 07:31
Default
  #2
New Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Berlin
Posts: 21
Rep Power: 7
Adam S is on a distinguished road
in one case your are "blowing" through your geometry and in the other one you are "sucking", arenīt you?! maybe this could explain the difference.
Adam S is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 2, 2009, 07:50
Default
  #3
New Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 9
Rep Power: 7
Ianto is on a distinguished road
Thanks for your reply Adam.

Physically yes, but I'm not sure what the difference is numerically. I thought since the same mass is moving through the passage at the same velocity in each case, pressure drop should be the same but it seems I'm wrong. Symptomatic of my only partially understanding what the solver is doing I guess.

Any further suggestions would be much appreciated!

Kind regards,

Ianto
Ianto is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 2, 2009, 08:46
Default
  #4
New Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Berlin
Posts: 21
Rep Power: 7
Adam S is on a distinguished road
if you are sucking through a diffusor the boundary layer normaly should be attached, if you are blowing it can easily detach. so compare your flow field and not only the pressure change.
Adam S is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 29, 2009, 14:02
Default
  #5
New Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 9
Rep Power: 7
Ianto is on a distinguished road
Adam,

Sorry for the delay I didn't realise you'd replied a second time, there was no email notification, I was just browsing old posts.

That explanation makes perfect sense it's seems very obvious with hindsight.

Thanks again!

Ianto
Ianto 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
Impinging Jet Boundary Conditions Anindya Main CFD Forum 24 January 11, 2012 13:40
Problems with boundary conditions for a lowRekOmegaSST turbulence model cfdmarkus OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 16 November 14, 2011 04:44
Pressure boundary conditions Lionel S. Main CFD Forum 1 August 24, 2007 18:03
Trimmed cell and embedded refinement mesh conversion issues michele OpenFOAM Other Meshers: ICEM, Star, Ansys, Pointwise, GridPro, Ansa, ... 2 July 15, 2005 04:15
periodic boundary conditions Ahmed Abdelwahab FLUENT 4 March 9, 2000 16:36


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 19:00.