|
[Sponsors] |
October 5, 2010, 04:27 |
Tubulence Numerics
|
#1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 268
Rep Power: 17 |
How are the RMS of The Turbulence solver equations defined, and how big shall they be in order to stay in range of good convergence ?
|
|
October 5, 2010, 20:10 |
|
#2 |
Super Moderator
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 17,700
Rep Power: 143 |
The residuals? They are all in the documentation. Also guides for acceptable residual targets. Start reading.
|
|
October 6, 2010, 03:31 |
|
#3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 268
Rep Power: 17 |
i mean the residuals of the turbulence equations
|
|
October 6, 2010, 06:19 |
|
#4 |
Super Moderator
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 17,700
Rep Power: 143 |
All discussed in the documentation.
But often the turbulence residuals are not so important. Momentum and mass are critical but sometimes you can get away with turbulence being not so tight. But the only way to be sure is to run a sensitivity check on your case and find out for yourself. |
|
October 12, 2010, 08:51 |
|
#5 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 268
Rep Power: 17 |
So after testing the turbulence numerics options i got this result:
With Turbulence Numerics turned on to High Resolution i got different results as with Turbulence Numerics turned on to First Order. In the counter-current water-air Flow in my Channel everything is smoth at the same level of quite high velocities whereas at the first order (Turbulence Numeric discretization) mode got a kind of churn bubbly with drops flow?? |
|
October 12, 2010, 18:09 |
|
#6 |
Super Moderator
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 17,700
Rep Power: 143 |
First order discretisation will smear the turbulence field out, whereas the second order approach will enable it to capture finer turbulence features. But from your post I am not completely sure what you are saying.
|
|
October 13, 2010, 04:20 |
|
#7 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 268
Rep Power: 17 |
With first order turbulence numeric i got such a hydraulic jump and the free surface is too much wavy and a kind of churn flow is arising at the crest of the waves whereas with high order turbulence numeric nothing occurs at the same inlet conditions.
|
|
October 13, 2010, 05:42 |
|
#8 |
Super Moderator
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 17,700
Rep Power: 143 |
A picture would help.
|
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Turbulence Numerics | Zaktatir | CFX | 4 | September 24, 2010 02:41 |
Vortex shedding, FSI-analysis, turbulence numerics | tallknuseren | CFX | 3 | May 10, 2010 04:31 |
tef numerics option | Felix | CFX | 2 | September 25, 2008 09:45 |
need tubulence compressible subsonic benchmark | javadi | Main CFD Forum | 1 | June 14, 2004 08:36 |
LES - numerics | David Hunt | Main CFD Forum | 8 | May 23, 2000 02:08 |