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

Optimize for laminar flow, assume it valid for turbulent flow?

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

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   October 21, 2011, 20:14
Default Optimize for laminar flow, assume it valid for turbulent flow?
  #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Zurich
Posts: 176
Rep Power: 6
Chander is on a distinguished road
Hi,

I want to optimize a design for convective heat transfer and pressure drop.
I have four designs..design 1 ,2,3 and 4.
I want to judge how these designs compare at different inlet Re numbers.
The Re numbers are in laminar region at lowest level and sweep through transition range on the higher side.
I am finding it difficult to get convergence at higher Re both with or without using turbulence models.
However i am able to get converged results at low Re i.e. in the laminar flow regime.

I analyse through CFD and rank the available designs in terms of their performance at low Re i.e. in the laminar flow regime and get a ranking say 2>3>1>4 in terms of their performance for pressure drop and conjugate heat transfer. Now how safe will it be to assume that the same ranking of designs will also hold at higher Re i.e. in the transition and turbulent flow regimes ( and thus avoid CFD analysis at higher Re)?
Chander is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   October 22, 2011, 01:52
Default -
  #2
Member
 
Mauricio Labarca
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 35
Rep Power: 7
mauricio is on a distinguished road
Hello Chander, i Have never worked with Low-RE models and the selection of a turbulent would depend on many factors such fluids, your required accuracy, the geometry itself, etc...

My small input in this is that the rank you obtained probabably will not hold true at turbulent conditions. The fact that the speed is changing will change the convective heat transfer as well, since by chaning the design you're changing geometry then flow field would be different for each heat exchanger when under Re numbers. You should rank them under turbulent flow as well.
Change the boundary conditions that produce those Re numbers. try this guidelines. But generally i doubt that same rank would hold for the high Re numbers...
mauricio is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   October 22, 2011, 06:05
Default
  #3
Super Moderator
 
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 10,797
Rep Power: 84
ghorrocks has a spectacular aura aboutghorrocks has a spectacular aura aboutghorrocks has a spectacular aura about
What turbulence model are you using? Is it turbulent at the entrance or does it transition in the domain? Any relaminarisation in the domain? How far into the turbulent regime do you go?
ghorrocks is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   October 24, 2011, 08:05
Default
  #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Zurich
Posts: 176
Rep Power: 6
Chander is on a distinguished road
Hi Glen,

This is the same problem as I discussed with you in the thread
Turbulence model in a simulation with wide spatial range of Reynolds numbers
I am reattaching the geometry figures here.

Essentially, the variation of Re is 600-4000 at inlet which reduces to about 150-750 at slot nozzle. This variation is shown in the figures attached with the next post
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Full_geometry.jpg (22.7 KB, 10 views)
File Type: jpg Inlet_duct.jpg (25.0 KB, 10 views)
File Type: jpg Outlet_duct.jpg (21.7 KB, 9 views)
File Type: jpg Porous_medium.jpg (22.1 KB, 10 views)
File Type: jpg Solid_domain.jpg (22.9 KB, 9 views)
Chander is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   October 24, 2011, 08:10
Default
  #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Zurich
Posts: 176
Rep Power: 6
Chander is on a distinguished road
Please refer to the figures.

Re_at_inlet.jpg : Variation of Re at inlet to inlet manifold
Re_at_slot_nozzle.jpg : Variation of Re at slot nozzle connecting inlet duct to porous medium.

Now convergence at conditions 2 and 3 is very difficult to get.

So the question is that if I optimize my geometry for pressure drop and heat transfer performance at condition 1, will the same optimization be valid for conditions 2 and 3?
In other words, will ranking of a given set of geomtrical designs in tyerms of their performance at condition 1 be valid at conditions 2 and 3?

If it is safe to assume so, than I can work on optimizing the geometry at condition 1 and then just analyse the performance of the optimized design at conditions 2 and 3 rather than separately optimizing for different Re conditions.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Re_at inlet.jpg (91.8 KB, 10 views)
File Type: jpg Re_at_slot_nozzle.jpg (83.5 KB, 10 views)
Chander is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   October 24, 2011, 08:23
Default
  #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Zurich
Posts: 176
Rep Power: 6
Chander is on a distinguished road
Just for clarification:

The first figure above is the variation of Re at inlet and the second figure is the variation of Re at slot nozzle
Chander is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   October 24, 2011, 18:32
Default
  #7
Super Moderator
 
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 10,797
Rep Power: 84
ghorrocks has a spectacular aura aboutghorrocks has a spectacular aura aboutghorrocks has a spectacular aura about
What is the inlet condition? Laminar or turbulent? This depends on the conditions upstream of the inlet.
ghorrocks is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   October 24, 2011, 19:19
Default
  #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Zurich
Posts: 176
Rep Power: 6
Chander is on a distinguished road
Well, the conditions upstream of the inlet are not known as yet.
But it will definitely not be fully developed flow.
At present I am using uniform velocity inlet.
While simulating for conditions 2 and 3 with SST model, I assume low turbulence intensity (as available in CFX option) as the inlet boundary condition for turbulence.
Chander is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   October 25, 2011, 02:19
Default
  #9
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 57
Rep Power: 7
Graham81 is on a distinguished road
How do you define the optimum design (i.e. what is the relative importance of pressure drop and heat transfer to you, as both will be promoted in a turbulent flow)?
Graham81 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   October 25, 2011, 05:23
Default
  #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Zurich
Posts: 176
Rep Power: 6
Chander is on a distinguished road
@Graham81
The optimized design will of course be the one with minimal pressure drop and maximum heat transfer from solid to fluid.
However, which one of these is given more importance will depend later on how much we can improve each one of them..though heat transfer will most probably have more importance.
Chander is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   October 27, 2011, 05:12
Default
  #11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Zurich
Posts: 176
Rep Power: 6
Chander is on a distinguished road
@ghorrocks

looking forward to your kind inputs on this questions

Thanks!
Chander
Chander is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   October 27, 2011, 06:02
Default
  #12
Super Moderator
 
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 10,797
Rep Power: 84
ghorrocks has a spectacular aura aboutghorrocks has a spectacular aura aboutghorrocks has a spectacular aura about
Looks like you are still running with a turbulence model. I have already said I think this is a bad idea.

What can you change in the optimisation process?
ghorrocks is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   October 27, 2011, 06:15
Default
  #13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Zurich
Posts: 176
Rep Power: 6
Chander is on a distinguished road
Thanks Glen for replying.

Yes, you had already pointed out that using turbulence models in low flow Re is not a good idea.

So I am
a) using laminar flow model for the lowest inlet Re of 600 i.e. condition 1 as shown in above Re plot
b) trying with both laminar model and SST turbulence model for the mmid-range inlet Re of ~2000 i.e. condition 2
c) trying with SST turbulence model for the highest inlet Re of ~4100 i.e. condition 3

During optimization, I plan to change the inlet/ outlet duct widths to change the mass flow rate through the slot nozzles. I may also vary the slot nozzle widths and locations.
So since I am having lot of difficulty in getting convergence in b) and c) above, I am thinking that if I perform the geometry i.e. shape optimization for (a) , then can I assume it to be valid for (b) and (c)?
I think that if for example I achieve a ranking for 4 designs A>B>C>D with A being the most optimal geometry for (a) and D being the least for (a), then this ranking should also hold for (b) and (c) though design A may not be THE optimal design for (b) or (c).
I am not sure if this approach is foolproof.
Chander is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   October 30, 2011, 18:46
Default
  #14
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Zurich
Posts: 176
Rep Power: 6
Chander is on a distinguished road
@ghorrocks

eagerly awaiting your kind inputs on this topic

Thanks!
Chander
Chander is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   November 5, 2011, 20:51
Default
  #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Zurich
Posts: 176
Rep Power: 6
Chander is on a distinguished road
Any inputs please.

Thanks!
Chander is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   November 6, 2011, 06:06
Default
  #16
Super Moderator
 
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 10,797
Rep Power: 84
ghorrocks has a spectacular aura aboutghorrocks has a spectacular aura aboutghorrocks has a spectacular aura about
The SST turbulence model should have no problems converging on Low-Re flow. If you can get laminar to converge but not SST then something is wrong in the setup of your model.
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
Inviscid Drag at subsonic, subcritical Mach # Axel Rohde Main CFD Forum 1 November 19, 2001 13:19
fluid flow fundas ram Main CFD Forum 5 June 17, 2000 21:31
Flow visualization vs. Calculated flow patterns Francisco Saldarriaga Main CFD Forum 1 August 2, 1999 23:18
Question on 3D potential flow Adrin Gharakhani Main CFD Forum 13 June 21, 1999 05:18
computation about flow around a yawed cone Tylor Xie Main CFD Forum 0 June 9, 1999 07:33


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 18:52.