Can I use Flow-3D for Two-Phase Numerical Simulation of Three-sided Spillways???
Yes, you can. A large number of spillway studies have already been done; I am not sure if any of them are of 3-sided or not. Here is a bibliography for FLOW-3D studies: http://www.flow3d.com/resources/tech..._tp_water.html
See the posts from last month and early this month about modeling two-phase and multi-phase flow with free surfaces using FLOW-3D.
Tnx for answering my question,
I couldn't find any tech paper about modeling two-phase and multi-phase flow with free surfaces using FLOW-3D!
would you guiding me more?
For papers organized by industry, check here: http://www.flow3d.com/resources/tech...s_tp_main.html
Here's a quick listing of free surface multiphase papers from those results. No casting simulations are included, but metal casting papers often discuss formation and transport of micro-bubbles and oxidation defects.
29-11 G. Möller & R. Boes, D. Theiner & A. Fankhauser, G. De Cesare & A. Schleiss, Hybrid modeling of sediment management during drawdown of Räterichsboden reservoir, Dams and Reservoirs under Changing Challenges – Schleiss & Boes (Eds), © 2011 Taylor & Francis Group, London, ISBN 978-0-415-68267-1.
56-10 G. B. Sahoo, F Bombardelli, D. Behrens and J.L. Largier, Estimation of Stratification and Mixing of a Closed River System Using FLOW-3D, American Geophysical Union, Fall Meeting 2010, abstract #H31G-1091
52-09 Mark Reed, Øistein Johansen, Frode Leirvik, and Bård Brørs, Numerical Algorithm to Compute the Effects of Breaking Waves on Surface Oil Spilled at Sea (available online), Final Report, Second revision, SINTEF, October 2009.
24-05 Hansen E.W., Separation Offshore Survey - Design/Redesign of Gravity Separators, Exploration & Production: The Oil & Gas Review 2005 - Issue 2
9-94 P. A. Chang, C-W Lin, CD-NSWC, Hydrodynamic Analysis of Oil Outflow from Double Hull Tankers, The Advanced Double-Hull Technical Symposium, Gaithersburg, MD, October 25-26, 1994.
18-11 Ortloff, C.R., Vogel, M., Spray cooling heat transfer — Test and CFD analysis, Semiconductor Thermal Measurement and Management Symposium (SEMI-THERM), 2011 27th Annual IEEE, 20-24 March 2011, pp 245 – 252, San Jose, CA, 10.1109/STHERM.2011.5767208.
44-09 Micah Fuller, Fabian Bombardelli, Deb Niemeier, Particulate Matter Modeling in Near-Road Vegetation Environments, Contract AQ-04-01: Developing Effective and Quantifiable Air Quality Mitigation Measures, UC Davis, Caltrans, September 2009
29-08 Ernst W.M. Hansen, Wojciech Nemec and Snorre Heimsund, Numerical CFD simulations — a new tool for the modelling of turbidity currents and sand dispersal in deep-water basins, Production Geoscience 2008 in Stavanger, Norway, © 2008
40-07 Nemec, W., Heimsund, S., Xu, J. & Hansen, E.W.M., Numerical CFD simulation of turbidity currents, British Sedimentological Research Group (BSRG) Annual Meeting, Birmingham, 17-18 December 2007
39-07 Heimsund, S, Xu, J. & Nemec, W., Numerical Simulation of Recent Turbidity Currents in the Monterey Canyon System, Offshore California, American Geophysical Union Fall Meeting, 10-14 December 2007
32-07 James, M. R., Lane, S. J. & Corder, S. B., Modeling the near-surface expansion of gas slugs in basaltic magma, Eos Trans. A.G.U., 88(52), Fall Meet. Suppl.. Abs. V12B-03. 2007
32-06 Heimsund, S., Möller, N. and Guargena, C., FLOW-3D simulation of the Ormen Lange field, mid-Norway, In: Hoyanagi, K., Takano, O. and Kano, K. (Ed.), Abstracts, International Association of Sedimentologists 17th International Sedimentological Congress, Fukuoka, Vol. B, p. 107, 2006
10-01 Ernst Hansen, SINTEF Energy Research, Phenomeological Modeling and Simulation of Fluid Flow and Separation Behaviour in Offshore Gravity Separators, PVP-Col 431, Emerging Technologies for Fluids, Structures and Fluids, Structures and Fluid Structure Interaction — 2001, ASME 2001, pp. 23-29
11-00 Thomas K. Thiis, A Comparison of Numerical Simulations and Full-scale Measurements of Snowdrifts around Buildings, Wind and Structures – ISSN: 1226-6116,Vol. 3, nr. 2 (2000), pp. 73-81
10-00 P.A. Sundsbo and B. Bang, Snow drift control in residential areas-Field measurements and numerical simulations, Fourth International Conference on Snow Engineering, pp. 377-382
9-00 Thomas K. Thiis and Christian Jaedicke, The Snowdrift Pattern Around Two Cubical Obstacles with Varying Distance—Measurement and Numerical Simulations, Snow Engineering, edited by Hjorth-Hansen, et al, Balkema, Rotterdam, 2000, pp.369-375.
3-94 A. Nielsen, B. Bang, P. A. Sundsbo and T. Wiik, Computer Simulation of Windspeed, Windpressure and Snow Accumulation around Buildings (SNOW-SIM), 1st International Conference on HVAC in Cold Climate, Rovaniemi, Finland, from Narvik Institute of Technology, Narvik, Norway, March 1994
1-94 T. Hong, C. Zhu, P. Cal and L-S Fan, Numerical Modeling of Basic Modes of Formation and Interactions of Bubbles in Liquids, Dept. Chem. Engineering, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, March 1994
Due to the Help menu:
CUSTOM TUTORIALS > Hydraulics Tutorial > Variation: Run as a Two-Fluid Problem
that say's when the two fluid densities vary by a significant amount, a two-fluid model is not accurate!
so how can i simulate my problem?!
Note: The model is highly turbulent.
I just checked the v10.0.2 User Manual (html version); can't find that phrase in the Hydraulics Tutorial. I think maybe you have an incorrect version of the User Manual. You can use the 2-fluid model for very different densities (air and water), just keep in mind that the free-surface tracking will not be as precise/accurate as with the 1-fluid approach.
For two-phase flow where one phase is dispersed in the other (i.e., air bubbles in water): THEN the 2-fluid approach will be problematic due to the differences in velocity. You should use the 1-fluid, free-surface model, and activate density-evaluation and drift-flux physics. Then you can model the separation (due to drag & buoyancy) of the two phases but maintain a sharp interface. I won't be able to help you much with the parameters, but I suggest 0.95 as the terminal drag coefficient for air bubbles, and that you set the inversion point to 1.0 so that the bubbles never become a continuous phase (there will almost always be a thin layer of water between even large bubbles). Set the air concentration at the boundaries by specifying the boundary density: it will be equal to or less than the pure-water density. Once you've tried that, consider activating air entrainment to add air concentration at the turbulent free surface. You'll have to calibrate the air entrainment model to your mesh and flow rate by trying different values of the rate coefficient until it matches experiment.
|All times are GMT -4. The time now is 17:13.|