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

OUTFLOW BC explanation in fluent

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

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   February 16, 2013, 14:31
Default OUTFLOW BC explanation in fluent
  #1
New Member
 
Debanjan Deep
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 14
Rep Power: 8
skyblue_mech is on a distinguished road
I have a question regarding the mass flow rate during outflow boundary condition employed in FLuent. It requires a mass flow ratio in case of multiple outlets of Outflow BC.
I am wondering why this mass flow rate ratio is required to put in fluent since I believe fully developed flow is sufficient bc condition to satisfy NS equation.
Am I right?
In case of multiple outflow outlet bc, it is mandatory to put those mass flow weight ratio to get a perfect simulation result as I have experienced before.
Can anyone explain this from NS equation using some easy scheme like FDM?

I am new in this field so any help would be highly appreciated!

Thanks,
Debanjan
skyblue_mech is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   February 17, 2013, 10:28
Default
  #2
Senior Member
 
Lefteris
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: UK, Greece
Posts: 189
Rep Power: 5
Aeronautics El. K. is on a distinguished road
It has to do with the conservation of mass. Since there are no sources or sinks, what comes in must go out. Thus, the sum of the mass leaving the domain must be equal to the mass entering the domain, regardless of the number of the inlets and outlets. In the case of multiple outlets you determine the portion of the flow that "uses" the one or the other outlet.
The fully developed flow you mentioned isn't a useful condition, actually it's not a BC at all.

Best regards,
Lefteris
Aeronautics El. K. is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   February 18, 2013, 07:52
Default
  #3
Senior Member
 
andy
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 129
Rep Power: 8
andy_ is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aeronautics El. K. View Post
It has to do with the conservation of mass. Since there are no sources or sinks, what comes in must go out. Thus, the sum of the mass leaving the domain must be equal to the mass entering the domain, regardless of the number of the inlets and outlets. In the case of multiple outlets you determine the portion of the flow that "uses" the one or the other outlet.
The fully developed flow you mentioned isn't a useful condition, actually it's not a BC at all.

Best regards,
Lefteris
A fully developed flow has zero normal gradient on the velocity components and a constant normal pressure gradient balancing the wall shear stress. It is a valid and sufficient boundary condition for outflow through a single exit but it is not a sufficient boundary condition for outflow through multiple exits. The OP was given reasons for this when he asked the same question a few posts below.
andy_ is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   February 18, 2013, 10:51
Default
  #4
Senior Member
 
Lefteris
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: UK, Greece
Posts: 189
Rep Power: 5
Aeronautics El. K. is on a distinguished road
You're absolutely right andy_ but as you said, for the specific problem they're not sufficient. Generally speaking though, these are the BC that should be used, you're right.
__________________
Lefteris

Aeronautics El. K. is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   February 18, 2013, 12:01
Default
  #5
New Member
 
Debanjan Deep
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 14
Rep Power: 8
skyblue_mech is on a distinguished road
Well, my question here is why it is not sufficient for multiple outlets ? Can this be proved from NS equation point of view?
skyblue_mech 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
How to open Icem mesh in Ansys Fluent? emmkell FLUENT 26 June 9, 2015 15:38
heat transfer with RANS wall function, over a flat plate (validation with fluent) bruce OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 5 September 25, 2013 04:40
Two questions on Fluent UDF Steven Fluent UDF and Scheme Programming 4 September 20, 2013 16:30
Error in reading Fluent 13 case file in fluent 12 apurv FLUENT 2 July 12, 2013 07:46
Fluent 6.3 32bit vs Fluent 12.0 64bit ibex7 FLUENT 7 April 18, 2011 02:44


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 00:50.