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

Transition SST model - convergence problem with 2nd order discretization

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

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   May 21, 2013, 07:40
Default Transition SST model - convergence problem with 2nd order discretization
  #1
New Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2
Rep Power: 0
xara is on a distinguished road
Hi,
I'm currently running a 2D case - airfoil in the tunnel flow. My task is to analyze the transition onset on the airfoil in the flow velocity of 0.7-0.8 Ma. I use Transition SST model (4eqn) to be able to properly predict flow in the boundary layer. My problem is when I switch form 1st order to 2nd order discretization the whole flow begins to diverge. At first the small oscillations of velocity start to appear on the airfoil lower surface, upstream. They look like small separation bubbles. They spread on the whole lower surface and cause divergence in all results: residuals, Cp, Cf, velocity. While the 1st order discretization works fine, after switching to 2nd order I can't get any converge solution. The same happens if only the 'Flow' is switched on 2nd order.

I attached pictures of the case boundary conditions, velocity contours and Cf results for 1st order and 2nd order solution.

Solver parameter are:
Solver: Density-Based
Time: Steady
Gradient: Green-Gauss Node based / Green-Gauss Cell based

Basic Boundary Conditions for Farfield are:
- Ma = 0.7
- AoA = 0 degrees
- Intermittency: 0
- Turbulence Intensity: 0.01%
- Turbulent Viscosity Ratio: 0.01

I have already tried many solutions, but the problem still exist. I have tried:
- very low under-relaxation factors
- different Mach numbers: 0.1, 0.3, 0.6, 0.7, 0.8 Ma
- different angles of attack: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4 degrees
- two times denser mesh
- different values of 'turbulence intensity' and 'turbulent viscosity rato' - up to 10

It seems like it was some trouble in turbulence model.
I'm fighting this problem for a long time now and I really appreciate any help.

Thanks!
Attached Images
File Type: png BCs.png (17.8 KB, 24 views)
File Type: jpg VelocityBL.jpg (33.7 KB, 32 views)
File Type: jpg Airfoil-Cf.jpg (35.3 KB, 30 views)
xara is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   May 22, 2013, 08:15
Default
  #2
Senior Member
 
RodriguezFatz's Avatar
 
Philipp
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,099
Rep Power: 16
RodriguezFatz will become famous soon enough
Sounds like checker-boarding oszillations, doesn't it? If you switch to second order discretiuation you kind of decouple adjacent values and such oszillations show.
Edit: Can you try pressure-based solver?
__________________
The skeleton ran out of shampoo in the shower.
RodriguezFatz is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   May 27, 2013, 06:43
Default
  #3
New Member
 
Muhammad Aqib Chishty
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Islamabad, Pakistan
Posts: 23
Rep Power: 0
MAC88 is on a distinguished road
Send a message via Skype™ to MAC88
Re-check your boundary conditions again. In first order, it add dissipation to the main flow that's why you get results but not in the case of second order.
I think you should look on couple of things:
1. Reduced the under-relaxation parameters
2. Run your case in unsteady mode

Best of luck!!!
MAC88 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   May 27, 2013, 07:20
Default
  #4
New Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2
Rep Power: 0
xara is on a distinguished road
Hi,
thanks for your help. I've already tried lower URFs and transient flows - it didn't help. However, today I've tried another approach, recommended by my colleague, and it seems like problem is finally solved. I switched solution method to "coupled scheme" and set "pressure-based solver" and I did calculations for Standard SST model (second-order discretization). After the convergence I switched the model to Transition SST model, leaving all the other settings untouched. The residuals and other parameters are converging and there aren't any oscillations on the airfoil surface. The results seem to be correct. It looks like it all depended on setting the right scheme of "pressure-velocity coupling".

I hope this tip will be useful for other Fluent users who use Transitional models.

Thanks!
xara is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   May 27, 2013, 13:16
Default
  #5
New Member
 
Muhammad Aqib Chishty
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Islamabad, Pakistan
Posts: 23
Rep Power: 0
MAC88 is on a distinguished road
Send a message via Skype™ to MAC88
Good best of luck!!!
MAC88 is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply

Tags
2d airfoil flow, transition sst

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
Use of k-epsilon and k-omega Models Jade M Main CFD Forum 12 June 2, 2015 13:16
2nd order upwind vs 2nd order upwind!!! Far Main CFD Forum 7 March 14, 2013 13:29
K - epsilon VS SST turbulence model Maicol Main CFD Forum 0 November 30, 2012 17:25
SST Transition model in Fluent 12.0 Far FLUENT 1 November 8, 2010 02:32
Missing Information in SST Transition Model Formulation Josh CFX 2 September 14, 2010 11:49


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 17:48.