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

Meaning of turbulence terms when flow direction is reversed at mass flow inlet

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

Like Tree3Likes
  • 1 Post By LuckyTran
  • 1 Post By LuckyTran
  • 1 Post By LuckyTran

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   October 27, 2014, 13:55
Default Meaning of turbulence terms when flow direction is reversed at mass flow inlet
  #1
New Member
 
zack
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 13
Rep Power: 2
zackufairu is on a distinguished road
Background:
It is known that we sometimes change mass flow inlet and velocity inlets to outlets by simply reversing velocity direction in FLUENT.
However I have a question.In case of velocity inlet the turbulence kinetic energy and dissipation % are specified for outside air coming into system.
And at pressure outlet the same two terms are only used when backflow occurs.
Question:

Then if I reverse mass flow inlet velocity direction such that it is now AN OUTLET what do the turbulence terms signify the terms only for use in backflow or infact it is rigidly specifying a boundary condition value of k and e for k-e equations inside the system at the boundary?
zackufairu is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   November 5, 2014, 23:15
Default
  #2
Senior Member
 
Lucky Tran
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Orlando, FL USA
Posts: 595
Rep Power: 11
LuckyTran is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by zackufairu View Post
infact it is rigidly specifying a boundary condition value of k and e for k-e equations inside the system at the boundary?
That is indeed the case. You can use a velocity inlet with any specified parameters in order to impose those conditions at the inlet. Any property you can specify will be imposed, (temperature, k, epsilon, intensity, length-scale, volume fraction, etc).

This is not a bug, since that is how velocity inlets work. And this property of velocity inlets (but used as an outlet) is can be exploited in order to impose "outlet boundary conditions." It's has niche applications for situations in which the outlet boundary condition is known from say a velocity traverse experiment but only pressure at the inlet is known.
zackufairu likes this.
LuckyTran is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   November 6, 2014, 13:45
Red face
  #3
New Member
 
zack
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 13
Rep Power: 2
zackufairu is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyTran View Post
That is indeed the case. You can use a velocity inlet with any specified parameters in order to impose those conditions at the inlet. Any property you can specify will be imposed, (temperature, k, epsilon, intensity, length-scale, volume fraction, etc).
But what about temprature and turbulence specifications for other boundary conditions(eg pressure inlet/outlet)
Do they also fix the values (temprature,k,e)? Because I read somewhere that the value of temprature is subject to change at a pressure boundary condition as per the solution in the system

Note:Thank you for your reply I had almost given up on recieving an answer to my query.
zackufairu is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   November 6, 2014, 14:59
Default
  #4
Senior Member
 
Lucky Tran
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Orlando, FL USA
Posts: 595
Rep Power: 11
LuckyTran is on a distinguished road
At a true outlet boundary, there are many free variables and those variables are subject to change. For those boundaries you specify parameters that are used when there is reversed flow (so-called backflow properties). If the flow is outward as intended, then the temperature, k, epsilon at the outlet boundary is computed according to the interpolation and discretization scheme.

But at an inlet, those variables are imposed, they are the boundary conditions. There is no "option" to not impose them.

For a velocity inlet, I think pressure is the only variable that might be exempt, and only for the subsonic pressure-based solver case. Otherwise, at a velocity inlet, or any type of inlet, you impose many boundary conditions (temperature, k, epsilon, etc) and all those imposed boundary conditions are also imposed at the pseudo-outlet condition.

Some remarks that may or may not apply depending on what you intend to do with a velocity inlet at outlet:

For transported properties like temperature, the only means for a imposed temperature outlet condition to propagate back upstream is via diffusion. If the Peclet number is large, the influence of the upstream diffusion may be considered negligible. In this case you will be able to still get a converged solution and fairly accurate since the influence of the non-sense boundary condition does not affect the problem much.

On the other hand, if you want to determine the temperature at the outlet of your domain using this method, it will not work since you specified the temperature at the outlet.
zackufairu likes this.
LuckyTran is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   November 6, 2014, 16:19
Default
  #5
New Member
 
zack
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 13
Rep Power: 2
zackufairu is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyTran View Post
For a velocity inlet, I think pressure is the only variable that might be exempt, and only for the subsonic pressure-based solver case. Otherwise, at a velocity inlet, or any type of inlet, you impose many boundary conditions (temperature, k, epsilon, etc) and all those imposed boundary conditions are also imposed at the pseudo-outlet condition.
.
I hope I am catching on if by pseudo outlet you mean only velocity inlet tuned outlet and not other outlet boundary conditions.?
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyTran View Post
For transported properties like temperature, the only means for a imposed temperature outlet condition to propagate back upstream is via diffusion. If the Peclet number is large, the influence of the upstream diffusion may be considered negligible. In this case you will be able to still get a converged solution and fairly accurate since the influence of the non-sense boundary condition does not affect the problem much.

On the other hand, if you want to determine the temperature at the outlet of your domain using this method, it will not work since you specified the temperature at the outlet
So you mean I have to be extra careful in imposing a velocity outlet making sure the outlet temprature is not really my concern and the flow from upstream is very convective to prevent "diffusion"of the imposed temprature and turbulence at velocity outlet?

just correct my statements if you think i understood them wrong.
I really appreciate the help here,cfd is so exciting when explained right.
zackufairu is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   November 6, 2014, 16:30
Default
  #6
Senior Member
 
Lucky Tran
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Orlando, FL USA
Posts: 595
Rep Power: 11
LuckyTran is on a distinguished road
You are correct on both points.
zackufairu likes this.
LuckyTran is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   November 6, 2014, 16:35
Default
  #7
New Member
 
zack
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 13
Rep Power: 2
zackufairu is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyTran View Post
For transported properties like temperature, the only means for a imposed temperature outlet condition to propagate back upstream is via diffusion. If the Peclet number is large, the influence of the upstream diffusion may be considered negligible. In this case you will be able to still get a converged solution and fairly accurate since the influence of the non-sense boundary condition does not affect the problem much.
I must say that is by far the best physical explanation I could receive which was absolutely non mathematical yet so intuitive.
I have learnt something today.
Thank you
zackufairu is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply

Tags
dissipation, k-e model, mass flow inlet

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
Split boundary zone in FLUENT for mass flow eishinsnsayshin FLUENT 1 January 18, 2013 14:43
Combination of mass flow inlet and pressure inlet boundaries MrStuebb Main CFD Forum 0 January 6, 2011 10:59
Reversed flow in pressure inlet eric FLUENT 3 January 26, 2004 21:04
mass flow + pressure inlet??? whai FLUENT 2 June 24, 2003 13:42
Mass Flow Inlet Pravir Kumar Rai FLUENT 0 February 17, 2003 20:23


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 00:01.