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

doubt with fluent

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

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   October 30, 2000, 05:55
Default doubt with fluent
  #1
G.Balakrishnan
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I am working in a steady state problem using fluent. If i am using a turbulent solver from the beginning, it gives physically unrealistic results. However if i use the laminar solver first and then after some iterations switch to turbulent model, results are physically meaningful. Is there anything wrong in this procedure?..of first using the laminar solver and then using the solution as initial solution to the turbulent flow.. Any help will be highly useful.
  Reply With Quote

Old   October 30, 2000, 06:21
Default Re: doubt with fluent
  #2
Chetan Kadakia
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Keep in mind that when one is solving for the turbulent case instead of the laminar case, more equations are required to be solved per each numerical iteration. That is why your laminar solution seems to be more accurate for the first set of iterations. When a solution is given an improved set of intial conditions, the solution should converge quicker and may obtain increased accuracy. It is advisable to obtain simpler solutions for a starting point and then change your models and solution controls for an improved solution. It may be best to begin with an inviscid model, and allow for minimal convergence (perhaps convergence criterion = 0.001). This will get you in the ballpark. Then change your model to laminar, and allow for convergence to a similar minimal convergence (0.001 or maybe 0.0001). From this point you can patch in this solution as your initial conditions for a solution with a turbulence model. At this time you can also enable the energy equation, change discreitization schemes, change the steady state solution to an unsteady case if desired, etc. You should also increase your convergence criterion up to the range of 1e-6 to 1e-9. Does this help?
  Reply With Quote

Old   October 30, 2000, 06:58
Default Re: doubt with fluent
  #3
G.Balakrishnan
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Thanks chetan...
  Reply With Quote

Old   October 30, 2000, 22:40
Default Re: doubt with fluent
  #4
John C. Chien
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
(1). The flow field of a laminar flow is very different from that of the turbulent flow. So, there is no advantage of solving the laminar flow first. (2). And even if you have the laminar flow solution, you still don't have the turbulence quantities such as the turbulence kinetic energy, the tke dissipation, the eddy viscosity. These quantities are not consistent with the laminar flow field. (3). I have never used this approach before, and I think, if you control the relaxation factors gradually, you can achieve the solution convergence by solving the turbulent flow equations right from the begining. (4). In using one of the commercial cfd code, the initial flow field can be obtained easily through interpolation of the coarse mesh solution, which normally is easier to converge (than the fine mesh solution.) (5). I think, it is a much better apporach to run a coarse mesh solution first. In this way, most of the flow variables will be self consistent. (6). The other way to do is to activate the multi-grid options. This will also speed up the convergence of a fine mesh solution. (7). I still think, I need to remind you of the mesh independent solution issue. So, even if the solution looks reasonable, you still have to push harder to obtain a mesh independence solution through a systematic mesh refinement. (8). So, based on my experience of using commercial codes (including the one you mentioned), there was no need to first solve the laminar flow problem, even for very complex 3-D problems.
  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
Abaqus - Fluent Coupling WITHOUT MPCCI s.mishra FLUENT 0 May 1, 2011 09:45
small doubt with fluent iņigo FLUENT 3 February 28, 2011 14:04
Master node in parallel computing only distirubtion syadgar FLUENT 1 September 8, 2009 16:41
On Bug of Fluent 12.0 lzgwhy FLUENT 0 August 26, 2009 06:41
Doubt with fluent David FLUENT 11 November 14, 2000 15:32


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:20.