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

Separation Prediction with Menters SST k-omega

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

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   March 11, 2002, 10:12
Default Separation Prediction with Menters SST k-omega
  #1
Jonas Larsson
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Has anyone done any validation studies on how the new k-omega model that is implemented in Fluent 6 performs (Menter's SST model)?

I'm interested in predicting separation on curved surfaces in highly turbulent flows (3D contoured end-walls in axial turbomachinery).

Menter's SST k-omega models works quite well in our in-house codes and I do belive that it could improve separation predictions compared to the two-layer model that I have used previously in Fluent. Before I trust it I'd like to see some validation data though - how these models are implemented can make a big difference.
  Reply With Quote

Old   March 13, 2002, 04:20
Default Re: Separation Prediction with Menters SST k-omega
  #2
Jonas Larsson
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Responding to myself here...

I've tried the SST model a bit now and it did affect separation predictions in some cases (not all) - the trend was a bit earlier separation in adverse pressure gradients than what is obtained with the two-layer Wolfstein model with the Realizable k-epsilon model.

However, the SST model predicts way too high losses - sometimes 50% higher than with the other models. This seems very strange and does not agree with my previous experience from this turbulence model. The standard k-w model in Fluent gives better loss-predictions. I hope that I have done something wrong in the SST simulation, otherwise I suspect that something is not fully correct in the SST implementation.

Anyone else compared loss-predictions with the SST model with other models or experimental data?
  Reply With Quote

Old   March 13, 2002, 05:12
Default Re: Separation Prediction with Menters SST k-omega
  #3
kim
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Can I use the same grid resolution for normal k-w model (not SST) as for realizable-ke model ? Or do I need finer grid? Did you compare k-w (without SST) vs. realiazable-ke in terms of separation loss prediction ? Thanks.
  Reply With Quote

Old   March 13, 2002, 05:51
Default Re: Separation Prediction with Menters SST k-omega
  #4
Jonas Larsson
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I haven't seen any recommendations from Fluent on this.

However, my experience from these models in our other in-house codes are that the Wolfstein's two-layer model is a bit less sensitive to the inner wall resolution - it often produces reasonable results with y+ up to around 2 or 3. The k-w models (both Wilcox's different models and Menter's SST model) usually require a bit better resolution, with y+ below 1. This is also true for the low-Re k-epsilon models available in Fluent's text interface. I ran all models on a very fine grid (y+ < 0.5, stretching < 1.25).

I am just now finishing a loss-prediction test with the std k-w model (not SST) in Fluent and losses seem to agree better with the two-layer model + realizable k-epsilon. This was in 3D (a 3D diffusive axial blade cascade).

I have also done some 2D validations and here the SST models gives good loss predictions. Strange! I still hope that I have made some misstakes in the 3D SST test.

Note that the differences in loss-predictions I'm referring to here are not primarily caused by different separation locations - then it would be natural. The overall flow looks very similar between the models (in most cases, as I mention the SST models predicts a bit earlier separation in some cases and then of course the losses should be different - nothing wrong with that).

  Reply With Quote

Old   March 16, 2002, 13:34
Default Re: Separation Prediction with Menters SST k-omega
  #5
Shahjalal
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I am interested.
  Reply With Quote

Old   March 20, 2002, 14:44
Default Re: Separation Prediction with Menters SST k-omega
  #6
Amadou Sowe
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
There is a section on separated flows in "Turbulence Modeling for CFD" by David Wilcox that will be very useful for you to take a look at. He refers to three papers by Menters on the k-Omega turbulence model that will also be good to check. I would have loved to do the problem discussed in this section in Wilcox' book, but I simply do not have the time yet. Please keep us informed on any further verification of k-omega model you have made.
  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
SST K- omega turbulence model mb.pejvak Main CFD Forum 8 September 16, 2011 08:52
overshooting of Omega in SST komega using simpleFoam cm_jubayer OpenFOAM 1 August 26, 2011 13:18
Boundary Conditions for k omega SST dancfd OpenFOAM Pre-Processing 0 June 9, 2011 23:25
Wall function implementation K Omega SSt cbarry OpenFOAM 3 August 18, 2009 10:09
correct prediction with massive separation efb FLUENT 0 October 27, 2006 10:04


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 15:57.