# Burner simulation

 User Name Remember Me Password
 Register Blogs Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
 March 18, 2003, 06:59 Burner simulation #1 Mark Guest   Posts: n/a Hi, I'm trying to simulate a non-premixed burner. I have run the simulation cold until a convergence of 10e-05. I then run the reacting flow. The simulation runs well for a while, approximately 100 iterations and then starts to oscilate badly. I have set a small under-relaxation factors for the reactives and the density, 0.9. Is this too large? Any ideas on how to fix this? Cheers, Mark.

 March 18, 2003, 10:53 Re: Burner simulation #2 Erwin Guest   Posts: n/a Not knowing anything about your reaction model etc, I would suggest to use values of 0.5 initially for the reacting components and 0.8 for energy. Later you can slowly increase the values to 0.8 or 0.9 for reaction components and 0.95 or so for energy. I have not noticed a strong influence of the density URF. Make sure your temperature field is initialized at 1000 K or so to get it all going.

 March 18, 2003, 11:12 Re: Burner simulation #3 Mark Guest   Posts: n/a Thanks Erwin, I will do that. I initialised my simulation with temp=1300k and ch4=0.2 to get ignition. Does this sound ok to you? Mark

 March 21, 2003, 04:34 Re: Burner simulation #4 Erwin Guest   Posts: n/a Don't use URF values that are too low, the solution will take 100 years to converge. Use at least 0.5 but don't go too quickly to 0.9.

 March 21, 2003, 06:09 Re: Burner simulation #5 Mark Guest   Posts: n/a Thanks Erwin, Just to confirm, the URF's just ease the change from the old value, say Vn, and the new value Vn+1. Is this correct? If so, changing the URF's in mid-calculation makes the calculation faster but could also cause the solution to diverge if the change is too sevre? It's basically just a tool to get convergence with the side effect of longer computation time - am I right? Mark.

 March 21, 2003, 10:01 Re: Burner simulation #6 Erwin Guest   Posts: n/a Yes, yup, and sure!

 March 21, 2003, 10:25 Re: Burner simulation #7 Mark Guest   Posts: n/a Thanks!!!

 Thread Tools Display Modes Linear Mode

 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 OffTrackbacks are On Pingbacks are On Refbacks are On Forum Rules

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post dharanishb FLUENT 1 March 2, 2014 14:30 kmk FLUENT 0 January 26, 2011 13:07 RPJones FLOW-3D 2 November 9, 2010 09:18 sudhirlv STAR-CCM+ 1 September 12, 2010 18:57 Mark FLUENT 2 January 24, 2003 06:33

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 14:10.

 Contact Us - CFD Online - Top