|
[Sponsors] |
May 9, 2003, 14:47 |
DPM-accurracy?
|
#1 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Hi! I'm having trouble with the particle tracking in FLUENT 6.1 giving inaccurate results:
I'm trying to model raindrops falling through the air and hitting a surface (the ground or a building). I drop a large number of particles in a steady-state flow field, using no turbulent dispersion and inert particles. I drop the particles approximately 70m, through a uniform flow field and then examine where they hit the ground. Since the flow field I use is totally uniform, 3m/s everywhere, even by the ground, one would expect all the particles to fall the same way, and thus ending up in a pattern similar to how they were injected. This shows out to be almost the case, most of the particles falls as expected, but a few percent end up a few decimeters from their expected location on the ground. I have tried decreasing the integration length scale down to 0.001m, but it doesn't help. And I guess that since the windfield is homogenous it shouldn't matter so much what length scale I use. I'm beginning to think that the mesh is affecting the particle tracking, even if it shouldn't considering the uniform flow field. I have also tried refining the mesh and using tetraedral as well as hexaedral cells, but without finding any clear cause to the inaccuaracy. I would appreciate any help on how to get better accurracy when tracking particles. // David |
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
DPM and LES | R.Sripriya | FLUENT | 6 | April 15, 2017 04:41 |
DPM - Solid reaction | sega | Fluent UDF and Scheme Programming | 3 | April 13, 2014 21:58 |
DPM modeling | Mohsin | FLUENT | 0 | March 31, 2010 22:11 |
DPM - do the particles affect the liquid? | Nikhil Dani | FLUENT | 0 | January 1, 2009 11:58 |
slow after mesh for enhanced wall treat DPM | joshkemp | FLUENT | 0 | May 1, 2007 17:20 |