
[Sponsors] 
April 26, 2012, 20:04 

#21 
Senior Member
Chris DeGroot
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Canada
Posts: 387
Rep Power: 5 
Hmm... so this is not your standard periodic problem since the outflow and inflow are not in line with one another. I would make two suggestions:
(i) I would suggest simulating two chambers such that your inlet and outlet are in line with one another. I don't believe that the way you have it set up that you can guarantee the outflow at the bottom is equal to to inflow at the top. If you simulate two chambers the geometric periodicity will guarantee periodicity in the flow. (ii) It sounds like you are coupling the inflow and outflow explicitly; that is you get a certain outflow profile and apply that as a Dirichlet BC at the inlet at the next iteration. Your code will converge much better if you couple them implicitly. However this much easier if you set up the problem as suggested in (i). 

April 26, 2012, 20:33 

#22  
Member
Mosi Owa
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 35
Rep Power: 4 
Quote:


April 26, 2012, 20:45 

#23 
Senior Member
Chris DeGroot
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Canada
Posts: 387
Rep Power: 5 
As an example, let's say you were computing the gradient of a quantity PHI on the east face of a volume adjacent to the outflow boundary. To do this implicitly it would be (PHI(1)PHI(N))/DELTAX, where "1" is the volume adjacent to the inlet and "N" is the volume adjacent to the outlet. So you are treating "1" like it is the east neighbour of "N" and this would be incorporated implicitly into your coefficient matrix. You would then form all of the terms in your equations in this manner, where inlet volumes are treated like neighbours of the outlet volumes and vice versa.


April 26, 2012, 21:47 

#24 
New Member
JMC
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 9
Rep Power: 4 
Can you verify that you are conserving mass? Are you solving a compressible or incompressible system? If it is compressible, then adjusting the pressure is not sufficient for convergence.


April 27, 2012, 08:53 

#25 
Member
Mosi Owa
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 35
Rep Power: 4 

April 27, 2012, 10:39 

#26  
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 251
Rep Power: 6 
Quote:
If you want to impose periodic boundary condition you should consider your domain twice as it is in your simulation. Check the sketch below, I hope you will understand what I mean.... I think this is the first reason why your simulation doesn't work. Then you will have to consider the pressure drop. 

April 27, 2012, 10:43 

#27  
Senior Member
Chris DeGroot
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Canada
Posts: 387
Rep Power: 5 
Quote:


April 27, 2012, 11:50 

#28 
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 251
Rep Power: 6 
Yes you got the point Chris ! We agree...


April 27, 2012, 12:52 

#29  
Member
Mosi Owa
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 35
Rep Power: 4 
Quote:
Kelkar K.M., Patankar S.V., 1987, "Numerical Prediction of Flow and Heat Transfer in a Parallel Plate Channel With Staggered Fins" ASME J. of Heat Transfer; Vol 109, pp 25:30. cdegroot gave me the same suggestion as you did and I am going to apply it. However, just a couple of minutes ago, I finally got result from my simulation with a single channel. The change I applied was that I first let the code converge with a prescribed inlet velocity (which prescribes a specific mass flow); then I used the converged outlet velocity as the inlet boundary condition and solved the problem again from the beginning. The thing is that if I initialize my flow field with the previous solution result, the same thing happens as before, but if I initialize it as a new problem and with zero velocity and pressure everywhere, it gets converged. I do the procedure over and over until the point that my inlet and outlet velocity difference approached to zero. I also correct my outflow with prescribed flow because otherwise my velocity increases over and over. The only thing is that Re number is a little different from what is presumed.The remedy is to correct the viscosity at any iteration to retain my Re. Now I am checking my result with the result of the paper. Then I will apply two channels side by side to investigate to all the suggestions you guys offered me. 

May 1, 2012, 16:38 

#30  
Member
Mosi Owa
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 35
Rep Power: 4 
Quote:


April 10, 2013, 00:41 
Coefficient matrix for Finite Volume method with periodic boundary in x direction

#31 
New Member
siyamak
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Baton Rouge
Posts: 3
Rep Power: 3 
Hello,
Help please! I wrote a 2D finite volume code for a rectangular using Neumann boundary in bottom, Dirichlet boundary at top and periodic boundary in x direction. I get some results and everything seems to be fine other than by results tilted toward right boundary and I'm assuming that is because of NOT applying correct periodic boundary condition. Could you please let me know how to build a coefficient matrix which have periodic boundary in x direction? I appreciate if anybody can help me with that. 

April 12, 2013, 09:09 

#32 
Senior Member

in x direction, if we have N control volumes. start from 0, to N1.
where 0 means the left boundary, N1 means the right boundary. for control volume 1 , if no periodic bc: we have AP1*1=AE1*E+Sp. the effects from the 0 boundary has been lumped into source term Sp. but with periodic bc, we have a fictious (N2) control volume at the left of 1 CV. we have AP1*1=AW1*(N2)+AE1*E+Sp. where AP, AE , AW means the matrix coefficent . Hope this help, if you get some problem again, please let me know. 

Thread Tools  
Display Modes  


Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Periodic boundary condition  Arif  FLUENT  2  January 17, 2014 06:48 
Implementation of a relaxation boundary condition  fs82  OpenFOAM  2  December 19, 2011 07:04 
Simulating A water bubble in air with periodic boundary condition  cubicmatrixist  Main CFD Forum  0  October 14, 2010 12:26 
vorticity boundary condition  bearcharge  Main CFD Forum  0  May 14, 2010 11:32 
periodic boundary condition?  Sima Baheri  Phoenics  5  October 20, 2007 09:20 