# pressure drop - pipe flow

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

October 8, 2012, 09:01
pressure drop - pipe flow
#1
Member

CC
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 55
Rep Power: 7
Hi all,

I want simulate a pipe flow in fluent... the inlet and outlet are linked by periodic boundary conditions... In the pressure gradient (periodic boundary condition) I have a value, but in the static pressure profile I have negative values. I want compare the pressure drop with an experimental value. My question is: what value should I use?
Thanks
Attached Images
 watercaseI.jpg (43.3 KB, 94 views) watercaseII.jpg (42.8 KB, 85 views) watercaseIII.jpg (41.0 KB, 87 views)

 October 8, 2012, 10:36 #2 Senior Member     Alex Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: Germany Posts: 1,308 Rep Power: 22 First of all: If you specify your periodic interface with a pressure drop, then there is no point in comparing the pressure drop obtained in the simulation with experimental data. You could compare mass flow this way. If you want to compare pressure drop, define a mass flow. Then again, the result of your simulation with a highly non-linear pressure drop (even an increase at the inlet) doesn't look trustworthy. There must be something wrong with your setup. The issue with negative static pressure is just a question of normalization. The pressure derivative (pressure drop) is unaffected by this issue.

 October 9, 2012, 15:03 #3 Senior Member   Chris DeGroot Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: Canada Posts: 388 Rep Power: 8 In Fluent, the periodic pressure condition is imposed by decomposing the pressure gradient into a constant part and a varying part, i.e. . The constant part is imposed as a body force and the varying part is imposed as a surface force. The constant part is iterated to satisfy your mass flow rate and the varying part is solved for. For a fully-developed pipe flow, the constant part is your pressure gradient along the pipe and the varying part is zero (since the pressure profile is linear). When you plot a contour, Fluent plots the varying part of the pressure. As you can see, the magnitude of your pressures are less than one Pascal which is negligible (numerical error). Ignore this and look at the constant part. The first image you posted shows your answer for the constant pressure gradient along the pipe's axis. C.C and Kamu like this.

 November 17, 2012, 10:55 #4 Member   Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 38 Rep Power: 7 Thanks for the elaborate explanation. I am having problems postprocessing periodic flows, for example how do you get the pressure drop to use in the calculation of the friction factors? Do you use the varying part or the constant part? How do you get these to parts in post processing?

 November 19, 2012, 10:05 #5 Member   CC Join Date: Jun 2011 Posts: 55 Rep Power: 7 Dear Chris DeGroot, Thank you for your explanation

November 19, 2012, 10:12
#6
Member

Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 38
Rep Power: 7
Quote:
 Originally Posted by cdegroot In Fluent, the periodic pressure condition is imposed by decomposing the pressure gradient into a constant part and a varying part, i.e. . The constant part is imposed as a body force and the varying part is imposed as a surface force. The constant part is iterated to satisfy your mass flow rate and the varying part is solved for. For a fully-developed pipe flow, the constant part is your pressure gradient along the pipe and the varying part is zero (since the pressure profile is linear). When you plot a contour, Fluent plots the varying part of the pressure. As you can see, the magnitude of your pressures are less than one Pascal which is negligible (numerical error). Ignore this and look at the constant part. The first image you posted shows your answer for the constant pressure gradient along the pipe's axis.
Thanks Chris, i now get it. Is there any way of getting the pressure gradient as an output parameter into workbench for optimization studies??

November 19, 2012, 11:02
#7
Senior Member

Chris DeGroot
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 388
Rep Power: 8
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Kamu Thanks Chris, i now get it. Is there any way of getting the pressure gradient as an output parameter into workbench for optimization studies??
You are welcome. I am sure that there is, but I don't know it. I'm not a big workbench user.

 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 joshi20h FLUENT 0 September 26, 2012 12:41 CRT FLUENT 0 July 20, 2012 13:03 SalvoCalvo Main CFD Forum 0 March 11, 2010 07:52 Joe A. FLUENT 2 April 23, 2007 07:50 Dan Moskal Main CFD Forum 0 October 24, 2002 22:02

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 19:24.