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

Core size in VEM

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

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   July 26, 1999, 05:17
Default Core size in VEM
  #1
Jerome
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I am using a regularized vortex element method to study wakes behind aircrafts but I have a problem with the choice of the core size of regularization: the cores of particles have to overlap and is then of the order of the mean inter-particles distance but my vortex sheet is likely to be torn between flaps, but the method cannot foresee that, and so to my mind, I can't take into account directly the mean inter-particles distance.

Can anybody help me?
  Reply With Quote

Old   July 26, 1999, 09:51
Default Re: Core size in VEM
  #2
olus boratav
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Hi,

The following references might help.

Knio and Ghoniem (1990)

Numerical study of a 3D vortex method

J. Comput. Phys, 86, pp.75-106

Fernandez, Zabusky, Gryanik (1995)

Vortex intensification and collapse.....

JFM 229, pp.289-331

Pelz (1997)

Locally Self-similar, finite-time collapse in a high-symmetry model

Phys. Rev. E. 55(2), 1617-1626

Olus Boratav
  Reply With Quote

Old   July 26, 1999, 14:22
Default Re: Core size in VEM
  #3
Adrin Gharakhani
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I don't see a significant problem with the vortex sheet spliting around the flaps. That is if you use discrete (disjoint) elements and not the vortex filament model (where the elements are assumed connected).

The core overlap condition is really a confusing criterion! Basically you'd want the core of an element to overlap the core of the nearest neighbors. If a stream of elements reach a "bifurfaction" such as the flap, then the particles within each stream would have to maintain their respective core overlap. In practice, and unless you have significant vorticity stretch, you hardly have to worry about core overlap if you have small enough of a timestep (as overlap would generally be satisfied if it was satisfied initially). You can check the validity of the above statement by post-processing the relative positions of the elements. As for the case with stretch, there are issues just as important as core overlap that you need to consider and worry about (and it is beyond the scope here)

Adrin Gharakhani
  Reply With Quote

Old   July 27, 1999, 03:42
Default Re: Core size in VEM
  #4
Jerome
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I understand what you mean but my aim was to fix the value of the core size in order not to give it arbitrarily so that I can find the same results as experiments. That's why I wanted to use the core overlap condition. In the main part of the computation, the core overlap is satisfied elsewhere but not between flaps where the stretch remains to high, hence my question: I have to give a value of the core size but how?

Hopping that I was clear,

Jerome
  Reply With Quote

Old   July 27, 1999, 15:29
Default Re: Core size in VEM
  #5
Adrin Gharakhani
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Well, the core size is an arbitrary variable (no ifs or buts about it) - in a sense it's similar to (but not exactly the same as) grid size in grid-based computations. Larger core sizes will give you more diffuse results, and convergence occurs (presumably) in the limit of zero core size (much like grid size).

I still don't see why you should worry (too much) about the flap region. You should just make sure that the cores don't cross the flap (that will lead to a misrepresentation of vorticity). Thus, so long as the cores don't cut through the flap and you have core overlap you're safe. If the cores do cut the flap, say at a sharp leading edge, I'd say the effect of this is similar to rounding the sharp edge. The rest is a matter of "convergence study"

Check out the JFM paper by Marshall et al (within the last 3 years or so) which is a vortex simulation of a 3D vortex ring cutting through a blade. This is quite similar to what you're doing - the difference is that in the JFM paper the blade does not generate vorticity (flow about it is inviscid)

Adrin Gharakhani
  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
Superlinear speedup in OpenFOAM 13 msrinath80 OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 18 March 3, 2015 06:36
critical error during installation of openfoam Fabio88 OpenFOAM Installation 21 June 2, 2010 03:01
OF 1.6 | Ubuntu 9.10 (64bit) | GLIBCXX_3.4.11 not found piprus OpenFOAM Installation 22 February 25, 2010 14:43
Phase locked average in run time panara OpenFOAM 2 February 20, 2008 15:37
fluent add additional zones for the mesh file SSL FLUENT 2 January 26, 2008 12:55


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:49.