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

how many BC's should be assigned physically in navier stokes runs?

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

Like Tree4Likes
  • 1 Post By FMDenaro
  • 1 Post By leflix
  • 1 Post By FMDenaro
  • 1 Post By Aeronautics El. K.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   August 9, 2013, 17:26
Default how many BC's should be assigned physically in navier stokes runs?
  #1
Senior Member
 
immortality's Avatar
 
Ehsan
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Iran
Posts: 2,205
Rep Power: 17
immortality is on a distinguished road
how many BC's on inlet and outlet have to be assigned in navier stokes equations?and what are they?
There is a table for euler and navier stokes but isn't clear enough for inlet and outlet.
__________________
Injustice Anywhere is a Threat for Justice Everywhere.Martin Luther King.
To Be or Not To Be,Thats the Question!
The Only Stupid Question Is the One that Goes Unasked.
immortality is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 10, 2013, 09:36
Default
  #2
Member
 
Jonas T. Holdeman, Jr.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Knoxville, Tennessee
Posts: 94
Rep Power: 9
Jonas Holdeman is on a distinguished road
It can be as few as none with the pressure-free modified-Hermite finite element method.
Jonas Holdeman is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 10, 2013, 12:42
Default
  #3
Senior Member
 
immortality's Avatar
 
Ehsan
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Iran
Posts: 2,205
Rep Power: 17
immortality is on a distinguished road
I'm not familiar with this method dear Jonas.I want to know about ordinary cases with navier-stokes equations.
I know we need p,T and direction of U for inlet and only p for outlet.is it true?
then whats the difference between navier-stokes and Euler equations?
immortality is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 10, 2013, 14:39
Default
  #4
Senior Member
 
Filippo Maria Denaro
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,645
Rep Power: 23
FMDenaro will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by immortality View Post
I'm not familiar with this method dear Jonas.I want to know about ordinary cases with navier-stokes equations.
I know we need p,T and direction of U for inlet and only p for outlet.is it true?
then whats the difference between navier-stokes and Euler equations?

see http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1992JCoPh.101..104P
immortality likes this.
FMDenaro is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 10, 2013, 17:17
Default
  #5
Member
 
Jonas T. Holdeman, Jr.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Knoxville, Tennessee
Posts: 94
Rep Power: 9
Jonas Holdeman is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by immortality View Post
I'm not familiar with this method dear Jonas.I want to know about ordinary cases with navier-stokes equations.
I know we need p,T and direction of U for inlet and only p for outlet.is it true??
(1) It is well-established that the NS equation is composite, and can be decomposed into a pressure-free governing equation for the velocity, and a pressure equation which depends on the velocity. Just how one can implement this with continuous, truly divergence-free finite elements is less well known. (2) If a (2D) divergence-free velocity field exists, then there necessarily must exist a stream function such that the velocity is the curl of that stream function. It would seem then that the velocity degrees-of-freedom go hand in hand with the stream function (there may be div-free finite elements in primitive variables where the stream function is implicit, but these are rather complicated). (3) The stream function and solenoidal velocities can be unified (a stream function - velocity method?) using a modified Hermite element for the stream function (the modification consists of identifying the derivatives v=dPsi/dy, u=-dPsi/dx). The velocity element is the curl of this stream function element. If one uses such an element with the pressure-free form of the NSE, one finds it necessary to impose BCs on the stream function. For problems like duct flow, the BC on the stream function determines the direction and magnitude of the flow in the duct. Thus, an additional BC is necessary, but it is imposed on no-flow boundaries and not imposed on the inlet or outlet, which was the point of your question. Having found the velocity, the pressure gradient is recovered from the "pressure" equation. The pressure requires an additional integration constant, which may be specified anywhere, including a boundary. This is why no inlet/outlet BCs are necessary for solving certain NSE problems.

In principle, one could form exactly div-free functions from non div-free functions by subtracting off the gradient of an irrotational function. The problem is that one cannot do this with a FE and still preserve the element BCs. So it is common to satisfy the div-free condition only weakly. Here it gets complicated with inf-sup conditions and such. This function to be subtracted out satisfies an equation just like the pressure equation, but with different boundary conditions. But here it gets confusing because people use the symbol p to represent this projection function, and worse yet, they call it the pressure. And, they apply physical arguments about the pressure to this function.

So you are really asking about conditions on this projection function. I don't know if a firm mathematical answer exists. The practical answers are based on lore and are part of the mystique of CFD.

Including a coupled energy equation does not change the argument above, nor does inclusion of magnetic effects with conducting fluids. And there are some interesting possibilities using a fully FE method with moving domains.

While this applies to the Euler equation, that subject is treated differently because of an additional simplification.
Jonas Holdeman is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 10, 2013, 17:33
Default
  #6
Senior Member
 
immortality's Avatar
 
Ehsan
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Iran
Posts: 2,205
Rep Power: 17
immortality is on a distinguished road
thanks Jonas for this fundamental argument you did.when you speak about FE do you use it in contradiction of finite volume method(FV)?
__________________
Injustice Anywhere is a Threat for Justice Everywhere.Martin Luther King.
To Be or Not To Be,Thats the Question!
The Only Stupid Question Is the One that Goes Unasked.
immortality is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 10, 2013, 23:29
Default
  #7
Member
 
Jonas T. Holdeman, Jr.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Knoxville, Tennessee
Posts: 94
Rep Power: 9
Jonas Holdeman is on a distinguished road
My interest is in FEM for incompressible flow by the method described using modified Hermite finite elements. I have also applied the method to magnetohydrodynamics and am presently extending the work to moving fluid domains. I have placed a couple of educational codes using the method on the CFD Wiki.
Jonas Holdeman is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 18, 2013, 10:29
Default
  #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 251
Rep Power: 7
leflix is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by immortality View Post
then whats the difference between navier-stokes and Euler equations?
Navier-Stokes equations are elliptic and have 2nd order spatial derivative,while Euler equations are hyperbolic and have only 1rst order spatial derivative.
These features are very important especially for outlet boundaries treatment where non reflective BC is repquired especially for Euler equations.
immortality likes this.
leflix is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 25, 2013, 09:01
Default
  #9
New Member
 
JAY
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 10
Rep Power: 4
JAY ADHVARYU is on a distinguished road
I have some problem with my boundary condition that how i utilize the neumann condition(∂φ/∂x = 0) at outlet. Can i select pressure outlet at outlet?
my inlet condition is :
flat velocity profile =40m/s
Re=1.916*10^5
turbulent intensity=4.5%
And Inlet height of duct=5mm


I select velocity inlet at inlet because my flow is incompresible.
And axis boundary condition applied along the centerline.
and no slip condition at wall.

pls help me.
JAY ADHVARYU is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 25, 2013, 09:09
Default
  #10
Senior Member
 
immortality's Avatar
 
Ehsan
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Iran
Posts: 2,205
Rep Power: 17
immortality is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by JAY ADHVARYU View Post
I have some problem with my boundary condition that how i utilize the neumann condition(∂φ/∂x = 0) at outlet. Can i select pressure outlet at outlet?
my inlet condition is :
flat velocity profile =40m/s
Re=1.916*10^5
turbulent intensity=4.5%
And Inlet height of duct=5mm


I select velocity inlet at inlet because my flow is incompresible.
And axis boundary condition applied along the centerline.
and no slip condition at wall.

pls help me.
it seems you use Fluent?if yes ask in Fluent Forum.
__________________
Injustice Anywhere is a Threat for Justice Everywhere.Martin Luther King.
To Be or Not To Be,Thats the Question!
The Only Stupid Question Is the One that Goes Unasked.
immortality is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 25, 2013, 09:14
Default
  #11
Senior Member
 
immortality's Avatar
 
Ehsan
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Iran
Posts: 2,205
Rep Power: 17
immortality is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by leflix View Post
Navier-Stokes equations are elliptic and have 2nd order spatial derivative,while Euler equations are hyperbolic and have only 1rst order spatial derivative.
These features are very important especially for outlet boundaries treatment where non reflective BC is repquired especially for Euler equations.
Hi Reflix.
I have to say one thing,Navier-Stokes in steady-state mode is elliptic but in unsteady form,is parabolic.and why you say its necessarily 2nd order in space?we can descritize space in 1st order methods like upwind.
and in related to Euler,I think it depends on Mach number,if Mach<.7 its elliptic,if M>1.4 its hyperbolic and in .7<M<1.4 its a combination of elliptic and hyperbolic.
__________________
Injustice Anywhere is a Threat for Justice Everywhere.Martin Luther King.
To Be or Not To Be,Thats the Question!
The Only Stupid Question Is the One that Goes Unasked.
immortality is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 25, 2013, 09:42
Default
  #12
Senior Member
 
Filippo Maria Denaro
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,645
Rep Power: 23
FMDenaro will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by immortality View Post
Hi Reflix.
I have to say one thing,Navier-Stokes in steady-state mode is elliptic but in unsteady form,is parabolic.and why you say its necessarily 2nd order in space?we can descritize space in 1st order methods like upwind.
and in related to Euler,I think it depends on Mach number,if Mach<.7 its elliptic,if M>1.4 its hyperbolic and in .7<M<1.4 its a combination of elliptic and hyperbolic.
Actually, the time-dependent NS equations are incompetley parabolic, the continuity equation is always hyperbolic ...
Note also that the time-dependent Euler equations are always hyperbolics, whatever the Mach numeber is, since the characteristic lines (or surface) are always real.
leflix likes this.
FMDenaro is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 25, 2013, 13:01
Default
  #13
Senior Member
 
Lefteris
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 192
Rep Power: 5
Aeronautics El. K. is on a distinguished road
Hi immortality!

Quote:
Originally Posted by immortality View Post
Hi Reflix.
I have to say one thing,Navier-Stokes in steady-state mode is elliptic but in unsteady form,is parabolic.and why you say its necessarily 2nd order in space?we can descritize space in 1st order methods like upwind.
Because the viscous term has a second order spatial derivative.

Quote:
and in related to Euler,I think it depends on Mach number,if Mach<.7 its elliptic,if M>1.4 its hyperbolic and in .7<M<1.4 its a combination of elliptic and hyperbolic.
Where did you find that?
leflix likes this.
__________________
Lefteris

Aeronautics El. K. is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 30, 2013, 20:08
Default
  #14
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 251
Rep Power: 7
leflix is on a distinguished road
Hi Immortality

Quote:
Originally Posted by immortality View Post
Hi Reflix.
why you say its necessarily 2nd order in space?we can descritize space in 1st order methods like upwind.
I do not mean order of the scheme but order of thespatial derivative.

NS equation is second order derivative for the diffusive term:
div(mu (grad(u) + grad(u) T) )

term with du/dx, du/dy etc...


Quote:
Originally Posted by immortality View Post
in related to Euler,I think it depends on Mach number,if Mach<.7 its elliptic,if M>1.4 its hyperbolic and in .7<M<1.4 its a combination of elliptic and hyperbolic.
As far as I know Euler is always hyperbolic because you don't have diffusive term.
I agree with Filippo
leflix is offline   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
NAvier Stokes and Newton's law coupling archeoptyrx Main CFD Forum 10 March 6, 2014 03:42
Adding a term to Navier Stokes Equation ashtonJ CFX 3 January 15, 2011 07:32
Navier stokes compresible viscid flow fea, somebody can help? Jose Choy Main CFD Forum 3 October 24, 2003 02:28
Newbie:Viscoelasticity and Navier stokes equation Rajil Saraswat Main CFD Forum 2 June 9, 2003 07:21
help: I am trying to solve Navier Stokes compressible and viscid flow Jose Choy Main CFD Forum 2 May 18, 2000 05:45


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:11.