
[Sponsors] 
October 10, 2001, 03:59 
[Rhie & Chow correction ?]

#1 
Guest
Posts: n/a

Hi, all. My code use colocated grid and SIMPLE scheme. So, I have used Rhie and Chow's pressure correction in calculation of mass flux for prevent checker board problem. Thesedays, I add Freesurface logic. (2fluid system) e.g ; gravitational force added as follows.
Source term  rho*Volume/Fn^2 in Wmomentum (3D) As you know, by this force, pressure become Total. But, (except lowRn) Checker board problem appeared. I just guess that pressure interpolation at surface has some problem... Is there anyCURE ? Please, help me. (I really don't want to change my code to staggered.) 

October 10, 2001, 09:05 
Re: [Rhie & Chow correction ?]

#2 
Guest
Posts: n/a

what is your density ratio.


October 10, 2001, 10:38 
Re: [Rhie & Chow correction ?]

#3 
Guest
Posts: n/a

You may need a bounded scheme to do interpolation at the interface, i.e. what's the density ratio? Because Rio*Vol/Fn*2 is much different here.
The problem may not be chess board pressure at all. just comment. 

October 10, 2001, 13:01 
Re: [Rhie & Chow correction ?]

#4 
Guest
Posts: n/a

hi there,
if you're using the collocated scheme, the fluxes satisfy continuity exactly ( divergence free), but the cellcenter velocities do not. Check the level of divergence for the cellcenter velocities and see if this it is appropriate, or if some regions of the flow have high divergence associated with them. If so, iterate on the cellcenter field to bring the divergence down to an acceptable level. Now, it may be possible that the condition for the pressure at the boundary are causing these problems. Right now, I really don't know what is the best approach to determine P on the boundary: 1 dp/dy = 0.0 ?? 2 Make an interpolation from the interior points ?? 3 Use the ymomentum equation to derive something for the dp/dy ?? The 3rd approach might have more physics associated with it, but still it would be an approximation. I hope this might help, Sincerely, Frederic Felten. 

October 10, 2001, 20:57 
Re: [Rhie & Chow correction ?]

#5 
Guest
Posts: n/a

Hi there,
Some people already knew the problem of RhieChow's method when body force is included in the momentum eq. Usually body force makes the pressure field highly nonlinear. For example let's think about natural convection in a square cavity with hot top wall, cold bottom wall, and two adiabatic vertical walls. You see flow field is stationary, but pressure is quadratic in vertical direction. This pressure gradient term can make face velocity nonphysical if grid scale is not compatible to the 3rd derivative pressure term added into a centraldifferenced face velocity. I recommand you to reduce pressure term of RhieChow scheme if it is very large compared to centraldifferenced face velocity. If you have a problem on the wall boundary, you should use higher order pressure extrapolation such as linear or quadratic. Or you can add body force term into wall pressure. Sincerely yours, Jongtae Kim 

October 11, 2001, 01:09 
Re: [Rhie & Chow correction ?]

#6 
Guest
Posts: n/a

Thanks.
My density ratio is common ; rho/rho_ref. so, in air cell, rho is rho_air/rho_water and in water cell, rho_water/rho_water. naturally, at interface, rho=rho_water*vof+rho_air*(1vof) ; vof means volume of fluid(water) AND, I understood MR. Kim 's comment. BUT, How can I reduce pressure ? if there were no gravitational force, it could. but, it can not make freesurface wave. Is there any method ? anyway thanks again. 

October 11, 2001, 01:44 
Re: [Rhie & Chow correction ?]

#7 
Guest
Posts: n/a

Hi name,
Your name is Name? Sorry just because of surprise. No, no, no What I mean is reducing the magnitude of pressure damping term in RhieChow scheme. You said you had checkerboar pressure field in your solution. How about velocity fields? Do you think it is physically reasonable? If velocity vecors somewhere in your computational domain are random, The cure is what I said. Please check it and reply Thank you 

October 11, 2001, 02:14 
Re: [Rhie & Chow correction ?]

#8 
Guest
Posts: n/a

I have also that problem in velocity field.(especially in Vvelocity) ordinaly, nondimensional presure has about 1 to 1. in gravity force, it depends on outer bottom size ; it means maximum pressure can be 20 or more. I think this big variable affects Rhie & Chow's correction term. (am I wrong ?)
reply plz. thanks 

October 12, 2001, 07:06 
Re: [Rhie & Chow correction ?]

#9 
Guest
Posts: n/a

This is a well known problem and can be easily sorted out if you also consider the extra body forces in Rhie and Chow formula.


October 12, 2001, 13:47 
Re: [Rhie & Chow correction ?]

#10 
Guest
Posts: n/a

Really ? Can you tell me more information(method, reference, etc. ...) ?
PLZ..... 

Thread Tools  
Display Modes  


Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
ansys12: turning off correction scaling  noa_emric  FLUENT  7  March 8, 2015 22:17 
Floating point exception error  Alan  OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD  10  April 6, 2012 14:02 
curvature correction term, material derivative of a tensor  volker  OpenFOAM Programming & Development  7  June 3, 2010 08:08 
Pressure correction problem  richard_larson  OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD  8  October 30, 2008 09:48 
mass flux correction at outflow boundaries  Subhra Datta  Main CFD Forum  2  November 24, 2003 14:11 