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

Pressure based and Density based Solver

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

Like Tree30Likes
  • 23 Post By johnfriend
  • 2 Post By JMern
  • 1 Post By leflix
  • 2 Post By Gatoscar
  • 2 Post By immortality

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   November 29, 2004, 14:41
Default Pressure based and Density based Solver
  #1
Xobile
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Hello,

what do we mean by Pressure based solver and Density based solver? what are the pros and cons of it?

Is there any paper or journal or book to read about these in detail?

For Hypersonic Compressible Flows , which solver is useful?

Thanks,

Xobile
  Reply With Quote

Old   November 30, 2004, 07:24
Default Re: Pressure based and Density based Solver
  #2
sun
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I also want to know the difference...will be glad if some one can make it clear.

Although I do know that density based solvers are more accurate for supersonic flows, while pressure based solvers are more accurate for incompressible subsonic flows. So for your application, density based solvers should be used.
  Reply With Quote

Old   November 30, 2004, 09:46
Default Re: Pressure based and Density based Solver
  #3
G.Ravanan
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
PL. TELL ME THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE PRESSURE, HEAD,PIPE DIA & LENGTH OF PIPE. FOR EXAMPLE: INLET WATER PRESSURE TO PIPE IS 10 BAR, PIPE DIA-3/4",PIPE LENGTH-600MTR, HEAD 2M. HOW MUCH COULD BE THE OUTLET WATER PRSSURE AT THE OTHER END OF PIPE?
  Reply With Quote

Old   July 10, 2009, 05:57
Default
  #4
New Member
 
Johnson Emmanuel
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 7
Rep Power: 8
johnfriend is on a distinguished road
Historically speaking, the pressure-based approach was developed for low-speed incompressible flows, while the density-based approach was mainly used for high-speed compressible flows. However, recently both methods have been extended and reformulated to solve and operate for a wide range of flow conditions beyond their traditional or original intent."
"In both methods the velocity field is obtained from the momentum equations. In the density-based approach, the continuity equation is used to obtain the density field while the pressure field is determined from the equation of state."
"On the other hand, in the pressure-based approach, the pressure field is extracted by solving a pressure or pressure correction equation which is obtained by manipulating continuity and momentum equations."
The pressure-based solver traditionally has been used for incompressible and mildly compressible flows. The density-based approach, on the other hand, was originally designed for high-speed compressible flows. Both approaches are now applicable to a broad range of flows (from incompressible to highly compressible), but the origins of the density-based formulation may give it an accuracy (i.e. shock resolution) advantage over the pressure-based solver for high-speed compressible flows."


refer: http://courses.cit.cornell.edu/fluent/wedge/step4.htm
johnfriend is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   July 22, 2009, 08:21
Default Highspeed?
  #5
RRD
New Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3
Rep Power: 8
RRD is on a distinguished road
How do you quantify Highspeed?
RRD is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   July 23, 2009, 08:58
Default
  #6
New Member
 
Vinayender
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: India
Posts: 24
Rep Power: 8
vinayender is on a distinguished road
To add to Jhonfriend point's

In incompressible flows, pressure is not a function of density and temperature ( or a weak function of for for very low mach flows).

In compressible flows, pressure is a function of both density and temperature and is determined by state equation (as John metioned) and hence the alorithm you use should respect this physics and hence we have a different algorithm for both regioms of flows.

Normally for Mach no greater than 0.3 can be taken as the barrior for compressible and incompressible flows.
__________________
Thanks ,
Vinayender
vinayender is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 3, 2012, 12:07
Default
  #7
New Member
 
John Mern
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2
Rep Power: 0
JMern is on a distinguished road
Coupled pressure-based solvers can be used in compressible flows and can sometimes be more efficient if there is a large region of low Re flow in the domain.
Ammofreak and Thota like this.
JMern is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 3, 2012, 15:42
Default
  #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 251
Rep Power: 7
leflix is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnfriend View Post
Historically speaking, the pressure-based approach was developed for low-speed incompressible flows, while the density-based approach was mainly used for high-speed compressible flows. However, recently both methods have been extended and reformulated to solve and operate for a wide range of flow conditions beyond their traditional or original intent."
"In both methods the velocity field is obtained from the momentum equations. In the density-based approach, the continuity equation is used to obtain the density field while the pressure field is determined from the equation of state."
"On the other hand, in the pressure-based approach, the pressure field is extracted by solving a pressure or pressure correction equation which is obtained by manipulating continuity and momentum equations."
The pressure-based solver traditionally has been used for incompressible and mildly compressible flows. The density-based approach, on the other hand, was originally designed for high-speed compressible flows. Both approaches are now applicable to a broad range of flows (from incompressible to highly compressible), but the origins of the density-based formulation may give it an accuracy (i.e. shock resolution) advantage over the pressure-based solver for high-speed compressible flows."


refer: http://courses.cit.cornell.edu/fluent/wedge/step4.htm

clear and perfect!!!! I have learned something tonight !
Thanx Johnfriend
leflix is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 3, 2012, 15:58
Default
  #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 251
Rep Power: 7
leflix is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by G.Ravanan
;31764
PL. TELL ME THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE PRESSURE, HEAD,PIPE DIA & LENGTH OF PIPE. FOR EXAMPLE: INLET WATER PRESSURE TO PIPE IS 10 BAR, PIPE DIA-3/4",PIPE LENGTH-600MTR, HEAD 2M. HOW MUCH COULD BE THE OUTLET WATER PRSSURE AT THE OTHER END OF PIPE?

I guess you are not in the right section to ask for your question.Your post has nothing to do with the original post of Xobile
Anyway, first compute the Reynolds number for your problem, then take the Moody's diagram and obtain the pressure loss coefficient lambda for your pipe.
If P0 is the pressure at inlet,then the pressure at outlet will be P0 -(lamba*L*Rho V²)/(2D) where D is the diameter, L the lenhht of your pipe, Rho the density, V the magnitude of velocity in the pipe.
This is a rough result.
mrenergy likes this.
leflix is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 16, 2013, 05:35
Default 2d airfoil-solver settings
  #10
New Member
 
deepthi
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 7
Rep Power: 4
deepthishan is on a distinguished road
For solving the 2d airfoil for various angles of attack which is used pressure or density based solver?Also simple or coupled is used?why?
The operating condition is at sea level and the velocity around 60m/s.
thanks in advance
deepthishan is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 21, 2013, 06:15
Default
  #11
New Member
 
TPRPR1
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 9
Rep Power: 4
tprpr1 is on a distinguished road
@deepthishan
teriyadu poyya!
tprpr1 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   October 16, 2013, 06:58
Default Inviscid Simulation
  #12
New Member
 
Jose Marķa Olmos
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 2
Rep Power: 0
joolpre is on a distinguished road
Hi!
I'm trying to chech the validity of the potential flow (Assuming inviscid flow) in subsonic and supersonic case of a slender body.
If I use the Pressure based solver in the subsonic case, I get a real good answer. However, if I make the same with supersonic case, the solution doesn't converge. If I use the density based solver i get a fairly good answer.
Anybody knows why this is happening?

Thank you in advance
joolpre is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   October 25, 2013, 15:43
Default
  #13
New Member
 
Debanjan Deep
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 14
Rep Power: 8
skyblue_mech is on a distinguished road
If I want to simulate a high speed air bearing where the rotating surface velocity magnitude is at the range of 100m/s to 250m/s; which solver should I use- pressure based or density? I am getting velocity divergence for density based solvers but is working fine with pressure based. Why is it happening do you think?
skyblue_mech is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   December 6, 2013, 08:47
Default
  #14
Senior Member
 
immortality's Avatar
 
Ehsan
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Iran
Posts: 2,205
Rep Power: 17
immortality is on a distinguished road
Hi,
although has passed several years but thanks Johnson for helpful text,
the link isn't there,what link you or other readers refer for density and pressure based solvers explanations and comparisons?
refer: http://courses.cit.cornell.ed...edge/step4.htm
__________________
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   December 23, 2013, 09:20
Default
  #15
New Member
 
Oscar Ochoa
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4
Rep Power: 3
Gatoscar is on a distinguished road
Hi Ehsan

I I found the same information in the next link:

http://aerojet.engr.ucdavis.edu/flue...ug/node986.htm

You can find more information about the algorithms in the link in the bottom of the page (25.1.1 Pressure-Based Solver and 25.1.2 Density-Based Solver)

Greetings
immortality and mollillull like this.
Gatoscar is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   December 24, 2013, 02:09
Default
  #16
Senior Member
 
immortality's Avatar
 
Ehsan
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Iran
Posts: 2,205
Rep Power: 17
immortality is on a distinguished road
Thank you very much dear Oscar,that was so helpful.
mollillull and Gatoscar like this.
__________________
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   April 8, 2015, 13:16
Default low speed
  #17
New Member
 
muammar
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 1
Rep Power: 0
morey is on a distinguished road
Explain the reasons why CFD codes are written in low speed solver and high speed solvers. A student is simulating an object flying at a velocity of 290m/s in the air using FDS6. Can this student obtain acceptable results and why?
morey is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 9, 2015, 16:08
Default
  #18
Member
 
Buddha's fight
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 40
Rep Power: 4
nvarma is on a distinguished road
Pressure based and density based solvers differ in how they couple the three equations. In most modern CFD software both can be used interchangeably according to the problem. However density based solvers might give faster convergence rates for compressible flows as that was the primary intended purpose. But that's not always the case either.

So experiment a bit with both. But if you have a highspeed flow( Mach 0.3 or above) make sure to use a compressible solver.

https://www.sharcnet.ca/Software/Flu...ug/node988.htm

https://www.sharcnet.ca/Software/Flu...ug/node987.htm

nvarma is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 13, 2015, 07:49
Default Problem in Trickle Bed reactor
  #19
New Member
 
Rahul omar
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 12
Rep Power: 4
omar.rahul is on a distinguished road
Hi,

I've tried to model a Trickle Bed reactor by both options 1) Three phase eulerian 2) 2 phase eulerian with porous media. Both simulations had convergence problem.

Problem for Gas & liquid phase is how to define the bubble dia considering gas is continuous phase.

For the 3 phase case, I patched solid vol fraction i.e. (1 - bed voidage ) in the solution domain, but to my surprise, solid volume fraction keeps on changing and eventually get replaced by the liquid & gas which is not correct.

Anybody has any clue?

Response will be appreciated.

email- omar.rahul51@gmail.com
omar.rahul 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
Using Density Gradient C_R_G(c,t), Pressure Based Solver Anirudh_Deodhar Fluent UDF and Scheme Programming 1 October 25, 2013 05:43
Pressure gradient in UDF for density based solver matzb FLUENT 0 February 22, 2010 07:34
regarding density and pressure based solver Reddy CFX 3 October 11, 2007 03:08
regarding density and pressure based solver Reddy FLUENT 0 August 18, 2007 11:11
Pressure based and Density based Solver Xobile CD-adapco 1 November 30, 2004 22:13


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:59.