# Unit conversion from 3-d to 2-d

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

 January 20, 2005, 16:43 Unit conversion from 3-d to 2-d #1 Raj Guest   Posts: n/a Hi- I have this experimental tank (38 x 9 x 9 cm) that has a circular inlet of 1.2 cm diameter. In my experiments, i have the flow coming in at the rate of 60 mL/minute. Now the problem is - when i have to simulate this in CFD, i need the velocity of flow coming in. So, from the equation Q = V.A, i can get the inlet velocity, but I am simulating this in 2-d (38 x 9 cm), where the inlet is represented by a line 1.2 cm in length. What will be the inlet velocity for this case? Will it be the same as i get from the above equation for 3-d simulation?

 January 21, 2005, 01:12 Re: Unit conversion from 3-d to 2-d #2 Praveen C Guest   Posts: n/a You are assuming that the flow is 2-D, there is no variation in the flow properties in the third direction. The velocity must be still taken to be Q/A.

 January 21, 2005, 01:51 Re: Unit conversion from 3-d to 2-d #3 amol palekar Guest   Posts: n/a I agree with Praveen. However now Q will be V.L.1 where L is characteristic length (may be diameter). amol

 January 21, 2005, 11:54 Re: Unit conversion from 3-d to 2-d #4 Raj Guest   Posts: n/a Praveen and Amol- Thanks for your responses. But what Praveen said is that we can use the Area from the 3-d calculation which will be pi*d*d/4 and Amol says it will be d*1. So, i am a bit confused again.

 January 21, 2005, 12:17 Re: Unit conversion from 3-d to 2-d #5 amol palekar Guest   Posts: n/a For simulations : A = d*1 For experiments : A = d*d/4 I am asssuming that in experiments the hole is in x-y plane and water is flowing in the z direction and in CFD you are neglecting either x or y.

 January 21, 2005, 12:38 Re: Unit conversion from 3-d to 2-d #6 O. Guest   Posts: n/a That depends on what you are interested in. Going from 3D to 2D is a big simplification in your case. If you would like to investigate the local effects of a jet impinging on a free surface you might want to keep the actual velocity. Another option would be to match the filling time, in which case you get a smaller velocity.

 January 24, 2005, 05:56 Re: Unit conversion from 3-d to 2-d #7 Alexander Starostin Guest   Posts: n/a Hi, Raj As I read your message first time I noticed that turning to 2D you are losing 3D influences at the coners of the tank. Besides, and it's more important, the crossection of the plume is much smaller than the tank has. 2D planar plume interacts with smaller volume as it does in the reality. I would have calculated the problem with cylindical geometry (not x,z but r,z), substituting outer diameter from 9 to sqrt(9*9/Pi/4). This way you conserve the ratio of volumes and cross-sections for coming fluid and fluid inside the tank.

 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 billynoe OpenFOAM 5 February 10, 2011 15:05 newbie FLUENT 5 November 14, 2010 06:44 prapanj OpenFOAM Meshing & Mesh Conversion 3 March 12, 2009 23:09 Topu Phoenics 2 July 19, 2007 10:11 lambuhere CFX 0 August 20, 2004 04:49

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 20:20.