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

Newbie: why don't I hear anyone refer to Re in FEM and FD methods?

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

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   January 8, 2012, 12:13
Default Newbie: why don't I hear anyone refer to Re in FEM and FD methods?
  #1
New Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 28
Rep Power: 7
bzz77 is on a distinguished road
Hello all:

I'm a bit of a newbie to advanced fluid dynamics. I'm a chemist and I often use code for 1- and 2-D advection/diffusion, based on finite element/difference/volume methods to deal with things like contaminant transport.

This is probably a very silly question, but I'd really appreciate a push in the right direction...

Since I started using finite element/difference/volume, I have heard anyone refer to the Reynolds number. I know I have to obey the CFL when using explicit schemes. But as far as going from laminar to turbulent flow, it seems like I don't need to worry about anything. In other words, is it true that I can use the exact same numerical schemes to model laminar and turbulent flow?

If this is not true, can anyone suggest a book that might help me figure out how to deal with turbulent flow within finite element/difference/volume schemes? I would like to start modeling higher Re flows.

Thanks a lot.
bzz77 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 10, 2012, 05:03
Post hello
  #2
kid
Senior Member
 
cfdkid
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 133
Rep Power: 8
kid is on a distinguished road
Well, Re should be discussed in FD,FV or FE schemes is not a clause or pivotal point. Re is used to judge type of flow or one can say it is used as a SI unit to discuss and convey type of flow or physics of flow in research community.

As far as different methods are concerned they can extract velocity from Re, that is all. But yes in experimental fluid dynamics it has got big significance as compared to computational fluid dynamics. Nevertherless, do not worry why Re is not discussed in computational methods. Rather think Re should be discussed only while pre-processing ( to understand flow boundary and expected result) and post-processing to interpret the results from nemerical schemes.
I hope , this would give you a direction to think on this matter.
All the best.

regards,
CFDkid
kid is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 10, 2012, 15:30
Default
  #3
Member
 
adrin
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 41
Rep Power: 8
adrin is on a distinguished road
Your assessment that no-one has referred to the Reynolds number (i.e., dealt with the turbulence issue) is incorrect. Turbulence modeling has been one of the most intensely active (and difficult) research fields in fluid dynamics for decades. There are volumes upon volumes of information on this.

As for the question on whether the same equation can be used for laminar and turbulent flows, the answer is "yes, so long as the numerics resolve the length and time scales associated with the Reynolds number". The Navier Stokes equations are a statement of conservation of mass and momentum (in the continuum regime), and the diffusion term essentially accounts for the proper Reynolds number effect. However, in discrete form, for this diffusion term to balance convection (and pressure) we would need ever increasingly smaller grid (and timestep) sizes. At present, this is computationally unfeasible except for very small physical domain sizes and very simple problems. The term "Direct Numerical Simulation" or DNS is used to imply direct accounting of all the Navier Stokes terms in a turbulent flow regime. Since DNS of complicated and large domains is not possible, one must resort to turbulence modeling, which is effectively a method to handle the complexities associated with convective non-linearity. Generally, this latter is formulated in terms of a "turbulent diffusion" term, and various models with various degrees of complexity exist to model the diffusivity "constant" (which is really not a constant as in the case of laminar diffusion of Newtonian fluids).

This is a very brief description; I hope it helps clear out your confusion.

adrin
adrin is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 10, 2012, 16:31
Default
  #4
New Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 28
Rep Power: 7
bzz77 is on a distinguished road
Thanks guys.
bzz77 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 11, 2012, 11:27
Default
  #5
Member
 
SergeAS's Avatar
 
Serge A. Suchkov
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 73
Blog Entries: 5
Rep Power: 5
SergeAS is on a distinguished road
Send a message via Skype™ to SergeAS
Without touching the context of accounting turbulence which has already been said adrin, back to the context of the stability of the solution (was referred to CFL), in some numerical schemes used by the cell Peclet number, which includes the cell Reynolds number (Pe = Re * Pr), for example in hybrid numerical scheme for switching between UD and CD. Thus, indirectly, higher Reynolds numbers can create problems for the stability of some numerical schemes.

PS: We must distinguish the Reynolds number for the domain which includes the characteristic size of the domain that points to the nature of the flow in a domain (laminar, turbulent or transitional) and cell Reynolds number which includes the cell size.
SergeAS is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 12, 2012, 14:58
Default
  #6
Senior Member
 
TWB
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 105
Rep Power: 8
quarkz is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by SergeAS View Post
Peclet number, which includes the cell Reynolds number (Pe = Re * Pr), for example in hybrid numerical scheme for switching between UD and CD.
I am wondering how one solves the Peclet no., or Prandtl no Pr, which involves the viscous and thermal diffusion rate. Wikipedia says for air, it's 0.7-0.8. So can I use it to get the Peclet no. in my CFD code, for switching between UD and CD?

Thanks
quarkz is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 12, 2012, 16:16
Default
  #7
Member
 
SergeAS's Avatar
 
Serge A. Suchkov
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 73
Blog Entries: 5
Rep Power: 5
SergeAS is on a distinguished road
Send a message via Skype™ to SergeAS
Quote:
Originally Posted by quarkz View Post
I am wondering how one solves the Peclet no., or Prandtl no Pr, which involves the viscous and thermal diffusion rate. Wikipedia says for air, it's 0.7-0.8. So can I use it to get the Peclet no. in my CFD code, for switching between UD and CD?

Thanks
You have a look http://www.cham.co.uk/phoenics/d_pol...scheme.htm#3.3 Hybrid-Differencing Scheme as example
SergeAS is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply

Tags
finite difference, finite element method, finite volume, reynolds number, turbulence

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



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 18:14.