
[Sponsors] 
January 11, 2012, 14:17 

#21  
Senior Member
Martin Hegedus
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 474
Rep Power: 11 
Quote:
If your separation is smooth body separation (i.e. a circle), then the pressure and viscous solution is dependent on initial grid spacing. Yes, as flow moves much further away from the body, I do expect the URANS flow to become unstable as eddy viscosity diminishes and the grid (in general) becomes coarser. 

September 1, 2014, 04:18 

#22  
Member
Albert Tong
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Perth, WA, Australia
Posts: 76
Blog Entries: 1
Rep Power: 7 
Quote:
I have a simple question that why 2D les is not physically right?
__________________
Kind regards, Albert 

September 1, 2014, 05:22 

#23  
Senior Member
Filippo Maria Denaro
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,516
Rep Power: 31 
Quote:
the key is to understand what you mean for 2d turbulence... 2d turbulence is a real model for large scale flows, such as atmospheric or oceanic turbulence becose you have a 2d plane of large scale and the third dimension (the vertical direction) is much smaller compared to them. For such flows you can perform 2d LES computation. On the other hand, if you have a 3d problem where all the characteristic scales in the three dimensions are comparable each other, then it makes no sense to perform an LES computation in 2d 

September 10, 2014, 01:40 

#24  
Member
Albert Tong
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Perth, WA, Australia
Posts: 76
Blog Entries: 1
Rep Power: 7 
Quote:
Thank you for your promote reply. That is to say 2D LES is similar to 2D RAS? I read through this thread and some people seem to suggest 2D LES is not mathematically right. I am simulating pipeline sitting on seabed, and the pipeline is very long compared to its diameter. Is 2D LES appropriate for such application, or 2D RAS is more appropriate? Many thanks.
__________________
Kind regards, Albert 

September 10, 2014, 03:21 

#25 
Senior Member
Filippo Maria Denaro
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,516
Rep Power: 31 
No, that's not a mathematical lack, LES can be formally performed even in 1D...
The key is in the physics of the flow problem.... as happen in geophysical flows, when you have turbulent structures extending several order of magnitude more in two dimensions compared to the third dimension, a 2D LES can be a reasonable approximate model. Pipe and channel flows are typically flow problems with 3D turbulent structures and you have to use 3D LES. RANS is used in 2D as it implies a statistical averaging, that's very different idea from LES 

December 7, 2015, 06:14 

#26  
New Member
anand sudhi
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 16
Rep Power: 3 
Quote:
I have seen many papers trying to do 3D URANS to capture the mean properties, even through the draw back you mentioned persists. So my questions is # Is it unreliable on properly describing the flow structures like in the wakes? # Also is there any application where URANS can give reliable results, in your experience, like calculation of Drag and other mean quantities. I am hoping you would find this thread as its an old one. Thank you 

December 7, 2015, 06:58 

#27  
Senior Member
Filippo Maria Denaro
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,516
Rep Power: 31 
Quote:
You should always consider your goal and then the suitable tool will be defined URANS can provide some statistical unsteady details but if you want to study the structure of the wake in its details with the complete range of produced frequancy, than you have only LES/DNS. The better framework I can see to define correctly the URANS formulation is to study the flow produced by an external timedependent force, for example the piston movin in a cylinder. 

January 26, 2016, 01:05 
2D, 2D axisymmetric

#28 
Member
azna
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 30
Rep Power: 5 
Hi ,
I was wondering that if anybody has any refrences regarding comparison of 2D ( planer) midel domain with 2D axisymmetric model. Thanks 

Thread Tools  
Display Modes  

