CFD Online Discussion Forums

CFD Online Discussion Forums (http://www.cfd-online.com/Forums/)
-   Main CFD Forum (http://www.cfd-online.com/Forums/main/)
-   -   High Re K Epsilon vs Low Re K Epsilon (http://www.cfd-online.com/Forums/main/97558-high-re-k-epsilon-vs-low-re-k-epsilon.html)

RSilva February 20, 2012 10:21

High Re K Epsilon vs Low Re K Epsilon
 
Hi folks,

I am somewhat new to CFD (only been doing for some months :o), and I have a doubt which I hope some can clear...

I am trying to implement a Low Re K-Epsilon turbulence model to a backstep and compare it to a High Re K-Epsilon turbulence model, to show that, in this particular case, the Low Re K-Epsilon turbulence model represents the situation better.

However, I get a pressure drop that is higher for the Low Re K-Epsilon turbulence model than the pressure drop for the High Re K-Epsilon turbulence model...

Is this correct? shouldn't it be the opposite? :confused:
Or perhaps I made a mistake in the modelling step?

Hope someone can help!

Best Regards,

Rui Silva

RSilva February 22, 2012 11:49

Anyone?

I'm really stuck in this matter...

julien.decharentenay February 22, 2012 20:34

Hi Rui,

In this specific case, you will need to ensure that the mesh is appropriate to the model employed (and ensure that the wall treatment is correct).

Low-Reynolds k-epsilon turbulence model:
- The first cell y+ should be around 1 (or less);
- the wall treatment is based on first cell being the viscous sub-layer.

High-Reynolds k-epsilon turbulence model:
- the first cell y+ should be around 15-30;
- A high-Reynolds wall treatment is to be used.

From your post, I am unsure that you are using two different mesh that are consistent with the employed model.

Kind regards,
Julien

RSilva February 23, 2012 10:17

5 Attachment(s)
Hello Julien,

thank you for your reply.

What I am doing is modifying the standard high Reynolds k-epsilon (according to Wilcox) that comes with a cfd software (comsol) so that it becomes the
Launder-Sharma Low Re k-epsilon Turbulence model.

So I modified the equations to incorporate the new set of damping functions and boundary conditions near the wall.

After reading some posts and papers I have refined my mesh.
But since I am using a modified standard k-epsilon model, I cannot see y+!

I have attached pics of my mesh near the wall and some size info!
Hope the pics help...

Is there a way to evaluate y+ for a low re k-epsilon model??

Best Regards,

Rui

julien.decharentenay February 23, 2012 20:56

Have a look at: http://www.cfd-online.com/Wiki/Dimen..._wall_distance for the definition of y+ - which can be evaluated for a low Reynold k-epsilon model.

There is also a simple y+ estimator on the web page.

Also, you could use the other calculations to estimate the friction velocity (under the assumption that the other calculations friction velocity is accurate).

The rule y+ around 1 is a guidelines - do not get stuck with it.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:24.