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

Turbulence models

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

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   May 4, 2005, 21:35
Default Turbulence models
  #1
Galathea
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Hi, I am new to CFD. May I know under what situation should I use Baldwin-Lomax model over k-epsilon models? This is the first time I actually came across this model as most textbooks mentioned only k-epsilon or k-omega models.

Any advice will be very much appreciated.

  Reply With Quote

Old   May 5, 2005, 06:41
Default Re: Turbulence models
  #2
Jonas Larsson
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
The Baldwin-Lomax model is a very robust and simple model which can produce surpricingly good results for turbomachinery blading simulations. It is suitable to use for quick design iterations. If you want to predict stall, complex 3D flows or separations it is probably not that suitable.
  Reply With Quote

Old   May 5, 2005, 21:21
Default Re: Turbulence models
  #3
Galathea
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I read it somewhere that the Baldwin-Lomax model is more suitable than k-epsilon in the case of transonic flow, but no explanation was given. Is this true?
  Reply With Quote

Old   May 6, 2005, 07:43
Default Re: Turbulence models
  #4
Jonas Larsson
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
The Baldwin-Lomax model is a much simpler algebraic turbulence model which does not include any transported turbulent quantities. That makes it very robust and it seldom behaves very badly.

K-epsilon on the other hand is a two-equation model which transports two turbulent properties (turbulent energy and dissipation). This makes it possible for k-epsilon models and other two-equation models to account for history effects in a way which Baldwin-Lomax can never do. Hence, k-epsilon is a more advanced model with the potential of predicting more complex phenomena.

However, k-epsilon models often produce completely unphysicial results with unrealisticly viscous regions. This often happens in regions with strong normal strain, ie in regions with strong acceleration or decelleration. In transonic flows where you have shocks the shocks can often make your standard k-epsilon model produce this kind of problematic viscous regions. To handle this you need special versions of the k-epsilon models that, for example, have some extra realizability constraint applied to them.

Hence, there is no simple answer to your question. Which model is best depends on your case (weather or not history effects are important), your own experience in identifying problems with k-epslion models and which k-epsilon model you are using.
  Reply With Quote

Old   May 28, 2005, 09:50
Default Re: Turbulence models
  #5
Yan
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
What about the Spallars-Almarlas? in case of incompressible simulation like water pumps. i found that in some cases the S-A model behaves better than the B-L, while some case not.
  Reply With Quote

Old   May 28, 2005, 17:19
Default Re: Turbulence models
  #6
Jonas Larsson
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
The Spalart-Almares model is a one-equation model that it something in between an algebraic model like the Baldwin-Lomax model and a two-equation model like the k-epsilon model. Since it includes one transported turbulent quantity it has the potential to include at least some history effects (transportation of turbulent energy). It is a more modern model than the BL model, but that is of course not a guarantee that it always produces better results.

Tha SA model is very robust and is easy to use. For attached flows it often produces good results. It is popular in aero-space applications and for quick design-iteration simulations in the turbomachinery field. The SA model rarely produces the completely unphysical results that a k-epsilon model can produce sometimes. This has made the SA model quite popular in the last 5 years.

Spalart has also developed a nice DES variant of the SA model, where the large eddies are resolved and the smaller edies are modeled using the SA model. This type of hybrid RANS/LES models have produced very good results for massively separated flows in aerospace applications - there is a very nice example of a SA DES simulation of a stalling F18 which you can probably find on the net if you google a bit.

For heat transfer applications I'd not recommend SA. It often under-predicts heat-transfer.
  Reply With Quote

Old   August 12, 2005, 06:33
Default Re: Turbulence models
  #7
kali charn nayak
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
What are the better turbulence models to predict the flow pattern and heat transfer in a stator -rotor cavity like in turbo-machinery secondary flow regions where many strong re-circulating zones are present.

Thanks, Kali
  Reply With Quote

Old   October 10, 2005, 06:42
Default Re: Turbulence models
  #8
sathish kumar.a
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
hi, can u please send me basic materials for reynolds stress modeling and its latest trend in cfd.

thank you

bye, sathish kumar
  Reply With Quote

Old   October 14, 2005, 04:55
Default Re: Turbulence models
  #9
SOHAIL Muhammad Amjad
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
respected sir i am working on a small ducted propellor, duct diameter is 180 mm and its lenght is .1 m in which the propellor is installed. this whole geometry is moving with speed 10m/sec. and rpm of motor used to rotate the propellor is 10000. now please tell me which model is better to use. baldwin_lomax , Spallars-Almarlas or k-e model. flow is nearly steady and this ducted propellor is used for uav. u r kindly requested to reply as soon as possible. sohail muhammad amjad
  Reply With Quote

Old   November 8, 2005, 23:31
Default Re: Turbulence models
  #10
PROF. VIVEK. YAKKUNDI
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
respected sir , kindly suggest the suitable model for external aerodynamics of car. thanks vivek
  Reply With Quote

Old   June 10, 2010, 15:51
Default
  #11
New Member
 
Quentin
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 22
Rep Power: 8
Bedotto is on a distinguished road
Hi,

I was wondering if the Spalart-Allmaras model implemented in Fine/turbo has been implemented to use wall functions when the mesh resolution is not sufficiently fine (like in Fluent). Because in my case I have 100<y+<250 and I'm wondering if results obtained with a so high y+ have any value?

Best regards

Quentin
Bedotto is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 5, 2010, 16:07
Default
  #12
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 145
Rep Power: 8
Jade M is on a distinguished road
Bedotto, I would recommend refining your grid to determine whether your y+ value is sufficient. Essentally, demonstrate grid independence.
Jade M is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 6, 2010, 08:19
Default cfd
  #13
New Member
 
balan
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1
Rep Power: 0
guuthi is on a distinguished road
how to calculate the lift drag by using cfd?
guuthi 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
LES & DES turbulence models Seva Reehal CFX 5 October 18, 2009 08:44
LES turbulence models kaama CFX 3 February 3, 2008 17:48
Turbulence Models cfd_novice Main CFD Forum 2 July 30, 2006 18:49
turbulence models Alex CD-adapco 1 November 21, 2005 08:46
Turbulence models help plz! Hung FLUENT 2 March 30, 2005 01:12


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 14:38.