# turbulence modeling error at a stagnation point

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

 August 8, 2006, 04:27 turbulence modeling error at a stagnation point #1 erdem Guest   Posts: n/a hi I'm studying external aerodynamics of Ahmed Body car geometry. I have used realizable k-eps, SST k-omega and RSM models. in terms of drag coefficient I got similar values with all models. but all of them calculated nearly 1.5-2 times drag at the front of the body (comparing with the original experiments. Realizable k-epsilon has the highest drag on the front. why does this happen? would you please help me about investigating the greater pressures at the front caused by turbulence modeling? I have to write a discussion about it. this is really important. thanks for you time. Erdem

 August 15, 2006, 14:46 Re: turbulence modeling error at a stagnation poin #2 PROF. VIVEK. YAKKUNDI Guest   Posts: n/a sir/madam This refers to your querry regarding turbulence modelling error at stagnation point. As you have mentioned the drag in the front has to be morein contrast to the stagnation point and other regions of the car body.This is because in the front the flow is more or less unidirectional where eddy viscosity needs to be properly modelled in order that Reynold's stress uv is rightly described.Due to wall blocking effect or viscous damping the transport normal to the wall is inhibited and therefore eddy viscosity must be decreased accordingly by an appropriate factor. Secondly the prediction of drag value in k-eps model is higher because the wall function used is based on the assumption of constant stress hypothesis( As demonstrated by Wilcox)and therefore the measurements are consistent with only constant stress. However Menter's model of shear stress transport ( k- omega) is devoid of these descrepancies and is consistent with measurements for all pressure gradients.Also RNG K-eps model is found to be ( yakhot & orszag)consistent as it contains its own low Reynold's number version and at high Reynold's numbers it gives the usual wall law. hope this reply clarifies your doubts.

 August 15, 2006, 15:40 Re: turbulence modeling error at a stagnation poin #3 erdem Guest   Posts: n/a Dear Mr. Yakkundi Thank You for your kind answer clarifying my question. Is there any publication of yours regarding this subject that I can cite in my thesis report. thank you best regards Erdem

 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 erdem CFX 3 August 9, 2006 19:54 erdem CD-adapco 4 August 9, 2006 10:44 erdem Main CFD Forum 2 August 8, 2006 10:28 erdem FLUENT 0 August 8, 2006 04:25 largeeedysimulation FLUENT 1 September 7, 2005 18:03

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 00:39.