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

Bug in wall function

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

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   June 6, 2007, 11:10
Default There is a minor bug in the im
  #1
Member
 
Rolando Maier
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 89
Rep Power: 8
rolando is on a distinguished road
There is a minor bug in the implementation of the wall function.
The production term is calculated as:
G = nu_t * dUdY * Cmu25 * sqrt(k) / (kappa * y)
As the production is defined as:
G = tau_wall * dUdY * (Cmu25 * sqrt(k) / (kappa * y)
and:
tau_wall = (nu + nu_t) * dUdY

nu_t should be replaced by (nu + nu_t)

In a wide range of the application of the wall function this doesnīt matter as nu << nu_t.
But in the lower wall function range nu_t ~ nu and it can have an influence.

Rolando
rolando is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   June 6, 2007, 12:38
Default We have been investigating thi
  #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 854
Rep Power: 13
henry is on a distinguished road
We have been investigating this recently. The current implementation using nu_t is consistent with the production term in the k-epsilon model which also uses nu_t rather than nu_eff. We understand that most people use nu_eff in the production term in the wall-functions and we will change OpenFOAM to conform. We also understand that in the latest version of Fluent nu_eff rather than nu_t is now used in the production term in the k-epsilon and other two-equation models although no justification is given for this. Do you have any thoughts on this matter?

Henry
henry is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   June 6, 2007, 15:55
Default In the inner flow field of a f
  #3
Member
 
Rolando Maier
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 89
Rep Power: 8
rolando is on a distinguished road
In the inner flow field of a fully turbulent flow there should be no difference between nut and nuEff, as nut >> nu.
At the wall the idea of a flow with no curvature, respectively constant shear stress between the wall point and the first field point is used. This is a Couette flow. For this flow the production of turbulent kinetik energy is:
P = -<u_t*u_n> * dU_t/dn
The reynolds stress is equivalent the wall shear stress (constant shear stress):
-<u_t*u_n> = tau_w / rho
The derivative at the first field point is built from the logarithmic velocity profile:
dU_t/dn = u_tau / (kappa * n) = pow(Cmu, 0.25) * sqrt(k) / (kappa * n)
=> P = tau_w / rho * pow(Cmu, 0.25) * sqrt(k) / (kappa * n)
tau_w = nuEff * dU_t/dn
So by the idea of using the couette flow, the usage nuEff rather than nut in the wall neat domain is justifiable.

Rolando
rolando is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   June 7, 2007, 05:35
Default Do you think the production te
  #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 854
Rep Power: 13
henry is on a distinguished road
Do you think the production term in the two-equation models should be made consistent, i.e. use nuEff rather than nut? If so what is the justification and why is it rarely done that way (apart from the latest Fluent that is)?

Henry
henry is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   June 7, 2007, 09:07
Default In the literature the wall pro
  #5
Member
 
Rolando Maier
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 89
Rep Power: 8
rolando is on a distinguished road
In the literature the wall production of k is mostly:
P_w = tau_wall * (dU/dy)

tau_wall is a function of nu_eff rather than nu_t.
This is also done in OpenFOAM at one place. There the wall function calculates the turbulent wall viscosity as:
nu_t_wall = tau_wall / (dU / dy) - nu_wall

For the calculation of P_w, tau_wall should be reconstructed in this same way, for consistency reasons. This means, that (nu_t_wall + nu_wall), rather than nu_t_wall should be used for the calculation of the wall production of k.

Below there is a plot of the ratio of the wall productions calculated by nu_eff and nu_t.
The abscissa shows the wall distance in the dimensionless formulation of y+. It is plotted from 30 (the lower end of the logarithmic region) to 1000.
The ordinate shows the ratio of the two formulations.
You can see, that at the lower end of the scope (y+ ~ 30) , there is a large difference of nearly 100%. At the other end the difference is of about 2%, which might be negligible, as the "error" by not simulating the wall near domain might be larger.



Rolando
rolando is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   June 7, 2007, 09:16
Default I understand the arguments abo
  #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 854
Rep Power: 13
henry is on a distinguished road
I understand the arguments about the wall production, my question relates to the production term in the two-equations models independent of the wall treatment, i.e. in the bulk flow.

Henry
henry is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   June 7, 2007, 09:30
Default Independent of the wall treatm
  #7
Member
 
Rolando Maier
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 89
Rep Power: 8
rolando is on a distinguished road
Independent of the wall treatment, Iīm familiar with the formulation P = nu_t * S^2 as it is implemented in OpenFOAM.

The latest fluent manual I own, is the fluent 6.2 (which one is the latest one?).
There it is still done in this way. If in a newer release it is done in an other way, I donīt know why.

Rolando
rolando is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   June 8, 2007, 04:51
Default Just a comment about the turbu
  #8
Member
 
Rattin Michele
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 36
Blog Entries: 1
Rep Power: 8
michele is on a distinguished road
Just a comment about the turbulence production in the k equation.
The turbulent production represents the rate at which kinetic energy is transferred from the mean flow to the turbulence, and is defined as
Pk=tau_ij S_ij,
where tau_ij represents the Reynolds stress tensor and S_ij the mean strain-rate tensor.
The Reynolds stress tensor, under the Boussinesq constitutive model (for incompressible flows), is
tau_ij=2 nu_t S_ij - 2/3 k delta_ij
(delta_ij is the Kronecker diagonal tensor).
Substituting and taking into account for the incompressibility (delta_ij S_ij=0), the production term is then
Pk=nu_t S^2,
as correctly defined in OpenFOAM.

Michele
michele 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
How can I add a new wall function imano OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 13 January 17, 2011 06:19
wall function for low Re M. Essuri FLUENT 2 December 18, 2006 04:11
wall function Alex CFX 9 May 19, 2005 10:05
Does RSM use wall function? Sam Main CFD Forum 4 March 3, 2005 00:58
Wall function Min-Hua Wang CFX 4 July 5, 2002 12:13


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:43.