|March 15, 2012, 06:15||
Sign inconsistency in the compressible Launder-Sharma k-epsilon model
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: University of Tor Vergata, Rome
Posts: 361Rep Power: 10
checking the epsilon transport equation in the Launder-Sharma low-Re model I've found a clear inconsistency in the C3 constant sign (at least it is there in the OF-2.1.0 release, I don't know if it has been already fixed in 2.1.x).
The following is the (correct) compressibility production term in the standard k-epsilon model implementation:
- fvm::SuSp(((2.0/3.0)*C1_ + C3_)*rho_*divU, epsilon_)
As you can see, the term multiplied by C1 enters with a negative sign, while the term multiplied by C3 actually becomes positive, as in OF C3 is equal to -0.33 while the correct constant value in the RHS of the epsilon equation should be +0.33.
This is the same (incorrect) term in the Launder-Sharma model:
+ fvm::SuSp((C3_ - 2.0/3.0*C1_)*rho_*divU, epsilon_)
The C1 term is again negative, but so it is the C3 one as in OF +C3=-0.33.
So, I don't know what is the real influence of such an error, but to me this is clearly a bug (I will report it to the bug tracker in a while).
Greetings to all
Last edited by vkrastev; March 15, 2012 at 06:23. Reason: Bug tracker reference added
|Thread||Thread Starter||Forum||Replies||Last Post|
|Low Reynolds K Epsilon Launder Sharma Model Functions Doubt...||RSilva||Main CFD Forum||17||February 17, 2014 10:52|
|Herschel-Bulkley non-Newtonian viscosity model has term with sign error||pbryant||OpenFOAM Bugs||5||June 18, 2013 23:53|
|derivation of epsilon equation of k-epsilon model||Ricardo Rezende||Main CFD Forum||5||May 1, 2007 05:38|
|Wall Boundary Condition in k - epsilon model||abhijeet vaidya||Main CFD Forum||0||July 14, 2002 03:18|
|Launder & Sharma model in combusion case||Richard Carroni||Main CFD Forum||1||November 17, 1998 19:59|