CFD Online Logo CFD Online URL
www.cfd-online.com
[Sponsors]
Home > Forums > OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD

Wall treatment with geometrical restriction

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

Like Tree3Likes
  • 2 Post By -mAx-
  • 1 Post By RodriguezFatz

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   January 30, 2013, 07:48
Question [Solved]-Wall treatment with geometrical restriction
  #1
Super Moderator
 
-mAx-'s Avatar
 
Maxime Perelli
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 2,992
Rep Power: 30
-mAx- will become famous soon enough
Hello,
I am turrning around since a week for wall treatment.
My geometries don't allow me keeping first cell's y+ >30.
If I generate BL with first cell's height computed for y+ =30, then I don't have enough cells for resolving flowfield in smallest section
I tried to switch on Low Re turb. model (Lauder-Sharma) for resolving the BL, but I get awful convergence. And I am doubtfully using Low-Re model for my applications (incompressible, simpleFoam with Reynolds-range between 2000-6000
Despite the y+ theory, I get acceptable results with realizable-ke and default wall function (with yPlusRAS giving me min & max y+ respectively 0.5 and 30)
Results (drop pressure) are confirmed with test
Any advice from anyone?

PS: I post picture of my mesh in minimal section (y+~1)
Sans titre1.jpg
__________________
In memory of my friend Hervé: CFD engineer & freerider

Last edited by -mAx-; February 4, 2013 at 03:56.
-mAx- is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   February 4, 2013, 03:56
Default
  #2
Super Moderator
 
-mAx-'s Avatar
 
Maxime Perelli
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 2,992
Rep Power: 30
-mAx- will become famous soon enough
Problem solved by using k-Omega SST model with nutUSpaldingWallFunction on fine grid.
Then k and omega were set with uniform value 1e-10 instead of zeroGradient
Once model converged yPlusRAS utility gave me 0.005 and 2.19 for min and max on walls.
__________________
In memory of my friend Hervé: CFD engineer & freerider
-mAx- is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   February 4, 2013, 05:49
Default
  #3
Senior Member
 
immortality's Avatar
 
Ehsan
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Iran
Posts: 2,205
Rep Power: 17
immortality is on a distinguished road
hi.congratiolation for solving the problem
How much should yplus be at walls for kOmegaSST?
Could you introduce me an article about this model?
immortality is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   February 4, 2013, 06:45
Default
  #4
Super Moderator
 
-mAx-'s Avatar
 
Maxime Perelli
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 2,992
Rep Power: 30
-mAx- will become famous soon enough
in my case y+ goes from 0.005 till 2.2 (results from yPlusRAS)
I don't have article about this, but I searched a lot in the forum.
For example: Compressible kOmegaSST
__________________
In memory of my friend Hervé: CFD engineer & freerider
-mAx- is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   February 4, 2013, 07:58
Default
  #5
Senior Member
 
immortality's Avatar
 
Ehsan
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Iran
Posts: 2,205
Rep Power: 17
immortality is on a distinguished road
thanks.then how you are sure about domain of y+ that is suitable or not?is there any appropriate values near wall?
immortality is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   February 4, 2013, 09:29
Default
  #6
Super Moderator
 
-mAx-'s Avatar
 
Maxime Perelli
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 2,992
Rep Power: 30
-mAx- will become famous soon enough
what I understood: this wall treatment switchs automatically between lowRe and standard wall function dependantly on your local y+
In my case, I build my mesh with y+~1
__________________
In memory of my friend Hervé: CFD engineer & freerider
-mAx- is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   February 4, 2013, 10:41
Default
  #7
Senior Member
 
immortality's Avatar
 
Ehsan
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Iran
Posts: 2,205
Rep Power: 17
immortality is on a distinguished road
thanks.could you send me your turbulency folders?
immortality is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   February 5, 2013, 06:51
Default
  #8
Super Moderator
 
-mAx-'s Avatar
 
Maxime Perelli
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 2,992
Rep Power: 30
-mAx- will become famous soon enough
/constant/RASProperties
RASModel kOmegaSST;
turbulence on;

/0/k
inlet
{
type fixedValue;
value uniform 0.006;
}
walls
{
type fixedValue;
value uniform 1e-10;
}
outlet
{
type zeroGradient;
}


/0/omega
inlet
{
type fixedValue;
value uniform 27.2;
}
outlet
{
type zeroGradient;
}
walls
{
type fixedValue;
value uniform 1e-10;
}

/0/nut
inlet
{
type calculated;
value uniform 0;
}
outlet
{
type calculated;
value uniform 0;
}
walls
{
type nutUSpaldingWallFunction;
value uniform 0;
}
immortality and JR22 like this.
__________________
In memory of my friend Hervé: CFD engineer & freerider
-mAx- is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   February 11, 2013, 04:42
Default
  #9
New Member
 
Gwenael Hauet
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Grenoble, France
Posts: 4
Rep Power: 7
Gwenael is on a distinguished road
Hi -mAx-,

I have just a question about the behaviour of your flow when the y+~0.005. Usually the y+ rules for SST is y+~1 but in practice, it is very difficult to have on every walls the y+~1. Did you see some strange behaviour of your flow when y+ goes down, y+~0.005 ?

Thanks
__________________
Gwen
Gwenael is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   February 11, 2013, 05:59
Default
  #10
Super Moderator
 
-mAx-'s Avatar
 
Maxime Perelli
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 2,992
Rep Power: 30
-mAx- will become famous soon enough
Bonjour Gwenael,
I don't think the problem may come from y+~0.005, since it is << 1.
But the problem may occures if you have cells with y+~30.
But as far as I read, then you can use nutUSpaldingWallFunction which selects automatically the right wall function depedantly on your y+.
In my case, I know that I have always y+~1 (or <<1, but never ~30), so I enforced (I think) solving directly sublayer by setting k and omega as 1e-10 at walls (instead of zeroGradient)
Bonne journee
__________________
In memory of my friend Hervé: CFD engineer & freerider
-mAx- is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 9, 2013, 23:54
Default B.C. for omega @wall
  #11
Senior Member
 
Fumiya Nozaki
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Yokohama, Japan
Posts: 170
Rep Power: 7
fumiya is on a distinguished road
Hi -mAx-,

I understand that the appropriate boundary condition for omega is the "omegaWallFunction".

Did you get good results by fixing omega to very small values(1e-10) at the walls instead of using the wall function?

Best regards,
Fumiya
fumiya is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 11, 2013, 07:14
Default
  #12
Super Moderator
 
-mAx-'s Avatar
 
Maxime Perelli
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 2,992
Rep Power: 30
-mAx- will become famous soon enough
Hello fumiya,
I set k and omega with very low value, since I know that my y+ are below 1. That's why I used nutUSpaldingWallFunction and not omegaWallFunction.
And I got good results
__________________
In memory of my friend Hervé: CFD engineer & freerider
-mAx- is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 13, 2013, 09:25
Default
  #13
New Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 6
Rep Power: 5
hayes is on a distinguished road
Hi -mAx-

so I understand this methods works only if you can ensure having y+~1 or y+<1 everywhere.

Otherwise with higher y+ you would have to use continuous wallfunctions for k and omega in combination with the nutUSpaldingWallFunction. I am being correct?

Best regards,
Chris
hayes is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 13, 2013, 09:59
Default
  #14
Super Moderator
 
-mAx-'s Avatar
 
Maxime Perelli
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 2,992
Rep Power: 30
-mAx- will become famous soon enough
Hello Chris,
I would rather say, with y+ >>1 you may use nutUSpaldingWallFunction, but k and omaga at walls should be zeroGradient.
Turbulence gurus may correct me
__________________
In memory of my friend Hervé: CFD engineer & freerider
-mAx- is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 13, 2013, 10:58
Default
  #15
New Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 6
Rep Power: 5
hayes is on a distinguished road
Hi -mAx-
yes I agree wallfunctions really being for a higher y+ range.

But lets consider your case where you have walls with y+~1 and y+<<1 and now in addition also walls with y+ going up to 50. I think using nutUSpaldingWallFunction with continueous k and omega wallfunctions could be beneficial with varying y+ at walls.
hayes is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 14, 2013, 02:59
Default
  #16
Super Moderator
 
-mAx-'s Avatar
 
Maxime Perelli
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 2,992
Rep Power: 30
-mAx- will become famous soon enough
Yes, if I have also walls with y+ up to 50, then I would use nutUSpaldingWallFunction with k and omega set as zeroGradient.
I set both them to very small value (not zeroGradient), if I am sure that max y+ at walls is O(1)
__________________
In memory of my friend Hervé: CFD engineer & freerider
-mAx- is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 7, 2014, 09:24
Default
  #17
Senior Member
 
RodriguezFatz's Avatar
 
Philipp
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,103
Rep Power: 16
RodriguezFatz will become famous soon enough
Hi Maxime,
Are you still sure about your boundary conditions? As far as I know omega goes to infinity at the walls. But you set it to zero. Why did you do so? I see you also set a wall function for nut, which will overwrite the nut at the boundary anyways, but setting a wrong boundary condition for omega will give wrong results in the whole domain !?
-mAx- likes this.
__________________
The skeleton ran out of shampoo in the shower.
RodriguezFatz is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 7, 2014, 10:19
Default
  #18
Super Moderator
 
-mAx-'s Avatar
 
Maxime Perelli
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 2,992
Rep Power: 30
-mAx- will become famous soon enough
I am pretty sure I have mixed settings for epsilon in Low-Re Model with settings for omega in k-omega SST.
Thanks for pointing me this out!
__________________
In memory of my friend Hervé: CFD engineer & freerider
-mAx- 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
Wall treatment with OpenFOAM roby OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 39 May 4, 2015 13:00
Automatic wall treatment in CFX Chander CFX 12 March 21, 2015 10:34
Water subcooled boiling Attesz CFX 7 January 5, 2013 04:32
large y+ with enhanced wall treatment keryfluid FLUENT 4 May 7, 2012 05:19
UDF for wall slipping HFLUENT Fluent UDF and Scheme Programming 0 April 27, 2011 12:03


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 13:07.