
[Sponsors] 
March 13, 2013, 04:56 
Channel Flow pisoFoam SA IDDES Re=4560

#1 
New Member
Corrado Sotgiu
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 13
Rep Power: 5 
I´m trying to get a fully developed turbulent flow in a channel with a mapped inlet boundary, periodic sides and fixed upper and lower walls. The only way to get some turbulence is to set nuTilda = 0 at inlet, which as far as I know is an ´ideal´ condition but then I get zero iterations for nuTilda (so the turbulence model is doing nothing). Any other value different from zero causes the complete dissipation of the turbulence and the flow to be laminar. Is this due to the low Reynolds number? Is it correct to keep nutilda=0 at inlet and have no iterations?
I have the following bundary conditions for nuTilda and nuSgs: nuTilda inlet, upper and lower walls: fixedValue 0 outlet: zeroGradient sides = periodic nuSgs sides = periodic everywhere except at the sides: zeroGradient 

March 13, 2013, 05:30 

#2 
Senior Member
Lieven
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Leuven, Belgium
Posts: 297
Rep Power: 14 
Hi Ingcorra,
If you want to use pisoFoam, you should modify the solver a bit to include a pressure gradient or fixed mass flow rate. Else your flow will simply slow down till there is no flow at all. But you would simply end up with the channelFoam solver. So my advice, start from the latter (is basically an extended version of pisoFoam, but only for LES models). Cheers, L 

March 13, 2013, 05:37 

#3 
New Member
Corrado Sotgiu
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 13
Rep Power: 5 
Hi Lieven,
thanks for your reply. I forgot to mention that the inlet condition for the U is mapped and has an average value that provides Re=4560, so the flow is not definitely slowing down. I´m using it to validate a modified pisoFoam solver (which includes a scalar transport equation) along with the IDDES model with DNS data so I prefer not to use the channelFoam solver. 

March 13, 2013, 06:37 

#4 
Senior Member
Lieven
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Leuven, Belgium
Posts: 297
Rep Power: 14 
Ok, that changes things
Why do you map only the velocity field? Seems to me that you should do the same with the other fields like nuSgs. You can turn of the averaging for these fields because once the steady condition is reached, the averagingfactor of the Ufield should be close to 1. cheers, Lieven 

March 13, 2013, 07:19 

#5 
New Member
Corrado Sotgiu
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 13
Rep Power: 5 
I mapped nuSgs and nuTilda too (without no average value of course) but I still get zero iterations


March 22, 2013, 03:08 

#6 
New Member
Corrado Sotgiu
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 13
Rep Power: 5 
I solved by choosing a different initial condition for nuTilda (near to nu). It just converges to a steady value very slow, thanks for the help


April 5, 2013, 13:19 

#7 
Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Wisconsin,USA
Posts: 34
Rep Power: 6 
Hi ingcorra,
I am facing the same problem. I increased the Re=12000, even then the flow eventually becomes laminar.Did you find a solution to this problem? Any help will be highly appreciated. 

April 5, 2013, 13:32 

#8 
Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Wisconsin,USA
Posts: 34
Rep Power: 6 
And i forgot to mention that i am using channelfoam intead of PISOfoam to simulate a fully developed turbulent flow.


April 5, 2013, 15:02 

#9 
New Member
Corrado Sotgiu
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 13
Rep Power: 5 
You have to provide a correct initial value for nuTilda and nuSgs. There are formulas to calculate it but I guess they're suitable only for external aerodynamics. You could use an initial condition calculated with another turbulence model or just make nuSgs=nuTilda=nu (I assume you already know how to set up the boudary conditions). Let it run until you have an eventually laminar steady flow and check if you have somewhat stable residuals for nuTilda, then add some randomisation to the velocity field and it should develope a nice turbulence


March 3, 2014, 21:37 

#10  
Senior Member
Huang Xianbei
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: CAU,China
Posts: 277
Rep Power: 5 
Quote:
I faced a problem of the convergence when using the icoFoam including pressure gradient. Both the fixed pressure gradient and fixed mass flow rate are performed, however, when I monitor the pressure gradient in the mass flow rate case, the pressure gradient decreases along time steadily, that means delta(grad(p))=const in the same time step change. Also, in the case of fixed pressure gradient, the velocity at the centerline increase steadily as the pressure gradient in mass flow rate case. I don't know why this happens. 

March 13, 2014, 10:58 

#11 
Member
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 57
Rep Power: 4 
Hi all,
I use OpenFoam for a couple of time (several weeks only). Please be gentle and slow I am interested in your topic. My task is to simulate a turbulent flow inside an injector. The solver pisoFoam seems to be suitable for my case study. Your experiences are greatly appreciated for my following questions: * Do you have idea about the boundary condition for nuSgs at the symmetry plane. * How can the lastest solutions of RANS (computed by simpleFoam) be imported as initial conditions for pisoFoam? All your ideas are wellcome. Thanks in advance, VUT 

Thread Tools  
Display Modes  


Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Channel flow using InterFOAM  DanM  OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD  41  July 12, 2016 02:48 
references for how to maintain a constant flow rate in turbulent channel flow  amirrstg  Main CFD Forum  0  October 25, 2011 03:17 
how to calculate CFL number in 3D convectiondiffusion channel flow  dryhill  Main CFD Forum  0  June 24, 2009 03:33 
pressure outlet (open channel flow)  Willem Brantegem  Main CFD Forum  0  April 3, 2007 09:39 
compressible channel flow..  R.D.Prabhu  Main CFD Forum  0  July 17, 1998 17:23 