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

Getting too high Drag Coefficients

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

Like Tree5Likes
  • 1 Post By tomf
  • 2 Post By vkrastev
  • 2 Post By vkrastev

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   June 22, 2011, 12:39
Default Getting too high Drag Coefficients
  #1
New Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 17
Rep Power: 6
nicolarre is on a distinguished road
Hello,

I've been running some test cases on simple geometry before jumping into more high detail modes, but have been getting wrong values for Cd on every case.

So fat i've tested the following cases:

Ahmed Body 12,5 Slant - RAS Spalart-Allmaras
Ahmed Body 12,5 Slant - RAS K-Epsilon
Ahmed Body 12,5 Slant - RAS K-Omega
Ahmed Body 12,5 Slant - RAS K-OmegaSST

Ahmed Body 12,5 Slant - LES oneEqEddy
Ahmed Body 12,5 Slant - LES Smagorinsky

All of these tests have been done with different mesh qualities, with and without surface Layers, with different domain sizes, with Hexahedra and tetrahedra meshes.

All of these cases resulted in Cd values between 70 and 130% higher than they should be.

I've also ran several cases with NACA0009 profiles at 0 , 5 , 7.5 and 10 attack angle, With and without Surface layers, With and without dense wake mesh, with different domain sizes and different mesh qualities, all using Spalart-Allmaras.

In all cases, Lift (Cl) errors where between 2% and 10%, however Drag (cd) errors where between 120% and 300%.

Has anyone ever encountered these problems? Am i doing something wrong? Where could the problem be?

Thanks
nicolarre is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   June 23, 2011, 02:44
Default
  #2
Senior Member
 
Tom Fahner
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Delft, Netherlands
Posts: 222
Rep Power: 10
tomf is on a distinguished road
Send a message via MSN to tomf Send a message via Skype™ to tomf
Hello Nicollare,

The Ahmed body has been studied succesfully with OpenFOAM by a lot of people. You can have a look at this thread:

Car aerodynamics

There you can also see some settings that people have used for their RAS computations. I am not sure about LES. I want to dive into that as well, but have not found the time to really do it well. But their are plenty of threads available that could help you with LES. Just search the forum.

Good luck,
Tom
joy2000 likes this.
tomf is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   June 23, 2011, 09:20
Default
  #3
Member
 
The True
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 80
Rep Power: 6
Eren10 is on a distinguished road
i am having the same problem. I am using k-epsilon.

What I observe is that the y+ values has a big influence on the drag. which is also obvious, due to the skin friction.
Eren10 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   June 23, 2011, 13:25
Default
  #4
Senior Member
 
Vesselin Krastev
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: University of Tor Vergata, Rome
Posts: 361
Rep Power: 10
vkrastev is on a distinguished road
With a proper numerical setup, you can easily obtain better results (for the Ahmed model) than the ones reported by you, at least for the more stable flow configurations (not too close to the critical slant angle of about 30). Try for instance to use a prism-tetra mesh, with 3-5 layers around the body and with an y+ distribution matching (approximately) the range 30-150. Then run it with the simpleFoam solver, using the realizable k-epsilon model and standard wall functions for k, epsilon and nut. If nothing gets better this way, then you probably have to play a bit with the numerics (fvSchemes and fvSolution files): in any case, be sure that at least on the div(phi,U) convenction term you are using something better than the "brutal" first order Gauss upwind scheme, otherwise your solution will be far too diffusive and with too high drag values (resulting also in smaller wake structures behind the body).

Hope this helps

V.
joy2000 and slint like this.
vkrastev is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   June 23, 2011, 13:43
Default
  #5
New Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 17
Rep Power: 6
nicolarre is on a distinguished road
vkrastev:

Some of my attempts with K-Epsilon, K-Omega and SpalartAllmaras had surface layers with proper Y+ values. For Ke and Ko i had Y+ in the 30-ish range, and for SA closte to 1.

I also run all my cases with SimpleFoam and use wall functions.

I didn't really know about realizable K-E, i just used plain K-Epsilon. Is it better?

As for the schemes, i was using Gauss upwind because i was adviced to use it to avoid boundings on epsilon and omega. What schemes should i use for better results?

Also, regarding initial and boundary conditions, what would be proper values for K and omega?

im using a turbulence intensity of 0.5% and a mean velocity of 70m/s but i dont know how to obtain the characteristic lenght of the free stream to better estimate omega.
nicolarre is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   June 23, 2011, 14:01
Default
  #6
Senior Member
 
Vesselin Krastev
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: University of Tor Vergata, Rome
Posts: 361
Rep Power: 10
vkrastev is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by nicolarre View Post
vkrastev:

Some of my attempts with K-Epsilon, K-Omega and SpalartAllmaras had surface layers with proper Y+ values. For Ke and Ko i had Y+ in the 30-ish range, and for SA closte to 1.

I also run all my cases with SimpleFoam and use wall functions.

I didn't really know about realizable K-E, i just used plain K-Epsilon. Is it better?

As for the schemes, i was using Gauss upwind because i was adviced to use it to avoid boundings on epsilon and omega. What schemes should i use for better results?

Also, regarding initial and boundary conditions, what would be proper values for K and omega?

im using a turbulence intensity of 0.5% and a mean velocity of 70m/s but i dont know how to obtain the characteristic lenght of the free stream to better estimate omega.
The standard k-epsilon model is not well suited for external aerodynamics flows, as it suffers of the so called "stagnation point anomaly". Other RANS models, such as the realizable k-epsilon or the SST k-omega are better for this kind of flows, as they are formulated in order to avoid this kind of anomaly.

About the div(phi,U) scheme, try to use this:

Gauss linearUpwindV cellMDLimited Gauss linear 1

About the characteristic turbulent lenght scale, you can estimate it as about 10% of the Body's characteristic lenght (for instance Body's height).

Good luck

V.
joy2000 and slint like this.
vkrastev is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   June 28, 2011, 12:28
Default
  #7
New Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 17
Rep Power: 6
nicolarre is on a distinguished road
Thanks for the help. I ran a new set of tests. 4 meshes with diferent qualities running Spalart Allmaras, KoSST using upwind and KoSST with the above suggested div schemes. All of them running an Ahmed Body with 12.5 slant angle

Mesh1= 77.000 cells
Mesh2= 320.000 cells
Mesh3= 1.000.000 cells
Mesh4= 2.850.000 cells

All mesh are tetrahedral meshes with no surface layers

Kw-SST = K omega SST with upwind scheme
Kw-SSTv2 = K omega SST with Gauss linearUpwindV cellMDLimited Gauss linear 1 scheme
SaM = Spalart Allmaras with upwind scheme


Here are the results. (Experimental drag Coeff = 0.23)



For some reason, Kw-SSTv2 Mesh 2 and Mesh 4 failed with excessive continuity errors. Dont know why.

The closest i got to the experimental value of 0.23 was 0.249 with the Kw-SSTv2 Mesh 3 run with an error of 8.26%. Not bad considering the lack of layers.

Kw-SST and Spalart allmaras (with upwind scheme) runs where all over the place and pretty far away from the experimental value.

Should i stick with Kw-SST and Gauss linearUpwindV cellMDLimited Gauss linear 1 schemes for these sort of tests? Will surface Layers help me improve my results?
nicolarre is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   February 28, 2012, 17:53
Default
  #8
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 65
Rep Power: 6
maalan is on a distinguished road
hi, nicolarre!

i wonder if you finally got the rigth results. i'm currently facing the same problem as you did some time ago, although i am using the 0 back slant model. anyway, i would like to know if you got well results or gave up the case, and if you could help me.

Thanks in advance!
maalan is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   February 28, 2012, 19:12
Default
  #9
New Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 17
Rep Power: 6
nicolarre is on a distinguished road
Hi maalan,

After some testing on different models, mesh types and schemes, the best results i got for a threedimensional 12.5 slant "floating" ahmed body where obteined with:

> K-Omega SST model
> Gauss linearUpwindV cellMDLimited Gauss linear 1 scheme for div(phi,U)
> aprox 3KK tetrahedral cells, giving a fair share to the wake of the vehicle

Errors around 6-8%

Hope it helps.
nicolarre is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   February 29, 2012, 09:16
Default
  #10
Senior Member
 
niaz's Avatar
 
A_R
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 118
Rep Power: 8
niaz is on a distinguished road
firstly, i recommend you check your Aref, Uref, and so on.
it maybe occur because of these wrong parameter.
niaz is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 10, 2014, 11:55
Default
  #11
Member
 
Nick Gardiner
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Chichester, UK
Posts: 93
Rep Power: 8
NickG is on a distinguished road
Hi. Please you you tell me what the bottom axis of the graph represents...

Thanks
NickG 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
lift and drag coefficients around a ground vehicle Pedro CFX 3 September 5, 2012 18:31
Incorrect Drag Coefficients / Mesh Confirmation w-nicholson ANSYS 3 May 18, 2011 12:00
Drag Coefficients mahadevan.swamy FLUENT 6 July 6, 2009 09:11
Lift and Drag Coefficients Reliability Luis FLUENT 2 December 27, 2005 15:45
Multicomponent fluid Andrea CFX 2 October 11, 2004 05:12


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:33.