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

[OpenFOAM-2.1.0] kklOmega RAS Turbulence Model (low Re)

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

Like Tree7Likes

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   December 20, 2011, 21:53
Default [OpenFOAM-2.1.0] kklOmega RAS Turbulence Model (low Re)
  #1
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 61
Rep Power: 7
alquimista is on a distinguished road
Hello everybody.

As referenced in the announcement of the new release version of OpenFOAM a new turbulence model has been implemented:


Quote:
Version 2.1.0 includes the k-kl-omega (low-Re) model for Reynolds-average simulation of incompressible flows with a boundary layer that undergoes a transition from laminar to turbulent flow. The model is described in D. K. Walters and D. Cokljat, J. Fluids Eng. 130:121401 (2008) and is based on the model k-w with an additional transport equation included to predict low-frequency velocity fluctuations that trigger transition in the boundary layer.
I have been looking for some additional information about it in the user guide but it doesn't appear. I just want to highlight that issue to discuss it and ask if someone has test it. As soon as I check the model I'll report it.

Since I'm not an expert.... Is it an "automatic near wall teatment" (like the near wall treatment implemented in ANSYS CFX)?...then It resolves the viscous layer near the wall (mesh refinement is needed)?

Thanks
alquimista is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 6, 2012, 08:41
Default
  #2
Member
 
Rui Vizinho de Oliveira
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 31
Rep Power: 5
RuiVO is on a distinguished road
Boas Alquimista (Or hi Alquimist )

I'm also going to begin using the transition model, I was also expecting to find some clarification about this in a tutorial or in any reference besides the one given in the openFoam site which is referencing an article of ASME.

The thing is, I suspect that the boundary conditions for "kt" and "w" are similar to a regular k-w model, though the boundary conditions for kl, since it represents the laminar fluctuations kinematic energy should be set to zeroGradient at the walls , uniform zero in the domain (for initial conditions), fixed value uniform zero at the inlet and zeroGradient at outlet.

My thoughts of course ..

Best regards

RuiVO
RuiVO is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 10, 2012, 14:19
Default Let's jointly setup a reference case...
  #3
Member
 
Klaus
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 70
Rep Power: 8
klausb is on a distinguished road
Hello Gentlemen,

let's join forces and setup a reference case using the kklomega model.

How about a 2D case for a wing?

I'd prefer a case based on a stl file so it can be adapted for different geometries.

Interested?

Klaus
klausb is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 10, 2012, 16:00
Default
  #4
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 61
Rep Power: 7
alquimista is on a distinguished road
Boas RuiVo (or Hola jejeje)

It's nice to see someone else interested in it. By now I needn't (or I can't) use this model since I realised that my case is fully turbulent but I'm interested on the results of the model.

In my first topic I talked about the near wall treatment but I was wrong mixing the turbulence model itself with the boundary conditions specified for the wall treatment.

I think it's a good idea suggested by klausb. I propose to use the object shown in the anouncement



It would be nice to use a geometry present in some tutorial. I'm trying to find something appropiate.
alquimista is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 11, 2012, 17:33
Default
  #5
Senior Member
 
lakeat's Avatar
 
Daniel WEI (老魏)
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Posts: 688
Blog Entries: 9
Rep Power: 12
lakeat is on a distinguished road
Send a message via Skype™ to lakeat
Anyone knows how to set the boudndary condition for kl and kt?

For now I just copy k file and then rename to kl and kt.

I am running a square case, and so far , the strouhal number, the mean and RMS value of force coeff look quite good!
__________________
~
Daniel WEI
-------------
NatHaz Modeling Laboratory
Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering & Earth Sciences
University of Notre Dame, USA
Email || My Personal CFD Blog
lakeat is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 12, 2012, 19:15
Default would you mind sharing your case
  #6
Member
 
Klaus
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 70
Rep Power: 8
klausb is on a distinguished road
Hello,

would you mind sharing your case (post your case directory).

I'd like to play with it over the weekend.

Klaus
klausb is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 13, 2012, 13:09
Default
  #7
Member
 
Simon Lapointe
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Québec, Qc, Canada
Posts: 33
Rep Power: 8
Simon Lapointe is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by lakeat View Post
Anyone knows how to set the boudndary condition for kl and kt?
According to the article presenting the model, you should use kl=kt=0 and omega =zeroGradient at walls. At the inlet, k=0 and kt and omega are similar to a k-w model so based on desired inlet turbulence intensity and viscosity ratio.
Simon Lapointe is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 13, 2012, 13:13
Default
  #8
Senior Member
 
lakeat's Avatar
 
Daniel WEI (老魏)
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Posts: 688
Blog Entries: 9
Rep Power: 12
lakeat is on a distinguished road
Send a message via Skype™ to lakeat
Quote:
Originally Posted by Simon Lapointe View Post
According to the article presenting the model, you should use kl=kt=0 and omega =zeroGradient at walls. At the inlet, k=0 and kt and omega are similar to a k-w model so based on desired inlet turbulence intensity and viscosity ratio.
Thanks, that's exactly what I have set right now.

But just for a future discussion.

I have done a lot of tests, and generally
I found kklOmega works well when it can work. But I found it do have convergence problems, especiall kl will grow very large within vortices.

Relatively, I found other LRN models are more stable.
miladrakhsha likes this.
__________________
~
Daniel WEI
-------------
NatHaz Modeling Laboratory
Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering & Earth Sciences
University of Notre Dame, USA
Email || My Personal CFD Blog
lakeat is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 15, 2012, 18:23
Default
  #9
egp
Senior Member
 
egp's Avatar
 
Eric Paterson
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Blacksburg, VA
Posts: 197
Blog Entries: 1
Rep Power: 9
egp is on a distinguished road
I would vote for two test cases: 1) a classic zero-pressure gradient flat-plate boundary layer (Figs. 2-6 of Walters and Cokljat) and 2) S809 wind-turbine airfoil (Fig. 15-16 of Walters and Cokljat).

I have meshes for both, and will try to reproduce the results in this paper. If I am successful, I post case files. If not, I'll post questions and case file and we can work on this as a group.
egp is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 16, 2012, 14:38
Default
  #10
Senior Member
 
lakeat's Avatar
 
Daniel WEI (老魏)
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Posts: 688
Blog Entries: 9
Rep Power: 12
lakeat is on a distinguished road
Send a message via Skype™ to lakeat
And also a reminder, that I found the following utility is needed for using these kind of LRN turb model.
__________________
~
Daniel WEI
-------------
NatHaz Modeling Laboratory
Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering & Earth Sciences
University of Notre Dame, USA
Email || My Personal CFD Blog
lakeat is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 20, 2012, 01:52
Default
  #11
Senior Member
 
Sandy Lee
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 207
Rep Power: 9
sandy is on a distinguished road
Yes, after my code skipped the time =0, it became convergent very well.

In addition, lakeat, you mean all LRN models can also solve transition flows (from laminar to turbulence), right?

Last edited by sandy; January 21, 2012 at 02:36.
sandy is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 20, 2012, 11:30
Default
  #12
Senior Member
 
lakeat's Avatar
 
Daniel WEI (老魏)
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Posts: 688
Blog Entries: 9
Rep Power: 12
lakeat is on a distinguished road
Send a message via Skype™ to lakeat
1. Turbulence;
2. (Re-)Attached or Separated Turbulence;

And IMO, I think the three-equation model still needs extensive tests, and it needs to be bounded.

(Chinese) 新年快乐!
owayz likes this.
__________________
~
Daniel WEI
-------------
NatHaz Modeling Laboratory
Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering & Earth Sciences
University of Notre Dame, USA
Email || My Personal CFD Blog
lakeat is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 20, 2012, 21:30
Default
  #13
Senior Member
 
Sandy Lee
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 207
Rep Power: 9
sandy is on a distinguished road
Hi 老魏, 春节快乐!

I want to find the model to simulation the transition flow, I guess kklomega model is good for it. However, you think, which scheme should be chose to bound the computation values? I find, in OF, almost all schemes are bounded schemes. What about your thought?

Sandy

Last edited by sandy; January 21, 2012 at 02:36.
sandy is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 21, 2012, 16:19
Default
  #14
Senior Member
 
lakeat's Avatar
 
Daniel WEI (老魏)
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Posts: 688
Blog Entries: 9
Rep Power: 12
lakeat is on a distinguished road
Send a message via Skype™ to lakeat
Quote:
Originally Posted by lakeat View Post
And IMO, I think the three-equation model still needs extensive tests, and it needs to be bounded.
Correction: I dont know if it really needs to be limited. I am struggling testing with some other convection schemes.
__________________
~
Daniel WEI
-------------
NatHaz Modeling Laboratory
Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering & Earth Sciences
University of Notre Dame, USA
Email || My Personal CFD Blog
lakeat is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 21, 2012, 20:10
Default
  #15
Senior Member
 
Sandy Lee
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 207
Rep Power: 9
sandy is on a distinguished road
Yes, lakeat, except Guass upwind, I will change my code schemes into bounded schemes ...
sandy is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 23, 2012, 09:41
Default
  #16
egp
Senior Member
 
egp's Avatar
 
Eric Paterson
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Blacksburg, VA
Posts: 197
Blog Entries: 1
Rep Power: 9
egp is on a distinguished road
I've set up the Schubauer and Klebanoff case for natural transition (as opposed to the ERCOFTAC bypass transition cases). I'm getting closer on getting kkLOmega to work, but the results still do not look good. Here is the Cf vs. Rex plot:



You can download my case from here:

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/2182201/kklOmega.tgz

Note, freestream parameters are set as follows:
U = 50.1 m/s
Tu = 0.3
kt = 0.03388 m2/s2
kl = 0 m2/s2
nut/nu = 1
nu = 1.5e-5 m2/s
omega = 2259 1/s

wall boundary conditions are set to:
kt = 0 m2/s2
kl = 0 m2/s2
omega = zeroGradient

I'd be interested to see how others would try to set this case up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by egp View Post
I would vote for two test cases: 1) a classic zero-pressure gradient flat-plate boundary layer (Figs. 2-6 of Walters and Cokljat) and 2) S809 wind-turbine airfoil (Fig. 15-16 of Walters and Cokljat).

I have meshes for both, and will try to reproduce the results in this paper. If I am successful, I post case files. If not, I'll post questions and case file and we can work on this as a group.
mm.abdollahzadeh likes this.
egp is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 23, 2012, 09:50
Default
  #17
egp
Senior Member
 
egp's Avatar
 
Eric Paterson
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Blacksburg, VA
Posts: 197
Blog Entries: 1
Rep Power: 9
egp is on a distinguished road
OK, found a mistake in the 0/nut. wall b.c. for nut was incorrectly set from a fully turbulent case to nutWallFunction, and is now set to zeroGradient. This improves the solution, but laminar Cf and transition location are still off quite a bit.




Quote:
Originally Posted by egp View Post
I've set up the Schubauer and Klebanoff case for natural transition (as opposed to the ERCOFTAC bypass transition cases). I'm getting closer on getting kkLOmega to work, but the results still do not look good. Here is the Cf vs. Rex plot:

You can download my case from here:

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/2182201/kklOmega.tgz

Note, freestream parameters are set as follows:
U = 50.1 m/s
Tu = 0.3
kt = 0.03388 m2/s2
kl = 0 m2/s2
nut/nu = 1
nu = 1.5e-5 m2/s
omega = 2259 1/s

wall boundary conditions are set to:
kt = 0 m2/s2
kl = 0 m2/s2
omega = zeroGradient

I'd be interested to see how others would try to set this case up.

Last edited by egp; January 23, 2012 at 10:16.
egp is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 23, 2012, 21:57
Default
  #18
Senior Member
 
Sandy Lee
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 207
Rep Power: 9
sandy is on a distinguished road
Hi egp, I guess, you gave wrong the kt value. How did you calculate the kt and omega values?
sandy is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 24, 2012, 05:06
Default
  #19
egp
Senior Member
 
egp's Avatar
 
Eric Paterson
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Blacksburg, VA
Posts: 197
Blog Entries: 1
Rep Power: 9
egp is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandy View Post
Hi egp, I guess, you gave wrong the kt value. How did you calculate the kt and omega values?
Why would you guess this? The Schubauer and Klebanoff (S&K) case is a well-known experiment with very low free-stream turbulence, i.e.,

U=50.1 m/s
Tu = 0.3%
nut/nu = 1

Given these parameters, I compute kt and omega to be:

kt = 1.5*(0.003*50.1)^2 = 0.0339
omega = k/nut = 0.0339/1.5e-5 = 2259

It's interesting to note that the paper by Walters and Cokljat (2008) did not use the S&K dataset for validation and only used the ERCOFTAC T3A-, T3A, T3B benchmarks. These latter cases have a varying degree of free-stream turbulence and are typically used to demonstrate bypass transition. In contrast, the S&K with low FST is more a test of natural transition.

Last edited by egp; January 24, 2012 at 05:42.
egp is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 24, 2012, 08:27
Default
  #20
Senior Member
 
Vincent RIVOLA
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: France
Posts: 277
Rep Power: 9
vinz is on a distinguished road
Dear Eric,

Very interesting test case. did you try different mesh refinement to see if it has a large impact on the solution? spanwise and wall refinement?
vinz 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
Superlinear speedup in OpenFOAM 13 msrinath80 OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 18 March 3, 2015 06:36
Turbulence model for low Reynolds number flow? Nokadu Main CFD Forum 3 May 26, 2013 11:42
Centrifugal Pump and Turbulence Model Michiel CFX 12 January 25, 2010 04:20
turbulence model equation Andy Chen FLOW-3D 4 January 1, 2010 22:45
build your own turbulence model with buoyancy Thomas Baumann OpenFOAM 11 November 23, 2009 09:53


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 00:44.