
[Sponsors] 
February 26, 2013, 06:17 
kepsilon model doesn't shows vortex

#1 
New Member
Md. Naimul Haque
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 14
Rep Power: 5 
Dear all,
I am running bluff body simulation in OpenFoam with various turbulence models. I used both kwsst and les 2D simulation and found after 2.5 sec of simulation it starts forming vortex after the body. drag and lift values are also okay. But with same mesh and BC, for kepsiln and kw turbulence model, I don't know why but it doesn't shows any vortex. I run the simulations for long time, it didn't produce any vortexes after the body. Does any body have any idea why is it happening? Please help me, your suggesting will expedite my research and I will be grateful to you. Sincerely, Naju. 

February 26, 2013, 10:21 

#2 
Senior Member
Lieven
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Mol, Belgium
Posts: 296
Rep Power: 14 
Hi Naju,
It makes perfectly sense that you don't find vortices in the wake of the body when using the ke and kw model. With RANS, the effect of such vortices on the flow is fully modelled and translated into an additional turbulent viscosity term in the momentum equation (= additional momentum dissipation). Because of this term, all vortices you would expect are (should be) damped out. This might sound strange but this in fact the whole purpose of RANS: you model the fluctuating component of the flow, regardless the scale of the fluctuations, and solve for the reynolds averaged components. So the result you get is (an approximation of) the timeaveraged flow field. In LES on the other hand, only the vortices/fluctuations below grid scale are modelled. Therefore, the added viscosity in the momentum equation is relatively small and does not damp out all vortices, hence you find a transient solution. So first, based on this explanation, and in my modest opinion, it is not fully correct that you find vortices in case of kw sst. And second, 2DLES does not make sense. Turbulence is by definition a 3D effect so I wouldn't trust those results... Cheers, L 

February 26, 2013, 21:55 

#3 
New Member
Md. Naimul Haque
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 14
Rep Power: 5 
Dear Lieven,
Greetings! Thank you very much for your suggestion. Actually, I am new user of OpenFOAM. Also my theoretical background is not so strong. I am studying all the basic theories. By this time I need your help. I read the code in OpenFOam of all these three models, In kepsioln model eddy viscosity is modeled from cmu, k and, epsilon; in kw, eddy viscosity is modeled from, k and w; in kwsst, eddy viscosity is modeled from a1, k, and gradient(U). But k, epsilon and w are calculated from mesh or somehow they are calculating, so I can't modify. Only way is to modify coefficient, cmu, a1, alphaK, alphaw, betaStar or sigmaEps etc. Now, What is your suggestion, Do I need to change the mesh or coefficients to get the vortex? In case coefficient, which parameter should I modify? Sorry to bother you. Please, help. 

March 9, 2013, 02:52 
mesh problem

#4 
New Member
Baek, Donghae
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Seoul
Posts: 24
Rep Power: 5 
i think you should make your mesh more fine.
i had same problem several time. I used pimplefoam and RANS(kepsilon model). before using RANS, I tried running case using LES(smagorisky) and it show me vortex. so I modified this case to RANS in same mesh. but the case calculated by RANS didn't show me vortex. then I made mesh more fine in same condition (density of mesh was almost 2times). finally, RANS model show me vortex. 

March 9, 2013, 14:41 

#5 
Senior Member
Lieven
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Mol, Belgium
Posts: 296
Rep Power: 14 
The fact that the vortices appear is most likely due to unphysical wiggles caused by the discretization scheme. So they are not an accurate representation of the real vortices but the result of numerical instability because of large gradients near your object. You can simply test this by using an upwind scheme for all parameters in fvSchemes. I'm pretty this will make your vortices disappear, regardless the grid resolution.
You should use higher order schemes which can cope with this effect, such as Gamma or SFCD (not claiming that these are the best options, nor that the effect would disappear completely). And again, if you are simulating a steady situation with RANS, e.g. the flow through a channel with objects present, your result should be steady as well. Cheers, Lieven 

Thread Tools  
Display Modes  


Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
BC for epsilon in NaganoTagawa kepsilon model  nikesh  OpenFOAM PreProcessing  0  February 16, 2013 09:15 
k and epsilon were hard to converge in multiphase model of Fluent  Yanlong Li  ANSYS  0  January 2, 2013 06:25 
k and epsilon discretization of RNG model  mehran  NUMECA  0  January 24, 2009 01:01 
How to model vortex of supersonic wing tip  Bernard  FLUENT  0  January 29, 2007 04:20 
DPM model w/ Wave model  errors in documentation  HS  FLUENT  0  April 12, 2006 04:37 