CFD Online Discussion Forums

CFD Online Discussion Forums (
-   OpenFOAM (
-   -   limit high velocity values (

riesotto February 16, 2012 04:46

limit high velocity values
Hi all,
I have a problem with unphysical high velocity values in some areas of my simulation (rhoPorousMRFLTSPimpeFoam). The high velocities appear at the end of the rotorblades (compressible flow in a turbocharger).
The rotorblades have sharp edges, so I believe this can be the problem.

Is there a possibility to limit the velocity???

There is a possiblity of the density:
rhoMin rhoMin [ 1 -3 0 0 0 ] 0.05;
rhoMax rhoMax [ 1 -3 0 0 0 ] 2.0;

but this works only for rho.

kind regards

doubtsincfd November 26, 2012 17:47

Hi. Did you find out how that can be done?

samiam1000 November 27, 2012 10:42

Any news about this problem?

How did you solve it? It could be very useful for me, too.

Thanks a lot,


doubtsincfd December 4, 2012 10:43

The method which works for density works for pressure as well but not for velocity. So for velocity I just looped over all cells and the boundary faces

U[cellI].component(0)=some value;

U.boundaryField()[patchI][faceI].component(0)=some value;


Let me know if this works

kwardle December 7, 2012 13:54

You might also take a look at UEqns.H in multiphaseEulerFoam. There is a velocity dampener there which might give you some idea of how better to tackle this than a brute force reassignment. Basically, what is used is a source term dampener that is controlled by a proportional coefficient defined in transportProperties.

immortality February 11, 2013 17:26

hi Omkar
how and where i can use the expressions you mentioned?

hi kent
where in the code below you mentioned the velocity bounding has been applied?and how i can use that in sonicFoam solver?do u have any idea?

int phasei = 0;
forAllIter(PtrDictionary<phaseModel>, fluid.phases(), iter)
    phaseModel& phase = iter();
    const volScalarField& alpha = phase;
    volVectorField& U = phase.U();

    volScalarField nuEff(sgsModel->nut() + iter().nu());

        new fvVectorMatrix
            (scalar(1) + fluid.Cvm(phase)/phase.rho())*
                fvm::ddt(alpha, U)
              + fvm::div(phase.phiAlpha(), U)
              - fvm::Sp(fvc::ddt(alpha) + fvc::div(phase.phiAlpha()), U)
            - fvm::laplacian(alpha*nuEff, U)
            - fvc::div
                  alpha*(nuEff*dev(T(fvc::grad(U))) /*- ((2.0/3.0)*I)*k*/),
            - fvm::Sp(fluid.dragCoeff(phase, dragCoeffs())/phase.rho(), U)
          //- (alpha*phase.rho())*fluid.lift(phase)
            + (alpha/phase.rho())*fluid.Svm(phase)
    mrfZones.addCoriolis(alpha, UEqns[phasei]);


kwardle February 28, 2013 18:14

I am not sure where you pulled that code from, but in multiphaseEulerFoam/UEqns.H the source term is given as:

          - fvm::Sp(fluid.dragCoeff(phase, dragCoeffs())/phase.rho(), U)
        //- (alpha*phase.rho())*fluid.lift(phase)
          + (alpha/phase.rho())*fluid.Svm(phase)
          - fvm::Sp
                    mag(U.dimensionedInternalField()) - maxSlamVelocity,
                    dimensionedScalar("U0", dimVelocity, 0)
              /pow(mesh.V(), 1.0/3.0),

The implicit dampener is given by the last term (the part in -fvm::Sp( <stuff here>)). Basically, it scales the velocity according to some max value (maxSlamVelocity) and a coefficient (slamDampCoeff) July 25, 2016 14:28

I want first to thank the members of this blog for the useful numerical tricks disclosed. They were indeed helpful to me.

I started with these ideas and I managed to ensure that the velocity can not increase beyond a given threshold value by introducing an artificial hydrodynamic resistance that increases polynomially as the velocity magnitude approaches that limit.
The code is this one


Rdamp[cellI] = Rref.value()*Foam::pow((mag(U[cellI])/maxVelocity.value()),10);

fvVectorMatrix UEqn
fvm::ddt(rho, U)
+ fvm::div(rhoPhi, U)
- fvm::laplacian(mu, U)
- fvc::div(mu*fvc::grad(U)().T())
+ fvm::Sp(Rdamp, U)

In my case, the units of Rdamp are [1 -3 -1 0 0 0 0].

With this technique, the pressure correction equation remains conservative. I imposed an high power of 10 to ensure that the dampening resistance is negligible when the velocity is slightly lower than the threshold value. Underelaxation of Rdamp on the order of 0.5 - 0.8 appears to have good effects on the numerical stability of the algorithm.

I would be glad to know if this numerical trick works for other cases too.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 16:59.