CFD Online Logo CFD Online URL
www.cfd-online.com
[Sponsors]
Home > Forums > Software User Forums > Siemens > STAR-CCM+

Problems with multiphase tangential separator

Register Blogs Community New Posts Updated Threads Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old   April 17, 2015, 02:54
Default Problems with multiphase tangential separator
  #1
New Member
 
Jacopo
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 15
Rep Power: 11
jano5889 is on a distinguished road
Hello guys,
I have to model a tangential multiphase separator. I have a cylinder in which the inlet pipe enters tangentially, like in figure1. Gas phase exits at the top and liquid at bottom. I setted segregated flow and k-epsilon turbulence. In the phase interaction model I specified the drag force and the lift force as Tomyiama model.
The inlet is a velocity inlet and outlets are split-flow outlets. This is my first time working with cfd, so I havre surely done something wrong...the solution doesn't converge, as you can see in "mass-flow sum" figure and in residuals, but I don't know what to do...maybe I have to use a finer mesh.
Please help me!
Thank you so much
geometry.jpg

mass-flow sum.jpg

residuals.jpg
jano5889 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 22, 2015, 17:33
Default
  #2
Senior Member
 
Matt
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 947
Rep Power: 17
fluid23 is on a distinguished road
What are your y+ values?

Also, can you show some shots of your mesh?

I would recommend k-w, not k-e for this type of problem.
fluid23 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 22, 2015, 17:56
Default
  #3
New Member
 
Jacopo
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 15
Rep Power: 11
jano5889 is on a distinguished road
Thank you for the answer, but I solved this problem using a better mesh. So I think it was the problem. Now I'm using Reynolds stress turbulence and results are more realistic.
jano5889 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 22, 2015, 17:58
Default
  #4
Senior Member
 
Matt
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 947
Rep Power: 17
fluid23 is on a distinguished road
Still watch your y+ values. They are very important.
fluid23 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 24, 2015, 03:11
Default
  #5
New Member
 
Jacopo
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 15
Rep Power: 11
jano5889 is on a distinguished road
Ok I'm monitoring Y+ values. My highest value now is 170. Is it too high? What's an acceptable range for a turbulent flow (reynold is about 2,000,000)?
jano5889 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 24, 2015, 09:20
Default
  #6
Senior Member
 
Matt
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 947
Rep Power: 17
fluid23 is on a distinguished road
That is too high. I am guessing you have all y+ wall treatment, right? Then you will want to stay between 1 and 60 for best results.
fluid23 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 24, 2015, 10:30
Default
  #7
New Member
 
Jacopo
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 15
Rep Power: 11
jano5889 is on a distinguished road
I have a trimmer mesh with Prism layer mesh added. The prism layer thickness is absolute 0.005 m (100% relative to base size) and the number of prism layer is 3. I tried with 10 prism layer, but the solution diverged. Can I solve the high y+ decreasing the base size of the mesh, or I have to do something more?
jano5889 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 24, 2015, 10:47
Default
  #8
Senior Member
 
Matt
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 947
Rep Power: 17
fluid23 is on a distinguished road
I would play with both layer thickness and number of layers to try to achieve both the y+ requirement but also the volume change requirement. That is probably why your 10 layer model diverged. The transition from your last prism layer to your core mesh was too aggressive. Try to make it so that the prism layer grows to meet your core cells, typically you would try to keep your volume change from cell to cell below 20%. You don’t need all 10 layers to be in the boundary layer, just the first 5 or so. The rest can just help you transition outward.

Without seeing your mesh it is hard to say what to change, but I would start by setting number of layers to between 7 and 10 and increasing the thickness to maybe 0.01m or even 0.015m.
fluid23 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 24, 2015, 11:07
Default
  #9
New Member
 
Jacopo
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 15
Rep Power: 11
jano5889 is on a distinguished road
Thank you very much, you're the best!
Last question: the inlet boundary is a velocity inlet: the pressure of the separator is 130 barg, but I don't know exactly pressure of top outlet and bottom outlet. Is it right to set both them as split flow outlets?
jano5889 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 24, 2015, 11:14
Default
  #10
Senior Member
 
Matt
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 947
Rep Power: 17
fluid23 is on a distinguished road
No, I would only do that if you already know what fraction of your flow rate is going through each one. The pressure of the separator, is that the pressure differential from inlet to outlet? If so, leave the pressure outlet as zero. This is like specifying atmoshperic pressure (or zero gauge) and since your inlet is specified in gauge you are all set! No need to convert that to gauge pressure.

Last edited by fluid23; April 24, 2015 at 11:15. Reason: Correction
fluid23 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 24, 2015, 11:33
Default
  #11
New Member
 
Jacopo
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 15
Rep Power: 11
jano5889 is on a distinguished road
No, 130 barg is the inlet pressure. The Top outlet pressure and the Bottom outlet pressure only depend on pressure drop. So I don't know the two outlet pressures...
jano5889 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 24, 2015, 11:38
Default
  #12
Senior Member
 
Matt
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 947
Rep Power: 17
fluid23 is on a distinguished road
So you know flow rate, but not the split in flow rate at the exit and not exit pressure? It seems like your problem isn't very well defined if you don't know what is happening at your boundaries.
fluid23 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 24, 2015, 13:03
Default
  #13
New Member
 
Jacopo
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 15
Rep Power: 11
jano5889 is on a distinguished road
Yes, I don't know the split in flow rate and the exit pressure...I do not have an experimental model, so it is very difficult to modeling...The only thing is to try every possibility and check the most reasonable...
jano5889 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 24, 2015, 13:47
Default
  #14
Senior Member
 
Matt
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 947
Rep Power: 17
fluid23 is on a distinguished road
Bummer. You might try the adjoint solver, it is made for this sort of thing. Look at the help docs, User Guide > Modeling Physics > Modeling Flow and Energy > Solving the Flow Adjoint.

You will still need some sort of criteria to judge against though. I assume you have some kind of performance perameter you are looking at that will determine your optimum or correct split, no? If you go this route, drop the pressure outlets and go with split flow outlet at your boundaries. Then the split ratio will be the variable that you feed into the adjoint solver. I haven't really used it beyond the tutorial so I won't be much help I am afraid.

Good Luck!
fluid23 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 24, 2015, 20:26
Default
  #15
New Member
 
Jacopo
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 15
Rep Power: 11
jano5889 is on a distinguished road
ok tank you very very much! You saved me!
jano5889 is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply


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 Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Mass balance and overflow problems for Multiphase Inhomogeneous Simulation DarrenC CFX 5 January 28, 2016 21:41
Low Mach Number Compressible Multiphase Flows DarrenC CFX 10 May 26, 2014 08:52
about butterfly valve multiphase problems houyue FLUENT 0 April 2, 2014 08:52
multiphase cfd model problems zhijing peng FLUENT 0 January 7, 2009 13:07
Convergence problems in multiphase flow! Mikael FLUENT 6 December 13, 2007 15:11


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 19:55.