|
[Sponsors] |
How do I know that my natural convection model is good? |
![]() |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
![]() |
![]() |
#1 |
New Member
Jose Fuentes
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 2
Rep Power: 0 ![]() |
Hello, I need your help please. I did my thesis and I am not sure of the results, since my tutor does not tell me anything or if they are ok or not. And with the time that has passed it is generating insecurity in them. I think they are fine, but in the end I am only a student, and it is not me who decides if it is fine or not.
My thesis was a numerical simulation of natural convection and surface radiation in closed three-dimensional rooms with different aspect ratios. I did a transient simulation in Ansys Fluent for the Rayleigh number range from 10e4 to 9e5 and H/L aspect ratio from 1 to 10 for two emissivity values e = 0.05 and 0.10. First use two different geometries with different lengths, in order to evaluate the Rayleigh number range you wanted, one length of L = 0.02764 m for 10e4 <Ra < 9e4 and another length of L = 0.05995 m for 10e5 <Ra <9e5. Use a structured mesh in each geometry (attached image So the question is, the meshes I selected for the models in my study were approximately 230,000 elements, and for example, for the model with L = 0.05995, the Nusselt number (parameter of interest in the study) for Ra = 9e5, H / L = 10 and a mesh of 230,000 elements was Nu = 5,30147, and perform a simulation for the same model but with a mesh of 1,000,000 elements, and the Nusselt number was Nu = 5, 3158, with a relative error of 0.27% between the two values and the difference between simulation time is quite considerable. My question is: Are the ones I made okay? Are the reasons enough to say that the numerical model you built is fine? Do I need to perform a simulation for the other configurations and with their highest Rayleigh number, or is it okay, with that one case, to check that the meshes I chose are sufficient for the study? The second question I have is regarding the passage of time I used (the simulation was transitory), in this case use a different passage of time for each Rayleigh number, Ansys fluent recommends the following equation DeltaT = (L) / (4sqrt (g * B * DT * L)), where L is the length, g the gravity, B the coefficient of volumetric expansion and DT the temperature difference in the room. As the Rayleigh number increases, that passage of time becomes less. So, is it okay that you have chosen a different time step for each Ra? Or did I have to use the time step of the greater Rayleigh number for the entire Rayleigh number range? I never had stability problems, I always reach convergence, but I have read that although there are no stability problems, the results may not be accurate. So I have doubts about it. Now, it should be noted that, as I mentioned earlier, I did a validation study, the same procedure that I explained before I did in that validation. Compare the numerical model with an experimental study and the relative error percentage with respect to its results was less than 3% in the entire Rayleigh number range evaluated. I enclose a graph of the Nusselt number with my results and the experimental ones Please, I need your help with this. I would be very grateful for your response |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Tags |
fluent - parallel, mesh 3d, natural convection, numerical analysis, time step size |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Entrainment boundary conditions in a natural convection model | emat | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 1 | March 28, 2017 08:37 |
Wrong flow in ratating domain problem | Sanyo | CFX | 17 | August 15, 2015 06:20 |
convergenceof natural convection prob. in cfx | cpkewat | CFX | 15 | January 31, 2014 06:29 |
laminar or turbulent model for natural convection | ans281086 | FLUENT | 0 | April 21, 2011 06:30 |
How to model natural convection | Ken Adams | FLUENT | 4 | January 23, 2007 15:14 |