CFD Online Logo CFD Online URL
www.cfd-online.com
[Sponsors]
Home > Forums > Software User Forums > ANSYS > CFX

Incorrect pressure calculation at inlet

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

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old   October 9, 2014, 11:01
Default Incorrect pressure calculation at inlet
  #1
New Member
 
Florian
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 12
Rep Power: 13
Floszwa is on a distinguished road
Hello,

I have encountered a problem during my simulation of a particle in a laminar tube flow.

I try to simulate the equilibrium position of a particle for Re = 500 (pipe Reynolds number). To simulate the movement of the particle, the flow at the wall has the negative value of the particle velocity. At the inlet is a parabolic flow profile minus the particle velocity. The velocity along the pipe is shown in the following picture:
flow profile.JPG


First I did the same simulation with a smaller particle and the results were as expected. The following picture shows the pressure development in the pipe. The inlet is in the upper right corner and the pressure does not change there.
smaller particle.JPG


After I raised the diameter of the particle, the results are different as shown in the following picture:
larger particle.JPG
As you can see, the pressure for the inlet changes along the x axis although only the diameter of the particle was changed.

I moved the inlet away from the particle (as shown in the picture for the larger particle), but nothing changed. So does anyone have an idea why the pressure at the inlet changes and how I can solve this problem?

Thank you in advance.

Best regards!
Florian
Floszwa is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   October 9, 2014, 19:04
Default
  #2
Super Moderator
 
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 17,862
Rep Power: 144
ghorrocks is just really niceghorrocks is just really niceghorrocks is just really niceghorrocks is just really nice
Have you checked your outlet boundary is far enough away from the sphere? Is the simulation fully converged?
ghorrocks is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   October 16, 2014, 11:35
Default
  #3
New Member
 
Florian
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 12
Rep Power: 13
Floszwa is on a distinguished road
The simulation was fully converged.

I moved the outlet farther away from the particle (I doubled the distance between the particle and the outlet) and repeated the simulations, but the results stayed the same. So the outlet boundary should be far enough away from the particle.
Floszwa is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   October 16, 2014, 19:21
Default
  #4
Super Moderator
 
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 17,862
Rep Power: 144
ghorrocks is just really niceghorrocks is just really niceghorrocks is just really niceghorrocks is just really nice
What do the streamlines look like? Is there any sign of a recirculation?
ghorrocks is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   October 22, 2014, 08:24
Default
  #5
New Member
 
Florian
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 12
Rep Power: 13
Floszwa is on a distinguished road
Hey,

I made a picture of the streamlines.
Stream lines.JPG
There seems to be a recirculation.
Floszwa is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   October 22, 2014, 18:43
Default
  #6
Super Moderator
 
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 17,862
Rep Power: 144
ghorrocks is just really niceghorrocks is just really niceghorrocks is just really niceghorrocks is just really nice
Then that is the problem. Your boundary condition is too close. You need to move your boundary further away so the flow is entirely in one direction.

(There are other solutions but this is the easiest and often the best)
ghorrocks is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   October 30, 2014, 09:38
Default
  #7
New Member
 
Florian
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 12
Rep Power: 13
Floszwa is on a distinguished road
In this case the particle Reynolds number is clearly below 1. For such a low particle Reynolds number the particle won't effect the flow this way, if the boundarys are already that far away from the particle.
Floszwa is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   October 30, 2014, 17:56
Default
  #8
Super Moderator
 
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 17,862
Rep Power: 144
ghorrocks is just really niceghorrocks is just really niceghorrocks is just really niceghorrocks is just really nice
But your image clearly shows lots of recirculations. Are you sure it is converged? Some of the recirculations appear to be a distance away from the particle - what is generating those?
ghorrocks is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   November 6, 2014, 12:19
Default
  #9
Member
 
Max
Join Date: May 2011
Location: old europe
Posts: 88
Rep Power: 15
murx is on a distinguished road
Hey Glenn,

Thanks for your effort! I work with Floszwa on this problem and just want to point out some things that were not made really clear so far.

The simulation is carried out in the frame of reference of the sphere/particle. Thus, the velocity profile is shifted and there is inflow and outflow at both boundaries, see picture 1.

Even for simulations that show physical results (those carried out for lower pipe Reynolds numbers ~ 100), some streamlines turn at the particle and exit through the same boundary as they entered. However... this seems physically meaningful to me as the inflow velocity of these streamlines is close to zero. I attached screenshots of the streamlines and corresponding pressure profiles for the working simulation (bottom, Re_pipe = 100) and the simulation not giving physical results (top, Re_pipe = 500), see picture 2.

The flow can be regarded as almost creeping (Re_particle < 1). To my understanding there should not be a recirculation (in terms of vortices forming behind the prticle). Even if there is, for those low particle reynolds numbers, I would expect the recirculations to fade in a distance in the order of magnitude of one particle diameter. We moved the outlet as far as ~40 particle diameters away. The simulations are converged. Do still you think we should go even further?
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 1_boundary_velocity_profiles.jpg (17.1 KB, 7 views)
File Type: jpg 2_streamlines.jpg (46.2 KB, 7 views)
murx is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   November 6, 2014, 17:05
Default
  #10
Super Moderator
 
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 17,862
Rep Power: 144
ghorrocks is just really niceghorrocks is just really niceghorrocks is just really niceghorrocks is just really nice
Quote:
The simulations are converged.
I doubt that. What you are seeing looks just like an inadequately converged simulation. Why do you say it is converged?
ghorrocks is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   November 7, 2014, 05:11
Default
  #11
Member
 
Max
Join Date: May 2011
Location: old europe
Posts: 88
Rep Power: 15
murx is on a distinguished road
What I meant is that the residuals decreased by several orders of magnitude and they do not decrease further when the claculation is carried on. You're right, that does not necessarily mean it is converged to the real solution or rather to the real solution of the problem we try to model.

But why is that?

The RMS-residuals are in the order of 10^-7. For lower Reynolds numbers, we could get physical results even at significantly higher residuals.
murx is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply

Tags
inlet, laminar flow, pressure

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
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 Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Mass flow inlet and pressure outlet issue nikhil FLUENT 5 December 11, 2013 13:30
Assign static pressure at inlet Tanjina FLUENT 0 November 3, 2013 12:34
Unsteady pressure differential between inlet and outlet of the pipe for single phase joshi20h FLUENT 0 September 26, 2012 13:41
Validation 12.1 vs 6.3, Difference in Reported Inlet Total Pressure jola FLUENT 1 May 5, 2011 15:33
Pressure Inlet yields wrong velocities Ben FLUENT 0 November 21, 2004 02:47


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 14:52.