
[Sponsors] 
March 14, 2015, 13:22 
Pressure outlet as a function of the flow rate (windkessel)

#1 
New Member
Andrew Norfolk
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 5
Rep Power: 4 
Hey everyone, this is my first post so I'll try to be as concise as possible for you but I apologise if it's a bit long winded as I'm not too sure what to include so you can help out.
I'm trying to model artery bifurcations using idealised geometries and so far the simulation is steady state with rigid walls and I have prescribed a fully developed parabolic velocity profile at the inlet using a CEL expression. I'm going to be adding progressively more complexity (transient inlet flow waveforms and nonNewtonian viscosity models) to the model to make it more representative but for now I've hit a snag in describing the outlet boundary conditions. In general the outlet static pressures can be treated as linear functions of the flow rates through them (accounting for the resistance of the arteries downstream and outside the domain of the simulation). I tried to model this using the following CEL expressions applied to the pressure outlets: Pressure1=resistance1*areaInt_z_Coord1(w)@Outlet1 Pressure2=resistance2*areaInt_z_Coord2(w)@Outlet2 resistance1 and resistance2 are predefined constants. Coord1 and Coord2 are local coordinate systems centred at the outlet faces with the z axes perpendicular to them. Basically static pressure=resistance*flowrate I set up monitors to watch these expressions converge during the solution process. I'm under the impression that at the end of each iteration the static pressures at the outlets are recalculated according to these formulas and updated ready for the next iteration. However it quickly became apparent that the values for static pressure at the outlets in the converging and converged solution do not equal the flow rate x resistance like in equations I set above. In fact checking the flow rate through the outlets with the function calculator in CFD post and then multiplying that value by the predefined resistance that I set gives a vastly different static pressure to the one CFD post is reporting in the solution??? For example in one trial run shown in the attachments i've provided I set both resistances to and the resultant flow rates through outlet1 and outlet2 were converged at and respectively. This should have therefore resulted in the static pressures at the outlets being and . The actual static pressures reported at the outlets in CFD post are and . When I evaluate my two expressions in CFD post they give me the values I expect yet these are not the values applied to the outlets? In summary my outlet CEL expressions are having an affect on the outlet pressures but they are not behaving as expected. Does anybody have any idea what I am doing wrong and why my static pressures at the outlets do not equal the values set in my expressions? Many thanks Trev0r 

March 14, 2015, 13:55 

#2 
New Member
Andrew Norfolk
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 5
Rep Power: 4 
I've actually solved this now, I needed to integrate the global velocity components v over outlet1 and u over outlet2 instead of w. I thought using the local coordinate system with z normal to the outlets changed the definition of the velocity componets but global velocity components, not local ones must be used.


October 25, 2015, 01:31 

#3 
Member
Pranjal Singh
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 34
Rep Power: 3 
Hi there, Did you try the transient formulation? I've been trying to apply pressure as function of previous pressure and flow rate. I've been trying to do this through UDFs in fluent but after a long time, I finally came to know CFX can also do FSI simulation. Can you please suggest a way to get values of a variable at previous time step? I know that CFX only keeps current value so there has to be a file i/o method.
Please help. Thanks. 

October 27, 2015, 15:58 

#4 
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 532
Rep Power: 14 
Why do you need the pressure at the previous timestep? Are you calculating dP/dt? If so, just ask for Pressure.Time Derivative in your CFX expressions.
If you really do need to old pressure, there's a hack you can use. Search this forum for "Update Loop = TRANS_LOOP". 

October 28, 2015, 01:10 

#5 
Member
Pranjal Singh
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 34
Rep Power: 3 
I tried that but I'm getting errors. SO, instead of solving for the differential equation, I did backward discretization so that I just need these values. I did that by UPDATE_LOOP command through same process you discribed. The Multifield solver just doesn't run giving an error code zero. (Note that I've gone through the CFXANSYS Training. I've taken all the necessary considerations I could.)
A major question that I have, which experienced person like yourself might answer is: Is it possible that some approximation like newtonian fluid or medium mesh may result in solver not even solving? As far as I know, you just obtain an unrealistic result. 

October 28, 2015, 08:58 

#6 
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 532
Rep Power: 14 
Error code zero doesn't mean too much. What's in the CFX and MAPDL log files before that error?


October 28, 2015, 10:48 

#7 
Member
Pranjal Singh
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 34
Rep Power: 3 
I got it! I was getting a back flow at outlet. I modeled it as 'outlet' rather than 'Opening'. After all the studies into solver stability and Theory Guides, It finally came down to such a simple mistake
Thank you for helping. (I looked into the log files and found that outlet was being closed!). 

February 17, 2017, 18:50 

#8 
Member
Ftab
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 71
Rep Power: 7 
I have a question regarding setting Windkessel model in steady solution and appreciate if Andrew or Pranjal answer it.
When you are setting the boundary you have two options:Opening or Pressure outlet. If you set it as opening with ~6000 Pa pressure, there will definitely be a back flow (according to your own pressure contour in Post 1) and there will be negative pressure as the boundary. Setting as pressure outlet is even worse as 100% of the outlet will be changed to wall. How did you both manage to converge to correct solution? 

Thread Tools  
Display Modes  


Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Pressure Outlet Targeted Mass Flow Rate  LuckyTran  FLUENT  1  November 23, 2016 11:40 
which BC for getting outlet pressure in a channel flow  josephmp  Main CFD Forum  3  February 9, 2015 15:59 
Mass flow inlet and pressure outlet issue  nikhil  FLUENT  5  December 11, 2013 13:30 
Guessing the static pressure needed to produce flow rate  jpo  FLUENT  0  June 22, 2009 12:53 
Terrible Mistake In Fluid Dynamics History  Abhi  Main CFD Forum  12  July 8, 2002 09:11 