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

Flow through a 90°pipe bend (2)

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

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   November 6, 2016, 00:07
Default Flow through a 90°pipe bend (2)
  #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 122
Rep Power: 4
MissCFD is on a distinguished road
Hi,

Can somebody explain me why when I impose parabolic velocity profile at inlet of pipe flow, there is a separation region of flow near the inside of the bend whereas when I impose a turbulent flow velocity profil (power-law velocity profile) the separation region appears at the end of the bend only (90°).

Is it because with a parabolic velocity profil, the thickness of the shear zones is more important than with a power-law velocity profil and therefore the velocity that arrives near the inside of bend is smaller so the centripetal forces is not high enough in this location to balance radial pressure gradient ?
Attached Images
File Type: png ParabolicVelocityProfile.PNG (38.4 KB, 17 views)
File Type: png PowerVelocityProfile.PNG (36.7 KB, 15 views)
MissCFD is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   November 6, 2016, 05:45
Default
  #2
Super Moderator
 
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 13,304
Rep Power: 103
ghorrocks is a jewel in the roughghorrocks is a jewel in the roughghorrocks is a jewel in the rough
Is this simulation turbulent or laminar? What Re number?
ghorrocks is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   November 6, 2016, 09:27
Default
  #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 122
Rep Power: 4
MissCFD is on a distinguished road
The two simulations are turbulent with Re = 2*10^6

Quote:
Originally Posted by ghorrocks View Post
Is this simulation turbulent or laminar? What Re number?
MissCFD is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   November 6, 2016, 18:32
Default
  #4
Super Moderator
 
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 13,304
Rep Power: 103
ghorrocks is a jewel in the roughghorrocks is a jewel in the roughghorrocks is a jewel in the rough
In that case you will probably find you have different turbulence profiles associated with the different velocity profiles. Turbulence affects separations, and so I suspect that is why the different profiles have different separations.
ghorrocks is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   November 6, 2016, 18:59
Default
  #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 122
Rep Power: 4
MissCFD is on a distinguished road
Yes, you have right, the evolution of turbulence quantities is not the same although they have been imposed with the same values at inlet.
Is the evolution different because they depend on the flow field ?

The adverse pressure gradient at the outlet of the bend, near the inner wall, can also contribute to the separation, isn't it ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ghorrocks View Post
In that case you will probably find you have different turbulence profiles associated with the different velocity profiles. Turbulence affects separations, and so I suspect that is why the different profiles have different separations.
MissCFD is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   November 6, 2016, 19:26
Default
  #6
Super Moderator
 
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 13,304
Rep Power: 103
ghorrocks is a jewel in the roughghorrocks is a jewel in the roughghorrocks is a jewel in the rough
In simple terms: Turbulence is generated by shear stresses and dissipated by viscosity. So when you change the shear stresses you change the production/dissipation balance the turbulence level changes.

Yes, adverse pressure gradients also contribute to turbulence (although it might not be modelled very accurately in the turbulence model).
ghorrocks is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   November 21, 2016, 22:07
Default
  #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 122
Rep Power: 4
MissCFD is on a distinguished road
Thank you for your response, it's a little more clear now.

But, is it trivial for you that turbulence intensity and turbulence length increase at the end of the bend ?

Should we not talk about coherent structure in a bend ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ghorrocks View Post
In simple terms: Turbulence is generated by shear stresses and dissipated by viscosity. So when you change the shear stresses you change the production/dissipation balance the turbulence level changes.

Yes, adverse pressure gradients also contribute to turbulence (although it might not be modelled very accurately in the turbulence model).
MissCFD is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   November 21, 2016, 22:15
Default
  #8
Super Moderator
 
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 13,304
Rep Power: 103
ghorrocks is a jewel in the roughghorrocks is a jewel in the roughghorrocks is a jewel in the rough
The points I have mentioned are just general characteristics of turbulence. For exactly what factors are contributing in this specific configuration will require some research and experimentation. I do not have the time to do this for you, so I will leave this more detailed study up to you.

It is an interesting case so it is worth investigating it a bit more deeply if you can.
ghorrocks is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   November 27, 2016, 19:13
Default
  #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 122
Rep Power: 4
MissCFD is on a distinguished road
Yes of course it's my work. I am just wondering if my question was trivial, apparently it's not.

One other point that I would like a clarification, is it right to say that the intensity of secondary flow after the bend decreases because of viscous dissipation ?

Thank you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ghorrocks View Post
The points I have mentioned are just general characteristics of turbulence. For exactly what factors are contributing in this specific configuration will require some research and experimentation. I do not have the time to do this for you, so I will leave this more detailed study up to you.

It is an interesting case so it is worth investigating it a bit more deeply if you can.
MissCFD is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   November 27, 2016, 19:18
Default
  #10
Super Moderator
 
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 13,304
Rep Power: 103
ghorrocks is a jewel in the roughghorrocks is a jewel in the roughghorrocks is a jewel in the rough
I am not an expert on turbulence but I would think attributing the change intensity of the secondary flow to viscous dissipation is far too simplistic. There is a lot more going on than just viscous dissipation.
ghorrocks is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply

Thread Tools
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 On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Exit Corrected Mass Flow Rate Mesh Sensitivity Study s__s__s CFX 4 July 20, 2016 11:46
transient pipe bend flow, laminar Rico87 FLUENT 0 December 30, 2013 16:00
transient, impregnating flow problem fgommer FLUENT 0 February 29, 2012 17:10
Non-steady flow simplified for use in Vissim steamerandy Main CFD Forum 0 October 31, 2011 22:08
180 degrees bend flow Tim Franke Main CFD Forum 0 February 1, 2000 08:28


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:35.