# lowering y+ on surfaces...

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

 March 22, 2002, 15:51 lowering y+ on surfaces... #1 Dimitrios Guest   Posts: n/a Hi I just started using CFX5.5 (CFX4 before) but I have a problem. With CFX4 I could build a block next to a wall and make a fine mesh and in that way keep low y+ values (around 11) but I don't know which parameter I should "play" with in CFX5. I've tried the mesh control and inflated boundary (were I adjusted the geometric progression on the relevant boundaries) but still my y+ values are too high. Does anyone have a good idea of what I can play around with in the Mesh menu? Every advice is welcome!!! Dimitris

 March 22, 2002, 17:33 Re: lowering y+ on surfaces... #2 Astrid Guest   Posts: n/a Dimitros What is high? CFX 5.5 provides two values: 1)SOLVER YPLUS and 2) YPLUS. Forget SOLVER YPLUS. Just look at YPLUS which should be between 11 and 100, provided you use a turbulence model with waal functions. If you use a sublayer model, it should be below 2. Improving your YPLUS can be established using an inflation layer with 10 elements with a progression of 1.3. You need at least 10 elements in your boundary layer. If YPLUS is too high, just increase the progression factor to 1.4 or 1.5. With a simple Excel-sheet you should be able to calculate your smallest element and estimate the expected YPLUS. Astrid

 March 23, 2002, 12:36 Re: lowering y+ on surfaces... #3 Dimitris Guest   Posts: n/a Thank you very much Astrid....it works great!!!

 March 23, 2002, 20:29 Re: lowering y+ on surfaces... #4 Neale Guest   Posts: n/a Also note that the fixed y-plus (scalable) wall functions in CFX-5.5 are the default when running k-epsilon. You can't get y-plus below 11 with these because the code is assuming that the first control volume at the wall is at the boundary of the viscous sub-layer, not inside it. You might try running SST instead of k-epsilon which automatically integrates to the wall where it can (i.e., you have enough grid to resolve the boundary layer), and automatically uses scalable where you don't have enough grid. Either way though, Astrid is right. You should use inflation and try and get some control volumes into your boundary layer if resolving the boundary layer is important for your application. Neale

 Thread Tools Display Modes Linear Mode

 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 OffTrackbacks are On Pingbacks are On Refbacks are On Forum Rules

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post CFD XUE FLUENT 3 March 18, 2015 04:28 Hydro1004 OpenFOAM 3 August 29, 2012 11:56 gija79 OpenFOAM 5 June 30, 2010 13:50 Chriss Main CFD Forum 1 May 6, 2008 15:18 Mark FLUENT 2 February 9, 2004 11:41

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:45.