|
[Sponsors] |
How does CFX handle two boundary conditions at a shared corner node? |
![]() |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
![]() |
![]() |
#1 |
New Member
Join Date: Dec 2019
Posts: 11
Rep Power: 7 ![]() |
I am trying to run a simple 2D square cavity natural convection simulation. The top and bottom edges are insulated (adiabatic), while the left and right edges have specified temperature.
What I'm trying to figure out is how does CFX handle the boundary conditions at the corner where two different boundary conditions meet. Here I quote the CFX modelling guide: "For Fixed Temperature walls, the wall temperature is the specified value Tw. For all other heat transfer boundary conditions, the wall temperature is backed out from turbulent wall functions when running a turbulent flow model. For laminar flow modelling the wall temperature is just the local fluid temperature at the vertex adjacent to the wall." So, at the top right corner node where the adiabatic and fixed temperature boundary conditions meet, would CFX force this node to have the fixed wall temperature or some other value that satisfy the adiabatic condition? From my results, the corner node temperature is not the fixed wall temperature I gave it, and it is not "the local fluid temperature at the vertex adjacent to the wall" as explained in the guide either. I hope someone could clarify for me what exactly CFX is doing in this case. Thanks in advance! |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Super Moderator
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 17,902
Rep Power: 144 ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
CFX uses control volumes centred around nodes inside the domain, so the boundary conditions are the boundary faces of this control volume. Each face of the control volume can only be one type of boundary condition - and there are no nodes located on the boundary faces - so there is no conflict as you describe.
This is also why you have hybrid and conservative values in the post processor. If you are not aware of this you should read about it in the documentation.
__________________
Note: I do not answer CFD questions by PM. CFD questions should be posted on the forum. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 | |
New Member
Join Date: Dec 2019
Posts: 11
Rep Power: 7 ![]() |
Quote:
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,884
Rep Power: 33 ![]() |
Your drawing is spot-on for the nodes. However, it is a matter of interpretation and vocabulary.
In your 2D drawing, faces are lines, correct?. Then, the nodes are NOT on any of the faces, they are at the end of the edges. ON the faces means anywhere along the line. My advice is to read the documentation and have a clear understanding of the fundamental steps in the control volume discretization approach. Differentiate what happens in a volume integral, and how BC comes into play when discretizing and interpreting what those BC represent. Hint: nodes are just placeholders to store data, and do NOT represent a specific location in space for that data.
__________________
Note: I do not answer CFD questions by PM. CFD questions should be posted on the forum. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 | |
New Member
Join Date: Dec 2019
Posts: 11
Rep Power: 7 ![]() |
Quote:
1. Due to low grid resolution and the high temperature gradient, the adiabatic wall temperature at the corner CV is a bit different from the fixed wall temperature I specified. 2. CFD-Post uses hybrid values (user-specified boundary values) to show the boundary temperature at the corner CV/node, which I think is either the fixed wall temperature or the calculated adiabatic wall temperature? So, my understanding is that under low Rayleigh number when the temperature gradient isn't too high at the corner, the two boundary values are close enough and either one is basically the same as the fixed temperature I specified. However, at high Ra, CFD-post might be using the adiabatic wall temperature which is slightly higher than the fixed wall temperature I gave it, causing all the confusion. So, I think now my question becomes how does CFD-post select which boundary value to use for the hybrid value at the corner CV/node? I've found that there might be a hierarchical order in choosing the boundary values: https://ansyskm.ansys.com/forums/top...aring-an-edge/. But for my case when the two boundaries are both "walls", what would the order be then? |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,884
Rep Power: 33 ![]() |
The arithmetic average for boundaries of the same physical type.
You can verify that by setting a problem with 300 [K] on wall 1, and 500 [K] on wall 2, the corner node should be @400 [K]
__________________
Note: I do not answer CFD questions by PM. CFD questions should be posted on the forum. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
New Member
Join Date: Dec 2019
Posts: 11
Rep Power: 7 ![]() |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Tags |
boundary condition, corner node |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
use the message in macro DEFINE_PROFILE with parallel processor | alireza_T | Fluent UDF and Scheme Programming | 3 | May 11, 2022 03:08 |
Multiphase flow - incorrect velocity on inlet | Mike_Tom | CFX | 6 | September 29, 2016 02:27 |
Error - Solar absorber - Solar Thermal Radiation | MichaelK | CFX | 12 | September 1, 2016 06:15 |
foam-extend_3.1 decompose and pyfoam warning | shipman | OpenFOAM | 3 | July 24, 2014 09:14 |
Question about heat transfer coefficient setting for CFX | Anna Tian | CFX | 1 | June 16, 2013 07:28 |