CFD Online Logo CFD Online URL
Home > Forums > CFX

Validation: ASHRAE Elbow Loss Coeffs

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

LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   April 13, 2009, 19:37
Default Validation: ASHRAE Elbow Loss Coeffs
New Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 16
Rep Power: 10
LKF is on a distinguished road
I'm curious, has anyone studied / compared CFX results to tabulated ASHRAE elbow loss coeffecients (or something similar)?

I've been studying a 60 inch diameter 90 degree elbow (5 Gore) for air between 2,000 fpm and 6,000 fpm.

Currently I'm seeing a CFX estimated Co that is about 0.65 times the ASHRAE value. Comparison against other reference values suggests similar under-prediction.

Last edited by LKF; April 13, 2009 at 22:00.
LKF is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 13, 2009, 21:19
Super Moderator
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 13,993
Rep Power: 107
ghorrocks is a jewel in the roughghorrocks is a jewel in the roughghorrocks is a jewel in the rough

Did you model the full experimental test setup, such as inlet and exhaust pipes? Have you done sensitivity analysis of all important variables?

Glenn Horrocks
ghorrocks is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 13, 2009, 21:58
New Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 16
Rep Power: 10
LKF is on a distinguished road
Hi Glenn,

I've modeled 3 diameters of duct length on either end - mass flow inlet w. zero gradient turbulence (to approximate fully developed flow), opening BC at 0 Prel on outlet. I understand there are possible improvements to the BC's, however in terms of sensitivity, I've considered different inflow velocity profiles such as 1/7 power law and uniform inlet velocity, with negligable change to the results. I could perhaps benefit from extending the outlet (as I've been advised from CFX tech support) and switching to an outflow condition. I've considered wall roughness, but have since reverted to a no slip smooth wall condition since there was little response to a rough wall.

I demonstrated grid indepence at about 300,000 nodes (using symmetry along the center, results are consistent for the whole domain). Y+ has only negligable impact at an average value of Y+ < 80 (that is Y+ in POST, not the solver y+ which is 1/4 of that value). Mesh spacing is about 2" and I've got 12 nodes of inflation that is about 2.5" thick.

I've compared both the standard k-e model and the SST model (with the appropriate mesh correction to get Y+ ~3). In all cases, I've converged to a max residual (not RMS) of 1E-4 (on some cases less than 5E-5). Mostly I've run double precision, but again haven't seen appreciable differences between single and double precision.

I believe I've done a fairly comprehensive analysis . . . and I still observe total pressure loss through the elbow that is around 0.65 times references of elbow loss data that I have access to (I would have expected +/-15% and would even be happy to get +/-20%). I should mention I'm using area based averaging instead of mass flow averages. I know mass flow averages are theoretically correct, but a lot of industry measurements I come across are area averages. Also, the mass flow based losses have even less agreement.

Do you have any experience with comparing this sort of scenario to reference / experimental results?
LKF is offline   Reply With Quote


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
Need help for loss coefficient of elbow diffuser Pete Main CFD Forum 0 November 9, 2004 03:54

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 13:52.