# Boundary Condition in CFX

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

January 30, 2011, 13:40
Boundary Condition in CFX
#1
New Member

Ricky Chen
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 17
Rep Power: 8
Hi all,

I'm trying to make a head pond model for a run-of-river project. The inlet is where the river is, outlet is where the penstock will be.

The inlet boundary condition is normal speed = 2m/s and I set the outlet condition as static pressure = Pres (where Pres is the water pressure due to gravity) (Please see the first picture for details). To simulate the gravity effect on the water, I added a sub-domain with general momentum source.

The result seems fine (please see the second diagram). But when I tried to change the inlet boundary to 0.2 m/s, the model starts to have problem with convergence. And the result doesn't make sense at all, especially the streamline from outlet (see third diagram). I'm thinking that there is something wrong with the outlet boundary condition, but I'm not sure where it is.

It would be great if anyone can provide some advices. Any suggestions would be welcome.

Ricky Chen
Attached Images
 Model.jpg (49.3 KB, 27 views) 3_001.jpg (85.6 KB, 37 views) 4_001.jpg (79.0 KB, 34 views)

Last edited by ssbear; January 30, 2011 at 14:13.

January 30, 2011, 17:50
#2
Super Moderator

Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 13,442
Rep Power: 104
Quote:
 To simulate the gravity effect on the water, I added a sub-domain with general momentum source.
Argh! How many times do I have to tell you that this is a bad idea and not required!

Your pictures are weird. Why are velocity vectors going outwards at wall boundaries?

Your outlet boundary condition will have problems as the flow rate changes. That, coupled with the strange behaviour which your "gravity" source term will generate is going to mean bizarre things will happen.

January 30, 2011, 21:34
#3
New Member

Ricky Chen
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 17
Rep Power: 8
Quote:
 Originally Posted by ghorrocks Argh! How many times do I have to tell you that this is a bad idea and not required! Your pictures are weird. Why are velocity vectors going outwards at wall boundaries? Your outlet boundary condition will have problems as the flow rate changes. That, coupled with the strange behaviour which your "gravity" source term will generate is going to mean bizarre things will happen.

ghorrocks,

Thanks for taking your time into my problem and sorry for my weird questions. I've removed the gravity source term and does that make more sense now?

Attached Images
 8_001.jpg (89.4 KB, 23 views) 8_002.jpg (75.1 KB, 25 views)

 January 31, 2011, 07:15 #4 Super Moderator   Glenn Horrocks Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 13,442 Rep Power: 104 Unless you have variable density from something (or are using the bousinessq buoyancy model) then you will have no need for gravity and no need for static head. Then you can define your outlet boundary as a constant pressure boundary and things are much easier. And yes, now you are not getting impossible flows across walls so keep that momentum source term off.

January 31, 2011, 14:19
#5
New Member

Ricky Chen
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 17
Rep Power: 8
Quote:
 Originally Posted by ghorrocks Unless you have variable density from something (or are using the bousinessq buoyancy model) then you will have no need for gravity and no need for static head. Then you can define your outlet boundary as a constant pressure boundary and things are much easier. And yes, now you are not getting impossible flows across walls so keep that momentum source term off.

Thanks very much!!

February 7, 2011, 02:10
#6
New Member

Ricky Chen
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 17
Rep Power: 8
Quote:
 Originally Posted by ghorrocks Unless you have variable density from something (or are using the bousinessq buoyancy model) then you will have no need for gravity and no need for static head. Then you can define your outlet boundary as a constant pressure boundary and things are much easier. And yes, now you are not getting impossible flows across walls so keep that momentum source term off.

ghorrocks,

This initial model works out well. My manager is happy with the results. Thanks again for your help.

 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 bearcharge Main CFD Forum 0 May 14, 2010 11:32 Pankaj CFX 9 November 23, 2009 05:05 Frank Main CFD Forum 1 April 21, 2008 18:36 hani OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 0 July 4, 2006 07:09 Veebs CFX 5 May 19, 2002 20:55

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 16:48.