Cannot get similar results based on two methods of friction factor calculation

lion1990 · January 14, 2016, 10:37

Hi.

I'm using periodic conditions in Fluent with specify mass flow rate to calculate a single phase laminar flow with heat transfer. After simulation, I want to calculate the Fanning friction factor. I'm using the following two methods:

1. Based on shear stress. I used the area averaged shear stress T (constant density) from the fluent report. f = T/(0.5*density*velocity^2).

2. Based on pressure gradient. After calculation, the periodic conditions panel would give the pressure gradient dp/dx. And f=-dp/dx*dh/(2*density*velocity^2).

But I got very different results from this two methods. The result of the second one is about two times than the first one. It should be similar.

My geometry is a sinusoid wavy fin in 2D. I also tried my simulation in a flat plate, and it doesn't show this problem.

My geometry is in the attachment.

LuckyTran · January 14, 2016, 22:40

Make sure you've properly integrated the shear stress.

The proper length scale in 3D (usually the hydraulic diameter Dh) is not quite the same in 2D.

The best way to check is to apply a force balance to relate the wall shear stress to the bulk pressure gradient and then compare that to what you have for friction factor. It is critical that the correct length scale is chosen to ensure the force balance holds.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Any questions about Runge-Kutta methods	Runge_Kutta	Main CFD Forum	33	September 9, 2019 16:32
Comparing Air numerical results with water experimental results	cristian2009es	Main CFD Forum	1	July 2, 2014 18:11
Sanity check: different nMoles in thermophysicalProperties similar results for 2 runs	massive_turbulence	OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD	1	May 6, 2014 17:51
Wall function mesh vs y+=1 mesh gives similar results	NickFSI	STAR-CCM+	0	March 12, 2013 05:35
Different results from similar quality cfx and ICEM meshes	Nick R	CFX	3	January 17, 2011 07:48

January 14, 2016, 22:40		#2
LuckyTran Senior Member Lucky Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Orlando, FL USA Posts: 5,704 Rep Power: 66	Make sure you've properly integrated the shear stress. The proper length scale in 3D (usually the hydraulic diameter Dh) is not quite the same in 2D. The best way to check is to apply a force balance to relate the wall shear stress to the bulk pressure gradient and then compare that to what you have for friction factor. It is critical that the correct length scale is chosen to ensure the force balance holds.