CFD Online Logo CFD Online URL
www.cfd-online.com
[Sponsors]
Home > Forums > Software User Forums > ANSYS > FLUENT

k and ω boundary condition type for outlet/ Dirichlet or Neuman

Register Blogs Community New Posts Updated Threads Search

Like Tree1Likes
  • 1 Post By alinik

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old   July 9, 2017, 13:37
Default k and ω boundary condition type for outlet/ Dirichlet or Neuman
  #1
Senior Member
 
ali
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 318
Rep Power: 17
alinik is on a distinguished road
Hi all,

I have two questions regarding the "Specified Flux" option that become available in UDS tab once we activate UDS and also k and ω boundary condition type:

1) what type of boundary condition does fluent use for pressure outlet in terms of k and ω. (Dirichlet or Neuman?) does the solver specify a value for the scalar at the outlet or the derivative of the quantity?

2) Is the specified flux boundary condition type in UDS tab, a Neuman-type condition? In other words, if I set it equal to zero for the scalar φ, does that impose 𝜕φ/𝜕n=0 at the outlet or 𝜕φ/𝜕n+ Un φ=0 ?

I did not found any information about this in the theory guide.

Thanks,
Ali
saihasil likes this.
alinik is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   July 10, 2017, 18:22
Default
  #2
Member
 
Vedamt Chittlangia
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 64
Rep Power: 9
vcvedant is an unknown quantity at this point
Hi Ali,

I have similar issue while describing boundary condition for UDS. Please post here if you find the solution to this.

Vedant
vcvedant is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   July 11, 2017, 17:34
Default
  #3
Senior Member
 
Lucky
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Orlando, FL USA
Posts: 5,674
Rep Power: 65
LuckyTran has a spectacular aura aboutLuckyTran has a spectacular aura aboutLuckyTran has a spectacular aura about
As far as I know, at a pressure outlet the BC is the zero gradient type.

I don't follow your question on the UDS. You can't (at least you shouldn't) specify ��φ/��n+ Un φ=0 at the outlet, that would be a impermeable wall.
LuckyTran is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   July 19, 2017, 10:56
Default
  #4
Senior Member
 
ali
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 318
Rep Power: 17
alinik is on a distinguished road
Hi all,

This is the response I got from an ANSYS rep:

at a pressure outlet, the k and omega, will be interpolated from the inside and the value at the face set to the same value as the adjacent cell center. No diffusive flux is computed, only the convective value is computed at such boundary.
For the UDS, if you specify the gradient, only the diffusive term will be set to that value, the convective term will be computed as for the k.


Does anyone know how to implement that with UDS?
If one wants to reproduce(and later modify) a turbulence model, they have to use UDS and the only options for UDS boundary conditions are specified flux and specified value which I believe are Neuman and Dirichlet BC respectively.
I am kind of lost and need help here.
alinik is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   July 19, 2017, 11:34
Default
  #5
Senior Member
 
Lucky
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Orlando, FL USA
Posts: 5,674
Rep Power: 65
LuckyTran has a spectacular aura aboutLuckyTran has a spectacular aura aboutLuckyTran has a spectacular aura about
Are you asking about only the pressure outlet or a generalized boundary condition? For an outlet, it is precisely written what here what happens:

Quote:
Originally Posted by alinik View Post
at a pressure outlet, the k and omega, will be interpolated from the inside and the value at the face set to the same value as the adjacent cell center. No diffusive flux is computed, only the convective value is computed at such boundary.
For the UDS, if you specify the gradient, only the diffusive term will be set to that value, the convective term will be computed as for the k.
For k and omega, diffusive fluxes are zero gradient. Advective fluxes are calculated per the discretization scheme, which is usually an upwind biased scheme. Hence for a UDS you have the option to specifying the same zero gradient for the diffusive flux so that the same advective discretization is used.
LuckyTran is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   July 19, 2017, 15:39
Default
  #6
Senior Member
 
ali
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 318
Rep Power: 17
alinik is on a distinguished road
Tran,

Thank you for the description.
Please correct me if I am wrong: what we specify in the UDS tab of the pressure-outlet BC, does not include the convective fluxes and if we set the Specified flux to zero, we have in fact eliminated the diffusion flux and the convective flux would still be there. Is that right?
alinik is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply

Tags
boundary condition, dirichlet, neuman, specified flux, specified value


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 Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:44.