# How to give no wall boundary condition?

 User Name Remember Me Password
 Register Blogs Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 March 5, 2020, 09:04 How to give no wall boundary condition? #1 New Member   Johny_walker Join Date: Feb 2020 Posts: 17 Rep Power: 5 Hello, I am conducting a simulation on vehicle aerodynamics. I have a rectangular domain. I dont want to have any wall on the side of the vehicle and on top of domain. The only wall present will be the ground. Which condition in Ansys Fluent should I give so that it represents a no wall? Best regards,

 March 5, 2020, 10:12 Wall or No Wall #2 Senior Member     Vinerm Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Nederland Posts: 2,946 Blog Entries: 1 Rep Power: 35 There are at least two options you can choose. Apply a wall condition but change it to free-slip wall. This essentially means that shear-stress is 0. Wall will act like a wall, i.e., it will confine the flow but it will not offer any resistance to the parallel. Most likely, this is what you want and is used by most people working on external aero. Some people using symmetry, which is correct for side wall but not for top. Second option is to use pressure-outlet. There will be a lot of flow-reversal, however, if this boundary is far away from the vehicle, then there is nothing to worry about. __________________ Regards, Vinerm PM to be used if and only if you do not want something to be shared publicly. PM is considered to be of the least priority.

 March 5, 2020, 13:37 #3 Senior Member   Lucky Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Orlando, FL USA Posts: 5,493 Rep Power: 64 There is also a pressure farfield boundary condition. All the BC types though are predicated on your boundaries being far enough away that they don't adversely affect the results. If the boundary is not far enough away, a slip-wall is not that great because there is boundary induced flow acceleration so it is generally preferred to use a farfield BC or pressure inlet/outlet BC because those allow flow to cross the boundary and provides relief. Either way, make your boundary very far away if you can.

 March 6, 2020, 03:39 Pressure Far-Field #4 Senior Member     Vinerm Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Nederland Posts: 2,946 Blog Entries: 1 Rep Power: 35 As Lucky mentioned, Pressure Far-Field is another option. However, it is inapplicable in your case since this condition has two particular requirements. 1. Fluid should be treated as ideal gas. This you can address by using ideal gas law for air, however, you will be end up solving an extra equation. 2. This condition should not be applied to a boundary that is adjacent to a wall. This you cannot address since the vehicle is on the ground and ground is a wall. So, if the side and top boundaries are far away from the vehicle; gap between vehicle top and top boundary should be at least 3 times the height and similarly gap between sides of the vehicle and sides of the corresponding side boundary should be at least 3 times the width, then stress free wall (otherwise called free-slip bc) is perfectly applicable. Pressure outlet, as stated earlier, will work but there will be flow reversals. In essence, keep boundaries far away from vehicle and you can use either pressure outlet or free slip. __________________ Regards, Vinerm PM to be used if and only if you do not want something to be shared publicly. PM is considered to be of the least priority.

 March 6, 2020, 06:40 #5 New Member   Johny_walker Join Date: Feb 2020 Posts: 17 Rep Power: 5 If we use free slip BC, we generally need to have a boundary layer on a wall with free slip. However, in my domain, I dont have a boundary layer resolved on top and side walls. Will this be an issue? Best regards,

 March 6, 2020, 07:03 Free Slip #6 Senior Member     Vinerm Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Nederland Posts: 2,946 Blog Entries: 1 Rep Power: 35 On the contrary, free slip does not require any boundary layer mesh or fine mesh since due to free slip the boundary layer does not exist. __________________ Regards, Vinerm PM to be used if and only if you do not want something to be shared publicly. PM is considered to be of the least priority.

 March 10, 2020, 03:35 #7 New Member   Johny_walker Join Date: Feb 2020 Posts: 17 Rep Power: 5 Dear all, I have been talking with my professors about this condition. It was decided that having a pressure outlet condition will be more suitable to simulate no wall condition that having a symmetry because in pressure outlet condition, if we set the gauge pressure to be 0, it will take it same as atmospheric boundary. Also velocity gradients is 0, so the velocity will be same. However, in symmetry condition, there is nothing related to pressure and only normal velocity component is 0. So, pressure outlet would simulate no walls much better. Furthermore, having a domain like this where one give pressure outlet on top would be more efficient because the car would generate some stream-line bending near the upper boundary, but these will be much smaller than the slope. So, the flow will be outlet everywhere. Regards,

 March 10, 2020, 03:50 Boundary Conditions #8 Senior Member     Vinerm Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Nederland Posts: 2,946 Blog Entries: 1 Rep Power: 35 Pressure outlet will certainly work, however, as mentioned earlier, it would have flow reversal. As long as boundary is far away from vehicle, this reversal would not affect the flow around the vehicle. Symmetry implies symmetry for each field, including pressure. When symmetry is applied, mathematically, gradient of each field with respect to the plane of symmetry is set to 0. So, as far as velocity field is concerned, this is same as free-slip. But it imposes similar conditions on pressure, which is wrong. So, symmetry is not good, at least not for top boundary. Do note that the pressure outlet works like pressure inlet for the flow that reverses and enters the domain. And in that case, the pressure applied is taken as total pressure. This causes static pressure to drop below operating pressure. But as mentioned, it will not have any effect if flow boundary is far away. johny_walker likes this. __________________ Regards, Vinerm PM to be used if and only if you do not want something to be shared publicly. PM is considered to be of the least priority.

 Tags ansys fluent, boundary condition, vehicle aerodynamics

 Thread Tools Search this Thread Search this Thread: Advanced Search 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 Off Pingbacks are On Refbacks are On Forum Rules

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post Yr0gErG FLUENT 4 December 2, 2019 00:04 j0hnny CFX 13 October 1, 2019 13:55 mpeppels CFX 11 August 22, 2019 07:30 Shaun Waters CFX 34 July 23, 2015 08:16 Tudor Miron CFX 15 April 2, 2004 06:18

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 00:45.

 Contact Us - CFD Online - Privacy Statement - Top