|
[Sponsors] |
June 25, 2004, 06:49 |
turbulent model k-epsilon
|
#1 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
hi,
i am trying to look at the flow of air around a rectangle (length 7m and width 2.5m) (in turbulent regime). the inlet velocity is 16.66m/s. i solved in 2nd order implicit segregated. i have tried 3 different models of turbulent regime in order to compare them: k-epsilon standard, K-epsilon realisable and K-epsilon RNG. i did focus my study on the recirculation zone generated after the rectangle and the drag coefficient. the results i have are quite disturbing: length of recirculation zone: k-espilon standard: 4.44m k-epsilon realisable: 4.36m k-epsilon RNG: 7.59m drag coefficient k-espilon standard: 2.3811 k-epsilon realisable: 2.2554m k-epsilon RNG: 2.5053m my problem is that i dont understand why the length of the recirculation zone is that big for the case of the k-epsilon RNG. it is almost the double of the length for the realisable or the standard. if someone has an explanation that would be nice! thanks |
|
June 27, 2004, 15:20 |
Re: turbulent model k-epsilon
|
#2 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Hi, It depends on which model you are using. You have to select apporpriate model for your geometry from the literature available. Each model will treats the N-S equations in different way. So, you should be careful before selecting the Turbulence model.
|
|
June 29, 2004, 14:40 |
Re: turbulent model k-epsilon
|
#3 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Hi there,
I am doing something pretty similar right now. You can look up a paper by Yao, Savill and Sandham (in Flow, Turbulence and Combustion 68, 2002); they compare DNS and RANS for the truncated trailing edge flow. RANS always gave approximatelly half the re-circulation region. This might suggest that the RNG variant is actually closer to the truth. What is more peculiar is that the RNG and the realizable model do not agree well, but instead the realizable agrees with the standard. The solution will also depend on the wall functions used. Are you using the same wall functions in all 3 runs? Are the mesh densities the same? Also since you are using essentially variants of the same model, try using the S-A model or the k-omega model and compare with that as well. Good luck! |
|
July 7, 2004, 08:37 |
Re: turbulent model k-epsilon
|
#4 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
|
|
July 7, 2004, 08:39 |
Re: turbulent model k-epsilon
|
#5 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
|
|
July 25, 2004, 16:51 |
k-epsilon method
|
#6 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Hi Im Surena Norouzi. Im from iran. Im a fluid mechanic engineering. I try to solve internal flow in a gas turbine blade. I must to use the K-Epsilon Method to simulate flow. I use finite difference method to solve Navier Stocks equations. But i have not discreat form of K-Epsilon equation in staggered mesh. please help me. regards
|
|
August 7, 2004, 09:18 |
Re: k-epsilon method
|
#7 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
hello,
My project is also regarding internal flows of a turbine blade. I am trying to find the internal heat transfer coefficints and trying to cool the blade by means of impingement and film cooling. I am dealing with totally conjugat heat transfer. Can you please tell me on what model should i select and what boundary conditions should i apply. You please tell me as to what journals should i refer to or send some if you have already any. thanks Ravi |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Epsilon boundary condition for walls in LamBremhorst LowRe model | maruthamuthu_venkatraman | OpenFOAM | 1 | April 21, 2019 07:25 |
turbulent viscosity in k-e model | orlik | Fluent UDF and Scheme Programming | 1 | July 19, 2017 13:27 |
k-w turbulent model and inflow boundary conditions | vaina74 | Main CFD Forum | 6 | April 26, 2010 07:03 |
Half laminar and turbulent model trying to solve | Andrew Clarke | FLUENT | 5 | May 19, 2008 14:40 |
Doubt about application of RST Turbulent model. | Dolly | Main CFD Forum | 0 | December 12, 2005 04:11 |