CFD Online Logo CFD Online URL
Home > Forums > Main CFD Forum

Random walk models

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

LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   August 12, 1999, 10:15
Default Random walk models
Hesham El-Batsh
Posts: n/a
I am simulating particle dispersion due to turbulence in the boundary layer using random walk models available in FLUENT. Part of the boundary layer is laminar flow and in this part, I would like to set the turbulent kinetic energy to zero to ignore the effect of turbulent fluctuating velocity in the particle movement. Could someone tell me whether this assumption is correct or not. Do you know some materials concerning the value of turbulent kinetic energy in the laminar boundary layer and its distribution as a function of wall units Y+.
  Reply With Quote

Old   August 12, 1999, 10:50
Default Re: Random walk models
Joern Beilke
Posts: n/a
Rüdiger Schwarze ( did a lot of work in his field.

Particle tracking in the boundary layer is much more complicated than one expets is at first. So just try to get some answer from him.
  Reply With Quote

Old   August 12, 1999, 11:12
Default Re: Random walk models
John C. Chien
Posts: n/a
(1). There is no laminar flow in a turbulent boundary layer. (2). The region next to the wall is called "viscous sub-layer". (3). Most CFD papers on turbulence modeling should have TKE profile plotted,especially in the near wall region.
  Reply With Quote

Old   August 12, 1999, 11:22
Default Re: Random walk models
Sung-Eun Kim
Posts: n/a

Part of any turbulent boundary layer, i.e., the so-called "viscous sublayer", is always effectively laminar due to near-wall effects, mostly damping. In fact, the wall effects are felt even beyond the viscous sublayer and this "less" turbulent region is called "buffer layer". The question is whether you want to resolve or skip the viscosity-effected near-wall region. Your idea is practical and I understand what's on your mind, considering your situation. But unfortunately, we can't arbitrarily set turbulent kinetic energy to zero there, primarily because near-wall turbulence feels the wall effects gradually, and because we can hardly say we know a priori how to demarcate the viscosity-affected region, especially if the flow in question is complicated.

If your flow is such that you ought to resolve the near-wall, instead of skipping it (i.e., relying upon wall function), I would rather suggest that you try the two-layer model in FLUENT 5. The two-layer near-wall model allows you to resolve the viscosity-affected near-wall region all the way down to walls. FLUENT itself, not you, will figure out where the viscosity effects are dominant over turbulence and adjust turbulence (turbulent viscosity, turbulence length scale, etc.) accordingly.

All you have to do is to throw in lots of mesh so that you can resolve the near-wall region and activate the two-layer model in the "Define"/"Model"/'Viscous" panel. But if you want to know what FLUENT internally does, please take a look at the on-line user's guide. Please find the "help" in the main menu bar inside FLUENT and click on "Turbulence Models", "Near-Wall Treatments for Turbulent Wall-bounded Flows", and "Two-Layer Zonal Model" in the order shown here.
  Reply With Quote


Thread Tools
Display Modes

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 On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
LPT random walk Edison_Ge OpenFOAM Programming & Development 2 September 9, 2016 08:49
Continuous Random Walk model (turbulence dispersion modeling of particles) mittal FLUENT 0 December 2, 2010 14:28
Incompressible Turbulence models achinta OpenFOAM 4 May 27, 2010 10:35
Two-fluid models vs mixture models for bubbly flows Hansong Tang Main CFD Forum 6 December 8, 2009 04:21
CFD models Xie Main CFD Forum 0 April 18, 2002 13:48

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:42.