|
[Sponsors] |
May 17, 2015, 05:24 |
Inviscid transonic flow over circular bump
|
#1 |
Senior Member
Ashwani
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Hyderabad
Posts: 154
Rep Power: 13 |
Dear all,
I was simulating the inviscid flow over circular bump (10% height) for M=0.675 (transonic regime). The problem I am facing is that I am not getting a proper match for the mach number plot along the lower bump wall at downstream. The plot is attached below. I have used subsonic outflow boundary condition (Whitfield'84 et al). I am using total pressure boundary condition at inflow. The walls have slip condition. it is a density-based solver, with roe scheme. The spatial accuracy is 2nd order, with minmod and Venkatkrishnan limiter. Can anyone please help. Did somebody also got such difference? Also, I want to ask as far as I have seen most transonic bump cases has been reported using pressure-based solver. Is that one reason for such difference. I am also attaching the Mach contours. Thanks for going through this post. M675.jpg machcnt.jpg |
|
May 18, 2015, 00:32 |
|
#2 |
Senior Member
Martin Hegedus
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 500
Rep Power: 19 |
I suspect it's the numerical dissipation which is adding additional entropy. I would suggest running at a lower Mach number such that at shock does not exist. That will remove the entropy generated by the shock. Then try adding more grid points. I suspect the "wake" will disappear to some extent. However, to some degree it will always be there. To remove it you might need to go to a higher order less dissipative method.
|
|
May 19, 2015, 08:52 |
|
#3 |
Senior Member
Ashwani
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Hyderabad
Posts: 154
Rep Power: 13 |
Thanks for your reply. I would run the lower mach number and report for the same. We are understanding that since we are using AUSM i.e. an upwind scheme we are getting such dissipation downstream. I have ran the similar cases with MacCormack Scheme (Central scheme), there I got a better match at the downstream. Is it the something same with pressure based solver, because of which dissipation is less their?
|
|
May 19, 2015, 12:02 |
|
#4 |
Senior Member
Martin Hegedus
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 500
Rep Power: 19 |
I'm not familiar with pressure based schemes, but how one iterates towards steady state should not effect the amount of dissipation at steady state. If the pressure based scheme uses a different discretization method, then yes the amount dissipation could be different.
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Particle deposition on circular cylinder in turbulent flow | Julian K. | CFX | 1 | October 3, 2011 18:51 |
Transonic flow over a bump | A.D.E | Main CFD Forum | 4 | July 8, 2011 08:25 |
Total pressures; Transonic flow | Louwrens | CFX | 9 | April 19, 2003 19:01 |
Inviscid flow calculator, Entropy rise?!! | MJK | Main CFD Forum | 3 | April 9, 2003 04:36 |
Inviscid flow | Atit Koonsrisuk | CFX | 12 | January 2, 2003 13:40 |