CFD Online Logo CFD Online URL
www.cfd-online.com
[Sponsors]
Home > Forums > General Forums > Main CFD Forum

y+ for realizable k-e model

Register Blogs Community New Posts Updated Threads Search

Like Tree1Likes
  • 1 Post By fluid23

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old   August 17, 2017, 18:56
Post y+ for realizable k-e model
  #1
New Member
 
mohammad mokhtari
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Iran,Tehran
Posts: 2
Rep Power: 0
mohammad-mmm is on a distinguished road
My project is about external flow around tube bundles (2D) . I want to get the Nusselt number around the tubes. Reynolds number is between 6000 & 16000. The model I used is realizable k-e . I want to Know what’s the best mesh around tubes so I need y+ range for my model.

I did a lot of research to find this range, but I have not reached the definitive answer .for example I find a article which used y+<3 for enhance wall treatment and 3<y+<10 for non-equilibrium wall functions.

I have two questions:
1. Is this model good for my geometry.
2. What’s the range of y+ for my model.
My second question is so importand for me.

The y+ that I've got from one of my mesh is between 2 and 15.

Thank you for your suggestions.[/SIZE]
Attached Images
File Type: jpg photo_2017-08-18_03-05-07_800x250.jpg (84.3 KB, 34 views)
mohammad-mmm is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 18, 2017, 15:57
Default
  #2
Senior Member
 
Matt
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 947
Rep Power: 17
fluid23 is on a distinguished road
The y+ range that is acceptable is a product of the near wall model that you are using and not the turbulence model per se. As you noted, there is no DEFINITIVE answer. The article that you mention that has the conditional y+ limits is probably some kind of blended function. The traditional wall model (u+=y+) technically requires y+=1 but is generally considered to be fairly accurate up to y+<5, some people will use y+<3 to give them that warm fuzzy feeling about their results. I would be cautious about having y+<<1 as well. That can cause all kinds of problems as well.

Beyond this value cutoff value, a log law is used to get u+ from y+ in order to close the turbulence equations.

What wall model are you using?
mohammad-mmm likes this.
fluid23 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 19, 2017, 11:41
Default
  #3
New Member
 
mohammad mokhtari
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Iran,Tehran
Posts: 2
Rep Power: 0
mohammad-mmm is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by MBdonCFD View Post
The y+ range that is acceptable is a product of the near wall model that you are using and not the turbulence model per se. As you noted, there is no DEFINITIVE answer. The article that you mention that has the conditional y+ limits is probably some kind of blended function. The traditional wall model (u+=y+) technically requires y+=1 but is generally considered to be fairly accurate up to y+<5, some people will use y+<3 to give them that warm fuzzy feeling about their results. I would be cautious about having y+<<1 as well. That can cause all kinds of problems as well.

Beyond this value cutoff value, a log law is used to get u+ from y+ in order to close the turbulence equations.

What wall model are you using?
The model is realizable k-e and near wall treatment is non-equilibrium wall function
mohammad-mmm is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 21, 2017, 10:17
Default
  #4
Senior Member
 
Matt
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 947
Rep Power: 17
fluid23 is on a distinguished road
For non-equilibrium, I think that 3<y+<10 is not unreasonable.
fluid23 is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply

Tags
range y+ for k-e model, turbulent flow in tube


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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
kklOmega omega boundary condition at the wall - OF3.0 Artur OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 1 June 17, 2016 15:42
Turbulence model choice dave13 CFX 3 December 22, 2015 07:12
problem with solving lagrange reaction cloud Polli OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 0 April 30, 2014 07:53
manualInjection model in sprayFoam Mentalo OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 1 April 2, 2014 09:29
Problems bout CFD model of biomass gasification, Downdraft gasifier wanglong FLUENT 2 November 25, 2009 23:27


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 23:11.