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

Particles following the flow trajectory

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

Like Tree10Likes

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old   December 26, 2020, 11:07
Default Particles following the flow trajectory
  #1
New Member
 
Shabi
Join Date: Dec 2020
Posts: 16
Rep Power: 5
Shabi is on a distinguished road
Consider a simple 2D channel where the flow enters the domain from one side with the inlet velocity boundary condition with a constant value and it forms a boundary layer.

1) If i add many number of particles consistently to the inlet and neglect all inertial forces and let it to follow the flow trajectories, is it true that the volume fraction of the particle in the domain (C) is the solution of the advection equation, dC/dt + div (vC) = 0? If so,

2) If the inlet boundary condition for C is the constant value of 1, we know that in the steady state whole domain will be filled with the uniform value of C=1. But, it contradicts with what we expect with the particle case. Because if we add particles to the inlet consistently, because of the boundary layer, we expect a non-uniform value for the volume fraction in the steady state, because it is not possible to have a uniform distribution of particles in the domain in the steady state.

Thank you in advance for sharing your ideas.
Shabi is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   December 26, 2020, 11:54
Default
  #2
Senior Member
 
Lucky
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Orlando, FL USA
Posts: 5,664
Rep Power: 65
LuckyTran has a spectacular aura aboutLuckyTran has a spectacular aura aboutLuckyTran has a spectacular aura about
1) Yes


2) Recall conservation laws. If you add C=1 at the inlet, and there are no sources/sinks, then C=1 everywhere.
Shabi likes this.
LuckyTran is online now   Reply With Quote

Old   January 4, 2021, 07:08
Default
  #3
New Member
 
Shabi
Join Date: Dec 2020
Posts: 16
Rep Power: 5
Shabi is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyTran View Post
1) Yes


2) Recall conservation laws. If you add C=1 at the inlet, and there are no sources/sinks, then C=1 everywhere.
Thanks. But how the particles can go to the area in the domain where the streamline is nearly zero? assume we have a solid circle in the middle of the domain and we have a moderate Reynolds number (no vortex behind the circle). So how the particles can fill the area behind the circle?
Shabi is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 4, 2021, 10:26
Default
  #4
agd
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 351
Rep Power: 18
agd is on a distinguished road
If you have a boundary layer in the channel, then wouldn't there be gradients of the velocity near the walls? and wouldn't these gradients affect the distribution of C, so that your distribution is not uniform in the steady state?
agd is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 4, 2021, 18:31
Default
  #5
q__
New Member
 
q
Join Date: Sep 2020
Posts: 19
Rep Power: 5
q__ is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shabi View Post

2) If the inlet boundary condition for C is the constant value of 1, we know that in the steady state whole domain will be filled with the uniform value of C=1. But, it contradicts with what we expect with the particle case. Because if we add particles to the inlet consistently, because of the boundary layer, we expect a non-uniform value for the volume fraction in the steady state, because it is not possible to have a uniform distribution of particles in the domain in the steady state.

Thank you in advance for sharing your ideas.

How do you imagine particles while injecting just a single phase defining c=1 at the inlet? There is no distribution of c since there is only one phase.
q__ is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 5, 2021, 04:29
Default
  #6
Senior Member
 
Filippo Maria Denaro
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 6,762
Rep Power: 71
FMDenaro has a spectacular aura aboutFMDenaro has a spectacular aura aboutFMDenaro has a spectacular aura about
Quote:
Originally Posted by q__ View Post
How do you imagine particles while injecting just a single phase defining c=1 at the inlet? There is no distribution of c since there is only one phase.



You are wrong, the particle injection obeys to the lagrangian equation Dc/Dt=0 in a single phase, that is each particle follows a trajectori.
In a divergence free velocity field, the eulerian equation counterpart is dc/dt+ div(vc)=0, if you integrate over the domain and apply Gauss, you see at the steady state that the inlet of c is balanced by the outlet of c.
At the steady state (if exists), the trajectory and the streamlines are the same and c is constant along the streamline in the BL.
aero_head likes this.
FMDenaro is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 5, 2021, 04:45
Default
  #7
q__
New Member
 
q
Join Date: Sep 2020
Posts: 19
Rep Power: 5
q__ is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by FMDenaro View Post
You are wrong, the particle injection obeys to the lagrangian equation Dc/Dt=0 in a single phase, that is each particle follows a trajectori.
In a divergence free velocity field, the eulerian equation counterpart is dc/dt+ div(vc)=0, if you integrate over the domain and apply Gauss, you see at the steady state that the inlet of c is balanced by the outlet of c.
At the steady state (if exists), the trajectory and the streamlines are the same and c is constant along the streamline in the BL.

I did not find the claim that he injects particles. Just assumes c=1 on the inlet.
q__ is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 5, 2021, 04:47
Default
  #8
Senior Member
 
Filippo Maria Denaro
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 6,762
Rep Power: 71
FMDenaro has a spectacular aura aboutFMDenaro has a spectacular aura aboutFMDenaro has a spectacular aura about
Quote:
Originally Posted by q__ View Post
I did not find the claim that he injects particles. Just assumes c=1 on the inlet.
See the title of the post
FMDenaro is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 5, 2021, 04:50
Default
  #9
q__
New Member
 
q
Join Date: Sep 2020
Posts: 19
Rep Power: 5
q__ is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by FMDenaro View Post
See the title of the post


Yes, I saw it. As can be seen I explicitly referred my reply to that statement:


"2) If the inlet boundary condition for C is the constant value of 1, we know that in the steady state whole domain will be filled with the uniform value of C=1. But it contradicts with what we expect with the particle case... "


Of course, it contradicts. So where am I wrong?
q__ is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 5, 2021, 05:15
Default
  #10
Senior Member
 
Filippo Maria Denaro
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 6,762
Rep Power: 71
FMDenaro has a spectacular aura aboutFMDenaro has a spectacular aura aboutFMDenaro has a spectacular aura about
Quote:
Originally Posted by q__ View Post

Yes, I saw it. As can be seen I explicitly referred my reply to that statement:


"2) If the inlet boundary condition for C is the constant value of 1, we know that in the steady state whole domain will be filled with the uniform value of C=1. But it contradicts with what we expect with the particle case... "


Of course, it contradicts. So where am I wrong?

No contradiction... consider for example the analytic solution for the Poiseulle case.
Immagine a uniform distribution of particles at the inlet and let them evolve until the particles reach the outlet. The particles close to a wall will have a slower velocity but they will finally reach the outlet so that all the domain is full of particles. The solution is steady and uniform. Of course, this model does not take into account a finite size of the particles.
Now consider the Eulerian counterpart dc/dt+div (vc)=0. The uniform distribution of particles can be obtained by setting the uniform value c=1 at the inlet. Again if you wait until the transient is ended the final solution will show c=1 everywhere. There is no diffusion and no compressibility effects to change this value.
aero_head and Shabi like this.
FMDenaro is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 5, 2021, 05:26
Default
  #11
Senior Member
 
Filippo Maria Denaro
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 6,762
Rep Power: 71
FMDenaro has a spectacular aura aboutFMDenaro has a spectacular aura aboutFMDenaro has a spectacular aura about
Many many years ago I worked on this problem


https://www.researchgate.net/publica...mental_results
aero_head and Shabi like this.
FMDenaro is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 21, 2021, 17:57
Default
  #12
New Member
 
Shabi
Join Date: Dec 2020
Posts: 16
Rep Power: 5
Shabi is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by FMDenaro View Post
No contradiction... consider for example the analytic solution for the Poiseulle case.
Immagine a uniform distribution of particles at the inlet and let them evolve until the particles reach the outlet. The particles close to a wall will have a slower velocity but they will finally reach the outlet so that all the domain is full of particles. The solution is steady and uniform. Of course, this model does not take into account a finite size of the particles.
Now consider the Eulerian counterpart dc/dt+div (vc)=0. The uniform distribution of particles can be obtained by setting the uniform value c=1 at the inlet. Again if you wait until the transient is ended the final solution will show c=1 everywhere. There is no diffusion and no compressibility effects to change this value.
I can imagine that the whole domain is filled with particles in the steady state. But is the volume fraction of particles near the wall is same as the volume fraction in the middle of the domain?
Or lets formulate like this. Assume that we don't have a constant inlet velocity (we have e.g. a parabolic one) and then if we inject the particles uniformly, we can clearly see the difference between the volume fraction of the particles near the inlet. However, if we solve the advection equation, we see the uniform constant value of C in the steady state in the whole domain...
Shabi is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 22, 2021, 04:53
Default
  #13
Senior Member
 
Filippo Maria Denaro
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 6,762
Rep Power: 71
FMDenaro has a spectacular aura aboutFMDenaro has a spectacular aura aboutFMDenaro has a spectacular aura about
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shabi View Post
I can imagine that the whole domain is filled with particles in the steady state. But is the volume fraction of particles near the wall is same as the volume fraction in the middle of the domain?
Or lets formulate like this. Assume that we don't have a constant inlet velocity (we have e.g. a parabolic one) and then if we inject the particles uniformly, we can clearly see the difference between the volume fraction of the particles near the inlet. However, if we solve the advection equation, we see the uniform constant value of C in the steady state in the whole domain...
What do you mean exactly for volume fraction? Using the passive lagrangian transport you are assuming that the particles are masseless and have no dimension.
Shabi likes this.
FMDenaro is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 22, 2021, 06:41
Default
  #14
New Member
 
Shabi
Join Date: Dec 2020
Posts: 16
Rep Power: 5
Shabi is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by FMDenaro View Post
What do you mean exactly for volume fraction? Using the passive lagrangian transport you are assuming that the particles are masseless and have no dimension.
I mean the number of particles in an specific volume size. For example, by a finite volume mesh descritization, if all mesh cells have the same volume size, the number of particles in the cells near the inlet located in the height of y=0.1h is different than the number of particles located in the height of y=0.5h (assuming a parabolic inlet velocity profile) .
But if we solve the advection equation exactly with the same configuration, we will get the same value of "C" in the whole domain.
Shabi is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 22, 2021, 11:24
Default
  #15
Senior Member
 
Filippo Maria Denaro
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 6,762
Rep Power: 71
FMDenaro has a spectacular aura aboutFMDenaro has a spectacular aura aboutFMDenaro has a spectacular aura about
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shabi View Post
I mean the number of particles in an specific volume size. For example, by a finite volume mesh descritization, if all mesh cells have the same volume size, the number of particles in the cells near the inlet located in the height of y=0.1h is different than the number of particles located in the height of y=0.5h (assuming a parabolic inlet velocity profile) .
But if we solve the advection equation exactly with the same configuration, we will get the same value of "C" in the whole domain.



But you are considering from a side a discrete particle representation and on the other a continuous representation of the convection discretized on a grid. What you see in the latter case is the same phenomenology, only differently represented.
Shabi likes this.
FMDenaro is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 23, 2021, 17:21
Default
  #16
New Member
 
Shabi
Join Date: Dec 2020
Posts: 16
Rep Power: 5
Shabi is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by FMDenaro View Post
But you are considering from a side a discrete particle representation and on the other a continuous representation of the convection discretized on a grid. What you see in the latter case is the same phenomenology, only differently represented.
Thanks and sorry for lots of questions. I hope it is the last one:
What we know so far:
1) The number of particles in some area per unit volume is more than other area.
2) the scalar field 'C' is constant everywhere in the steady state.

Recalling the start of this topic, i wanted to understand the relation between the volume fraction of the particles and the scalar field 'C'.
I think if 1 and 2 is correct, the only explanation for this conflict is that the number of particles per unit volume does not represent the volume fraction. I hope i could clarify my question. you say that the convection discretized on a grid is the same phenomenology. But, the number of particles per unit volume is not constant, whereas 'C' is constant everywhere.

Last edited by Shabi; January 24, 2021 at 06:18.
Shabi is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 24, 2021, 07:32
Default
  #17
Senior Member
 
Lefteris
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 337
Rep Power: 15
Aeronautics El. K. is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shabi View Post
Thanks and sorry for lots of questions. I hope it is the last one:
What we know so far:
1) The number of particles in some area per unit volume is more than other area.
2) the scalar field 'C' is constant everywhere in the steady state.

Recalling the start of this topic, i wanted to understand the relation between the volume fraction of the particles and the scalar field 'C'.
I think if 1 and 2 is correct, the only explanation for this conflict is that the number of particles per unit volume does not represent the volume fraction. I hope i could clarify my question. you say that the convection discretized on a grid is the same phenomenology. But, the number of particles per unit volume is not constant, whereas 'C' is constant everywhere.
Having read through the whole post here, I still don't understand if you're referring to single phase flow or multiphase flow.
I can't make sense of what you're asking.
Would you like to clarify this please?
FMDenaro likes this.
__________________
Lefteris

Aeronautics El. K. is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 24, 2021, 08:19
Default
  #18
New Member
 
Shabi
Join Date: Dec 2020
Posts: 16
Rep Power: 5
Shabi is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aeronautics El. K. View Post
Having read through the whole post here, I still don't understand if you're referring to single phase flow or multiphase flow.
I can't make sense of what you're asking.
Would you like to clarify this please?
It is a single phase flow. I would like to resemble the continuous scalar field 'C' by 'very small particles'. We can imagine the particle as 'fluid parcels'.
What is clear is how a advection equation is solved. Assuming that the inlet boundary condition of C is 1, we know that in the steady state C is 1 in the whole domain. So, i would like to resemble this process with very small particles, i.e., transport very small particles and make them to follow the flow trajectories. Those particles are not going to have any influence on the flow. They only follow the flow trajectories. Similar to what the continuous scalar field 'C' does. if the number of my particles reaches infinity, i expect to converge to the continuous field 'C'.
Shabi is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 24, 2021, 08:28
Default
  #19
Senior Member
 
Lefteris
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 337
Rep Power: 15
Aeronautics El. K. is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shabi View Post
It is a single phase flow. I would like to resemble the continuous scalar field 'C' by 'very small particles'. We can imagine the particle as 'fluid parcels'.
What is clear is how a advection equation is solved. Assuming that the inlet boundary condition of C is 1, we know that in the steady state C is 1 in the whole domain. So, i would like to resemble this process with very small particles, i.e., transport very small particles and make them to follow the flow trajectories. Those particles are not going to have any influence on the flow. They only follow the flow trajectories. Similar to what the continuous scalar field 'C' does. if the number of my particles reaches infinity, i expect to converge to the continuous field 'C'.
Pardon my ignorance but that's essentially a Lattice-Boltzmann method, no?
__________________
Lefteris

Aeronautics El. K. is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 24, 2021, 08:34
Default
  #20
New Member
 
Shabi
Join Date: Dec 2020
Posts: 16
Rep Power: 5
Shabi is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aeronautics El. K. View Post
Pardon my ignorance but that's essentially a Lattice-Boltzmann method, no?
I am not sure, actually i am not doing any real simulation using any method. It is more related to understanding the basics. I saw the conflict here, and i cannot find the answer for that. We are in an incompressible flow. 'C' fills the domain gradually and in the steady state we get a uniform distribution of 'C'. And it is what we expect from the advection equation and the incompressibility. So, why can't we repeat this process with infinite number of tiny 'massless' particles?
Shabi is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply

Tags
advection equation, particle concentration, transport equation, volume fraction.

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
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 Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Will the results of steady state solver and transient solver be same? carye OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 9 December 28, 2019 05:21
How to simulate particles in a gas flow sara OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 13 October 8, 2019 05:12
Choosing a solver to model particles at rest in a flow field Nigel Bruce Khan OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 0 March 22, 2019 08:35
Particles in the flow nissen21 Fluent Multiphase 5 May 21, 2014 19:21
Interpolate particles together with flow asal FLUENT 0 March 30, 2014 14:22


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:42.