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

Development of RANS equations

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

Like Tree1Likes
  • 1 Post By LuckyTran

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old   September 30, 2022, 09:00
Question Development of RANS equations
  #1
New Member
 
Join Date: May 2022
Posts: 14
Rep Power: 2
Boone is on a distinguished road
Hello everyone,

I am learning the RANS equations for incompressible flows. I am not sure to understand the classical development of RANS equations as given in the attached figure.
1) Why eq(4) is simplified compared to eq(3) ?

2) I think that eq(4) is the conservative form of the equation while eq(3) is the non-conservative form. Is that true ?

3) The author introduces a "null term" to obtain eq(4). This null term is u \left[ \frac{\partial u}{\partial x} + \frac{\partial v}{\partial y} \right]. I understand that \frac{\partial v}{\partial y} is equal to 0 if we consider an established flow. However, if \frac{\partial u}{\partial x} is null too it means that this term should then also be null in the left side of eq(3) and eq(4). Am I right ? So why not simplifying it from the begining ?

Thanks !
Attached Images
File Type: jpg tmp.jpg (117.1 KB, 22 views)
Boone is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   September 30, 2022, 10:20
Default
  #2
Senior Member
 
Lucky
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Orlando, FL USA
Posts: 5,145
Rep Power: 61
LuckyTran has a spectacular aura aboutLuckyTran has a spectacular aura aboutLuckyTran has a spectacular aura about
Yeah nothing is being simplified.

(3) is indeed the convective form and (4) would be the conservation form if the derivation is correct. If (3) & (4) is supposed to be the Navier-Stokes then your author has mixed up a u with a v, or a y with an x.

This null term is of course the divergence free incompressibility constraint. The sum must go to zero \left[ \frac{\partial u}{\partial x} + \frac{\partial v}{\partial y} \right]=0, not the individual term \frac{\partial v}{\partial y}=0.
LuckyTran is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   September 30, 2022, 12:03
Default
  #3
Senior Member
 
Filippo Maria Denaro
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 6,290
Rep Power: 67
FMDenaro has a spectacular aura aboutFMDenaro has a spectacular aura aboutFMDenaro has a spectacular aura about
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boone View Post
Hello everyone,

I am learning the RANS equations for incompressible flows. I am not sure to understand the classical development of RANS equations as given in the attached figure.
1) Why eq(4) is simplified compared to eq(3) ?

2) I think that eq(4) is the conservative form of the equation while eq(3) is the non-conservative form. Is that true ?

3) The author introduces a "null term" to obtain eq(4). This null term is u \left[ \frac{\partial u}{\partial x} + \frac{\partial v}{\partial y} \right]. I understand that \frac{\partial v}{\partial y} is equal to 0 if we consider an established flow. However, if \frac{\partial u}{\partial x} is null too it means that this term should then also be null in the left side of eq(3) and eq(4). Am I right ? So why not simplifying it from the begining ?

Thanks !



Where do you find these equations? To be honest, I don't like that...


I suppose they should illustrate the momentum equations in quasi-linear and divergence form but why the diffusive term has only one component?
FMDenaro is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   September 30, 2022, 12:33
Default
  #4
Senior Member
 
Lucky
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Orlando, FL USA
Posts: 5,145
Rep Power: 61
LuckyTran has a spectacular aura aboutLuckyTran has a spectacular aura aboutLuckyTran has a spectacular aura about
Yeah I don't like it either. Either we are not looking at the navier-stokes or this is a really interesting derivation.

Not only is (3) questionable, they should be adding the entire continuity equation and not just the solenoidal condition if they want to go to the conservative form. And even then, where are all the other missing terms...?
FMDenaro likes this.
LuckyTran is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply

Tags
equation, navier-stokes, rans, simplification

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
Solving coupled scalar transport equations in openFoam pavaninguva OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 1 December 28, 2019 09:28
Calculation of the Governing Equations Mihail CFX 7 September 7, 2014 07:27
modelling Differential equations in a udf RikardMNorén Fluent UDF and Scheme Programming 2 October 1, 2013 04:36
Reynolds transport, turbulence model, etc Beginner Main CFD Forum 1 January 7, 2009 06:36
RANS equations Alex CFX 4 May 10, 2005 04:59


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 22:44.