# Reinolds number in SIMPLE method

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

 January 15, 2001, 07:08 Reinolds number in SIMPLE method #1 Marat N. M. Guest   Posts: n/a Hello, I tried to use SIMPLE-algorithm (3D laminar flow), it works fine with Re=1 ( mu=1 ), but when I use higher Reinolds numbers, the code becomes unstable. Is SIMPLE appropriate for high Relnolds number flows? Re=1000-100000 ( mu = 0.001-0.00001 )

 January 15, 2001, 09:44 Re: Reinolds number in SIMPLE method #2 Sebastien Perron Guest   Posts: n/a 1) Do you have introduce any artificial viscosity (upwind scheme) ? It is mandatory for higher Reynolds nnumber flow. 2) Is your relaxation parameter for the p' equation correctly set-up (around 0.5)? 3) Do you use an implicit or explicit scheme?

 January 15, 2001, 10:42 Re: Reinolds number in SIMPLE method #3 Marat N. M. Guest   Posts: n/a 1) Do you have introduce any artificial viscosity (upwind scheme) ? It is mandatory for higher Reynolds nnumber flow. I use QUICK scheme (2nd order of accuracy) and I have not introduced artificial viscosity. If I do so, will my solution be correct and suitable? (Air viscosity is about 10e-5.) And will I obtain a backward flow behind my body (it is a cube) with artificial viscosity? As I realize, artificial viscosity means decreasing Reinolds number. Is that right? 2) Is your relaxation parameter for the p' equation correctly set-up (around 0.5)? The relaxation parameter helps a little (up to Re=10), but with Re=100 my code is still unstable. I also use inertial relaxation, but it does not help. 3) Do you use an implicit or explicit scheme? I consider a steady-state flow.

 January 15, 2001, 11:49 Re: Reinolds number in SIMPLE method #4 Sebastien Perron Guest   Posts: n/a 1) Artificial dissipation is implicity introduced by using any upwinding (such as the QUICK scheme). There was a discussion on artificial dissipation some times ago on this site. For your Reynolds numbers I think the QUICK scheme should be ok (I never used this scheme. This advice is based on some readings I have done. Some people on this board could give better advices on this subject.) Or it can be explicitly introduced (I personnaly think it not a good idea). 2) Is "inertial relaxation" a false time step? (i.e using a time step even with permanent flow). 3) I had similar problems with permanent flow and high Rayleigh numbers. I had to introduce a false time step in order to get a converged solution. 4) Is it your own code? Did you validate your code on some well known problems (flow between two infinit planes, lid-driven flow, backward facing step,etc.. ) There could be a bug in your code. Good luck.

 January 15, 2001, 14:57 Re: Reinolds number in SIMPLE method #5 John C. Chien Guest   Posts: n/a (1). What kind of 3-D problem you are trying to solve? You will have to describe it more clearly first. (2). For Reynolds number=1, how was the Reynolds number defined? and How many grid points or cells were used in the computational domain? Is it 1x1x1, or 10x10x10, or 100X100X100? (3). Assuming that your code is all right, then you can change the mesh size first to see how it affect the solution. (4). If your Reynolds number=1 case is all right, then your Reynolds number=100000 case will probably need 100000 times the mesh size to get a solution. The fact is, Reynolds number changes the solution behavior, and in general it makes the boundary layer thinner. So, in order to capture the correct solution, you will need more mesh point in the right place. (5). This is only one area which you can do some experiment easily.

 January 17, 2001, 12:38 Re: Reinolds number in SIMPLE method #6 guo Guest   Posts: n/a "You will need more mesh points in the right place" means that mesh needs be refined near the wall, is my understanding right? Can we just use wall functions to avoid the cost of refinement? Thank you!

 January 17, 2001, 14:06 Re: Reinolds number in SIMPLE method #7 John C. Chien Guest   Posts: n/a (1). If the flow is nice and clean, yes, normally you can use wall function to avoid expensive calculation near the wall. (2). If you have separated flow situation, no, the wall function is not designed for such condition.

 February 10, 2001, 06:20 Wall function for flow separation region #8 rupa dutta Guest   Posts: n/a Dr. John C Chien For a submerged jet of a newtonian incompressible fluid having low Prandtl (~0.1), impinging on a wall, how should one model the flow near the wall for flow and energy solution. Pls. advice with ref. of books/journals.

 February 10, 2001, 14:39 Re: Wall function for flow separation region #9 John C. Chien Guest   Posts: n/a (1). I don't know.

 Thread Tools Display Modes Linear Mode

 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 OffTrackbacks are On Pingbacks are On Refbacks are On Forum Rules

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post Luiz Eduardo Bittencourt Sampaio (Sampaio) OpenFOAM Mesh Utilities 42 January 8, 2017 13:55 luckyxu Main CFD Forum 6 November 9, 2011 08:17 universez Main CFD Forum 0 February 8, 2010 11:38 michele OpenFOAM Other Meshers: ICEM, Star, Ansys, Pointwise, GridPro, Ansa, ... 2 July 15, 2005 04:15 Abhijit Tilak Main CFD Forum 7 March 20, 2001 01:01

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:30.