# Diffusor testcase

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

 January 30, 2001, 04:09 Diffusor testcase #1 Marat Hoshim Guest   Posts: n/a Hello, I have a question concerning the testcase 8.2 of the 8th ERCOFTAC workshop in Helsinki, 1999. It's a 2D asymmetric diffusor flow. I'm not quite sure about the inlet condition. There's said the inlet condition is a fully developed channel flow with a Reynolds-Number of 20000 based on the centreline velocity and the channel height. Is the centreline velocity the max. velocity of the channel velocity profile ? If my channel has a height of 1m and the fluid is air am I right if the the centreline velocity is: v=Re*vis/rho/height=20000*1.8e-5/1.16/1=0.3134 m/s. In the testcase there was separation but in my calcs there's attached flow. That why I'm so doubtful towards my boundary conditions. Thanks for your help, Marat

 January 30, 2001, 04:56 Re: Diffusor testcase #2 John C. Chien Guest   Posts: n/a (1). I don't know what you do with your calculation, the formulation?, the turbulence model?, etc. (2). The accurate prediction of separated diffuser flow is very difficult, because the existing two-equation k-epsilon turbulence model performs poorly in adverse-pressure gradient conditions, which exists in diffuser flows.

 January 30, 2001, 05:06 Re: Diffusor testcase #3 Marat Hoshim Guest   Posts: n/a Hi John, thanks for your advise. But what's your opinion towards my two questions ? Regards, Marat

 January 30, 2001, 10:32 Re: Diffusor testcase #4 sylvain Guest   Posts: n/a > Is the centreline velocity the max. velocity of the channel velocity profile ? The answer is yes. >If my channel has a height of 1m and the fluid is air am I right if the the centreline velocity is: > v=Re*vis/rho/height=20000*1.8e-5/1.16/1=0.3134 m/s. The answer is yes again. > In the testcase there was separation but in my calcs there's attached flow. As John said, this is a very difficult test case for turbulence models (so it's a good one in fact). I'm not so surprise that the numerical result doesn't show the correct behavior. The proceedings of this workshop show how it was difficult to correctly predict the recircultaion zone.

 January 30, 2001, 13:42 Re: Diffusor testcase #5 frederic felten Guest   Posts: n/a hi there, i don't exactly know all the details of your calculation, but you should be able to find some very usefull informations in the following publication: H.-J. Kaltenbach, M. Fatica, R. Mittal , T. S. Lund, and P. Moin. "Study of flow in a planar asymmetric diffuser using Large Eddy Simulation" J. Fluid Mech. 390, 151-185, 1999. I hope this helps. Sincerely, Frederic Felten CFD Lab, UT Arlington. http://utacfdb.uta.edu/

 January 30, 2001, 14:11 Re: Diffusor testcase #6 John C. Chien Guest   Posts: n/a (1). I don't see anything wrong with the maximum centerline velocity, if it is fully-developend. Sometimes, people use the averaged inlet velocity. (2). My estimate of the velocity is around 1m/sec, which is close to your number.

 January 31, 2001, 03:18 Re: Diffusor testcase #7 Marat Hoshim Guest   Posts: n/a John, your estimate is around 1m/sec. But that 3 times higher than my estimate ! Where does that difference come from ? Regards, Marat

 January 31, 2001, 05:38 Re: Diffusor testcase #8 John C. Chien Guest   Posts: n/a (1). It comes from my estimate of the kinematic viscosity of the air.

 January 31, 2001, 12:51 Re: Diffusor testcase #9 Marat Hoshim Guest   Posts: n/a So, what is your estimate for the kinematic viscosity of air ? Regards, Marat

 January 31, 2001, 16:15 Re: Diffusor testcase #10 John C. Chien Guest   Posts: n/a (1).In the book of Boundary Layer Theory, by Schlichting, the kinematic viscosity of air at 68degreeF, 14.7psi, is 160x10E-06 FT*FT/SEC. (2). You get 3.2 FT/SEC when U is calculated from U=Re*nu/L, with RE=20,000. So, U is around 1m/sec.

 February 1, 2001, 11:48 Re: Diffusor testcase #11 sylvain Guest   Posts: n/a I'm sorry, but you get U=3.2 FT/SEC if L=1FT but if L=1m=3.2FT, it comes U=0.097FT/SEC, which leads to U=0.31m/s. Best regards, Sylvain

 February 1, 2001, 13:04 Eureka! #12 John C. Chien Guest   Posts: n/a (1). I think, you are right. (2). That's why I said, it was an estimate. It's important to double check the result. Thank you. By now everybody knows how to compute the Reynolds number.

 February 12, 2001, 13:27 Re: Diffusor testcase #13 clifford bradford Guest   Posts: n/a Marat, as John pointed out your issue is probably with your turbulence model. I guess you're using k-e (because it's so popular) unfortunately k-e is known to be poor for adverse pressure gradients. you may want to use the k-omega. See David Wilcox's "Turbulence Modelling for CFD"

 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

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 00:12.