CFD Online Discussion Forums (https://www.cfd-online.com/Forums/)
-   Main CFD Forum (https://www.cfd-online.com/Forums/main/)
-   -   need help on 3D meshing of flat-back airfoil (https://www.cfd-online.com/Forums/main/64484-need-help-3d-meshing-flat-back-airfoil.html)

 LSC May 13, 2009 00:08

need help on 3D meshing of flat-back airfoil

The airfoil profile that I am meshing does not end with a common vertex at the trailing edge. It has a equal finite thickness for both upper and lower surface. I have followed the tutorials from Cornell. At the trailing edge, I have 3 vertex with 2 being the end points at the trailing edge and 1 at the center(y=0). My problem is with the 2 separate edges connecting the domain and the edge on the trailing edges. I tried using grid spacing with y+ =1 but encountered problems running the solver..I am actually doing 2D analysis but CFX only solves 3D..How to tackle the region? http://i725.photobucket.com/albums/w.../untitled6.jpg

 jchawner May 16, 2009 09:05

It seems to me that you need more than 3 points on the blunt trailing edge. By using only 3 points you have a huge spacing jump across the wake region thru the boundary layer mesh into the blunt-wake mesh.

My suggestion for the blunt trailing edge is to cluster points to the top and bottom using the same spacing as to the airfoil surface and put enough points on the TE to have a smooth variation in cell sizes.

Hope this helps.

 LSC May 16, 2009 09:10

Thanks a lot for the suggestion..will try it out

And why do you aim for y+=1 at the trailing edge? This gives you a huge spacing jump also in the flow direction. IMHO it's better to take the length of the first cell in the wake equal to the length of the last cell at the surface

 LSC May 18, 2009 05:40

I am trying to investigate whether a grid spacing corresponding to Y+=1 would give me more accurate results for Lift and Drag Coefficient.. The blunt trailing edge certainly posed a lot of problems and I am trying very hard to figure how to mesh the wake region..What I tried was to put more nodes in the wake region which grid spacing equal to the surface node which increasing grid size towards the centerline..not sure whether this is the best approach..kindly advice