
[Sponsors] 
March 10, 2004, 14:14 
Wall functions?

#1 
Guest
Posts: n/a

I have question What is the use of wall functions? Pr


March 10, 2004, 21:12 
Re: Wall functions?

#2 
Guest
Posts: n/a

The answer of this question can be found in any CFD book.


March 11, 2004, 03:47 
Re: Wall functions?

#3 
Guest
Posts: n/a

Below is a brief explanation  more details may be found in textbooks and on the web.
When you do not use wall functions, you should have several cells within the viscous sublayer. For high Re, this requires a very fine grid near walls. The wallfunction concept is to overcome this difficulty by locating the first offwall cell outside the viscous sublayer, with its center y+ above 30. It is accomplished by using the standard lawofthe wall profiles. 

March 11, 2004, 06:33 
Re: Wall functions?

#4 
Guest
Posts: n/a

So I guess it is technique by which you can optimize your meshing near wall. Pr


March 11, 2004, 11:48 
Re: Wall functions?

#5 
Guest
Posts: n/a

Pr Enjoy your ignorance ! Good Luck !


March 11, 2004, 13:31 
Re: Wall functions?

#6 
Guest
Posts: n/a

I do not get you amv. Pr


March 16, 2004, 05:39 
Re: Wall functions?

#7 
Guest
Posts: n/a

Hi there,
True, you can say that you optimize the mesh, but I would rather say that you reduce the meshsize. Use wall functions sparsely, as they make severe simplifications on the physiscs.... Regards Jonas 

April 8, 2004, 07:15 
Re: Wall functions?

#8 
Guest
Posts: n/a

Exactly. Expanding on other posts here I present the following:
I.) Motivation and Situations A.) 2equation model B.) Wall boundedflows C.) Need B.C.'s for velocity, k, and D.) Many 2 eqn. models fail to predict the law of the wall constant, C, satisfactorily E.) Consequently one CANNOT apply noslip B.C., integrate through the viscous sublayer (y > 0), and expect to yield satisfactory results for predicting the loglayer solution II.) One method for 2Equation Wall Treatment is the use of wall functions ("a matching procedure") – HIGH REYNOLDS APPROACH  Simply matching to the law of the wall using a suitable value of C WALL FUNCTIONS III.) "Law of the Wall" as the Constitutive Relation A.) Generally, it is a constitutive relation between velocity and shear stress 1.) The velocity we are focusing on is that for the "matching point" 2.) "Matching point" relates to the mesh point closest to the surface or the first point outside the viscous sublayer. B.) More specifically, it is a transcendental equation for the friction velocity and hence shear stress (see Turbulence Modeling textbooks like that of Wilcox) C.) Assumptions to wall functions 1.) constant pressure boundary layer 2.) incompressible boundary layer 3.) far from the case of internal combustion engine flows!!! IV.) a.) It's empirical b.) Near wall cell placement 1.) Placed in regions where the underlying hypothesis of the 2eqn. models are satisfied 2.) In the loglaw region where turbulent Reynolds number is > 150 === Why Wall Functions Need to Be Used With Caution === A.) Assumptions to wall functions do not hold for many practical flows 1.) constant pressure boundary layer 2.) incompressible boundary layer B.) Cannot predict the computational domain to fit the high Reynolds number approach in complex flows 1.) High Reynolds number approach requirement y+ between 30 and 100 inclusive 2.) Those velocities are tough to predict > tough to predict proper grid resolution 3.) Even if local velocity measurements were available, it is not feasible to satisfy the high Reynolds number requirement a.) Complex flows > wide range of velocities throughout domain b.) Separation, curvature, rotation, or stagnation points occur throughout the domain c.) Even if alternative formulations of wall functions are used, they cannot escape the strongest limitation of wall functions i.) Namely, that is the evaluation of y+ based on friction velocity ii.) In complex flows (e.g., separated and recirculating flows), friction velocity varies locally throughout the domain iii.) In separated flow, fric. vel. changes sign!!! iv.) The changeover of sign of fric. vel. implies it is less than or equal to zero. Also note that omega and epsilon in the 2 eqn. models are odd functions of fric. vel. and omega and epsilon are positive definite quantities. v.) A neg. fric. velocity > y+ < 0 which is clearly not feasible C.) Turbulence anisotropy which characterizes near boundary regimes are neglected as well  Significant lack of accuracy D.) Very sensitive to the choice of the first grid point from the wall 1.) Calculations of Pattjin, S., "Niet lineaire, laagReynolds, tweevergelijkingen turbulentiemodellen", Ph.D. Thesis, Universiteit Gent, 1999. 2.) He/she mentioned that the first grid point must be located at y+ between 40 and 50 inclusive to get agreement with DNSdata 3.) y+ > 50 can lead to discrepancies E.) Therefore wall functions provide totally nonsense results for complex flows  more accurate alternatives are the lowReynolds and twolayer approach for these cases 

Thread Tools  Search this Thread 
Display Modes  


Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Modelling Turbulent Wall Functions  victorwfreire  CFX  11  January 14, 2015 16:48 
LES with wall functions, wall boundary, Re 10000  subba  CFX  4  July 10, 2007 06:04 
Wall Functions  pierre  OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD  0  October 1, 2005 14:13 
Wall functions  iterative approach  agg  Main CFD Forum  1  May 13, 2005 13:25 
LES wall functions  barrat  Main CFD Forum  10  September 1, 2004 09:29 