# Area weighted or mass weighted average

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

 October 1, 2004, 04:01 Area weighted or mass weighted average #1 SAM Guest   Posts: n/a I wonder wat is difference b/w the area weighted and mass weighted average values of any varaible. and which one is better to use and in what type of situations Regards

 October 1, 2004, 08:33 Re: Area weighted or mass weighted average #2 Apurva Guest   Posts: n/a Hi, For pressure use area weighted averaged value. For rest mass averaged is fine. Thanks Apurva sircorp, silviliril, Gerhard and 2 others like this.

 October 1, 2004, 10:55 Re: Area weighted or mass weighted average #3 Jon Guest   Posts: n/a Won't this depend on the profile through your boundary? If you want ave vel. you want area ave, if you want ave. temp. you will want Mf ave. sircorp likes this.

 October 2, 2004, 17:44 Re: Area weighted or mass weighted average #4 centaur_ks Guest   Posts: n/a consult. "Computational Fluid Dynamics" - T J Chung. This things are better explained in that. hope this helps

 October 4, 2004, 02:55 Re: Area weighted or mass weighted average #5 Jan Rusås Guest   Posts: n/a For incompressible flow it is physical correct to use mass average for the pressure. For velocities you should use area weighted. You can also do a search in the forum, it has been discussed before.

 October 4, 2004, 03:21 Re: Area weighted or mass weighted average #6 sam Guest   Posts: n/a thank i will look into it but any body else can give me more suggestion , coz my experience says that both normally gives same resutls

 October 4, 2004, 03:33 Re: Area weighted or mass weighted average #7 Junseok Kim Guest   Posts: n/a Take a look at below paper. Junseok INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR NUMERICAL METHODS IN FLUIDS Int. J. Numer. Meth. Fluids 2003; 41:551560 (DOI: 10.1002/d.455) Interfacial transfer in Tryggvason's method Joel H. Ferziger∗;  Department of Mechanical Engineering; Stanford University; Stanford CA; U.S.A. SUMMARY Tryggvason's method computes two phase ows by smoothing the regions near the boundaries between the two uids. This requires averaging of the uid properties, which may dier by orders of magnitude and can lead to large errors. Traditional linear averaging produces a rst order error that can be extremely large. In this paper, we show that for a number of simple test cases, averaging of the inverses of the properties can lead to a signicant improvement in the quality of the results.

 October 4, 2004, 04:31 Re: Area weighted or mass weighted average #8 Jan Rusås Guest   Posts: n/a Regarding the average methode for pressure, you can find that from the energy equation. It should actually be volume flow averaged, but if the density is constant you can use mass flow average. Only if the velocity is near constant, same mass flow at each position, will result in same value for mass flow and area average. sircorp and haitham osman like this.

 October 4, 2004, 05:29 Re: Area weighted or mass weighted average #9 Jon Guest   Posts: n/a If the flow is reasonably spatially constant w.r.t. the variable you are intersted in AND the velocity then both will be similar. If not, see above.

 October 4, 2004, 09:33 Re: Area weighted or mass weighted average #10 sam Guest   Posts: n/a in fluent how can we take the inverse (as stated in above mentioned paper ) I will grateful to u for ur help Regards

 October 4, 2004, 09:35 Re: Area weighted or mass weighted average #11 sam Guest   Posts: n/a can u send me papers or any refernce in fluent users guide .

 October 4, 2004, 11:42 Re: Area weighted or mass weighted average #12 Junseok Kim Guest   Posts: n/a I don't use fluent.

 October 5, 2004, 02:30 Re: Area weighted or mass weighted average #13 sam Guest   Posts: n/a OR DO U HAVE ANY REFERECNE

 October 14, 2004, 07:00 Re: Area weighted or mass weighted average #14 deepesh nanda Guest   Posts: n/a Dear friend, U use area weighted avg. when ever u r using incompressible flow. The reason is that the density of the fuild is constant from inlet to outlet and hence area weigh. avg. will do. But for incompressible flow the density vary with temp and pressure and hence during that time u should used mass weight avg. All the best. with regards deepesh

 October 14, 2004, 11:59 Re: Area weighted or mass weighted average #15 SAM Guest   Posts: n/a thanks for ur reply but i have to give reason for this in my thesis , could u please give some references i will be grateful to u regards

 October 16, 2004, 07:53 Re: Area weighted or mass weighted average #16 deepesh Guest   Posts: n/a Buddy, If u r using fluent software then u can go to the fluent help file where they clearly give the difference and the reason for the same. By chance if u do not have the same, mail me, i will mail the required document. all the best, deepesh nanda

 October 16, 2004, 07:54 Re: Area weighted or mass weighted average #17 SAM Guest   Posts: n/a please mail me

 October 18, 2004, 11:16 Re: Area weighted or mass weighted average #18 deepesh nanda Guest   Posts: n/a Correction, I replied for the area/mass weight avg, u use mass weight avg. only when u have compressible flow becoz. density varies with pressure and temperature for such flow. i will soon mail u the document. thanks

 January 31, 2011, 01:40 area weighted or mass weighted average #19 New Member   Amit Chauhan Join Date: May 2010 Location: Chennai, India Posts: 18 Rep Power: 16 I have tried for both area weighted and mass weighted average for my problem. And I am giving incompressible flow, still the averages values are not same which contradicts many of u all posts here above. Can any one please counter check and tell us what is the reason and with correct explanation.

 January 31, 2011, 05:31 #20 Administrator     Jonas Larsson Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Gothenburg, Sweden Posts: 827 Rep Power: 10 Area-averaging and mass-averaging will give different results and what you should use depends on what variable you are interested in. For conserved variables like total-pressure you should use mass-averaging, whereas for other variables, like static-pressure, you should use area-averaging. Check out some of the refences mentioned. To make things even more complex another type of averaging often used is flux-averaging. With flux-averaging all gradients are mixed out and a flux-averaged value is the value you would get if you measure at the outlet of an infinently long friction-free pipe put at the boundary. In turbomachinery applications flux-averaging is common, and sometimes you do not flux-average everything, you do flux-averaging circumferentially to mix-out wakes, but you do not do flux-averaging radially because you do not want to mix-out the end-wall boundary layers. Far, jonny_b, teguhtf and 10 others like this.

 Tags area weighted average, mass weighted average