CFD Online Logo CFD Online URL
www.cfd-online.com
[Sponsors]
Home > Forums > Software User Forums > NUMECA

NLH with SA (Extended Wall Functions)

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

Like Tree1Likes
  • 1 Post By DarylMusashi

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old   March 1, 2018, 05:57
Default NLH with SA (Extended Wall Functions)
  #1
New Member
 
Kacper Palkus
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Rzeszow
Posts: 9
Rep Power: 6
Cappytbg is on a distinguished road
Hello!

I have a question to NLH method. Particularity, I saw in Numeca Fine/Open User's Guide restrictions for use of NLH method, it says that the only possibility for this kind of analysis is the use of SA turbulence model, but... can you tell me, if Numeca Fine/Open can run simulation with SA (with Extended Wall Functions) model?

I am running simulation of stator and rotor and want to catch their interference.

Thank you for your help!
Cappytbg is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 1, 2018, 14:29
Default
  #2
New Member
 
Kacper Palkus
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Rzeszow
Posts: 9
Rep Power: 6
Cappytbg is on a distinguished road
I mean - simulation is running with this set, but my question is if Numeca does not changes automaticaly from this model.
Cappytbg is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 2, 2018, 05:23
Default
  #3
Senior Member
 
DarylMusashi's Avatar
 
Holger Dietrich
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Germany
Posts: 174
Rep Power: 13
DarylMusashi is on a distinguished road
Dear Cappytbg,

May I ask which kind of mesh you are using? If you created a "low Reynolds" mesh you resolve the boundary layer with a typical first cell height of 1E-5 [m] for turbomachinery applications and result in y+ values < 10. In this case a wall function approach does not make sense.

The second scenario would be a "high Reynolds" mesh with only one cell in the boundary layer, the recommended y+ values are between 30 and 100. In this case an (extended) wall function approach is necessary.

For turbomachinery applications I recommend the first. Is there a particular reason why you want to use the SA (extended wall function) model instead of the standard SA model?

Kind regards,
Holger
eng.abdul likes this.
DarylMusashi is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 2, 2018, 05:40
Default
  #4
New Member
 
Kacper Palkus
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Rzeszow
Posts: 9
Rep Power: 6
Cappytbg is on a distinguished road
Dear DarylMusashi,

Thank you for your answer! I am using unstructured mesh. And Re is high.
You see, I have conducted a series of analyses so far, but I am making investigation.
I have done analysis with y+<1, but now I want to check the wall functions approach.

About y+ values, I have read Numeca's User Guide, and it says that to be in WF range y+ should be 20-50, what I obtained. And here I used SA (with Extended Wall functions).

But, I want also to run NHL simulation and I do not know if Numeca (by automatic) does not change SA (w EWF) to pure SA.

Do you happen to know this?
Cappytbg is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 2, 2018, 06:01
Default
  #5
Senior Member
 
DarylMusashi's Avatar
 
Holger Dietrich
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Germany
Posts: 174
Rep Power: 13
DarylMusashi is on a distinguished road
Dear Cappytbg,

I don't think that it is reset to SA model without wall function approach. What you can do is to analyse the convergence histories of two computations with the standard SA model and the SA model with extended wall functions. You can easily load multiple computations in the monitor to compare them. The residuals and convergence of the flow quantities should slightly differ.

I have attached the button in the attached figure.

Kind regards,
Holger
Attached Images
File Type: jpg monitor_button.jpg (14.1 KB, 21 views)
DarylMusashi is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 2, 2018, 07:27
Default
  #6
New Member
 
Kacper Palkus
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Rzeszow
Posts: 9
Rep Power: 6
Cappytbg is on a distinguished road
Thank you for reply and your advice!
I will try to do as you said. Thanks!

Kind regards!
Cappytbg is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 15, 2018, 05:26
Default
  #7
New Member
 
Kacper Palkus
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Rzeszow
Posts: 9
Rep Power: 6
Cappytbg is on a distinguished road
To finish this thread: I have compared those convergence histories and they are different, thus SA with EWF works with NLH method.


I have also found out (seen somewhere on Numeca's site) that from 6.1 (?) also two equation Turbulence Models are available, but I have not tried it, thus its not confirmed).
However in User's Guide 6.2 still is written that only SA is available.
Cappytbg is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply

Tags
extended wall functions, nlh, numeca fine/open

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

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 Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Wall functions - questions about implementation AlmostSurelyRob OpenFOAM Programming & Development 44 May 6, 2020 10:11
Wall functions vs. boundary layers kandelabr OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 3 June 12, 2017 07:05
Boundary Field and Wall Functions, time 0 & time >0 NJG OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 1 April 5, 2013 10:48
wall functions implementation besh OpenFOAM Programming & Development 0 January 1, 2013 09:14
[ICEM] Export ICEM mesh to Gambit / Fluent romekr ANSYS Meshing & Geometry 1 November 26, 2011 12:11


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 22:42.