Darcy-Forchheimer Online Calculator
Hi all,
I just want to inform you, that I implemented an Darcy-Forchheimer Calculator on my website. It is not yet finished and I have to check the results but the next days I will finish it. Nevertheless, the first indications seems to work fine. https://holzmann-cfd.com/community/b...cy-forchheimer |
Its still crap and buggy. I had not time to check everything in detail.
Matej = Matej Forman? So its my colleague. Do you have the calculation base from him? (community@holzmann-cfd.com). Otherwise you can tell me the material-name and I can check it myself. Thanks, Tobi |
1 Attachment(s)
Hello Tobi,
Funny coincidence, although I must state that I am in no way, shape or form affiliated with Matej Forman. Inspired by your calculator tool, I made a similar one (only with the help of MATLAB). In order to compare the results with your calculator tool, please use the following info: When inserting aforementioned inputs into your calculator, the Darcy contribution output differs severely. |
Hey. Nice and thanks for your feedback.
Using your darcy and forchheimer values by using the equation given on my website (first one right hand side: https://holzmann-cfd.com/community/b...cy-forchheimer), we end up with the graph attached:
dp = (D*U+F*U^2)*dx using dx = 0.073 m http://holzmann-cfd.com/forum/DarcyCompare.png So with your extreme linear contribution, its clear that you will get such an offset. However, my curve is not fitting too good either. Shame on me that I still have that buggy guy available. |
Hello Tobi,
Thanks for taking time and looking into this topic. The deviation of the Forchheimer contribution is self-explanatory, as your tool only takes into account two data points. Therefore, the curve fit is of lower fidelity. However, I think that there is some underlying mystery about the Darcy contribution. If we assume that the , then the Darcy and Forchheimer contributions are determined in the following manner: Just by looking at the expression for the Darcy contribution, we can note that in the case of air (dynamic viscosity in the vicinity of 1.73e-5 Pa s) that the Darcy contribution should be a rather large number. So to return to the actual point of my question, how does your tool determine the Darcy contribution? |
The main problem in the whole calculation is that I need (or we need) to avoid negative numbers as they are treated differently by OpenFOAM (a negative number means blockage).
I second your statement and if you only take the Darcy-Calculation into account (in my tool), you will get D to be around 119246891. Hence, a very large number as you have. My tool is doing some magic :) No, its simply some derivation - need to recheck but its in the javascript that you can checkout manually if you go through my source-code of the website (view-source:https://holzmann-cfd.com/modules/mod...Forchheimer.js) Code:
|
Quote:
Hey Tobi, first of all, thanks for making your contributions and the tool available to us all! I just checked out the source code, since i was confused comparing the online calculators small result for the darcy contribution with the very large value i came up with in my own calculations. In Line 397 of the code the coefficients are calculated as: D.value = r*mu.value; F.value = 2*f/rho.value; Isn't there a little mistake here? r gets multiplied by mu, yet per definition the Darcy coefficient is: D = r/mu as Matej stated above. F seems correct to me. Or is this the "magic" you speak of? Im not very experienced with Porous zones in OpenFOAM so please let me know if i am missing anything! Best regards, Markus |
Hey Markus,
you are excellent. I love people who are investigating into the code and know how to get to the simple javascript. (EDIT: I saw that I posted the link :) - but anyway - nice that you checked it). I agree - as it is already postulated on my website - D = r / mu. In the code I have D = r * mu for the Darcy-Forchheimer calculation. We also see that the pure Darcy calculation is correct hence, for any reason, I made a mistake here. Thanks for your hint and investigation. Code is already corrected. Tobi |
Stuff like this happens to me all the time - youre a legend for already having the corrected one up and running.
Good yard, Markus |
Do your results look better now?
|
Hey,
scusi for the late reply. Up to that point i hadnt even set up my porous model. However, initial tests with the coefficients seem to produce results which are in the expected ball park. At a later time, i will need to check against some velocity measurements of the prototype to see how far we are off. Cheers |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 21:16. |