CFD Online Logo CFD Online URL
www.cfd-online.com
[Sponsors]
Home > Forums > OpenFOAM Post-Processing

Wall Heat Flux utulity

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

Like Tree2Likes
  • 2 Post By student666

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   September 8, 2017, 07:43
Default Wall Heat Flux utulity
  #1
New Member
 
Atul Kumar
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 27
Rep Power: 3
atulkjoy is on a distinguished road
Hi,
The Vertical wall fire case where WallHeatFlux has been calculated on Vertical Isothermal Wall at 300k 722 mm high , Radiation model used is fvDOM.
The flow is natural convective and buoyancy driven mostly similar to buoyant hot plume after 200 mm. Meshing is simply block Mesh.

I have use two versions of OpenFoam , OpenFOAM-4.x and OpenFOAM-plus utility for post Processing wallHeatFlux.
OpenFOAM-4.x gives convective Wall Heat Flux and Total Wall Heat Flux,
while OpenFOAM-plus give only wallHeatFlux using fireFoam -postProcess -func wallHeatFlux.

There is significant difference between this two during summation of Qr and Convective HeatFlux and any one can be right.

Which version calculation is right
Attached Images
File Type: jpg cfd-online.jpg (153.8 KB, 26 views)
File Type: jpg CO2.jpg (55.6 KB, 16 views)
File Type: jpg T.jpg (40.2 KB, 12 views)

Last edited by atulkjoy; September 10, 2017 at 07:34. Reason: none
atulkjoy is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   September 9, 2017, 21:28
Default
  #2
Senior Member
 
M. C.
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Italy
Posts: 247
Rep Power: 10
student666 is on a distinguished road
Hi,

it's hard to say what is the problem as anybody can't understand what you're doing.
What are you simulating? What solver? Mesh? etc...
You should give more details in order to get help.

Quote:
There is significant difference between this two during summation of Qr and Convective HeatFlux and any one can be right.
I suppose that you're running your final case or you're running it without some preliminary hand-calculations, as the case needs a CFD calculation.

I suggest to stop and use a simple case taken from your text book where you can be confident of the results and use it as an OF case to get same results.
You should take one where you can test:
  • radiative only
  • convective only
  • both of them
This way I think you can get to a conclusion by yourself.

Regards
wyldckat and atulkjoy like this.
student666 is online now   Reply With Quote

Old   September 10, 2017, 07:28
Default reply with images
  #3
New Member
 
Atul Kumar
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 27
Rep Power: 3
atulkjoy is on a distinguished road
Hi,
Thanks For quick reply it is Vertical fire case where WallHeatFlux has been calculated on Vertical Isothermal Wall at 300k 722 mm high , Radiation model used is fvDOM.
The flow is natural convective and buoyancy driven mostly similar to buoyant hot plume after 200 mm.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg CO2.jpg (42.9 KB, 10 views)
File Type: jpg T.jpg (40.2 KB, 10 views)

Last edited by atulkjoy; September 10, 2017 at 07:38. Reason: None
atulkjoy is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   September 10, 2017, 19:10
Default
  #4
Super Moderator
 
Bruno Santos
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Lisbon, Portugal
Posts: 10,021
Blog Entries: 39
Rep Power: 109
wyldckat is a glorious beacon of lightwyldckat is a glorious beacon of lightwyldckat is a glorious beacon of lightwyldckat is a glorious beacon of lightwyldckat is a glorious beacon of lightwyldckat is a glorious beacon of light
Greetings to all!

Quote:
Originally Posted by atulkjoy View Post
I have use two versions of OpenFoam , OpenFOAM-4.x and OpenFOAM-plus utility for post Processing wallHeatFlux.
OpenFOAM-4.x gives convective Wall Heat Flux and Total Wall Heat Flux,
while OpenFOAM-plus give only wallHeatFlux using fireFoam -postProcess -func wallHeatFlux.

There is significant difference between this two during summation of Qr and Convective HeatFlux and any one can be right.
In OpenFOAM 4.x and older, the calculation is done as:
Code:
convective_term - radiative_term
While in OpenFOAM 5.x and OpenFOAM v1612+ and newer, the calculation is done as:
Code:
convective_term + radiative_term
I haven't managed to figure out which one is correct, because I haven't managed to figure out what is the sign convention for Qr and for the convective heat flux. At a first glance, it seemed like Qr was always positive ("q = Boltzman * T^4 * Area"), which doesn't make much sense in this context, since it should be a subtraction of the two or more temperature sources, imposed on the wall.

The only way to verify this is to do as student666 indicated: it is necessary to isolate and conquer. In other words, it is necessary to create small+simple test cases that allow us to check how the signs work for each term.

The problem is I don't have the time necessary right now to check this myself. So I will have to leave this to someone else here on the forum.

Best regards,
Bruno
__________________
wyldckat is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   September 30, 2017, 14:40
Default
  #5
New Member
 
Atul Kumar
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 27
Rep Power: 3
atulkjoy is on a distinguished road
Hi bruno
Thanks for your blogs I have corrected it. Now solver is validated.

Thanks and Regards.
Atul K Joshi
atulkjoy is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply

Thread Tools
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 On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Radiation interface hinca CFX 15 January 26, 2014 18:11
An error has occurred in cfx5solve: volo87 CFX 5 June 14, 2013 17:44
Heat transfer BC at wall- why need wall thickness? Julie FLUENT 7 February 3, 2012 22:41
how to export "wall heat flux" to tecplot? victor CFX 3 November 27, 2008 10:45
CFX - wall heat flux divarano CFX 2 December 4, 2006 17:14


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 18:08.