CFD Online Logo CFD Online URL
www.cfd-online.com
[Sponsors]
Home > Forums > Software User Forums > OpenFOAM > OpenFOAM Programming & Development

Energy equation in rhoCentralFoam (revisited)

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

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old   May 31, 2016, 07:54
Default Energy equation in rhoCentralFoam (revisited)
  #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Singapore
Posts: 102
Rep Power: 8
usv001 is on a distinguished road
Hello everyone,

I am a bit confused about the energy equation implementation in rhoCentralFoam. Particularly, why does the viscous term 'sigmaDotU' appear in the (supposedly) Euler equation?

Code:
surfaceScalarField sigmaDotU
        (
            "sigmaDotU",
            (
                fvc::interpolate(muEff)*mesh.magSf()*fvc::snGrad(U)
              + (mesh.Sf() & fvc::interpolate(tauMC))
            )
            & (a_pos*U_pos + a_neg*U_neg)
        );

        solve
        (
            fvm::ddt(rhoE)
          + fvc::div(phiEp)
          - fvc::div(sigmaDotU)
        );
Here's why I think it should not:
- Kuragnov flux scheme is derived for strictly hyperbolic equations which are the Euler equations in this case
- 'a_pos' and 'a_neg' are calculated using the eigenvalues of Euler equations and hence, the flux scheme should not be applied to the viscous term 'sigmaDotU'

However, when I modified the solver by removing the viscous term from this equation and introducing it in the internal energy/enthalpy equation later, the results were not as good as the current solver (more diffusion, shocks were not sharp, unexpected flow separation). So, I am guessing that whatever the current solver is doing is correct but I can't seem to understand why.

There are two other threads that I managed to find asking the exact question but both remain open:
1. Viscous terms in rhoCentralFoam
2. energy equation in rhoCentralFoam

I am hoping that someone would point in the right direction. Thanks to all!
usv001 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 30, 2018, 10:46
Default
  #2
Member
 
Mary
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 93
Blog Entries: 1
Rep Power: 6
mkhm is on a distinguished road
Did you find any answer for your questions ? I have the same exact questions.
mkhm is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   May 2, 2018, 00:10
Default
  #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Singapore
Posts: 102
Rep Power: 8
usv001 is on a distinguished road
Hi Mary,

I am afraid that I do not have a complete answer but let me give my opinion and, hopefully, someone will confirm/correct it.

The first thing to note is that if the case is inviscid, then muEff=0. So, the term 'sigmaDotU' does not have any effect on the results for inviscid flows.

The second thing to note is that the energy equation is solved using a predictor step for rhoE:
Code:
  fvm::ddt(rhoE)
+ fvc::div(phiEp)
- fvc::div(sigmaDotU)
and a corrector step for e:
Code:
  fvm::ddt(rho, e) - fvc::ddt(rho, e)
- fvm::laplacian(turbulence->alphaEff(), e)
When you add these two steps together you'll recover the correct energy equation. So, there is nothing overtly wrong with this splitting. However, for some reason the developers of rhoCentralFoam decided to place the 'sigmaDotU' term in the predictor step. Perhaps, they were aiming to get a good estimate of rhoE in the predictor step by including all the possible terms (if so, why didn't they do the same for momentum equation with 'tauMC'?).

a_pos and a_neg are essentially interpolation factors to compute an intermediate state at each face based on the pos and neg values obtained by TVD reconstruction. So, (a_pos*U_pos + a_neg*U_neg) can be seen as some intermediate velocity Ustar. This intermediate velocity is used in the calculation of 'sigmaDotU'.
Code:
surfaceScalarField sigmaDotU
(
    "sigmaDotU",
    (
        fvc::interpolate(muEff)*mesh.magSf()*fvc::snGrad(U)
      + (mesh.Sf() & fvc::interpolate(tauMC))
    )
    & (a_pos*U_pos + a_neg*U_neg)
);
Hope that clarifies at least some of your doubts.

Cheers,
USV
usv001 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   July 5, 2018, 05:52
Default
  #4
Member
 
Mary
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 93
Blog Entries: 1
Rep Power: 6
mkhm is on a distinguished road
Thanks a lot USV. Your explanation clarifies my question very well.
mkhm is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply

Tags
energy equation, openfoam, rhocentrafoam

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
Energy equation issue zytra FLUENT 0 October 20, 2014 21:34
Need experience comment on cavitation combine energy equation!!! lehoanganh07 FLUENT 0 September 24, 2014 10:28
Energy equation in OpenFoam nwpukaka OpenFOAM Programming & Development 2 June 24, 2014 02:40
energy equation in rhoCentralFoam nakul OpenFOAM 0 October 10, 2010 15:07
SIMPLE and energy equation convergence Fabio Main CFD Forum 0 June 1, 2007 06:06


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:26.