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

Radiation intensity coupling BC

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

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   May 23, 2017, 08:24
Default Radiation intensity coupling BC
  #1
New Member
 
Tomas Denk
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 8
Rep Power: 2
TomasDenk is on a distinguished road
Hello,

I would like to solve radiative heat transfer in two adjacent regions with chtMultiRegionFoam. I was able to mimic the solution procedure already present for fluid regions and include it in solid regions. However, I can't figure out how to implement boundary condition to couple radiation intensity.

Assumptions:
-vfDOM radiation model (we can also assume the same azimuthal and polar angles)
-fixed solid/fluid or solid/solid interface (constant shape)
-equal refractive index, i.e. no need to redistribute ray intensity that passes through the interface
-grey radiation

In the greyDiffusiveRadiationMixedFvPatchScalarField.C (OpenFOAM 3.0.x) the essential part of code:

Code:
forAll(Iw, faceI)
    {
        if ((-n[faceI] & myRayId) > 0.0)
        {
            // direction out of the wall
            refGrad()[faceI] = 0.0;
            valueFraction()[faceI] = 1.0;
            refValue()[faceI] =
                (
                    Ir[faceI]*(scalar(1.0) - temissivity[faceI])
                  + temissivity[faceI]*physicoChemical::sigma.value()
                  * pow4(Tp[faceI])
                )/pi;

            // Emmited heat flux from this ray direction
            Qem[faceI] = refValue()[faceI]*nAve[faceI];
        }
        else
        {
            // direction into the wall
            valueFraction()[faceI] = 0.0;
            refGrad()[faceI] = 0.0;
            refValue()[faceI] = 0.0; //not used

            // Incident heat flux on this ray direction
            Qin[faceI] = Iw[faceI]*nAve[faceI];
        }
    }
How should I treat the direction out of the interface? I think I should read intensities I_?? of particular rays in the other region and set it to refValue()[faceI] instead of reflected intensity and black body radiation. How can I implement it?
TomasDenk is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   May 25, 2017, 09:43
Default Progress
  #2
New Member
 
Tomas Denk
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 8
Rep Power: 2
TomasDenk is on a distinguished road
Looking at some other coupling BCs, I've managed to get the first approximation of desired boundary condition. Now, my code looks like this:

Code:
// Get the coupling information from the mappedPatchBase
    const mappedPatchBase& mpp =
        refCast<const mappedPatchBase>(patch().patch());
    const polyMesh& nbrMesh = mpp.sampleMesh();
    const label samplePatchI = mpp.samplePolyPatch().index();
    const fvPatch& nbrPatch =
        refCast<const fvMesh>(nbrMesh).boundary()[samplePatchI];
    const greyRadiationIntensityCouplingMixedFvPatchScalarField& nbrField =
        refCast <const greyRadiationIntensityCouplingMixedFvPatchScalarField>
        (nbrPatch.lookupPatchField<volScalarField, scalar> (dimensionedInternalField().name()) );
    tmp<scalarField> nbrIw(new scalarField(nbrField.size(), 0.0));
    nbrIw() = nbrField.patchInternalField();
    mpp.distribute(nbrIw());
    
    const radiationModel& radiation =
        db().lookupObject<radiationModel>("radiationProperties");

    const fvDOM& dom(refCast<const fvDOM>(radiation));

    label rayId = -1;
    label lambdaId = -1;
    dom.setRayIdLambdaId(dimensionedInternalField().name(), rayId, lambdaId);

    const label patchI = patch().index();

    if (dom.nLambda() != 1)
    {
        FatalErrorIn
        (
            "Foam::radiation::"
            "greyRadiationIntensityCouplingMixedFvPatchScalarField::updateCoeffs"
        )   << " a grey boundary condition is used with a non-grey "
            << "absorption model" << nl << exit(FatalError);
    }

    scalarField& Iw = *this;
    const vectorField n(patch().nf());

    radiativeIntensityRay& ray =
        const_cast<radiativeIntensityRay&>(dom.IRay(rayId));

    const scalarField nAve(n & ray.dAve());

    ray.Qr().boundaryField()[patchI] += Iw*nAve;

    scalarField& Qem = ray.Qem().boundaryField()[patchI];
    scalarField& Qin = ray.Qin().boundaryField()[patchI];

    const vector& myRayId = dom.IRay(rayId).d();

    forAll(Iw, faceI)
    {
        if ((-n[faceI] & myRayId) > 0.0)
        {
            // direction out of the wall
            refGrad()[faceI] = 0.0;
            valueFraction()[faceI] = 1.0;
            // assumes the same rays, i.e. phi and theta angles, for both sides
            refValue()[faceI] = nbrIw()[faceI];

            // Emmited heat flux from this ray direction
            Qem[faceI] = refValue()[faceI]*nAve[faceI];
        }
        else
        {
            // direction into the wall
            valueFraction()[faceI] = 0.0;
            refGrad()[faceI] = 0.0;
            refValue()[faceI] = 0.0; //not used

            // Incident heat flux on this ray direction
            Qin[faceI] = Iw[faceI]*nAve[faceI];
        }
    }
It uses intensity from coupled region as refValue for every ray. However, this works only for the same setting of rays in both radiation regions.

Can someone post a code that would retrieve radiation model from neighboring region (on the other side of the interface) to allow me to test for nPhi and nTheta?

Would it make sense to use Qin from the other side and distribute intensities uniformly on my side when nbr_nPhi <> nPhi or nbr_nTheta <> nTheta?
TomasDenk is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply

Tags
coupling, multiregion, radiation, transparent interface

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
chtMultiRegionSimpleFoam: Thermal Conduction + Surface-To-Surface Radiation Zeppo OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 16 May 18, 2017 18:04
Fluent Radiation/porous media Schmitt pierre-Louis FLUENT 26 September 1, 2016 10:29
Monte Carlo Simulation: H-Energy is not convergating & high Incident Radiation volleyHC CFX 5 April 3, 2016 05:41
Radiation Modeling Chris89 CFX 20 August 14, 2014 07:51
GETVAR Error in Multiband Monte Carlo Radiation Simulation with Directional Source silvan CFX 3 June 16, 2014 09:49


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:29.