|
Energy equation for compressible flow
Hello,
I have a question about the energy equation (compressible flow - subsonic) in OF v 1.6-ext and 2.1.0 (there are some posts but still without answer). The conservation of energy has the form: ![\rho \frac{D}{Dt} \left[\frac{u_{i}u_{i}}{2} + e\right] - \rho k_{i}u_{i} - \frac{\partial}{\partial x_{j}}[\tau_{ji}u_{i}] + \frac{\partial q_{i}}{\partial x_{i}} = 0,](/Forums/vbLatex/img/aa73f642a71cf54b48a7e9905ffe7cc7-1.gif "\rho \frac{D}{Dt} \left[\frac{u_{i}u_{i}}{2} + e\right] - \rho k_{i}u_{i} - \frac{\partial}{\partial x_{j}}[\tau_{ji}u_{i}] + \frac{\partial q_{i}}{\partial x_{i}} = 0,") where  is the stress tensor: 1) From the conservation of energy I can derive the energy equation (EE), which is used in OF v 2.1.0 but I can not reach the EE which is implemented in version 1.6-ext. Why is the difference between EE? The left hand sides of the energy equations are the same in both versions and similarly the enthalpy definitions. Steady-state case without volume forces and viscous term (same EE implemented in OF 2.1.0): ![\rho u_{i}\frac{\partial h}{\partial x_{i}} + \frac{\partial q_{i}}{\partial x_{i}} = -\rho u_{i}\frac{\partial }{\partial x_{i}}\left[\frac{u_{i}u_{i}}{2}\right],](/Forums/vbLatex/img/bb17ce54bcef51608d90d155714b6133-1.gif "\rho u_{i}\frac{\partial h}{\partial x_{i}} + \frac{\partial q_{i}}{\partial x_{i}} = -\rho u_{i}\frac{\partial }{\partial x_{i}}\left[\frac{u_{i}u_{i}}{2}\right],") In OF 1.6-ext the EE: ![\rho u_{i}\frac{\partial h}{\partial x_{i}} + \frac{\partial q_{i}}{\partial x_{i}} = fvc::div[\frac{\phi}{fvc::interpolate \rho}, \frac{\rho}{\psi}] - \frac{\rho}{\psi}*fvc::div[\frac{\phi}{fvc::interpolate \rho}].](/Forums/vbLatex/img/ad4384588a9ffc0be99af644821ae49e-1.gif "\rho u_{i}\frac{\partial h}{\partial x_{i}} + \frac{\partial q_{i}}{\partial x_{i}} = fvc::div[\frac{\phi}{fvc::interpolate \rho}, \frac{\rho}{\psi}] - \frac{\rho}{\psi}*fvc::div[\frac{\phi}{fvc::interpolate \rho}].") 2) I solved some simple case (diffuser), which can be "easy" described analytically. The OF 2.1.0 solver gives the best results.. BUT.. When I applied both version of OF solvers for same turbomachinery case, the version 2.1.0 gave unrealistic temperature field (convergent solution in both version, 6000it). If EE should be the same in both versions, why I have obtained so much different result for identically same case (velocity filed, temperature, pressure, thermoModel, turbulence, ...)? Your answers would be very helpful for me. Thank you. Michal |
Hello Michal,
I am solving one Impeller case. For me also, Temperature values are not coming properly at outlet. Did you recieve any information from people? If so, Could you please share that information? Regards Prasant. |
Quote:
no answer today. M |
hi dear michal.i have had doubt about energy equation ever.but i didn't understand what you have done.did diffuser problems were solved properly at both versions but another problem didn't?both versions gave incorrect results in second experiment or just one did so?
|
Hello foamers,
Did you succeed to perform any compressible flow simulation for turbomachinery application? What is you feedback? I have also encoutered some problems you were talking about. This is my case: OpenFOAM-v2006 Geometry: Centrifugal compressor, only one blade passage with cyclic/cyclicAMI (with diffuser vanedless and without volute) BCs: flowRateInletVelocity with fixedValue temperature inlet and fixedValue pressure outlet MRF model Turbulence: kOmegaSST Thermophysical: hePsiThermo, pureMixture, transport const, hConst, perfectGas, sensibleInternalEnergy Tried Solvers: rhoSimpleFoam, rhoCentralFoam, sonicFoam Results are strange, the pressure increased as expected at the exit but not the temperature which seems remain almost constant. Do you have any idea of the problem? |
I kindly suggest you to review the understanding of yours for the problem at hand: I don't see any application that you can subsequently test {rhoSimpleFoam, rhoCentralFoam, sonicFoam} for modelling of the same physical phenomena. Yet note that compressible flow simulations in general are far more sensitive to the numerical settings than its incompressible counterparts.
If the concern of yours is the numerical stability: I suggest you to test these fvOptions: limitTemperature, (if the case is unsteady) limitVelocity, (if the case is steady) velocityDampingConstraint. |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:09. |