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

MULES with source terms and multiple phases

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

Like Tree1Likes
  • 1 Post By tgvosk

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old   August 7, 2012, 18:17
Question MULES with source terms and multiple phases
  #1
New Member
 
Tyler V
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 24
Rep Power: 14
tgvosk is on a distinguished road
Hello,

I have a question for any of the MULES experts out there.

I am attempting to add source terms to multiphaseInterFoam and am running into trouble maintaining boundedness. I have added the source term for each phase to both the limiter for that phase (MULES::limit) and the solver for that phase (MULES::explicitSolve) but the solution still slowly becomes unbounded when the source terms are non-negligible. Odder still, increasing nAlphaSubCycles only makes it become unbounded sooner.

Does anyone know what could cause MULES to stop producing bounded results? It seems like the limiter algorithm called on phase A isn't being influenced enough by the source in phase B, for example, but I'm not sure how that could be fixed.

Thanks!
tgvosk is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   December 11, 2013, 10:04
Default
  #2
Member
 
Hrushi
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 58
Rep Power: 13
hrushi.397 is on a distinguished road
Hi Tyler,

Did you find solution to your problem?

Thanks and regards,

Hrushi
hrushi.397 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   December 11, 2013, 11:17
Default Unfortunately, no
  #3
New Member
 
Tyler V
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 24
Rep Power: 14
tgvosk is on a distinguished road
Hrushi,

I never did find a solution to this, so I ended up restructuring my code to use only two phases (liquid and gas) and differentiate between components using species mass fraction instead. With only two phases it's easier to maintain boundedness and the MULES multiphase limiter gets really expensive with more phases anyway.

-Tyler
tgvosk is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   December 11, 2013, 11:25
Default
  #4
Member
 
Hrushi
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 58
Rep Power: 13
hrushi.397 is on a distinguished road
Thank you for a quick response, Tyler.

I am facing a similar issue with two phase simulations. Is it possible to post your implementation of source for two phases for me to compare?

Thanks and regards,

Hrushi
hrushi.397 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   December 11, 2013, 11:35
Default
  #5
New Member
 
Tyler V
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 24
Rep Power: 14
tgvosk is on a distinguished road
With only two phases, there are several solvers that do this already. Take a look at the alphaEqn.H files in compressibleInterFoam and interPhaseChangeFoam for examples. If you have severe boundedness issues, the implicit solver used in interPhaseChangeFoam may help.

-Tyler
mbookin likes this.
tgvosk is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   December 11, 2013, 11:52
Default
  #6
Member
 
Hrushi
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 58
Rep Power: 13
hrushi.397 is on a distinguished road
Thanks Tyler. Will look them up.

- Hrushi
hrushi.397 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   December 13, 2013, 08:43
Default
  #7
New Member
 
Tommy V
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 29
Rep Power: 13
Villo is on a distinguished road
Hi foamers!
Tyler, which OpenFoam release are you using?
I had similar problems for multiphase flow (twoLiquidMixingFoam and interMixingFoam) in OpenFoam 2.0. I have try hundreds different numerical schemes to limit the field, but problems were finally suppressed moving from OpenFoam 2.0 to OpenFoam 2.2.0 (more limiters (as lambda) and better structured)).
Regards
Villo is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   December 22, 2015, 10:24
Default
  #8
New Member
 
Markus
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 2
Rep Power: 0
Mastra is on a distinguished road
Dear all,

I am also trying to implement a source term into the phaseEquation of a multiphase solver (multiphaseInterFoam).

My goal is to convert one phase e.g. alpha2 ( 3 phases in total: alpha1, alpha2, alpha3) into another phase (e.g. alpha3 with different transportProperties -> liquid into vapour) at certain conditions.
The distinction criterion for each phase should be a volScalarField between 0 and 1, where 0 means alpha2 only and 1 alpha3 only respectively.

Is this possible using MULES in the solveAlphas() Method in multiphaseMixture.C ?

Code:
void Foam::multiphaseMixture::solveAlphas
(
    const scalar cAlpha
)
{
    static label nSolves=-1;
    nSolves++;

    word alphaScheme("div(phi,alpha)");
    word alpharScheme("div(phirb,alpha)");

    surfaceScalarField phic(mag(phi_/mesh_.magSf()));
    phic = min(cAlpha*phic, max(phic));

    PtrList<surfaceScalarField> phiAlphaCorrs(phases_.size());
    int phasei = 0;

    forAllIter(PtrDictionary<phase>, phases_, iter)
    {
        phase& alpha = iter();

        phiAlphaCorrs.set
        (
            phasei,
            new surfaceScalarField
            (
                fvc::flux
                (
                    phi_,
                    alpha,
                    alphaScheme
                )
            )
        );

        surfaceScalarField& phiAlphaCorr = phiAlphaCorrs[phasei];

        forAllIter(PtrDictionary<phase>, phases_, iter2)
        {
            phase& alpha2 = iter2();

            if (&alpha2 == &alpha) continue;

            surfaceScalarField phir(phic*nHatf(alpha, alpha2));

            phiAlphaCorr += fvc::flux
            (
                -fvc::flux(-phir, alpha2, alpharScheme),
                alpha,
                alpharScheme
            );
        }

        MULES::limit
        (
            geometricOneField(),
            alpha,
            phi_,
            phiAlphaCorr,
            zeroField(),
            zeroField(),
            1,
            0,
            3,
            true
        );

        phasei++;
    }

    MULES::limitSum(phiAlphaCorrs);

    rhoPhi_ = dimensionedScalar("0", dimensionSet(1, 0, -1, 0, 0), 0);

    volScalarField sumAlpha
    (
        IOobject
        (
            "sumAlpha",
            mesh_.time().timeName(),
            mesh_
        ),
        mesh_,
        dimensionedScalar("sumAlpha", dimless, 0)
    );

    phasei = 0;

    forAllIter(PtrDictionary<phase>, phases_, iter)
    {
        phase& alpha = iter();

        surfaceScalarField& phiAlpha = phiAlphaCorrs[phasei];
        phiAlpha += upwind<scalar>(mesh_, phi_).flux(alpha);

        MULES::explicitSolve
        (
            geometricOneField(),
            alpha,
            phiAlpha,
            zeroField(),
            zeroField()
        );

        rhoPhi_ += phiAlpha* fvc::interpolate (alpha.rho());

        Info<< alpha.name() << " volume fraction, min, max = "
            << alpha.weightedAverage(mesh_.V()).value()
            << ' ' << min(alpha).value()
            << ' ' << max(alpha).value()
            << endl;

        sumAlpha += alpha;

        phasei++;
    }

    Info<< "Phase-sum volume fraction, min, max = "
        << sumAlpha.weightedAverage(mesh_.V()).value()
        << ' ' << min(sumAlpha).value()
        << ' ' << max(sumAlpha).value()
        << endl;

    calcAlphas();

}
I know i have to replace the zeroFields somehow with the implicit and explicit source terms, but how can i make sure that alpha2 converts into alpha3 only and alpha1 stays unchanged using the distinction Field between 0 and 1 ?

Or is there another way to do this ?

Thanks and Regards

Markus
Mastra is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 21, 2018, 07:14
Default Solving alpha2
  #9
New Member
 
Saicharan
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Bangalore, India
Posts: 29
Rep Power: 8
wavefunction is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgvosk View Post
Hrushi,

I never did find a solution to this, so I ended up restructuring my code to use only two phases (liquid and gas) and differentiate between components using species mass fraction instead. With only two phases it's easier to maintain boundedness and the MULES multiphase limiter gets really expensive with more phases anyway.

-Tyler
Hi Tyler.

So if you modified interPhaseChangeFoam to accomodate your source terms in it, did you add an equation to solve alpha2 as well? Because if there are multiple phases present, alpha2 is not equal to (1 - alpha1) as given in the alphaEqn.H file in interPhaseChangeFoam.
wavefunction is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply

Tags
mules, multiphaseinterfoam, openfoam

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
Source term units in 2D Chief FLUENT 1 August 23, 2004 13:40
Multiple species and UDS source terms Ale FLUENT 2 September 9, 2002 04:45


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:22.