CFD Online Logo CFD Online URL
Home > Forums > Software User Forums > OpenFOAM > OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD

flow over a smoothly contoured ramp

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

LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   July 6, 2013, 11:17
Default flow over a smoothly contoured ramp
New Member
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 4
Rep Power: 6
schludom is on a distinguished road
Hello everybody,

currently I am investigating on the flow over a contoured ramp using different turbulence models and 2 meshes (one with y+=30 and one with y+=1)

At first I used the k-omega-sst model for both meshes. Everything seems to be ok. There are just small differences between that cases regarding boundary layer thickness and the velocities, but that should be because of the wallfunctions i used for the y+=30-meshes.

Now I have set up my cases with the k-epsilon-model. Again the y+=30 meshes look ok, even in comparison to the k-w-sst cases (y+=30 and y+=1). My problem now are the low-Reynolds-cases using the k-epsilon-model. The velocity-profiles differ greatly from the others.
I think my problem are the BC's at the wall. for k i use fixedValue 1e-12 and for epsilon i tried now 3 ways. At first i used epsilon =fixedValue 1e-12, then zeroGradient and at least i tried the epsilonLowReWallfunction.

I attached some pictures to make my situation clear. One picture shows the geometry. I am solving only 2 dimensional. The point where i extracted the velocityprofiles from is upstream, near to the ramp, but far away enough to be not influenced by the ramp. the Freestream velocity should be around 20.4 m/s and the Bl thickness around 25.3mm(experimental data). The y+=30 picture shows how my other solutions have been so far, even when i used kwsst for the y+=1-mesh.

Sooo. I would really appreciate some hints, how to set up my case using the k-epsilon model and my y+=1-Mesh, to get nearly the same solutions as before
Attached Images
File Type: jpg y+=1_epsilon=0.jpg (27.2 KB, 14 views)
File Type: jpg y+=1_epsilonLowReWallfunct.jpg (25.0 KB, 16 views)
File Type: jpg y+=1_epsilon_zeroGradient.jpg (26.0 KB, 16 views)
File Type: jpg y+=30.jpg (24.9 KB, 16 views)
File Type: jpg geometry.jpg (8.8 KB, 15 views)
schludom is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   July 7, 2013, 02:33
Senior Member
Fumiya Nozaki
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Yokohama, Japan
Posts: 217
Blog Entries: 1
Rep Power: 11
fumiya is on a distinguished road

I understand the k-epsilon model implemented in OpenFOAM is standard high-Re type.
Please correct me if I'm wrong.

So, you might want to try out the low-Re turbulence models such as LaunderSharmaKE:

Hope this helps,
fumiya is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   July 10, 2013, 06:25
New Member
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 4
Rep Power: 6
schludom is on a distinguished road
Hi Fumiya,

thanks for your reply. Unfortunately the LaunderSharmaKE-Model didnt work for me. I also tried the SpalartAllmaras.model and it worked fine. Using LaunderSharma caused an unphysical thickening of the BL and i still have no clue why. My BC's for k and epsilon on the walls are fixedValue 1e-12 and i set nut to calculated. Regarding the way nut ist calculated in LaunderSharma this should work, or am i wrong?
schludom is offline   Reply With Quote


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
mass flow inlet and pressure outlet with target mass flow rate Zigainer FLUENT 10 January 5, 2013 22:51
transient, impregnating flow problem fgommer FLUENT 0 February 29, 2012 17:10
Flow meter Design CD adapco Group Marketing Siemens 3 June 21, 2011 08:33
Supersonic flow over ramp srinath OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 3 June 16, 2008 09:58
potential flow vs. Euler flow curious ... Main CFD Forum 23 July 21, 2006 07:40

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:46.