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

twoPhaseEulerFoam (very) high pressure when using kinetic theory

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

Like Tree2Likes
  • 1 Post By rdbisme
  • 1 Post By rdbisme

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old   May 13, 2016, 04:58
Thumbs up twoPhaseEulerFoam (very) high pressure when using kinetic theory
  #1
Senior Member
 
rdbisme's Avatar
 
Ruben Di Battista
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Paris
Posts: 137
Rep Power: 9
rdbisme is on a distinguished road
Hello everybody,

I'm basically simulating a slurry flow with solid particles in a liquid carrier. I managed to run simulation with different turbulent models for the liquid carrier (basically k-w SST and std. k-epsilon) getting reasonable velocity profiles and pressure drops.

In most of the papers I'm trying to emulate (i.e. CFD modeling for pipeline flow of fine particles at high concentration - Kaushal et al.) they use kinetic-theory for granular flow.

I tried to enable it but I get a practically laminar profile for the solid phase.

Here an image that compares the two velocity profiles with same volume fraction (13%), inlet velocity (1.5), particle diameter (1.3mm), k-w for carrier and in the red profile I used the kinetic-theory for granular flows with equilibrium hypothesis.

GEOMETRY DETAILS

Pipe Diameter: 15e-3 [m]
Pipe Length: 0.6 [m]
Gravity: [0 0 -9.81]
Position of the sample line: 0.4 [m] from the inlet
Boundary Conditions:
  • inlet:
    • U.carrier: 1.5 [m/s]
    • U.dispersed: 1.5 [m/s]
    • k: Intensity 0.005 U.carrier (turbulentIntensityKineticEnergyInlet)
    • omega.carrier: FixedValue 1
    • alpha.carrier = FixedValue 0.13
    • p = calculated
    • p_rgh = zeroGradient
    • Theta.dispersed = FixedValue 0
    • nut for both: calculated
  • outlet:
    • U.carrier: zeroGradient
    • U.dispersed: zeroGradient
    • k: zeroGradient
    • omega.carrier: FixedValue 1
    • alpha.carrier = FixedValue 0.13
    • p = calculated
    • p_rgh = zeroGradient
    • Theta.dispersed = FixedValue 0
    • nut for both: calculated
  • walls
    • U.* = no-slip
    • k = LowReWallFunction/Std Wall Function (depends from the mesh)
    • omega = Wall Function
    • p = calculated
    • p_rgh = zeroGradient
    • Theta = zeroGradient
    • nut: calculated
  • symmetryPlane:
    • symmetry for all





PHASES INFORMATIONS
Liquid Carrier Density: 870 [Kg/m]
Liquid Carrier Viscosity: 0.292E-3 [Pa s]
Dispersed Phase Density: 1026 [Kg/m]
Dispersed Phase Viscosity: 0.292E-3 [Pa s]

(Case naming system: 15_13_kw_keq:
  • 15 = 1.5 m/s inlet velocity
  • 13 = 1.3mm particle diameter
  • kw = k-omega sst turbulence for carrier
  • keq = kinetic theory with equilibrium )
Seems to be related to viscosity provided by the model: it's basically a laminar profile so I would say that there is not enough viscosity.



An help would be very appreciated, thanks...

OpenFOAM 3.0.1



Here is my case too:

cfd-online.tar.gz

HPE likes this.

Last edited by rdbisme; May 20, 2016 at 05:53.
rdbisme is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 13, 2020, 12:00
Default
  #2
New Member
 
Masoud Kahnooji
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Iran
Posts: 5
Rep Power: 5
masoudbme90 is on a distinguished road
Hello Ruben (tidusuper91)



I am simulating slurry flow by twophaseeulerfoam, and I study your case. I am surprised because of your refine mesh (very small). I read that "The cell size is chosen to be roughly about 30 times the particle diameter of the solid phase, and If a finer mesh should be used, it is important that the size of the control volumes is not smaller than the diameter of the particle. In a control volume smaller than the particle diameter, the particle would fill the entire control volume (αp = 1) and not allow for e.g., particle-particle interactions.", but the minimum volume size of your mesh is smaller than particle volume. What is your idea about the size of the mesh when we use twophaseeulerfoam for slurry flow?
I know that your question was in 2016, but could you tell me how did your problem solve?


Sincerely yours
masoudbme90 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 13, 2020, 13:16
Default
  #3
Senior Member
 
rdbisme's Avatar
 
Ruben Di Battista
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Paris
Posts: 137
Rep Power: 9
rdbisme is on a distinguished road
Hello Masoud,



it was indeed long time ago. Where did you read that? Can you provide a reference?
masoudbme90 likes this.
rdbisme is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 13, 2020, 13:41
Default
  #4
New Member
 
Masoud Kahnooji
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Iran
Posts: 5
Rep Power: 5
masoudbme90 is on a distinguished road
Hello Ruben
Thank you for your kind response . I read a tutorial about twophaseeulerfoam at Chalmers university was written by Busch:

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...j7gVliLiYwiVsf
masoudbme90 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 13, 2020, 16:18
Default
  #5
HPE
Senior Member
 
Herpes Free Engineer
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: The Home Under The Ground with the Lost Boys
Posts: 658
Rep Power: 8
HPE is on a distinguished road
It has been a while that I haven't read a well prepared question such as this one in this forum.

Thanks.
HPE is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 13, 2020, 16:48
Default
  #6
Senior Member
 
rdbisme's Avatar
 
Ruben Di Battista
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Paris
Posts: 137
Rep Power: 9
rdbisme is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by masoudbme90 View Post
Hello Ruben
Thank you for your kind response . I read a tutorial about twophaseeulerfoam at Chalmers university was written by Busch:

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...j7gVliLiYwiVsf
Well, as I said, it was long time ago. But I don't think there's a limitation on that ratio numerically speaking. The question would then be if the results are physically sound. I was able, at the end, to extract useful profiles from this configuration.

This question was related to my M.Sc. thesis that you can find here. I hope that would help you!
rdbisme is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 13, 2020, 16:54
Default
  #7
Senior Member
 
rdbisme's Avatar
 
Ruben Di Battista
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Paris
Posts: 137
Rep Power: 9
rdbisme is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by HPE View Post
It has been a while that I haven't read a well prepared question such as this one in this forum.

Thanks.
Ahahah, thanks. It was long time ago and... yet nobody answered.
rdbisme is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 15, 2020, 13:38
Default
  #8
New Member
 
Masoud Kahnooji
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Iran
Posts: 5
Rep Power: 5
masoudbme90 is on a distinguished road
Hello Ruben
Thank you for your response.
masoudbme90 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   July 3, 2020, 04:52
Default
  #9
Member
 
yangqi
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 96
Rep Power: 3
qi.yang@polimi.it is on a distinguished road
Hi Masoud, did you simulate slurry flow without problem? I am also doing this research.

Quote:
Originally Posted by masoudbme90 View Post
Hello Ruben
Thank you for your response.
qi.yang@polimi.it is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   July 3, 2020, 04:54
Default
  #10
Member
 
yangqi
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 96
Rep Power: 3
qi.yang@polimi.it is on a distinguished road
Thanks for your post. I found in Fvsolution file, you used under relaxation factor. However, during the simulation, it was neglected no matter how you changed the coefficient. Also, the issue of time step is significant.


Quote:
Originally Posted by rdbisme View Post
Hello everybody,

I'm basically simulating a slurry flow with solid particles in a liquid carrier. I managed to run simulation with different turbulent models for the liquid carrier (basically k-w SST and std. k-epsilon) getting reasonable velocity profiles and pressure drops.

In most of the papers I'm trying to emulate (i.e. CFD modeling for pipeline flow of fine particles at high concentration - Kaushal et al.) they use kinetic-theory for granular flow.

I tried to enable it but I get a practically laminar profile for the solid phase.

Here an image that compares the two velocity profiles with same volume fraction (13%), inlet velocity (1.5), particle diameter (1.3mm), k-w for carrier and in the red profile I used the kinetic-theory for granular flows with equilibrium hypothesis.

GEOMETRY DETAILS

Pipe Diameter: 15e-3 [m]
Pipe Length: 0.6 [m]
Gravity: [0 0 -9.81]
Position of the sample line: 0.4 [m] from the inlet
Boundary Conditions:
  • inlet:
    • U.carrier: 1.5 [m/s]
    • U.dispersed: 1.5 [m/s]
    • k: Intensity 0.005 U.carrier (turbulentIntensityKineticEnergyInlet)
    • omega.carrier: FixedValue 1
    • alpha.carrier = FixedValue 0.13
    • p = calculated
    • p_rgh = zeroGradient
    • Theta.dispersed = FixedValue 0
    • nut for both: calculated
  • outlet:
    • U.carrier: zeroGradient
    • U.dispersed: zeroGradient
    • k: zeroGradient
    • omega.carrier: FixedValue 1
    • alpha.carrier = FixedValue 0.13
    • p = calculated
    • p_rgh = zeroGradient
    • Theta.dispersed = FixedValue 0
    • nut for both: calculated
  • walls
    • U.* = no-slip
    • k = LowReWallFunction/Std Wall Function (depends from the mesh)
    • omega = Wall Function
    • p = calculated
    • p_rgh = zeroGradient
    • Theta = zeroGradient
    • nut: calculated
  • symmetryPlane:
    • symmetry for all





PHASES INFORMATIONS
Liquid Carrier Density: 870 [Kg/m]
Liquid Carrier Viscosity: 0.292E-3 [Pa s]
Dispersed Phase Density: 1026 [Kg/m]
Dispersed Phase Viscosity: 0.292E-3 [Pa s]

(Case naming system: 15_13_kw_keq:
  • 15 = 1.5 m/s inlet velocity
  • 13 = 1.3mm particle diameter
  • kw = k-omega sst turbulence for carrier
  • keq = kinetic theory with equilibrium )
Seems to be related to viscosity provided by the model: it's basically a laminar profile so I would say that there is not enough viscosity.



An help would be very appreciated, thanks...

OpenFOAM 3.0.1



Here is my case too:

Attachment 47417

qi.yang@polimi.it is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply

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
Pressure Outlet Guage pressure Mohsin FLUENT 36 April 29, 2016 18:16
About kinetic Theory in twoPhaseEulerFoam cheng1988sjtu OpenFOAM Programming & Development 3 April 8, 2016 17:32
sonicFoam - pressure driven pipe: flow continuity violation and waveTransmissive BC Endel OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 3 September 11, 2014 17:29
high pressure simulation mahi FLUENT 0 November 7, 2008 02:30
Hydrostatic pressure in 2-phase flow modeling (long) DS & HB Main CFD Forum 0 January 8, 2000 16:00


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