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

ABL Log-Law Questions

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

LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old   March 25, 2017, 11:34
Question ABL Log-Law Questions
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 39
Rep Power: 13
fatirishman53 is on a distinguished road
I've been trying to develop a precursor simulation of the turbulent ABL. However, I don't think I'm getting very good results and was hoping someone might be able to point out what I'm doing wrong.

Here's the setup (mostly based off Tim Stovall's master's thesis):

version: OpenFOAM-3.0.0
simulationType: LES
solver: pimpleFoam
domain: 1250m x 800m x 800m, (x, y, z), (streamwise, vertical, horizontal)
mesh: 125 x 200 (grading factor 10) x 80
viscosity: 1.55e-5 m2/s
fvOptions: meanVelocityForce with Ubar = (3 0 0)

top: symmetryPlane
sides: symmetryPlane
inlet: cyclic
outlet: cyclic
bottom: wall
U - fixedValue; uniform ( 0 0 0 );
p - zeroGradient;
nut - fixedValue; uniform 1.55e-5; (have used nutkWallFunction and nutUWallFunction)
k - fixedValue; uniform 0;

Smagorinsky and kEqn

Wall Functions:
As pictured: nutkWallFunction
Also have tried: nutUWallFunction

I have also run a couple versions using the nutkWallFunction and vanDriest damping. However, all of my results are very similar.

I initially ran this simulation to develop turbulence and monitored the average fluctuations at the domain center in order to determine when it became statistically stable. Then, the initial turbulence was run for 5000 seconds (approx. 10 flow-through times), and probes were taken at 10 Hz. Attached are the post-processed results.

For the nondimensionalized semi-log plots (u+ vs. y+) I used sciPy's curve_fit while iterating through values for u* in order to best fit a function of the form A(ln(x * u* / nu)) + B. The results are in a textbox on each plot and were probed from a vertical line through the center of the domain. My hopes were to have data whose curve fit resulted in a von Karman (kappa) = 0.41 and B = 5.2. However, as you can see, the results are way off. I also got the same curves at the lower and upper y+ regions. At first, I considered these regions to be the sub-viscous layer and outer region. However, the lower y+ values do not match u+ = y+... not even close.

I also included images of my plots for auto-correlation based off probes at the domain center point. I don't understand why my x-component's auto-correlation does not decrease with increased time lag. Instead, it seems to remain perfectly correlated (unless I messed up my Python script).

One other question, which one-equation eddy viscosity model is the kEqn SGS model based off of?

Any help would be immensely appreciated. Thanks in advance.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg keq_sm_log.jpg (47.8 KB, 58 views)
File Type: jpg keq_stability.jpg (60.6 KB, 36 views)
File Type: jpg sm_stability.jpg (58.7 KB, 25 views)

Last edited by fatirishman53; March 25, 2017 at 14:52. Reason: Forgot a couple details and a question
fatirishman53 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 25, 2017, 14:09
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 39
Rep Power: 13
fatirishman53 is on a distinguished road
Here are the log-linear plots for the nutUWallFunction implementation and the nutkWallFunction with vanDriest damping. The auto-correlation plots are very similar to the ones posted previously.

The only things I can think of are:
1. Problem with boundary conditions. Perhaps cyclic sides and a slip top would yield better results.
2. Changing the k boundary condition at the bottom wall to zeroGradient as suggested by de Villers
3. The meanVelocityForce is having an adverse affect on the log layer and auto-correlation (interfering with dissipation???)
Attached Images
File Type: jpg nutU_keq_sm_log.jpg (46.1 KB, 27 views)
File Type: jpg vd_keq_sm_log.jpg (47.7 KB, 20 views)
fatirishman53 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 27, 2017, 21:25
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 39
Rep Power: 13
fatirishman53 is on a distinguished road
Somebody? Anybody? Pretty please....
fatirishman53 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   June 13, 2017, 17:13
Luis Eduardo
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 85
Rep Power: 15
lebc is on a distinguished road
Hi Matt,

I'm also studying the ABL on OF, but considering k-epsilon turbulence model...

Either way, now I'm using some reference articles, maybe you can have an insight from one of them (of course, if you don't know them already!):

"On the use of the k–epsilon model in commercial CFD software to model the neutral atmospheric boundary layer" D.M. Hargreaves, N.G. Wright

"Appropriate boundary conditions for computational wind engineering models revisited" P.J. Richards, S.E.Norris

"Atmospheric Turbulence Effects on Wind-Turbine Wakes: An LES Study" Yu-Ting Wu and Fernando Port´e-Agel

Hope I can help with this!

Best Regards,
lebc is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   November 21, 2022, 07:57
New Member
Hongxiang Yu
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 8
Rep Power: 8
Nicole Yu is on a distinguished road
Originally Posted by fatirishman53 View Post
Somebody? Anybody? Pretty please....
did you finally solve the problem? I have the same questions
Nicole Yu is offline   Reply With Quote


abl flow, log law, openfoam 3.0.0

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
questions about the stokes law and pressure gradient force socreate Main CFD Forum 3 March 9, 2017 12:31
log law for wind velocity profile Tom P Main CFD Forum 17 February 13, 2016 15:30
Log law for unsteady velocity profile hyderkhan74 Main CFD Forum 1 July 11, 2012 10:02
Wall Function Approach - log law Paul CFX 2 June 30, 2005 06:06
questions about the DPM law rookie FLUENT 0 June 16, 2003 11:41

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:24.