
[Sponsors] 
May 13, 2017, 17:40 
yPlus Difference between OpenFoam and CFX

#1 
Senior Member
khedar
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 110
Rep Power: 2 
Hi All,
I recently completed a mesh independence study for a plane rectangular channel in OpenFoam and compared it to CFX for Total average Heat Transfer over the wall patch. I had to implement a wallHeatFlux utility for wall function meshes similar to the way it is implemented in CFX. I get good agreement between the Heat Flux values. The issue is in yPlus values, OF values are almost 1/3 to 1/2 of that of CFX. Now I know one reason for this is the Vertex based formulation of CFX compared to cellcentered in OpenFoam. But my doubt is which value i should trust? 

May 14, 2017, 02:02 

#2 
Senior Member
Uwe Pilz
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Posts: 259
Rep Power: 4 
y+ is in close connection to the Prandtl boundary layer. So I recommend to look at the course of the velocity inside this layer at different places. May be, the wall functions are not identical and lead to a difference in the boundary layer.
For the openFoam suite the paraFoam with the "plot over line" filter may be used for that task.
__________________
Uwe Pilz  Sie ahnen nicht, wieviel Poesie in der Berechnung einer Logarithmentafel enthalten ist (Carl Friedrich Gauß) 

May 14, 2017, 07:58 

#3 
Senior Member
khedar
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 110
Rep Power: 2 
Hi piu58,
If you look at the formula for yPlus, it is proportional to the first grid point distance (y) and sqrt(tau_w) the wall shear stress. What I found was y value for Openfoam = 0.5 CFX due to the difference in CellCentered vs Vertexbased implementation. Also I compared the wall_shear stress values for both using kOmegaSST model and found that values of CFX are approximately twice that of OpenFoam. This in total would give a factor of 2*sqrt(2) = 3 for the yPlus values between OF and CFX and matches well with the values which I am getting. Correct me if I am wrong. If I am right, than one has to keep in mind this difference while generating the mesh which is quiet tricky. Regards, khedar P.S. I would also try your suggestion of plotting along the line to compare CFX and OF results. 

May 14, 2017, 08:05 

#4 
Senior Member
Uwe Pilz
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Posts: 259
Rep Power: 4 
> = 0.5 CFX due to the difference in CellCentered vs Vertexbased implementation
This is some kind of definition: Which y+ is given. > also I compared the wall_shear stress values for both using kOmegaSST model and found that values of CFX are approximately twice that of OpenFoam. This is a real difference in the calculated results. It point to different models in both programs. Of course you know which wall function you used in Openfoam. Is that known for CFX too? I don't know CFX at all.
__________________
Uwe Pilz  Sie ahnen nicht, wieviel Poesie in der Berechnung einer Logarithmentafel enthalten ist (Carl Friedrich Gauß) 

May 14, 2017, 08:16 

#5  
Senior Member
Arjun
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Nurenberg, Germany
Posts: 700
Rep Power: 19 
Quote:
Are you suggesting that by shifting the node to 2 d distance CFX can give you twice shear force? Edited to add: If what you say is true then by refining mesh you would get almost 0 shear force, but we do DNS to get accurate shear force and usually it is not 0. 

May 14, 2017, 09:58 

#6 
Senior Member
khedar
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 110
Rep Power: 2 
I did not say shear stress has to be twice, but i made a mistake in reading the results, tau_w for openfoam is around 7 Pa against 8.5 Pa which is a much smaller difference (I said twice in my previous post).
But still it is bit confusing, because in some places one talks in term of grid spacing (ds) of the first cell and other places, its the the distance to the first grid point(center of the first cell). 

May 14, 2017, 15:03 

#7  
Senior Member
Arjun
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Nurenberg, Germany
Posts: 700
Rep Power: 19 
Quote:
I wrote that because of this "Also I compared the wall_shear stress values for both using kOmegaSST model and found that values of CFX are approximately twice that of OpenFoam" Anyway, the reason for confusion is because you are only looking at yplus. What value has to be taken depends on where the variable is stored. As you noted for CFX variable is stored at the nodes while openfoam it is at cell center. Now for solver the value of shear stress is what matters, yplus etc is means to achieve it. Other than yplus you also have other quantities like for example uplus, they also change based on the location. also the difference stems from slight difference in formulation (for example using different profile than log or something like that). As long as you get similar shear stress you are fine, it would be tough for you to match exact values of yplus etc as these details are not completely written in manuals. 

May 15, 2017, 00:37 

#8 
Senior Member
Uwe Pilz
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Posts: 259
Rep Power: 4 
I recommend to analyse the wall shear stress and the velocity profile in normal direction form the surface. With these values you may come closer to the differences of the program results.
__________________
Uwe Pilz  Sie ahnen nicht, wieviel Poesie in der Berechnung einer Logarithmentafel enthalten ist (Carl Friedrich Gauß) 

July 10, 2017, 08:01 

#9 
Member
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 34
Rep Power: 2 
So, assuming that you did the same simulation in both softwares, the recommended values of yPlus would be different for OpenFOAM and CFX?
For exemple: OpenFOAM: yPlus = 45, recommended 30 < yPlus < 500 CFX: yPlus = 90, recommended 60 < yPlus < 1000 

July 10, 2017, 09:18 

#10  
Member
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 34
Rep Power: 2 
Quote:


July 11, 2017, 17:26 

#11  
Senior Member
khedar
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 110
Rep Power: 2 
Quote:
Quote:


Thread Tools  
Display Modes  


Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Differences between CFX and OpenFOAM regarding convergence and robustness!  magjohan  OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD  4  February 26, 2015 11:26 
OpenFOAM vs. Fluent & CFX  marco  FLUENT  13  February 18, 2015 00:19 
Suggestion for a new subforum at OpenFOAM's Forum  wyldckat  Site Help, Feedback & Discussions  20  October 28, 2014 10:04 
Different flow pattern between OpenFOAM and CFX  AirS  OpenFOAM  0  January 12, 2010 08:08 
OpenFOAM vs. Fluent & CFX  marco  Main CFD Forum  81  March 31, 2009 14:22 