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

Boundary Conditions of a free hot jet (OF vs STARCCM)

Register Blogs Community New Posts Updated Threads Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old   March 5, 2018, 06:08
Post Boundary Conditions of a free hot jet (OF vs STARCCM)
  #1
New Member
 
Pedro Marreiro
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Lisbon
Posts: 8
Rep Power: 8
pmarreiro is on a distinguished road
Hey! The post is quite extense so i am sorry in advance.

I have been struggling with entrainment boundary conditions for a while and still found no solution.

The problem is to replicate, using LES, the results of a free hot jet as studied in this experimental paper/report: https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/c...9930007195.pdf.

The first attempts were with buoyantPimpleFoam but i realized that it wasn't the best option so i changed to fireFoam (removed combustion, radiation, etc). I built the case based on the tutorial smallPoolFire3D but with a cylindrical domain built with the m4 macro with 7D diameter and 30D height, where D is the inlet diameter.

The obtained results were compared with a STARCCM+ 12 simulation using exactly the same mesh (with over 2M cells), timestep (0.0015s), LES model (Smagorinsky with Cs = 0.094) and time-averaging interval (20s). The entrainment conditions in STAR are pressureOutlet and, as you can see in the attached plots, the results are amazingly close to the experimental.

As the results in OF were so bad, i took some steps back and built a 2D simulation in order to test some other BCs.

This paper https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmass...r.2014.01.066; used OF to study some buoyancy corrections in k-epsilon models in a wedge (axisymetric) domain and clearly state the used BCs (attached table).

With these last BCs the results are better (compare the outlet, e.g.) but still unsatisfactory. What concerns me is that, not only the results are still bad, but also these BCs are not correct for the stated problem, as the boundaries are not far away from the flow. The "merge BCs" in the plots is a case setup where the side entrainment is modeled with the totalPressure+pressureInletOutletVelocity and the top has the same BCs as in table1, giving worse results.


Any advice on how to solve this?


Kind regards,
Pedro Marreiro


//------------------------------------------------------------------------//
NOTE: The cases, with both the boundary conditions are attached.
//------------------------------------------------------------------------//
Attached Images
File Type: jpg U_comp.jpg (70.7 KB, 26 views)
File Type: jpg T_comp.jpg (70.4 KB, 21 views)
File Type: png Kumar&Dewan_BCs.png (37.8 KB, 20 views)
Attached Files
File Type: zip 2D_cases.zip (47.5 KB, 6 views)
pmarreiro is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply

Tags
boundary conditions, entrainment, free jet


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
Radiation in semi-transparent media with surface-to-surface model? mpeppels CFX 11 August 22, 2019 07:30
CGNS Boundary conditions using SU2 denzell SU2 3 July 9, 2018 05:58
Question about adaptive timestepping Guille1811 CFX 25 November 12, 2017 17:38
Question about heat transfer coefficient setting for CFX Anna Tian CFX 1 June 16, 2013 06:28
Low Mixing time Problem Mavier CFX 5 April 29, 2013 00:00


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 00:02.