
[Sponsors] 
June 25, 2018, 10:17 
nonuniform geometry between cyclic boundary

#1 
New Member
Georg
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 7
Rep Power: 6 
I want to simulate an infinite serpentine channel with laminar flow only.
The aim is a periodic inlet/outlet and the flow driven by a constant pressure gradient. The basic setup can also be seen in the pictures attached (serpentine_massflow.png). For basic channel flows, the case is solved by applying a constant momentum source (as pressure gradient) to the momentum equation which holds for the whole fluid domain. The U and p inlet/outlet are set to cyclic, respectivley. However, when facing a more complex geometry, the pressure gradient is not uniform in streamwise direction and only known at the boundaries (in the form of Reynolds number and hence, mass flux, pressure gradient, all equivalent). I have found the suggestion of applying the "fan BC" for the cyclic pressure boundaries here (Periodic B.C or Inlet/Outlet B.C), which sould define the pressure gradient at a cyclic boundary. However, with type fan; patchType cyclic; f List<scalar> 1(6e05); // p_OF = p_real / rho value uniform 0; for the pressure inlet/outlet, the result is not desirable. Am i using the right boundary conditions for the setup? I appreciate any thoughts on this problem. Greetings, G. Picture 1: "serpentine_cyclic.png" using U and p as cyclic without any flow driving source. Picture 2: "serpentine_fan.png" using U as cyclic and p as fan at the boundary. Picture 3: "serpentine_massflow.png" using U inlet as constant mass flow at inlet and zeroGradient at outlet. The pressure es set to zeroGradient at inlet and a fixedValue at outlet. This case is just for the general vizualisation of the setup. 

June 28, 2018, 06:52 

#2 
New Member
Georg
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 7
Rep Power: 6 
I have finally broken down the case to a very simple one of one fourth of a circle. So, the the flow is driven by an artificial pressure gradient, introduced with the fan boundary condition.
Anyhow, the result is oscillating at the inlet/outlet. The case is available here https://ufile.io/fak0j, maybe someone has ideas on the stability of this case. The attached pictures show, mesh, pressure and velocity, where the oscillations are at the inlet/outlet of those fields. Summary of the case: 2D, laminar, steadystate (just run simpleFoam), cyclic inlet/outlet where the flow is driven by the pressure gradient defined as "fan" bc at the inlet. OpfenFOAM version 5.x and 4.0 tried out. I use stable schemes and solver setting (as far as i know), and played around with the relaxation factors wich ended up in relax_p=0.7 and relax_U=0.1. This seems to be kind of weird, but standard values of 0.3, 0.7, respectivley caused early divergence by enhancing the oscillations. Moreover, finer meshes exhebit the same behaviour (wheter streamwise or normal refinement). 

June 28, 2018, 09:50 

#3 
Senior Member
Robert
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Bremen, GER
Posts: 292
Rep Power: 11 
Hello Georg,
you wrote in your first post that for basic cases you would apply a constant momentum source to the whole domain. For you more complex cases have you tried using the same source and applying it only to a cell set at the cyclic inlet of your domain? Constantly forcing the inflow to a certain threshold without influencing all cells of your domain. Technically it should work with e.g. the meanVelocityForce or the vectorExplicitSetValue. /edit: From this souce it seems like the fvOptions sources accept a mapRegion. Maybe you could even use a steady profile at your inlet without compromising your cyclic BCs. 

July 4, 2018, 06:46 

#4 
New Member
Georg
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 7
Rep Power: 6 
The case seems to be kind of solved, but i am still not sure wheather this setup is valid to hold proper validation.
Thank you Robert for your interest in this one. For the final case i have applied usual cyclic bcs at the inlet/outlet and used the meanVelocityForce momentum source in fvOptions with Code:
momentumSource { type meanVelocityForce; active yes; meanVelocityForceCoeffs { selectionMode cellSet; cellSet SETgradP; fieldNames (U); fields (U); Ubar (0.056 0 0); relaxation 0.8; } Somehow, this approach does work. But i still think a definition of the pressure gradient at the boundaries ONLY should be me appropriate as intended by the fan bc, since i think the former approach is way too restrictive by constraining certain gradients within the domain. 

July 8, 2018, 04:32 

#5 
New Member
Georg
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 7
Rep Power: 6 
Still struggeling with the fan bc. The problem seems to be kind of OF5.X related, since the implementation of this particular bc is unusual.
I have found a very good reference page http://translate.google.com/translat...00201,15700208. This case is prepared for OF2.1, using fan bc and works fine for me aswell. Here, the cyclic fan patches are both defined with Code:
type fan; patchType cyclic; f ( 87.622); value uniform 0; 

Tags 
cyclic bc, pressure gradient 
Thread Tools  Search this Thread 
Display Modes  


Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
rSF: p divergence in combustor (wt negative value)  zonda  OpenFOAM PreProcessing  4  April 10, 2018 06:59 
Strange high velocity in centrifugal pump simulation  huangxianbei  OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD  26  August 15, 2014 02:27 
Question about heat transfer coefficient setting for CFX  Anna Tian  CFX  1  June 16, 2013 06:28 
OpenFOAM solution is diverging for stress analysis in twopahse microstructure.  Sargam05  OpenFOAM  16  April 30, 2013 16:18 
Need help with boundary conditions: open to atmosphere  Wolle  OpenFOAM  2  April 11, 2011 07:32 