|
[Sponsors] |
January 24, 2019, 10:52 |
failed validating Cd for 2D airfoil
|
#1 |
Member
Sereff
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 49
Rep Power: 7 |
Dear Foamers:
The case I was simulating is air flow around a 2D airfoil with Re = 1e6, with following:
I've been getting pretty covincing results for Cl, but not for Cd. I've read from some source that Cd is far more sensitive to mesh quality than Cl does. I assume that 'high mesh quality' means more refined mesh as in more cells and finer boundary layers? And talking about boundary layers, I took a closer look at the yPlus value for my simulations on different mesh, please correct me if I was using wrong BCs, case 1,30<y+<70, with boundary conditions on airfoil:
Kind regards, Last edited by Sereff; January 24, 2019 at 15:04. |
|
January 24, 2019, 11:50 |
|
#2 |
Member
Sereff
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 49
Rep Power: 7 |
Attached are my Cd and Cl results for different aoa.
Last edited by Sereff; January 28, 2019 at 05:09. |
|
January 25, 2019, 02:41 |
|
#3 |
Senior Member
Zander Meiring
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 125
Rep Power: 8 |
Drag is a difficult property to get right in airfoil simulations. It is very dependent on the wall boundary layer, and so using a wall function will likely not work.
What is meant by a high mesh quality is details such as density, minimal grading near the walls, low non-orthogonality and skewness, and cells aligned to the direction of flow as much as possible. Also, as the drag is so dependent on the boundary layer, accurate turbulence modelling at the boundary is also very important. Unfortunately, all RANS formulations are simply an approximation of turbulence effects, so this introduces enhanced difficulty in getting a correct boundary layer |
|
January 25, 2019, 03:44 |
|
#4 |
Member
Sereff
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 49
Rep Power: 7 |
Hi, thank you for your anwer.
So I assume with k-Omega-SST, it is expected to have a rather bad Cd prediction. But do you know what boundary condition should I use for velocity on the surface of airfoil? I've been told if wall function were to apply then I should use 'zeroGradient' for airfoil surface instead of 'noSlip'. Kind regards, |
|
January 25, 2019, 05:10 |
|
#5 |
Senior Member
Zander Meiring
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 125
Rep Power: 8 |
AFAIK if you are interested in the effect of the wall, a no slip condition is always needed
|
|
Tags |
2d airfoil, boundary conditions, drag coefficient, validation, yplus |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Foam::error::printStack(Foam::Ostream&) with simpleFoam -parallel | U.Golling | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 52 | September 23, 2023 04:35 |
Initial conditions for uniform flow | andreas | OpenFOAM | 5 | November 16, 2012 16:00 |
[OpenFOAM] ParaView/Parafoam error when making animation | Disco_Caine | ParaView | 6 | September 28, 2010 10:54 |
user subroutine error | CFDUSER | CFX | 2 | December 9, 2006 07:31 |
user defined function | cfduser | CFX | 0 | April 29, 2006 11:58 |