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

Adding Radiations in chtMultiRegionSimpleFoam

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

Like Tree16Likes

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old   August 12, 2019, 11:53
Default
  #21
Senior Member
 
Peter Hess
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Austria
Posts: 250
Rep Power: 17
peterhess is on a distinguished road
Well, that will take a while

Are the dimenions of the case such small?

You have 0.0005 X 0.0005 X 0.0005 m

Each side has just 0.5 mm length!

Is it realy such small?

Are you using OF7.0?

Regards

Peter
peterhess is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 13, 2019, 03:51
Default
  #22
Senior Member
 
Raza Javed
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Germany
Posts: 183
Rep Power: 7
Raza Javed is on a distinguished road
Well, that will take a while

Quote:
Originally Posted by peterhess View Post
Are the dimenions of the case such small?

You have 0.0005 X 0.0005 X 0.0005 m

Each side has just 0.5 mm length!

Is it realy such small?

I am sorry I was re-scaling it in Allrun, that's why it became so small. Now I removed that line from Allrun script.


Quote:
Originally Posted by peterhess View Post
Are you using OF7.0?

I am using OpenFOAM 4.1.
Raza Javed is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 16, 2019, 22:08
Default
  #23
Senior Member
 
Peter Hess
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Austria
Posts: 250
Rep Power: 17
peterhess is on a distinguished road
Here is your case in OF7.0

Regards

Peter
Attached Files
File Type: gz radiation_box_New.tar.gz (7.5 KB, 36 views)

Last edited by peterhess; September 8, 2019 at 08:53. Reason: Case updated!
peterhess is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 21, 2019, 09:48
Default
  #24
Senior Member
 
Raza Javed
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Germany
Posts: 183
Rep Power: 7
Raza Javed is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by peterhess View Post
Here is your case in OF7.0

Regards

Peter

Thank you so much for your help.


I have one general question here:


If I have two regions in my geometry, just like I have Now, (one is solid and one is air).


And I am putting radiations on Solid region using viewFactor radiation model. and those radations will radiate from solid to air.


Do I need to put radiation model also on air region to accept the radiations coming from the solid region?



Thank you
Raza Javed is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 21, 2019, 11:10
Default
  #25
Senior Member
 
Peter Hess
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Austria
Posts: 250
Rep Power: 17
peterhess is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raza Javed View Post

If I have two regions in my geometry, just like I have Now, (one is solid and one is air).


And I am putting radiations on Solid region using viewFactor radiation model. and those radations will radiate from solid to air.
No!

Activating the radiation in Solid calculates the radiation in solid. i.e. inside the solid!

Anyway you can try it in the last model I uploaded by activating the radiation in Solid and deactivating it in Fluid ans see what happens...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raza Javed View Post

Do I need to put radiation model also on air region to accept the radiations coming from the solid region?
There is no radiation comming from Solid to Fluid.

There is a radiation coming from the Fluid-Side of the interface between the Solid and Fluid.

If you delete the solid region and defined the same temperature on the Fluid-Side of the interface, you will get the identical results!

Activating the radiation in a region lets Radiation in this region calculated.

Viewfactor method does not calculates the interaction between two (or more) regions. The only method for my poor knowledge that is able doing that is FVDOM!

Example: The radiation from a LED in a car head lamp through the polycarbonate front cover.

Anyway, I dont know if OF is able to do that for "Semi transparent medium".

Regards

Peter
altinel likes this.
peterhess is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 21, 2019, 11:22
Default
  #26
Senior Member
 
Raza Javed
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Germany
Posts: 183
Rep Power: 7
Raza Javed is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by peterhess View Post
No!

Activating the radiation in Solid calculates the radiation in solid. i.e. inside the solid!

Anyway you can try it in the last model I uploaded by activating the radiation in Solid and deactivating it in Fluid ans see what happens...



There is no radiation comming from Solid to Fluid.

There is a radiation coming from the Fluid-Side of the interface between the Solid and Fluid.

If you delete the solid region and defined the same temperature on the Fluid-Side of the interface, you will get the identical results!

Activating the radiation in a region lets Radiation in this region calculated.

Viewfactor method does not calculates the interaction between two (or more) regions. The only method for my poor knowledge that is able doing that is FVDOM!

Example: The radiation from a LED in a car head lamp through the polycarbonate front cover.

Anyway, I dont know if OF is able to do that for "Semi transparent medium".

Regards

Peter

I think I am completely out of track.


what I am doing is the following.


I put viewFactor radiation model in the Air region. and OpaqueSolid model in the solid region. And I am putting the temperature of 500K at the solid region.


Now as we know the temperature on the solid is 500K, and the temperature of the air is 300K, and I put the velocity (U) of the air equals to zero, so I am expecting to see the heat transfer through radiation from solid to air. I think this is wrong approach?

And what happened is that I saw the heat transfer in paraview, but when I removed the radiations from the simulations, the results remained the same. It means that the radiations are not working.


My only focus is, to simulate the radiations coming out of solid(because it is HOT), into the air. Just like we have heaters in our home.


And I am unable to decide, which radiation model will work in this case.


Thank you
Raza Javed is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 21, 2019, 13:33
Default
  #27
Senior Member
 
Peter Hess
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Austria
Posts: 250
Rep Power: 17
peterhess is on a distinguished road
For sure the simulations with and without radiation are not identical!

They seams to be identical, but the wall heat flux shows the difference...

Because you have constant walls temperatures:

- The temperature fields will be identical

- The very weak velocity field will be also identical because the very weak free convection fields is getting its buoyancy from identical temperature fields

- The density is also identical, cause everywhere an identical temperature fields govers

- The pressure is also identical because the temperature and density are identical (perfect gas low)

Calculate the heat flux from the solid to the fluid (or at the walls of the fluid) with and without the radiation and you will find the difference.

Alternativly you could change the constant temperature of the solid to constant heat generation.

In this case the temperature of the solid/fluid interface will be much higher without radiation in comparing with radiation!

Regards

Peter
peterhess is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 21, 2019, 18:01
Default
  #28
Senior Member
 
Raza Javed
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Germany
Posts: 183
Rep Power: 7
Raza Javed is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by peterhess View Post
No!

Activating the radiation in Solid calculates the radiation in solid. i.e. inside the solid!

Anyway you can try it in the last model I uploaded by activating the radiation in Solid and deactivating it in Fluid ans see what happens...



There is no radiation comming from Solid to Fluid.

There is a radiation coming from the Fluid-Side of the interface between the Solid and Fluid.

If you delete the solid region and defined the same temperature on the Fluid-Side of the interface, you will get the identical results!

Activating the radiation in a region lets Radiation in this region calculated.

Viewfactor method does not calculates the interaction between two (or more) regions. The only method for my poor knowledge that is able doing that is FVDOM!

Example: The radiation from a LED in a car head lamp through the polycarbonate front cover.

Anyway, I dont know if OF is able to do that for "Semi transparent medium".

Regards

Peter
Thank you so much for your reply.

From your this post, I understood the following:

1. If I am putting radiation (for example: viewFactor model) in one region, then it just calculates radiation inside this region, not outside this.

2. If I want to see radiations from one region to the other, then I should use fvDOM radiation model.

Please let me know, If I understood wrong.

Thank you
Raza Javed is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 22, 2019, 12:21
Default
  #29
Senior Member
 
Peter Hess
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Austria
Posts: 250
Rep Power: 17
peterhess is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raza Javed View Post

1. If I am putting radiation (for example: viewFactor model) in one region, then it just calculates radiation inside this region, not outside this.
Yes!

Every region has its own viewFactorDict that just calculates the viewFactor inside it.

There is no viewFactorDict for regions exchange.

If Exchange between the regions to be recognized, then fvDoM must be used.

By the way, you can not calculate the radiation in one region and turn it off in the other!

The "other" region, in our case Solid MUST also turn the radiation on, but it as opaqueRegion to be defined!

That is why opaqueRadtiation is at all exists as a radiation model...

Like that the region with viewFactor calculate the radiation in it and the other region with opaque namely does not..

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raza Javed View Post

2. If I want to see radiations from one region to the other, then I should use fvDOM radiation model.
Yes!

Regards

Peter
altinel likes this.

Last edited by peterhess; August 22, 2019 at 16:41.
peterhess is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 22, 2019, 17:45
Default
  #30
Senior Member
 
Raza Javed
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Germany
Posts: 183
Rep Power: 7
Raza Javed is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by peterhess View Post
Yes!

Every region has its own viewFactorDict that just calculates the viewFactor inside it.

There is no viewFactorDict for regions exchange.

If Exchange between the regions to be recognized, then fvDoM must be used.

By the way, you can not calculate the radiation in one region and turn it off in the other!

The "other" region, in our case Solid MUST also turn the radiation on, but it as opaqueRegion to be defined!

That is why opaqueRadtiation is at all exists as a radiation model...

Like that the region with viewFactor calculate the radiation in it and the other region with opaque namely does not..



Yes!

Regards

Peter
Thank you so much for your reply.

One more question please, can we also use P1 radiation model in our case?

because I checked one paper and in that, the geometry was closely related to our geometry, and he is using P1 model.

In case if you want to have a look, the link is given below:

http://www.tfd.chalmers.se/~hani/kur...Foam_final.pdf

Thank you
Raza Javed is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 22, 2019, 18:00
Default
  #31
Senior Member
 
Peter Hess
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Austria
Posts: 250
Rep Power: 17
peterhess is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raza Javed View Post
can we also use P1 radiation model in our case?
I can not comment that cause I do not have sufficient experience using P1.

Regards

Peter
peterhess is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 25, 2019, 13:21
Default
  #32
Senior Member
 
Raza Javed
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Germany
Posts: 183
Rep Power: 7
Raza Javed is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by peterhess View Post
I can not comment that cause I do not have sufficient experience using P1.

Regards

Peter



Hi.


I have one general question, how can we see that our radiation is working?


because I have run the same case, with radiation and without radiation, but it looks exactly the same when I see temperature in Paraview.


I don't know how I can check that my radiation is working or NOT?


And one more question, Is it necessary to use topoSet to make cellSets when using view Factor radiation model?


Thank you
Raza Javed is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 25, 2019, 14:06
Default
  #33
Senior Member
 
Peter Hess
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Austria
Posts: 250
Rep Power: 17
peterhess is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raza Javed View Post

because I have run the same case, with radiation and without radiation, but it looks exactly the same when I see temperature in Paraview.

I don't know how I can check that my radiation is working or NOT?
Because the temperature at walls in both simulations are identical/fixed, you will not recognize a difference in Termperature field.


To see the difference with and without radiation, you need to calculate the heat flux leaving the solid and resieved by the outer walls of fluid.

I told this way before...

To calculate the wallHeatFlux leaving the interface (Fluid/Solid) and recieved by the outer boundaries of the fluid you need to use the utility:

WallHeatFlux

https://www.openfoam.com/documentati...lHeatFlux.html

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raza Javed View Post

And one more question, Is it necessary to use topoSet to make cellSets when using view Factor radiation model?
The topoSet has nothing to do with the solving or calculation of the viewFactors.

topoSet just tells which cells belongs to which region and which boundaries belongs to which region.

Regards

Peter
peterhess is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 25, 2019, 14:19
Default
  #34
Senior Member
 
Raza Javed
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Germany
Posts: 183
Rep Power: 7
Raza Javed is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by peterhess View Post
Because the temperature at walls in both simulations are identical/fixed, you will not recognize a difference in Termperature field.


To see the difference with and without radiation, you need to calculate the heat flux leaving the solid and resieved by the outer walls of fluid.

I told this way before...

To calculate the wallHeatFlux leaving the interface (Fluid/Solid) and recieved by the outer boundaries of the fluid you need to use the utility:

WallHeatFlux

https://www.openfoam.com/documentati...lHeatFlux.html



The topoSet has nothing to do with the solving or calculation of the viewFactors.

topoSet just tells which cells belongs to which region and which boundaries belongs to which region.

Regards

Peter

Thank you so much for your reply.


I am sorry I am asking you stupid question, but I didn't get how to use wallHeatFlux in my simulation?


Where do I need to mention it?


Thank you
Raza Javed is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 25, 2019, 17:35
Default
  #35
Senior Member
 
Peter Hess
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Austria
Posts: 250
Rep Power: 17
peterhess is on a distinguished road
Wall heat flux in OF 4.1

Regards

Peter
peterhess is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 28, 2019, 06:30
Default
  #36
New Member
 
Matteo Quirino
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 6
Rep Power: 7
MatteoQ is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by peterhess View Post
To reduce calculation time of radiation you are able to reduce the number of faces that calculate the radiation.

Suppuse you have a surface with 120 cells. i.e. 120 faces.

Instead of recognize every face as a sparate face, you can say:

nFacesInCoarsestLevel 10;

In this case the viewFactor-Generator will collect every 12 faces (120/10) as one face (or called patch). The temperature of the patch is the avarage temperature of the 12 faces included and the viewFactor is calculated and applied one time for one patch instead 12 times.

For sure the 10 patches in this case are collecting faces that are bounded or neighboured to each other as a patch.

If You increase to:

nFacesInCoarsestLevel 120;

Then every surface is one patch!

As higher the number as more accurate the results. But also as more calculation time needed.

By the way it is a good idea to apply renumberMesh utility before calculating the viewFactor.


And now to:

featureAngle 10;

During viewFactor calculation every patch is emitting rays in all directions and see which target patch is recieving more.

If patch-1 sends 10 rays and patch-3 recieve 6 of the 10 then the view factor between patch-1 and patch-3 is 0.6!

As smaller the featureAngle as more rays will be emitted. Or as higher the resolution of the emitted rays.

In this case:

featureAngle 10;

Means every 10 degrees emitte one ray!

As smaller the value as exacter the calculation.

Peter

Thanks a lot this is very useful to know! Can you please tell me where did you find those information? I searched for keywords like "angle" and "feat" in the shootRays.H, viewFacotrsGen.C and faceAgglomerate.C files but I couldn't find anything relevant. My C++ skills are not the best so I might have missed something.

Furthermore, when I change the featAngle the rays seems that they do not change, I attached two figures, the first one with featAngle 1 and the second with 180, they are the same, I don't understand why.

The explanation you gave about the faces is confirmed by the last picture, there is a cube with 36 faces, I used nFacesInCoarsestLevel 20, so 36/20=1.8 and indeed the faces are gatherd 2 by 2.



Still I cannot visualize in paraview what concerns the rays.


Regards

Matteo
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Ray2Angle1.jpg (129.1 KB, 31 views)
File Type: jpg Rays2ANgle180.jpg (129.1 KB, 20 views)
File Type: jpg RaysFaces.jpg (95.2 KB, 27 views)

Last edited by MatteoQ; August 28, 2019 at 10:10.
MatteoQ is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 30, 2019, 16:46
Default
  #37
Senior Member
 
Peter Hess
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Austria
Posts: 250
Rep Power: 17
peterhess is on a distinguished road
Hello MatteoQ!

And sorry for the late answer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MatteoQ View Post

Can you please tell me where did you find those information? I searched for keywords like "angle" and "feat" in the shootRays.H, viewFacotrsGen.C and faceAgglomerate.C files but I couldn't find anything relevant. My C++ skills are not the best so I might have missed something.

Well the source of my informations is actualy the help of Ansys-Fluent...

The S2S (surface to surface) Radiation method is very good described there.

See Clustering:

http://www.afs.enea.it/project/neptu...th/node116.htm

Quote:
Originally Posted by MatteoQ View Post

Furthermore, when I change the featAngle the rays seems that they do not change, I attached two figures, the first one with featAngle 1 and the second with 180, they are the same, I don't understand why.
Well it depends how you validate the difference!

If you compared the size of the F file in the region, where the view factor is calculated, between different values for the angle, you will find that the size is identical.

That is because the number of patches is identical.

Anyway, if you compared the values inside the F file for different angles, you will notice that they are slightly different!

Quote:
Originally Posted by MatteoQ View Post

Still I cannot visualize in paraview what concerns the rays.
I can not comment that because I did not made any visualisation for the rays bevore
MatteoQ likes this.

Last edited by peterhess; September 2, 2019 at 01:45.
peterhess is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   September 3, 2019, 03:59
Default
  #38
New Member
 
Matteo Quirino
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 6
Rep Power: 7
MatteoQ is on a distinguished road
Thanks again for you answer ,

I will have a look inside the F files to observe the changes you mentioned and I will investigate deeper in the openfoam codes to see if I find something.


Your answers have been very usefull to me.


Regards


MatteoQ
MatteoQ is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   September 9, 2019, 09:26
Default
  #39
Senior Member
 
Raza Javed
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Germany
Posts: 183
Rep Power: 7
Raza Javed is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by peterhess View Post
Here is your case in OF7.0

Regards

Peter

Here are the images...
Attached Images
File Type: png p_rgh.png (129.3 KB, 29 views)
File Type: png p.png (122.7 KB, 25 views)
Raza Javed is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   September 9, 2019, 10:25
Default
  #40
Senior Member
 
Peter Hess
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Austria
Posts: 250
Rep Power: 17
peterhess is on a distinguished road
Well, you have vacuum!!!

The values on the scale are absolute values.

Take a look to rho and you will see that rho in paraFoam is very low!

rho has an avarage value of 6e-5.

Regards

Peter
peterhess is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply

Tags
chtmulitregionfoam, chtmultiregionsimpefoam, openfoam, radiation

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
Incorporating pyrolysis Model in chtMultiRegionFoam Archana V OpenFOAM Programming & Development 31 April 2, 2022 02:11
multiRegionHeater error ordinary OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 2 June 9, 2020 17:43
chtMultiRegionSimpleFoam: crash on parallel run student666 OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 3 April 20, 2017 11:05
conjugateHeatFoam + interFoam farhagim OpenFOAM Programming & Development 15 July 19, 2016 07:55
chtMultiRegionSimpleFoam samiam1000 OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 39 March 31, 2016 08:43


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:32.