# Flow goes the wrong way

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

 August 11, 2005, 11:41 in the example a flow enters a #1 New Member   Klaus Wittig Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 20 Rep Power: 10 in the example a flow enters a volume at a given angle (picture) and i would assume that it will keep the direction for a while. The initial velocity in the volume is zero. But to my surprise the flow starts to change direction immediatelly. There is no pressure gradient in this direction. Only the mesh is not orthogonal but i included: nCorrectors 4; nNonOrthogonalCorrectors 8; Has somebody an explanation? Greetings, Klaus

 August 11, 2005, 17:15 Which solver/what flow conditi #2 Senior Member   Hrvoje Jasak Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: London, England Posts: 1,810 Rep Power: 25 Which solver/what flow conditions? Are you having problems with boudnary conditions? How about trying potentialFoam for starters to see what you get (that one is easy) and then trying a restart from the potential solution. Your picture looks like it has already blown up pretty much + I cannot say whether you've got a velocity going through the bottom boundary - is that meant to be a wall? Try checking the pressure and velocity b.c. on that patch. Hrv __________________ Hrvoje Jasak Providing commercial FOAM/OpenFOAM and CFD Consulting: http://wikki.co.uk

 August 13, 2005, 11:44 Hrvoje, i followed your pro #3 New Member   Klaus Wittig Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 20 Rep Power: 10 Hrvoje, i followed your proposal to use potentialFoam but the problem is not solved. I attached a picture of a part of the structure together with the flow. Its a turbo-charger turbine (half of it is displayed). You see the flow-velocity in y direction which is nearly circumferential. In the picture you see that the circumferential velocity is changing to zero after leaving the bladed section. Of course this is wrong. The rotational momentum of the flow should stay but it does not. I use the "cyclic" boundary-condition as shown in the scetch. This is very disturbing. Are there are some known limitations on using the "cyclic" conditions? Any other ideas? regards, Klaus

 August 13, 2005, 20:28 I've also observed some proble #4 Member   Ali Heidari Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Surrey, London, United Kingdom Posts: 39 Rep Power: 10 I've also observed some problems with "cyclic" boundaries in OpenFOAM, especially when dealing with "gamma" for interface flows. I can provide a case that proves cyclic boundary has problems at least for gamma.

 August 14, 2005, 07:33 Well, cyclic has been in the c #5 Senior Member   Hrvoje Jasak Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: London, England Posts: 1,810 Rep Power: 25 Well, cyclic has been in the code for about 10 years now and it has been tested in a lot of detail. Regarding the cyclic problems for the Gamma scheme, I have never seen any (and I have implemented both) so if you've got a test case showing the problem please post it to me or the Bugs mailing list asap. As for the turbine case, I don't see anything unusual about it and FOAM should solve this kind of thing without any trouble. However, the potential flow is only a first step. Consider what happens in this case if you say that U equals grad p - that's what you get from the potential solution. Behind the rotor, there is no circumferential pressure gradient (right?), so the potential solution gives you no rotation - you need inertia for that. Try restarting the full Navier-Stokes solution from this. Incidentally, how are you dealing with the fact that the rotor is rotating? Do you have the whole domain "spinning" (needs centrifugal and Coriolis forces added into the code) or do you have a sliding interface? Sorry, I don't usually do turbomachinerey so I don't know the customary approach. Hrv __________________ Hrvoje Jasak Providing commercial FOAM/OpenFOAM and CFD Consulting: http://wikki.co.uk

 August 21, 2005, 16:49 Of course, there's nothing wro #6 Senior Member   Hrvoje Jasak Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: London, England Posts: 1,810 Rep Power: 25 Of course, there's nothing wrong with the cyclic boundary: the case provided by Ali was set up all wrong. For future reference, please note: BOTH sides of the cyclic boundary belong into the same patch, such that the first half is one side and the second is the opposite. (this may change in the near future, but is the case for foam-1.1). Also, reading the manual sometimes helps... Hrv __________________ Hrvoje Jasak Providing commercial FOAM/OpenFOAM and CFD Consulting: http://wikki.co.uk

 August 21, 2005, 20:28 So sorry Hrv, bad mistake, I w #7 Member   Ali Heidari Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Surrey, London, United Kingdom Posts: 39 Rep Power: 10 So sorry Hrv, bad mistake, I was under impression cyclic needs certain settings as inlet boundary does for "gamma" variable (phase indicator) and although I had looked through sampleb tutorials, I totally forgot that may be the problem.

 Thread Tools Display Modes Linear Mode

 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 OffTrackbacks are On Pingbacks are On Refbacks are On Forum Rules

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post lam OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 3 August 8, 2007 03:56 zhu FLUENT 1 August 29, 2006 09:35 tristan FLUENT 0 April 20, 2006 04:27 andimb OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 2 March 20, 2006 09:51 SAM FLUENT 2 November 5, 2004 02:39

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:41.