
[Sponsors] 
June 22, 2011, 12:39 
Getting too high Drag Coefficients

#1 
New Member
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 17
Rep Power: 8 
Sponsored Links
I've been running some test cases on simple geometry before jumping into more high detail modes, but have been getting wrong values for Cd on every case. So fat i've tested the following cases: Ahmed Body 12,5º Slant  RAS SpalartAllmaras Ahmed Body 12,5º Slant  RAS KEpsilon Ahmed Body 12,5º Slant  RAS KOmega Ahmed Body 12,5º Slant  RAS KOmegaSST Ahmed Body 12,5º Slant  LES oneEqEddy Ahmed Body 12,5º Slant  LES Smagorinsky All of these tests have been done with different mesh qualities, with and without surface Layers, with different domain sizes, with Hexahedra and tetrahedra meshes. All of these cases resulted in Cd values between 70 and 130% higher than they should be. I've also ran several cases with NACA0009 profiles at 0º , 5º , 7.5º and 10º attack angle, With and without Surface layers, With and without dense wake mesh, with different domain sizes and different mesh qualities, all using SpalartAllmaras. In all cases, Lift (Cl) errors where between 2% and 10%, however Drag (cd) errors where between 120% and 300%. Has anyone ever encountered these problems? Am i doing something wrong? Where could the problem be? Thanks 

Sponsored Links 
June 23, 2011, 02:44 

#2 
Senior Member

Hello Nicollare,
The Ahmed body has been studied succesfully with OpenFOAM by a lot of people. You can have a look at this thread: http://www.cfdonline.com/Forums/ope...odynamics.html There you can also see some settings that people have used for their RAS computations. I am not sure about LES. I want to dive into that as well, but have not found the time to really do it well. But their are plenty of threads available that could help you with LES. Just search the forum. Good luck, Tom 

June 23, 2011, 09:20 

#3 
Member
The True
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 80
Rep Power: 8 
i am having the same problem. I am using kepsilon.
What I observe is that the y+ values has a big influence on the drag. which is also obvious, due to the skin friction. 

June 23, 2011, 13:25 

#4 
Senior Member
Vesselin Krastev
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: University of Tor Vergata, Rome
Posts: 368
Rep Power: 12 
With a proper numerical setup, you can easily obtain better results (for the Ahmed model) than the ones reported by you, at least for the more stable flow configurations (not too close to the critical slant angle of about 30°). Try for instance to use a prismtetra mesh, with 35 layers around the body and with an y+ distribution matching (approximately) the range 30150. Then run it with the simpleFoam solver, using the realizable kepsilon model and standard wall functions for k, epsilon and nut. If nothing gets better this way, then you probably have to play a bit with the numerics (fvSchemes and fvSolution files): in any case, be sure that at least on the div(phi,U) convenction term you are using something better than the "brutal" first order Gauss upwind scheme, otherwise your solution will be far too diffusive and with too high drag values (resulting also in smaller wake structures behind the body).
Hope this helps V. 

June 23, 2011, 13:43 

#5 
New Member
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 17
Rep Power: 8 
vkrastev:
Some of my attempts with KEpsilon, KOmega and SpalartAllmaras had surface layers with proper Y+ values. For Ke and Ko i had Y+ in the 30ish range, and for SA closte to 1. I also run all my cases with SimpleFoam and use wall functions. I didn't really know about realizable KE, i just used plain KEpsilon. Is it better? As for the schemes, i was using Gauss upwind because i was adviced to use it to avoid boundings on epsilon and omega. What schemes should i use for better results? Also, regarding initial and boundary conditions, what would be proper values for K and omega? im using a turbulence intensity of 0.5% and a mean velocity of 70m/s but i dont know how to obtain the characteristic lenght of the free stream to better estimate omega. 

June 23, 2011, 14:01 

#6  
Senior Member
Vesselin Krastev
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: University of Tor Vergata, Rome
Posts: 368
Rep Power: 12 
Quote:
About the div(phi,U) scheme, try to use this: Gauss linearUpwindV cellMDLimited Gauss linear 1 About the characteristic turbulent lenght scale, you can estimate it as about 10% of the Body's characteristic lenght (for instance Body's height). Good luck V. 

June 28, 2011, 12:28 

#7 
New Member
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 17
Rep Power: 8 
Thanks for the help. I ran a new set of tests. 4 meshes with diferent qualities running Spalart Allmaras, KoSST using upwind and KoSST with the above suggested div schemes. All of them running an Ahmed Body with 12.5º slant angle
Mesh1= 77.000 cells Mesh2= 320.000 cells Mesh3= 1.000.000 cells Mesh4= 2.850.000 cells All mesh are tetrahedral meshes with no surface layers KwSST = K omega SST with upwind scheme KwSSTv2 = K omega SST with Gauss linearUpwindV cellMDLimited Gauss linear 1 scheme SaM = Spalart Allmaras with upwind scheme Here are the results. (Experimental drag Coeff = 0.23) For some reason, KwSSTv2 Mesh 2 and Mesh 4 failed with excessive continuity errors. Dont know why. The closest i got to the experimental value of 0.23 was 0.249 with the KwSSTv2 Mesh 3 run with an error of 8.26%. Not bad considering the lack of layers. KwSST and Spalart allmaras (with upwind scheme) runs where all over the place and pretty far away from the experimental value. Should i stick with KwSST and Gauss linearUpwindV cellMDLimited Gauss linear 1 schemes for these sort of tests? Will surface Layers help me improve my results? 

February 28, 2012, 17:53 

#8 
Member
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 79
Rep Power: 8 
hi, nicolarre!
i wonder if you finally got the rigth results. i'm currently facing the same problem as you did some time ago, although i am using the 0º back slant model. anyway, i would like to know if you got well results or gave up the case, and if you could help me. Thanks in advance! 

February 28, 2012, 19:12 

#9 
New Member
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 17
Rep Power: 8 
Hi maalan,
After some testing on different models, mesh types and schemes, the best results i got for a threedimensional 12.5º slant "floating" ahmed body where obteined with: > KOmega SST model > Gauss linearUpwindV cellMDLimited Gauss linear 1 scheme for div(phi,U) > aprox 3KK tetrahedral cells, giving a fair share to the wake of the vehicle Errors around 68% Hope it helps. 

February 29, 2012, 09:16 

#10 
Senior Member
A_R
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 120
Rep Power: 10 
firstly, i recommend you check your Aref, Uref, and so on.
it maybe occur because of these wrong parameter. 

August 10, 2014, 11:55 

#11 
Member
Nick Gardiner
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Chichester, UK
Posts: 93
Rep Power: 10 
Hi. Please you you tell me what the bottom axis of the graph represents...
Thanks 

Thread Tools  
Display Modes  


Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
lift and drag coefficients around a ground vehicle  Pedro  CFX  3  September 5, 2012 18:31 
Incorrect Drag Coefficients / Mesh Confirmation  wnicholson  ANSYS  3  May 18, 2011 12:00 
Drag Coefficients  mahadevan.swamy  FLUENT  6  July 6, 2009 09:11 
Lift and Drag Coefficients Reliability  Luis  FLUENT  2  December 27, 2005 15:45 
Multicomponent fluid  Andrea  CFX  2  October 11, 2004 05:12 
Sponsored Links 