- **OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD**
(*https://www.cfd-online.com/Forums/openfoam-solving/*)

- - **2D Airfoil Pressure Coefficients from simpleFOAM**
(*https://www.cfd-online.com/Forums/openfoam-solving/96396-2d-airfoil-pressure-coefficients-simplefoam.html*)

2D Airfoil Pressure Coefficients from simpleFOAM1 Attachment(s)
After searching the forum, I have seen relatively limited discussion regarding validation of pressure distributions via simpleFOAM with experimental data.
I have a converged simpleFOAM result for 2D, incompressible, laminar, and attached flow about a thick airfoil. Using ptot as total pressure at the inlet, I have defined cp, cp = 2(p* - ptot*)/(U0^2) where * denotes density-normalized pressure values from simpleFOAM, p*=p/rho, ptot*=ptot/rho, and U0 is the velocity at the inlet. Plotting these coefficients gives a puzzling non-smooth profile (Fig. attached). Has anyone else observed this for a converged case? Any suggestions are much appreciated. |

Surface definitionThought I'd reply to my own post in case anyone else needs help in the future...
I found my surface geometry to be way too coarse, especially near the leading edge. Once I reverted to B-Splines in my gmsh setup to refine the initial STL file, I had success with snappyHexMesh in building the 2D grid. Then with a simple RANS (k-omega) turbulence model I was able to very closely match experimental pressure profiles. The key is surface refinement. It is probably overkill as I haven't run any grid sensitivity study yet, but I used 1000 points around the leading edge. My STL file for a simple airfoil is 64MB...but I have good results :) |

Quote:
but for future reference, about 100-150 points in the cordwise direction should suffice, given that they are clustered near the LE. best regards. |

1 Attachment(s)
Again with the hope of solving someone's problem in the future...I certainly have learned heaps from this forum.
Attached are the laminar simpleFoam & RANS results, compared to test data. There are certainly some more tweaks but the preliminary result is not bad. @sail: Perhaps turbulence was a bigger deal here than I initially gave credit. However, the mesh is certainly much improved from the first plot. Thanks for your tip, I'll be sure to try it out. |

5 Attachment(s)
Quote:
i have a smilar problem, would you please guide me? i am working on multi element airfoils, my pressureCoeffs figures for 3 element separately are in the attachment. As you see the pressureCoeffs has flactuation in three of them, whould you please explain more that how should i refine my STL file to have a smooth pressureCoeffs figure. Thank you very much:) your answer may help me a lot. |

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 19:17. |