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

strange behaviour of fvc::grad(U) and NonlinearKEShih turbmod - analitical comparison

Register Blogs Community New Posts Updated Threads Search

Like Tree1Likes
  • 1 Post By ancsa

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old   May 18, 2012, 11:45
Default strange behaviour of fvc::grad(U) and NonlinearKEShih turbmod - analytical comparison
  #1
Member
 
Aniko Rakai
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Geneva
Posts: 30
Rep Power: 16
ancsa is on a distinguished road
As I found no solution on the forum to the strange behaviour of the NonlinearKEShih turbulence model I tried to compare the results for a boundary layer flow for which the analytical components or the Reynolds stress tensor can be derived and thus compared.

The analytical solution in my opinion for a boundary layer where grad(U) is only dU/dz is attached as nonlinearStressforBL.gif. The test case is also attached, together with the results plotted.

The inlet was defined by timeVaryingMappedFixedValue to maintain the flow, simpleFoam is used for solution, coded functions in controlDict to obtain fvc::grad(U) and R utility to obtain the Reynolds stress tensor, changing constant/RASProperties from kEpslion to NonlinearKEShih. The inlet values are from wind tunnel measurents.

What I see is
- R_{11} and R_{33} seem to be swapped

I think the problem is that fvc::grad(U) is transposed. I.e. dU/dz appeares in the 10th column of the sample file, instead of the 6th. Using transposed grad(U) exactly results analytically in swapping those terms.

- R_{22} is identical to the linear version which it should not be

The missing dirac terms of the implementation seem to cause the problem as again the analytical result without them is R_{22nonlin} = R_{22lin}.


Maybe there is something I did not take into account and the implementations are correct, I would be grateful if someone could point me to that direction as now this model seems to perform badly for the simpler flow I could think of.

Thanks
Aniko
Attached Images
File Type: gif nonlinearReStressforBL.gif (4.4 KB, 45 views)
File Type: jpg Velocities.jpg (26.8 KB, 54 views)
File Type: jpg VelocityGradients.jpg (27.6 KB, 49 views)
File Type: jpg MeanReynoldsStresses.jpg (31.5 KB, 44 views)
Attached Files
File Type: gz ABL.gz (16.3 KB, 14 views)
ingcorra likes this.

Last edited by ancsa; May 19, 2012 at 05:14.
ancsa is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 20, 2015, 11:00
Default
  #2
New Member
 
My Name
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 13
Rep Power: 13
ingcorra is on a distinguished road
You cannot believe how much you helped me with this post. THE VELOCITY GRADIENT IS TRANSPOSED. (and I even knew it)

A simple minus sign in front of the vorticity tensor and finally the turbulence model I was struggling to make work since a pair of months works flawlessly.

THANK YOU SO MUCH.
ingcorra is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply

Tags
fvc::grad(u), nonlinearkeshih


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



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:04.