
[Sponsors] 
February 13, 2013, 07:55 

#21 
New Member
Markus Trompa
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Regensburg, Germany
Posts: 13
Rep Power: 6 
Sponsored Links
"Heat Transfer Predictions based on TwoEquation Turbulence Models with Advanced Wall Treatment" and "Elements of Industrial Heat Transfer Prediction" 16th Brazilian Congress of Mechanical Engineering (COBEM), Nov. 2001 respectively, too. I am studying the implementation of the kOmegaSST model. It would be very nice if someone could send me the paper. Markus.Trompa@tonline.de Thank you very much. 

Sponsored Links 
April 26, 2013, 02:15 

#22  
Senior Member
Mehdi
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Iran
Posts: 130
Rep Power: 8 
Quote:
I am so sorry for the mistake I made. the paper I have is "Heat Transfer Predictions using Advanced Two Equation Turbulence Models" by Wolfgang Vieser, Thomas Esch and Florian Menter. if anyone needs this paper, please send an Email to me.I will be happy to send it to him/her.
__________________
Best Regards; Mehdi Email: mb.pejvak[at]Gmail[dot]com 

August 15, 2013, 05:38 
Elements of Industrial Heat Transfer Prediction

#23 
New Member
Bojan Sekutkovski
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 18
Rep Power: 6 

August 19, 2013, 09:45 

#24 
New Member
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 3
Rep Power: 6 
Hi, could anyone send to me the papers dealt in this thread, please?
I mean: "Heat Transfer Predictions using Advanced Two Equation Turbulence Models" by Wolfgang Vieser, Thomas Esch and Florian Menter and "Heat Transfer Predictions based on TwoEquation Turbulence Models with Advanced Wall Treatment" T.Esch and F.R. Menter  Turbulence, Heat and Mass Transfer 4 davide.peloso@gmail.com Thanks in advance. 

February 25, 2014, 13:08 
request for 2 papers

#25 
New Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1
Rep Power: 0 
Hi friends. I am looking for these 2 papers. this will be my pleasure if you can email them to me.
"Heat Transfer Predictions using Advanced Two Equation Turbulence Models" by Wolfgang Vieser, Thomas Esch and Florian Menter and "Heat Transfer Predictions based on TwoEquation Turbulence Models with Advanced Wall Treatment" T.Esch and F.R. Menter  Turbulence, Heat and Mass Transfer 4 my email address is: e.a.tahmasebi[at]gmail.com Thanks in advance. 

March 25, 2014, 05:20 
The paper exists.

#26 
New Member
shawn qin
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 3
Rep Power: 5 
Hi, everybody.
According to the bugs report below, the paer, Elements of Industrial Heat Transfer Prediction, does exist. But we can not read it. http://openfoam.org/mantisbt/print_b...php?bug_id=232 Are there anyone find it helpful to understand the komegasst model in OF after reading that paper, Heat Transfer Predictions based on TwoEquation Turbulence Models with Advanced Wall Treatment? Besides, can anybody send me a copy of Heat Transfer Predictions based on TwoEquation Turbulence Models with Advanced Wall Treatment. Thank you a lot. My email is shawnqin2014 at gmail.com shawn 

March 25, 2014, 22:22 

#27 
Member
Eric Robertson
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 95
Rep Power: 8 
These two are available online:
http://www.doc88.com/p387479694178.html http://nippon.zaidan.info/seikabutsu...okyo_ts059.pdf 

April 22, 2014, 21:09 

#28 
Senior Member
Daniel
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 156
Rep Power: 10 
Hello all,
I contacted a number of authors who made reference to the COBEM paper, and found someone who pointed me to what looks to be the complete proceedings from COBEM 2001, available in the public domain no less: http://www.abcm.org.br/pt/wpcontent...f/Lectures.pdf Therein is the difficult to find Menter 2001 paper. Hopefully this will make the paper available to one and all, and end the aura of mystery surrounding it! Regards, Daniel 

April 22, 2014, 23:28 

#29 
Senior Member
Daniel
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 156
Rep Power: 10 
I have a question about how the equation in the 2001 paper was corrected, as indicated in kOmegaSST.H:
Code:
Also note that the error in the last term of equation (2) relating to sigma has been corrected. kOmegaSST.C lines 409434 give the same equation as follows: Code:
tmp<fvScalarMatrix> omegaEqn ( fvm::ddt(rho_, omega_) + fvm::div(phi_, omega_)  fvm::Sp(fvc::ddt(rho_) + fvc::div(phi_), omega_)  fvm::laplacian(DomegaEff(F1), omega_) == rhoGammaF1*GbyMu  fvm::SuSp((2.0/3.0)*rhoGammaF1*divU, omega_)  fvm::Sp(rho_*beta(F1)*omega_, omega_)  fvm::SuSp ( rho_*(F1  scalar(1))*CDkOmega/omega_, omega_ ) ); omegaEqn().relax(); omegaEqn().boundaryManipulate(omega_.boundaryField()); solve(omegaEqn); bound(omega_, omegaMin_); Code:
volScalarField CDkOmega ( (2*alphaOmega2_)*(fvc::grad(k_) & fvc::grad(omega_))/omega_ ); Code:
Note that this implementation is written in terms of alpha diffusion coefficients rather than the more traditional sigma (alpha = 1/sigma) so that the blending can be applied to all coefficients in a consistent manner. Thanks for any advice, Daniel 

April 23, 2014, 20:29 

#30 
Member
Eric Robertson
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 95
Rep Power: 8 
Quote:
Menter's 2003 paper is more in line with the OpenFOAM implementation than the 2001 paper that's referenced in the header file (if, for nothing else, the fact that the coefficients are written as 1/sigma, which gives values written in the 2003 paper). http://cfd.mace.manchester.ac.uk/flo...SSTpaper.pdf 

April 28, 2014, 10:39 

#31 
Senior Member
Daniel
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 156
Rep Power: 10 
Hello Eric,
Thanks for your response. I am having a hard time finding the alpha = 1/sigma difference in the papers, though; looking at the equations in the two papers, they both have the sigma terms (sigma_omega1, etc) and they are used the same way. I think I found the error in sigma, but it is not in the last term as indicated in the kwSST.H code; rather, it is in the secondtolast term where Menter 2001 gives: But Menter 2003 gives: Which is consistent with OpenFOAM: Code:
alphaOmega(F1)*mut_ + mu() Code:
tmp<volScalarField> alphaOmega(const volScalarField& F1) const { return blend(F1, alphaOmega1_, alphaOmega2_); } Thanks, Daniel 

April 28, 2014, 11:23 

#32 
Member
Eric Robertson
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 95
Rep Power: 8 
Dan,
I think the OpenFOAM implementation is very accurate. The coefficients are definitely written as alpha = 1/sigma, but the nomenclature differs from the literature. For instance, if you look at Menter 2001, = 1.176. The reciprocal of this is 0.85034, which is the exact value given to in the code. Now, OpenFOAM writes these as etc, even though Menter keeps the nomenclature in 2003 (even though the 2003 and 2001 coefficients are certainly not the same in face value). Long story short, the coefficients that are in 2003 are in fact what OpenFOAM calls "alpha" in the code, and (sigma being the value of any coefficient from 2001). Naturally, this also means that: Code:
alphaOmega(F1)*mut_ + mu() Hopefully I have answered your questions properly. I have combed through the incompressible portion of the code thoroughly and have read several of Menter's papers. Looking at the compressible code, there doesn't seem to be any fundamental differences. 

April 28, 2014, 12:07 

#33 
Senior Member
Daniel
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 156
Rep Power: 10 
Hello Eric,
Thanks for your response. I understand that alpha and sigma are reciprocals, therefore it follows that to remain consistent each instance of sigma in the Menter papers would have to appear as 1/alpha in the OpenFOAM code, would it not? If I look at the code for the turbulent kinetic energy equation, I understand the laplacian term to be implemented as follows: with alpha_k1 = 0.85. The [Menter 2001] paper shows the same term as follows: with sigma_k1 = 1.176. The [Menter 2003] paper shows the same term as follows: with sigma_k1 = 0.85. I am satisfied that the above expressions are equivalent. So if sigma from Menter 2003 is equivalent to alpha in OpenFOAM, which is equivalent to 1/sigma in Menter 2001, then how can it be explained that the equations for CD_kw, F1, as well as the last term in the omega equations, are the same in both papers, even though each contains a sigma term to the same power, but they have reciprocal values? The difference in the omega equation can be explained as an error in the Menter 2001 paper as explained by the OpenFOAM code, but if the equations for CD_kw and F1 are the same in both papers yet the constants are different, I do not see how they can be equivalent. Perhaps there is an inconsistency between the two Menter papers and not with the OF code. Daniel 

April 28, 2014, 12:22 

#34  
Member
Eric Robertson
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 95
Rep Power: 8 
Quote:
I have pondered the same on these two terms before but dropped the issue some time back. It may just be an inconsistency between Menter's papers, as you say, but may be worth a try with reciprocated coefficients. 

April 28, 2014, 19:05 

#35 
Senior Member
Daniel
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 156
Rep Power: 10 
Hello Eric,
Thanks for your feedback. I looked through the code with a finetoothed comb to try to convince myself that it matched one or the other of the references, and found some more differences: F1:  arg1 (OpenFOAM) = min(10, arg1(Menter)); why was this done?  Within arg1, OpenFOAM removed the rho from the numerator and from the CD_kw expression, which is fine if CD_kw < 1e10; if not, CD_kw = 1e10 and then the rho does not cancel, making the OF expression = Menter * 1/rho (and therefore a units mismatch). F2:  arg2 (OpenFOAM) = min(100, arg2(Menter)); why was this done? kEqn, omegaEqn:  Not clear what the influence is of the Su term on the LHS  Pk appears to be related to the SuSp and rhoGammaF1*GbyMu or min(G...) terms, but I am not certain. Any ideas why these changes were made to the model? Thanks, Daniel 

April 28, 2014, 23:07 

#36  
Member
Eric Robertson
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 95
Rep Power: 8 
Quote:
I.E., values for F2 very near the wall can get very large, depending on your first cell height (especially thanks to the y^2 value in the denominator). So, adding a ceiling of scalar(100) to this term prevents this (and, I'm assuming, any funny stuff that might happen near the wall when calculating the eddy viscosity). If you can imagine, since nut is calculated as: Code:
nut_ = a1_*k_/max(a1_*omega_, F2()*sqrt(S2)); Code:
max(a1_*omega_, F2()*sqrt(S2)) Quote:


April 29, 2014, 09:27 

#37 
Member
Eric Robertson
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 95
Rep Power: 8 
An edit to that post. The tanh makes the large F2 irrelevant, but there is no point in storing so many digits I suppose. Hence the limit.


December 15, 2014, 05:05 
Menter's papers

#38 
New Member
fabio berni
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 1
Rep Power: 0 
Good morning,
I'm a PhD student working on heat transfer problems, and it would be very useful for me having a copy of Menter's papers. In particular i'm looking for: Menter, F., Esch, T.: "Elements of Industrial Heat Transfer Prediction". 16th Brazilian Congress of Mechanical Engineering (COBEM),Nov. 2001 Grotjans, H. and Menter, F. "Wall functions for general CFD codes". In Proc. of 4th European Comp. Fluid Dynamics conference, Athens, Greece, 1998, pp. 11121117 "Heat Transfer Predictions based on TwoEquation Turbulence Models with Advanced Wall Treatment" T.Esch and F.R. Menter  Turbulence, Heat and Mass Transfer 4 This is my email address: fabio.berni@unimore.it Thank you in advance for the help 

January 22, 2015, 00:48 

#39 
New Member
s_shimz
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 8
Rep Power: 8 
Could someone provide me with the following paper?
"Elements of Industrial Heat Transfer Prediction" 16th Brazilian Congress of Mechanical Engineering (COBEM), Nov. 2001 email is: shimizu.shunsuke@gmail.com Thanks in advance. 

January 22, 2015, 04:48 
Final version Online

#40 
Senior Member
Roman Thiele
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: London, UK
Posts: 368
Rep Power: 14 
Dear all,
the paper together with many other papers can be found in the following link. The paper belongs to the invited lectures http://www.abcm.org.br/pt/wpcontent.../2001/home.htm Please post further comments when the link becomes dead.
__________________
~roman 

Thread Tools  
Display Modes  


Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
DES ( SA+LES) vs DES ( kwSST+LES) for bluff body  Phil  Main CFD Forum  0  January 8, 2008 10:04 
Validation of shear mixing layer using kwsst  Samuell  FLUENT  0  September 9, 2003 22:46 
Validation of shear mixing layer using kwsst  Samuell  FLUENT  0  September 9, 2003 22:27 
Does somebody has the eletronic copy of this paper  Puma_Lihh  Main CFD Forum  3  March 25, 2003 09:31 
copy and paste....  giosue  Siemens  4  March 3, 2003 11:42 
Sponsored Links 