
[Sponsors] 
May 15, 2009, 17:55 
origin of fvm::Sp(fvc::div(phi_), epsilon_) in kepsilon Eqn?

#1 
New Member
Bob De Clercq
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Belgium
Posts: 17
Rep Power: 10 
Dear all,
I am trying to figure out what some terms are in the kepsilon turbulence equations, i.e.  fvm::Sp(fvc::div(phi_), epsilon_) Does someone know and can tell me where it originates from? A similar term can be seen in the equation for kinetic energy. Further on, I was wondering how the continuity equation is accounted for with respect to incompressible flows. I cannot find it in e.g. icoFoam.C. Is it somewhere integrated? Many thanks in advance! Regards, Bob 

May 16, 2009, 02:11 

#2 
Senior Member
Hrvoje Jasak
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: London, England
Posts: 1,790
Rep Power: 23 
The term you refer to is added to account for boundedness of k when the model is used with simpleFoam (and alike) and partial convergence of the pressure equation. In other cases, div(flux) will be zero, so the term disappears.
Regarding icoFoam, continuity equation is the pressure equation. Have a look at my Thesis or CFD lecture notes  the full explanation is done in about 2 pages. Enjoy, Hrv
__________________
Hrvoje Jasak Providing commercial FOAM/OpenFOAM and CFD Consulting: http://wikki.co.uk 

May 18, 2009, 15:16 

#3 
New Member
Bob De Clercq
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Belgium
Posts: 17
Rep Power: 10 
Dear Hrv,
Many thanks for the information. I look further into it! Cheers, Bob 

May 25, 2009, 15:49 

#4 
New Member
Bob De Clercq
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Belgium
Posts: 17
Rep Power: 10 
Dear Hrvoje,
I am still trying to figure out the term:  fvm::Sp(fvc::div(phi_), epsilon_) You mentioned that it is included in the equations to account for boundedness of k, epsilon, or the density (in case of compressible fluids). Do you perhaps have a reference where this is further explained so I can figure out the origin of the term? Many thanks. Regards, Bob 

May 26, 2009, 17:35 

#5 
Senior Member
Hrvoje Jasak
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: London, England
Posts: 1,790
Rep Power: 23 
So:
div(phi, epsilon)  in translation: div(U epsilon) will be bounded only if div(phi)  in translation div(U)) is zero, right? On the other hand, U & grad epsilon is bounded irrespective of the velocity distribution. Thus, on incomplete convergence, we prefer to solve a weak form of convection (U & grad epsilon) rather than the strong form. Final step: div(U epsilon) = U & grad epsilon  epsilon div(U). Clear? Hrv
__________________
Hrvoje Jasak Providing commercial FOAM/OpenFOAM and CFD Consulting: http://wikki.co.uk 

May 29, 2009, 10:07 

#6 
New Member
Bob De Clercq
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Belgium
Posts: 17
Rep Power: 10 
Dear Hrvoje,
Thanks for the explanations, but I thought the identity of your final step would be written as something like: div(U epsilon) = U & grad epsilon + epsilon div(U). Is there some mistake from my side? Cheers, Bob 

July 2, 2014, 02:02 

#7 
Member
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 83
Rep Power: 7 
Hello
I know this thread is older, but if there is someone interested: here is an explanation for the question: http://www.cfdonline.com/Forums/ope...1missing.html 

Thread Tools  
Display Modes  


Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
SimpleFoam k and epsilon bounded  nedved  OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD  16  March 4, 2017 09:30 
SimpleFoam k and epsilon bounded  nedved  OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD  1  November 25, 2008 21:21 
A velocity dependent kepsilon boundary condition  tangd  OpenFOAM PreProcessing  2  September 15, 2006 07:04 
UDFs for Scalar Eqn  Fluid/Solid HT  Greg Perkins  FLUENT  0  October 13, 2000 23:03 
UDFs for Scalar Eqn  Fluid/Solid HT  Greg Perkins  FLUENT  0  October 11, 2000 03:43 