Gravity Casting: Pressure Outlet vs. Stagnation Inlet

joeballer · May 28, 2014, 16:05

Hello CFD Community!

I just started a co-op where I am continuing work done by another student.
We're modeling a simple gravity casting simulation and comparing the simulated cooling curve to those measured on an actual casting of identical geometry to our model. This is in hopes that eventually we will be able to predict grain growth for any model before we cast it.

The inlet of the sprue is modeled as a pressure inlet. The vents are modeled as stagnation inlets as opposed to pressure outlets. This was done in an attempt to restrict the flow (say in the event of a splash) when the melt reaches the top of the mould, but given our geometry and the fact that as this is a gravity casting, I cannot imagine the melt splashing at all.

I have a sneaking suspicion that the stagnation inlet is causing some issues with the solver and, therefore, is throwing off the accuracy of our simulation. Everywhere I have read, it is suggested that mass flow inlets should be paired with pressure outlets; this especially makes sense when you consider that the mould is filled with air before the melt is poured, thus we do actually have a fluid moving through the pressure outlet during the simulation.

I am curious as to you're take on this. Any advice is welcome

.

Cheers,

Joe

me3840 · May 28, 2014, 17:17

I would use the pressure outlet since you shouldn't use the compressible condition for an incompressible fluid

joeballer · May 29, 2014, 09:28

Thanks for the quick reply, me3840.

Julian, CD-Adapco's casting expert, recently suggested I introduce a slight compressibility on the melt EOS to enhance convergence and robustness.

Would it then be appropriate to model the outlets as stagnation inlets?
Or is it still a best practice to stick with a pressure outlet for the solver's sake?

May 28, 2014, 16:05	Gravity Casting: Pressure Outlet vs. Stagnation Inlet	#1
joeballer New Member Joe Join Date: May 2014 Posts: 4 Rep Power: 11	Hello CFD Community! I just started a co-op where I am continuing work done by another student. We're modeling a simple gravity casting simulation and comparing the simulated cooling curve to those measured on an actual casting of identical geometry to our model. This is in hopes that eventually we will be able to predict grain growth for any model before we cast it. The inlet of the sprue is modeled as a pressure inlet. The vents are modeled as stagnation inlets as opposed to pressure outlets. This was done in an attempt to restrict the flow (say in the event of a splash) when the melt reaches the top of the mould, but given our geometry and the fact that as this is a gravity casting, I cannot imagine the melt splashing at all. I have a sneaking suspicion that the stagnation inlet is causing some issues with the solver and, therefore, is throwing off the accuracy of our simulation. Everywhere I have read, it is suggested that mass flow inlets should be paired with pressure outlets; this especially makes sense when you consider that the mould is filled with air before the melt is poured, thus we do actually have a fluid moving through the pressure outlet during the simulation. I am curious as to you're take on this. Any advice is welcome . Cheers, Joe

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Pressure Driven Supersonic Flow in Converging-Diverging Nozzle	cdm	OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD	7	August 28, 2019 01:37
2D Hypersonic Inlet in FLUENT - Convergence Issues	Fraisdegout	FLUENT	6	December 15, 2016 02:07
Pressure Inlet Boundary Condition Issue	zoeburton1987	FLUENT	0	May 15, 2012 09:20
steam flow in a pipe driven by a pressure gradient between inlet and outlet	SalvoCalvo	COMSOL	0	March 11, 2010 06:52
Drop in pressure between inlet and outlet	tommie	OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD	0	September 12, 2008 04:37

May 28, 2014, 17:17		#2
me3840 Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: USA Posts: 1,232 Rep Power: 24	I would use the pressure outlet since you shouldn't use the compressible condition for an incompressible fluid

May 29, 2014, 09:28		#3
joeballer New Member Joe Join Date: May 2014 Posts: 4 Rep Power: 11	Thanks for the quick reply, me3840. Julian, CD-Adapco's casting expert, recently suggested I introduce a slight compressibility on the melt EOS to enhance convergence and robustness. Would it then be appropriate to model the outlets as stagnation inlets? Or is it still a best practice to stick with a pressure outlet for the solver's sake?