CFD Online Logo CFD Online URL
www.cfd-online.com
[Sponsors]
Home > Forums > Software User Forums > Siemens > STAR-CCM+

mixing plane vs frozen rotor

Register Blogs Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Like Tree1Likes
  • 1 Post By ping

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old   August 7, 2014, 19:47
Unhappy mixing plane vs frozen rotor
  #1
New Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 12
Rep Power: 13
feafan is on a distinguished road
Hi, I am simulating a fan system using MRF method. I have attached a picture showing the convergence path. Interesting, the frozen rotor converged nicely but the mixing plane floats on a high level. From your experience, do you think the mixing plane result is usable? How come they behave so differently. Exactly the same mesh, same physics, but the interface type is different.

Thanks.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg f1.jpg (49.8 KB, 225 views)
feafan is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 21, 2014, 12:12
Default
  #2
Senior Member
 
Ping
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 556
Rep Power: 20
ping is on a distinguished road
your question is confusing since mrf is a type of motion to apply to a region whereas mixing plane is a type of interface to connect different regions
ping is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 21, 2014, 22:43
Default
  #3
New Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 12
Rep Power: 13
feafan is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by ping View Post
your question is confusing since mrf is a type of motion to apply to a region whereas mixing plane is a type of interface to connect different regions
Thanks Ping, but I am comparing frozen rotor and mixing plane. CCM+ didn't explain well that the default MRF and interface is in fact frozen rotor method.
feafan is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 22, 2014, 05:09
Default
  #4
Senior Member
 
Ping
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 556
Rep Power: 20
ping is on a distinguished road
mrf is much more than frozen rotor since it applies to linear motion too

for the forum to help you we need to understand what you want to do so i will say this again in star-ccm+ terminology

- mrf is a method to apply motion to one or more regions

- mixing plane is a type of interface to connect two regions and does circumferential averaging of the fields and is used normally in combination with the mrf technique on multi-stage turbines with uneven blade numbers

so you cant 'compare' the two
ping is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 24, 2014, 20:46
Default
  #5
New Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 12
Rep Power: 13
feafan is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by ping View Post
mrf is much more than frozen rotor since it applies to linear motion too

for the forum to help you we need to understand what you want to do so i will say this again in star-ccm+ terminology

- mrf is a method to apply motion to one or more regions

- mixing plane is a type of interface to connect two regions and does circumferential averaging of the fields and is used normally in combination with the mrf technique on multi-stage turbines with uneven blade numbers

so you cant 'compare' the two
Thanks Ping, I don't want to waste your time. So I have to repeat my first question. I am comparing frozen rotor and mixing plane. You can say default interface vs mixing plane interface otherwise. The physics is very simple, steady state with a single fan and a simple ducting system.
feafan is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 25, 2014, 07:14
Default
  #6
Senior Member
 
Ping
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 556
Rep Power: 20
ping is on a distinguished road
it would help if you explained this correctly in the first place rather than confusing us and remember than frozen rotor is not a term cd-adapco uses in the documentation

a mixing plane interface smears or averages the flow around its circumference, whereas a normal inplace interface transfers the flow from each local cell on one side to the matching cell on the other side of the interface and maybe with some interpolation if the interface is not conformal

if you create a scalar scene and place just the interface in the scene and show axial velocity for example, the above will be very clearly shown

there is no reason to use mixing plane interfaces unless the circular extent of the geometry on either side of the interface is not identical - eg you model one blade of a fan in a sector but connect it to a full cylindrical model of the rest of the domain
shk09 likes this.
ping is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Contra rotating rotor simulation using mixing plane method venkat_aero2007 FLUENT 1 August 29, 2012 06:36
Frozen Rotor Model CFX windsim CFX 13 January 5, 2012 14:25
Meshing a Mixing Plane using ICEM Will Anderson FLUENT 0 November 6, 2010 18:08
Frozen rotor and mixing plane - difference? sam CFX 2 November 27, 2006 15:14
Mixing plane geometry definition Hbet FLUENT 0 January 18, 2002 08:16


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:39.