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

Air foil lift coefficient validation

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

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old   September 17, 2015, 08:10
Unhappy Air foil lift coefficient validation
  #1
New Member
 
Xiaosong Zhang
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 14
Rep Power: 8
jsb12136 is on a distinguished road
Hi guys,
I am doing a validation for lift and drag coefficient with NACA0012 air foil in different pitch angles. Chord length is 0.14m with a height of 0.005m. The foil is totally under water with a fluid speed of 3.8m/s. Time step is 0.001s. I got good Cl at first and it is stable, but there is a jumping of Cl at 0.7s. What is the problem of this situation?
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 12deg, jumping 2.jpg (34.3 KB, 30 views)
File Type: jpg mesh.jpg (116.1 KB, 32 views)
File Type: jpg Velocity.jpg (32.3 KB, 28 views)
jsb12136 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   September 17, 2015, 12:24
Default
  #2
Senior Member
 
Matt
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 858
Rep Power: 14
fluid23 is on a distinguished road
The first problem that I see is that you need to improve mesh resolution in the wake. What is going on downstream will affect what is happening upstream.

How are you initializing the solution? It could be that you aren't to a point where you should consider the transient solution. It is best to run a steady state case, let it converge completely and use that as your initialization for transient study.

For the transient solution, how many inner iterations are you performing? Is each time step converging?

I would also caution you that the NACA0012 isn't the best airfoil for this for 2 reasons. First, symmetric airfoils tend to be a little tricky for some reason. I have had issues in the past trying analyze them. Unless you must do 0012, pick something with a little camber. Second, there is considerable disagreement between published data sets for the 0012. I suggest making sure that you are comfortable with the data you are using for your comparison.
fluid23 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   September 18, 2015, 11:18
Default
  #3
New Member
 
Xiaosong Zhang
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 14
Rep Power: 8
jsb12136 is on a distinguished road
Hi, Matt
Thanks for your reply. I agree that downstream will influence the upstream so I increase the mesh cell numbers(tripled cell numbers). The time-step is 0.001s calculated based on the Strouhal number 0.2 and 50 iterations each time-step to make sure its converging. What do you mean by a steady state? I tried to use steady solver at first and then use that file as initialization for unsteady simulation. The results are improved nicely. Am I doing right? Would you please tell me the reason why?
jsb12136 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   September 18, 2015, 11:24
Default
  #4
Senior Member
 
Matt
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 858
Rep Power: 14
fluid23 is on a distinguished road
Basically you are just giving your solution a starting point that is closer to reality so that you don't have to wait for (simulation) time to pass before you start to see a properly developed flow field. If you start with 0 velocity everywhere, then even after 50 iterations your first time step is no where near correct. Then the second time step assumes that the end condition of the first step was correct and uses that as its starting point. This continues for a while until this initialization error has disappeared which is (I think) what you were seeing before. That's maybe not the most technical description of what is happening but should give you an idea of why you are doing it.
fluid23 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   September 18, 2015, 11:26
Default
  #5
Senior Member
 
Matt
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 858
Rep Power: 14
fluid23 is on a distinguished road
When I said steady state, I mean use the steady state solver. Then you can clear results (history only) then change your physics continua over to transient and you will have a file that will start at iteration 1 of time step 0 with a flow field that is pretty close to accurate.
fluid23 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   June 16, 2016, 10:27
Default installation problem
  #6
New Member
 
Maheboob
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 1
Rep Power: 0
Maheboob is on a distinguished road
I am having problem in opening a new simulation
as a new to star CCM+ i dont know how to start the simulation workbench
whenever i i click on create new simulation it shows"server process ended unexpectedly"
can anyone help in installing or to troubleshoot my problem..?
Maheboob is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply

Tags
drag coefficients, lift coefficients, naca 0012, star ccm+ v9

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
airfoil lift and drag coefficient amir_14 FLUENT 5 January 1, 2013 08:30
Drag and Lift coefficient for diffusor rego STAR-CCM+ 3 May 7, 2012 18:05
Zero Coefficient of Lift Problem MH FLUENT 0 February 25, 2007 11:48
Lift force or coefficient of lift Rola FLUENT 1 November 12, 2006 13:29
drag and lift coefficient No Siemens 5 July 13, 2004 10:21


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