Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
MM4CFD Assignment 1

MM4CFD Assignment 1

Ratings: (0)|Views: 272|Likes:
Published by Malcolm Chan

More info:

Published by: Malcolm Chan on Nov 11, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





MM4CFD Assignment 1Malcolm Chan Hao XianUNIMKL-003434
ASSIGNMENT 1aComparison of CFD Simulation to Experimental Data for Backward Facing StepTest
Malcolm Chan Hao XianModel DomainThe domain used in computation is a two-dimensional setup with a stream wise length 30 meter with the entrylength of 10 meter before the fluid flow encounters the step of 1 meter height. The total vertical height on theother hand is 6 meter. The model can be view in Figure 1, where h=1meter. The benchmark for this case study istaken from [1] and [2], utilizing the experimental results from Jovic and Driver’s NASA experiment. The domainsetup is extracted from Tota’s computational setup.Figure 1: Model Domain of Backward Facing StepViscous ModelMany models can actually be utilized to perform computation. But often, to achieve the most accuratecomputation, a suitable viscous model must be selected where the selection made must be based upon wall y
andmeshing configuration of the Backward Facing Step model. From [5], it can be concluded that different turbulentmodels are often used based on the near wall treatment approach. Among all the viscous models, five models canbe chosen; Spalart-Allmaras, Reynolds Stress, K-Epsilon, K-Omega, as well as Large Eddy Simulation Model.For example, if a model has high near-wall mesh resolution, the wall y
value will be lower and located within theviscous sub layer region, therefore is a perfect case for K-Omega and Spalart-Allmaras models; which isintegrated to the wall itself. The perfect opposite can be commented on K-Epsilon and RSM as well. These twomodels are more dominant in turbulent core flow and their wall y
values are higher than 30, located in the loglaw region. Therefore, to perform computation, the centroid of adjacent-to-wall mesh must be located within thelog law region, eliminating the need for near wall meshing. However, a wall function must be attached to RSMand K-Epsilon to bridge the model to viscosity affected region on the wall.The two models chosen for computation in this assignment are the Spalart-Allmaras and K-Omega-SST Model.The reason behind using K-Omega SST model is because of elimination of wall functions; hence the model isable to integrate to the wall as well. Furthermore, the SST formulation combines the K-Epsilon solution model infree stream region thus enable the model to reduce sensitivity towards turbulent properties of free stream inletflow. This enables K-Omega to produce a high quality simulation of flow separation. Spalart-Allmaras, on theother hand is being chosen for comparison of the best model to use within the case of backward facing step, in acase of solution within the viscous sub layer. Another apparent reason for these two selections is due to its low
Reynolds Number at 5100. From [7], it can be noted that K-Onega SST and Spalart-Allmaras is suitable for lowReynolds Number problem.MeshingMesh EconomyThe mesh in Gambit is modeled where the step model is divided into three main faces. The reason behind suchmodeling is to facilitate the formation of meshes.Figure 2: Model Split Into 3 Separate DomainFrom [5], it can be concluded that the meshing performed must pertain to the viscous model used to simulate theturbulent fluid flow in the test model and at the same time should consist of low skewness and sufficientdefinition as well in order to obtain a good computation result. However, the computational cost required must beconsidered as well. Therefore, the definition of mesh is not only prioritized according to the viscous model butalso to the purpose of computation.In this case of backward facing step which is a wall bounded flow case study, the purpose is to study thecharacteristic of separation of fluid flow at the sudden step descend, as well as monitoring the behavior of fluid atdifferent locations on the wall. Therefore, it can be said that it is more important to define the step and wall zonesof the model with finer mesh, while other locations can be applied with bigger mesh size. This will allow themodel to free up an amount of computational cost and focus them on areas that are more important.Another purpose of the zone division is to allow aspect ratio meshing on the model and prevent skewed meshelements. As mentioned before, the step region and wall zone are the most important, and the importance of finemeshing will decrease for locations further away from zone 3. For example, in zone 1, the size of mesh will befiner as it progresses along into the step region. Also, the mesh is finer on both side of walls in zone 1, but themesh will grow bigger as it progresses along the centerline of the channel. In zone 2 as well, the mesh isconfigured to grow coarser as it leaves the step region. These arrangements will help release unnecessary meshingin unimportant areas. On the other hand, there must also be a balance between mesh economy and mesh quality. Itis acceptable to compute meshes that are considerably bigger in size at area that are not important. However, theremust be a limit to the size as not to affect the quality of mesh.

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->