masters project lj final_2
TRANSCRIPT
-
7/27/2019 Masters Project LJ FINAL_2
1/35
Numerical Study using FLUENT of the Separation and Reattachment
Points for Backwards-Facing Step Flow
byLuke Jongebloed
An Engineering Project Submitted to the Graduate
Faculty of Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the degree of
Master of Engineering
Major Subject: Mechanical Engineering
Approved:
_________________________________________
Ernesto Gutierrez-Miravete, Project Adviser
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
Hartford, Connecticut
December, 2008
-
7/27/2019 Masters Project LJ FINAL_2
2/35
ii
CONTENTS
Numerical Study using FLUENT of the Separation and Reattachment Points for
Backwards-Facing Step Flow ....................................................................................... i
LIST OF SYMBOLS ........................................................................................................ iii
LIST OF TABLES............................................................................................................. v
LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................................... vi
ACKNOWLEDGMENT..................................................................................................vii
ABSTRACT....................................................................................................................viii
1. Background .................................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................ 1
1.2 Previous research................................................................................................ 3
2. Methodology ................................................................................................................ 5
2.1 Theory ................................................................................................................ 5
2.2 Approach using FLUENT .................................................................................. 8
3. Discussion .................................................................................................................. 10
3.1 Laminar ............................................................................................................ 12
3.2 Turbulent .......................................................................................................... 15
4. Conclusion ................................................................................................................. 18
5. References.................................................................................................................. 19
6. Appendix.................................................................................................................... 21
6.1 FLUENT Input ................................................................................................. 21
-
7/27/2019 Masters Project LJ FINAL_2
3/35
iii
LIST OF SYMBOLS
A0 Model constant
As Model variable
C2 Model constantC Model variable
D Hydraulic diameter of backwards step
ER Expansion ratio
Gk Turbulent generation term
h Height of inlet channel
H Height of outlet
I Identity matrix
i Sub index
j Sub index
k Turbulent kinetic energy
k Sub index
Re Reynolds number
S Step height
S Magnitude of mean strain
Sij Mean strain tensor
t Time
u Fluid velocity
U Characteristic velocity scale
W Model variable
x Direction vector
x1 Reattachment point for 1st bottom recirculation zone
x2 Separation point for 2st bottom recirculation zonex3 Reattachment point for 2nd bottom recirculation zone
x4 Reattachment point for 1st top recirculation zone
x5 Separation point for 2st top recirculation zone
Xe Inlet channel length
Xo Outlet channel length
-
7/27/2019 Masters Project LJ FINAL_2
4/35
iv
Dissipation rate
Eddy viscosity
k Model constant
Epsilon model constant
Model variable
Stress tensor
Kinematic viscosity
Dynamic viscosity
Density
-
7/27/2019 Masters Project LJ FINAL_2
5/35
v
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Backward-facing step dimensions (all in meters).............................................. 2
Table 2 Miscellaneous reference values used in this study. ........................................... 3
Table 3 Number of nodes for grid reference number used to indicate amount of meshrefinement in discussion section. ............................................................................... 9
Table 4 Effect of mesh refinement for Re=800. ........................................................... 14
Table 5 Comparison of reattachment and separation points for Re=800 and ER=1.942
for various numerical studies. .................................................................................. 14
Table 6 Separation points obtained for turbulent flow. ................................................ 15
Table 7 Comparison of methods used to obtain solution for Re=7470. ....................... 17
-
7/27/2019 Masters Project LJ FINAL_2
6/35
vi
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Schematic of backward-facing step turbulent-flow.......................................... 1
Figure 2 Three recirculation zones for laminar flow. ..................................................... 2
Figure 3 Schematic of backward-facing step geometry (not to scale). ........................... 2Figure 4 Schematic showing region of grid refinement, 200m downstream from step
(to scale). .................................................................................................................... 9
Figure 5 Comparison of separation and reattachment points for present analysis with
experimental data collected by Armaly et al............................................................ 10
Figure 6 Comparison of separation and reattachment points between present analysis
and experimental data collected by Armaly et al. for Re
-
7/27/2019 Masters Project LJ FINAL_2
7/35
vii
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
I would like to thank my cat for sitting with me and providing support while I completed
my school work.
-
7/27/2019 Masters Project LJ FINAL_2
8/35
viii
ABSTRACT
A numerical investigation is conducted on the affect of Reynolds number on the
separation and attachment points for backward-facing step flow. Both turbulent and
laminar flow is considered for two-dimensional viscous flow, neglecting compressibility,heat generation, and external body forces. A steady-state coupled pressure and velocity
algorithm is used for laminar flow and a steady-state segregated pressure-velocity
algorithm is used with a realizable k-wall-enhanced turbulence model. The expansion
ratio of inlet height to outlet height is a 1.942. The results are compared to published
experimental and numerical data. The present study agrees with published data for low
Reynolds numbers (Re15000). Results exhibit
behavior of published data, but are slightly lower in magnitude for 400
-
7/27/2019 Masters Project LJ FINAL_2
9/35
1
1. Background
1.1 Introduction
A numerical analysis is performed using FLUENT to investigate backward-facing step
flow for Reynolds numbers in the laminar and turbulent regions. Separation and
reattachment lengths are determined for each Reynolds number and the results are
compared to experimental data and numerical analyses found in literature.
Flow over a backward-facing step produces recirculation zones where the fluid
separates and forms vortices. For turbulent flow, the fluid separates at the step and
reattaches downstream, as show below in Figure 1. Only a single recirculation zone
develops for turbulent flow and the reattachment point is believed to be independent of
the Reynolds number and depend only on the ratio of inlet height to outlet height.
Figure 1 Schematic of backward-facing step turbulent-flow.1
For laminar flow, various recirculation zones occur downstream from the step, as
shown below in Figure 2. Separation occurs when adverse pressure gradients act on the
fluid. As the Reynolds number increases from zero, the first region of separation occursat the step to x1 on the bottom wall. Next, the second region of separation occurs
between x4 and x5 on the top wall. As the Reynolds number increases into the transition
zone, a third separation region occurs between x2 and x3 on the bottom wall.
1Figure from R.L. Simpson.
-
7/27/2019 Masters Project LJ FINAL_2
10/35
2
Theoretically, recirculation zones will continue to develop downstream as the Reynolds
number increases and the flow remains laminar; however, this has not been observed
experimentally and the flow will eventually become turbulent.
Figure 2 Three recirculation zones for laminar flow.
The geometry for the backward-facing step used in this analysis is similar to that used by
Armaly et al. Figure 3 and Table 1 provide the dimensions of the geometry.
Figure 3 Schematic of backward-facing step geometry (not to scale).
Significant length is provided for the inlet channel to ensure that the flow is fully
developed and does not contain any additional effects created by the flow source. The
significant length of the outlet channel ensures that the outlet condition does not affect
the flow near the step. The expansion ration, ER, is ratio of the outlet height over the
inlet height. For this case, ER = 1.942.
Table 1 Backward-facing step dimensions (all in meters).
Height of inlet channel h 5.2
Height of outlet H 10.1Step height S 4.9
Inlet channel length Xe 200
Outlet channel length Xo 500
The Reynolds number is defined as,
Du =Re , where u is the inlet velocity, is the
kinematic viscosity, and D is the hydraulic diameter. The Reynolds number has been
-
7/27/2019 Masters Project LJ FINAL_2
11/35
3
expressed differently throughout literature; D can be based on the inlet height, the outlet
height, or the step height. In agreement with Armaly et al., this study will use D=2h. It is
important to know how the Reynolds number was calculated when comparing data. Also
of importance is the method used to calculate the inlet velocity. The average velocity can
be used or one can use functions of the measured velocity profile, e.g., Armaly et al.
used 2/3 maximum measured inlet velocity. Another factor that may affect the
comparison of results is the turbulent intensity of the inlet velocity. Although inlet
velocity parameters have significant effect on the reattachment points (Badran and
Bruun), a relatively long inlet channel length should dissipate the discrepancies. Table 1
lists various constants used in this study.
Table 2 Miscellaneous reference values used in this study.
Density 1.225 3mkg
Dynamic viscosity 1.78945
10 smkg
Expansion Ratio ER 1.942 -
1.2 Previous research
The in-depth experimental data analysis performed by Armaly et al has provided the
majority of data used for comparison in the present study. Others, including Driver and
D. M., Seegmiller; D.E. Abbott and S.J. Kline; Denham. M. K. & Patrick; Etheridge,
D.W. & Kemp, have performed similar experiments and yielded similar results. These
experiments have provided useful data to compare with and validate numerical schemes.
In the following we can summarize the relationship between the location of the
separation point and Reynolds number. The two dimensional approximation is only valid
for Re 6600, for 400
-
7/27/2019 Masters Project LJ FINAL_2
12/35
4
there is only one reattachment point for turbulent flow. For all flows, as ER increases the
distance that separation occurs increases.
The single reattachment point for turbulent flow has been observed to be
independent of the Reynolds number and depends only on geometry. Both Armaly et al.
and Abbot and Kline have determined experimentally that for turbulent flow (Re>6600)
the reattachment point 81 Sx at ER=1.94. The reattachment length decrease for
decreasing step heights; e.g., De Brederode and Bradshaw found the reattachment point
61 Sx at ER=1.2 and Moss et al. found the reattachment point 5.51 Sx at ER=1.1.
Backward-facing step flow research continues to be pursued as analysis methods
evolve. Lima et al. investigated two-dimensional laminar flow with Reynolds number
varying between 100 and 2500. Convergence could not be obtained using a steady state
segregated finite volume method (FVM); instead, an unsteady flow was analyzed for
very large time. Good agreement with Armaly et al. was found for x1 with Re
-
7/27/2019 Masters Project LJ FINAL_2
13/35
5
2. Methodology
Flow over a backward-facing step is studied based on the numerical methods discussed
in Section 2.1 and the approach in Section 2.2. Compressibility and energy terms are
neglected. The following boundary conditions are used: non-slip walls, zero gaugepressure outlet, and constant normal inlet velocity that does not vary along the height of
inlet. The Reynolds number is varied from 50 to 1250 and the separation and
reattachment points are determined from minimum values of the coefficient of friction.
Reattachment points are also determined for various Reynolds numbers in the turbulent
region (Re>6600).
2.1 Theory
The governing equations for computational fluid dynamics (CFD) are based on
conservation of mass, momentum, and energy. FLUENT uses a finite volume method
(FVM) to solve the governing equations. The FVM involves descretization and
integration of the governing equation over the control volume. The following is a
summary of the theory involved in the FLUENT analysis and is based on the FLUENT
Users Manual, Bardina et al., and Anderson.
The basic equations for steady-state laminar flow are conservation of mass and
momentum. When heat transfer or compressibility is involved the energy equation is
also required. The governing equations are,
Continuity Equation:
Momentum equation:
where, , the stress tensor is,
Turbulent flow can be modeled using mean and fluctuating values for components,
such as velocity, iii uuu += . Substituting the mean and fluctuating value equations into
-
7/27/2019 Masters Project LJ FINAL_2
14/35
6
the Navier-Stokes equations yields the Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS)
equations:
The k- model is semi-empirical two-equation turbulence model that is based on an
exact solution for the turbulent kinetic energy (k) and a model of the dissipation rate ().
To model the Reynolds stress, , in the RANS equations, the - model uses the
Bousinesq approximation to relate the Reynolds stresses to the mean velocity gradients.
Along with the Bousinesq approximation above, the following definition of the eddy
viscosity is used,
The realizable portion of the k- model is based on the following relationship, which
can be obtained by determining the point that the average normal stress becomes
negative. The realizable k- model coefficient,
C , is determined by equilibrium
analysis at high Reynolds numbers.
The realizable k- model is defined by the following two equations,
and
Gkrepresents the generation of turbulence kinetic energy due to the mean velocity
gradients and relies on the Boussinesq approximation.
-
7/27/2019 Masters Project LJ FINAL_2
15/35
7
where the modulus of the mean rate-of-strain tensor,
and
+
=
i
j
j
iij
u
u
u
uS
2
1
The variable in the eddy viscosity is,
where,
and the model constants are,
where,
The following values are used for the remaining constants,
-
7/27/2019 Masters Project LJ FINAL_2
16/35
8
2.2 Approach using FLUENT
The continuity and momentum equations, along with the realizable k- model with wall
enhancements and pressure gradients effects for turbulent flows, are solved using the
FVM in FLUENT. A pressure based solver is used since the flow is incompressible and
separation is caused by adverse pressure gradients. As demonstrated by Kim et al. the
realizable k- model with wall treatment performs well for boundary layers subject to
separation and is used.
A coupled pressure and velocity algorithm is used for laminar flows, which
solves the continuity and momentum equations in a simultaneous fashion and removes
the approximations associated with segregated algorithms where the momentum and
continuity equations are solved separately. The coupled algorithm is employed because
of convergence issues with segregated solvers on backward-facing step flows. The
coupled algorithm does not offer solution accuracy improvement over segregated
solvers; rather it provides improvement in stability and ability to converge. The semi-
implicit method for pressure-linked equations SIMPLE algorithm is a segregated
algorithm and is used for turbulent flow analysis in this study. The SIMPLE algorithm
solves the momentum equation first, then solves for pressure, and later corrects the
descretized solutions. The SIMPLE algorithm can offer increased convergence time due
to the smaller memory requirement over the coupled algorithm.
A convergence criterion of 5101 is used for continuity, x-velocity and y-velocity.
A convergence criterion of 3101 is used for k and . All solutions converged with
second order pressure and third order MUSCL (Monotone Upstream-centered Schemes
for Conservation Laws) momentum interpolation schemes for laminar flow. All
solutions converged with second order pressure, momentum, turbulent intensity, and
turbulent dissipation interpolation schemes for turbulent flow. Third order MUSCL
schemes did not provide significant accuracy for turbulent flow.
Adequate grid independence is satisfied with a quadrilateral mesh of 59251
nodes. The entire surface is meshed with 30151 nodes then adapted to 59251 nodes with
refinement only in the region of recirculation from the step (x=200) to 200 m
downstream from the step. Further adaptation to 174645 nodes in this region does not
-
7/27/2019 Masters Project LJ FINAL_2
17/35
9
provide significant increase in the accuracy of the results. Shown below, Table 3 and
Figure 4 summarize the amount of grid adaptation used and the area of refinement.
Table 3 Number of nodes for grid reference number used to indicate amount of
mesh refinement in discussion section.
grid
number
number of
nodes
region
refinement
0 30151 no
1 59251 yes
2 174645 yes
Figure 4 Schematic showing region of grid refinement, 200m downstream from
step (to scale).
-
7/27/2019 Masters Project LJ FINAL_2
18/35
10
3. Discussion
Laminar flow exists for Re
-
7/27/2019 Masters Project LJ FINAL_2
19/35
11
not compare well with experimental data. The top reattachment point, x5, compares well
with data for Re1250). Oscillating residuals
were experienced and can be attributed to the use of a steady-state method. Numerical
unsteady analyses have obtained convergence for flows with three or more recirculation
zones, e.g., Lima et al. In this region, however, the flow is 3-D and numerical and
measured values do not agree.
-
7/27/2019 Masters Project LJ FINAL_2
20/35
12
3.1 Laminar
The plot in Figure 6 below shows a closer view for Re
-
7/27/2019 Masters Project LJ FINAL_2
21/35
13
Table 4 below. The first adaptation of the initial mesh 59251 nodes provided reasonable
accurate results and is used for all laminar Reynolds number. Adaptation was only
performed in the region between the step and 200 meters downstream (see Figure 4).
-
7/27/2019 Masters Project LJ FINAL_2
22/35
14
Table 4 Effect of mesh refinement for Re=800.
gridnumber
4
x1/S x4/S x5/S
0 10.83 8.44 19.26
1 11.67 9.24 19.92
2 11.88 9.42 20.02
Table 5 below summarizes the values for separation and reattachment points at
Re=800 determined by various authors. The results of the present study are lower than
the average of values obtained by the various authors, but are still within the range of
data. The largest difference between present results and average literature value is the
upper reattachment point, x5/S=19.92; average is 20.62. This present result of
x5/S=19.92 is closer to the experimental value (Armly et al.) 19.33 than the average20.62.
Table 5 Comparison of reattachment and separation points for Re=800 and
ER=1.942 for various numerical studies.
x1/S x4/S x5/S (x5-x4)/S
Presentt study 11.67 9.24 19.92 10.68
Lima 11.97 9.51 20.40 10.89
Gartling 12.20 9.70 20.96 11.26
Lee and Mateescu 12.00 9.60 20.60 11.00
Barton 11.51 9.14 20.66 11.52Kim and Moin 11.90 - - -
Guj and Stella 12.05 9.70 20.20 10.50
Gresho et al. 12.20 9.72 20.98 11.26
Keskar and Lyn 12.19 9.71 20.96 11.25
Grigoriev and Dargush 12.18 9.70 20.94 11.24
Rogers and Kwak 11.48 - - -
Erturk 11.83 9.48 20.55 11.07
Average 11.93 9.55 20.62 11.07
Armaly et al.* 14.00 11.11 19.33 8.22
ER=2.0, * Experimental
A plot of the stream lines over the step for Re=800 is shown in Figure 7. The
fluid velocity at the step dissipates as slower recirculation region absorb some of the
momentum.
4See Table 2.
-
7/27/2019 Masters Project LJ FINAL_2
23/35
15
Figure 7 Streamlines for Re=800; colored by velocity magnitude.
3.2 Turbulent
For turbulent flow (Re>6600) Armaly et al. and Abbot and Kline have determined
experimentally that the reattachment point, 81 Sx at ER=1.94. Table 6 below
summarizes the range of values obtained in the present study for the reattachment point
at various turbulent Reynolds numbers. The average value, x1/S=7.21, for the separation
point is lower than x1/S=8, the accepted value. The higher Reynolds numbers studied are
closer to the accepted value. For Re= 17799, x1/S=8.0, which is in agreement with the
accepted value.
Table 6 Separation points obtained for turbulent flow.
Re x1/S
7000 6.92
7476 6.61
7830 6.54
8000 6.80
11400 7.0117799 8.00
24480 8.60
average 7.21
A plot of the streamlines over the step is displayed in Figure 8 below. A second eddy
near the step corner is observed. The velocity of the recirculation zone is on the order of
magnitude lower than the velocity at the step.
-
7/27/2019 Masters Project LJ FINAL_2
24/35
16
Figure 8 Plot of streamlines for Re=8000; colored by velocity magnitude.
Solving for turbulent flow required multiple levels of refinement to obtain an accurate
solution. Figure 9 shows a plot of the scaled residuals for the solution at Re=7470. Table7 provides the type of methods used to achieve each level of convergence displayed in
Figure 9.
-
7/27/2019 Masters Project LJ FINAL_2
25/35
17
Figure 9 Scaled residuals for Re=7470.
RKE with mesh refinement provides significant accuracy over SKE with out wall
treatment. The third order MUSCL RKE with number 2 mesh refinement does not offer
significant increase in accuracy over second order RKE with number 1 mesh refinement.
Table 7 Comparison of methods used to obtain solution for Re=7470.
Method Pressure
Momentum,Turbulent Kinetic
Energy, and turbulentdissipation rate
wallenhancementsand pressure
gradient effectsMeshrefinement
5 x1/S
SKE 1st order 1st order no 0 5.37
RKE 1st order 1st order yes 0 5.74
RKE 1st order 1st order yes 1 6.26
RKE 2nd order 2nd order yes 1 6.54
RKE 2nd order 3rd order MUSCL yes 1 6.59
RKE 2nd order 3rd order MUSCL yes 2 6.61
5See Table 2.
-
7/27/2019 Masters Project LJ FINAL_2
26/35
18
4. Conclusion
The values for the separation and reattachment points obtained in this study compare
fairly well with published numerical data. The present results begin to differ from
experimental data at Reynolds numbers (Re>400) where three-dimensional effectsbecome important. The normalized values (x1/S~6.5) for the turbulent reattachment
points are less than accepted value (x1/S~8) for low turbulent Reynolds numbers
(Re~8000); however for higher Reynolds numbers (Re>15000), good agreement is
found. A general trend in the laminar results of this analysis is slightly lower values for
separation and reattachment points than compared with other numerical studies. This
difference with present results for laminar flow can be attributed to the range of methods
and grids used to perform the numerical calculations. Unsteady methods iterated over a
large time span are typically used for the laminar case because of convergence issues;
however, this study used a steady-state method with a coupled pressure-velocity
algorithm.
-
7/27/2019 Masters Project LJ FINAL_2
27/35
19
5. References
Anderson, J.D. Jr., Computational Fluid Dynamics: The Basics with Applications,
McGraw Hill, 1995
Armaly, B.F., Durst, F., Pereira, J.C.F., and Schonung, B., Experimental and theoreticalinvestigation of backward-facing step flow, J. Fluid. Mech. 127 (1983), pp. 473496.
Badran, O.O., Bruun, H.H., Effect of inlet conditions on flow over backward facing step,
Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, v 74-76, Apr-Aug,
1998, p 495-509.
Barber, B.W., Fonty, A., A numerical study of laminar flow over a confined backward-
facing step using a novel viscous-splitting vortex algorithm, 4th GRACMCongress on Computational Mechanics, Patras, 27-29 June 2002.
Bardina, J. E., Huang, P. G., Coakley, T. J., Turbulence Modeling Validation, Testing,and Development, AIAA-1997-2121, NASA Technical Memorandum 110446
Barton I.E., The entrance effect of laminar flow over a backward-facing step geometry,
Int J Numer Methods Fluids 1997, 25:63344.
Biswas, G., Breuer, M., Durst F., Backward-facing step flows for various expansion
reatios at low and moderate Reynolds numbers, Journal of Fluid EngineeringVol. 126, May 2004, 363-374.
De Brederode, V., Bradshaw, P., Three-dimensional flow in nominally two-dimensional
separation bubbles. I. Flow behind a rearward-facing step, Aero Report 72-19,Imperial College of Science and Technology (1972), London, England.
Denham. M. K. & Patrick, M. A. Laminar flow over a downstream-facing step in a two-
dimensional flow channel. Trans. Inst. Chem. Engrs 52 (1974), 361.
Driver, D. M., Seegmiller, H. L. and Marvin, J., Time-dependent behavior of areattaching shear layer, AIAA J. 25 (1987), 914-919.
Erturk E., Numerical solutions of 2-D steady incompressible flow over backward-facingstep, Part I: High Reynolds number solution, Computers & Fluids 37 (2008),
633-655.
Etheridge, D.W. & Kemp, P.H., Measurements of turbulent flow downstream of a
backward-facing step, J. Fluid Mech. 86 (1978), 545.
Fluent Inc, Users Guide, 6.3.26 version, 2006
Gartling D.K., A test problem for outflow boundary conditions flow over a backward-
facing step, Int J Numer Methods Fluids 1990, 11:95367.
-
7/27/2019 Masters Project LJ FINAL_2
28/35
20
Gresho P.M., Gartling D.K., Torczynski JR, Cliffe KA, Winters KH, Garratt TJ, et al. Is
the steady viscous incompressible two-dimensional flow over a backward-facing
step at Re = 800 stable?, Int J Numer Methods Fluids 1993, 17:50141.
Grigoriev M.M., Dargush G.F., A poly-region boundary element method forincompressible viscous fluid flows, Int J Numer Methods Eng 1999, 46:112758.
Guj G., Stella F., Numerical solutions of high-Re recirculating flows in vorticityvelocity form, Int J Numer Methods Fluids 1988, 8:40516.
Keskar J., Lyn D.A., Computations of a laminar backward-facing step flow at Re = 800
with a spectral domain decomposition method, Int J Numer Methods Fluids
1999, 29:41127.
Kim J., Moin P., Application of a fractional-step method to incompressible Navier
Stokes equations, J Comp Phys 1985, 59:30823.
Kim, Ghajar, Tang, Foutchm Comparison of near-wall treatment methods for highReynolds number backward-facing step flow, International Journal of
Computational Fluid Dynamics, Vol. 19, No. 7 (2005), 493-500.
Lee, T. and Mateescu, D., Experimental and numerical investigation of 2-D backward-
facing step flow, Journal of Fluids and Structures (1998) 12, 703-716.
Lima, R.C., Andrade, C.R., and Zaparoli, E.L., Numerical study of three recirculation
zones in the unilateral sudden expansion flow, International Communications inHeat and Mass Transfer, Volume 35, Issue 9, November 2008, Pages 1053-1060.
Moss, Bakers, Bradburly, 1979 Measurements of mean velocity and Reynolds stresses in
some regions of recirculation flows, In Turbulent Shear Flows 1 (ed. F. Durst, B.
C. Launder, F. W. Schmidt & J. H. Whitelaw). Springer.
Rogers S.E., Kwak D., An upwind differencing scheme for the incompressible Navier
Stokes equations, Appl Numer Math 1991, 8:4364.
Simpson, R.L., Aspects of turbulent boundary-layer separation, Prog. Aerospace Sci.Vol 32 (1996), 457-521.
-
7/27/2019 Masters Project LJ FINAL_2
29/35
21
6. Appendix
6.1 FLUENT Input
FLUENT
Version: 2d, dp, pbns, lam (2d, double precision, pressure-based, laminar)
Release: 6.3.26
Title:
Models
------
Model Settings
-------------------------------------
Space 2D
Time Steady
Viscous Laminar
Heat Transfer Disabled
Solidification and Melting Disabled
Species Transport Disabled
Coupled Dispersed Phase Disabled
Pollutants Disabled
Pollutants Disabled
Soot Disabled
Boundary Conditions
-------------------
Zones
name id type
---------------------------------------
fluid 2 fluid
outlet 3 pressure-outlet
inlet 4 velocity-inlet
top_wall 5 wall
bottom_wall 6 wall
default-interior 8 interior
-
7/27/2019 Masters Project LJ FINAL_2
30/35
22
Boundary Conditions
fluid
Condition Value
---------------------------------------------------------------
Material Name air
Specify source terms? no
Source Terms ()
Specify fixed values? no
Fixed Values ()
Motion Type 0
X-Velocity Of Zone (m/s) 0Y-Velocity Of Zone (m/s) 0
Rotation speed (rad/s) 0
X-Origin of Rotation-Axis (m) 0
Y-Origin of Rotation-Axis (m) 0
Deactivated Thread no
Porous zone? no
X-Component of Direction-1 Vector 1
Y-Component of Direction-1 Vector 0
Relative Velocity Resistance Formulation? yes
Direction-1 Viscous Resistance (1/m2) 0
Direction-2 Viscous Resistance (1/m2) 0
Choose alternative formulation for inertial resistance? no
Direction-1 Inertial Resistance (1/m) 0
Direction-2 Inertial Resistance (1/m) 0
C0 Coefficient for Power-Law 0
C1 Coefficient for Power-Law 0
Porosity 1
outlet
Condition Value
-----------------------------------------------
Gauge Pressure (pascal) 0
-
7/27/2019 Masters Project LJ FINAL_2
31/35
23
Backflow Direction Specification Method 1
X-Component of Flow Direction 1
Y-Component of Flow Direction 0
X-Component of Axis Direction 1
Y-Component of Axis Direction 0
Z-Component of Axis Direction 0
X-Coordinate of Axis Origin (m) 0
Y-Coordinate of Axis Origin (m) 0
Z-Coordinate of Axis Origin (m) 0
is zone used in mixing-plane model? no
Specify targeted mass flow rate no
Targeted mass flow (kg/s) 1
inlet
Condition Value
---------------------------------------------------
Velocity Specification Method 2
Reference Frame 0
Velocity Magnitude (m/s) 0.00028099999
X-Velocity (m/s) 0
Y-Velocity (m/s) 0
X-Component of Flow Direction 1
Y-Component of Flow Direction 0
X-Component of Axis Direction 1
Y-Component of Axis Direction 0
Z-Component of Axis Direction 0
X-Coordinate of Axis Origin (m) 0
Y-Coordinate of Axis Origin (m) 0
Z-Coordinate of Axis Origin (m) 0
Angular velocity (rad/s) 0
is zone used in mixing-plane model? no
top_wall
Condition Value
----------------------------------------------------------
-
7/27/2019 Masters Project LJ FINAL_2
32/35
24
Wall Motion 0
Shear Boundary Condition 0
Define wall motion relative to adjacent cell zone? yes
Apply a rotational velocity to this wall? no
Velocity Magnitude (m/s) 0
X-Component of Wall Translation 1
Y-Component of Wall Translation 0
Define wall velocity components? no
X-Component of Wall Translation (m/s) 0
Y-Component of Wall Translation (m/s) 0
Rotation Speed (rad/s) 0
X-Position of Rotation-Axis Origin (m) 0
Y-Position of Rotation-Axis Origin (m) 0
X-component of shear stress (pascal) 0Y-component of shear stress (pascal) 0
Specularity Coefficient 0
bottom_wall
Condition Value
----------------------------------------------------------
Wall Motion 0
Shear Boundary Condition 0
Define wall motion relative to adjacent cell zone? yes
Apply a rotational velocity to this wall? no
Velocity Magnitude (m/s) 0
X-Component of Wall Translation 1
Y-Component of Wall Translation 0
Define wall velocity components? no
X-Component of Wall Translation (m/s) 0
Y-Component of Wall Translation (m/s) 0
Rotation Speed (rad/s) 0
X-Position of Rotation-Axis Origin (m) 0
Y-Position of Rotation-Axis Origin (m) 0
X-component of shear stress (pascal) 0
Y-component of shear stress (pascal) 0
Specularity Coefficient 0
-
7/27/2019 Masters Project LJ FINAL_2
33/35
25
default-interior
Condition Value
-----------------
Solver Controls
---------------
Equations
Equation Solved
-----------------
Flow yes
Numerics
Numeric Enabled
---------------------------------------
Absolute Velocity Formulation yes
Relaxation
Variable Relaxation Factor
-------------------------------
Density 1
Body Forces 1
Linear Solver
Solver Termination Residual Reduction
Variable Type Criterion Tolerance
-----------------------------------------------------
Flow F-Cycle 0.1
Pressure-Velocity Coupling
-
7/27/2019 Masters Project LJ FINAL_2
34/35
26
Parameter Value
---------------------------------------------
Type Coupled
Courant Number 200
Explicit Momentum Relaxation Factor 0.75
Explicit Pressure Relaxation Factor 0.75
Discretization Scheme
Variable Scheme
----------------------------
Pressure Second Order
Momentum Third-Order MUSCL
Solution Limits
Quantity Limit
---------------------------------
Minimum Absolute Pressure 1
Maximum Absolute Pressure 5e+10
Minimum Temperature 1
Maximum Temperature 5000
Material Properties
-------------------
Material: air (fluid)
Property Units Method Value(s)
----------------------------------------------------------------
Density kg/m3 constant 1.225
Cp (Specific Heat) j/kg-k constant 1006.43
Thermal Conductivity w/m-k constant 0.0242
Viscosity kg/m-s constant 1.7894e-05
Molecular Weight kg/kgmol constant 28.966
L-J Characteristic Length angstrom constant 3.711
L-J Energy Parameter k constant 78.6
-
7/27/2019 Masters Project LJ FINAL_2
35/35
Thermal Expansion Coefficient 1/k constant 0
Degrees of Freedom constant 0
Speed of Sound m/s none #f
Material: aluminum (solid)
Property Units Method Value(s)
---------------------------------------------------
Density kg/m3 constant 2719
Cp (Specific Heat) j/kg-k constant 871
Thermal Conductivity w/m-k constant 202.4