Best Practice Advice AC3-12: Difference between revisions

From KBwiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 46: Line 46:


==Discretisation and Grid Resolution==
==Discretisation and Grid Resolution==
<!--{{Demo_AC_BPA4}}-->
For full three-dimensional calculations of the considered swirling flow
at least 300,000 control volumes should  be  used  when  applying  RANS
methods. In the case of LES, the grid resolution should be much higher.
Apte et al.  (2003)  have  for  example  used  1.6  million  hexahedral
volumes.
 
For steady-state calculations several hundred  thousands  of  particles
should be sufficient. For unsteady simulations the number of considered
particles needs to be  higher  in  order  to  ensure  good  statistical
averaging.
 
==Physical Modelling==
==Physical Modelling==
<!--{{Demo_AC_BPA5}}-->
<!--{{Demo_AC_BPA5}}-->

Revision as of 12:25, 12 February 2013

Front Page

Description

Test Data

CFD Simulations

Evaluation

Best Practice Advice

Particle-laden swirling flow

Application Challenge AC3-12   © copyright ERCOFTAC 2024

Key Fluid Physics

The introduced swirling flows are highly turbulent and as known, the turbulence structure is strongly anisotropic. Moreover, the flow is characterized by a central recirculation region and a flow separation in the pipe expansion. Mostly such kind of flows is not stationary, but exhibits some fluctuations of the vortex core (precessing). This effect also influences the particle behaviour which is manifested in the formation of particle ropes. These are caused by slight fluctuations of the particle-laden primary jet induced by the vortex precession. Eventually these ropes move spirally along the test section wall downward. As a consequence of the locally high particle concentration two-way coupling effects and also inter-particle collisions might become of importance.

Application Uncertainties

The flow geometry is relatively simple and can be accurately specified and discretised. The inlet conditions were measured 3 mm downstream the exit of the inlet tubes so that the variation of the flow during the first 3 mm (i.e. from the exact geometrical exit) can be neglected. In previous calculations, as shown above, the particle size across the central tube inlet was specified according to that provided in Fig. 2 (i.e. no variation). The first measured profile reveals that a spatial variation of the particle size distribution at the exit can be neglected. Possibly however, the mean velocity and the rms values for the different particle size classes might be slightly different. It should be also kept in mind that the measurements were only done for one profile across the test section. Hence any asymmetries of the flow could bias the results.

Computational Domain and Boundary Conditions

Previous calculations, as shown above, have been done based on the two-dimensional axisymmetric conservation equations. As a matter of fact however the flow should be considered as fully three-dimensional and possibly the computations should be done using an unsteady approach in order to capture the slight precessing of the swirling vortex. This will also affect the particle behaviour and it is possible to numerically predict particle rope formation and dispersion (Lipowsky and Sommerfeld 2007, Sommerfeld et al. 2010).

Discretisation and Grid Resolution

For full three-dimensional calculations of the considered swirling flow at least 300,000 control volumes should be used when applying RANS methods. In the case of LES, the grid resolution should be much higher. Apte et al. (2003) have for example used 1.6 million hexahedral volumes.

For steady-state calculations several hundred thousands of particles should be sufficient. For unsteady simulations the number of considered particles needs to be higher in order to ensure good statistical averaging.

Physical Modelling

Recommendations for Future Work




Contributed by: Martin Sommerfeld — Martin-Luther-Universitat Halle-Wittenberg

Front Page

Description

Test Data

CFD Simulations

Evaluation

Best Practice Advice


© copyright ERCOFTAC 2024