August 11, 2018 at 8:14 pmJosé MantovaniSubscriber
I make a cavitation simulation through a venturi tube. I dont have much experience with this type of simulation, and I want know how do to get a good convergence. I used the Schnerr-Sauer cavitation model with Realizable k-epsilon turbulence model. I create a unstructured mesh with inflation layer at walls. Below have a image with flow solution in 500 iterations and the controls settings.
I noticed a behavior of the solution and scribbled up the graph. How can I improve convergence? Perhaps performing a simulation without the multiphase model and obtaining convergence to later connect the cavitation model and simulate? Can anyone give me tips on this?
I did not turn on the energy equation, but I'm trying to simulate a part of a system in which the venturi has, and in the actual experiment there is a temperature increase throughout the experiment, if I turn on the energy equation I'm going to get that temperature increase ?
Also, for this type of simulation is there a better mesh type? Structured or unstructured?
Another thing I noticed is that when opening the results in the CFD Post I did not get data like pressure and vapor fraction, this error occurred to me before when I simulated cavitation in orifice plates according to the tutorial of Raef Kobeissi, creating another file and doing everything again it's works, I do not know why this error/bug occurs.
Thanks for the help!
August 13, 2018 at 5:35 amDrAmineAnsys Employee
Use another implicit under-relaxation (Pseudo-Transient) + altering some explicit under-relaxation factors (especially for vaporization and density)+small time scales (very conservative).
Structured grids are always preferred whenever the flow is depicting a main flow direction or when you are trying to explicitly resolve some features /scales.. (less diffusive than other mesh topologies).
Please track other issues in different threads.
August 13, 2018 at 2:28 pmJosé MantovaniSubscriber
Very thanks Abenhadj, I try to make this and soon I post here some results or possible new doubts about the numerical solution. I will do a structured mesh and use the Pseudo-Transient method with very small time scales.
When you say about relaxation factors, should I go changing over the calculation or use a small value for every calculation?
August 13, 2018 at 7:46 pmDrAmineAnsys Employee
URF's are case dependent but do not influence the final results but might influence the way to final results. Stick first of all to pseudo-transient approach.
August 13, 2018 at 8:55 pmJosé MantovaniSubscriber
Okay Abenhadj, I will try this now.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Earth Rescue – An Ansys Online Series
The climate crisis is here. But so is the human ingenuity to fight it. Earth Rescue reveals what visionary companies are doing today to engineer radical new ideas in the fight against climate change. Click here to watch the first episode.
Subscribe to the Ansys Blog to get great new content about the power of simulation delivered right to your email on a weekly basis. With content from Ansys experts, partners and customers you will learn about product development advances, thought leadership and trends and tips to better use Ansys tools. Sign up here.
- Suppress Fluent to open with GUI while performing in journal file
- Floating point exception in Fluent
- What are the differences between CFX and Fluent?
- Heat transfer coefficient
- Getting graph and tabular data from result in workbench mechanical
- The solver failed with a non-zero exit code of : 2
- Difference between K-epsilon and K-omega Turbulence Model
- Time Step Size and Courant Number
- Mesh Interfaces in ANSYS FLUENT
- error in cfd post
© 2023 Copyright ANSYS, Inc. All rights reserved.