Menu

Discussion Forum

New Discussion
Filtrer

Note: This discussion is about an older version of the COMSOL Multiphysics® software. The information provided may be out of date.

Discussion Closed This discussion was created more than 6 months ago and has been closed. To start a new discussion with a link back to this one, click here.

CFD, wall lift-off and the Boundary Layer attribute

Posted 25 août 2014, 16:45 UTC−4 Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD), Mesh Version 4.4 2 Replies

John Stasko
Send Private Message Flag post as spam

Please login with a confirmed email address before reporting spam

This question comes from my poor understanding of the "boundary layer" tool in the mesher.

1. It appears that these "boundary layers" are one technique to ensure that "wall lift-off" is of the proper order. IS THIS CORRECT? I have worked through this fabulous model www.comsol.eu/model/download/176325/models.cfd.pipe_elbow.pdf and have discovered that they are using boundary layers to get good solution.

2. When I mesh without the boundary layer, I get a certain "appearance" of the mesh, and the minimum element quality is 0.14, which is considered "good." Then I add the boundary layer. This increases the number of elements from about 2.3M to 2.9M, but the minimum element quality now drops to 3E-8 and the mesh does not change in appearance. My interpretation of this is that the boundary layer is a mathematical construct outside the problem at hand, so it does not appear in the mesh, and so this new, lower and "bad" minimum element quality is not a concern. IS THIS CORRECT?

3. I have heard that k-epsilon is degerate near the walls and therefore requires wall functions, whereas the k-omega model does not. Does this mean that wall lift-off is not considered in the k-omega model, and consequently the work with boundary layers is obviated?

Thank you for your kind help!
2 Replies Last Post 19 sept. 2014, 15:54 UTC−4
John Stasko
Send Private Message Flag post as spam

Please login with a confirmed email address before reporting spam

Posted: 1 decade ago 25 août 2014, 16:53 UTC−4
Actually, that model uses both k-omega and boundary layers, so that answers the last question: wall lift-off and boundary layers are important considerations for the k-omega model as well.
Actually, that model uses both k-omega and boundary layers, so that answers the last question: wall lift-off and boundary layers are important considerations for the k-omega model as well.
Victor Koppejan
Send Private Message Flag post as spam

Please login with a confirmed email address before reporting spam

Posted: 1 decade ago 19 sept. 2014, 15:54 UTC−4
The difference for the kappa-epsilon and kappa-omega model (as well as other turbulence mode) is quite nicely covered in the theory sectios of the CFD manual.

In a nutshell, k-e uses a wall function based on self-similarity to cover the viscous effects at the wall. k-om uses a specific turbulent energy dissipation (k-e uses non-specific) and integrates up until the wall.
The difference for the kappa-epsilon and kappa-omega model (as well as other turbulence mode) is quite nicely covered in the theory sectios of the CFD manual. In a nutshell, k-e uses a wall function based on self-similarity to cover the viscous effects at the wall. k-om uses a specific turbulent energy dissipation (k-e uses non-specific) and integrates up until the wall.

Note that while COMSOL employees may participate in the discussion forum, COMSOL® software users who are on-subscription should submit their questions via the Support Center for a more comprehensive response from the Technical Support team.

Suggested Content