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.
Mirror/duplicate data after using a symmetry plane
Posted 8 juil. 2015, 04:51 UTC−4 Fluid & Heat, Heat Transfer & Phase Change, Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD), Geometry Version 5.0 2 Replies
Please login with a confirmed email address before reporting spam
Hello everyone,
I have a question concerning symmetry planes.
I want to model a static mixer and a surrounding cooling structure.
I want to simulate the flow through the mixer first, and then model the heat transfer in a second step. Because the mixer is symmetric along the main flow axis, I would like to use a symmetry plane. However, the surrounding cooling structure is not symmetric, and thus would have to be modeled completely.
My question is: Can I mirror the result from the flow simulation to get the flow field of the full mixer, and then use the full flow field for the heat transfer step?
I know I can mirror results to get a plot of the full mixer, but I don't just want a plot but actually use the data for a further simulation step. Is this possible?
Best regards,
Moritz
I have a question concerning symmetry planes.
I want to model a static mixer and a surrounding cooling structure.
I want to simulate the flow through the mixer first, and then model the heat transfer in a second step. Because the mixer is symmetric along the main flow axis, I would like to use a symmetry plane. However, the surrounding cooling structure is not symmetric, and thus would have to be modeled completely.
My question is: Can I mirror the result from the flow simulation to get the flow field of the full mixer, and then use the full flow field for the heat transfer step?
I know I can mirror results to get a plot of the full mixer, but I don't just want a plot but actually use the data for a further simulation step. Is this possible?
Best regards,
Moritz
2 Replies Last Post 10 août 2015, 08:49 UTC−4
Please login with a confirmed email address before reporting spam
Posted:
9 years ago
Hi
if you can fully uncouple the flow and the thermal aspects (fully segregated) then certainly you may arrange the model in this way, for a flow i.e. in rotation you have also the periodic boundary conditions, to simplify a PIE section type model, you would need then to define a cylindrical coordinate system in the flow symmetry and use that to map the flow velocity to the thermal case in full thermal model.
But normally the two physics are at least weakly coupled so you might need to loop a few times
--
Good luck
Ivar
if you can fully uncouple the flow and the thermal aspects (fully segregated) then certainly you may arrange the model in this way, for a flow i.e. in rotation you have also the periodic boundary conditions, to simplify a PIE section type model, you would need then to define a cylindrical coordinate system in the flow symmetry and use that to map the flow velocity to the thermal case in full thermal model.
But normally the two physics are at least weakly coupled so you might need to loop a few times
--
Good luck
Ivar
Please login with a confirmed email address before reporting spam
Posted:
9 years ago
Hello Ivar,
sorry it took so long, but I still want to thank you for your response!
I don't quite understand what you suggested though. My question wasn't whether spliting the computation of the flow field and the temperature field is permissible, but rather how the mapping of the velocity to the thermal model is done exactly.
Best regards
Moritz
sorry it took so long, but I still want to thank you for your response!
I don't quite understand what you suggested though. My question wasn't whether spliting the computation of the flow field and the temperature field is permissible, but rather how the mapping of the velocity to the thermal model is done exactly.
Best regards
Moritz