|
|
The DPMFoam solver does not exist in OpenFOAM-9. > You can run the Lagrangian-Goldschmidt tutorial by DPMFoam but with water properties. The pressure readings will be off. In what way are the "pressure readings ... off"? > This can be easily fixed by multiplying gravity component with alphac or the interpolated version (alphacf). This would make the handling of the pressure and gravity inconsistent. Could you provide much more detail about the results, the expected results and the change you propose? |
|
|
Based on the momentum equation, the gravity force in momentum equation must be multiplied by alphac. However, in the UEqn.H, the gravity force is never multiplied by fluid-phase volume fraction. These files are from OpenFOAM 7 version. I could of course be wrong, but I checked the way the interFoam handles UEqn.H and pEqn.H (interFoam basically uses density in the same exact way as alphac, and there, we have the gravity force and density multiplied. Of course I could be wrong, I appreciate your time and consideration. MomentumEqn.PNG (7,910 bytes) UEqn.PNG (78,258 bytes) |
|
|
We had serious problem with numerical noise when the buoyancy and pressure terms were multiplied by the phase-fraction which of course is noisy as it comes from the Lagrangian phase. Also it is not clear how the pressure term should be treated within the particulate phase and hence how it should be treated in the continuous phase; it is not equivalent to VoF or Euler-Euler. Can you provide a set of test-cases which demonstrate the advantage of multiplying the buoyancy and/or pressure terms by the continuous phase fraction? |
|
|
Pending feedback, test-cases and Lagrangian phase pressure closure model. |
- Anonymous
