1 / 27

Numerical Benchmark for Natural Convection of Freezing Water

This benchmark focuses on validating CFD results for natural convection of freezing water through verification and validation processes, using specific code comparisons, profiles analysis, and error indicators. The study emphasizes sensitivity analysis, experimental techniques like Particle Image Velocimetry and Thermometry, and estimation of uncertainties in experimental data. It includes validation methodology and quantitative comparisons with experimental benchmarks, examining thermal boundary conditions and fluid variable properties, ultimately enhancing confidence in the accuracy of numerical simulations.

jeromef
Download Presentation

Numerical Benchmark for Natural Convection of Freezing Water

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Tomasz Michałek, Tomasz A. Kowalewski NUMERICAL BENCHMARK BASED ON NATURAL CONVECTION OF FREEZING WATER Institute of Fundamental Technological Research Polish Academy of Sciences, Dept. of Mechanics and Physics of Fluids, Poland.

  2. Building confidence to CFD results Verification Validation Code/Program verification Verification of Calculation Validation of Idealized problems Validation of actual configuration • Method of • manufactured solution [Roache] • Analytical solutions • Numerical benchmarks • [Ghia, de Vahl Davis, • Le Quere,…] • Unit problems • Benchmark cases • Simplified/Partial • Flow Path • Actual Hardware • [Sindir et al.] • Richardson extrapolation (RE) • Generalized RE • [Stern at all.] • Grid Convergence Index (GCI) [Roache] sensitivity analysis

  3. BENCHMARK DEFINITION FOR THERMAL AND VISCOUS FLOWS • 2D viscous, incompressible flow driven by natural convection • Navier – Stokes equations with non-linear buoyancy term (water) coupled with heat transfer • Temperature gradient ΔT = 10ºC • Verified programs: Th = 10C Tc = 0C • FRECON (FDM) • FLUENT (FVM) • FIDAP (FEM) • SOLVSTR (FDM) • SOLVMEF (MEF) Ra = 1.5 · 106 Pr = 13.31

  4. VERIFICATION PROCEDURE Compare profiles (not points!) CALCULATE: SOLUTION S , SOLUTION UNCERTAINTY USN Error indicator for code comparisons Reference solution

  5. INTER-CODE COMPARISONS using selected profiles FRECON3V (FRE) FLUENT 6.1. (FLU) FIDAP 8.7.0.(FID) SOLVSTR (STR) Details of the reference solutions w(x) Michalek T., Kowalewski T.A., Sarler B. ”Natural Convection for Anomalous Density Variation of Water: Numerical Benchmark” Progress in Computational Fluid Dynamics, 5 (3-5),pp 158-170,2005 Error U,W along Y=0.5L Error U,W along X=0.5L Error U,W along X=0.9L Mesh sensitivity

  6. SENSITIVITY ANALYSISParameters and control points COMP. RESULTS INITIAL PARAMETERS Boundary conditions TH, TC, Text, Q1, Q2, Q3 Initial conditions Tinit. ,vinit Material properties ,,,,cp MODEL OUTPUT SENSITIVITY MEASURES 1. Fundamental parameters for validation procedure 2. Precision of measurements necessary to validate calculations

  7. EXPERIMENTAL SET-UP light sheet

  8. CAVITY DETAILSControl points for monitoring internal and external temperatures T14 PLEXIGLASS WALL T7 T10 Th Tc ALUMINIUM WALL ALUMINIUM WALL TL TP PLEXIGLASS WALL T15 CENTRAL CROS-SECTION TE1 TE2

  9. EXPERIMENTAL TECHNIQUES • Particle Image Velocimetry (PIV) • Particle Image Thermometry (PIT) • 2D Visualization • Point temperature measurements correlation F(t0) F(t0+t)

  10. ESTIMATION OF EXP. UNCERAINTY UD • PIV Avg. Fields N – length of series Std. Dev. Std. Dev. Error Experimental Data Uncertainty • PIT

  11. EXPERIMENTAL BENCHMARK DEFINEDDifferent liquid crystal tracers to cover entire color range PIT - temperature Ra = 1.5*106 Pr = 11.78 PIV – velocity Th = 10 C Tc = 0 C

  12. EXPERIMENTAL BENCHMARK DEFINEDSelected velocity and temperature profiles 2D Temp. Field Temp. along X = 0.9L Temp. along Y = 0.5L W along Y = 0.5L U along X = 0.5L W along X = 0.9L

  13. EXPERIMENTAL UNCERTAINTY ESTIMATION N = 40, t = 1s • PIV • PIT • two sets of tracers

  14. VALIDATION METHODOLOGY Stern et all., Comprehensive approach to verification and validation of CFD simulations – Part 1: Methodology and procedures Journal of Fluids Engineering – Transactions of ASME, 123 (4), pp. 793-802,2001. • Validation error • Validation metric In our example: for water

  15. TUNNING NUMERICAL SOLUTIONEffect of fluid variable properties and thermal boundary conditions Simulation A Variable liquid properties (T),(T),cp (T) Simulation B Const. liquid properties ,,cp = const. Simulation C Adiabatic and isothermal walls ,,cp = const Temperature fields Velocity fields

  16. THERMAL BOUNDARY CONDITIONValidation of the selected numerical model for Tc=-2oC Computational Simulation Tc= - 2C Th=10C Experiment

  17. THERMAL BOUNDARY CONDITION Validation of the selected numerical model for Tc=-1oC Computational Simulation Tc = -1C Th=10C Experiment

  18. THERMAL BOUNDARY CONDITIONValidation of the selected numerical model for Tc=+1oC Computational Simulation Tc=1C Th=10C Experiment

  19. THERMAL BOUNDARY CONDITIONValidation of the selected numerical model for Tc=+2oC Computational Simulation Tc=2C Th=10C Experiment

  20. VALIDATION – QUANTITATIVE COMPARISONS WITH THE EXPERIMENTAL BENCHMARK Y=0.5L X=0.5L X=0.9L Temperature profiles Velocity profiles

  21. NATURAL CONVECTION AT HIGH RAYLEIGH NUMBER Th = 27.33 C Tc = 6.87 C PIV PIT with two TLCs Th = 27.21 C Tc = 6.77 C

  22. NATURAL CONVECTION AT HIGH RAYLEIGH NUMBER Ra = 3.107 control points and area selected for velocity measurements Ra = 4.4.108

  23. HIGH RAYLEIGH NUMBERVelocity field statistics Ra = 3x107 Ra = 1.5x108 Turbulence Intensity Ra = 4.4x108 Ra = 1.8x108 N = 150 t = 100 ms t = 15 sec

  24. HIGH RAYLEIGH NUMBERVelocity histogram and time series Ra = 3x107 N=150 t = 100 ms

  25. HIGH RAYLEIGH NUMBERVelocity histogram and time series Ra = 4.4x108 N=138 t = 100 ms

  26. CONCLUSIONS Numerical benchmark based on natural convection of freezing water defined A sensitivity analysis proposed to evaluate effects of initial parameters and to identify fundamental (crucial) parameters => determination of measurement’s precision needed in the validation procedure. Experimental benchmark defined 2D Temperature field, 2D Velocity fieldobtained for defined configuration Uncertainty of experimental data assessed Validation procedure performed in order to assess modeling errors. High Rayleigh number natural convection resolved experimentally – Numerical solution … pending

  27. Thank you for your attention!

More Related