Difference between revisions of "Natural convection in 3D irregular domain"
(19 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
− | The classical [[De Vahl Davis natural convection test]] can be extended to 3D | + | The classical [[De Vahl Davis natural convection test]] can be extended to 3D. |
+ | In below figures steady state temperature contour and velocity quiver plots | ||
+ | for Ra$=10^6$ case in 3D are presented. A more quantitative analysis is done by comparing characteristic values, i.e. | ||
+ | peak positions and values of cross section velocities, with data available in literature. We analyze six different cases, | ||
+ | namely Ra$=10^6,10^7,10^8$ in 2D, and Ra$=10^4,10^5,10^6$ in 3D. | ||
+ | The comparison in presented in below table. | ||
+ | |||
All spatial operators are discretized using RBF-FD with $r^3$ PHS radial basis | All spatial operators are discretized using RBF-FD with $r^3$ PHS radial basis | ||
functions, augmented with monomials up to order $2$, with the closest $25$ | functions, augmented with monomials up to order $2$, with the closest $25$ | ||
nodes used as a stencil. For the time discretization time step | nodes used as a stencil. For the time discretization time step | ||
− | $\Delta t=10^{-3}$ was used for all cases. Nodal distance $h=0. | + | $\Delta t=10^{-3}$ was used for all cases. Domain is discretized with our [[Positioning of computational nodes|fill algoritm]] with |
− | + | Nodal distance $h=0.025$. Boundaries with Neumann | |
− | boundary conditions are additionally treated with | + | boundary conditions are additionally treated with [[Ghost nodes (theory)]]. |
+ | |||
+ | [[File:DVD_3D.png|400px]] | ||
+ | [[File:DVD_3D_irreg.png|400px]] | ||
+ | |||
+ | {| class="wikitable" | ||
+ | ! | ||
+ | ! style="text-align: center;" | Ra | ||
+ | ! $v_{max}$ | ||
+ | ! | ||
+ | ! | ||
+ | ! $x$ | ||
+ | ! | ||
+ | ! | ||
+ | ! $u_{max}$ | ||
+ | ! | ||
+ | ! | ||
+ | ! $y$ | ||
+ | ! | ||
+ | ! | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | | | ||
+ | | | ||
+ | | present | ||
+ | | ref a | ||
+ | | ref b | ||
+ | | present | ||
+ | | ref a | ||
+ | | ref b | ||
+ | | present | ||
+ | | ref a | ||
+ | | ref b | ||
+ | | present | ||
+ | | ref a | ||
+ | | ref b | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | | 2D | ||
+ | | $10^6$ | ||
+ | | 0.2628 | ||
+ | | 0.2604 | ||
+ | | 0.2627 | ||
+ | | 0.0378 | ||
+ | | 0.0380 | ||
+ | | 0.0390 | ||
+ | | 0.0781 | ||
+ | | 0.0765 | ||
+ | | 0.0782 | ||
+ | | 0.8476 | ||
+ | | 0.8510 | ||
+ | | 0.0390 | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | | | ||
+ | | $10^7$ | ||
+ | | 0.2633 | ||
+ | | 0.2580 | ||
+ | | 0.2579 | ||
+ | | 0.0226 | ||
+ | | 0.0230 | ||
+ | | 0.0210 | ||
+ | | 0.0588 | ||
+ | | 0.0547 | ||
+ | | 0.0561 | ||
+ | | 0.8705 | ||
+ | | 0.8880 | ||
+ | | 0.0210 | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | | | ||
+ | | $10^8$ | ||
+ | | 0.2557 | ||
+ | | 0.2587 | ||
+ | | 0.2487 | ||
+ | | 0.0149 | ||
+ | | 0.0110 | ||
+ | | 0.0090 | ||
+ | | 0.0314 | ||
+ | | 0.0379 | ||
+ | | 0.0331 | ||
+ | | 0.9189 | ||
+ | | 0.9430 | ||
+ | | 0.0090 | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | | 3D | ||
+ | | $10^4$ | ||
+ | | 0.2495 | ||
+ | | 0.2218 | ||
+ | | 0.2252 | ||
+ | | 0.8500 | ||
+ | | 0.8873 | ||
+ | | 0.8833 | ||
+ | | 0.2435 | ||
+ | | 0.1968 | ||
+ | | 0.2013 | ||
+ | | 0.1611 | ||
+ | | 0.1799 | ||
+ | | 0.1833 | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | | | ||
+ | | $10^5$ | ||
+ | | 0.2545 | ||
+ | | 0.2442 | ||
+ | | 0.2471 | ||
+ | | 0.9402 | ||
+ | | 0.9317 | ||
+ | | 0.9353 | ||
+ | | 0.1564 | ||
+ | | 0.1426 | ||
+ | | 0.1468 | ||
+ | | 0.1447 | ||
+ | | 0.1493 | ||
+ | | 0.1453 | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | | | ||
+ | | $10^6$ | ||
+ | | 0.2564 | ||
+ | | 0.2556 | ||
+ | | 0.2588 | ||
+ | | 0.9614 | ||
+ | | 0.9653 | ||
+ | | 0.9669 | ||
+ | | 0.0841 | ||
+ | | 0.0816 | ||
+ | | 0.0841 | ||
+ | | 0.1435 | ||
+ | | 0.1403 | ||
+ | | 0.1443 | ||
+ | |} | ||
+ | |||
+ | [ref a for 2D] Couturier, H. & Sadat, S. Performance and accuracy of a meshless method for laminar natural convection Numerical Heat Transfer: Part B: Fundamentals, Taylor & Francis, 2000 , 37 , 455-467 | ||
+ | |||
+ | [ref b for 2D] Kosec, G. & Šarler, B. Solution of thermo-fluid problems by collocation with local pressure correction International Journal of Numerical Methods for Heat & Fluid Flow, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 2008 , 18 , 868-882 | ||
+ | |||
+ | [ref a for 3D] Wang, P.; Zhang, Y. & Guo, Z. Numerical study of three-dimensional natural convection in a cubical cavity at high Rayleigh numbers Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, Elsevier, 2017 , 113 , 217-228 | ||
− | [ | + | [ref b for 3D] Fusegi, T.; Hyun, J. M.; Kuwahara, K. & Farouk, B. A numerical study of three-dimensional natural convection in a differentially heated cubical enclosure Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, Elsevier, 1991 , 34 , 1543-1557 |
Latest revision as of 16:03, 18 May 2019
The classical De Vahl Davis natural convection test can be extended to 3D. In below figures steady state temperature contour and velocity quiver plots for Ra$=10^6$ case in 3D are presented. A more quantitative analysis is done by comparing characteristic values, i.e. peak positions and values of cross section velocities, with data available in literature. We analyze six different cases, namely Ra$=10^6,10^7,10^8$ in 2D, and Ra$=10^4,10^5,10^6$ in 3D. The comparison in presented in below table.
All spatial operators are discretized using RBF-FD with $r^3$ PHS radial basis functions, augmented with monomials up to order $2$, with the closest $25$ nodes used as a stencil. For the time discretization time step $\Delta t=10^{-3}$ was used for all cases. Domain is discretized with our fill algoritm with Nodal distance $h=0.025$. Boundaries with Neumann boundary conditions are additionally treated with Ghost nodes (theory).
Ra | $v_{max}$ | $x$ | $u_{max}$ | $y$ | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
present | ref a | ref b | present | ref a | ref b | present | ref a | ref b | present | ref a | ref b | ||
2D | $10^6$ | 0.2628 | 0.2604 | 0.2627 | 0.0378 | 0.0380 | 0.0390 | 0.0781 | 0.0765 | 0.0782 | 0.8476 | 0.8510 | 0.0390 |
$10^7$ | 0.2633 | 0.2580 | 0.2579 | 0.0226 | 0.0230 | 0.0210 | 0.0588 | 0.0547 | 0.0561 | 0.8705 | 0.8880 | 0.0210 | |
$10^8$ | 0.2557 | 0.2587 | 0.2487 | 0.0149 | 0.0110 | 0.0090 | 0.0314 | 0.0379 | 0.0331 | 0.9189 | 0.9430 | 0.0090 | |
3D | $10^4$ | 0.2495 | 0.2218 | 0.2252 | 0.8500 | 0.8873 | 0.8833 | 0.2435 | 0.1968 | 0.2013 | 0.1611 | 0.1799 | 0.1833 |
$10^5$ | 0.2545 | 0.2442 | 0.2471 | 0.9402 | 0.9317 | 0.9353 | 0.1564 | 0.1426 | 0.1468 | 0.1447 | 0.1493 | 0.1453 | |
$10^6$ | 0.2564 | 0.2556 | 0.2588 | 0.9614 | 0.9653 | 0.9669 | 0.0841 | 0.0816 | 0.0841 | 0.1435 | 0.1403 | 0.1443 |
[ref a for 2D] Couturier, H. & Sadat, S. Performance and accuracy of a meshless method for laminar natural convection Numerical Heat Transfer: Part B: Fundamentals, Taylor & Francis, 2000 , 37 , 455-467
[ref b for 2D] Kosec, G. & Šarler, B. Solution of thermo-fluid problems by collocation with local pressure correction International Journal of Numerical Methods for Heat & Fluid Flow, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 2008 , 18 , 868-882
[ref a for 3D] Wang, P.; Zhang, Y. & Guo, Z. Numerical study of three-dimensional natural convection in a cubical cavity at high Rayleigh numbers Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, Elsevier, 2017 , 113 , 217-228
[ref b for 3D] Fusegi, T.; Hyun, J. M.; Kuwahara, K. & Farouk, B. A numerical study of three-dimensional natural convection in a differentially heated cubical enclosure Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, Elsevier, 1991 , 34 , 1543-1557