0 tayangan

Judul Asli: Poly Grids

Diunggah oleh perrychem

Poly Grids

Polyhedral Grids in STAR-CCM+

© All Rights Reserved

- Multiple Integrals
- tablecontents.pdf
- Mt2176 Further Calculus Study Guide
- Engineering Graphics
- 2013_1_MATH132
- calculus.pptx
- Iit Jee Sylabus
- BichtelerDellacherie Theorem Arbitrge
- chap5 - student solutions
- Integration Results
- mech_II
- H.eliyev Math
- 3 4 definite integrals
- Impes Method
- Notes on Integration by Parts
- 2017 12 Maths Sample Paper 02 Qp
- skf2133-chapter7n.pdf
- apcalculussolidsofrevolution
- Syllabus I Year
- Semester 1 Note Summary

Anda di halaman 1dari 31

In STAR-CCM+

Milovan Perić

www.cd-adapco.com

Finite-Volume Method, I

volumes) by a grid...

● ...which can be

structured,

block-structured (with either matching or non-matching interfaces,

overlapping or non-overlapping blocks),

or fully unstructured...

polyhedra...

Finite-Volume Method, II

STAR-CCM+: An unstructured grid, made of

tetrahedra and prism layers along walls (top

left); a trimmed hexahedral grid with prism

layers along walls (top right); a polyhedral grid

with prism layers along walls (left)

Polyhedral Control Volumes, I

CV as if it were an arbitrary polyhedron – than the same code can

handle any grid.

Vertex (defined by grid coordinates; saved)

Line (connects two vertices; not saved)

Face (a closed polygon of lines; defined by an

ordered list of vertices; saved)

Volume (enclosed by faces; defined by a list of faces; saved)

faces (attached to one cell).

• Cells must be “watertight”: each edge must appear twice…

Polyhedral Control Volumes, II

Loop over volumes (approximation of volume integrals; linear equations

solver…)

from one cell to another; linear equations solver..)

boundary conditions)

used to distinguish solvers that operate mostly on face loops and

have no limit to the number of faces that a CV can have, contrary

to solvers for unstructured grids that operate on cell loops and the

number of faces per cell is limited (STAR-CD was like this until it

was re-written for Version 4).

Polyhedral Control Volumes, III

Face centroid position;

Cell centroid position, cell volume;

Continuum properties…

Polyhedral Control Volumes, IV

Computational point is the vertex of the generated/imported grid, around

which a control volume is created by solver; it is not in the CV-centroid.

Both surface and volume integrals are computed element-wise (grid cells

are interpolation “elements”; e.g. in ANSYS-CFX, see left figure).

Left: 12 surface

integration points, 6

volume integration

points (in this 2D

example; in 3D,

typically around 60

surface integration

points and around 12

volume integration

points; multiple faces ANSYS-CFX STAR-CCM+

shared by the same

control volumes).

Polyhedral Control Volumes, V

Computational point is at the cell-centroid of the generated/imported grid.

The grid represents boundaries of control volumes ; interpolation is

performed between computational points using shape functions.

The number of integration points is minimized (see right figure).

Right: 6 surface

integration points, one

volume integration

point (at cell centroid).

One common face for

two neighbor cells.

Note: the number of

neighbor nodes is the

same in both cases, the

algebraic equation ANSYS-CFX STAR-CCM+

system looks the same…

Polyhedral Control Volumes, VI

● The first approach requires special treatment at boundaries, since a

control volume is also created around boundary nodes…

Polyhedral Control Volumes, VII

● Face centroid and surface vector are needed to compute fluxes.

● Surface vector is unique when edges are straight (which is usually the

case) – vector components are face projections onto coordinate

planes…

● Face definition must be unique for both cells it belongs to…

● Triangulation is used to uniquely define face properties…

In order to define cell faces and cell H: Cell hub point

volume uniquely, STAR-CCM+

introduces “hub points”, which are

used to split faces into triangles and

volume into tetrahedra (only for the

purpose of computing surface

vectors and cell volume).

Discretization

● Integral approximation (quadrature; for surface, volume and time

integrals)

● Interpolation (computing variable values at locations other than cell

centroid – primarily for face centroids when computing surface integrals)

● Differentiation (gradients; needed at cell centroid and at face centroids)

● Midpoint rule (2D space, 3D space, time; used in STAR-CCM+ and all

other commercial codes): 2nd-order approximation on any grid type

● Trapezoid rule (2D space, time; used in research 2D codes); 2nd-order

● Simpson rule (2D space ; used in research 2D codes); 4th-order

Why Polyhedral Grids?, I

outlined before) simplifies the solver – there is no need for any special

treatment for these special situations:

Local grid refinement interfaces;

Non-conformal grid interfaces;

Sliding grid interfaces.

● In order to handle these situations, one only needs to define the faces

at interfaces appropriately (which is not always trivial…).

● Each piece of interface – which can be an arbitrary polygon – that is

common to two neighbour cells must be identified and added to the

list of internal faces.

Non-Conformal Grid Interfaces, I

to handle, since the definition of new faces is trivial)…

Non-Conformal Grid Interfaces, II

sliding interfaces (identification of new faces can be tricky – tolerance

sensitive…).

Why Polyhedral Grids?, II

● There are also good reasons for generating and using polyhedral grids,

especially for internal flows:

It is easier to control grid size changes (zonal refinement or coarsening) –

this can take place gradually, without sudden changes as with trimmed

hexahedral grids (advantage in LES, acoustics etc.);

The variation of grid size at walls (in tangential direction) can also be

better controlled than with trimmed grids, where often jumps in face

size occur;

When using midpoint-rule integral approximation and the usual gradient

approximations, higher accuracy is obtained than with tetrahedral grids

(more immediate neighbours, better gradients);

Gradients are not smeared like when using more distant neighbours to

compute gradients on tetrahedral grids (polyhedral grid has more

immediate neighbours since it has more faces).

Why Polyhedral Grids?, III

● There are also good reasons for generating and using polyhedral grids,

especially for internal flows (continued):

When using polyhedral control volumes, conformal grids can easily be

generated at solid-fluid interfaces (important for heat transfer and some

other processes);

This is also true for tetrahedral grids, but not for trimmed hexahedral

grids…

When the flow is nearly orthogonal to a pair of opposite faces, convection

flux approximation has the highest accuracy (minimum numerical

diffusion) – especially important in recirculating flows...

In polyhedral grids, there are more directions which can be aligned with

flow direction in the sense just described (typically 6) than in hexahedral

(three) or tetrahedral grids (none).

In principle it is easier to optimize grid quality than with any other grid

type (more freedom to split, merge, deform etc.).

Conformal Grid at Fluid-Solid Interface

conjugate heat transfer…

● For efficiency reasons, it is important to solve the energy equation in

both continua simultaneously…

● A conformal grid at the interface between continua is important,

because cells are usually very thin on fluid side (prism layer near wall),

and solid walls are sometimes also thin…

Solid Interface

Interface

Fluid

Solid

Grid Section

usually obtains a more

uniform face size at walls than

when a trimmed grid is used,

where often small trimmed

faces cause jumps in face size

(see marked zone and similar

places elsewhere)…

Comparison of Hex-, Tet- and Poly-Grid, I

transfer) with the following data:

The pipe wall is hot (400 K). Fluid is water with inlet temperature 300 K

and velocity of 5 m/s (Re = 200,000).

A half of the geometry is considered, with a symmetry boundary condition

(3D-flow, with pronounced secondary flow effects due to bend). Wall

functions are used, y+ is around 50.

Pipe diameter: D = 0.04 m; mean bend radius: R = 0.04 m

Pipe length upstream of bend: 4 D; pipe length downstream of bend: 7 D

Three grids are created, with BaseSize: 0.002 m, 0.001 m and 0.0005 m

(reduction by a factor of 2);

6 prism layers are created; thickness of the layer next to wall the same, 3e-

4 m, while the total thickness of all layers was 0.004 m, 0.003 m and 0.002

m, respectively. Extrusion used both upstream and downstream of elbow.

Comparison of Hex-, Tet- and Poly-Grid, II

polyhedral (top left), tetrahedral (top

right) and trimmed (bottom left).

Comparison of Hex-, Tet- and Poly-Grid, III

Grid Type Grid Level Base Size No. of Cells No. of Faces

Tetrahedral 1 0.002 128,823 297,077

Tetrahedral 2 0.001 680,544 1,489,269

Tetrahedral 3 0.0005 3,734,138 7,894,478

Polyhedral 1 0.002 60,805 244,046

Polyhedral 2 0.001 231,544 1,035,947

Polyhedral 3 0.0005 984,343 5,286,580

Trimmed 1 0.002 42,079 120,837

Trimmed 2 0.001 171,021 496,402

Trimmed 3 0.0005 933,686 2,744,399

Data for three levels of refinement for all three grid types (the same grid generation

parameters are used).

Comparison of Hex-, Tet- and Poly-Grid, IV

Tetrahedral Polyhedral

Trimmed process: computation on the next finer

grid is started with automatically

extrapolated solution from the next

coarser grid. The same under-relaxation

factors are used in all cases (0.2 for

Grid 1 Grid 2 Grid 3 pressure, 0.9 for temperature, 0.8 for all

other variables). On tetrahedral grids, one

needs more iterations to reach steady

integral values – residuals cannot be

reduced beyond certain limit, they

oscillate…

Comparison of Hex-, Tet- and Poly-Grid, V

Tetrahedral 2 60,004.9 4,717.61 18.705 -47.806

Tetrahedral 3 59,805.6 4,680.66 18.684 -47.370

Polyhedral 1 60,004.9 4,729.08 18.658 -48.656

Polyhedral 2 59,891.1 4,682.88 18.674 -47.515

Polyhedral 3 59,805.4 4,671.63 18.675 -47.285

Trimmed 1 60,037.6 4,763.99 18.648 -48.532

Trimmed 2 60,095.4 4,705.41 18.679 -47.713

Trimmed 3 60,006.4 4,687.90 18.680 -47.516

- Total heat flux through pipe wall

- Pressure drop between inlet and outlet (specified constant velocity at inlet)

- Force on pipe wall in x- and y-direction

Comparison of Hex-, Tet- and Poly-Grid, VI

Tetrahedral Polyhedral

Trimmed

pressure, since p=0 is specified at outlet)

during iterations on all grids.

On tetrahedral grids 1 and 2, the solution

is not completely steady (residuals

Grid 1 Grid 2 Grid 3 oscillate).

Solution on the polyhedral grid 2 is as

accurate as the solutions on finer

tetrahedral or trimmed grids.

Comparison of Hex-, Tet- and Poly-Grid, VII

Tetrahedral Polyhedral

Trimmed

direction during iterations on all grids.

On tetrahedral grids 1 and 2, the solution

is not completely steady (residuals

oscillate).

Grid 1 Grid 2 Grid 3 Solutions on polyhedral and trimmed grids

are similar (the force increases with grid

refinement); on tetrahedral grids, the force

reduces as the grid is refined. On the finest

level, results are close on all grids.

Comparison of Hex-, Tet- and Poly-Grid, VIII

Tetrahedral Polyhedral

Trimmed

direction during iterations on all grids.

On tetrahedral grids 1 and 2, the solution

is not completely steady (residuals

oscillate).

Grid 1 Grid 2 Grid 3 On the finest level, results are close on all

grids (within 0.5%).

Comparison of Hex-, Tet- and Poly-Grid, IX

Tetrahedral Polyhedral

Trimmed

during iterations on all grids.

On all grid levels, results are close (within

0.3%).

Comparison of Hex-, Tet- and Poly-Grid, X

Tetrahedral Polyhedral

On all grid levels, results are close (within

0.3%).

Minimum and maximum pressure values

Trimmed are close – within 0.3%.

Comparison of Hex-, Tet- and Poly-Grid, XI

Tetrahedral Polyhedral

on level-3 grids.

On all grid levels, maximum velocity values

are close – within 0.15%.

Trimmed

Comparison of Hex-, Tet- and Poly-Grid, XII

Tetrahedral Polyhedral

bend exit, computed on level-3 grids.

On all grid levels, maximum secondary

velocity values are close – within 0.6%.

Trimmed

Comparison of Hex-, Tet- and Poly-Grid, XIII

● Results for this test case confirm observations from earlier studies using

STAR-CCM+:

When a tetrahedral grid is converted to polyhedral grid (which is roughly

what we get when generating grids using the same base size), the number

of cells is 4-5 times lower, and the number of faces is also substantially

lower.

When the same under-relaxation factors are used, iterations converge

better on polyhedral than on tetrahedral grids (on tetrahedral grids,

residuals often oscillate and do not go below certain level).

The computing time on the polyhedral grid is ca. 5 times lower (partly

because substantially less iterations are needed, partly because of less

cells and faces). In the cases studied here, the total computing time on

polyhedral grids was 637 s and on tetrahedral grids it was 3030 s.

When the grid is sufficiently fine, results are very close; however, the cost

of obtaining them is lower on polyhedral grids.

- Multiple IntegralsDiunggah olehPancham Alva
- tablecontents.pdfDiunggah olehDhrubajyoti Das
- Mt2176 Further Calculus Study GuideDiunggah olehMehrdad Abutalebi
- Engineering GraphicsDiunggah olehVikram Rao
- 2013_1_MATH132Diunggah olehZohaibKhan
- calculus.pptxDiunggah olehNathaliaEicellRoseBueno
- Iit Jee SylabusDiunggah olehVedant Sumaria
- BichtelerDellacherie Theorem ArbitrgeDiunggah olehCarlos Cañizares
- chap5 - student solutionsDiunggah olehPatricia Woller
- Integration ResultsDiunggah olehctbiju
- mech_IIDiunggah olehPrakash Sundharam
- H.eliyev MathDiunggah oleh1bakuvi1
- 3 4 definite integralsDiunggah olehapi-299265916
- Impes MethodDiunggah olehDavid Reyes
- Notes on Integration by PartsDiunggah olehkelvinlagota
- 2017 12 Maths Sample Paper 02 QpDiunggah olehRishabh Singh
- skf2133-chapter7n.pdfDiunggah olehdaviufc
- apcalculussolidsofrevolutionDiunggah olehapi-310833245
- Syllabus I YearDiunggah olehDipesh Patel
- Semester 1 Note SummaryDiunggah olehhonestliar13
- Double Integral Over Rectangular RegionsDiunggah olehvishank94
- EThirdDiunggah olehJojuPeter
- deltafnDiunggah olehGines Cosmo
- differentiatedcenteredlessonDiunggah olehapi-253275467
- EnmDiunggah olehAnirodh
- Lab 5Diunggah olehryanritchie35
- Gráficos polares.pdfDiunggah olehLeonel Molina Alvarado
- Ass 1Diunggah olehShiyeng Charmaine
- civil_IIDiunggah olehajaiforce
- mech_IIDiunggah olehvit_mech

- 中英对照Diunggah oleh连富兴
- KTL Brochure EngDiunggah olehperrychem
- NYR17320_SaleCatDiunggah olehperrychem
- Prog -May 20!8Diunggah olehperrychem
- Little LondonDiunggah olehperrychem
- Spt Mozley Desanding Hydrocyclones BrochureDiunggah olehperrychem
- 9780714866963-WA-previewDiunggah olehperrychem
- Trumpf- TruLaser.pdfDiunggah olehNastase Eduard
- Laser Cutting410 39553Diunggah olehEduard Kuna
- Computational Modelling Blackett ReviewDiunggah olehperrychem
- MED_6396_7289Diunggah olehperrychem
- Gurnard Pub WalkDiunggah olehperrychem
- Why ISO Standards Should Be Preferred for Metric FastenersDiunggah olehV Voot Hor
- Electronic Sound - Issue 35, 2017Diunggah olehperrychem
- Tips_EMPDiunggah olehperrychem
- No-14 FactSheet Vane Mist Eliminator (Sep 2011)Diunggah olehperrychem
- OGF Article - The Savvy Separator SeriesDiunggah olehperrychem
- 4792.pdfDiunggah olehpe
- Gas ConstantDiunggah olehAnonymous ncBe0B9b
- pag031-64ING3Diunggah olehLuis Guardia Matos
- NeerajKumarMastersThesisDiunggah olehlluisvs5931
- An Introduction to Differential-Pressure Flow MetersDiunggah olehsre_eram4160
- 1998_3.3_STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES.pdfDiunggah olehkjyeom_258083906
- BETE Metric CatalogDiunggah olehperrychem
- Development of the optimal strategy for managing the integrity and production risks associated with sand productionDiunggah olehperrychem
- Enerscope Systems Solids TransportDiunggah olehperrychem
- Johnson Industrial ScreensDiunggah olehperrychem
- Ring Type Joint Brochure 2016Diunggah olehperrychem
- En Sothebys HK Spring 2016 Kangxi Mandate of HeavenDiunggah olehperrychem

- Math March 19 DemoDiunggah olehSi Yue
- Welcome to Grade 8 PresentationDiunggah olehksonico
- Chapter04 SolidsDiunggah olehlen16328
- RoboticsDiunggah olehRahul Gupta
- Polyhedronj1Diunggah olehAayush Agarwal
- starburst volume lesson plan gr 8 pdfDiunggah olehapi-252821229
- Maths Form 2 Exam P3.docxDiunggah olehJK
- Ese DrawingDiunggah olehramlakhan
- c y l i n d e r sDiunggah olehGerald Robles
- Technical LetteringDiunggah olehMaverick Timbol
- Geo2Diunggah olehwshen1468
- lessonplan week13-mathDiunggah olehapi-336792837
- Maths - Data, Chance and Measurement.pdfDiunggah olehttorn2
- Multiple Choice Questions-EDDiunggah olehDevarakonda Kondayya
- Assignment sheet no. 5 & 6.pdfDiunggah olehArnav Anuj Kasar
- Solid Geometry.docDiunggah olehDoms
- maths form2 - revisionDiunggah olehNK28
- Claude Bragdon - Projective Ornament (1915)Diunggah olehHomers Simpson
- EN(340)Diunggah olehreacharunk
- Egyptian Water ClocksDiunggah olehCeaser Said
- bangun-ruangDiunggah olehsam_raunay
- Lesson 16: Surface Area and VolumeDiunggah olehmisterreid
- r05010107-engineering-graphicsDiunggah olehSrinivasa Rao G
- ECE - AssignmentDiunggah olehsimalaravi
- 4 ESO Academics - UNIT 06 - AREAS AND VOLUMES. SIMILARITY.Diunggah olehGoheim
- surface-area.pdfDiunggah olehAmalia An
- Mathematical Formulars For College StudentsDiunggah olehtvogunleye
- Third Periodic Test in Math 6 2017-2018Diunggah olehMaryHazelClaveBeniga
- GiD CourseDiunggah olehSukumar Baishya
- studentscopymodule7-Diunggah olehpbp_88_995464790