
[Sponsors] 
June 19, 2014, 08:41 
Adding fvOptions to turbulence model

#1 
New Member
Robin
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 5
Rep Power: 10 
Does anyone know if it's possible to get fvOptions sources to work in the equations for turbulence quantities like k and epsilon? I've been trying to use a scalarExplicitSetValue 'source' for both epsilon and k using the standard kEpsilon model, with the subdict:
turb1 { type scalarExplicitSetValue; active true; selectionMode cellZone; cellZone Zone_1; scalarExplicitSetValueCoeffs { injectionRate { epsilon 1; k 1; } } } but what I get when I run is: > FOAM Warning : From function void option::checkApplied() const in file fvOptions/fvOption.C at line 368 Source turb1 defined for field epsilon but never used > FOAM Warning : From function void option::checkApplied() const in file fvOptions/fvOption.C at line 368 Source turb1 defined for field k but never used I've had a look in the code for the kEpsilon model, and tried to recompile with the equations as follows (adding fvOptions source at the end): // Dissipation equation tmp<fvScalarMatrix> epsEqn ( fvm::ddt(epsilon_) + fvm::div(phi_, epsilon_)  fvm::laplacian(DepsilonEff(), epsilon_) == C1_*G*epsilon_/k_  fvm::Sp(C2_*epsilon_/k_, epsilon_) + fvOptions(epsilon_) ); and: // Turbulent kinetic energy equation tmp<fvScalarMatrix> kEqn ( fvm::ddt(k_) + fvm::div(phi_, k_)  fvm::laplacian(DkEff(), k_) == G  fvm::Sp(epsilon_/k_, k_) + fvOptions(k_) ); but I get the compilation error: mykEpsilon.C: In member function ‘virtual void Foam::incompressible::RASModels::mykEpsilon::corre ct()’: mykEpsilon.C:254:27: error: ‘fvOptions’ was not declared in this scope I'm afraid that my very limited knowledge ends roughly here. The problem is especially irksome as the sample in the code for explicitSetValue.H is: 32 \verbatim 33 <Type>ExplicitSetValueCoeffs 34 { 35 injectionRate 36 { 37 k 30.7; 38 epsilon 1.5; 39 } 40 } 41 \endverbatim Did this work in a previous OF version? I'm using 2.3.0. 

June 19, 2014, 09:30 

#2 
Senior Member

Hi,
if you'd like to use fvOptions you have to create it. You add a property to class Code:
fv::IOoptionList fvOptions Code:
fvOptions(mesh_) 

June 20, 2014, 05:23 

#3 
New Member
Robin
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 5
Rep Power: 10 
Hi Alexey,
Thanks so much for getting back to me so quickly! I added the lines you recommended, and with an #include "fvIOoptionList.H" in the mykEpsilon.H file the modified turbulence model compiled correctly and I was able to call it in the solver. Unfortunately it still doesn't seem to be working correctly. I'm running a version of pimpleFoam that I've modified slightly to include the transport of a passive scalar, and I have fvOptions sources for both momentum and the scalar, vectorCodedSources applied to set timevarying values of U and scalarSemiImplicitSources to set zonal injection rates of the scalar. These both have been working as expected. To recap my objective, I'm looking to prescribe zonal values of k and epsilon with scalarExplicitSetValue sources. When I run pimpleFoam now, I get: > FOAM Warning : From function void option::checkApplied() const in file fvOptions/fvOption.C at line 368 Source turb1 defined for field epsilon but never used > FOAM Warning : From function void option::checkApplied() const in file fvOptions/fvOption.C at line 368 Source turb1 defined for field k but never used before the Ux, Uy, Uz and scalar solution steps, and: > FOAM Warning : From function void option::checkApplied() const in file fvOptions/fvOption.C at line 368 Source codedSourceMom_1 defined for field U but never used > FOAM Warning : From function void option::checkApplied() const in file fvOptions/fvOption.C at line 368 Source smoke1 defined for field smoke but never used before the k, epsilon solution steps, which I figure is all okay, as I wouldn't expect the turbulent sources to be used in the momentum/scalar equations and vice versa. The problem I'm having is that although the velocity and scalar are still being set correctly, the turbulence quantities are unchanged, whereas I was hoping for my fixed, specified levels (currently unity) to be set in those zones. Any idea what I'm missing? Thanks again for your help, Robin 

June 20, 2014, 06:10 

#4 
Senior Member

Hi,
Can you post output of the simulation for one time step? I'd like to see the errors you've posted here in the context of solver output. 

June 20, 2014, 07:18 

#5 
New Member
Robin
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 5
Rep Power: 10 
Hi Alexey,
Here is the output of the first two iterations. Seemingly I only get the warnings on the second time step? Robin 

June 23, 2014, 03:53 

#6 
Senior Member

Hi,
In case of fvOption in turbulence model, it is really applied only on the last PIMPLE iteration (as it is instructed by turbOnFinalIterOnly option in PIMPLE dictionary in fvSolution). In case of codedSource fvOption, I guess, your code is in charge of setting applied state. As I don't know the source of Mom_x options there's nothing I can add. 

June 23, 2014, 08:11 

#7 
New Member
Robin
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 5
Rep Power: 10 
Hi Alexey,
The momentum sources are currently just applying fixed values of velocity over the zones, although I intend to make them time/spatially varying in due course. I think I've fixed the problem! I hadn't applied the functions fvOptions.constrain() and fvOptions.correct() to the turbulence quantities. Having done that, the relevant sections of mykEpsilon.H are something like: tmp<fvScalarMatrix> epsEqn ( fvm::ddt(epsilon_) + fvm::div(phi_, epsilon_)  fvm::laplacian(DepsilonEff(), epsilon_) == C1_*G*epsilon_/k_  fvm::Sp(C2_*epsilon_/k_, epsilon_) + fvOptions(epsilon_) ); epsEqn().relax(); fvOptions.constrain(epsEqn()); epsEqn().boundaryManipulate(epsilon_.boundaryField ()); solve(epsEqn); fvOptions.correct(epsilon_); bound(epsilon_, epsilonMin_); and the same for the k equation. Seems to be working now as the turbulence quantities are constant within the prescribed zones. Thanks very much for your help on this, I don't think I would have been able to get started without your help. Robin 

June 23, 2014, 11:11 

#8 
Senior Member

Hi,
good to know you've solved the problem. Actually it was my first suggestion but then I've decided to read source code of fvOption class and found that operator () sets applied state. So I've decided that constrain and correct calls are in fact not necessary. It seems I was wrong 

October 15, 2014, 22:34 

#9 
Senior Member
Pete Bachant
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 171
Rep Power: 11 
slottedLemon,
I am looking to add sources to kEpsilon as well, but I can't get the code to compile. Would you be willing to share your code? What I have so far is up at https://github.com/petebachant/kEpsilonSources Last edited by pbachant; October 16, 2014 at 00:12. 

May 23, 2020, 19:13 

#10 
Member
René Thibault
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: Canada
Posts: 88
Rep Power: 3 
I got similar issue trying to make fvOptions working with ke model by adding a source term 'scalarCodedSource'.
Did you guys find a solution about your issues? here is the link of the thread: Adding source term with fvOptions to ke model 

May 28, 2020, 07:43 

#11 
Member
alexander thierfelder
Join Date: Dec 2019
Posts: 71
Rep Power: 3 
Hi I just manged to get fvOptions codedScalarSource to work for my case, I did not use it for turbulence, but for a heat source. Maybe you can take some of it I don't know.
scalarCodedSource fvOptions example moving heat source 

May 28, 2020, 08:00 

#12 
Member
René Thibault
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: Canada
Posts: 88
Rep Power: 3 
Thank you very much for your reply!
Is there a reason why your heSource[i] function is multiply by the volume V[i]? Some day a go, I suspected that I had to multiply my function by V[i](I assumed that I had to do this since I didn't use the 'fvm' for the coding), and the simulation went well and converge but I was wondering if it was a simple luck. Thank in advance for your feedback. Regards, 

May 28, 2020, 08:42 

#13 
Member
alexander thierfelder
Join Date: Dec 2019
Posts: 71
Rep Power: 3 
Hey, I did not bother about that^^. But I mean it depends. It does not make really sense in that case to have the source be dependent on the cell volume, since he is a specific quantity. It would mean, that in smaller cell the specific source would be smaller what would not make sense. It was more of an example for me how to include different attributes of the simulation into fvOptions. But I could be totally wrong, because in the official example:
https://www.openfoam.com/documentati...cescoded.html they also included V[i], for a specific heat source. I have to think about that, and look for what the EEqn really solves. 

May 28, 2020, 13:27 

#14 
Member
René Thibault
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: Canada
Posts: 88
Rep Power: 3 
I understand what do you mean. Since it a specific value, doesn't make sense to multiply by the volume.
The thing is, the term source that I try to implement is not a heat source but a source term apply to the dissipation equation (epsilon). Like you saying, it depend on what OpenFoam do during the resolving process with the function in 'fvOptions' file. And I noticed that the V[i] was included in other example also, like you said. For instance, we have to divide the term by 'rho', because we use 'nut' in the transport equation and I guess it multiply by 'rho' later on. So, I was suspecting that my issue could be something similar to this. P.S.: If you look at the thread I linked, the results calculated by the function in the fvOptions file is right(I validated the calculation with MathCad) but when it carry on in the transport equation to resolve it, the digit go really high. 

Tags 
fixed value, fvoptions, source, turbulence, turbulence model 
Thread Tools  Search this Thread 
Display Modes  


Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Adding graviational acc. to turbulence model  fertinaz  OpenFOAM Programming & Development  6  December 12, 2020 01:04 
chtMultiRegionSimpleFoam: strange error  samiam1000  OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD  26  December 29, 2015 23:14 
Compressible turbulence model issues  351Cleveland  OpenFOAM  5  October 24, 2013 16:41 
What model of turbulence choose to study an external aerodynamics case  raffale  OpenFOAM  0  August 23, 2012 06:45 
Low Reynolds kepsilon model  YJZ  ANSYS  1  August 20, 2010 14:57 