[Nek5000-users] Only neumann and periodic boundary conditions for energy equation

[nek5000-users at lists.mcs.anl.gov]

Hi Steffen,


The attached file shows how to deal with the case

you're interested in.


Please see the README, the .pdf, and the .usr files.


hth,


Paul


________________________________
From: Nek5000-users <nek5000-users-bounces at lists.mcs.anl.gov> on behalf of nek5000-users at lists.mcs.anl.gov <nek5000-users at lists.mcs.anl.gov>
Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2017 2:11 AM
To: nek5000-users at lists.mcs.anl.gov
Subject: [Nek5000-users] Only neumann and periodic boundary conditions for energy equation

Hi Neks,

I want to simulate "ideal" isoflux boundary conditions in a pipe.
As the temperature (T) increases in streamwise direction (in my case
z-direction), I define
theta(r,phi,z,t) = (<T_w>(z) - T(r,phi,z,t))/T_r
with T_r = q_w/(rho c_p U_b) and <T_w>(z) denoting the time average of
the wall temperature T_w.

With that I can recast my energy equation to solve for the temperature
difference theta instead of the temperature T which allows for periodic
boundary conditions as theta does not change in streamwise direction.
This introduces an additional source term 4 u_z.

I would like to set a constant heat flux boundary condition at the wall
(see e.g. Piller: Direct numerical simulation of turbulent forced
convection in a pipe. 2005), i.e. a Neumann boundary condition (ideal
isoflux), and compare the results to those obtained with the same PDE
but a Dirichlet boundary condition theta_w=0 (mixed-type). This setup of
applying only Neumann boundary conditions is "ill-posed". I believe
because there is no unique solution to this setup, right?
As Piller points out, one can introduce an additional constraint and
enforce the volume averaged temperature to be constant to overcome this
issue. Piller did not face this problem as he was using a finite volume
method.

I can calculate the volume integral over temperature like this, correct?
       nt = nx1*ny1*nz1*nelt
       t_vol = glsc2(t, bm1, nt)

And then I would adjust my source term in each step to keep t_vol=constant.
However, I do not know this constant in advance. If I set it to an
arbitrary value, e.g. zero, this leads to negative theta at the wall,
which contradicts my definition of theta.


I know this is not a specific Nek5000 Problem but maybe someone has
experienced similar issues and found a solution that works in Nek5000?

Best Regards,
Steffen Straub

--
Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT)
Institute of Fluid Mechanics

M.Sc. Steffen Straub
Doctoral Researcher

Kaiserstraße 10
Building 10.23
76131 Karlsruhe, Germany

Phone: +49 721 608-43027
E-mail: steffen.straub at kit.edu
Web: http://www.istm.kit.edu

KIT – The Research University in the Helmholtz Association

Since 2010, the KIT has been certified as a family-friendly university.

_______________________________________________
Nek5000-users mailing list
Nek5000-users at lists.mcs.anl.gov
https://lists.mcs.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/nek5000-users
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/nek5000-users/attachments/20170727/a9b11303/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: nusselt.tgz
Type: application/x-gzip
Size: 161930 bytes
Desc: nusselt.tgz
URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/nek5000-users/attachments/20170727/a9b11303/attachment-0001.tgz>