,CFD Simulation of Delta Wing: Questions & Guidance

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the setup and execution of a CFD simulation for a 70-degree swept delta wing at various angles of attack. Participants explore aspects of meshing, turbulence modeling, and boundary conditions in the context of subsonic flow simulations.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes their CFD simulation setup, including mesh characteristics, turbulence models, and boundary conditions, and seeks feedback on potential mistakes.
  • Another participant suggests that the original poster might find better assistance on a different forum, implying a lack of engagement or expertise in this thread.
  • A participant requests a visual representation of the mesh to better understand its quality and suitability for the turbulence models mentioned.
  • One reply questions the basis for the original poster's concern about mistakes in their setup and references the ANSYS theory manuals for guidance on turbulence modeling and y+ values.
  • There is a suggestion that structured meshes may provide advantages in terms of solver efficiency and cell quality.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

The discussion contains multiple viewpoints regarding the adequacy of the simulation setup, the choice of turbulence models, and the necessity of structured versus unstructured meshes. No consensus is reached on the best approach or the presence of mistakes in the setup.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty about the implications of y+ values for different turbulence models and the quality of the mesh. There are references to external resources for further information, indicating that some assumptions may depend on specific contexts or definitions.

Who May Find This Useful

Individuals interested in CFD simulations, particularly those working with delta wings or similar aerodynamic shapes, may find the discussion relevant.

rahman1019
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
I am trying to perform a CFD simulation of a 70 degree sweep Delta Wing at different angles of attack (aoa = 20, 25, 30, 35 degrees). The inlet flow is at 25m/s. I have made a spherical Far-field boundary with the sphere radius of 5 times the root chord length of the delta wing. Because of the symmetrical shape only half of the delta wing and spherical far-field boundary is considered for meshing. I have made 10 inflation layers on the delta wing surface to capture the boundary layer and an unstructured mesh in the far-field using ICEM-CFD. A mesh with 0.7 million cells has been created. Since the Mach no. is low, I have run a steady state Pressure based simulation using SA turbulence model in Fluent. Density of air is taken as constant. The hemi-spherical boundary is taken as velocity inlet and the symmetry is applied at the symmetrical face. My y+ lies in the range of 0.1 - 0.6.

I want to know, have i made any mistake in the case setup?

what turbulence conditions i need to mention at the inlet velocity boundary condition?

I also want to perform simulations with k-w SST and k-epsilon turbulence models. Is my y+ enough for the simulations with the above mentioned turbulence models? Among all which is a relatively better turbulence model for subsonic CFD simulations of delta wings at high angles of attack?

Do i need to make a structured mesh?

Your guidance will be appreciated.

Best regards
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It'd be nice to see a picture of the mesh. It's kind of hard to imagine. That should be enough cells for the turbulence models, but the mesh has to be constructed well. A picture of it would help a lot.
 
What makes you think there is a mistake?

There is a lot of information on turbulence modeling in the ANSYS theory manuals, especially for fluent (you didn't mention which solver you use). They also give guidelines for the y+ values, depending on your near-wall treatment. If you use some 'law-of-the-wall' kind of wall function, y+ actually needs to be large (>30), if you are resolving the boundary layer, y+ needs to be small (<1).

You might also want to take a look at some NASA papers on their online NASA Technical Reports database. Some papers give a lot of details on settings, model comparison etc.

If your solver knows about structured meshes, it's better because it can be solved faster. Also, structured meshes tend to have higher quality cells.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
7K
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K