I am running a steady periodic propeller simulation using the MRF approach (60 deg, periodic). I have had good results by setting the blade zone as the rotational one and having the rest as stationary (Traditional setting for MRF as far as I understand) so my question is ... Do you have any experience with these kind of simulations but using all as rotating zones rather than using only one? Do you know if is better in order to see the vorticity behind the blade?
If I use all-rotating approach, part of the geometry has to be a moving wall since that part is not rotating in reality.
Of course I can try by actually simulating it but it takes time. That is why your answer might save me some days :)
Thanks in advance!
Look at this forum. Good luck ;)
https://www.simscale.com/forum/t/definition-of-mrf-rotating-zone/41912
Hi Antonio,
I did the single-reference rotation (SRF) method, which you intent to use (as far as I understand the question), in ANSYS Fluent once and it gave the same results like the MRF model when the wall boundary in the SRF was set for wall rotation opposed to the fluid rotation direction. For the SRF method, you don't have to divide the fluid domain in subregions at all. However, it only gives reasonable results for mixing tanks without any installations (based on my experience).
Nevertheless, since the SRF provides identical results like the MRF, you shouldn't be able to see vorticies "better". Depending on the results you are actually interested in, I recommend to use a sliding mesh approach and/or LES simulations, for example. With these models you should be able to actually resolve voriticies inside the mixing tank.
Good luck.
Regards, Stephan
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Biological Science
- Kinesiology
- Running