I found that the adiabatic no-slip wall boundary condition is more suitable than the isothermal wall condition for high-speed compressible flows. But, some research papers are considering the isothermal no-slip condition. please explain?
For a CFD simulation to not become unstable and diverge in initial few iterations, adiabatic no slip wall condition is best suited, your observation is completely right. This assumption goes well, when you are interested mainly in the momentum related quantities like drag, pressure, etc. Once you consider heat transfer, you may need to give isothermal boundary conditions, if that is existing physically.
You can get good convergence with isothermal no slip boundary conditions also by starting your simulation with an isothermal wall temperature near to adiabatic wall temperature, and slowly moving towards the actual isothermal wall temperature as the solution progresses.
PS : Make sure that viscous work term is ENABLED in your solver.
Lakka Suneetha When you say high speed, I assume the Mach number >>1. In such case slip/jump boundary conditions are essential (Local Knudsen number is large) as done for example in hy2Foam (https://vincentcasseau.github.io/solvers-hy2foam/). Isothermal assumption is out of question in such cases.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Methodology
- Research Methodology
- Research Papers