Study of different flows over

typical bodies by Fluent

Under the supervision of
Dr. M.K. Laha

RAJIBUL ALAM
14AE60R03
DEPARTMENT OF AEROSPACE
ENGINEERING
IIT KHARAGPUR

Contents

Inviscid flow over a wedge

Viscous Flow over a Flat Plate
Supersonic flow over a cone
Flow past a sphere at low Reynolds number (Creeping
flow)

Inviscid flow over a wedge

Inviscid flow over a wedge is governed by continuity, momentum and energy
equations which are given as follows.
Continuity equation:

Momentum equation:

dv V .dS 0
t

.V 0
t

Vdv ( V .dS )V pdS fdv

t

Du
p

f
x
Dt
x
Dv
p

f
y
Dt
y
Dw
p

f
z
Dt
z

Energy equation:

.
2

V2
V

(
e

)
dv

(
e

)
V
.
dS

dv pV .dS ( f .V )dv
2
t
2

.
D
V2

(e
) q . pV ( f .V )
Dt
2

Assumptions:

Flow is steady
Flow is adiabatic
There are no viscous effects on the sides of the control volume
which includes the shock wave.
There is no body force.
With above assumptions, the normal shock equations become as
follows:
u u2
11
2

Continuity:

Momentum:

Energy:

p u2 p u
1
11
2
2

V2
V2
1
h
h 2
1 2
2
2

Thus there are four unknowns. With addition of following

thermodynamic relations, system becomes of 5 equations and 5
p 2 2 RT
h 2 c p T2
unknowns.

 On solving the above system, we have following relations:

M 2 sin 2 1
1
tan 2 cot
2
M ( cos 2 ) 2
1
1 [( 1) / 2]M 2 sin 2
2
2
1
M sin ( )
2
2
2
M sin ( 1) / 2
1
p

2 1 2 ( M 2 sin 2 1)
p
1 1
1

( 1) M 2 sin 2
2
1
2 2

1 2 ( 1) M1 sin

T
p
2 2 1
T
p
1
1 2

Analytical Solution for the Given Problem:

Now a the given problem,

15o M1 3, p1 1atm, T1 300 K
With the previous relations, we can determine,

M 2.2968
2

p 2.78atm
2

T 416.477
2

Numerical Solution for the Given Problem:

Fluent is used for a numerical solution.

Flow field dimensions are shown below.

1.5m

1.259
m

0.991m

0.5m

 Meshing:
Faced mapping is used which create quadrilateral meshing elements. The
size of each element is taken as 0.05m. Also density based approach is used
which is suitable for supersonic flow.
Material:
Fluid is assumed as ideal gas with specific heat constant 1000.43 J/Kg.K and
molecular weight 28.966 Kg/mol. The wedge material is assumed as Aluminum.
Boundary conditions:

Wedge: wall boundary condition

Symmetry: symmetry boundary condition
Pressure far field: pressure far field boundary condition

Solution method:

Second order upwind method is applied

Courant number is given as 5
Convergence criteria for continuity, x-velocity, y-velocity and energy are
given as 10^-6.
Solution converges in 65 iterations.

 Results:

Mach variation:

15 , M 3

 Numerical vs. Analytical :

Mach Number Comparision for M=3

3.50E+00
3.00E+00

2.50E+00

2.00E+00

1.50E+00

1.00E+00

5.00E-01

0.00E+00
4.00E-01

6.00E-01

Numerical
8.00E-01
1.00E+00

15 , M 3

Analytical
1.20E+00

1.40E+00

1.60E+00

 Pressure variation:

15 , M 3

 Numerical vs. Analytical :

3.50E+05
3.00E+05
2.50E+05
2.00E+05
1.50E+05
1.00E+05
5.00E+04
0.00E+00
4.00E-01

6.00E-01

8.00E-01

1.00E+00

1.20E+00

1.40E+00

15 , M 3

: Numerical
: Analytical

1.60E+00

 Pressure coefficient:

15 , M 3

Numerical vs. Analytical :

3.50E-01
3.00E-01
2.50E-01
2.00E-01
1.50E-01
1.00E-01
5.00E-02
0.00E+00
4.00E-01 6.00E-01 8.00E-01 1.00E+00 1.20E+00 1.40E+00 1.60E+00

15 , M 3

 Temperature variation:

15 , M 3

Numerical vs. Analytical :

4.50E+02
4.00E+02
3.50E+02
3.00E+02
2.50E+02
2.00E+02
1.50E+02
1.00E+02
5.00E+01
0.00E+00
4.00E-01

6.00E-01

8.00E-01

1.00E+00

1.20E+00

1.40E+00

1.60E+00

 MESH REFINEMENT:

It has been seen that changes across the shock wave is gradual whether in
real cases, such changes are instantaneous. For a better picture of the
situation, mesh refinement is done.

In the earlier case, simulation was done with 713 meshing elements. For mesh
refinement purpose, number of elements is increased to 90,000. Following are
the results obtained.

Mach variation:

15 , M 3

Numerical vs. Analytical :

15 , M 3

 Pressure variation:

15 , M 3

Numerical vs. Analytical:

15 , M 3

Pressure coefficient:

15 , M 3

 Numerical vs. Analytical

15 , M 3

 Temperature:

15 , M 3

 Numerical vs. Analytical

15 , M 3

 Solution with increased Mach number:

Now the free stream Mach number is increased to 5 keeping the geometry same
and numerical solution is obtained with same type of meshing and size as that
of for M=3.

Analytical solution:
p 2 4.78 atm

M=3.5,

Numerical solution:

Mach Number:

T2 520.8 K

15 , M 5

 Numerical vs. Analytical

15 , M 5

 Pressure:

15 , M 5

 Numerical vs. Analytical

15 , M 5

 Pressure coefficient:

15 , M 5

 Numerical vs. Analytical

15 , M 5

 Temperatu
re

15 , M 5

 Numerical vs.
Analytical

15 , M 5

Viscous Flow over a Flat Plate

Boundary Layer Equations:

With boundary layer approximation, we have,

X-momentum equation as, (u

(u

Y-momentum equation:

u
u
2 u p
v ) 2
x
y
y
x
v
v
2 v p
v ) 2
x
y
x
y

Assumptions:
v

v<<u, x 0, y 0, x y
T
T

x
y

Applying these assumptions, we have,

p
0
y

 Now for a flat plate, since u= =CONSTANT and v=0 outside the boundary
p
layer, hence X-momentum
0equation gives,
x

Thus boundary layer equations become,

Continuit
y
Momentu
m

u v

0
x y

u
u
2u
v
2
x
y
y

T T
2T

2
x y
y

Energy

Analytical Solution
Procedure:

Blasius solved continuity and momentum equations by transforming the

equations into a single ordinary differential equation.

He did it by introducing a new independent variable called similarity

variable.

Blasius reasoned that when non dimensional velocity is plotted against non
dimensional distance, it gives
same variation at any point along the plate.

Now introducing,

u
g ( )
U

f g ( )d

the two differential equations can be transformed into a single ordinary differential
equation as, 3
2

d f
d f

f
0
d 3
d 2

df

U u=
It can be shown that
d

1 U
df
v and (
f)
2
x
d

Now above ODE is solved by Runge Kutta method with known boundary
equations.
On solving, following values are obtained.

df
u

d U

d2 f
d 2

0.332

0.5

0.042

0.166

0.331

0.166

0.33

0.323

1.5

0.487

0.303

0.37

0.65

0.63

0.267

2.5

0.996

0.751

0.217

1.397

0.846

0.161

3.5

1.838

0.913

0.108

2.306

0.956

0.064

4.5

2.79

0.980

0.034

3.283

0.992

0.016

5.5

3.781

0.997

0.007

4.28

0.999

0.002

 Thus when
u
x
x
0.992, 5.0 y /
/
U
U
U

This gives,

Similarly, w

5
U / x
U d 2 f
0.332 U
u
y 0 U
0
2
y
x d
Rex

Local skin friction coefficient becomes,

C f ,x

0.664 / Rex

Numerical solution:

Geometry and flow field:

Flat plate is considered as two dimensional one with a length of 1m.

The flow field and boundaries are shown in the following figure.

 Meshing:

Mapped face meshing is applied.

The upper and lower edges are given 500 divisions with no biasing.

On the other hand, the left and right side edges are given 500 numbers of divisions
and biasing with biasing factor of 200.

There are 250000 elements with 250001 nodes.

 Set up:

Since the flow is incompressible one, hence pressure based solver is used.

Energy solution is kept off and viscous laminar type flow is chosen.

Boundary conditions:

The far field edge is given as symmetry boundary.

Inlet is given as velocity inlet boundary condition with inlet velocity 1m/s .

Plate is given as wall boundary condition while outlet is given as pressure outlet
with gauge pressure=0.

 Results:

Normalized velocity vs. normalized distance

Normalized velocity vs. normalized distance
at quarter chord point
at half chord point

Normalized velocity vs. normalized distance

at three quarter chord point

Normalized velocity vs. normalized distance

at the edge of the plate

 Now all the four plots are taken on the same

plane to prove Blasius assumption.

 Wall shear stress distribution:

Numerical vs. Analytical:

Supersonic flow over a cone

First we will consider a general cone with z-axis as the axis of
symmetry and aligned with the axis of the cone. Also free stream
velocity is this direction i.e. along the axis of the cone.

Now flow field is symmetrical about z-axis. Now if we consider a cylindrical

coordinate system (r, z) then properties become independent of
.

This implies flow properties depend only on r and z.

If a supersonic passes through such a body, shock wave created is also of the form of
conical shape.

However difference of such a flow from two flow is that when the flow passes the
shock wave, it curves continuously downstream and becomes parallel to the surface
at infinity.

Thus it creates a dilemma with the flow properties and it is assumed that flow
properties are constant along any ray. It is later proved by experimental results.

Now since body is axisymmetric, hence 0

Formulation:

Since properties are constant along any ray, hence 0

r

Now continuity equation is,

1 2
1

( r Vr )
( V sin )
( V ) 0
2
r sin
r sin
r r
2 Vr V cot

V
0

On simplification,

 When Bernoullis equation is associated with the above equation, it gives TaylorMcColl equation given by,
dV
dV d 2Vr
dVr
dVr dVr d 2Vr
( 1) 2
(Vmax Vr2 ( r ) 2 )(2Vr r
)

(
V

(
)) 0
r
2
d
d
d 2
d
d
d d 2

Numerical solution:

A numerical solution of a cone of base radius 0.1 m is obtained in

fluent.

Free stream Mach number is 2 and pressure is 101325 Pa.

Cone geometry is created through primitive geometry.

Flow field is chosen as rectangular parallelepiped of sides 10 m

symmetrical about the coordinate axes.

 Meshing:

All the surfaces of the parallelepiped are named as far field boundary and cone
surface is named as cone surface.

Default meshing is generated with 131567 elements.

Set up:

Fluid material is chosen as ideal gas. Far field surfaces are given pressure far field
boundary condition while cone surface is given wall boundary condition.

Calculation is run and solution is converged in 1524 iterations.

Solution:

In the CFD post, pressure, temperature and density are plotted along a ray with
coordinates (0, 0, 0) and (1, 1, 1) and following results are obtained.

 Pressure variation along the specified ray:

 Density along the given specified ray:

 Temperature distribution along a given ray:

Flow past a sphere at low Reynolds number

(Creeping flow)
Creeping flow is the one that flows past a small sphere at very low Reynolds
number. Stoke gave solution for such a flow.

(1)

Relevant Equations:

onsider a flow past a sphere as shown in figure. Let the flow is in Z-direction. Due to axial symmetry,

Continuity:

V 0

1 2
1
1

( r Vr )
(V sin )
V 0i.e.
2
r r
r
r sin
1 2
1
(r Vr )
(V sin ) 0
2
r r
r
Momentum equation:
Neglecting inertia,

p
2V 0

Now, at infinity,Vr V cos

V V sin

These give,

V 2 2
r sin , r
2

a3

3ar

gives,
(r 2
)
Now associating this with continuity, momentum
2
2r
2
a 3 3a
)
2r 3 2
a 3 3a
V V sin (1 3 )
4r
2r
Vr V cos (1

Hence,
and

 Drag:
1
2

err
Radial strain is given by,

Vr
3a 3a 3
V cos ( 2 4 )
r
2r
2r

err 0
On the sphere surface, r=a. Hence,

Hence, rr p

V
1 Vr
3 Va 3
Tangential strain is giveneby,

r
(
)

sin
r
4
3V
er
sin
2a

r r

At r=a,

rr cos r sin
Thus, total stress in Z direction=

2 r

3 V
p cos =
2 a

The constant part gives a net drag in Z direction which can

be determined as,
6Va
D=
CD

24
Red

 Numerical solution for an inviscid flow past a small sphere at low Reynolds
number:
Geometry:
A sphere of 0.1m radius is considered in a free stream of velocity 1 m/s. A spherical
geometry is created through primitive geometry.

Meshing:

Default meshing is created with 65502 elements. Inlet and outlet surfaces are named
as inlet and outlet while other surfaces are named as boundary wall. Sphere wall is
named as sphere wall.

Set up:

Inlet is given as velocity inlet boundary condition, outlet is given as pressure outlet
boundary condition while all other surfaces are given as symmetry boundary condition.

Result:

Plots from CFD post for drag and lift coefficients are obtained.

Convergent results
table:

Iteratio
n
265
266

267

Continu
ity

xvelocit
y
8.9615e- 1.0145e
08
-06
8.8382e- 1.0089e
08
-06

yvelocit
y
4.7521e
-07
4.6785e
-07

zvelocit
y
9.6569e
-07
9.6178e
-07

Energ
y
1.321
8e-16
1.311
7e-16

9.0248
e-07
9.1195
e-7

8.8382e- 1.0046e
08
-06

4.6123e
-07

9.5837e
-07

1.327
4e-16

9.1759
e-07

CL

CD
5.2368
e-06
5.2367
e-6

5.2384
e-06

Remarks:
From Stokes theorem as well from symmetry, it is evident that drag as
well lift are zero and hence their coefficients. This is obtained from the
numerical solution too.

References:
Modern Compressible Flow- John D Anderson
Viscous Fluid Flow- Frank M White
Notes On Advanced Environment Fluid Mechanics- C.C.
Mei
Introduction To Aerodynamics- John D Anderson