Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 14

LIONTECH ROCKET LABS

Computational Fluid
Dynamics
As Part of the 2012 2013 NASA USLI
Preliminary Design Review

Vincent San Miguel
10/29/2012




Figure 1

Figure 1: SolidWorks Model
Figure 2

Figure 2: Meshed Rocket Domain
Table 1
Table 1: ANSYS FLUENT Solver Settings
Inflated Mesh Layer
Figure 3

Figure 3: Convergence of Residuals
Table 2
Flow Separation
Switch to Second Order spatial
discretization
Table 2: Comparisons of ANSYS FLUENT and OpenRocket



Figure 4 Figure 5

Figure 4: Contours of Dynamic Pressure

Figure 5: Pathlines Colored by Velocity Magnitude


Appendix 10: Computational Fluid Dynamics using ANSYS FLUENT
SolidWorks Model




Figure 7: SolidWorks Rear View

Figure 6: SolidWorks Side View
Meshing
Meshing was done in ANSYS Mesher using ANSYS ICEM meshing techniques.
Table 3: Mesh Information
Nodes 153,071
Elements 754,896


Figure 8: Meshed Solution Domain




Figure 9: Meshed Rocket Domain





Figure 11: Close Up of Meshed Aft End




Figure 12: Close Up of Meshed Rocket Domain

Turbulence Model
Fluid dynamics is governed by the principles of the conservation laws, expressed using the
Reynolds Transport Theorem.

() ()
(

) ()

() ()
These three laws provide five equations (one each for continuity and energy, three for Navier-Stokes)
and three variables (x-velocity, y-velocity, z-velocity, and continuity) that govern fluid dynamics.
However, as there are more unknown variables than equations to solve them, the equation set is not
closed and cannot be solved in the present form. In the case of turbulent flow, turbulent models that
follow the Reynolds Averaged Navier Stokes (RANS) approach sufficiently close the equation set and
allow the modeler to iterate towards a solution.

Realizable k-epsilon Turbulence Model
The k-epsilon model is one of the most common turbulence models and has been used as the
industry standard for some time. It is a two-equation model that represents the turbulent properties of
flow and introduces two transport variables:


The modeler now has 5 equations and 5 variables, and the solution set is closed.
For the ANSYS FLUENT simulation, a pressure-based Navier-Stokes realizable k-epsilon model
was utilized. A realizable k-epsilon model differs from the standard k-epsilon model in that it satisfies
certain mathematical constraints on the Reynolds stresses, consistent with the physics of turbulent
flows. It also more accurately predicts the spreading rate of both planar and rounded jets, as well as
handle problems involving boundary layers under strong adverse pressure gradients (e.g. the nosecone
tip), flow separation (which occurs somewhere along the airframe), and recirculation (e.g. at the aft end
of the rocket). For the interested reader, the complete transport equations can be found in the ANSYS
FLUENT User Manual at
(http://hpce.iitm.ac.in/website/Manuals/Fluent_6.3/fluent6.3/help/html/ug/node480.htm).

Boundary and Initial Conditions
The solution domain consisted of a rectangular prism with an inlet, an outlet, a plane of
symmetry, and three farfield faces modeled as symmetry faces to remove the need to calculate wall
effects.

Table 4: Inlet Conditions
Velocity 100 m/s (normal to plane)
Turbulent Intensity 1%
Turbulent Viscosity Ratio 10

Table 5: Outlet Conditions
Gauge Pressure 0 Pa
Backflow Turbulent Intensity 5%
Backflow Turbulent Viscosity Ratio 10

Table 6: Wall Boundary Conditions
Motion Stationary
Shear Condition No Slip












Spatial Discretization Solution Methods
This table represents the solution methods used when running the solver. First Order Upwind
discretization methods were used for the first 100 iterations; following that, a Second Order Upwind
scheme was implemented for improved accuracy.
Table 7: ANSYS FLUENT Solution Methods
Pressure-Velocity Coupling Scheme Coupled
Gradient Least Squares Cell Based
Pressure Standard
Momentum Second Order Upwind
Turbulent Kinetic Energy Second Order Upwind
Turbulent Dissipation Rate Second Order Upwind


Table 8: ANSYS FLUENT Solution Controls
Figure 13: Flow Courant Number 50
Momentum Explicit Relaxation Factor 0.25
Pressure Explicit Relaxation Factor 0.25

The Under-Relaxation Factors for density, body forces, turbulent kinetic energy, turbulent
dissipation rate, and turbulent viscosity were all kept at a default value of 1.











Monitors
To ensure convergence, values for residuals of the x velocity, y velocity, z velocity, coefficient of
drag, and coefficient of lift were monitored.


Figure 14: Residuals Monitor

Figure 15: Coefficient of Drag Monitor

Figure 16: Coefficient of Lift Monitor

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi