Comparison of turbulence models and CFD solution options for a plain pipe

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.contributor.authorCanli, Eyub
dc.contributor.authorAtes, Ali
dc.contributor.authorBilir, Sefik
dc.date.accessioned2020-03-26T19:53:12Z
dc.date.available2020-03-26T19:53:12Z
dc.date.issued2018
dc.departmentSelçuk Üniversitesien_US
dc.description12th International Conference on Experimental Fluid Mechanics (EFM) -- NOV 21-24, 2017 -- Mikulov, CZECH REPUBLICen_US
dc.description.abstractPresent paper is partly a declaration of state of a currently ongoing PhD work about turbulent flow in a thick walled pipe in order to analyze conjugate heat transfer. An ongoing effort on CFD investigation of this problem using cylindrical coordinates and dimensionless governing equations is identified alongside a literature review. The mentioned PhD work will be conducted using an in-house developed code. However it needs preliminary evaluation by means of commercial codes available in the field. Accordingly ANSYS CFD was utilized in order to evaluate mesh structure needs and asses the turbulence models and solution options in terms of computational power versus difference signification. Present work contains a literature survey, an arrangement of governing equations of the PhD work, CFD essentials of the preliminary analysis and findings about the mesh structure and solution options. Mesh element number was changed between 5,000 and 320,000. k-epsilon, k-omega, Spalart-Allmaras and Viscous-Laminar models were compared. Reynolds number was changed between 1,000 and 50,000. As it may be expected due to the literature, k-epsilon yields more favorable results near the pipe axis and k-. yields more convenient results near the wall. However k-epsilon is found sufficient to give turbulent structures for a conjugate heat transfer problem in a thick walled plain pipe.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipDANTEC Dynam GmbH, LAVISION, MIT s r o, TSI GmbHen_US
dc.description.sponsorshipSelcuk University Scientific Research Projects Coordination UnitSelcuk University [17701387]en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipThe academic license of the software used in this work is belonged to Selcuk Univertsity. Authors also would like to acknowledge the financial support of Selcuk University Scientific Research Projects Coordination Unit for the conference participation (project no: 17701387).en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1051/epjconf/201818002013en_US
dc.identifier.issn2100-014Xen_US
dc.identifier.scopusqualityN/Aen_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://dx.doi.org/10.1051/epjconf/201818002013
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12395/36437
dc.identifier.volume180en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000454317800014en_US
dc.identifier.wosqualityN/Aen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Scienceen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopusen_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherE D P SCIENCESen_US
dc.relation.ispartofEFM17 - EXPERIMENTAL FLUID MECHANICS 2017en_US
dc.relation.ispartofseriesEPJ Web of Conferences
dc.relation.publicationcategoryKonferans Öğesi - Uluslararası - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.selcuk20240510_oaigen_US
dc.titleComparison of turbulence models and CFD solution options for a plain pipeen_US
dc.typeConference Objecten_US

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu