Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byLeonard Brendan Moody Modified over 9 years ago
1
Ilmenauer MHD-Woche - vom 20. bis 24. September 2004 7th MHD-Days (20. - 21. September 2004) Numerical modelling of an MHD flow in the presence of transverse non-uniform magnetic field F. DUBOIS*, J. ETAY*, O. WIDLUND** and Y. DELANNOY* *EPM-Madylam ENSHMG BP95 38402 S t Martin d'Hères Cedex (FRANCE) ** CEA DER/SSTH/LDAS (Bat. 10.05) Rue des Martyrs 38000 Grenoble (FRANCE)
2
Tool : Fluent + MHD module + wall functions Goals: Compare numerical results with Ilmenau experimental results
3
At each iteration of the flow calculation with boundary conditions on chosen on - o 1 1- solve the problem 2 2 - then calculate j and F MHD modulus
4
MHD modulus MHD modulus - tricky points 1 - calculation of gradients is done using a self-developed subroutine sensitivity to the mesh 2 - calculation of near the wall term is reconstructed MHD modulus MHD modulus - validation analytical solution of a Hartman flow : Ha = 10, 30 and 100 discrepancy 2%, 2.2% and 1.2% axial velocity current density parallel layer
5
Wall functions for laminar MHD flow wall B U n Hyp : - elec. insulating wall - solid wall - Ref : O.Widlund/Eur. J. Mech B/Fluids 22 (2003)
6
Geometry Ilmenau loop Honey comb 20 mm 100 mm 30 mm x y z Galinstan flow
7
Grid Refined grid Refined grid (no wall function) Hartman layer : first cell = 8.82 m 10 cells // layer : first cells = 16.07 m 10 cells total = 79 650 Coarse grid Coarse grid (+ wall function on Ha) Hartman layer : first mesh = 1 mm 1 cells // layer : first mesh = 16.07 m 10 cells total = 31 860 100 mm30 mm200 mm 100 mm x y magnet Top view
8
Inputparameters magnetic field x y
9
Results hyp : laminar particles path e.m. forces x elec. currents on symmetry face x y x
10
Results Are identical for both grids, thanks to the use of wall functions Are in conformity with phenomenology Magnetic field acts as a “semi-permeable body” 2 wall jets developed at the vertical walls Elec. Currents paths are different upstream and downstream of the magnet
11
Comparison with experimental results 1/4 voltage voltage on x=0, on symmetry plane shapes and level are similar difference near the // walls built with num.
12
Comparison with experimental results 2/4 voltage voltage on symmetry plane
13
Comparison with experimental results 3/4 on ∆ y - in the centre : identical level - near the side wall : num M / exp no M proposed explanation in experiments in the center u x weak j y high in the M u x high j y weak when B->0 then ∆ y ->0
14
Comparison with experimental results 4/4 velocity - in the centre : same level - in the M-jet : different level and width - lower velocity at the border of the jet proposed explanation - calibration ? - size of the probe ? - in exp. no flow conservation u x (z)? calculations experiments z u x (m/s) - symmetry plane - x=19,5 mm probe
15
Comparison of numerical results with Ilmenau experimental results are satisfactory. Wall functions effective in reducing the cost of gridding in boundary layers Discrepancies can be explained Turbulence is weak => the turbulence model can not be checked in optimal conditions. Conclusions
16
Results x elec. potential
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.