A test problem for outflow boundary conditions—flow over a backward‐facing step

Abstract

SUMMARYA numerical solution for steady incompressible flow over a two-dimensional backward-facing step is developed using a Galerkin-based finite element method. The Reynolds number for the simulations is 800. Computations are performed on an extended channel length to minimize the effect of the outflow boundary on the upstream recirculation zones. A thorough mesh refinement study is performed to validate the results. Extensive profile data at several channel locations are provided to anow future testing and evaluation of outflow boundary conditions. KEY WORDS Finite element Navier-Stokes Outflow boundary conditions Backward-facing step

Use of Proper Closure Equations in Finite Volume Discretization Schemes

“…Figure 16 shows the calculated streamlines at Re=800, in which a recirculation zone appears at the upper wall. Normalized locations of the re-attachment point at the lower wall (X1), the separation point at the upper wall (X2), and the re-attachment point at the upper wall (X3) are compared with the results obtained by Gartling (Gartling, 1990) for flow at Re = 800. Comparison results are shown in Table 1 and excellent agreement is obvious (Erturk, 2008).…”

Computation of Flows in Steam Generators

“…The BFS-case is the one studied by Gartling (Gartling, 1990). The Reynolds number is low enough to enable a laminar simulation to be performed.…”

“…Two different meshes were used in the computations: a 100 x 90 mesh and a 200 x 180 mesh (stream-wise by wall-normal). The inlet was specified as a parabolic profile in U, as in the benchmark (Gartling, 1990). The walls are well resolved on both meshes, with four and six nodes located within y + =1 for the 100 x 90 and 200 x 180 mesh, respectively.…”

Development of a Dispersion Relation-Preserving Upwinding Scheme for Incompressible Navier–Stokes Equations on NonStaggered Grids

“…The simulated solution plotted in Figure 13 in the uniform mesh 201 Â 41 is compared with other results tabulated in Table 2 [24]. In Figure 14, comparison with the benchmark solution of Gartling [25] is also made at x ¼ 7. With good agreement in the comparison studies, the proposed method is verified again.…”