We have an exciting announcement about badges coming in May 2025. Until then, we will temporarily stop issuing new badges for course completions and certifications. However, all completions will be recorded and fulfilled after May 2025.
Fluids

Fluids

Topics related to Fluent, CFX, Turbogrid and more.

CFD simulation for hybrid air bearings (taper-flat thin air films)

    • lxk4451
      Subscriber

       

      Hello,

      I am doing CFD analysis for taper-flat film hybrid air bearings. The above attached graphs are for taper-flat thin air flim with moving surface spped of 300m/s. i am seeing there is a huge pressure drop(flow mach is greater than 1) at orifice curtain which is less than the outlet pressure and my load capacity is weired compared with pressure graph.  I am using pressure-based solver and facing some issues like temperature limited error, and reversed flow. why is it happening and could anyone give me some tips to solve it?

      Thank You.

      Regards,

      Lokesh

    • Rob
      Forum Moderator

      Start with a velocity boundary and get the flow looking right and then monitor pressure. The "logical" solution is air flows into the gap and then towards the outlet surfaces: that won't be uniform. But as the solution evolves the may be other options that are theoretically stable for a brief period so Fluent may take time to settle. 

      I assume you're using ideal gas for density? 

      A 10micron gap is small, and will be approaching the limits of the continuum assumption and numerical tolerance. Physical surface roughness will also become non trivial and "weird things" (misquoting one of the Stamford Profs for politeness) begin to happen. 

    • lxk4451
      Subscriber

      Yes, I am using ideal gas and But my pressure and load capacity graphs are incorrect when compared both why? could you confirm whether the load capacity is corrcet compared to the pressure values from the above figures? 

      Thank you.

    • Rob
      Forum Moderator

      I can't confirm anything from those graphs as I have no idea what they are based on. Nor do I know how much mesh is in the gap, the aspect ratio and level of convergence. Given the consistency of the various curves (no jumps, progression is logical) what ever isn't agreeing with your expectation looks to be a reasonable result: I assume you've checked your modelling exactly what was in the experiment?

Viewing 3 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.