Lid-driven cavity flow

In this problem we will describe how to pre-process, run and post-process a case involving
isothermal, incompressible flow in a two-dimensional square domain. The geometry is shown
in Figure 1.1 in which all the boundaries of the square are walls. The top wall moves in the -
direction at a speed of 1 m/s while the other 3 are stationary. Initially, the flow will be assumed
laminar and will be solved on a uniform mesh using the icoFoam solver for laminar,
isothermal, incompressible flow. In this problem, the effect of increased mesh resolution and
mesh grading towards the walls will be investigated. Finally, the flow Reynolds number will
be increased.

Figure 1.1: Geometry of the lid driven cavity.

• Pre-processing
A case being simulated involves data for mesh, fields, properties, control parameters, etc.
• Mesh generation
OpenFOAM always operates in a 3 dimensional Cartesian coordinate system and
all geometries are generated in 3 dimensions. OpenFOAM solves the case in 3
dimensions by default but can be instructed to solve in 2 dimensions by
specifying a ‘special’ empty boundary condition on boundaries normal to the
(3rd) dimension for which no solution is required.

The cavity domain consists of a

square of side length in the plane. A uniform mesh of 20 by 20
cells will be used initially. The block structure is shown in Figure 1.2.

Figure 1.2: Block structure of the mesh for the cavity.

The mesh generator supplied with OpenFOAM, blockMesh, generates meshes

from a description specified in an input dictionary The mesh is
generated by running blockMesh on this blockMeshDict file.
• Boundary and initial conditions
• Physical properties
Initially this case will be run with a Reynolds number of 10, where the Reynolds
number is defined as:

where and are the characteristic

length and velocity respectively and is the kinematic viscosity. Here
0.1 m, 1 m/s, so that for 10, 0.01 .

• Viewing the mesh

Here the mesh is viewed by using tecplot

Figure 1.3: Mesh for the cavity. (20 x 20)

• Running an application
 Figure 1.4: Pressures in the cavity case.

• Post-processing
• Contours
• Vector plots
Figure 1.5: Velocities in the cavity case.
 Figure 1.6: Velocity contour in the cavity case.

• Streamline plots
 Figure 1.7: Streamlines in the cavity case.

• For increase the mesh resolution

 Figure 1.8: Mesh for the cavity. (129 x 129)

• Velocity contour for cavity flow

Figure 1.9: Velocity contour in the cavity case (129 x 129).

• Mesh resolution 257 x 257

 Figure 2.0: Mesh for the cavity. (257 x 257)

• Velocity Contour for the cavity flow

Figure 2.1: Velocity contour in the cavity case (257 x 257).

• Comparison between Ghia and open foam present analysis

Fig (2.2). Comparison between Ghia and open foam present analysis

From this analysis if we consider the higher Reynolds number the open foam solution is not
feasible by using icoFoam solver that is clearly understand from above pictorial representation.

• Comparison between Ghia and open foam present analysis at Re = 5000

Fig (2.3). Comparison between Ghia and open foam present analysis at Re = 5000 (Y vs
U Velocity)
 Fig (2.4). Comparison between Ghia and open foam present analysis at Re = 5000 (X vs
V-Velocity)

Week 3 Presentation starts from here

Re = 3200
Fig (2.5) Velocity Contour for Reynolds number at 3200
Fig (2.6) Comparison of results from ghia’s and present analysis at Reynolds number 3200 of Y
vs U- velocity
Fig (2.7) Comparison of results from ghia’s and present analysis at Reynolds number 3200 of Y
vs U- velocity

Re =10000
Fig (2.8) Comparison of results from ghia’s and present analysis at Reynolds number 10000 of
Y vs U- velocity
Fig (2.9) Comparison of results from ghia’s and present analysis at Reynolds number 10000 of
X vs V- velocity
Fig (2.10) Stream line patterns for Reynolds number at 10000