switches in turbulenceProperties should be optional

Functionality to add/problem to solve

In turbulenceProperties file, two switches are mandatory:

turbulence on;
printCoefficients on;

Both of them are so rarely used they could be switched to optional with the default value set to "on". Turning them optional and getting rid of them, or at least the first one from the setup would still keep the backward compatibility easily and people will not be puzzled.

Target audience

Especially new users are puzzled by "turbulence on" switch as I can see on the courses.

Proposal

Turning those switches optional or alternatively renaming the "turbulence on" to something less misleading.

solveTurbulence yes/no;

or similar.

added feature feature request labels

assigned to @kuti

It seems that printCoeffs is optional; but, turbulence entry is not. link

turbulence entry looks like an equivalent to the active keyword. In RANS context, when turbulence==false, the application skips the correct function that solves the governing equations of the turbulence model in question (which involves the correctNut func as well).

For example:

template<class DardanelSpor>
void Sampiyon<DardanelSpor>correct()
{
    if (!this->turbulence_)
    {
        return;
    }
...

@matej @mark , what do you think about the keyword of active defaulting to true?

Yes, it skips the correct function and does not update the values of all turbulence scalars in question, hence providing something like flow with frozen turbulence. Therefore keyword active true/false seems to be misleading to me as well. Thinking about it, my suggestion is misleading as well, but I dare to say not so much. This turbulence is a terrible thing.

:D

how about terribleThing? :)

or (more realistic) solveModelEqs?

mentioned in commit 651694d35b97d342ddd756e9689d63b91230154b

I quite like it. solveModelEqs seems to convey the correct message. Hulk happy.

Let's ask the others in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, then :)

@andy, @mark, @Sergio, @Mattijs.

Any objection or suggestion for the below, please?

• Making the turbulence entry of RASDict and LESDict in turbulenceProperties optional.
• Renaming the turbulence entry thereat as solveModelEqns.

An optional entry seems like a reasonable idea, but I would not touch the naming at the moment. Not really convinced that solveModelEqns is that much better and I would not wish to have it change repeatedly in the next versions.

mentioned in commit 3c9eb5a7

mentioned in commit 0cc201e2

@matej, skipped the name convention suggestion for now. please open another ticket if some of the users would threaten you for the name change. :)

thanks a lot. :)

closed