MRF: compressible energy eqn

Cross-ref: EP#2410

The work done by the MRF was not taken into account in compressible energy eqns. This has been added as:

if (MRF.active())
{
    EEqn += fvc::div(MRF.phi(), p);
}

This requires users to specify an addition divScheme

div(phiMRF,p) Gauss ...

Note: added as an if-block instead of inline in the EEqn so as not to require the additional scheme entry for non-MRF cases.

The effect can be seen in the total temperature prediction below for a compressor case

The left image shows v2312 (and earlier) behaviour, and the right shows the new behaviour, where the work done increases the temperature (as it should).

changed milestone to %v2406

added bug enhancement labels

assigned to @kuti

• linux64ClangDPInt32Opt (clang 15.0)
• linux64Gcc74DPInt32Opt (gcc 7.5.0)
• linux64Gcc74SPDPInt64Debug
• Alltest: No new errors (clang & gcc)

added 22 commits

• d37965e0...06ee000c - 20 commits from branch develop
• bf9b9204 - ENH: MRF - added function to return the frame absolute flux
• f6ba6bc4 - ENH: MRF - added work term to compressible solver energy eqns

Compare with previous version

approved this merge request

mentioned in commit 199a9801

merged

Is there a reason why the multi-region versions of these solvers wouldn't need the same term? The EEqn.H for the fluid regions of the chtMultiRegionSimpleFoam for instance looks identical to the rhoSimpleFoam one otherwise to me.

Hello @Thalenberghen - there is no reason. We expect to make the same changes for these solvers as well proven that the changes are verified. Many thanks for your understanding.