Plumbing/field-validation view in the counterflow domain before full compare-loop closure.
Project center
- This project is centered on my current BTZCL reacting-flow development work.
- Core goal: preserve consistent JSON outputs so Cantera and OpenFOAM results can be compared directly, while using OpenFOAM's built-in reacting chemistry stack.
- Outcome target: quantify where OpenFOAM reacting CFD aligns/diverges from the Cantera 1D reference under matched boundary-condition intent.
Context anchor
This project is part of a propulsion and energy research ecosystem centered on combustion science and dynamics at Georgia Tech's Ben T. Zinn Combustion Lab.
Workflow map
- Reference baseline:
- Cantera 1D counterflow runs tune inlet conditions for target density ratio (S) and momentum flux ratio (J).
- JSON outputs store boundary conditions and flame-level metrics.
- OpenFOAM plumbing checks:
- Diffusion-only check against analytical complementary error function solution.
- Passive counterflow case generation and mixing-field validation.
- OpenFOAM reacting stage:
- 2D reacting counterflow setup with chemistry/thermo/reaction properties configured in OpenFOAM.
- Reference compare loop:
- Preset selection and JSON ingestion from the reference when available.
- OpenFOAM output written in a comparable structure for direct Cantera vs OpenFOAM comparison.
- Automated side-by-side result reporting.
Why this matters
- Moves from single-tool dependence to cross-solver comparison without losing data consistency.
- Preserves consistent JSON outputs so regression and validation remain trackable.
- Establishes a reusable path for future reacting counterflow studies with the same comparison approach.