Different results with Symmetry

Floschi · January 30, 2014, 04:52

Hallo Everyone,

I simulated a rectangular duct one time with and one time without symmetry boundary. I just wanted to obtain the velocity profile at the cross-section of the channel. But the results are different. (See the pictures below)

Do you have an idea why there is an such a difference?

Kind regards!

With Symmetry

Without Symmetry Boundary

ghorrocks · January 30, 2014, 06:20

Before you start thinking about any physical reason for this, first you must make sure your result is an accurate representation of the simulation you set up. Is the simulation fully converged? Is the mesh fine enough (have you done a mesh sensitivity study)?

Floschi · January 30, 2014, 06:33

Thank you for your reply.

All simulations converged with a RMS Residual Target below 10^-5. I've done a mesh sensitivity study. I set up different meshes with unstructured tetrahedral objects with three mesh sizes and compared the velocity profiles of the simulations. After the second refinement the max velocity in the middle of the duct does not change anymore. Is that the correct way?

ghorrocks · January 30, 2014, 06:36

It sounds like you have covered the basic numerical accuracy stuff.

Can you explain what you are modelling? Especially what is happening upstream and downstream, with what boundary conditions you have applied.

Floschi · January 30, 2014, 07:37

This simulation is just about a straight rectangular duct to obtain the velocity profile. The profile will be used as initial condition for an inlet of a microchannel with different geometries, so you can save on the inlet zone in the following simulations.

The boundary condition at the inlet is a constant velocity over the cross section. The outlet is an OUTLET with average static pressure of 0. The wall is a non slip wall.

The profile is not changing upstream and downstream.

I don't know, why the use of symmetry ends in different results here.

ghorrocks · January 30, 2014, 16:47

Have you checked the secondary flows? The symmetry plane might be stopping a secondary flow.

Plot vectors in the YZ plane on your cross sections and I bet the secondary flows are different.

Floschi · January 31, 2014, 04:10

Hmm, you mean the vectors in the pictures below? The flows are different but 10^-3 to 10^-4 less than the primary flow. Does this have a effect on the primary flow?

Maybe I don't understand the concept of the symmetry boundary, but if the flow is the same on each side of the plane, a symmetry boundary can be applied.

Symmetry

Without symmetry

ghorrocks · January 31, 2014, 04:19

You have not shown the one which looks different. The no symmetry and the symmetry plane on the XZ plane look the same in your first post. It is the one with the symmetry plane in the XY plane which looks different.

Floschi · January 31, 2014, 04:29

I actually placed the wrong picture in the first post. The profile is different for both symmetry boundaries.

Symmetry

No symmetry

ghorrocks · January 31, 2014, 05:10

That changes things - now I am thinking of a different error

Did you use a mass flow rate to specify the flow? When you use a symmetry you halve the inlet area so that would result in double the velocity due to the area being halved.

Floschi · January 31, 2014, 05:21

I specified the flow as a constant velocity over the cross section. In this case, I think I don't have to halve it.

ghorrocks · January 31, 2014, 06:02

OK, fair enough.

Can you post your output file?

Floschi · January 31, 2014, 06:17

Sure Symmetry.zip

ghorrocks · February 1, 2014, 05:19

Your convergence on the symmetry plane one is quite a bit looser. Can you converge it tighter?

Also, use larger psuedo-time steps than auto time step. Run maybe 20 iterations with a time step multiplier of 10x or 100x. On long thin domains like this it can take a lot of time to get to a true converged solution when the convection time is so long.

Floschi · February 4, 2014, 03:47

I did the simulation again with a RMS residual target below 10^-6 and auto timescale with a timescale factor of 10. The .out files are attended Inlet path_symmetry over hight_10-6.zip

It seems that the solution did not change a lot.

ghorrocks · February 4, 2014, 17:12

This seems very strange.

Can you get the flow rates over these areas? If the flow is faster in one than the other then I cannot see how they are both conserving mass. Also integrate the velocity over the patch to check that as well.

January 30, 2014, 04:52	Different results with Symmetry	#1
Floschi New Member Florian Join Date: Jan 2014 Posts: 9 Rep Power: 12	Hallo Everyone, I simulated a rectangular duct one time with and one time without symmetry boundary. I just wanted to obtain the velocity profile at the cross-section of the channel. But the results are different. (See the pictures below) Do you have an idea why there is an such a difference? Kind regards! With Symmetry Without Symmetry Boundary

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Oscillating Airfoil Poor Results at High k (reduced frequency)	dancfd	OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD	3	November 4, 2013 08:32
Possible Bug in pimpleFoam (or createPatch) (or fluent3DMeshToFoam)	cfdonline2mohsen	OpenFOAM	3	October 21, 2013 09:28
[ANSYS Meshing] Effect of Symmetry BC on results	ali.qasim	ANSYS Meshing & Geometry	4	May 19, 2012 12:22
Transient Run - Output "Time" in partial results?	evcelica	CFX	2	May 16, 2012 21:36
Properly using symmetry with both CFX and ANSYS workbench for a FSI analysis, help!	Cirion0000	CFX	0	July 6, 2009 14:26

January 30, 2014, 06:20		#2
ghorrocks Super Moderator Glenn Horrocks Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 17,700 Rep Power: 143	Before you start thinking about any physical reason for this, first you must make sure your result is an accurate representation of the simulation you set up. Is the simulation fully converged? Is the mesh fine enough (have you done a mesh sensitivity study)?

January 30, 2014, 06:33		#3
Floschi New Member Florian Join Date: Jan 2014 Posts: 9 Rep Power: 12	Thank you for your reply. All simulations converged with a RMS Residual Target below 10^-5. I've done a mesh sensitivity study. I set up different meshes with unstructured tetrahedral objects with three mesh sizes and compared the velocity profiles of the simulations. After the second refinement the max velocity in the middle of the duct does not change anymore. Is that the correct way?

January 30, 2014, 06:36		#4
ghorrocks Super Moderator Glenn Horrocks Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 17,700 Rep Power: 143	It sounds like you have covered the basic numerical accuracy stuff. Can you explain what you are modelling? Especially what is happening upstream and downstream, with what boundary conditions you have applied.

January 30, 2014, 07:37		#5
Floschi New Member Florian Join Date: Jan 2014 Posts: 9 Rep Power: 12	This simulation is just about a straight rectangular duct to obtain the velocity profile. The profile will be used as initial condition for an inlet of a microchannel with different geometries, so you can save on the inlet zone in the following simulations. The boundary condition at the inlet is a constant velocity over the cross section. The outlet is an OUTLET with average static pressure of 0. The wall is a non slip wall. The profile is not changing upstream and downstream. I don't know, why the use of symmetry ends in different results here.

January 30, 2014, 16:47		#6
ghorrocks Super Moderator Glenn Horrocks Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 17,700 Rep Power: 143	Have you checked the secondary flows? The symmetry plane might be stopping a secondary flow. Plot vectors in the YZ plane on your cross sections and I bet the secondary flows are different.

January 31, 2014, 04:10		#7
Floschi New Member Florian Join Date: Jan 2014 Posts: 9 Rep Power: 12	Hmm, you mean the vectors in the pictures below? The flows are different but 10^-3 to 10^-4 less than the primary flow. Does this have a effect on the primary flow? Maybe I don't understand the concept of the symmetry boundary, but if the flow is the same on each side of the plane, a symmetry boundary can be applied. Symmetry Without symmetry

January 31, 2014, 04:19		#8
ghorrocks Super Moderator Glenn Horrocks Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 17,700 Rep Power: 143	You have not shown the one which looks different. The no symmetry and the symmetry plane on the XZ plane look the same in your first post. It is the one with the symmetry plane in the XY plane which looks different.

January 31, 2014, 04:29		#9
Floschi New Member Florian Join Date: Jan 2014 Posts: 9 Rep Power: 12	I actually placed the wrong picture in the first post. The profile is different for both symmetry boundaries. Symmetry No symmetry

January 31, 2014, 05:10		#10
ghorrocks Super Moderator Glenn Horrocks Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 17,700 Rep Power: 143	That changes things - now I am thinking of a different error Did you use a mass flow rate to specify the flow? When you use a symmetry you halve the inlet area so that would result in double the velocity due to the area being halved.

January 31, 2014, 05:21		#11
Floschi New Member Florian Join Date: Jan 2014 Posts: 9 Rep Power: 12	I specified the flow as a constant velocity over the cross section. In this case, I think I don't have to halve it.

January 31, 2014, 06:02		#12
ghorrocks Super Moderator Glenn Horrocks Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 17,700 Rep Power: 143	OK, fair enough. Can you post your output file?

January 31, 2014, 06:17		#13
Floschi New Member Florian Join Date: Jan 2014 Posts: 9 Rep Power: 12	Sure Symmetry.zip

February 1, 2014, 05:19		#14
ghorrocks Super Moderator Glenn Horrocks Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 17,700 Rep Power: 143	Your convergence on the symmetry plane one is quite a bit looser. Can you converge it tighter? Also, use larger psuedo-time steps than auto time step. Run maybe 20 iterations with a time step multiplier of 10x or 100x. On long thin domains like this it can take a lot of time to get to a true converged solution when the convection time is so long.

February 4, 2014, 03:47		#15
Floschi New Member Florian Join Date: Jan 2014 Posts: 9 Rep Power: 12	I did the simulation again with a RMS residual target below 10^-6 and auto timescale with a timescale factor of 10. The .out files are attended Inlet path_symmetry over hight_10-6.zip It seems that the solution did not change a lot.

February 4, 2014, 17:12		#16
ghorrocks Super Moderator Glenn Horrocks Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 17,700 Rep Power: 143	This seems very strange. Can you get the flow rates over these areas? If the flow is faster in one than the other then I cannot see how they are both conserving mass. Also integrate the velocity over the patch to check that as well.