# implementing boundary conditions

 User Name Remember Me Password
 Register Blogs Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 February 5, 2000, 09:52 implementing boundary conditions #1 Andreas Abdon Guest   Posts: n/a Hello everybody! I'm implementing boundary conditions on a user scalar equation in user fortran subroutine USRSRC. I want to assign the scalar a value in the near wall cells. The manual recommends the following procedure: SP=-c SU=c*value AM=0 for all faces where c is "set equal to approximately the maximum flux in the CV.. .. to stop potential errors due to the Rhie-Chow terms." (quote). I have tried this approach and also different constant values of c and found that it may distort the solution seriously, especially when the flux (velocity) is close to zero. Does anybody have a recommendation how to proceed? Is a large (1.0E10) value of c "safe" to use? Greetings Andreas Abdon Div. Heat Transfer Lund Institute of Technology Box 118 22100 Lund Sweden

 March 14, 2000, 14:00 Re: implementing boundary conditions #2 Andreas Abdon Guest   Posts: n/a I'm stuck! ** Does ANYBODY have any info on this matter, please help! ** Even if you haven't come across these problems when implementing boundary conditions I would be grateful if you let me know how you did it. I have traced the problem to one of my equations, it's a diffusion eq. with NO CONVECTION. I have tried different c values and the high ones (like 1e10) gives a reasonable solution but slows down convergence seriously. A low value gives a very good convergence rate (final residual levels as for c=1e10) but the solution is not very good. Andreas (...nervous breakdown coming soon)

 March 15, 2000, 14:20 Re: implementing boundary conditions #3 Andreas Abdon Guest   Posts: n/a ----> I FOUND IT! <------ Don't use AM(NCELL,0,IPHASE) when putting AM=0 for all six facial components! You have to loop over each individual face: AM(NCELL,1,IPHASE)=0, AM(NCELL,2,IPHASE)=0,AM(NCELL,3,IPHASE)=0, and so on.... Doing this, the solution is the same for c=1.0 nd c=1.0e10, i.e. dependence of c value is eliminated. Cheers Andreas

 Thread Tools Display Modes Linear Mode

 Posting Rules You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On HTML code is OffTrackbacks are On Pingbacks are On Refbacks are On Forum Rules

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post Anindya Main CFD Forum 24 January 11, 2012 14:40 HMR CFX 3 March 6, 2011 21:10 Ardalan Main CFD Forum 6 April 17, 2010 23:40 Paolo Lampitella FLUENT 0 June 12, 2008 06:25 lyang Main CFD Forum 0 September 19, 1999 18:29

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:50.

 Contact Us - CFD Online - Top