CFD Online Discussion Forums (http://www.cfd-online.com/Forums/)
-   CFX (http://www.cfd-online.com/Forums/cfx/)
-   -   Joule heating convergence problem (http://www.cfd-online.com/Forums/cfx/71820-joule-heating-convergence-problem.html)

 shahpar73 January 16, 2010 09:46

Joule heating convergence problem

Hi
I am simulating Joule heating. There are two domains, one is solid electrode (copper) and other is Fluid (Argon with temperature dependent electrical conductivity and others).
I apply current at the top of the solid electrode as electric field flux in. Simulation converges at a current flux of 25 [A m-2] but when I change it to actual value of 25000000 [A m-2] the solution diverges after 4 iterations. Error message is bellow:

+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
| ****** Notice ******
| While evaluating Static Enthalpy,
| Static Pressure
| went outside of its lower limit. Its minimum value was
| -2.4670E+11. The bounds error was handled by clipping.
| If this situation persists, consider increasing the table range.
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+

+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
| ERROR #004100018 has occurred in subroutine FINMES.
| Message:
| Fatal overflow in linear solver.
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+

Regards

 Attesz January 16, 2010 17:03

Only guess, the problem is with the fineness of your mesh...

 ghorrocks January 16, 2010 17:09

Looks like a simple divergence to me. Fixing it could mean many things. Also there is a power 1e6 difference between your two tests - that probably means they have very little in relation to each other, just as a Re=1 flow looks nothing like a Re=1e6 flow. Try some intermediate fluxes.

You will almost certainly need a smaller timestep for the higher heating rate one. Also local timescale factor to start things off might help.

Also consider simplifying the problem. Start with the simplest physics possible and get that to converge. Add the physics one at a time until you have all the physics working.

Also have a look here:
http://www.cfd-online.com/Wiki/Ansys...gence_criteria

 shahpar73 January 17, 2010 00:02

Can you please comment on the error message bellow? what this mean? how to increase the table range? and will it help in convergence?
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
| ****** Notice ******
| While evaluating Total Enthalpy,
| Static Pressure
| went outside of its upper limit. Its maximum value was
| 6.3200E+10. The bounds error was handled by clipping.
| If this situation persists, consider increasing the table range.
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+

 ghorrocks January 17, 2010 06:25

As I said, your simulation has diverged. The message says the maximum pressure was 6e10. This is almost certainly physically impossible so is the sign of a rapidly diverging simulation. Only increase the table range if this pressure is likely to be correct. If it is not correct then fix the divergence and the problem will be fixed.

 ckleanth January 17, 2010 09:30

assuming you are modeling ionisation of argon, the plasma core can reach extreme temperatures in excess of 15K [K] hense the divergence.

if you have modified the fluid properties taking in to account the range of temperatures refine your mesh, use small timesteps and use underelax on
enthalpy, entropy, conelec and jcur.

 shahpar73 January 17, 2010 09:34

What about the ramp loading concept? What if I apply 25 in first iteration then 25e1, 25e2.....and 25e6 in the succeeding iterations? will it help in convergence?

 ckleanth January 17, 2010 09:44

if the divergence is because of the high temperature thus your energy equation falls apart, do you think that ramping the flux will help? the emag module is also very demanding on the mesh resolution so sort your physics and mesh first, and as glenn said, get simplest physics possible to converge and add more complexity bit by bit

 shahpar73 January 19, 2010 00:06

Dear Goerge
Thanks for the comments. Yes you right, its about the ionization of Argon.
Can you please also comment on how to set under-relaxation(s) you mentioned in your post?

 All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:24.