# Expression for physical timescale

 Register Blogs Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 March 21, 2011, 14:55 Expression for physical timescale #1 Member   newansysuser Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 33 Rep Power: 8 From the help file under physical time scale chapter, "It is often necessary to alter the physical time scale for buoyancy driven flows in order to achieve convergence." So max physical time scale will be : delta(tmax)=(dL/(B*g*deltaT))^0.5 here L is a length scale associated with the vertical temperature gradient; deltaT is the temperature variation in the fluid; B is the thermal expansivity of the fluid; g is the gravity So an expression for the physical time scale is needed. But for a 3D model with non-uniform mesh ,how to define the CEL of the physical time scale? how to define dL here? deltaT is radial or vertical temperature difference?

 March 21, 2011, 20:16 #2 Super Moderator   Glenn Horrocks Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 12,709 Rep Power: 98 The equation just gives a first guess estimate. If you could not be bothered working it out you can just make a guess (1s is a good starting point) and just go from there. Obviously a bit of trial and error and not very efficient but should be OK for most cases. Often the time scale size makes little difference in steady state simulations.

 March 22, 2011, 03:33 #3 Member   newansysuser Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 33 Rep Power: 8 From the original sentence, "it's often necessary to alter the physical timescale", so I do not need to use a CEL language to alter it from time to time? just use a fixed number for example 1s?

 March 22, 2011, 07:53 #4 Super Moderator   Glenn Horrocks Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 12,709 Rep Power: 98 Yes, just a fixed number. I change it while the simulation is running (using solver manager) so I can adjust the timestep easily and adjust it if it looks too big or small without having to restart.

 March 22, 2011, 09:06 #5 Member   newansysuser Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 33 Rep Power: 8 so I guess you use "Edit Run in Progress" under "Tool" Menu. During the running, I found RMS of U,V,W-Mom and H-energy is one order higher than MAX, for example rms=2.5e-06 and max is 1.4e-04, how shall I modify the physical timescale?

March 22, 2011, 09:14
#6
Member

newansysuser
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 33
Rep Power: 8
the location of high residuals is not very far from the place I am interested in, so I guess this is a local problem. WHile from the attached graph, I do not have poor grid quality, so what kind of step can I do to fix this problem?
Attached Images
 1.JPG (26.2 KB, 30 views)

 March 22, 2011, 22:20 #7 Super Moderator   Glenn Horrocks Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 12,709 Rep Power: 98 Do a sensitivity study. Do a simulation using your current convergence, and a second converged to maybe a factor of 10 better. Did values of interest to you change significantly? If not then your current convergence is probably OK.

 March 23, 2011, 03:59 #8 Member   newansysuser Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 33 Rep Power: 8 Now my convergence criteria is 1e-06, so your suggestion is getting to 1e-05 and see the result? I have done the grid independent study, the mesh is ok. And from the help file, it says"When you are having problems converging, you can check RMS and MAX residuals" I can converge to RMS 1e-06, while my MAX residual is more than one order higher than RMS, so is this a local problem or we can just neglect it since its convergence Thank you

 March 23, 2011, 18:46 #9 Super Moderator   Glenn Horrocks Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 12,709 Rep Power: 98 Yes, you can also compare against a run with looser convergence. The aim is to see whether convergence makes any difference.

 March 24, 2011, 04:04 #10 Member   newansysuser Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 33 Rep Power: 8 The temperature and velocity distribution shape are the same, only I got slightly higher temperature in lower convergence criteria. So do you have any comments on this. I can converge while still there is one order higher between RMS and MAX residual, does it matter? THe MAX residual show near the region of interest

 March 24, 2011, 21:33 #11 Super Moderator   Glenn Horrocks Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 12,709 Rep Power: 98 I cannot comment on this - it is you to decide. Is the difference between the tight and loose convergence significant for the results you are interested in. Only you know what you are interested in.

 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 mitra FLUENT 14 February 16, 2016 13:07 lzgwhy Main CFD Forum 1 January 11, 2011 19:44 manaliac Main CFD Forum 2 November 29, 2010 07:25 Parthipan CFX 2 August 24, 2007 10:07 Jamesd69climber CFX 8 February 17, 2005 18:23

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 16:55.