# Grid independency in a Quasi-staedy flow

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

 July 31, 2012, 03:02 Grid independency in a Quasi-staedy flow #1 New Member   kazem Join Date: Jan 2011 Posts: 7 Rep Power: 7 Hi guys I deal with a quasi-staeady B.C in a microchannel. What can I check my grid indepency??? This flow depend on time step size and this problem confuse me !!! best regards Kazem

 July 31, 2012, 08:22 #2 Senior Member     Alex Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: Germany Posts: 1,160 Rep Power: 19 What exactly do you mean with "quasi-steady boundary condition"? Mesh dependency is usually checked by obtaining solutions on meshes with different cell sizes and comparing the results.

 July 31, 2012, 09:36 #3 New Member   kazem Join Date: Jan 2011 Posts: 7 Rep Power: 7 My B.C is V(t)=a sin (omega*t) As you know, since this B.C depend on time, solution in addition to grid size, alter with different time step.

 July 31, 2012, 10:05 #4 Senior Member     Alex Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: Germany Posts: 1,160 Rep Power: 19 All right, now I see. To me, your boundary condition is transient. But lets not bother with definitions. Since you have two factors influencing the accuracy of the solution (time step size and mesh size; of course there are others like covergence criteria...) i would study them individually. First you choose a "reasonable" mesh size and obtain solutions with decreasing time step size. Plot a result of your computation (like wall shear or pressure drop, I don't know what you want to simulate) versus time step size and check for independency. When finished, fix the time step size to a "reasonable" value (much easier to find now since you already have results for different time step sizes) and perform a normal grid dependency study. This way, you cannot capture any cross-dependencies of the two influencing factors, but you still get an idea where the "independent" solution might be found. There are better methods, especially when more than two influencing factors are to be considered, but these require some advanced statistics ("Design of experiments")

 July 31, 2012, 10:55 #5 New Member   kazem Join Date: Jan 2011 Posts: 7 Rep Power: 7 Dear flotus1. Thanks for your comments. Only one question. My geometry is complex (various bifurcated and curved microchannel). How do I determine the first "reasonable grid", for beginning ??? If I start with a coarse grid (that I think that is reasonable grid), then find the independence time step. afterwards, refine my grid to find the appropriate grid; Is there something problem??? Thanks

 July 31, 2012, 11:06 #6 Senior Member     Alex Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: Germany Posts: 1,160 Rep Power: 19 Yes, there is the problem that you don't know the cross-influence of the two factors. On a fine grid, it is quite likely that details of the flow are resolved which have a smaller timescale and thus require an even smaller timestep for the solution to be considered as independent of the timestep size. The "easy" way to determine this influence is by setting up a matrix with combinations of both parameters instead of changing them individually. Of course this leads to a large number of simulations.

 July 31, 2012, 11:39 #7 New Member   kazem Join Date: Jan 2011 Posts: 7 Rep Power: 7 many Thanks, If I act vice versa, i.e. I first solve the problem for critical boundary conditions (Vmax=a and -a) and determine the appropriate grid. Then, I do time step independency, is it easier?? Regards

 August 1, 2012, 09:26 #8 Senior Member     Alex Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: Germany Posts: 1,160 Rep Power: 19 That sounds like quite a good idea. Damn, why didn't I come up with this one

 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 dpc-buaa Main CFD Forum 0 February 22, 2011 23:24 dfmona CFX 9 March 21, 2010 20:47 Hans Klaufus CFX 1 June 28, 2000 16:43 Ridwan Setiadi Arrizar Main CFD Forum 1 January 30, 1999 18:43 J. Ehrhard Main CFD Forum 1 October 8, 1998 19:47

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:07.