CFD Online Logo CFD Online URL
www.cfd-online.com
[Sponsors]
Home > Forums > FLUENT

VOF mass loss

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

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   November 28, 2012, 05:19
Default
  #21
Member
 
Smaras
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Germany
Posts: 78
Rep Power: 4
Smaras is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by RodriguezFatz View Post
I am confused... you can not decrease to 1e-3 from 1e-5. This is an increase.
ok that's increase and yes that what i did i.e. increase from 1e-5 and change the time step to 1e-3.

Now if i am using directly 1e-3 from the start. The courant no. is increasing surpassing 250. So what to do now?
Smaras is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   November 28, 2012, 05:31
Default
  #22
Senior Member
 
RodriguezFatz's Avatar
 
Philipp
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,097
Rep Power: 16
RodriguezFatz will become famous soon enough
Alright! Now, in your residual picture it looks like the first 2000 iterations did not converge at all, is that right? How many iterations per timestep did you set as maximum, 25? That means that the first 80 time steps did not converge? Maybe the loss of mass happens right there. Every single timestep of your simulation should converge in a satisfactory manner, otherwise you can not expect mass conservation.

I would try to increase the maximum number of iterations and see if you get convergece for the first timesteps.
__________________
The skeleton ran out of shampoo in the shower.

Last edited by RodriguezFatz; December 3, 2012 at 04:37.
RodriguezFatz is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   December 3, 2012, 04:37
Default
  #23
Senior Member
 
RodriguezFatz's Avatar
 
Philipp
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,097
Rep Power: 16
RodriguezFatz will become famous soon enough
Did it work out Smaras?
__________________
The skeleton ran out of shampoo in the shower.
RodriguezFatz is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   December 3, 2012, 04:53
Default
  #24
Member
 
Smaras
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Germany
Posts: 78
Rep Power: 4
Smaras is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by RodriguezFatz View Post
Alright! Now, in your residual picture it looks like the first 2000 iterations did not converge at all, is that right? How many iterations per timestep did you set as maximum, 25? That means that the first 80 time steps did not converge? Maybe the loss of mass happens right there. Every single timestep of your simulation should converge in a satisfactory manner, otherwise you can not expect mass conservation.

I would try to increase the maximum number of iterations and see if you get convergece for the first time-steps.
Well thanks Rodriguez,

i tried to refine the mesh (adopt) in the regions of inlet and the interaction of two phases and used 10 iterations per step. Using 1e-5 as step size and 10000 steps. Got convergence after 3000 iterations i.e. 300 ts. And then onward every step got convergence.

I don't know why there is mass loss, may be because of viscous heating even though i have not selected that option or either it was something else. But in this run i have got relatively less mass loss and was getting almost similar penetration as in the research papers.

now i want to use K-w SST model what would you suggest???
Smaras is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   December 3, 2012, 04:59
Default
  #25
Senior Member
 
RodriguezFatz's Avatar
 
Philipp
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,097
Rep Power: 16
RodriguezFatz will become famous soon enough
Hold on. You really need convergence every single timestep. Otherwise you can not take things such as mass conservation into account: What, if during your first 100 non-converged time steps something unphysical happens? Your equations are not converged and it can easily happen, that you lose some mass or whatever. You need to do as many iterations as it takes to get a converged solution right from the start, for time step number one, number two...
__________________
The skeleton ran out of shampoo in the shower.
RodriguezFatz is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   December 3, 2012, 05:03
Default
  #26
Member
 
Smaras
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Germany
Posts: 78
Rep Power: 4
Smaras is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by RodriguezFatz View Post
Hold on. You really need convergence every single timestep. Otherwise you can not take things such as mass conservation into account: What, if during your first 100 non-converged time steps something unphysical happens? Your equations are not converged and it can easily happen, that you lose some mass or whatever. You need to do as many iterations as it takes to get a converged solution right from the start, for time step number one, number two...
Ok got it....ill try to make more iteration i.e. 20 now an see
Smaras is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   December 3, 2012, 05:17
Default
  #27
Member
 
Smaras
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Germany
Posts: 78
Rep Power: 4
Smaras is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by RodriguezFatz View Post
Hold on. You really need convergence every single timestep. Otherwise you can not take things such as mass conservation into account: What, if during your first 100 non-converged time steps something unphysical happens? Your equations are not converged and it can easily happen, that you lose some mass or whatever. You need to do as many iterations as it takes to get a converged solution right from the start, for time step number one, number two...
Yup getting convergence in K-eps with 20 iteration per step and step size being 1e-6 and for k-w with 25 iteration per step and step size being 1e-5. From the start.

Now running both simulations and will take around a day or so to complete. Then see what is the penetration. And hope now there would be no mass loss.

Thanks once again Rodriguez fro help.

Regards,
Smaras
Smaras is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   December 4, 2012, 03:41
Thumbs up
  #28
Member
 
Smaras
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Germany
Posts: 78
Rep Power: 4
Smaras is on a distinguished road
Thanks Rodriguez,

For the help, the problem lies in the pressure residual monitor. Even though it wasn't not changing too much but it wasn't giving converging.....i have also change it to 0.01 and now getting converging at every iteration. Further no mass loss and the penetration is also kept the step size 1e-5 and iteration per step 20. Getting converge solution. Better results in both models.

Thanks for the help, learnt a lot.

Regards,
Smaras
Smaras is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   December 4, 2012, 10:09
Default
  #29
Senior Member
 
RodriguezFatz's Avatar
 
Philipp
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,097
Rep Power: 16
RodriguezFatz will become famous soon enough
Just one more comment:
By "change it to 0.01" i guess you mean that you increased the residual convergence criterion to 0.01 ?
You should better try to increase the max. number of iterations (and lower the residual) than relaxing the threshold of "good" and "bad" convergence.
__________________
The skeleton ran out of shampoo in the shower.
RodriguezFatz is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   December 4, 2012, 10:37
Default
  #30
Member
 
Smaras
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Germany
Posts: 78
Rep Power: 4
Smaras is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by RodriguezFatz View Post
Just one more comment:
By "change it to 0.01" i guess you mean that you increased the residual convergence criterion to 0.01 ?
You should better try to increase the max. number of iterations (and lower the residual) than relaxing the threshold of "good" and "bad" convergence.
Ok doki...am working on it.
Smaras is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   December 14, 2012, 05:29
Default
  #31
Member
 
Smaras
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Germany
Posts: 78
Rep Power: 4
Smaras is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by RodriguezFatz View Post
Just one more comment:
By "change it to 0.01" i guess you mean that you increased the residual convergence criterion to 0.01 ?
You should better try to increase the max. number of iterations (and lower the residual) than relaxing the threshold of "good" and "bad" convergence.
Thanks for the help Rodriguez. Had increase the number of iteration and getting the desired result i mean the result approximately matching the research results.

now working on 3D. Need some help, do you have some idea where to find good resource on meshing techniques in ICEM. And mesh refinement for 3D.

Regards.
Smaras is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   December 14, 2012, 05:44
Default
  #32
Senior Member
 
RodriguezFatz's Avatar
 
Philipp
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,097
Rep Power: 16
RodriguezFatz will become famous soon enough
Watch the youtube tutorial by Simon (PSYMN in this forum). Search for "ICEM CFD Hexa 2D Airfoil meshing" in youtube. It has three parts and is really helpful, although it's just 2d.

Mesh refinement can be done pretty easy in ICEM since you can increase the number of gridpoints on edges quickly.
__________________
The skeleton ran out of shampoo in the shower.
RodriguezFatz is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply

Tags
penetration, phase change, vof modeling

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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 Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
VOF mass loss Smaras FLUENT 2 November 20, 2012 07:36
Source terms due to mass transfer in VOF model ssamton FLUENT 0 March 5, 2012 01:03
mass flow in is not equal to mass flow out saii CFX 2 September 18, 2009 08:07
Mass loss! So what? jinwon park Main CFD Forum 13 May 22, 2008 09:29
HELP! adding a mass source to VOF eqn. by UDF??? ROOZBEH FLUENT 4 May 29, 2003 09:54


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:55.