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

Unsteady problems - under-relaxation factors

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

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   March 28, 2013, 09:10
Default Unsteady problems - under-relaxation factors
  #1
New Member
 
Stefanos Katifeoglou
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 19
Rep Power: 5
stefanos is on a distinguished road
Dear community,

At unsteady problems where noticeable structures of the fluid interacting with other fluid or body zones might appear (alike vortex shedding) it is often necessary to decrease the under-relaxation factors of pressure, momentum, density, etc for avoiding "divergence problems" of the transferred properties. I would like to ask, if the under-relaxation factors of turbulent quantities are also decreased, is there a possibility that this may influence the appearance of these structures/or not?
In particular, i have been expecting to track a jet somewhere within my FSI problem, but it isn't very clear, beside the dense mesh, etc.
stefanos is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 28, 2013, 09:41
Default
  #2
Senior Member
 
flotus1's Avatar
 
Alex
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,097
Rep Power: 19
flotus1 will become famous soon enoughflotus1 will become famous soon enough
The URFs should not affect the final solution. Yet lower URFs mean that the solution advances slower and you need more Iterations to get convergence.

Phenomena like vortex shedding cannot be captured accurately with a RANS-type turbulence models. Maybe this is why your solution is not as you expected.
flotus1 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 29, 2013, 06:31
Default
  #3
New Member
 
Stefanos Katifeoglou
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 19
Rep Power: 5
stefanos is on a distinguished road
Thank you for your notification, sir.

Regards

S
stefanos is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   July 21, 2013, 15:09
Default
  #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 196
Rep Power: 4
openfoammaofnepo is on a distinguished road
Hi All,

Is it reasonable to use an under-relaxation factor for unsteady simulation? I think it is not, but I found that some of the Openfoam tutorials still have the options for under-relaxation factors for the unsteady solvers. Could anyone tell something about this issues ? Thank you so much!

Quote:
Originally Posted by stefanos View Post
Dear community,

At unsteady problems where noticeable structures of the fluid interacting with other fluid or body zones might appear (alike vortex shedding) it is often necessary to decrease the under-relaxation factors of pressure, momentum, density, etc for avoiding "divergence problems" of the transferred properties. I would like to ask, if the under-relaxation factors of turbulent quantities are also decreased, is there a possibility that this may influence the appearance of these structures/or not?
In particular, i have been expecting to track a jet somewhere within my FSI problem, but it isn't very clear, beside the dense mesh, etc.
openfoammaofnepo is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   July 21, 2013, 15:23
Default
  #5
Senior Member
 
Saeed
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 177
Rep Power: 4
flow_CH is on a distinguished road
For openfoam please go openfoam forum.
For fluent yes you can change under relaxation factors in unsteady simulation in solve -------> control --------> solution
Discretization of equations are same for steady and unsteady.
flow_CH is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   July 21, 2013, 15:29
Default
  #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 196
Rep Power: 4
openfoammaofnepo is on a distinguished road
Thank you very much. But I think this is a general CFD problem. Does anybody know something about this?

Quote:
Originally Posted by flow_CH View Post
For openfoam please go openfoam forum.
For fluent yes you can change under relaxation factors in unsteady simulation in solve -------> control --------> solution
Discretization of equations are same for steady and unsteady.
openfoammaofnepo is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   July 22, 2013, 04:25
Default
  #7
Senior Member
 
flotus1's Avatar
 
Alex
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,097
Rep Power: 19
flotus1 will become famous soon enoughflotus1 will become famous soon enough
Why dont you think it is reasonable to use under-relaxation?
Without it, implicit solvers like SIMPLE become unstable.
flotus1 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   July 22, 2013, 04:32
Question
  #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 196
Rep Power: 4
openfoammaofnepo is on a distinguished road
Because, for example, when i use the time step is 1.0d-04, and then I use under-relaxation factor is 0.1, in terms of time marching, does it mean that the effective time step will be reduced? In other words, the simulation is marching with a time step less than 1.0d-04. Is that so?

Quote:
Originally Posted by flotus1 View Post
Why dont you think it is reasonable to use under-relaxation?
Without it, implicit solvers like SIMPLE become unstable.
openfoammaofnepo is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   July 22, 2013, 04:38
Default
  #9
Senior Member
 
flotus1's Avatar
 
Alex
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,097
Rep Power: 19
flotus1 will become famous soon enoughflotus1 will become famous soon enough
This holds true only for the iterations within each timestep.
Given a sufficient amount of iterations per timestep (convergence!) the physical time step size remains unaffected of the under-relaxation.
flotus1 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   July 22, 2013, 04:41
Default
  #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 196
Rep Power: 4
openfoammaofnepo is on a distinguished road
OK, thank you very much. if I just use one iteration for each time step, but the convergence is reached for that iteration. So the under-relaxation is still can be used for unsteady time marching.

Quote:
Originally Posted by flotus1 View Post
This holds true only for the iterations within each timestep.
Given a sufficient amount of iterations per timestep (convergence!) the physical time step size remains unaffected of the under-relaxation.
openfoammaofnepo is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   July 22, 2013, 04:49
Default
  #11
Senior Member
 
flotus1's Avatar
 
Alex
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,097
Rep Power: 19
flotus1 will become famous soon enoughflotus1 will become famous soon enough
No.
An iterative solver with only one under-relaxed iteration does not produce correct results.
flotus1 is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply

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
Problems with the unsteady flamelet Model Christoph_84 FLUENT 2 April 24, 2015 16:20
rESIDUALS and rElaxation factors Mohsin FLUENT 9 October 24, 2010 00:22
conditions for unsteady problems dvdromnu OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 5 November 9, 2009 03:15
Running unsteady problems in the background Jie Cui FLUENT 0 February 17, 2005 18:59
relaxation factors Roberto Ciardulli CD-adapco 3 October 26, 2000 11:35


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 16:35.