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

Grid independence study

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

Like Tree5Likes
  • 1 Post By ajb
  • 1 Post By lehoanganh07
  • 1 Post By lehoanganh07
  • 1 Post By lehoanganh07
  • 1 Post By ringtail

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   July 28, 2004, 19:59
Default Grid independence study
  #1
prasanth
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Dear friends,

To study the grid independency/dependency, how should the mesh size be varied in order to check the solution at different grid sizes and get a range at which there is no variation in the solution.

Thanking you for a kind response!

prasanth
  Reply With Quote

Old   July 30, 2004, 08:43
Default Re: Grid independence study
  #2
ozgur
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Hi,

You can adapt your grid and continue you simulation with the refined grid to see whether there is a significant change in the parameters.

regards
  Reply With Quote

Old   July 30, 2004, 10:59
Default Re: Grid independence study
  #3
wxl
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Do you mean that we don't have to redo the meshing in gambit, instead, we only need to adapt grid in fluent? Thanks.
  Reply With Quote

Old   July 30, 2004, 15:42
Default Re: Grid independence study
  #4
prasanth
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Hello Ozgur

Thanks for your reply. But, I know what you are saying, adapting the grid to refine mesh at locations of high gradients!!

but I am talking about grid independence studies!! you will take 3-4 different grid sizes and like that, repeat the simulation until we get no change in solution!

Thanks prasanth
  Reply With Quote

Old   August 4, 2004, 16:57
Default Re: Grid independence study
  #5
Chetan Kadakia
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I believe you can modify the grid based on different methods (not just high gradients), and when you are convinced that adapting the grid anywhere will not change your outcome, then you are grid independent. Your solution is 3D, the continuous adaption may not be practical. You can also refine the grid in Gambit as it seems you are about to do, but do decide where you want to make your changes based on what you are studying in the flow. May I ask what you are simulating, what model you are using, and how many cells you are going to have in your various meshes.
  Reply With Quote

Old   August 9, 2004, 19:01
Default Re: Grid independence study
  #6
ajb
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
A good rule of thumb I use is 15 to 25% difference between subsequent grids. Sometimes it is necessary to refine grids in order to achieve values of pressure, velocity, turbulent reynolds number, y+ (if turbulent flow), etc that are appropriate. Then once those values are "believable" or close to experiment, refine grid with something like 3 or 4 or more densities. If you are in hexahedrals, you can refine in one direction at a time to ensure there is no effect from grid. Or if in tetrahedrals, a gross refinement of total cell sizes would be O.K. Finally, if tetrahedrals are use, it is always a good idea to try to create hex grid that is very close to the density of the tet grid so you can see whether there is effect of grid type. Hope it helps.
rgd likes this.
  Reply With Quote

Old   August 16, 2014, 10:53
Default
  #7
Member
 
ABDUL GAFOOR CP
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 30
Rep Power: 3
gafoorcp is on a distinguished road
hii
after doing some solutions with different grid sizes..am gettting matching result in some parameter and different result in some other parameter.....
is this a grid independent solution?
gafoorcp is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 16, 2014, 21:40
Default
  #8
Member
 
le hoang anh
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 96
Rep Power: 4
lehoanganh07 is on a distinguished road
You can make the number of cell in order 1.5 time incresing, and do calculation with same condition, if the solution is unchange to much, so you can get grid independent and chose the smallest grid fir your calculation
gafoorcp likes this.
lehoanganh07 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 17, 2014, 02:10
Default
  #9
Member
 
ABDUL GAFOOR CP
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 30
Rep Power: 3
gafoorcp is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by lehoanganh07 View Post
You can make the number of cell in order 1.5 time incresing, and do calculation with same condition, if the solution is unchange to much, so you can get grid independent and chose the smallest grid fir your calculation
thanks sir....
is this 1.5 times increasing is a rule of thumb or can we take any other ratio for increment?
gafoorcp is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 17, 2014, 23:43
Default
  #10
Member
 
le hoang anh
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 96
Rep Power: 4
lehoanganh07 is on a distinguished road
No, It is just my work, you can do whatever you want
gafoorcp likes this.
lehoanganh07 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 18, 2014, 02:26
Default
  #11
Member
 
ABDUL GAFOOR CP
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 30
Rep Power: 3
gafoorcp is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by lehoanganh07 View Post
No, It is just my work, you can do whatever you want
thanks sir...for your valuable suggestions....
gafoorcp is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 19, 2014, 02:21
Default
  #12
Member
 
ABDUL GAFOOR CP
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 30
Rep Power: 3
gafoorcp is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by lehoanganh07 View Post
No, It is just my work, you can do whatever you want
sir...
after completing some run with different number of cells....am getting a matching result within a range of number of cells....and a different result after that range.....so can we take the range at which we r getting same solution for our actual testing....is that a valid method......
please reply....
regards
gafoor
gafoorcp is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 19, 2014, 11:36
Default
  #13
Member
 
le hoang anh
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 96
Rep Power: 4
lehoanganh07 is on a distinguished road
So it is not conv yet, I think need more grid point
gafoorcp likes this.
lehoanganh07 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 19, 2014, 14:00
Default
  #14
Member
 
ABDUL GAFOOR CP
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 30
Rep Power: 3
gafoorcp is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by lehoanganh07 View Post
So it is not conv yet, I think need more grid point
sir.....can you please explain this....i didnt get ur point in your reply
gafoorcp is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 20, 2014, 01:31
Default
  #15
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: China
Posts: 79
Rep Power: 7
ringtail is on a distinguished road
FYI http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/wind/val.../spatconv.html

In my opinion, grid independence is almost impractical, especially for engineering
gafoorcp likes this.
ringtail is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 20, 2014, 06:42
Default
  #16
Member
 
ABDUL GAFOOR CP
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 30
Rep Power: 3
gafoorcp is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by ringtail View Post
FYI http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/wind/val.../spatconv.html

In my opinion, grid independence is almost impractical, especially for engineering
thanks sir.......for your valuable suggestion.....and can you suggest me that if am getting same solution in a range of 60000 cells(maximum number of cells are only 1.2 lakh)...can I go further with my solution with this grid setup...pls reply...
gafoorcp 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
What is meant by Grid Independence Study? Khan FLUENT 10 July 2, 2015 22:40
grid independence questions lucifer FLUENT 0 December 14, 2009 20:59
grid independence study in transition simulation littlelz CFX 4 March 30, 2009 07:16
Combustion Convergence problems Art Stretton Phoenics 5 April 2, 2002 05:59
A doubt on grid independence study G.Balakrishnan FLUENT 4 November 21, 2000 12:05


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:29.