how to improve the convergence of chemical reac.?

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

 April 12, 2006, 07:15 how to improve the convergence of chemical reac.? #1 lily Guest   Posts: n/a I have 14 species and 31 related reactions. Can anyone tell me if there is really chance that i would get an converged result? Can anyone give me some suggestions that i can follow to improve the convergence? Thanks in advance.

 April 12, 2006, 13:32 Re: how to improve the convergence of chemical rea #2 Allan Walsh Guest   Posts: n/a It may work. I'm modeling 12 to 15 species, with 10 to 12 separate reactions and convergence is not a problem. I'm modeling combustion cases with a modest number of cells (1/2 million) and enthalpy and radiation are the last to converge (and first to diverge). I never bother with decreasing under-relaxation to less than 1 for species.

 April 12, 2006, 22:42 Re: how to improve the convergence of chemical rea #3 lily Guest   Posts: n/a thank you for your reply, allan. but now i am facing the problem of divergence already with only one reaction activated. can you give me some tips that how did you make it converge? thanks.

 April 13, 2006, 00:16 Re: how to improve the convergence of chemical rea #4 AkA Guest   Posts: n/a can u specify the type of model u have selected for ur reactions? before activating the reaction(if it is combustion) try to run the case in cold flow , once this is converged activate the reaction.

 April 13, 2006, 16:47 Re: how to improve the convergence of chemical rea #5 Allan Walsh Guest   Posts: n/a lily - not sure about your problem, but we are modeling combustion in industrial boilers. So, our velocities are relatively low and pressure gradients small, but temperatures above 2000K exist. Divergence of multiple finite-rate/eddy dissipation reactions has never been a problem. Our grids our coarse - say 0.1 m - but the gradients in species concentration can be large. We use the basic k-epsilon model for turbulence - are you using something more complicated? Does your case converge without the reactions? Or is heat generated so that the solution is trivial without the reaction? You could set up a box or small 2-d case to check your reactions. In order to test sub-models, we have looked at cases with half-a-dozen species and a few reactions, to confirm that the finite rate/eddy dissipation model in Fluent matches up with laboratory data. Good luck.

 April 13, 2006, 17:10 Thanks. Allan, my case is like this #6 lily Guest   Posts: n/a the very opposite to your case, my domain is very very small, a small nozzle, the grid is like 1e-7m, i have very high velocity and also very high temperature, the gas so is compressible. every gradient is huge, T, P. I didn't do detailed calculation to see how big the reaction would affect the whole calculation, but it's for sure not very convincing without it, the initial reactant has a mass ratio of 38% in total, and to break the bonds need energy. if the temperature field got affected by the reaction, so will the momentums.

 April 13, 2006, 17:15 thanks, AkA, i use finite-rate #7 lily Guest   Posts: n/a thanks, aka. i want to pull it out by modeling Species Transport and Finite-Rate Chemistry. I started from modeling only all the species transport and it converged well. but as soon as i added a reaction, it went wild.

 March 15, 2013, 12:41 #8 New Member   Murdy Baskan Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 4 Rep Power: 5 Do not forget to include radiation at combustion, because 500^4 small with respect to convective heat flux, but 1800^4 is high enough to decrease temperature of flame zones.

 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 Centurion2011 FLUENT 29 August 27, 2016 03:19 colopolo CFX 13 October 4, 2011 22:03 Daniele111 OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 43 November 6, 2010 12:50 nasdak CFX 2 June 29, 2009 01:17 Mohamed FLUENT 0 May 14, 2003 05:43

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 19:42.