CFD Online Logo CFD Online URL
Home > Forums > FLUENT

Problem with residuals, especially continuity

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

LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   October 14, 2010, 12:32
Default Problem with residuals, especially continuity
New Member
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 6
Rep Power: 7
Ozgur_ is on a distinguished road
Hello everyone,

I'm solving a case with the steady SST k-omega scheme in Fluent 12.1 with a coupled solver with second order discretizations. The relaxation factors and Courant number values I use are lower than their default values. I also solve for the energy equation.

The results I get are ok for my case; however I would like to get better convergence to be sure that the results are accurate. The continuity residuals reach a steady level of 10^-2, but I'd definitely like that to go down more. Because continuity residuals should easily reach a level of 10^-4 at least. Other residuals are better but none of them g lower than 10^-4.

I tried to diagnose the problem and noticed one thing that was weird: The velocity, turbulent kinetic energy and specific dissipation rate profiles I inserted at the inlet are all correctly seen at the end of the run. But the turbulence intensity that corresponds to these is not; I get incredibly high turbulence intensity values. My mesh is very well defined, worked on it for quite a while so I don't think it's related to that.

Any suggestions on how to decrease residual levels and improve convergence? Also a general question: Is it better to use a single scheme (coupled, simplec etc.) or start out with a simplec scheme for a couple hundred iterations than continue with coupled? Does that have an effect on residual levels?
Ozgur_ is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   December 3, 2013, 06:04
Default Same issues here...
New Member
Manuel Díaz Brito
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 16
Rep Power: 4
MDB is on a distinguished road
Hello Ozgur_,

This thread is quite old now, but since there were no replies I was wondering whether you solved your convergence issues because I am facing something very similar at the moment (but not solving density)...

In your case I am quite surprised that having correct velocity and TKE profiles you then have wrong turbulence intensity! Could you throw more light into what happened at last?

About switching the solver scheme I don't think that this should have a great impact, but in general a segregated solver takes more iterations to reach the same solution. The transport equations of your turbulence model could present better convergence with a segregated solver though, since they would be solved after and based on the results of momentum, continuity and energy equations. Changing the scheme is changing the algorithms that solve the PDE's; in principle you would change the rate of convergence of your problem but not its accuracy and final residuals. On the other hand coupled schemes are less sensitive to initial conditions and mesh quality, but they could perform bad in rotating machinery and complex geometry internal flows. For more information you might want to check the link below:

Did you try to monitor that the mass flow out of your domain is balanced with the mass flow in? The residual monitor for a pressure-based solver is the sum of the imbalances in all the cells and for a density-based solver it is something like the rate of change of the variables with "time" (time=iteration for pseudo-transient steady simulation). Despite the continuity residual being large, say O(e-2), if your physical quantities monitored do show mass conservation you could deem your simulation converged (after all continuity would be satisfied in your whole domain). Lastly, my main concern would be that if the physics of the "real" flow cannot be coped by your models, the residuals would tend to be high. For example bad residuals could be due to forcing a steady solution in an inherently unsteady flow.


MDB is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   December 3, 2013, 06:48
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Leeds, UK
Posts: 79
Rep Power: 6
Andrea1984 is on a distinguished road
have you tried to use the pseudo-transient formulation?
In same cases it improves the convergence for steady state simulation.

Andrea1984 is offline   Reply With Quote


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
Dynamic moving mesh Pei-Ying Hsieh (Hsieh) OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 64 June 7, 2012 10:04
Convergence moving mesh lr103476 OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 30 November 19, 2007 15:09
problem with continuity confused Phoenics 0 June 10, 2005 05:36
Periodic flow boundary condition problem sudha FLUENT 3 April 28, 2004 08:40
Transient Purging Problem Sundar FLUENT 1 June 6, 2002 14:20

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:46.