|
[Sponsors] |
July 14, 2011, 17:21 |
Implicit Timestep
|
#1 |
New Member
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 2
Rep Power: 0 |
Hi, I had a quick question dealing with time steps in an implicit solution. I am dealing with transient system and finding that 1e-7 was taking to long to stabilize, so during the middle of the simulation i stopped and changed the time step to 1e-6. My question is will this introduce error, I do fully understand higher time step yields solution faster with less accuracy, my question deals more with am I creating a hole or effecting the results in a way that would invalidate them.
So I guess I am asking, does changing the time step create unacceptable noise in the solution after the change. I am actually only interested in the steady state solution, so I am not sure if it even matters. |
|
July 21, 2011, 01:59 |
|
#2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Indiana, US
Posts: 186
Rep Power: 17 |
It is a common practice, for unsteady flows, to start with a low TS and then gradually increase it as time progresses. It will not affect your flow as long as the higher TS leads to a converged flow. Check the value of Courant Number in your domain whenever you adjust the TS, a value <10 should be acceptable.
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Restart 2-way FSI with different timestep? | Lance | CFX | 10 | April 17, 2013 01:37 |
Help. implicit discritization | dearboy | Main CFD Forum | 0 | November 25, 2010 22:46 |
need for an unsteady implicit solver suitable for large timestep | dinonettis | OpenFOAM | 2 | May 26, 2010 07:57 |
Can anyone explain the difference between these implicit concepts? | bearcat | Main CFD Forum | 0 | February 20, 2010 19:39 |
Use of Timestep in obtaining solution. | hagupta | CFX | 7 | February 28, 2006 14:14 |