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

convergence unsteady state

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

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   March 20, 2012, 20:01
Default convergence unsteady state
  #1
Member
 
andres
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 44
Rep Power: 6
cfdhydraulic is on a distinguished road
Hi everyone!
I am studying a transient state study (unsteady).
The first iteration is correct and it achieves a perfect convergence but, the second one... it doesn't converge at all
it's that a problem?? is there anything I should change?
I decreased the time step from 1E-4 to 1E-05 but it didn't converge whatsoever

any idea??

thank you
cfdhydraulic is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 20, 2012, 20:03
Default convergence/divergence unsteady state
  #2
Member
 
andres
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 44
Rep Power: 6
cfdhydraulic is on a distinguished road
I post a picture so you can figure it out
Thanks in advance


Hi everyone!
I am studying a transient state study (unsteady).
The first iteration is correct and it achieves a perfect convergence but, the second one... it doesn't converge at all
it's that a problem?? is there anything I should change?
I decreased the time step from 1E-4 to 1E-05 but it didn't converge whatsoever

any idea??

thank you
Attached Images
File Type: jpg convergence.jpg (21.1 KB, 79 views)
cfdhydraulic is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 21, 2012, 14:54
Default
  #3
Senior Member
 
Lucky Tran
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Orlando, FL USA
Posts: 696
Rep Power: 13
LuckyTran will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by cfdhydraulic View Post
I post a picture so you can figure it out
Thanks in advance


Hi everyone!
I am studying a transient state study (unsteady).
The first iteration is correct and it achieves a perfect convergence but, the second one... it doesn't converge at all
it's that a problem?? is there anything I should change?
I decreased the time step from 1E-4 to 1E-05 but it didn't converge whatsoever

any idea??

thank you
It's working right. Your definition of "convergence" is the problem.

From 30-40 you can clearly see the solution convergence.
LuckyTran is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 21, 2012, 15:01
Default
  #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Germany
Posts: 130
Rep Power: 6
Zigainer is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by cfdhydraulic View Post
I post a picture so you can figure it out
Thanks in advance


Hi everyone!
I am studying a transient state study (unsteady).
The first iteration is correct and it achieves a perfect convergence but, the second one... it doesn't converge at all
it's that a problem?? is there anything I should change?
I decreased the time step from 1E-4 to 1E-05 but it didn't converge whatsoever

any idea??

thank you
Your residuals (for the second step) do not fall below 1E-3, but that does not mean, that your solution is not converged!
Zigainer is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 21, 2012, 21:31
Default
  #5
Member
 
andres
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 44
Rep Power: 6
cfdhydraulic is on a distinguished road
thanks you all!
another question though...

if my time step must to be 0.00001 to achieve convergence, I have to iterate 10000 to simulate 1 second!!! and it takes hours!! like... forever!

what can I do if want to simulate 5 minutes simulation? what about 1h simulation?

To simulate 1 second takes 10 hours or even more... what about 3600seconds????


itīs impossible... is there anything I can do to acelerate this ?
THANKS!!
cfdhydraulic is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 21, 2012, 21:39
Default
  #6
Senior Member
 
Lucky Tran
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Orlando, FL USA
Posts: 696
Rep Power: 13
LuckyTran will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by cfdhydraulic View Post
thanks you all!
another question though...

if my time step must to be 0.00001 to achieve convergence, I have to iterate 10000 to simulate 1 second!!! and it takes hours!! like... forever!

what can I do if want to simulate 5 minutes simulation? what about 1h simulation?

To simulate 1 second takes 10 hours or even more... what about 3600seconds????


itīs impossible... is there anything I can do to acelerate this ?
THANKS!!
it's impossible, unless you redefine space-time. If I drive 120km/h, can I go 120km in less than an hour?

10hrs is not very long. It's not even one day, let it run on a weekend if need be.

You should figure out why you need such a small time step and/or why you need to simulate 1 second. You can use an implicit time advancement scheme, stability is guaranteed, and just use more iterations per time-step. It all depends on what you are really after, and WHY. Why did I need to accomplish both 120km and in less than an hour?
LuckyTran is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 21, 2012, 21:46
Default
  #7
Member
 
andres
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 44
Rep Power: 6
cfdhydraulic is on a distinguished road
I need to simulate what's happening in my process after 5 minutes. The time step is 0.0001 to small because I have a good mesh. Good mesh, smaller cells, so small time step.


"It all depends on what you are really after, and WHY." well I need to simulate a discharging process of a tank, and it will take around 5 minutes. however, 1 second is more than 10 hours... 300 seconds will be...3000hours... which means that its not possible...
any suggestion?
cfdhydraulic is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 21, 2012, 21:57
Default
  #8
Senior Member
 
Lucky Tran
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Orlando, FL USA
Posts: 696
Rep Power: 13
LuckyTran will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by cfdhydraulic View Post
I need to simulate what's happening in my process after 5 minutes. The time step is 0.0001 to small because I have a good mesh. Good mesh, smaller cells, so small time step.


"It all depends on what you are really after, and WHY." well I need to simulate a discharging process of a tank, and it will take around 5 minutes. however, 1 second is more than 10 hours... 300 seconds will be...3000hours... which means that its not possible...
any suggestion?
with an implicit time advancement, time step does not matter. and use a coarser mesh
LuckyTran is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 22, 2012, 01:39
Default
  #9
Member
 
andres
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 44
Rep Power: 6
cfdhydraulic is on a distinguished road
But NITA is only operative in pressure-based cases and I am using density-based...

on the other hand, my experience says that the tank that I am simulating will discharge in about 5 minutes but fluent calculations says more than 1 hour... which is impossible... something wrong...
cfdhydraulic is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 22, 2012, 01:42
Default
  #10
Senior Member
 
Lucky Tran
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Orlando, FL USA
Posts: 696
Rep Power: 13
LuckyTran will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by cfdhydraulic View Post
But NITA is only operative in pressure-based cases and I am using density-based...

on the other hand, my experience says that the tank that I am simulating will discharge in about 5 minutes but fluent calculations says more than 1 hour... which is impossible... something wrong...
I am not talking about non-iterative time advancement.
LuckyTran is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 22, 2012, 01:44
Default
  #11
Member
 
andres
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 44
Rep Power: 6
cfdhydraulic is on a distinguished road
mmm.... where is this option located in the interface program? i am going to google it


I appreciate your help, thanks
cfdhydraulic is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 22, 2012, 01:53
Default
  #12
Senior Member
 
Lucky Tran
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Orlando, FL USA
Posts: 696
Rep Power: 13
LuckyTran will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by cfdhydraulic View Post
mmm.... where is this option located in the interface program? i am going to google it


I appreciate your help, thanks
The implicit scheme is the default.

for the pressure based solver, only the implicit formulation is allowed.
for density based, you can choose implicit or explicit formulation.

Again, implicit is default.
LuckyTran is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 22, 2012, 17:04
Default
  #13
Member
 
andres
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 44
Rep Power: 6
cfdhydraulic is on a distinguished road
I am using implicit, as you said, it is default. But time seems to matter...I am going to try with a coarser mesh by changing advanced control parameters "max coarser"
I will let you know

please see photo, for advise
thanks
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Untitled.jpg (47.7 KB, 32 views)
cfdhydraulic is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 22, 2012, 17:42
Default here is the problem
  #14
Member
 
andres
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 44
Rep Power: 6
cfdhydraulic is on a distinguished road
Hi! this is the problem...
I need to perform unsteady state study to get info about how a system behaves during 60 seconds.
If I use a time step of 0.00001 it converges perfect and the results seem to be right. But it will take weeks of running calculations... so it doesn't work

If I use another time step... it diverges.
If I use a coarsen mesh, it diverges because of the poor mesh.

I am working with density-based , implicit time advancement , courant number 0.1

any suggestion???
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Untitled.jpg (31.9 KB, 21 views)
cfdhydraulic is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 22, 2012, 18:22
Default
  #15
Senior Member
 
Lucky Tran
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Orlando, FL USA
Posts: 696
Rep Power: 13
LuckyTran will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by cfdhydraulic View Post
I am using implicit, as you said, it is default. But time seems to matter...I am going to try with a coarser mesh by changing advanced control parameters "max coarser"
I will let you know

please see photo, for advise
thanks
I recommend you do not touch any of the multigrid parameters unless you know exactly what's going on and after you have already debugged everything that is already wrong. The max coarser levels parameter is not the same as running with a coarser mesh. That control is to control the maximum coarse levels used in the multigrid algorithm. The coarsen by parameter controls the new resolution of the coarse grid by a factor of the original grid. In the multigrid algorithm, all solutions eventually are solved in the finest grid (the actual grid).

By use a coarser grid, I mean to go back and generate a coarser mesh from the start.

Also, for larger time step, you will need more iterations per time step to achieve convergence. If you increased the time step size by a factor of 100, you can guess that it will take 100x iterations to converge (it will be slightly less). It will definitely take more than 1x iterations. You increased the time step by 5 orders of magnitude, of course you should wait more than 40 iterations.
LuckyTran is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 23, 2012, 14:07
Default
  #16
Member
 
banty
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 52
Rep Power: 5
banty is on a distinguished road
In tank depletion problem, Two time scale (Long time scale(to deplete the tank) and small time scale ( to track back wave ). it is vary important to set proper time step to capture( even in implicit solver) the phenomena that u want. U can not capture the phenomena if u are overstepping it.

to know the tank depletion time, u can use density base solver with large time step and large courant no, but for tracking wave, u must use fine mesh and smaller time step (wave should not cross one cell length in single time step.dt = cell length/wave speed)

Quote:
Originally Posted by cfdhydraulic View Post
I am using implicit, as you said, it is default. But time seems to matter...I am going to try with a coarser mesh by changing advanced control parameters "max coarser"
I will let you know

please see photo, for advise
thanks
banty is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 23, 2012, 14:22
Default
  #17
Member
 
andres
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 44
Rep Power: 6
cfdhydraulic is on a distinguished road
actually I would liket to know how long is the discharging time. How long does the tank take to discharge form 300bar to 75 bar
but my experience tell me that it will take less than a minute, but Fluent... well.... tell me 4000 seconds or something like that... which is impossible.
I believe itīs a problem of setting a proper time step but, I donīt know how to do it as Velocity is unknown as itīs a discharging process.


How can I track (calculate) the back wave?

cfdhydraulic is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 23, 2012, 14:25
Default
  #18
Member
 
andres
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 44
Rep Power: 6
cfdhydraulic is on a distinguished road
by the way what is "large" time steps or "small" time steps....

large = 1 second? 5 seconds? 30 seconds???

small = 0.001? 0.00001?
cfdhydraulic is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 24, 2012, 04:48
Default
  #19
Member
 
banty
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 52
Rep Power: 5
banty is on a distinguished road
its all about relative scaling. u know time to deplete the tank as about 60 sec approx. so 100 or 500 time step(60/100 or 60/500) with implicit methodology should be sufficient otherwise u have problem with solver setting.
banty is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 24, 2012, 08:55
Default
  #20
Member
 
andres
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 44
Rep Power: 6
cfdhydraulic is on a distinguished road
why 100 or 500? is it 100 or 500 iterations with 0.6 time step or 0.12 time step? this is it?

60/100 = 06
60/500 = 0.12

but why this number ?

I am going to perform the calculations and let you know but I donīt think my Velocity will go down after 60 sec or around...
cfdhydraulic 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
Calculation of the Governing Equations Mihail CFX 7 September 7, 2014 06:27
error message cuteapathy CFX 14 March 20, 2012 07:45
Force can not converge colopolo CFX 13 October 4, 2011 22:03
Constant velocity of the material Sas CFX 15 July 13, 2010 08:56
mass flow in is not equal to mass flow out saii CFX 2 September 18, 2009 08:07


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:21.