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

Pressure Correction

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

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   April 1, 2012, 14:46
Default Pressure Correction
  #1
New Member
 
Peter
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 29
Rep Power: 5
peatmac is on a distinguished road
Hello,

I am modelling a cylinder oscillating in a uniform current due to VIV. The simulation will run up to about 25 seconds flow time, but then it fails due to a pressure correction.
I have had a read through all the other threads available about trying to solve this problem. I am running the simulation with PISO pressure-velocity coupling with skewness-Neighbour Coupling disabled. My URF values are 0.3,1,1 and 0.7 - Pressure, Density, Body Forces and Momentum respectively. Under the Discretization tab the pressure is set to Standard and Momentum as Second Order Upwind.
I have tried to change all these values but with still no success.

However.

When I change my time step from 0.001 s to 0.003 s the analysis will keep iterating. If I let it run at this time step I run into a negative cell volume in my mesh, but If I quickly change the time step back to 0.001 s after 1 or 2 iterations the analysis will run for about 10 more time steps then fail due to a negative cell volume.

Can anyone please advise me on how to resolve this problem?

Many thanks.

P.
peatmac is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 3, 2012, 06:30
Default
  #2
New Member
 
Peter
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 29
Rep Power: 5
peatmac is on a distinguished road
Could it be anything to do with the number of iterations per time step? Currently I run the simulation at 1 iteration per time step, and plan to crank it up to 20-30 when the cylinder settles into a regular motion.

Cheers
peatmac is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 3, 2012, 06:45
Default
  #3
New Member
 
Peter
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 29
Rep Power: 5
peatmac is on a distinguished road
Currently I am running Fluent in 2d, would running it in 2ddp be better?

Regards.
peatmac is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 3, 2012, 08:33
Default
  #4
New Member
 
neville
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 12
Rep Power: 6
neville is on a distinguished road
The double precision solver does help in getting improved results however I don't think its the solution to your problem. Check your mesh. Also try using the green gauss node based scheme for gradient. Maybe this is your problem.
neville is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 3, 2012, 10:05
Default
  #5
New Member
 
Peter
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 29
Rep Power: 5
peatmac is on a distinguished road
Neville,

Thanks for your advise. I am running the simulations as we speak, they take out 24 hours to run so I will post how I get on.

Thanks!

P
peatmac is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 4, 2012, 02:22
Default
  #6
New Member
 
Peter
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 29
Rep Power: 5
peatmac is on a distinguished road
Neville,

This may seem trivial. But when you say check the mesh, What am I checking for?

Peter
peatmac is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 5, 2012, 05:27
Default
  #7
New Member
 
Peter
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 29
Rep Power: 5
peatmac is on a distinguished road
Sorry to flag his up again people.

Can anyone explain to me what I should be checking for in my mesh to try stop getting these pressure convergence errors?

Thanks for your help

Peter
peatmac is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 14, 2012, 05:52
Default
  #8
New Member
 
neville
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 12
Rep Power: 6
neville is on a distinguished road
Hello Peter,
Sorry for the late reply but By mesh check I mean you should see whether your mesh is uniform and that cells are not clustered in particular region unless necessary refinement is required in that region.

Also the min cell volume for the mesh should be positive. I had an experience the mesh being discontinuous in my work. this is due to the fact that the mashing algorithm failed in that region but I was lucky to notice it visually.
neville is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 14, 2012, 08:48
Default
  #9
New Member
 
Peter
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 29
Rep Power: 5
peatmac is on a distinguished road
Neville,

Thanks very much for that info there.

One thing I have found with my problem seems pretty weird. If I reduce the mass of my cylinder, the simulations run for a lot longer. I ran a simulation a few months ago with an extremely light cylinder that was critically damped. And it seemed to settle into a steady state.

Any idea why this could be?

Thanks again,

Peter
peatmac is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 16, 2012, 08:43
Default
  #10
New Member
 
neville
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 12
Rep Power: 6
neville is on a distinguished road
Sorry Peter, but I can't help you on this as I have not worked on vibrations.
neville 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
changing the coefficients of pressure correction Noel Phoenics 1 April 7, 2009 08:54
Does star cd takes reference pressure? monica CD-adapco 1 April 19, 2007 11:26
Pressure correction scheme in axissymmetric model Adam Wu Main CFD Forum 0 September 30, 2005 11:45
residual in the pressure correction George Main CFD Forum 2 July 28, 2005 04:43
a problem about pressure correction method tommewang Main CFD Forum 2 May 15, 2003 21:18


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:19.