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

CONVERGENCE IN FLUENT

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

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   November 14, 2005, 07:13
Default CONVERGENCE IN FLUENT
  #1
Fer
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Hi all!

I'm making 2D simulations with Fluent. The case is that the problem seems to converge at 3000 iterations (you know, low+stable residuals and almost constant solution). My problem is that if I let Fluent simulating after that iteration the residuals increase progressively, while the solution remains the same. I tried solving this fact by making lower the default under-relaxation factors that I used during all the process: firstly the residuals decreased suddenly but then they continued with the previous increasing trend. I think that it's not a grid problem.

I would be very grateful if anybody could give me some advice.

Fer
  Reply With Quote

Old   November 14, 2005, 21:13
Default Re: CONVERGENCE IN FLUENT
  #2
cfd101
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Is it all the residuals or just the pressure-correction equation residual which tends to increase.

thanks.
  Reply With Quote

Old   November 15, 2005, 03:26
Default Re: CONVERGENCE IN FLUENT
  #3
Fer
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
All the residuals trend to increase. The fact is that the continuity, k and epsilon (I'm using k-e standard model to get a solution and then RNG to get better results) residuals are about 2 magnitude orders higher than velocity residuals.

Yesterday I probed making lower the under-relaxation factors given by default but that wasn't the solution. Finally, I probed by using a first order and first order upwind solution (instead of using the second order): that worked quite good and after 800 iterations all the residuals trend to decrease very hard. Could you tell me if that's a good solution to solve my problem? and also, does first order solution option give good results (I'm modeling the flow arround an automobile in 2D)?

Thanks for all

Fer
  Reply With Quote

Old   November 16, 2005, 17:41
Default Re: CONVERGENCE IN FLUENT
  #4
AnotherCFDUser
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Does first order solution option give good results

Depends upon the size of the grid. Have a read of any introductory text on CFD and it will explain what is meant by first and second order discretization schemes. Once you understand this you will be able to answer your own question and will be on your way to becoming a better CFD analyst.
  Reply With Quote

Old   November 16, 2005, 20:10
Default Re: CONVERGENCE IN FLUENT
  #5
zxaar
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
usually fluent suggests to use first order scheme to get good solution and then to switch to second order scheme. Anyway, for second order schemes the value of scalar at face is estimated by using gradients (as compared to first order where it is cell center value from either side of face). Now these gradients are restricted, so that the face value should not exceed local max-minima. If the mesh is coarse or severely nonorthogonal at some places, these restriction will hamper the smooth convergence,, that you get in case of second order scheme. So my advise will be to check your mesh and look out for the two issues mentioned above.
  Reply With Quote

Old   November 16, 2005, 20:11
Default Re: CONVERGENCE IN FLUENT
  #6
zxaar
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
sorry read :

that you get in case of second order scheme

as

that you get in case of first order scheme
  Reply With Quote

Old   November 17, 2005, 03:34
Default Re: CONVERGENCE IN FLUENT
  #7
Fer
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Thanks all!

In fact, I proved with a finer mesh before (170000 vs 110000 elements) and I had no problem with convergence using second order scheme. In that case, the simulation was quite more slowly (obviously) but the solution obtained is almost the same for both cases.

In my case, I have simulated the 2D car that I'm studying for a wide range of flow velocities (from 10 to 50 m/s) with that RNG+Non-Equil_Wall_Functions and with a first order scheme. The results gave very similar Cd values (between 0.29 and 0.30) in all cases and also coherent contours; the y+ in the car walls had values in (30, 300) mainly and the pressure gradients where quite low. My question is: are these results a good criteria to confirm that the simulation is well done?

Thanks for your help again

Fer

  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
Fluent jobs through pbs ibnkureshi FLUENT 5 June 9, 2011 13:43
Fluent 12.0 is worst then Fluent 6.2 herntan FLUENT 5 December 14, 2009 03:57
Fidap to Fluent Ravi FLUENT 3 July 10, 2008 13:31
convergence problem with FLUENT cavitation model Belete Kiflie FLUENT 3 February 20, 2006 11:16
Standard convergence limit in FLUENT 6.1 Henrik Ström FLUENT 3 December 20, 2005 09:48


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 13:57.