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

about under relaxation factor

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

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   August 13, 2012, 04:56
Default about under relaxation factor
  #1
New Member
 
B Aram
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 9
Rep Power: 4
landa is on a distinguished road
I have a question about setting under relaxation factor.
is changing the relaxation factor supposed to change the final answer?!
when i changed it in a problem, the final solution that i was expected wasn't gained and when i decreased it again, the final solution changed again
landa is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 13, 2012, 06:25
Default
  #2
Senior Member
 
flotus1's Avatar
 
Alex
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,097
Rep Power: 19
flotus1 will become famous soon enoughflotus1 will become famous soon enough
If your "final" solution is obtained based on a residuum, not on a number of iterations, then the results should be independent of the underrelaxation factor.
flotus1 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 13, 2012, 09:02
Default
  #3
Member
 
Jonas T. Holdeman, Jr.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Knoxville, Tennessee
Posts: 90
Rep Power: 8
Jonas Holdeman is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by flotus1 View Post
If your "final" solution is obtained based on a residuum, not on a number of iterations, then the results should be independent of the underrelaxation factor.
Yes it should, but this is not always the case. When the sequence of residuals is not monotonicly decreasing, it may not converge without relaxation. What is happening with relaxed convergence is that the advection velocity, i.e. Ubar in the expression (Ubar dot grad U), is implicitly filtered or smoothed, averaged over many iterrations. So what you get is not necessarily the solution to the original NS equation (which may not exist), but is the solution to a smoothed advection-diffusion equation. This will be the same as the solution to the unrelaxed equation where the latter exists (Ubar=U), but can provide a generalized solution when it doesn't.

Last edited by Jonas Holdeman; August 13, 2012 at 09:04. Reason: grammar
Jonas Holdeman is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 13, 2012, 11:51
Default
  #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 251
Rep Power: 6
leflix is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by landa View Post
I have a question about setting under relaxation factor.
is changing the relaxation factor supposed to change the final answer?!
when i changed it in a problem, the final solution that i was expected wasn't gained and when i decreased it again, the final solution changed again
If the choice of your relaxation factor change your solution, so there is a bugg in your code.
With an improper value of relaxation factor your solution can blow up. with a good one the solution will converge. But there are plenty values for which the solution will converge. For all theses values the solution should be the same (especially for steady cases) and the only difference will be the rate of convergence.
As an example it is often recommended to underlax the pressure for incompressible flow. Underlaxation factor over 0.7 may blow up your code,it is really problem dependent. For UF =0.6 it may converge, but for UF=0.5 also and for UF=0.2 too. For all theses values between 0.2 and 0.6 you will obtain the same solution. But there is an optimal value for which your code will converge faster. Generally it is the highest value for which the code still converge just over this limit it diverges.
Some authors have prescribed that UF_velocity+ UF_p = 1
leflix is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 14, 2012, 03:14
Default
  #5
New Member
 
B Aram
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 9
Rep Power: 4
landa is on a distinguished road
thanks for your considerations
my problem is a simple steady state problem that is devised just for evaluating the effect of under relaxation factor on convergance. the physics of problem indicates that the solutuion should be a linear gradient for temperature. it is true for URF = 1 but when the URF is decreased, it's no longer linear. although decreasing the factor has a positive effect on convergance.
landa is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 14, 2012, 04:24
Default
  #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 251
Rep Power: 6
leflix is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by landa View Post
the physics of problem indicates that the solutuion should be a linear gradient for temperature. it is true for URF = 1 but when the URF is decreased, it's no longer linear. although decreasing the factor has a positive effect on convergance.
So I'm afraid there is a bugg in your program in the way you implemented the URF.
leflix is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   August 14, 2012, 04:33
Default
  #7
New Member
 
B Aram
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 9
Rep Power: 4
landa is on a distinguished road
ok thanks alot
landa 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
Under relaxation factor for external coupling dhxlxz CFX 9 September 13, 2012 11:42
under relaxation factor and the steady state jing113cn FLUENT 0 November 2, 2009 13:13
Relaxation factor Benzaa Main CFD Forum 1 August 18, 2009 07:27
Question on adjusting relaxation factor CFD Rookie Main CFD Forum 3 January 26, 2004 15:37
Relaxation factor Moon CD-adapco 1 June 13, 2003 11:13


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:20.