# Question about grid independence study

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

 October 24, 2012, 10:18 Question about grid independence study #1 Senior Member     Meimei Wang Join Date: Jul 2012 Posts: 494 Rep Power: 8 Hi, Why we need 3 points on the parabolic grid independence study curve? Why not only 2? Why all of the 3 points have to be on the parabolic curve? In the case that my medium mesh simulation result is very close to the fine mesh but my coarse mesh is totally out of the parabolic curve, why I still can't say my fine mesh is good enough to use? Thank you very much! __________________ Best regards, Meimei

 October 25, 2012, 09:04 #2 Senior Member   Jonas T. Holdeman, Jr. Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Knoxville, Tennessee Posts: 108 Rep Power: 10 If I understand your question correctly, the convergence rate upon mesh refinement, assumed parabolic in your case, is an assymptotic relation, valid only for sufficiently refined meshes. Three points on a parabolic curve doesn't prove your mesh is fine enough for the relation to apply, but may give you some confidence that it is. Two points don't tell you anything about assymptotic convergence rate.

October 25, 2012, 10:15
#3
Senior Member

Meimei Wang
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 494
Rep Power: 8
Why three points on parabolic curve still can't prove my mesh is good enough? What can prove that?

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Jonas Holdeman If I understand your question correctly, the convergence rate upon mesh refinement, assumed parabolic in your case, is an assymptotic relation, valid only for sufficiently refined meshes. Three points on a parabolic curve doesn't prove your mesh is fine enough for the relation to apply, but may give you some confidence that it is. Two points don't tell you anything about assymptotic convergence rate.
__________________
Best regards,
Meimei

 October 25, 2012, 14:02 #4 Senior Member   Jonas T. Holdeman, Jr. Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Knoxville, Tennessee Posts: 108 Rep Power: 10 Suppose the convergence was actually linear, given asymptotically by a0*h+a1*h^2+a2*h^3+...., but where a0 was very small. Then there might be a range of h where a0*h << a1*h^2. Then in this range the assymptptic convergence would appear to be quadratic. But if you made h small enough, the linear term would begin to dominate. So you can't prove by giving examples that the convergence is quadratic, but if points continue to lie on the quadratic curve as you decrease h, you might gain confidence that quadratic convergence is indeed the case.

 October 25, 2012, 14:13 #5 Senior Member   Filippo Maria Denaro Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 2,607 Rep Power: 33 See Section 3.9 in the book of Ferziger and Peric, three grids give you an estimation of the rate of convergence

 Thread Tools Display Modes Linear Mode

 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 OffTrackbacks are On Pingbacks are On Refbacks are On Forum Rules

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post Khan FLUENT 10 July 2, 2015 22:40 Luigi_ STAR-CCM+ 7 January 15, 2012 15:40 lucifer FLUENT 0 December 14, 2009 20:59 hbf FLUENT 3 July 21, 2009 05:42 CH Main CFD Forum 3 May 22, 2007 12:35

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 18:21.