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

MultiGrid

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

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   May 30, 2000, 10:42
Default MultiGrid
  #1
JonTai
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Can anyone please enlighten me, why I get a larger Strouhal numbers, St, when a run test case of vortex shedding behind a circular cylinder with multigrid? The Reynolds numbers, Re is 200.0 and the St number for single grid is 0.19, whereas the St number I got for multigrid is 0.28.

Thank you very much

Regards, JonTai
  Reply With Quote

Old   May 30, 2000, 10:54
Default Re: MultiGrid
  #2
John C. Chien
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
(1). What code are you using? (2). Lower the Reynolds number such that the flow is steady-state, say Re=50, and then repeat the single grid and the multi-grid calculations. (3). Check the steady-state solutions to see if they are identical or not.
  Reply With Quote

Old   May 30, 2000, 11:01
Default Re: MultiGrid
  #3
JonTai
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I'm using two-dimensional finite volume Navier-Stokes solver on unstructured grids using higher-order upwind scheme. The unsteady flows are calculated by using an implicit second-order real-time discretizations and a dual-time stepping scheme.

I have tried Re=41.0 for both single and multigrid. The results I got for both are comparable and the reduction of residual for MG is good.

What are possible reasons that make the St nos. different for single grid & MG ?

Thank you very much

JonTai
  Reply With Quote

Old   May 30, 2000, 11:18
Default Re: MultiGrid
  #4
John C. Chien
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
(1). Well, the next thing to do is to change the time step size to see how it affects the results. (2). You can also check your single grid case (RE=200) to see whether it is mesh independent or not.
  Reply With Quote

Old   June 1, 2000, 02:18
Default Re: MultiGrid
  #5
Duane Baker
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Hi Jon,

you state that "the reduction of residual for the MG is good."

What about the single grid? If you don't shrink down the residuals to the same level, say 6 orders of magnitude with both methods then what do you have to compare? What is your single grid linear eq solver strategy for the single grid (Gauss Seidel)? and what is the convergence criteria? It really does take forever with the slow convergence of GS to squeeze down those residuals! Many people make this mistake! I heard a true story of a publication in a Numerical Heat Transfer that made a whole series of comparasons of convective heat transfer and conclusions about the physics behind it (all wrong). A reader then spotted a bunch of problems like isotherms not normal to sym boundaries etc. It was found that the authors used a single grid method and never got anywhere near convergence because they were monitoring the change in residual and it of course started to change very little but was nowhere near convergence when they stopped the computation.

If in doubt, read through the excellent discussion in Ferziger and Peric's text.

Regards, Duane
  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
LES by Multigrid mnabi Main CFD Forum 8 July 11, 2009 20:21
multigrid sureshkumar Main CFD Forum 0 June 9, 2006 01:20
Multigrid method Suresh kumar Main CFD Forum 1 April 24, 2006 20:07
MULTIGRID at the wall Jim Main CFD Forum 0 February 19, 2003 13:22
Multigrid applied to k-e models Paulo Zandonade Main CFD Forum 9 May 24, 1999 08:10


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 18:05.