
[Sponsors] 
July 15, 2009, 06:54 
Problem solving pressurecorrection equation

#1 
New Member
Jan Blechta
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2
Rep Power: 0 
Hi everybody,
I'm trying to simulate an incompressible unsteady flow. I assume inlet BC (given velocities), wall, symetry plane and outlet (Neumann condition for velocities). So I use zero normal derivative condition for pressure correction on whole boundary, but I'm not sure that this is right. The pressurecorrection equation is to be solved by GaussSeidel or SOR solver. Solver behaves quite a curious way. It does not converge neither diverge. More accurately residuum = A fi  q is falling for a while and then it stops on a value (too high). It seems problem is in a source term but I can't resolve it. It's needed for a poisson equation with Neumann condition source term to be zero in average. I tried to fix it by correcting computed mass fluxes on outlet to giver the same total mass flux as on inlet in accordance with sugestion in Ferziger, Peric. This treatment ensures that sum of source terms is about 1.e13. I'm not sure whether it isn't too much and doesn't cause the bad convergence. Or could be the cause of the problem large gradient of the source term near outlet boundary caused by this correction? What do you think? Thank you for your suggestions 

July 15, 2009, 10:42 

#2 
Senior Member

yes you are right. pressure correction equation with a insulation bc


July 16, 2009, 05:05 

#3 
New Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3
Rep Power: 8 
Hi Alex,
I would suggest that you enforce Dirichlet conditions on some parts (at least one point) of your whole boundary set. Then, the problem is wellposed and you are not bound by the compatibility integral constraint. If the convergence does improve (and goes down to machineaccuracy), then it is probably this integral condition which is not fullfilled. In this case, make sure that your discrete scheme is fully conservative... that might help. If it does not improve, then the problem is somewhere else. Hope this helps... 

July 17, 2009, 12:54 

#4 
New Member
Jan Blechta
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2
Rep Power: 0 

July 20, 2009, 03:44 

#5 
New Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3
Rep Power: 8 
Hi Alex.
It seems that the integral compatibility constraint is not fulfilled then... What I mean by conservative: since the laplacian operator is formally the divergence of a gradient, you can express it as flux differences (of the gradient component normal to the cell faces) between the cell faces of your mesh cells. Conservative means that the flux leaving one cell should be identical (in your discrete scheme) to the flux entering the neighbouring one. If your equation reads like this: div(grad(fi))=q adding this over all cells of the entire mesh will result in: sum of q over all cells = sum of normal flux over all boundary faces which is the integral constraints which should be fulfilled. If the scheme is not conservative, then you cannot be sure that this constraints holds... As you wrote before, you should as well ensure that your Neumann boundary conditions are set so that the constraint is fulfilled. You can do that by correcting them as you mentionned in your previous post. Does it make sense? 

Thread Tools  
Display Modes  


Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Nature of Pressure Correction Equation  Abhijit Tilak  Main CFD Forum  10  April 10, 2016 17:03 
Negative value of k causing simulation to stop  velan  OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD  1  October 17, 2008 05:36 
Pressure Correction Equation  morteza  OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD  2  September 4, 2007 06:16 
Neumann pressure BC and velocity field  Antech  Main CFD Forum  0  April 25, 2006 02:15 
Preconditioning for Pressure Correction Equation  cfd101  Main CFD Forum  1  February 23, 2006 15:34 