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

help, solution blows up!

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

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   May 9, 2005, 13:17
Default help, solution blows up!
  #1
noName
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Hello,

I am trying to do a finite volume LES calculation using a commercial code for flow across a blunt body. I am using a steady inflow BC with 2% turbulence intensity and fixed pressure outflow BC. I am using Crank Nicholson for time advancement.

After about 600 time steps, I see that the code blows up. (Kinetic energy of the flow tends to infinity). I think there could be several reasons, listed below. Please try to eliminate them or add to them..

1. Could the instability be due to crank nicholson? I know that the method is unconditionally stable, but only in the weak sense. I know my CFL numbers (U*delta_t/delta_x) in many parts of the grid are way above unity. Could this be the problem? I don't want to use a first order implicit method to avoid it's diffusion, and I cannot really reduce the time step as it would make the computation impractically expensive.

2. Could waves be reflecting off my outflow BC and causing instability? How do I check for this? How do I remedy this?

3. I am using central differencing for my advective terms (to avoid the well known diffusion due to upwinding). Based on the cell Peclet number, I know that I cannot satisfy boundedness at every point on my grid, and this may well be the cause of instability. Does anyone have a similar exeprience? How do I get around it? Does anyone have any experience with second order upwind methods? How do they perform in an LES?
  Reply With Quote

Old   May 9, 2005, 16:51
Default Re: help, solution blows up!
  #2
Andrew
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
CFL numbers need to be ideally below 0.3 in LES. Reduce your time step significantly.
  Reply With Quote

Old   May 9, 2005, 17:58
Default Re: help, solution blows up!
  #3
Sachin
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
crank nicolson should be an implicit scheme, but it doesn't guarantee stability.

Is there a way you can look at the residuals in your computational domain, i.e. where are the locations which have the highest residuals? It might have to do with extremely fine/highly unstructured grid.

Are you using a pressure-based or a density-based formulation?

Tell us about the problem you're running, the Reynolds number, the time-step, the grid resolution etc.. and we may have a better shot at convergence.
  Reply With Quote

Old   May 10, 2005, 01:26
Default Re: help, solution blows up!
  #4
amol palekar
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I never did LES but some suggesations : Can you limit the kinetic energy till u have passed trasient stage and then may be remove this limit. amol
  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
Integrated conjugate heat transfer solver in OpenFOAM hjasak OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 168 June 27, 2013 01:56
IcoFoam parallel woes msrinath80 OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 9 July 22, 2007 02:58
solution singularity litonx OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 1 February 21, 2007 02:32
Mesh independent solution CFX Begineer CFX 0 October 27, 2002 11:54
Discussion about Mesh independant solution Seb Main CFD Forum 13 May 22, 2001 13:37


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 15:59.