|
[Sponsors] | |||||
|
|
|
#1 |
|
New Member
Ali Q Raeini
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 20
Rep Power: 5 ![]() |
I had some problems with using OpenFOAM-2.1, and I was wondering if anybody else had similar problems, or if they have worked on finding the solution.
I have noticed when I run my two phase simulations using OpenFOAM-2.1 they are more prone to instability, specially when run in parallel. When using the OpenFOAM-1.6-extend, however, my simulation are more stable, The instabilities occur after some time from the beginning of the simulation and appear in terms of some non-physical velocities slowly increasing and finally destroying the simulation results. When I run my code in serial if I just use smaller time-steps then the simulations are less likely to diverge. I haven't seen these instabilities when using OF-1.6-ext. So my first question is what has made the OF-1.6-ext more stable. It should be some improvements in discretization algorithms, but it would be great if we know more exactly what are these improvements. There is another problem which is more an issue for me. It happens when using OF-2.1 in parallel, where I have seen instabilities mainly occurring in the processor boundaries. This time the problem can be due to a looser coupling of the linear equation solvers (I use GAMG most of the times), or maybe improper handling of the boundary conditions. I don't have this problem when using OF-1.6-ext, with identical algorithm, so this is not a problem with my code. My simulations are two-phase flow at low capillary numbers, and these instabilities happen when capillary forces are active on the processor boundaries. At this time, I use OF-2.1 for preprocessing and post processing, while OF-1.6-ext for running my simulations. So it is not that bad, but it would be better if I could figure out what is the problem. Is there anybody else having similar problems? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Senior Member
Olivier
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: France, grenoble
Posts: 139
Rep Power: 5 ![]() |
hello,
If i remember correctely, Co calculation has changed with the 2.0/2.1 version, so this may be a starting point to investigate : try with lower time step and compare with 1.6-ext . regards, olivier |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Super Moderator
Bruno Santos
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Lisbon, Portugal
Posts: 4,228
Blog Entries: 31
Rep Power: 45 ![]() ![]() |
Greetings to both of you!
I knew I had seen reports about this sometime ago in OpenFOAM.org bug tracker and here they are:
Bruno
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Senior Member
Alberto Passalacqua
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Ames, Iowa, United States
Posts: 1,877
Rep Power: 23 ![]() |
What solver(s) is showing this problem? InterFoam?
__________________
Alberto GeekoCFD - A free distribution based on openSUSE 64 bit with CFD tools, including OpenFOAM. Available as live DVD/USB, hard drive image and virtual image. GeekoCFD 32bit - The 32bit edition of GeekoCFD. GeekoCFD text mode - A smaller version of GeekoCFD, text-mode only, with only OpenFOAM. Available in a variety of virtual formats. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
New Member
Ali Q Raeini
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 20
Rep Power: 5 ![]() |
Dear Alberto, Bruno and Olivier
Thanks for your help. The modification on Courant number calculation can explain my problem, or part of it at least. I didn't know about it and were using the same maxCo for both OF1.6 and the OF2.1. Nevertheless, I have put an additional constraint on time step size myself, so I need to check to see whether fixing this solves the problem. The code is something based on the interFoam code, but heavily modified. I will test this out further and post back. Thanks again, Ali |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
New Member
Ali Q Raeini
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 20
Rep Power: 5 ![]() |
Just to confirm that this problem is NOT due to the time-step size. I have to mention that this happens for parallel cases; the difference is not that significant for the single-CPU simulations. I suspect it is due to the linear eqn solver (the computed pressure is different from the beginning of the simulation), or I may have done something with the boundary conditions which is not consistent with the new version. Anyway, I rather stick to the old OF for now; I might spend more time on this if I have got the time.
Last edited by aliqasemi; September 24, 2012 at 14:09. |
|
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| New OpenFOAM Forum Structure | jola | OpenFOAM | 2 | October 19, 2011 06:55 |
| Can openfoam solve problems in cylindrical and spherical coordinate systems? | GGerber | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 3 | October 27, 2010 17:18 |
| 64bitrhel5 OF installation instructions | mirko | OpenFOAM Installation | 2 | August 12, 2008 18:07 |
| OpenFOAM installation on SUSE92 problems | derath | OpenFOAM Installation | 1 | April 3, 2006 06:44 |
| Problems of numerical instability because of high gradients | Xiangyang Ye | Main CFD Forum | 4 | September 28, 1998 03:48 |