Hi Luois !
With your hack my simulation is now running. I had to introduce that line of code in both AMI1 and AMI2 boundary conditions. Thank you very much !! best regards, Werner |
1 Attachment(s)
Hi again,
The simulation ran for a couple of hours (in debug Mode) and then the courant number began growing dramaticly before the solver crashed. What is making the courant number to grow that way ? May it be because the simulation starts working with the finer cells of my model that have a smaller deltaX ? (having in mind that the courant number is Co=U*deltaT/deltaX) Do you have any ideas of how to solve this issue? thank a lot in advance, Werner Quote:
|
Solution to Problem
Hi,
I could solve the problem working with a courser mesh. Now I'll refine it slowly to get a better precision in the results. Using a searchableCylinder to define the geometry of the slinding Cylinder where the turbine is contained, I was able to avoid the low weight faces on the AMI interface. I guess snappyHexMesh works more stable with this definition that with and .stl for the Cylinder. thank you all ! Werner |
Quote:
Regards, -Louis |
Thank YOU Louis !
What software and settings do you use to generate the .stl file ? |
For the cylinders I use Gmsh with a simple script that generates them. I don't even need to open the graphical interface and it is completely parametrized...
|
Mesh refinement in SnappyHexMesh
2 Attachment(s)
Hi Louis and OpenFoamers,
I have worked further with my wind Turbine Model and now I'm finding issues since I can't refine the model as much as I need. I hope this is inquiry is not very far away of the topic of the thread. I have been able to run a model (with pimpleDyMFoam) of a wind turbine already and have got nice results so far. However the torque that I'm getting is just one third of the experimental Torque. Therefore I'm trying to refine my mesh in a Grid Independence test but I'm not able to increase the number of cells over 250 000 cells. Whenever I increase this (e.g. increasing the surface refinement over rotor as you can see in my MeshSensiAna.xls spreadsheet) the solver blows-up with large MaxCourant numbers that get balanced by decreasing deltaTime (since I'm using adjustableTimeStep in controlDict). As a results the simulation advances much slower and crashes eventually. This is presumably because I have too small deltaX in the finer cells. Some advice is to implement the same region refinement outside of the rotating cylinder so that the sliding interface would have the same cell size at both sides, thus I created a region called CylinderBig (as you may see in my snappyHexMeshDict.txt ), yet with no positive result. Do you know how to create a finer Mesh and get my simulation running ?. I tried already increaing the relaxationFactors in fvSolution, and refining the mesh changing several parameters (as you may see in MeshSensiAna.xls) but this didnt't work either. I haven't tried yet with other meshing software because I want to understand what is happening with my model and if possible make it run with snappyHexMesh, where I have everything ready. thanks in advance for your attention, Werner ps. I'm dealing as well with the layer addition that is not properly made. I'm trying to put just 1 layer around the blades and as the addlayers application iterates the layers that I had at the beginning get all removed, aparently because they didn't comply with the meshquality controls.. Do you have any ideas for this issue ? |
Dear Werner,
I only had time to look quickly at your files, but I'd suggest you try to change the faceType to baffle for your AMI interface: Code:
refinementSurfaces // Surface-wise min and max refinement level I would also reduce the initial timestep as it seems you Courant number in the first few time steps is too high. Try not to let it ever go above ~5 I hope this leads to to some sort of solution. Regards, -Louis |
Hi Louis,
I'm currently also struggeling with getting a good AMI source and target weights with mesh generated using snappyHexMesh. I've tried both, using .stl files for the cylinder and creating the cylinder as searchableCylinder in SHMD but both options do not give me a good mesh around the edges of the cylinder. Further, I'm meshing a number of cylinders and the quality of the mesh around the edges varies quite a bit between cylinders at different positions within my domain. Could you give some more information as to what actually changes by changing the faceType to baffle?I did this and it solved all the problems i was encountering for a long long long time !! Getting very good numbers now on the patch weights. Code:
AMI: Patch source sum(weights) min/max/average = 1, 1.00006, 1 |
Hi Martin,
I'm glad this solved your issue. I'm not the code expert, but from what I recall the baffle condition imposes that both inside and outside AMI interfaces have exactly the same cell faces. In the other scenario, the inside and outside interfaces are allowed to be meshed differently. There seems to be issues when there are big cells on one side of the AMI and small cells on the other. Best Regards, -Louis |
3 Attachment(s)
Are you using the splitOrMergeBaffles after this step? I'm getting a lot of errors now in the moveDynamicMesh -checkAMI and it looks like the cells are being pulled by the rotation or there was some error during snapping?
Code:
solidBodyMotionFunctions::rotatingMotion::transformation(): Time = 7.69383 transformation: ((0 0 0) (0.996041 (0.0889006 0 0))) |
Hello Martin,
Yes, I use these tools after running snappyHexMesh: Code:
runParallel createPatch $nProcs -overwrite -Louis |
Hi,
Might be a bit late to the party on this one, but thought it might be better to post in a thread that is already established, rather than to make another. I was hoping Bruno (or anyone else for that matter) might have some advice for a similar problem. I am trying to use sHM to make a mesh of a volute casing and the internal volume. I am finding that the quality of the mesh is not very good (particularly the internal volume). In particular, there are a number of skewed faces that are being generated during the patch smoothing iterations. Here is a link to the directory containing the problem. https://universityofcambridgecloud-m....000Z&e=jczdgy Disclaimer: I am using OpenFOAM Extend 4.0. I do not feel there will be any issues if one were to attempt this on normal installations of OF (e.g. OF V5.0), but I have not tested this. The Allrun file will most likely need to be slightly modified however. Regards, James |
problem with meshing - how to change parameters -SkewFaces and nonOrthoFaces
4 Attachment(s)
Hi everyone!
I have a very similar problem. I don’t have a lot of experience with openFoam and also not with scripting. I have a very complex building geometry that sits on a topography ground and I need to run an air flow around the building. Attached 2 screenshots of the case. I am trying for a few days to mesh this with snappyhex and always 2 highly skew faces left and in the last try, also 2 nonOrthoFaces. I can visualize them in paraview but imposible to find them in my rhino model or stl file. I redid the area there they appear a few times and still no change. They appear in a different location. I don’t know what parameters to change to improve my mesh. My snappyhex was set up by someone else that I cant contact. I gave a try to start the simulation but error is: Floating point exception(core dumped) What I did until now is to increase the level of cells for my building, I am not at 30 cm cell size. below is my snappyHexMeshDict if anyone would have time to take a look. Any help is highly appreciated. Thank you very much! Gabriela |
Hi Gabriela,
It seems you are using a script to run the case, pyFoam, with which I am not familiar. The floating point error you mention may be linked to something else than the mesh, I would advise running the case with a smaller mesh step by step to see where it actually "breaks". Also, to better understand snappy, have a read at this quick guide: https://cfd.direct/openfoam/user-guide/snappyhexmesh/ Good luck, -Louis |
1 Attachment(s)
Dear pcaron
I am going to test your solution "This problem arises when your surface is almost aligned with the mesh." and see if it works for me or not. I have attached my skewed face to this post. Thanks, Farzad Quote:
|
Dear Pacron
your suggestion does not worked! Thanks, Farzad Quote:
|
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 15:13. |