CFD Online Logo CFD Online URL
www.cfd-online.com
[Sponsors]
Home > Forums > OpenFOAM Programming & Development

non linear terms in OF

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

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   November 5, 2012, 13:30
Default non linear terms in OF
  #1
New Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 15
Rep Power: 3
besh is on a distinguished road
Dear OpenFoamers
I understand that non-orthogonality is handled through deferred correction that solves the same equation repeatedly with different source term. But how are other sorts of non-linearity such as those from higher order convection schemes as QUICK, explicit boundary conditions such as slip, turbulence models etc handled? I do not see a loop like the case for non-orthogonality for momentum prediction equation or k-e turbulence models for instance. Are all of them handled implicitly? For steady state problems it seems to me that the outer loop takes care of all non-linearity but for transient problems shouldn't there be another loop to make sure that we have a converged solution at each time step before going to the next. I appreciate it if someone can shed a light on this.
Thanks
besh is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   November 8, 2012, 16:35
Default
  #2
Senior Member
 
santiagomarquezd's Avatar
 
Santiago Marquez Damian
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Santa Fe, Santa Fe, Argentina
Posts: 416
Rep Power: 14
santiagomarquezd will become famous soon enough
Hi, the non linearities are treated by using the previous time-step information. This is the case for momentum predictor equation, TVD, schemes, etc.

Regards.
__________________
Santiago MÁRQUEZ DAMIÁN, Ph.D.
Post-doctoral Fellow
Research Center for Computational Mechanics (CIMEC) - CONICET/FICH-UNL
T.E.: 54-342-4511594 Ext. 1005
Güemes 3450 - (3000) Santa Fe
Santa Fe - Argentina
http://www.cimec.org.ar
santiagomarquezd is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   November 21, 2012, 07:33
Default
  #3
New Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 15
Rep Power: 3
besh is on a distinguished road
Hi,
I still don't understand how the new equation with improved corrections are iteratively solved just like the case of non orthogonal corrections in pressure. I give the outline of icoFoam below without non-orthogonal loop. I appreciate if you can point out the code takes care of other deffered corrections due to TVD schemes for instance.
Code:
icoFoam() {
    for(timeSteps) 
    {
          Predict U //has div(phi,U)

          for(pisoLoop) {  //2 iteration
                 Correct U
                 Solve pressure equat
          }
    }
}
The momentum predictor has div(phi,U) term say discretized with linearUpwind that has explicit term. So that is solved once but to get better results shouldn't this be solved multiple times just like other deferred corrections? Or is it just that since this is a prediction, we take what we have and do corrections of U and P in pisoLoop. Does increasing the number of piso iterations (>2) improve deferred corrections from div(phi,U) ? I don't think that happens because the discretization of momentum equation is outside the pisoLoop?
For steady state solution I can understand that the timesteps loop will take care of corrections in div(phi,U) but for transient solutions I just don't see it.
I am definately missing something so I appreciate if anyone can point it out.
besh is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   November 21, 2012, 08:25
Default
  #4
Senior Member
 
santiagomarquezd's Avatar
 
Santiago Marquez Damian
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Santa Fe, Santa Fe, Argentina
Posts: 416
Rep Power: 14
santiagomarquezd will become famous soon enough
Hi, much of this non-linearities are treated but by the time-step, which must be such that Co<1. Nevertheless, you have solvers with "outer corrections" based in the pimple loop like pimpleFoam. In these solvers in each time-step you have an outer loop over all the equations as you want to find.

Regards.
__________________
Santiago MÁRQUEZ DAMIÁN, Ph.D.
Post-doctoral Fellow
Research Center for Computational Mechanics (CIMEC) - CONICET/FICH-UNL
T.E.: 54-342-4511594 Ext. 1005
Güemes 3450 - (3000) Santa Fe
Santa Fe - Argentina
http://www.cimec.org.ar
santiagomarquezd is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   November 21, 2012, 08:46
Default
  #5
New Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 15
Rep Power: 3
besh is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by santiagomarquezd View Post
Hi, much of this non-linearities are treated but by the time-step, which must be such that Co<1. Nevertheless, you have solvers with "outer corrections" based in the pimple loop like pimpleFoam. In these solvers in each time-step you have an outer loop over all the equations as you want to find.

Regards.
Thank you very much. I finally see what you mean after looking in pimpleFoam. So if I understand correctly, for Co<1 the ddt term dominates most terms including source contributions from deferred corrections, thus there is no need for outer corrector loop to do repeated corrections. But I guess in principle the loop should be there for both small or large time steps.
besh is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   December 2, 2012, 05:38
Default
  #6
Member
 
Zifei Yin
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Shanghai & Ames
Posts: 31
Rep Power: 3
yzf1215 is on a distinguished road
Sorry to bother you. Why we need Co < 1 to get non-ortho correction?
yzf1215 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   December 2, 2012, 15:39
Default
  #7
New Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 15
Rep Power: 3
besh is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by yzf1215 View Post
Sorry to bother you. Why we need Co < 1 to get non-ortho correction?
Hi,
From what I understood, all explicit terms (including tvd shemes and non-orthogonality) are treated using deferred correction. For icoFoam and simpleFoam, the iteration over a time-step is done only once by default. Therefore if you use large time step, you accept inaccurate solutions at each time step. OTOH PimpleFOAM has an outer loop that does corrections multiple times. I guess that with Co<1, one deferred correction step is enough probably because time discretization term swamp the secondary corrections. I do not think there is a theory similar to why we need to specify Co<1 when use explicit time discretization schemes such as crank-Nicholson. Someone can correct if I am wrong as I am not knowledgeable in OF.

Hope this helps.
besh is offline   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
please help me which solver is better for my application Ger_US OpenFOAM 8 January 8, 2013 12:29
[LaunderGibsonRSTM-channel] tonkiplis OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 1 November 9, 2011 08:04
solution diverges when linear upwind interpolation scheme is used subash OpenFOAM 0 May 29, 2010 01:23
IdeasUnvToFoam Bug amp Fix benru OpenFOAM Bugs 42 November 13, 2009 07:59
Water pump OpenFOAM 15 ANSYS CFX 110 comparation waynezw0618 OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 39 March 5, 2009 12:57


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:06.