CFD Online Logo CFD Online URL
www.cfd-online.com
[Sponsors]
Home > Forums > OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD

Parallel run: boundary condition missing on processorX/0

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

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   May 17, 2012, 10:57
Default Parallel run: boundary condition missing on processorX/0
  #1
Senior Member
 
lore
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Italy
Posts: 463
Rep Power: 9
lovecraft22 is on a distinguished road
Send a message via Skype™ to lovecraft22
Hi all;
if you try and run the motorbike tutorial in parallel you'll get an error about the motorbike patch missing within the processors folders.

My error is this one:

Code:
keyword cilindro_patch0 is undefined in dictionary "/home/ubuntu/Desktop/condivisa/test/processor0/0/p::boundaryField"
It is actually missing within any of the boundary files held in the 0 folder of every processor folder after running decomposePar.

Now, I read somewhere on the forum that the problem is due to decomposePar which cannot handle all the "#include" inside the boundary files so I got rid of those but… again… the same error…

I enclose my test case. Is a simple cylinder made to speed up the whole process. I started from the motorbike tutorial.

Can anybody please help me understanding how a case needs to be set up to be run in parallel?

Thank you!
Attached Files
File Type: zip test.zip (27.7 KB, 2 views)
lovecraft22 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   May 17, 2012, 13:08
Default
  #2
Senior Member
 
lore
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Italy
Posts: 463
Rep Power: 9
lovecraft22 is on a distinguished road
Send a message via Skype™ to lovecraft22
The discussion I was referring is this one:
Parallel Computing decomposePar

So is using changeDictionary the only way to achieve this? There's must be a way of defining the boundary conditions that doesn't require for the changeDictionary command to be run…


Also, I found out that if I run decomposePar after snappyHexMesh then the error disappears… I can run the solver in parallel then but it would be nice to run snappy as well in parallel…

Last edited by lovecraft22; May 17, 2012 at 13:27.
lovecraft22 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   May 21, 2012, 16:59
Default
  #3
Super Moderator
 
Bruno Santos
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Lisbon, Portugal
Posts: 8,503
Blog Entries: 34
Rep Power: 86
wyldckat is just really nicewyldckat is just really nicewyldckat is just really nicewyldckat is just really nice
Hi lovecraft22,

I can't go into detail, but you can study the tutorials provided here: http://code.google.com/p/bluecfd-sin...untimes202_211

Best regards,
Bruno
wyldckat is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   May 21, 2012, 17:07
Default
  #4
Senior Member
 
lore
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Italy
Posts: 463
Rep Power: 9
lovecraft22 is on a distinguished road
Send a message via Skype™ to lovecraft22
Thank you Bruno;
I had a quick look and it seems that the boundaries are pretty similar to mine, apart for the "proc.*" entry.

There's a lot of stuff in the allRun instead so I need to have a better look at that.

Thank you!
lovecraft22 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   May 29, 2012, 09:26
Default
  #5
Senior Member
 
lore
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Italy
Posts: 463
Rep Power: 9
lovecraft22 is on a distinguished road
Send a message via Skype™ to lovecraft22
Hi Bruno;
could you please explain what's the difference between the method you advised and this one:
snappyHexMesh in parallel

Thank you very much for your help!
lovecraft22 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   May 29, 2012, 15:53
Default
  #6
Super Moderator
 
Bruno Santos
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Lisbon, Portugal
Posts: 8,503
Blog Entries: 34
Rep Power: 86
wyldckat is just really nicewyldckat is just really nicewyldckat is just really nicewyldckat is just really nice
Hi lovecraft22,

Quote:
Originally Posted by lovecraft22 View Post
Hi Bruno;
could you please explain what's the difference between the method you advised and this one:
snappyHexMesh in parallel

Thank you very much for your help!
If I remember correctly, the examples cases that I referenced above use the same "0" folder throughout most of the Allrun script. It only copies the folder "0.org" to "0" once. Again, this is if I remember correctly.

Another detail was to take into account the changes between scotch and ptscotch for decomposition and snappyHexMesh, respectively.

I believe that the method I used was more generic, since it would work for both 2.0 and 2.1, but in OpenFOAM 2.1 I think it doesn't need to reconstruct the mesh in between... the "motorBike" case in the "les" example demonstrates just that.

Best regards,
Bruno
wyldckat is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   May 29, 2012, 16:06
Default
  #7
Senior Member
 
lore
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Italy
Posts: 463
Rep Power: 9
lovecraft22 is on a distinguished road
Send a message via Skype™ to lovecraft22
Thank you!
lovecraft22 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
Use sampled data from previous run as boundary condition for new setup Arnoldinho OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 3 December 6, 2012 14:16
Boundary condition coding - problem in parallel wavemaster OpenFOAM 0 April 4, 2011 08:06
RPM in Wind Turbine Pankaj CFX 9 November 23, 2009 05:05
Own boundary condition modified simpleFoam erorr in parallel execution sponiar OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 1 August 27, 2008 09:16
Convective Heat Transfer - Heat Exchanger Mark CFX 6 November 15, 2004 16:55


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 13:59.