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

Handling bad cells at the solver level

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

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   May 30, 2014, 02:58
Default Handling bad cells at the solver level
  #1
Member
 
Akshay Kumar
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 67
Rep Power: 6
Akshay is on a distinguished road
Hey Foamers!

I wanted to know if any of you have worked on handling bad cells at the solver level. Something like ... ignore the bad cells during the solving phase..interpolate the values around the bad cell and move on.
Or has someone worked on any other ideas ?

**Bruno ... point me in the right direction!

Thanks
Akshay

Last edited by Akshay; May 30, 2014 at 06:56.
Akshay is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   June 15, 2014, 12:53
Default
  #2
Super Moderator
 
Bruno Santos
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Lisbon, Portugal
Posts: 8,301
Blog Entries: 34
Rep Power: 84
wyldckat is just really nicewyldckat is just really nicewyldckat is just really nicewyldckat is just really nice
Greetings Akshay,

This question has already been asked a few times, although I don't have the time to go search for it now.

It really depends on what kinds of bad cells you're dealing with. If it's an orthogonality issue, you can try using a value greater than 0 for the "nonOrtho*" option in the "SIMPLE", "PISO" and "PIMPLE" solvers in "system/fvSolution".

If the cells are reaaaaaaly bad, it's usually better to just re-do the mesh, because the only other solution is to fix it manually, either:

Best regards,
Bruno

PS: Next time you want to bump the thread up, you could take the time to list some of the information you've already found and for what you've looked for.
wyldckat is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   June 17, 2014, 00:17
Default
  #3
Member
 
Akshay Kumar
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 67
Rep Power: 6
Akshay is on a distinguished road
Hi Bruno

Thanks for the reply.
All the correctors...schemes...limiters... and modifying mesh options..all that is there (been there ... done that )
But when I have a mesh count of say 5 million and I have say 100 skewed cells and 100 non-ortho cells, I'd like to ignore these and carry on with my simulation. If this can be done at the solver phase, it would be very handy. I don't really have to worry about stability and accuracy...unless the cells are in areas of high gradients, which let us assume is not in my case.

So I wanted to know if anyone has implemented anything like this in the solver. And it would help a great deal, wouldn't it?

Akshay
Akshay is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   June 18, 2014, 00:32
Default
  #4
Senior Member
 
Tushar Chourushi
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: IIT-Indore, India
Posts: 318
Blog Entries: 1
Rep Power: 9
Tushar@cfd is on a distinguished road
Can you explain your case?

Quote:
But when I have a mesh count of say 5 million and I have say 100 skewed cells and 100 non-ortho cells, I'd like to ignore these and carry on with my simulation. If this can be done at the solver phase, it would be very handy. I don't really have to worry about stability and accuracy...unless the cells are in areas of high gradients, which let us assume is not in my case.
Are you sure about this? (highlighted point)

If your cells are away from high gradient region, then you can use coarse mesh in that region and avoid non-ortho cells. It is easy to handle non-orthogonality of coarse mesh and you can do smoothing of such cells. As per your case, why you require non-ortho cells in those regions (low gradient regions)?

It's just a suggestion

-
Best Luck!
Tushar@cfd is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   June 18, 2014, 01:35
Default
  #5
Member
 
Akshay Kumar
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 67
Rep Power: 6
Akshay is on a distinguished road
Hi Tushar

It is hard to make sure that I will not end up(in the first attempt) with a bad cell in some region considering we use snappyhexmesh...and I DO NOT want to mesh it again and ensure that I don't have those cells in my domain.
But what I said(my case) is just an assumption...I'm sure Fluent and other commercial solvers have this implemented (apart from their limiters and other robust numerical implementations).
And again we are deviating from my original point...I feel this kind of an implementation will help the solver a great deal. Comments?

Akshay
Akshay 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
SnappyHexMesh for internal Flow vishwa OpenFOAM Native Meshers: snappyHexMesh and Others 23 August 6, 2014 03:50
3d vof Smaras FLUENT 2 February 19, 2013 07:58
No layers in a small gap bobburnquist OpenFOAM Native Meshers: snappyHexMesh and Others 2 November 25, 2012 09:54
Layers don't fully surround surface EVBUCF OpenFOAM Native Meshers: snappyHexMesh and Others 14 August 20, 2012 04:31
Help handling inner cells of flow past sq.cylinder zonexo Main CFD Forum 5 November 14, 2005 00:04


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 19:31.