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

Convergence problem using simpleFoam steady state

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

Like Tree1Likes
  • 1 Post By gaby

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   January 17, 2006, 09:34
Default dear all, I am now caculati
  #1
Member
 
VVqf
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Braunschweig
Posts: 66
Rep Power: 7
vvqf is on a distinguished road
dear all,

I am now caculating a model(small mesh: 20000 cells, big: 1000000 cells) created in ICEM CFD(converting to OpenFoam by fluentMeshToFoam) with simpleFoam, but whichever mesh i use, I cant get the convergent solution. also tried reducing the timestep from 1s to 0.01s, but wouldn't help.
time step continuity errors increase fast.

but i got satisfying solution solving the same finer meshed model with ANSYS-CFX.

anyone could be so kind to give any suggestion?

PS:
parameters in the transportation file were same as in the simpleFoam tutorial case.
And fvScheme are Gauss and upwind. If i should change a better scheme, which one would you recommend?

Thank you.
vvqf is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 17, 2006, 09:42
Default simpleFoam is a steady-state s
  #2
Senior Member
 
Hrvoje Jasak
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: London, England
Posts: 1,730
Rep Power: 20
hjasak will become famous soon enough
simpleFoam is a steady-state solver and changing the time-step size will do nothing at all (just change the names of output directories).

You should play around with the under-relaxation factors in the

system/fvSolution file:

relaxationFactors
{
p 0.2;
U 0.7;
k 0.5;
epsilon 0.5;
R 0.7;
nuTilda 0.7;
}

change the default convergence on the pressure equation in the same file:

solvers
{
p ICCG 1e-06 0.001;

check if your k and epsilon are bounded (any warnings in the log file), adjust the spatial discretisation, play around with non-orthogonal correctors, try a limited laplacian scheme on k and epsilon (if appropriate, depending on the mesh) and similar.

Good luck,

Hrv
__________________
Hrvoje Jasak
Providing commercial FOAM/OpenFOAM and CFD Consulting: http://wikki.co.uk
hjasak is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 31, 2006, 05:30
Default The mesh is hybrid, tet + pris
  #3
Member
 
VVqf
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Braunschweig
Posts: 66
Rep Power: 7
vvqf is on a distinguished road
The mesh is hybrid, tet + prism + hex, + few pyramids. The cells are around 300 000.

I did as you suggested above, and chose limited linear divScheme for k and epsilon, limitedLinearV divScheme for U, and tried some higher order schemes, but still time step continuity errors increase.

Concerning the non-orthogonal correctors, I first used 10, slow, didn't help. each timestep more than 200s, and keeps increasing.
Now am trying 20 as suggested in UserGuide U-114. it is extremely slow, I'm wondering should i stop the computation.
vvqf is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 31, 2006, 05:42
Default You can try the following:
  #4
Senior Member
 
Håkan Nilsson
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Posts: 185
Rep Power: 7
hani is on a distinguished road
You can try the following:

Initialize the flow as good as possible, set some relevant constant value for k and epsilon in the internal field. Use potentialFoam to initialize the velocity.

Use upwind scheme initially for U,k,epsilon, and later change to a better scheme.
Under-relax as proposed by Hrv.
Decrease the Reynolds number by increasing the viscosity or lower the velocity, and later change back to the real Reynolds number.

Use stabilizing boundary conditions. Typically a Dirichlet condition for the pressure at the outlet seems more stable than a Neumann bc. You can later try to switch back to the bc's you really want.

Håkan.
hani is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   February 2, 2006, 10:09
Default Dear Vvqf, I am also a CFX-Us
  #5
New Member
 
Thomas Groensfelder
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6
Rep Power: 7
groens is on a distinguished road
Dear Vvqf,
I am also a CFX-User and trying to do some comparison to OpenFOAM.
Ho did you export your mesh from ICEM to Fluent?
Everytime I when I convert the mesh I get error-messages from fluentMeshToFoam(see below).

I am using a pure hexa mesh exporting as unstructured. So far I never had a problems with CFX.

Thanks in advance
Thomas

Here is the beginning of the error messages:
/*---------------------------------------------------------------------------*\
| ========= | |
| \ / F ield | OpenFOAM: The Open Source CFD Toolbox |
| \ / O peration | Version: 1.2 |
| \ / A nd | Web: http://www.openfoam.org |
| \/ M anipulation | |
\*---------------------------------------------------------------------------*/

Exec : fluentMeshToFoam . . fluent.msh
Date : Feb 02 2006
Time : 16:03:10
Host : arianna
PID : 10095
Root : /romeo_home/groens/OpenFOAM/groens-1.2/run/movingIcoSFD
Case : .
Nprocs : 1
Create time

Dimension of grid: 3
Number of points: 12000
Reading points
Number of cells: 9044
Reading uniform cells
number of faces: 29945
Reading uniform faces
Reading uniform faces
Reading uniform faces
Reading uniform faces
Reading uniform faces
Reading zone data
Reading zone data
Reading zone data
Reading zone data
Reading zone data
Reading zone data


FINISHED LEXING


dimension of grid: 3
Creating shapes for 3-D cells
Creating patch for zone: 15 start: 1 end: 24319 type: interior name: int_MDL_CRVS
Patch 15 contains solid or internal faces. Not added to boundary
Adding to internal boundaries
Creating patch for zone: 16 start: 24320 end: 24471 type: wall name: MIRROR
Creating patch for zone: 17 start: 24472 end: 24947 type: wall name: ROTOR_AUS
Creating patch for zone: 18 start: 24948 end: 29469 type: wall name: VOLUMEN
Creating patch for zone: 19 start: 29470 end: 29945 type: wall name: WAND

Default patch type set to empty
Checking mesh
--> FOAM Serious Error :
From function bool primitiveMesh::checkClosedCells(const bool report, labelHashSet*) const
in file meshes/primitiveMesh/primitiveMeshCheck.C at line 289
9044 high aspect ratio cells found. Max aspect ratio: 2.63847e+199
--> FOAM Warning :
From function primitiveMesh::checkFaceDotProduct(const bool report, labelHashSet* setPtr) const
in file meshes/primitiveMesh/primitiveMeshCheck.C at line 534
Severe non-orthogonality detected for face 0 between cells 0 and 1: Angle = 180 deg.
--> FOAM Warning :
From function primitiveMesh::checkFaceDotProduct(const bool report, labelHashSet* setPtr) const
in file meshes/primitiveMesh/primitiveMeshCheck.C at line 534
Severe non-orthogonality detected for face 1 between cells 0 and 4: Angle = 179.991 deg.
groens is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   February 2, 2006, 14:04
Default Sounds like your cells are def
  #6
Super Moderator
 
Mattijs Janssens
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,416
Rep Power: 15
mattijs is on a distinguished road
Sounds like your cells are defined inside out or rather the converter expects the numbering of the vertices of a hex to be in a certain order. See the User Guide (section 6 I believe) on what Foam expects.

Try creating a 1 hex mesh and put some print statements in the converter where it creates a the cellShape. E.g.

Pout<< cellShapes[cellI] << endl;

and see if you can figure out what needs to be changed.
mattijs is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   February 2, 2006, 15:44
Default Hello Mattjis, thanks for you
  #7
New Member
 
Thomas Groensfelder
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6
Rep Power: 7
groens is on a distinguished road
Hello Mattjis,
thanks for your quick answer.

You put me on the right way.
I just built up my grid from scratch and found out that it is working when I create my mesh with another block orientation.
I think the problem is in the vertice-numbering.
I didn't expect this problem as the export function of icem is explicitely for an unstuctured mesh type.
Found a check-mesh function in icem which I never had to use during the last 4 years.

Anyway, thanks a lot one more time.

Thomas
groens is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   February 3, 2006, 08:18
Default BTW, OpenFoam also offers the
  #8
Member
 
VVqf
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Braunschweig
Posts: 66
Rep Power: 7
vvqf is on a distinguished road
BTW, OpenFoam also offers the Checkmesh utility.

The turbulence model I chose for simpleFoam is k-epsilon model.
I want to use SST model, but it is not available in OpenFoam.

Do you think RNGkEpsilon might be a better choice?
vvqf is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   February 3, 2006, 08:54
Default As Håkan suggested, I did firs
  #9
Member
 
VVqf
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Braunschweig
Posts: 66
Rep Power: 7
vvqf is on a distinguished road
As Håkan suggested, I did first a potentialFoam calculation. And it seems now to be convergent, the time step continuity errors is decreasing slightly.
But the computing time increase, and from 5th timestep, it needs over 20 minutes(1200+s).

non-orthogonal correctors is set to 6.

any way to improve?

ps: 2-cpu machine, 3G mem.
vvqf is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   February 3, 2006, 09:07
Default Have you tried upwind? Also, c
  #10
Senior Member
 
Eugene de Villiers
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 724
Rep Power: 11
eugene is on a distinguished road
Have you tried upwind? Also, check if you are getting inflow at the outlet. That is the most common source of instability.

For simpleFoam, non-orthogonal correctors do not always improve convergence (at least in my experience), more than 1 is probably overkill. I would try with different values and see how the simulation reacts.
eugene is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   February 3, 2006, 09:34
Default Yes, the outlet. I just have p
  #11
Member
 
VVqf
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Braunschweig
Posts: 66
Rep Power: 7
vvqf is on a distinguished road
Yes, the outlet. I just have problem there.

I tried upwind, and the outlet pressureOutlet, but without initializing U with potentialFoam.

The boundary condition I want for the outlet is openning. Later I swithed to pressureInletOutlet. Under inletOutlet, there are 3 other options. But i dont know what are they for, like freeStream and atmosphere. dont know which to choose.

Thank you!
vvqf is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 9, 2008, 07:56
Default Hello! I am calculating a m
  #12
New Member
 
Gabriela Bracho
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Valencia, Valencia, Spain
Posts: 14
Rep Power: 7
gaby is on a distinguished road
Hello!

I am calculating a model created in OpenFOAM (using blockMesh), with simpleFoam, but I can't get the convergent solution (incompresible flow). The geometry is similar to the nozzle2D case used in cavitatingFoam

BC==> back and front: wedge, inlet and outlet pressure: positive values normalized by density, inlet and outlet velocities: zeroGradient, Wall velocity: fixedvalue (0 m/s)

The problem is that Ux, Uy, k and epsilion converged, but Uz never converged.... I've played with all relaxation factors, solvers, fvSchemes.... and it didn't get better

Anyone could be so kind to give any suggestion? or explain why this Uz never converged

Thank you!

Gaby
dplucenio likes this.
gaby is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   May 18, 2011, 07:51
Default
  #13
New Member
 
Daniel Plucenio
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1
Rep Power: 0
dplucenio is on a distinguished road
Hello Gaby, I am using OpenFOAM to simulate flow in a duct, using the wedge geometry and axisymmetric condition. I am having the same problem with Uz that you had years ago. Did you find out how to manage tha problem with Uz convergence?

Thanks in advance,
Regards


Quote:
Originally Posted by gaby View Post
Hello!

I am calculating a model created in OpenFOAM (using blockMesh), with simpleFoam, but I can't get the convergent solution (incompresible flow). The geometry is similar to the nozzle2D case used in cavitatingFoam

BC==> back and front: wedge, inlet and outlet pressure: positive values normalized by density, inlet and outlet velocities: zeroGradient, Wall velocity: fixedvalue (0 m/s)

The problem is that Ux, Uy, k and epsilion converged, but Uz never converged.... I've played with all relaxation factors, solvers, fvSchemes.... and it didn't get better

Anyone could be so kind to give any suggestion? or explain why this Uz never converged

Thank you!

Gaby
dplucenio 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
convergence for transient/steady state simulation Gab CFX 36 August 20, 2012 12:55
SimpleFoam unable to reach steady state francois OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 8 November 19, 2009 13:33
Steady state DPM - Convergence and particle tracks Sandilya Garimella FLUENT 2 March 28, 2008 16:53
transient problem run in steady state luigi FLUENT 4 March 13, 2008 07:54
steady state PISO problem denizen CD-adapco 0 December 20, 2006 02:55


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:13.