CFD Online URL
[Sponsors]
Home > Forums > OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD

Changing DILUPBiCG output when solving equation

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

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   December 17, 2007, 11:39
Default Hello, When running turbFoa
  #1
Member
 
nicolas
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 42
Rep Power: 7
nico765 is on a distinguished road
Hello,

When running turbFoam, I get output from the DILUPBiCG solver:
"DILUPBiCG: Solving for Ux, Initial residual = 1, Final residual = 7.53093e-07, No Iterations 4".

But when running interFoam, i dont get any output from the momentum equations; the code looks similar.

What governs the type of output?

Thanks

Nico
nico765 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   December 17, 2007, 12:15
Default Hi Nico, i suppose you are
  #2
caw
Member
 
Christian Winkler
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Mannheim, Germany
Posts: 63
Rep Power: 7
caw is on a distinguished road
Hi Nico,

i suppose you are running the dambreak testcase, where the momentum predictor in the fvSolution file is switched off. So only the pressure equation is solved. The correct velocity results from the pressure-velocity correction.

You can change that in the PISO section:
PISO
{
momentumPredictor yes;
...
}

regards
Christian
caw is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   December 18, 2007, 08:50
Default perfect, thank you very much
  #3
Member
 
nicolas
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 42
Rep Power: 7
nico765 is on a distinguished road
perfect, thank you very much
nico765 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   September 2, 2009, 01:01
Default
  #4
Senior Member
 
santiagomarquezd's Avatar
 
Santiago Marquez Damian
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Santa Fe, Santa Fe, Argentina
Posts: 418
Rep Power: 14
santiagomarquezd will become famous soon enough
Thanks to Caw for the answer, i was about to post the same question. I have some related questions:

1. What is the purpose of the momentum predictor?
2. Where I can find some theory about it?
3. With your clue we are able to see what are the residuals for the momentum equation, but, What parameters we have to change to set up the residuals limits in order to force the solver to go with the residuals below a given value (as is usual in commercial CFD codes)?

Thanks in advance.
__________________
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   September 2, 2009, 01:26
Default
  #5
Senior Member
 
Sandy Lee
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 207
Rep Power: 8
sandy is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by caw View Post
Hi Nico,

i suppose you are running the dambreak testcase, where the momentum predictor in the fvSolution file is switched off. So only the pressure equation is solved. The correct velocity results from the pressure-velocity correction.

You can change that in the PISO section:
PISO
{
momentumPredictor yes;
...
}

regards
Christian
Hi Christian, you think, when the momentum predictor is switched off or on, what is the differences to the solution of the velocity field in PISO? Thanks.
sandy is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   September 2, 2009, 22:48
Default
  #6
Senior Member
 
Sandy Lee
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 207
Rep Power: 8
sandy is on a distinguished road
If the momentum predictor is switched off, the velocity fields will be gotten explicitly from the pressure equation, I guess, it is easier to implement parallel computation because only a pressure equation is solved. However, I think, if the momentum predictor is switched on, maybe we can get more efficiently during an un-parellel simulation??
sandy is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   September 3, 2009, 00:16
Default
  #7
Senior Member
 
lakeat's Avatar
 
Daniel WEI (老魏)
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Posts: 688
Blog Entries: 9
Rep Power: 10
lakeat is on a distinguished road
Send a message via Skype™ to lakeat
Quote:
Originally Posted by santiagomarquezd View Post
1. What is the purpose of the momentum predictor?
It's all about SIMPLE/PISO algorithm.

Quote:
2. Where I can find some theory about it?
Try to read a thesis from Hrv's wensite.

Quote:
3. With your clue we are able to see what are the residuals for the momentum equation, but, What parameters we have to change to set up the residuals limits in order to force the solver to go with the residuals below a given value (as is usual in commercial CFD codes)?
This is exactly what file fvSolution does.
__________________
~
Daniel WEI
-------------
NatHaz Modeling Laboratory
Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering & Earth Sciences
University of Notre Dame, USA
Email || My Personal CFD Blog
lakeat is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   September 7, 2009, 13:31
Default
  #8
Senior Member
 
santiagomarquezd's Avatar
 
Santiago Marquez Damian
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Santa Fe, Santa Fe, Argentina
Posts: 418
Rep Power: 14
santiagomarquezd will become famous soon enough
Thanks Daniel for your answers, it's a pleasure for me to interact with somebody in China (actually mi first time I guess). About answers 1 & 2 I'll read these thesis, I promise. And respect answer 3, you're right, I found the info in the pdf manuals. 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   September 23, 2009, 10:01
Default
  #9
Senior Member
 
santiagomarquezd's Avatar
 
Santiago Marquez Damian
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Santa Fe, Santa Fe, Argentina
Posts: 418
Rep Power: 14
santiagomarquezd will become famous soon enough
Daniel, I've been reading some thesis, specially the one from Jasak, it's awesone, none more clear about FVM and errors. Now I'm dealing with the interpretation of some lines of icoFoam solver, particularly with A and H operators. If we recall the annotated version from OpenFOAM Wiki:


Code:
//set up the linear algebra for the momentum equation.  The flux
// of U, phi, is treated explicity using the last known value of U.  
 
        fvVectorMatrix UEqn
        (
            fvm::ddt(U)
          + fvm::div(phi, U)
          - fvm::laplacian(nu, U)
        );
In the last portion of code UEqn matrix is assembled from geometrical data and phi field, this field is obtained from a previous U field. I agree with this.

Code:
// solve using the last known value of p on the RHS.  This gives us
// a velocity field that is not divergence free, but approximately satisfies
// momentum.  See Eqn. 7.31 of Ferziger & Peric

        solve(UEqn == -fvc::grad(p));
Solving UEqn gives us a new U field.


Code:
         // --- PISO loop---- take nCorr corrector steps
 
        for (int corr=0; corr<nCorr; corr++)
        {
 
// from the last solution of velocity, extract the diag. term from the
// matrix and store the reciprocal note that the matrix coefficients are
// functions of U due to the non-linearity of convection.
  
          volScalarField rUA = 1.0/UEqn.A();
Here I have my first question, nevertheless matrix coefficients are really functions of U, when we use the method A, we are simply extracting the diagonal coefficients UEqn associated matrix, this coefficients are function of U BUT via field phi which is not actualized yet, then the the text "note that the matrix coefficients are functions of U due to the non-linearity of convection" is a bit confusing here. Am I right?

Code:
// take a Jacobi pass and update U.  See Hrv Jasak's thesis eqn. 3.137 and
// Henrik Rusche's thesis, eqn. 2.43 UEqn.H is the right-hand side of the
// UEqn minus the product of (the off-diagonal terms and U).  Note that
// since the pressure gradient is not included in the UEqn. above, this
// gives us U without the pressure gradient.  Also note that UEqn.H() is
// a function of U.
 
            U = rUA*UEqn.H();
Here we use the H operator, it calculates the product between off-diagonal UEqn matrix coefficients and corresponding U values, in this case I completely agree about that it is a explicit function of U because we use U to calculate it (in the product). Am I right?

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

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
Changing BC from Opening to Wall during Solving Ahmad M. Kermani CFX 0 December 17, 2008 22:20
Solving the momentum equation msg30 OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 2 January 11, 2008 08:24
Solving an additional equation rene OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 2 May 12, 2005 04:36
Implicit equation solving Dr B.M. Smith (Smith) OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 2 December 10, 2004 06:36
Differential equation solving cfd-user Main CFD Forum 1 November 12, 2003 03:42


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:17.