
[Sponsors] 
November 18, 2011, 07:24 
OF ignores relaxation factor

#1 
New Member
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 17
Rep Power: 7 
Hi foamers,
I'm calculation temperature fields (steadystate) using laplacianFoam. Now I need to force underrelaxation in order to obtain convergence  but OpenFoam does not consider the relexation factor I define in fvSolution by relaxationFactors { T 0.7; } What could be wrong? Regards Hugo 

November 18, 2011, 12:39 

#2 
Senior Member
Steven van Haren
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 149
Rep Power: 8 
there is no call to the relaxation function in laplacianFoam
This function needs to be called and will then read the relaxationfactor from the dictionary. But why do you need relaxation for this simple diffusion equation? 

November 18, 2011, 15:15 

#3  
Assistant Moderator
Bernhard Gschaider
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,931
Rep Power: 41 
Quote:
In general: if you're unsure whether your relaxationFactor is being read replace it with an x (or your name). If the solver fails, then you're sure that it is being read 

November 21, 2011, 03:23 
Relaxation in laplacianFoam

#4 
New Member
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 17
Rep Power: 7 
Thank you very much for your remarks!
I have got a groovyBC which calculates the gradient depending on the wall temperature (simulating steadystate heat flow through an insulation which is beyond the OpenFOAM domain). When this "virtual" insulation is relatively thin, huge temperature gradients occure at the boundary  and convergence is not reached. Thus, I think that underrelaxation should allow convergence. Is it difficult to add relaxation to the laplacianFoam solver? Which solver is the simplest one with relaxation which I can use as an example? Regards Hugo 

November 21, 2011, 18:38 

#5  
Assistant Moderator
Bernhard Gschaider
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,931
Rep Power: 41 
Quote:
solve( <the eqn >); write fvScalarMatrix TEqn( < the eqn >); TEqn.relax(); TEqn.solve(); 

November 22, 2011, 10:35 

#6 
New Member
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 17
Rep Power: 7 
Thank you so much, Bernhard. I created own_laplacianFoam including the following algorithm:
for (int nonOrth=0; nonOrth<=simple.nNonOrthCorr(); nonOrth++) { fvScalarMatrix TEqn ( fvm::ddt(T)  fvm::laplacian(DT, T) ); TEqn.relax(); TEqn.solve(); } Unfortunately, the relaxation factor is still not read. Do you have any idea? Regards Hugo 

November 22, 2011, 15:17 

#7  
Assistant Moderator
Bernhard Gschaider
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,931
Rep Power: 41 
Quote:
Or do you mean "is rad but has no effect"? 

November 23, 2011, 03:28 

#8 
New Member
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 17
Rep Power: 7 
Your are right  actually, it does not have any effect, but it's read.
I checked if I'm using the right binary by adding a message output to own_laplacianFoam  it is displayed when I run the solver. My entry in fvSolution is relaxationFactors { T 0; } and if I change "0" to "b", I get an error  hence, it is read. But what could be the reason that the relaxationFactor is not taken into account by the solver? 

November 23, 2011, 18:15 

#9  
Assistant Moderator
Bernhard Gschaider
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,931
Rep Power: 41 
Quote:
Or, in other words: your relaxation parameter would give a superstable solution: nothing changes at all (as the new solution would not be considered) 

November 24, 2011, 03:37 

#10 
New Member
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 17
Rep Power: 7 
1. After 10 iteration steps, the results are identical both with relaxation factor 0 and 1  but different from the results after one step (but with the factor 0 considered, the results after all iteration steps would be the same if I understand it in the right way)
2. During calculation, the output is "Initial residual = 1" for time=1, "Initial residual = 0.75..." for time =2 and so on both with relaxation factor 0 and 1  but I expect the initial residual remaining 1 for every time step when the relaxation factor 0 is considered? 

January 13, 2012, 12:52 

#11 
Senior Member
Illya Shevchuk
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Darmstadt, Germany
Posts: 176
Rep Power: 9 
Hi,
I have the same problem. In my PIMPLEbased solver I try to relax the TEqn. In the outer iteration cycle I have: Code:
{ fvScalarMatrix TEqn (...); TEqn.relax(); eqnResidual = TEqn.solve().initialResidual(); } Code:
relaxationFactors { T x; } Best regards, Illya 

May 10, 2012, 13:25 

#12 
New Member
Alton Luder III
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Michigan
Posts: 22
Rep Power: 8 
I had similar problems in 2.0.x.
It seems that for incompressible flow the relxation factors are specified as: relaxationFactors { p 0.3; U 0.7; } while in multiphase they must be specified: relaxationFactors { "p.*" 0.3; "U.*" 0.7; } You can add some info statements before and after UEqn.relax() to check that your code is indeed finding the relaxation factors. (Or just hard code using UEqn.relax(0.7) ) It looks like 2.1 has changed the format to relaxationFactors { fields { "p.*" 0.3; } equations { "U.*" 0.7; } } So good luck finding your answer. 

May 10, 2012, 14:11 

#13 
Assistant Moderator
Bernhard Gschaider
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,931
Rep Power: 41 
No need to change the solver. Just replace the relaxation factor with "x" (or your name). If the solver fails ("not a scalar" or something like this) then the factor is read


May 10, 2012, 16:18 

#14 
New Member
Alton Luder III
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Michigan
Posts: 22
Rep Power: 8 
That trick only checks that the value is getting read in right, not that its actually getting used properly inside the solver.
For instance, it won't tell you if you put a relaxation factor on "p" when only the "p_rgh" field can be relaxed. Speaking of this problem, do any of you know a way to have to the solver output what field names can use an underrelaxation factor? 

May 10, 2012, 19:26 

#15  
Assistant Moderator
Bernhard Gschaider
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,931
Rep Power: 41 
Quote:
Quote:
Maybe (but I havn't tried it) a variation of the above might word. Set a "catch all" regular expression in the relaxation factors: ".+" x; and remove all other entries. Then the first relaxation should fail. Add a "correct" (==numeric) factor for that field and retry. As soon as the solver doesn't fail you found all relaxations for that solver 

Thread Tools  
Display Modes  


Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Under relaxation factor for external coupling  dhxlxz  CFX  10  August 11, 2015 20:52 
under relaxation factor and the steady state  jing113cn  FLUENT  0  November 2, 2009 13:13 
Relaxation factor  Benzaa  Main CFD Forum  1  August 18, 2009 07:27 
Question on adjusting relaxation factor  CFD Rookie  Main CFD Forum  3  January 26, 2004 15:37 
Relaxation factor  Moon  CDadapco  1  June 13, 2003 11:13 