|
[Sponsors] |
September 2, 2015, 09:56 |
Expert Parametrs doubt CFX
|
#1 |
Senior Member
Talles Caio
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Brazil
Posts: 101
Rep Power: 13 |
Guys, I'm working on a hard reactive system monofasico.Logo at the beginning occurs the following problem:
Newton's method warnings at: END OF TIME STEP | + ------------------------------------------------- ------------------- + + ------------------------------------------------- ------------------- + | | | Newton's method failed to converge while computing the variables | | Listed below. In each case, the solver continued with the variable | | The field it was on the last iteration. | | | | If this situation persists, you might try decreasing the Newton | | Iteration underrelaxation factor. This can be changed by setting | | Following one of the parameters for your mixture: | | | | Temperature: "Constitutive Relation Under Relaxation" | | Pressure: "Newton Under Pressure Relaxation" | | | + ------------------------------------------------- ------------------- + | | | Location Name: Serpentine | | Mesh location: Vertex | | Routine: UPD_LOCALE_PROP1 | | Partition: 12 | | Variable Name: Temperature | | Last 3 Changes: 1.01653E 1.15153E + 30 + 30 + 30 1.09939E | | Tolerance: 1.0000E-02 | | Status: Diverging | | Max Iterations: 100 already checked the fluid properties, expressions, boundary conditions. one option would be acting on expert parameters Does anyone know where I can change the expert parametrs the following variables pressure and temperature? |
|
September 2, 2015, 19:02 |
|
#2 |
Super Moderator
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 17,700
Rep Power: 143 |
I would look at numerical stability problems before the expert parameters. Try double precision numerics, better mesh quality, a better initial condition and/or smaller time steps.
|
|
May 16, 2019, 08:32 |
|
#3 | |
Member
Abdullah Arslan
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 94
Rep Power: 7 |
Quote:
|
||
May 16, 2019, 18:20 |
|
#4 |
Super Moderator
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 17,700
Rep Power: 143 |
It is unlikely you got this problem from the same method as the previous post. As I said before, this is a sign of numerical instability, so you should look at issues which contribute to numerical instability.
__________________
Note: I do not answer CFD questions by PM. CFD questions should be posted on the forum. |
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
CFX Treatment of Laminar and Turbulent Flows | Jade M | CFX | 18 | September 15, 2022 07:08 |
Different flow pattern between OpenFOAM and CFX | AirS | OpenFOAM | 0 | January 12, 2010 07:08 |
heat generation in CFX | Ema | CFX | 4 | August 7, 2009 05:39 |
CFX 10's solutions differ from CFX 5.7's | Atit Koonsrisuk | CFX | 4 | July 26, 2006 11:59 |
FSI using CFX and ANSYS | Bi Chang | CFX | 2 | May 10, 2005 04:47 |