
[Sponsors] 
September 21, 2016, 05:31 
Hybrid discretisation  blend factor

#1 
New Member
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 16
Rep Power: 6 
Hi,
I was wondering if there is any way to find what blend factor the solver is using while solving for the hybrid discretisation scheme? I have specified the blending factor as a function of aitern and stepping it up as the iterations progress to get the solution closer to second order accurate as it progresses, and also have added dependency of Blend Factor on aitern in RULES file. I had to suppress the warning in CFX Pre that the blend factor can't be a function of variable etc so the def file can generate. In monitor plots, I see the expression for blend factor change with iterations as desired, but is there any way to find out whether the solver is indeed taking these values for blend factor? Alternatively, is there any easier way to achieve this? Thanks 

September 21, 2016, 06:36 

#2 
Super Moderator
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 16,301
Rep Power: 125 
Be careful suppressing warnings. They are there for a reason  have you checked it is working correctly even though the warning is present (until you suppress it that is).
The best way to do this is to send your function you set the blend factor to as a CEL expression, then make a monitor point set to that expression. Then you will be able to view the function as the simulation progresses in solver manager. 

September 21, 2016, 06:57 

#3 
New Member
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 16
Rep Power: 6 
Hi Glenn,
The warning is given because CFX doesn't allow the variables to be used in expression for Blend Factor. Until this warning is addressed (either by correcting it or suppressing it) I can't run the solution (perhaps def file is generated only after the warnings are addressed). I have created following variable with expression: bf=0.1*step(5aitern)+0.3*step(10aitern)*step(aitern5)+0.5*step(15aitern)*step(aitern10)+0.75*step(aitern15) ..and specified Blend Factor as "bf" The monitor plots of this expression do show bf stepping up after each 5 iterations from 0.1 to 0.3 to 0.5... so it works. To force solver to assign "bf" to Blending Factor, the following dependency was added in RULES file. PARAMETER: Blend Factor Description = Specifies the blend between pure UDS (0.0) and \ second order (1.0) discretisation. Solver Name = BETA Parameter Type = Real Quantity Type = Dimensionless Dynamic Reread Item = Yes Default = 1.0 Lower Bound = 0.0 Upper Bound = 1.0 Dependency List = aitern #New line added in RULES file END "Edit run in progress" shows value of Blend Factor as "bf" and simulation continues flawlessly. But then, how to make sure if solver indeed is assigning value of bf to Blending Factor? I tried putting value of 2 after 15 iterations, hoping the solver will give error because 2 is beyond the bounds of 0 and 1, but nothing happened. Perhaps the solver discarded value of 2 and used 1, making it a second order scheme? I wish there were a way to know what value of Blend Factor it is using... 

September 21, 2016, 07:21 

#4 
Super Moderator
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 16,301
Rep Power: 125 
There is no way of getting the actual blend factor it is using to my knowledge. I share your concern that it is not actually updating the blend factor at all  I suspect that is why the blend factor must be a constant.
The only way I can suggest to tell if it actually changes the value is to do a simulation with blend factor =0 and another with blend factor =1.0, then a third one which changes the blend factor from 0 to 1.0. This will allow you to check that the bf=0 and 1 simulations are actually different, and then whether your variable blend factor is actually working. Note that this whole thing is unnecessary  you can achieve the same thing using "Edit run in progress", or by stopping and restarting the run with a new blend factor. Both of these approaches are fully supported should work fine. They can also be scripted if you want automation. 

September 22, 2016, 07:42 

#5 
New Member
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 16
Rep Power: 6 
Thanks Glenn, you made a good point. I modelled a simple axisymmetric wedge of stepped cylinder and had results with first and second order (0 and 1 factor) as a reference. Then I prescribed the value of bf to Blend Factor and stepped it to 1 after 15 iterations. But the results resembled to that of first order scheme, with jet spreading out at a shorter distance than second order scheme due to added diffusion of first order. Next I tried a 1D interpolation function instead of expression to specify Blend Factor as bf(aitern), yet no luck. Lastly, I ran CFX through command line with cfx5solve def wedge.def ccl RULES, but the result was same. So if CFX solver doesn't like the forced value of Blend Factor, it keeps it as 0.
I was hoping to make it work to run overnight simulations without needing an intervention. This can of course be automated through scripting but I wanted to keep life simpler 

September 23, 2016, 08:05 

#6 
New Member
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 16
Rep Power: 6 
Hi Glenn,
My scripting is still at nascent stage but I created an external Perl script to automate bf. Here subsequent runs are initialised with results of prior run with a new bf using the ccls "printed" by the Perl script in foreach loop. Results of run3_001.res file (which uses Blend Factor 1) shows the profile matching a second order solution so this approach works. Code:
### Simple script to run the simulation with increasing Blend Factor### #Set up a hash for the name, Blend Factor and initialisation file for each run %run1= (NAME => "run1", ITER=>5, BF => 0, INIT => ""); %run2= (NAME => "run2", ITER=>10, BF => 0.5, INIT => "run1_001.res"); %run3= (NAME => "run3", ITER=>300, BF => 1, INIT => "run2_001.res"); # Create a list of references to the runs @runList = (\%run1, \%run2, \%run3); #loop over the list foreach $run (@runList) { $name = $run>{NAME}; $iterations = $run>{ITER} $BlendFactor = $run>{BF}; $initFile = $run>{INIT}; # Initialising with appropriate file if (! r $initFile) { print "Warning: Initial conditions file $initFile not found for run $name.\n"; print " Proceeding with default initial conditions\n"; $initCmd = ""; } else { $initCmd = "ini $initFile"; } #Open the solver to accept some CCL from STDIN open(SOLVER,"cfx5solve def stepped_cyinder.def name $name $initCmd parlocal part 2 ccl "); # Send off the CCL to modify the BC print SOLVER "FLOW: Flow Analysis 1\n"; print SOLVER " SOLVER CONTROL:\n"; print SOLVER " Turbulence Numerics = High Resolution\n"; print SOLVER " ADVECTION SCHEME:\n"; print SOLVER " Blend Factor = $BlendFactor\n"; print SOLVER " Option = Specified Blend Factor\n"; print SOLVER " END\n"; print SOLVER " CONVERGENCE CONTROL:\n"; print SOLVER " Length Scale Option = Conservative\n"; print SOLVER " Maximum Number of Iterations = $iterations\n"; print SOLVER " Minimum Number of Iterations = 1\n"; print SOLVER " Timescale Control = Auto Timescale\n"; print SOLVER " Timescale Factor = 1.0\n"; print SOLVER " END\n"; print SOLVER " CONVERGENCE CRITERIA:\n"; print SOLVER " Residual Target = 1.E4\n"; print SOLVER " Residual Type = RMS\n"; print SOLVER " END\n"; print SOLVER " DYNAMIC MODEL CONTROL:\n"; print SOLVER " Global Dynamic Model Control = On\n"; print SOLVER " END\n"; print SOLVER " END\n"; print SOLVER "END\n"; print SOLVER "COMMAND FILE:\n"; print SOLVER " Version = 16.0\n"; print SOLVER "END\n"; close(SOLVER); } # end of loop Code:
:: Initialising with default settings cfx5solve def stepped_cyinder.def part 4 startmethod "Platform MPI Local Parallel" :: Using ccls and initialising with prior results cfx5solve def stepped_cyinder.def part 4 startmethod "Platform MPI Local Parallel" ccl run2.ccl ini stepped_cyinder_001.res cfx5solve def stepped_cyinder.def part 4 startmethod "Platform MPI Local Parallel" ccl run3.ccl ini stepped_cyinder_002.res Thanks Last edited by gcoopermax; September 26, 2016 at 05:20. Reason: Added initialisation line and bat file approach 

Thread Tools  Search this Thread 
Display Modes  


Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
High order scheme vs Specified Blend factor 1  realanony87  CFX  1  November 10, 2015 10:36 
Specified Blend factor =1 Vs Central Difference  Kushagra  CFX  4  May 2, 2008 13:14 
larger blend factor or high resolution ?  amine  CFX  2  March 4, 2008 20:28 
automatic change of advetion scheme (blend factor)  Ben  CFX  6  September 28, 2004 10:32 
SST blend factor  stefano  CFX  1  March 24, 2003 06:23 