|
[Sponsors] |
June 1, 2005, 13:28 |
Under-relaxation Factors
|
#1 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Hi everybody
I am analysing a flow over a special geometric body. i find ridiculous values of drag coefficient. When i change the momentum value of under relaxation factor to half, drag coefficient changes What do i expect from changing under relaxation factor? Is it safe to change them in order to get the expected results? Thank you |
|
June 1, 2005, 14:10 |
Re: Under-relaxation Factors
|
#2 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Judge your convergence by monitoring the drag coefficient at a specific point/surface in your domain. If your flow is steady, then wait for the monitor to level off or exhibit steady fluctuations about a steady value. That will indicate convergence. Theoretically, converged results are independent of the Under Relaxation Factors chosen.
|
|
June 1, 2005, 15:10 |
Re: Under-relaxation Factors
|
#3 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
To expand the problem, i can say that i already know the drag coefficient value of the shape from the literature. The value that fluent gives me is different (applying the standart procedure of aerodynamic analysis).
I think you meant the drag coefficient should not change with the und. rel. fac. ,but it does...I came across satisfying result with some under rel. factors with manually changing (the momentum value). Thanks for answering by the way. |
|
June 1, 2005, 19:11 |
Re: Under-relaxation Factors
|
#4 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
You may reduce the tolerance for the residuals by 10 or 100 times to get better results.
Saad |
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Relaxation Factors for Transient solvers | philippose | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 19 | March 20, 2014 04:39 |
Purpose of relaxation factors | Mohsin | FLUENT | 5 | April 30, 2010 11:57 |
relaxation factors and time accuracy | Mike | Main CFD Forum | 7 | May 21, 2005 12:41 |
Relaxation Factors | Tim | Phoenics | 3 | June 30, 2004 02:03 |
relaxation factors adjust | zhujianguo | Phoenics | 1 | July 15, 2003 11:11 |