CFD Online Logo CFD Online URL
Home > Forums > FLUENT

mesh quality and convergence

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

LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   April 17, 2006, 14:08
Default mesh quality and convergence
Ed Schaub
Posts: n/a
Okay folks, I'm fixing to get in an argument with colleaque. Anyway, I am trying to achieve similar results on a slightly different geometry. We have a molten glass(highly viscous, temperature dependent viscosity and density), with multiple outlets. The glass surface is conditioned by a 'radiation temperature profile' boundary on the glass surface. These profiles come from other models. I run a steady-state solution and it converges smoothly to the fluent default residuals. I then indicate a transient solution with the time step he specifies. At each step, it converge within 2 iterations. It can't be transient! I say to myself. I then look at the transient solution my colleague obtained. His mesh quality is quite a bit poorer. For equi-angle skew, his model has 0.94 while mine is 0.86, and for equi-volume skew, he has 0.99 while I have 0.93. Is the problem with his mesh, or should I be looking for something else? Your feedback is appreciated. Ed
  Reply With Quote

Old   April 21, 2006, 18:38
Default Re: mesh quality and convergence
sai muppur
Posts: n/a
think what you are seeing is a pseudo-steady state solution. If the flow parameters arent changing physically i dont see why you wud expect longer solution times with each time-step! what you are basically doing is tracking time-based solution after it has reached theres not going to be much difference. make sense?
  Reply With Quote

Old   April 24, 2006, 10:55
Default Re: mesh quality and convergence
Ed Schaub
Posts: n/a
Sai, Possibly, he's getting vortex rolling where I am not. I don't have access to his model, so I can't improve his mesh. All I can do is improve mine. I believe he has numerical dispersion. He's only running 1st order time accuracy on a bad mesh, whereas I'm running 2nd order time accuracy on a reasonably good mesh. I'm going to try increasing my mesh density to make sure I'm not possibly 'missing' the psuedo-steady-state. I don't believe that's the case since I have mesh where he predicts the rolls. I would try reducing the time step size, but I'm just trying to keep a consistency with his model. We'll see what happens. Thanks for your response. Ed
  Reply With Quote


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
Convergence Centurion2011 FLUENT 44 June 20, 2017 09:57
Naca 0012 (compressible and inviscid) flow convergence problem bipulsaha FLUENT 1 July 6, 2011 07:51
early stall, poor convergence, and mesh quality everest CFX 2 May 12, 2010 16:27
increasing mesh quality is leading to poor convergence tippo CFX 2 May 5, 2009 10:55
convergence, mesh quality, and dispersion Ed Schaub Main CFD Forum 0 April 21, 2006 12:23

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:12.