
[Sponsors] 
March 20, 2012, 20:01 
convergence unsteady state

#1 
Member
andres
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 44
Rep Power: 8 
Hi everyone!
I am studying a transient state study (unsteady). The first iteration is correct and it achieves a perfect convergence but, the second one... it doesn't converge at all it's that a problem?? is there anything I should change? I decreased the time step from 1E4 to 1E05 but it didn't converge whatsoever any idea?? thank you 

March 20, 2012, 20:03 
convergence/divergence unsteady state

#2 
Member
andres
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 44
Rep Power: 8 
I post a picture so you can figure it out
Thanks in advance Hi everyone! I am studying a transient state study (unsteady). The first iteration is correct and it achieves a perfect convergence but, the second one... it doesn't converge at all it's that a problem?? is there anything I should change? I decreased the time step from 1E4 to 1E05 but it didn't converge whatsoever any idea?? thank you 

March 21, 2012, 14:54 

#3  
Senior Member
Lucky Tran
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Orlando, FL USA
Posts: 1,768
Rep Power: 25 
Quote:
From 3040 you can clearly see the solution convergence. 

March 21, 2012, 15:01 

#4  
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Germany
Posts: 130
Rep Power: 8 
Quote:


March 21, 2012, 21:31 

#5 
Member
andres
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 44
Rep Power: 8 
thanks you all!
another question though... if my time step must to be 0.00001 to achieve convergence, I have to iterate 10000 to simulate 1 second!!! and it takes hours!! like... forever! what can I do if want to simulate 5 minutes simulation? what about 1h simulation? To simulate 1 second takes 10 hours or even more... what about 3600seconds???? itīs impossible... is there anything I can do to acelerate this ? THANKS!! 

March 21, 2012, 21:39 

#6  
Senior Member
Lucky Tran
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Orlando, FL USA
Posts: 1,768
Rep Power: 25 
Quote:
10hrs is not very long. It's not even one day, let it run on a weekend if need be. You should figure out why you need such a small time step and/or why you need to simulate 1 second. You can use an implicit time advancement scheme, stability is guaranteed, and just use more iterations per timestep. It all depends on what you are really after, and WHY. Why did I need to accomplish both 120km and in less than an hour? 

March 21, 2012, 21:46 

#7 
Member
andres
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 44
Rep Power: 8 
I need to simulate what's happening in my process after 5 minutes. The time step is 0.0001 to small because I have a good mesh. Good mesh, smaller cells, so small time step.
"It all depends on what you are really after, and WHY." well I need to simulate a discharging process of a tank, and it will take around 5 minutes. however, 1 second is more than 10 hours... 300 seconds will be...3000hours... which means that its not possible... any suggestion? 

March 21, 2012, 21:57 

#8  
Senior Member
Lucky Tran
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Orlando, FL USA
Posts: 1,768
Rep Power: 25 
Quote:


March 22, 2012, 01:39 

#9 
Member
andres
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 44
Rep Power: 8 
But NITA is only operative in pressurebased cases and I am using densitybased...
on the other hand, my experience says that the tank that I am simulating will discharge in about 5 minutes but fluent calculations says more than 1 hour... which is impossible... something wrong... 

March 22, 2012, 01:42 

#10  
Senior Member
Lucky Tran
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Orlando, FL USA
Posts: 1,768
Rep Power: 25 
Quote:


March 22, 2012, 01:44 

#11 
Member
andres
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 44
Rep Power: 8 
mmm.... where is this option located in the interface program? i am going to google it
I appreciate your help, thanks 

March 22, 2012, 01:53 

#12  
Senior Member
Lucky Tran
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Orlando, FL USA
Posts: 1,768
Rep Power: 25 
Quote:
for the pressure based solver, only the implicit formulation is allowed. for density based, you can choose implicit or explicit formulation. Again, implicit is default. 

March 22, 2012, 17:04 

#13 
Member
andres
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 44
Rep Power: 8 
I am using implicit, as you said, it is default. But time seems to matter...I am going to try with a coarser mesh by changing advanced control parameters "max coarser"
I will let you know please see photo, for advise thanks 

March 22, 2012, 17:42 
here is the problem

#14 
Member
andres
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 44
Rep Power: 8 
Hi! this is the problem...
I need to perform unsteady state study to get info about how a system behaves during 60 seconds. If I use a time step of 0.00001 it converges perfect and the results seem to be right. But it will take weeks of running calculations... so it doesn't work If I use another time step... it diverges. If I use a coarsen mesh, it diverges because of the poor mesh. I am working with densitybased , implicit time advancement , courant number 0.1 any suggestion??? 

March 22, 2012, 18:22 

#15  
Senior Member
Lucky Tran
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Orlando, FL USA
Posts: 1,768
Rep Power: 25 
Quote:
By use a coarser grid, I mean to go back and generate a coarser mesh from the start. Also, for larger time step, you will need more iterations per time step to achieve convergence. If you increased the time step size by a factor of 100, you can guess that it will take 100x iterations to converge (it will be slightly less). It will definitely take more than 1x iterations. You increased the time step by 5 orders of magnitude, of course you should wait more than 40 iterations. 

March 23, 2012, 14:07 

#16 
Member
banty
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 52
Rep Power: 7 
In tank depletion problem, Two time scale (Long time scale(to deplete the tank) and small time scale ( to track back wave ). it is vary important to set proper time step to capture( even in implicit solver) the phenomena that u want. U can not capture the phenomena if u are overstepping it.
to know the tank depletion time, u can use density base solver with large time step and large courant no, but for tracking wave, u must use fine mesh and smaller time step (wave should not cross one cell length in single time step.dt = cell length/wave speed) 

March 23, 2012, 14:22 

#17 
Member
andres
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 44
Rep Power: 8 
actually I would liket to know how long is the discharging time. How long does the tank take to discharge form 300bar to 75 bar
but my experience tell me that it will take less than a minute, but Fluent... well.... tell me 4000 seconds or something like that... which is impossible. I believe itīs a problem of setting a proper time step but, I donīt know how to do it as Velocity is unknown as itīs a discharging process. How can I track (calculate) the back wave? 

March 23, 2012, 14:25 

#18 
Member
andres
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 44
Rep Power: 8 
by the way what is "large" time steps or "small" time steps....
large = 1 second? 5 seconds? 30 seconds??? small = 0.001? 0.00001? 

March 24, 2012, 04:48 

#19 
Member
banty
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 52
Rep Power: 7 
its all about relative scaling. u know time to deplete the tank as about 60 sec approx. so 100 or 500 time step(60/100 or 60/500) with implicit methodology should be sufficient otherwise u have problem with solver setting.


March 24, 2012, 08:55 

#20 
Member
andres
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 44
Rep Power: 8 
why 100 or 500? is it 100 or 500 iterations with 0.6 time step or 0.12 time step? this is it?
60/100 = 06 60/500 = 0.12 but why this number ? I am going to perform the calculations and let you know but I donīt think my Velocity will go down after 60 sec or around... 

Thread Tools  
Display Modes  


Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Calculation of the Governing Equations  Mihail  CFX  7  September 7, 2014 06:27 
error message  cuteapathy  CFX  14  March 20, 2012 07:45 
Force can not converge  colopolo  CFX  13  October 4, 2011 22:03 
Constant velocity of the material  Sas  CFX  15  July 13, 2010 08:56 
mass flow in is not equal to mass flow out  saii  CFX  2  September 18, 2009 08:07 