|
[Sponsors] |
Turbulent viscosity limited to viscosity ratio of |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
March 17, 2020, 01:44 |
Turbulent viscosity limited to viscosity ratio of
|
#1 |
New Member
Suraj Garad
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Kharagpur
Posts: 16
Rep Power: 8 |
Hi,
"Turbulent viscosity limited to viscosity ratio of ....." it this an error? For my simulations, it is for nearly 50% of the total cell count but still, my solution is getting converged. I have also attached a picture with this thread. Any suggestions are welcome. |
|
March 17, 2020, 02:17 |
|
#2 |
Senior Member
Lucky
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Orlando, FL USA
Posts: 5,746
Rep Power: 66 |
Check your boundary conditions and initial conditions. You shouldn't get that warning if a case converges to a reasonable solution. That high of a turbulent viscosity ratio is non-physical / borderline insanity
Last edited by LuckyTran; March 19, 2020 at 07:26. |
|
March 17, 2020, 02:26 |
|
#3 |
New Member
Suraj Garad
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Kharagpur
Posts: 16
Rep Power: 8 |
Thanks for the reply,
I am doing a 2D simulation. I am using open channel wave conditions at the inlet (left) to generate the wave, top and right-hand sides are pressure outlet. Please let me know if any other inputs are required. |
|
March 17, 2020, 02:41 |
|
#4 |
Senior Member
Lucky
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Orlando, FL USA
Posts: 5,746
Rep Power: 66 |
Boundary conditions for turbulence?
Initial conditions for everything? Actual values for everything... not just their types. Anything that you left default is likely a culprit and it's likely (my guess) the turbulence BC's and initial conditions. |
|
March 17, 2020, 02:56 |
|
#5 |
New Member
Suraj Garad
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Kharagpur
Posts: 16
Rep Power: 8 |
VoF model, implicit body force, open channel flow and open channel wave BC
K-w SST model, default settings Numerical beach treatment is activated Pressure-Velocity coupling-- SIMPLE Pressure-- PRESTO Momentum -- Second order upwind Vol. fraction-- Modified HRIC Turbulent K.E. -- Second order upwind Sp. dissipation rate-- Second order upwind Transient formulation -- second-order implicit URF -- default values |
|
March 17, 2020, 08:18 |
|
#6 |
Senior Member
Lucky
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Orlando, FL USA
Posts: 5,746
Rep Power: 66 |
Those are neither boundary conditions nor initial conditions. Specifically I'm looking for what you specified as the inlet for k and omega and the initial condition for k and omega.
Hint: they'll be numbers. |
|
March 17, 2020, 09:07 |
|
#7 |
New Member
Suraj Garad
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Kharagpur
Posts: 16
Rep Power: 8 |
I think you are looking for these values.
Thanks for your patience |
|
March 17, 2020, 10:17 |
|
#8 |
Senior Member
Lucky
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Orlando, FL USA
Posts: 5,746
Rep Power: 66 |
I'm really not interested in your model settings and urf's.
Okay so you have an inlet turbulence intensity of 2% and viscosity ratio of 2. Is the 2 correct? That's a low number but still reasonable for a laminar inlet. Alright. Now what about the initial conditions? Hint: they're in the initialization pane. What did you do? Standard where you manually set them or did you do some automatic hyrbid/FMG initialization where you have no control? If you don't provide the proper initialization then of course you will into issues with the turbulence viscosity ratio while the case is iterating.. |
|
March 18, 2020, 00:08 |
|
#9 |
New Member
Suraj Garad
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Kharagpur
Posts: 16
Rep Power: 8 |
Inlet turbulence intensity of 2% and viscosity ratio of 2, that I have provided from one reference. I don't know how much it is applicable.
I have selected standard initialization and initial values are taken as default. |
|
March 18, 2020, 09:33 |
|
#10 |
Senior Member
Lucky
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Orlando, FL USA
Posts: 5,746
Rep Power: 66 |
So your initial condition for k is 1 (which is a very high value) and initial condition for omega is also 1 (which is a very very low value). That's how you end up with these viscosity ratio warnings.
Either you make better guesses. Or keep iterating and pray they go away and eventually converge to the correct values. |
|
March 19, 2020, 01:05 |
|
#11 |
New Member
Suraj Garad
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Kharagpur
Posts: 16
Rep Power: 8 |
Thanks for clearing my doubts.
I have checked with lower values k and omega of 1e-06 (which are very low values). That's removed my error. Before that, I have checked with different values but the error was still there after that only I posted the thread. I will check as you recommended i.e. lower values of K and higher value of omega. Please can you mention the range of values for k and omega? |
|
March 19, 2020, 07:26 |
|
#12 |
Senior Member
Lucky
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Orlando, FL USA
Posts: 5,746
Rep Power: 66 |
Convert your inlet BC of 2% and 2 into k and omega. Or again you can just keep iterating and wait and get the value from the solution.
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Identifying cells having Turbulent viscosity limited to viscosity ratio of 1.000e+05 | Sayantan Biswas | FLUENT | 0 | September 20, 2019 05:49 |
Problem with divergence | TDK | FLUENT | 13 | December 14, 2018 07:00 |
RSM+2nd ordedr causes turbulent viscosity limited to viscosity ratio of.... | khsiavash | Main CFD Forum | 10 | January 7, 2016 13:30 |
turbulent viscosity limited to viscosity ratio | Alex_B | FLUENT | 16 | September 12, 2012 14:17 |
On limiting to turbulent viscosity ratio! | varghese | FLUENT | 2 | November 15, 2003 09:56 |