|
[Sponsors] |
May 16, 2001, 09:47 |
on Poisson eq solution
|
#1 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
i am trying to solve a poisson equation:
d^2/dx^2(PHI) + d^2/dy^2(PHI) = S where S is a modified source term that satisfy the consequence of Green Thereom. the boundary conditions are the Neumann type, where at the boundary: the normal derivative of PHI=0, i.e. d(PHI)/dn=0 By utilizing ADI, solution is obtained. but the problem is when i substitute the solution to check if the boundary conditions are satisfied, it turns out that : d(PHI)/dn <> 0 (not equal to) the question are: what can be the possible cause? how can this problem be tackled? any advice is appreciated. regards, yfyap |
|
May 16, 2001, 11:26 |
Re: on Poisson eq solution
|
#2 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
When you have only Neumann type boundary conditions, the solution is not unique, i.e. any PHI+C will satisfy the Poisson equation.
As to how to resolve this -- boundary conditions of the mixed types (Dirichlet+Neumann+Robin) should be used. At least, analytical solution will be unique. |
|
May 16, 2001, 14:14 |
Re: on Poisson eq solution
|
#3 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
For discussion, think of this as the heat conduction equation with PHI the temperature. If you have a steady state (and you do, D PHI / Dt = 0), while adding energy to the system (S > 0) or removing it (S < 0), then S has to be balanced by energy crossing the boundary. If the normal derivitive of temperature on the boundary is everywhere 0, no energy crosses the boundary, and a steady state is not possible.
I'm sure this can be stated completely mathematically. Your problem is that your boundary condition is not compatible with your equation. |
|
May 16, 2001, 14:47 |
Re: on Poisson eq solution
|
#4 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
There are several possibilities.
If the normal derivative is zero everywhere on the boundary, then the Greens theorem would imply that the volume (or area in 2D) integral of the source term also be zero. Convergence to machine zero is possible only if discrete version of the Green's theorem is satisfied. When you say "solution is obtained", what does that mean ? ADI is not a direct solver, it is iterative. What criterion do you use to stop the iterations and conclude that the solution is accurate enough. It is quite likely that the residual could still be quite high. When you build tridiagonal matrices (for sweeping along each direction), do you build into it, the (zero gradient) boundary conditions. ADI sometimes has convergence problems if you have a singular matrix and based on your BCs, it is evident that you have one. |
|
May 16, 2001, 21:19 |
Re: on Poisson eq solution
|
#5 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
thanks for the precious advice. iteration stops when
{ PHI[i][j][t+1]-PHI[i][j][t] } < {permitted error} when i said "solution is obtained", what i mean is that if i reduce the {permitted error}, let's say by a factor of 10e-3, it gives identical solution. in the previous posting i forgot to mention that since any PHI+C is solution, then i fixed PHI[0][0]=constant, then, the solution should be unique, right? the BCs are actually of the Robin type. i have checked that: int{ d^2/dx^2(PHI) + d^2/dy^2(PHI) }dA - int{S}dA < 10-e16 note: int = integration of can this implies that "discrete version of the Green's theorem is satisfied."? i am checking if the residual is large and the imposition of the BCs. thanks for the precious advice. |
|
May 17, 2001, 18:13 |
Re: on Poisson eq solution
|
#6 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
What kind of discetization method do you use (FDM, FVM, FVEM or FEM). Myself or others people could give you better answers.
|
|
May 18, 2001, 12:23 |
Re: on Poisson eq solution
|
#7 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
i used finite difference method.
|
|
May 18, 2001, 22:26 |
Re: on Poisson eq solution
|
#8 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
thanks. both positive and negative values of S exist for my problem, then, there are sink and source within the boundary. i have checked that: int{ d^2/dx^2(PHI) + d^2/dy^2(PHI) }dA - int{S}dA < 10-e16 note: int = integration of
in the previous posting i forgot to mention that since any PHI+C is solution, then i fixed PHI[0][0]=constant, then, the solution should be unique, right? the BCs are actually of the Robin type. |
|
May 19, 2001, 02:43 |
Re: on Poisson eq solution
|
#9 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
check your code everywhere carefully!
|
|
May 19, 2001, 04:33 |
Re: on Poisson eq solution
|
#10 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
thanks. both positive and negative values of S exist for my problem, then, there are sinc and source within the boundary. i have checked that:
int{ d^2/dx^2(PHI) + d^2/dy^2(PHI) }dA - int{S}dA < 10-e16 note: int = integration of in the previous posting i forgot to mention that since any PHI+C is solution, then i fixed PHI[0][0]=constant, then, the solution should be unique, right? the BCs are actually of the Robin type. |
|
May 19, 2001, 04:38 |
Re: on Poisson eq solution
|
#11 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
thanks. doing the checking...
|
|
May 20, 2001, 07:35 |
Re: on Poisson eq solution
|
#12 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
1) Do you have any unknowns on the domain boundary?
2) How do you impose the boundary condition? |
|
May 23, 2001, 18:11 |
Re: on Poisson eq solution
|
#13 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Quite likeky you have to check out how do you impose and implement the boundary conditions with your FD approach.
I wonder what scheme CDS or upwind you use to implement the boundary conditions. If you use CDS, you will impose the zero gradient condition across the wall but this does not garantee when you do the check out that the gradient is zero on the wall. This doesn't happen if you use upwind. Any case, you should take a look at how you implement the boundary conditions on your domain. |
|
May 23, 2001, 21:08 |
Re: on Poisson eq solution
|
#14 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
thanks for the advice.
|
|
May 23, 2001, 21:29 |
Re: on Poisson eq solution
|
#15 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
thanks for your concerns. i applied some sort of linearized scheme so that there are some terms in the source term evaluated in the preceding station. other than that, PHI is the only unknown at the boundary. to impose the boundary conditions, i used the reflection method. it is found that i get the same equations at the boundary if i used three-point-one-sided finite differece formula. it should be ok, right? regards, yfyap
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
interFoam solution tolerances | mgdenno | OpenFOAM | 4 | September 13, 2011 12:58 |
Naca 0012 (compressible and inviscid) flow convergence problem | bipulsaha | FLUENT | 1 | July 6, 2011 07:51 |
Transient, initial variables from a previous solution | nakor | FloEFD, FloWorks & FloTHERM | 0 | April 22, 2011 04:34 |
Doubt on Implicit Methods | analyse In India | Main CFD Forum | 10 | March 9, 2007 03:01 |
Discussion about Mesh independant solution | Seb | Main CFD Forum | 13 | May 22, 2001 13:37 |