CFD Online Logo CFD Online URL
www.cfd-online.com
[Sponsors]
Home > Forums > Software User Forums > OpenFOAM > OpenFOAM Community Contributions

[OLAFLOW] The OLAFLOW Thread

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

Like Tree17Likes

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old   February 25, 2020, 14:37
Default
  #201
Senior Member
 
Pablo Higuera
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Auckland
Posts: 535
Rep Power: 14
Phicau is on a distinguished road
Hi Philip,


yes, the turbulence modelling in olaFlow is set up as in any other OpenFOAM solver.
LES can be run under any situation, including coarse meshes and in 2D, now the question is whether the results will be physical/realistic.


Best,


Pablo
__________________
Check out my new project: olaFlow --> The olaFlow Support Thread
Phicau is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   February 26, 2020, 07:13
Default thanx, regards
  #202
Member
 
philip lu
Join Date: Aug 2019
Posts: 50
Rep Power: 2
philiplu is on a distinguished road
Hello, Phicau,
thank u for the reply, so you mean:
logically as RANS in ola, LES can also be run in 2D (for reducing overhead in e.g. waves normal to shore)? when taking sufficient care in the mesh-buildup, especially the "sensitive" areas?

if no reply from u (I've re-edited this post, to state more clear), means, my understanding is Ok.

sorry, my OF/ola know-how is still limited, thus I must be "careful", since
1. RANS is of ensemble average, but LES, partial DNS, so(with my limited turbulence knowhow) am not sure, if fully logical to spare 1D, but
2. specifically the original linear/nonlinear wave-theories are all 2D-derived


thank you and regards

Last edited by philiplu; February 26, 2020 at 15:23.
philiplu is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   February 28, 2020, 13:53
Default wave absorption
  #203
Member
 
Arash
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 31
Rep Power: 3
arashghgood is on a distinguished road
Dear Pablo
1) In the following movie as you can see, despite the genabs is true, the reflection occurs at the right boundary.

https://youtu.be/dghEx9QiEBA

how can I modify the waveDict so that wave becomes absorbed at the right wall?

2) I am interested in starting from an initial wave pattern in the whole domain at t=0. I try to use funkySetFields for fields U and alpha.water. But the olaFlow boundary types are unknown. So fatal error appears. How can I do this?

thanks for your help in advance.
arashghgood is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   February 28, 2020, 17:11
Default
  #204
aow
Member
 
Andrew O. Winter
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Seattle, WA, USA
Posts: 70
Rep Power: 6
aow is on a distinguished road
Hi Arash,

I'm not sure about what to do for your first question since I've never used the wave absorption capabilities of olaFlow; however, for your second question, is there a reason you cannot use the built-in setWaves utility (see https://github.com/OpenFOAM/OpenFOAM...m/laminar/wave)? Unless you're using a non-standard wave theory or recorded data, this utility is the easiest way to setup initial wave conditions.

Best,

Andrew
aow is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   February 28, 2020, 19:05
Default initial wave
  #205
Member
 
Arash
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 31
Rep Power: 3
arashghgood is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by aow View Post
Hi Arash,

I'm not sure about what to do for your first question since I've never used the wave absorption capabilities of olaFlow; however, for your second question, is there a reason you cannot use the built-in setWaves utility (see https://github.com/OpenFOAM/OpenFOAM...m/laminar/wave)? Unless you're using a non-standard wave theory or recorded data, this utility is the easiest way to setup initial wave conditions.

Best,

Andrew
Dear Andrew
thanks for answering me. My issue is not related to gave generation. I am interested in following
consider that the whole domain (x-z) in two dimensions, is initially at eta=sinh(z)*cos(k*x) at t=0. So the water is not at rest at t=0.
then olaFlow will implement for t>0.
arashghgood is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   February 28, 2020, 19:37
Default
  #206
aow
Member
 
Andrew O. Winter
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Seattle, WA, USA
Posts: 70
Rep Power: 6
aow is on a distinguished road
Ah, I don't think you can implement something quite like that function using the setWaves utility. The z-direction (transverse or perpendicular to the wave propagation direction) variation in amplitude is not implemented in the default OpenFOAM wave generation utilities as far as I can tell (i.e. it's only capable of making a constant eta for the transverse direction).

However, if you didn't need the transverse variation in eta, setWaves would be able to set fields (alpha.water, U, etc...) throughout the domain according to the chosen wave theory and wave parameters (length, height, etc...) so that there are waves with non-zero velocity and amplitude at t = 0 s (see https://www.openfoam.com/documentati...modelling.html).

If you really want to get crazy, you could manually specify the field data in a very painful process similar to, but more involved than what is presented in this video, which provides details for setting a non-uniform inlet velocity profile.

Also, this may not work as I have not tried it, but it occurred to me that perhaps you could initially set the BCs to be built-in OpenFOAM options when running funkySetFields and then switch the BCs back to the olaFlow options before running your case. This could be automated in your job running script so you don't have to do it by hand. I would recommend you use sed to do it if you choose to try this.

Sorry I can't be of more help...
aow is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   February 29, 2020, 06:58
Default thanks
  #207
Member
 
Arash
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 31
Rep Power: 3
arashghgood is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by aow View Post
Ah, I don't think you can implement something quite like that function using the setWaves utility. The z-direction (transverse or perpendicular to the wave propagation direction) variation in amplitude is not implemented in the default OpenFOAM wave generation utilities as far as I can tell (i.e. it's only capable of making a constant eta for the transverse direction).

However, if you didn't need the transverse variation in eta, setWaves would be able to set fields (alpha.water, U, etc...) throughout the domain according to the chosen wave theory and wave parameters (length, height, etc...) so that there are waves with non-zero velocity and amplitude at t = 0 s (see https://www.openfoam.com/documentati...modelling.html).

If you really want to get crazy, you could manually specify the field data in a very painful process similar to, but more involved than what is presented in this video, which provides details for setting a non-uniform inlet velocity profile.

Also, this may not work as I have not tried it, but it occurred to me that perhaps you could initially set the BCs to be built-in OpenFOAM options when running funkySetFields and then switch the BCs back to the olaFlow options before running your case. This could be automated in your job running script so you don't have to do it by hand. I would recommend you use sed to do it if you choose to try this.

Sorry I can't be of more help...
Dear Andrew
First of all, thanks for your help. exactly, my idea of using funkySetFields is what you mentioned. However, I asked it to receive ideas because I am not an expert in OF and olaFlow. There is also an error when I set back the boundary conditions to olaFlow ones. this is another reason.
I aim to see the damping and propagation of waves starting from initial conditions throughout the domain. In other words, we know that waves will damp in time and in distance theoretically. to check the simulation results it is necessary to provide the same condition as theory.
======

one more thing for all, I believe (my experience with olaflow) in olaflow/genAbs/common/ the iteration for calculating wavelength (in waveFun.C) is not enough. I increase it to 1000000 to get better results.
arashghgood is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 2, 2020, 15:12
Default
  #208
Senior Member
 
Pablo Higuera
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Auckland
Posts: 535
Rep Power: 14
Phicau is on a distinguished road
Hi Arash,


regarding your first question, have you set active wave absorption correctly on the right boundary? All BCs should be like those in the baseWaveFlume tutorial.
If you did, you can try using the Extended Range Active Wave Absorption, because your waves seem to be in the mid- to deep-water regime. You can find more information here: https://olaflow.github.io/blog/exten...een-published/


Regarding your second question, Andrew is right, you can set the olaFlow boundary types to, e.g., zeroGradient, use funkySetFields and then set them back to the original types. If you use zeroGradient I presume that the format will be easier to change.

Alternatively, I am not sure if this works but it is worth trying, you can link the olaFlow BCs dynamically in controlDict and see if they are then recognized by funkySetFields. More information here https://openfoamwiki.net/index.php/C...ary_Conditions


Finally, a couple of years back I programmed a setFields-like tool to set wave initial conditions, which I have been testing and sharing with some colleagues already. Most likely I will be releasing it to the public next month, so stay tuned.


Best,


Pablo
aow likes this.
__________________
Check out my new project: olaFlow --> The olaFlow Support Thread
Phicau is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 2, 2020, 15:43
Default
  #209
aow
Member
 
Andrew O. Winter
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Seattle, WA, USA
Posts: 70
Rep Power: 6
aow is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Finally, a couple of years back I programmed a setFields-like tool to set wave initial conditions, which I have been testing and sharing with some colleagues already. Most likely I will be releasing it to the public next month, so stay tuned.
Definitely keeping tabs on this. I'll be looking forward to trying it out once you've decided it's ready for public consumption.
aow is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 28, 2020, 05:19
Default error in McCowan solitary wave
  #210
Member
 
Arash
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 31
Rep Power: 3
arashghgood is on a distinguished road
Dear Pablo
I am using McCowan wave theory to generate a soliton. the geometry is a simple box of the following size:
0 < x < 2, 0 < y < -0.0002 and -0.001 < z < 0.004
meshx = 5000 , mesh y =1,
meshz = 100 in this way ( (0.14 0.3 1) (0.12 0.5 1) (0.74 0.2 1) )
and finally
waveHeight 2e-4;

after running the simulation an error appears
Code:
#0  Foam::error::printStack(Foam::Ostream&) at ??:?
#1  Foam::sigFpe::sigHandler(int) at ??:?
#2  ? in "/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6"
#3  Foam::PhiScheme<double, Foam::interfaceCompressionLimiter>::limiter(Foam::GeometricField<double, Foam::fvPatchField, Foam::volMesh> const&) const at ??:?
#4  Foam::limitedSurfaceInterpolationScheme<double>::weights(Foam::GeometricField<double, Foam::fvPatchField, Foam::volMesh> const&) const at ??:?
#5  Foam::surfaceInterpolationScheme<double>::interpolate(Foam::GeometricField<double, Foam::fvPatchField, Foam::volMesh> const&) const at ??:?
#6  Foam::fv::gaussConvectionScheme<double>::flux(Foam::GeometricField<double, Foam::fvsPatchField, Foam::surfaceMesh> const&, Foam::GeometricField<double, Foam::fvPatchField, Foam::volMesh> const&) const at ??:?
#7  ? at ??:?
#8  ? at ??:?
#9  __libc_start_main in "/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6"
#10  ? at ??:?
./runCase: line 16:  6295 Floating point exception(core dumped) olaFlow > olaFlow.log
Simulation complete.
Does it mean that deciding by zero is in the theory? or my problem is wrong?
could you explain to me the error?
thank you in advance
arashghgood is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 29, 2020, 16:21
Default
  #211
Senior Member
 
Pablo Higuera
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Auckland
Posts: 535
Rep Power: 14
Phicau is on a distinguished road
Hi Arash,


the information in that error seems to suggest that wave generation is not the problem. When in doubt, substitute the olaFlow boundary conditions by zeroGradient and try to solve the problem with interFoam to see if you get the same error. You may also need to change the setFieldsDict to add a small water hump to get some movement ongoing. Always use checkMesh and Paraview to check your mesh quality.


Best,


Pablo
__________________
Check out my new project: olaFlow --> The olaFlow Support Thread
Phicau is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 29, 2020, 20:50
Default thank you
  #212
Member
 
Arash
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 31
Rep Power: 3
arashghgood is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phicau View Post
Hi Arash,


the information in that error seems to suggest that wave generation is not the problem. When in doubt, substitute the olaFlow boundary conditions by zeroGradient and try to solve the problem with interFoam to see if you get the same error. You may also need to change the setFieldsDict to add a small water hump to get some movement ongoing. Always use checkMesh and Paraview to check your mesh quality.


Best,


Pablo
Dear Pablo
Thank you for your attention and suggestion. I will apply your suggestion.
arashghgood is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 30, 2020, 17:43
Default
  #213
New Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2020
Location: Paris
Posts: 3
Rep Power: 2
georgiak is on a distinguished road
Hi Pablo,

I am relatively new to the CFD and I try to simulate a coastal area in shallow waters with olaFlow.

My parameters are: h=5.47m, Hmax=4.88m and T=13.3s. According to the Mehaute diagram, I am marginally placed at cnoidal or Stokes V theory.

However, when I run the simulation with cnoidal I always take this waveVelocity related error:

#0 Foam::error:rintStack(Foam::Ostream&) at ??:?
#1 Foam::sigFpe::sigHandler(int) at ??:?
#2 ? in "/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6"
#3 cnoidalFun::calculations(double, double, double, double*, double*) at ??:?
#4 Foam::waveVelocityFvPatchVectorField::updateCoeffs () at ??:?
#5 Foam::GeometricField<Foam::Vector<double>, Foam::fvPatchField, Foam::volMesh>::Boundary::evaluate() at ??:?
#6 ? at ??:?
#7 __libc_start_main in "/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6"
#8 ? at ??:?
Exception en point flottant (core dumped)

While the Stokes V model returns me convergence error (No convergence for Stokes V wave theory).

I just tried the StokesII model to see if it will work and it runs, but during the first trough generation it bugs (deltaT very small (magnitude of e-15) and clearly the model is not adapted physically).

Firstly I would like to ask you if the wave models are based on the Mehaute diagram, because it seems strange this story of StokesII, when theoritically we are clearly placed on cnoidal theory. Also, I would like to ask you what kind of error is it on cnoidal case? Should I just update my olaFlow version (updateCoeffs()...)?

Thank you in advance

Georgia
georgiak is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 31, 2020, 15:30
Default
  #214
Senior Member
 
Pablo Higuera
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Auckland
Posts: 535
Rep Power: 14
Phicau is on a distinguished road
Hi Georgia,


please double check your calculations because they are wrong. Your wave steepness is around 0.9, so your waves are breaking. This is why the solver fails to converge.


Mathematically you can do lots of things, but it does not mean that the results will be physical. Can you run such wave with Stokes II? Sure, Stokes II does not have any iterative solvers except for linear wavelength. Does that mean that what I am simulating makes any sense? No.



Best,


Pablo
__________________
Check out my new project: olaFlow --> The olaFlow Support Thread
Phicau is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 1, 2020, 03:32
Default
  #215
New Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2020
Location: Paris
Posts: 3
Rep Power: 2
georgiak is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phicau View Post
Hi Georgia,


please double check your calculations because they are wrong. Your wave steepness is around 0.9, so your waves are breaking. This is why the solver fails to converge.


Mathematically you can do lots of things, but it does not mean that the results will be physical. Can you run such wave with Stokes II? Sure, Stokes II does not have any iterative solvers except for linear wavelength. Does that mean that what I am simulating makes any sense? No.



Best,


Pablo
Yes Pablo,


You are write I checked this yesterday!



Thanks again for your quick response


Georgia
georgiak is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 4, 2020, 07:42
Default
  #216
New Member
 
renos
Join Date: Dec 2019
Posts: 7
Rep Power: 2
renos is on a distinguished road
Dear Pablo,

I am trying to simulate wave breaking in a 3d NWT with wave generation of Stokes V and k-omega SST turbulence model.
I have a question in the boundary conditions for the sides patch (front and back). Can I use the slip boundary condition or I have to use the no slip boundary condition. What is the difference beween them?
Also in k and omega files can i use slip condition for side patch or I have to use the wall functions?

Thank you very much for your time,

Kind regards,

Renos
renos is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 5, 2020, 15:41
Default
  #217
Senior Member
 
Pablo Higuera
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Auckland
Posts: 535
Rep Power: 14
Phicau is on a distinguished road
Hi Renos,


of course you can, you just need to understand it and check if it makes sense. No slip BC is fixed value equal to 0; Slip BC is no flux across the boundary and zero gradient BC in tangential directions, which is the same as having a symmetry BC.



Best,


Pablo
__________________
Check out my new project: olaFlow --> The olaFlow Support Thread
Phicau is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply

Tags
olaflow, waves

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
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 Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Divergence detected in AMG solver: k when udf loaded google9002 Fluent UDF and Scheme Programming 3 November 7, 2019 23:34
udf problem jane Fluent UDF and Scheme Programming 37 February 20, 2018 04:17
UDF velocity profile willroca Fluent UDF and Scheme Programming 2 January 10, 2016 03:13
Error messages atg enGrid 7 August 30, 2013 11:16
Phase locked average in run time panara OpenFOAM 2 February 20, 2008 14:37


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 18:28.