
[Sponsors] 
All Mach number implicit solver with KurganovTadmore scheme  pisoCentralFoam 

LinkBack  Thread Tools  Search this Thread  Display Modes 
February 28, 2022, 12:49 

#101  
Senior Member
Matvey Kraposhin
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Moscow, Russian Federation
Posts: 355
Rep Power: 21 
slicedSurfaceScalarField works as pointer to data of array (field) that was specified during construction.
Quote:
__________________
MDPI Fluids (Q2) special issue for OSS software: https://www.mdpi.com/journal/fluids/..._modelling_OSS GitHub: https://github.com/unicfdlab Linkedin: https://linkedin.com/in/matveykraposhin413869163 RG: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Matvey_Kraposhin 

March 1, 2022, 10:54 

#102  
Senior Member
Matvey Kraposhin
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Moscow, Russian Federation
Posts: 355
Rep Power: 21 
Quote:
Hi, Pete! This is how MULES algorithm for multicomponent flow was designed. To make approximation of transport equations consistent between different phases, it takes minimum value of lambdaCoeff (the same approach is used for Vversion of limited schemes in OpenFOAM, such as vanLeerV, MinmodV, etc): \phi_f = \phi_f^{Upwind} + \lambda \times (\phi_f^{TVD}  \phi_f^{Upwind}) . However, if \phi = 0, then MULES sets lambda to 0 and all other fields are transported with upwind. This is a very diffusive, but at the same time robust approach. I think, this is rather technical issue, but it's solution requires some efforts. Maybe you will find time to solve it
__________________
MDPI Fluids (Q2) special issue for OSS software: https://www.mdpi.com/journal/fluids/..._modelling_OSS GitHub: https://github.com/unicfdlab Linkedin: https://linkedin.com/in/matveykraposhin413869163 RG: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Matvey_Kraposhin 

March 8, 2022, 12:46 

#103 
New Member
Pete
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 8
Rep Power: 10 
Matvey  I'm working on this but haven't found a good way to fix this problem without going into the MULESTemplates.C code and I was hoping to not have to mess with that.
Also, I think I found a bug in your Y.eqn (dev2112) code on line 187: Code:
owner = mesh.owner()[iFace]; neighbour = mesh.owner()[iFace]; Code:
neighbour = mesh.neighbour()[iFace]; Thanks Pete 

March 8, 2022, 14:14 

#104  
Senior Member
Matvey Kraposhin
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Moscow, Russian Federation
Posts: 355
Rep Power: 21 
Yes, you are right. This is a bug, thank you.
To circumvent indexing problem, wrap next code into if (mesh.isInternalFace(iFace)): Code:
if (mesh.isInternalFace(iFace)) { owner = mesh.owner()[iFace]; neighbour = mesh.neighbour()[iFace]; deltaY = mag(Y[iCmpt][owner]  Y[iCmpt][neighbour]); if (deltaY > maxDeltaY.primitiveField()[iFace]) { maxDeltaY.primitiveFieldRef()[iFace] = deltaY; } } Quote:
__________________
MDPI Fluids (Q2) special issue for OSS software: https://www.mdpi.com/journal/fluids/..._modelling_OSS GitHub: https://github.com/unicfdlab Linkedin: https://linkedin.com/in/matveykraposhin413869163 RG: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Matvey_Kraposhin 

March 8, 2022, 15:21 

#105 
New Member
Pete
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 8
Rep Power: 10 
Thanks, that did the trick with the indexing error. Now I am seeing realistic values of hLambdaCoeffs and they are much better behaved than the lambdaCoeffs (only less than 1 in regions of steep phi gradients).
What I am testing now is moving the section of code: "Solve for Components" below the calculation of hLambdaCoeffs and using hLabmdaCoeffs on the Y equations (instead of lamdaCoeffs) as well as h. That way everything is using the same limiter and it seems to get around the phi=0 issue with MULES. I'll keep you posted. Pete 

March 16, 2022, 02:56 

#106 
Senior Member
Matvey Kraposhin
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Moscow, Russian Federation
Posts: 355
Rep Power: 21 
Please write if you get any progress
__________________
MDPI Fluids (Q2) special issue for OSS software: https://www.mdpi.com/journal/fluids/..._modelling_OSS GitHub: https://github.com/unicfdlab Linkedin: https://linkedin.com/in/matveykraposhin413869163 RG: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Matvey_Kraposhin 

February 27, 2024, 17:38 

#107  
New Member
Join Date: Aug 2022
Location: Mexico
Posts: 16
Rep Power: 3 
Quote:
Hello, I know it's been some years since the last post on this thread. I'm still learning OpenFoam and I'm actually doing some work at Mach 67 based on the rhoCentralFoam/forwardStep tutorial and I'm having issues when applying different initial conditions aside of P=1Pa and T=1K... What changes do I need to make in order to simulate flow at Mach 67 with P=200Pa & T=220K? 

Thread Tools  Search this Thread 
Display Modes  


Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
DPMFoam  Serious Error particleladen flow in simple geometric config  benz25  OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD  27  December 19, 2017 20:47 
foamextend_3.1 decompose and pyfoam warning  shipman  OpenFOAM  3  July 24, 2014 08:14 
Solver is finishing with huge Mach number  Fonzie  CFX  1  March 12, 2007 14:15 
High Mach number solver error  Luke  CFX  3  January 31, 2007 22:26 
TVD scheme at low Mach number  Axel Rohde  Main CFD Forum  5  August 6, 1999 02:01 