Hey jetfire, maybe we can speed up this a little. If you want that,
1) post some log output (one time step is enough) 2) how do you decompose? 3) post your current solver settings (fvSolution) |
Quote:
The density changes due to pressure too! Can you check which pressure you will have in between your blades? I dont know which model you are using but the ideal gas rule is: means its proportional to
As I expect, your rotor gives a high partial vacuum -> very small densities! That is the reason (in my opinion) why your density is in that range. Therefor you should decrease your rhoMin to 0.1 or whatever. |
@Tobi: Thanks for the clarification.
|
@Tobi,
Thanks for the tips to speeden up my simulation, I will try implementing them and let you know the results. Can you message me your email id , i will send my output log file to you. Cannot post it here as it is exceeding max file size. |
Quote:
|
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:
1. Please find the output for 2 timeSteps in attachments 2. I am using hierarchical decomposition with 8 cores. Code:
numberOfSubdomains 8; Code:
/*--------------------------------*- C++ -*----------------------------------*\ |
Quote:
Please show us the output of your decomposition: Code:
decomposePar > log fvSolution: Code:
tolerance for U|h|rho -> 1e-9; Code:
time step continuity errors : sum local = 4.538409924e-06, global = -4.522927178e-06, cumulative = -0.002405985855 Please check your logfile with pyFoam (pyFoamPlotWatcher). Additionally you can check your meshCourantNo if you insert "checkMeshCourantNo true" into the PIMPLE directory of your fvSolution. I think it is possible to increase your maxCo no to 3. |
I have the output of decomposePar on my terminal , here it is
Code:
/*---------------------------------------------------------------------------*\ |
Hi,
Code:
Processor 1 Additionally after decomposing, renumbering! |
@Tobi
Here is my complete domain http://www.cfd-online.com/Forums/ope...tml#post515511 Since large no. of elements are there in all 3 directions i have given '(2 2 2)' to make it 8 cores. The similar decomposition method is used for Propeller tutorial which is similar to my case. Please see the domain and let me know if i have to change the decomposition approach or change the subdomains. |
Jetfire, did you try to use some other decomposition method? I had a very simple pipe flow and thought it is a clever idea to use "simple" decomposition. It showed low number of shared faces and all that stuff, but for some reason it was slower than just using "scotch" without any additional settings. You can just try some different methods and write down the different execution times. It's worth it for such long simulations to try a bit at the beginning.
Just a general question: Why is every time step converged to insanity? I mean, do you really get different results for these kind of problems with 30 pimple loops compared to - let's say a 3 times smaller time step and PISO solver (thus 1 outer iteration per time step)? Your Courant number is close to "1" anyway, so for stability of PISO just a slightly smaller time step would be needed. All the LES guys use PISO... is this that much different from what you are doing? Also: Why the first pressure corrector with 60 iterations? For me, this looks like something is going utterly wrong. I think each linear solver should not take more than just a few iterations. Maybe this is again due to your solver, but please can someone elaborate this? |
Another point is: Did you try different settings for the GAMG solver? I did this for a case of mine and found out that playing with "mergeLevels" decreased the simulation time (in my case "2" was the best). Also changing the pre,post,finest sweeps settings changed a lot:
Code:
"(p|pFinal)" |
Quote:
Quote:
If you get 1000 Iterations something is wrong. In the pressure calculation (my experience) it could occur. But it also could be possible that the BC are wrong for that problem. However, I first should have a look at the calculation procedure in that solver but there is not time for that now. Quote:
|
Quote:
Or is this just a matter of initialization? Does the number of PIMPLE loops decrease drastically after a few time steps? |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
If there would be no advantage of PIMPLE compared to PISO then nobody would use PIMPLE. |
Quote:
|
He also can try something like that:
I can not test the case because I do not have it (: |
Question: are you using the boundary condition which you attached in this post: http://www.cfd-online.com/Forums/ope...tml#post516087
The reason why I ask is due to the U - file, if it is like that you have an error which could be the reason of the pcorr iteration. Quote:
|
1 Attachment(s)
Hi,
Bad news , Simulation crashed showing the same error as posted earlier after few timeSteps. check the output in attachments
|
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:18. |