CFD Online Discussion Forums

CFD Online Discussion Forums (https://www.cfd-online.com/Forums/)
-   OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD (https://www.cfd-online.com/Forums/openfoam-solving/)
-   -   why interDyMFoam does not support backward ddt scheme? (https://www.cfd-online.com/Forums/openfoam-solving/167501-why-interdymfoam-does-not-support-backward-ddt-scheme.html)

Yage March 3, 2016 04:02

why interDyMFoam does not support backward ddt scheme?
 
Dear Foamer,

I would like to use backward second order time discretization in interDyMFoam, but the solver doest not support this time scheme.

Could someone explain the reason for that?

Many Thanks,
Yage

Yage March 3, 2016 04:31

I found that the interDyMFoam support Crank-Nicolson (CN) scheme and I set the weighing factor to 1 for fully second order accuracy.

But the alphasubcycle must be 1 in this case.

Any idea about the reason?

olivierG March 3, 2016 05:53

hello,

This may come from the fact the backward are not a bounded scheme, and MULES need it, or that MULES aren't coded to use backward.
CN just need current and old time, so sub-cycling used in MULES may not be usable. Same for backward.

regards,
olivier

Yage March 3, 2016 07:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by olivierG (Post 587838)
hello,

This may come from the fact the backward are not a bounded scheme, and MULES need it, or that MULES aren't coded to use backward.
CN just need current and old time, so sub-cycling used in MULES may not be usable. Same for backward.

regards,
olivier

Thanks for your answear

Yage March 3, 2016 07:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by olivierG (Post 587838)
hello,

This may come from the fact the backward are not a bounded scheme, and MULES need it, or that MULES aren't coded to use backward.
CN just need current and old time, so sub-cycling used in MULES may not be usable. Same for backward.

regards,
olivier

and any suggestion for which one to use, 1st order ddt + sub-cycling or 2nd order ddt without sub-cycling?

Regards,
Yage

olivierG March 3, 2016 08:26

hello,

I would say first order for a RANS may be enough, and 2nd order with lower time step for more fine RANS/ LES case.

regards,
olivier

Yage March 3, 2016 12:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by olivierG (Post 587873)
hello,

I would say first order for a RANS may be enough, and 2nd order with lower time step for more fine RANS/ LES case.

regards,
olivier

Thanks for the suggestion


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:18.