
[Sponsors] 
courant number increases to rather large values 

LinkBack  Thread Tools  Search this Thread  Display Modes 
March 9, 2017, 09:23 
courant number increases to rather large values

#1 
Senior Member
Bill Wang
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 109
Rep Power: 11 
Dear,
I have been facing the problem below for two geometries. Code:
/**\  =========    \\ / F ield  OpenFOAM: The Open Source CFD Toolbox   \\ / O peration  Version: 4.1   \\ / A nd  Web: www.OpenFOAM.org   \\/ M anipulation   \**/ Build : 4.1 Exec : myIcoFoam parallel Date : Mar 09 2017 Time : 14:06:12 Host : "avakasfrontend2" PID : 1938 Case : /home/ywang005/run/GWDf1/test/Re15000 nProcs : 12 Slaves : 11 ( "avakasfrontend2.1939" "avakasfrontend2.1940" "avakasfrontend2.1941" "avakasfrontend2.1942" "avakasfrontend2.1943" "avakasfrontend2.1944" "avakasfrontend2.1945" "avakasfrontend2.1946" "avakasfrontend2.1947" "avakasfrontend2.1948" "avakasfrontend2.1949" ) Pstream initialized with: floatTransfer : 0 nProcsSimpleSum : 0 commsType : nonBlocking polling iterations : 0 sigFpe : Enabling floating point exception trapping (FOAM_SIGFPE). fileModificationChecking : Monitoring runtime modified files using timeStampMaster allowSystemOperations : Allowing usersupplied system call operations // * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * // Create time Create mesh for time = 0 PISO: Operating solver in PISO mode Reading transportProperties Reading field p Reading field U Reading/calculating face flux field phi Starting time loop volRegion volumeAverage:all(): total cells = 8396 total volume = 20249.7 Time = 0.0125 Courant Number mean: 0 max: 0 DILUPBiCG: Solving for Ux, Initial residual = 1, Final residual = 3.14067e11, No Iterations 18 DILUPBiCG: Solving for Uy, Initial residual = 0, Final residual = 0, No Iterations 0 DICPCG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 1, Final residual = 9.96628e08, No Iterations 246 time step continuity errors : sum local = 2.62573e13, global = 2.24611e24, cumulative = 2.24611e24 DICPCG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.00826593, Final residual = 9.75861e08, No Iterations 216 time step continuity errors : sum local = 5.1487e13, global = 4.59247e24, cumulative = 6.83858e24 ExecutionTime = 0.26 s ClockTime = 0 s Time = 0.025 Courant Number mean: 5.34236e06 max: 0.00488047 DILUPBiCG: Solving for Ux, Initial residual = 0.754291, Final residual = 8.55034e11, No Iterations 16 DILUPBiCG: Solving for Uy, Initial residual = 0.330802, Final residual = 6.98711e11, No Iterations 16 DICPCG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.420872, Final residual = 9.52255e08, No Iterations 265 time step continuity errors : sum local = 5.26749e13, global = 1.48591e23, cumulative = 8.02052e24 DICPCG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.0611023, Final residual = 9.76153e08, No Iterations 261 time step continuity errors : sum local = 7.56513e13, global = 8.53319e24, cumulative = 1.65537e23 ExecutionTime = 0.29 s ClockTime = 0 s Time = 0.0375 Courant Number mean: 1.02253e05 max: 0.0113322 DILUPBiCG: Solving for Ux, Initial residual = 0.528265, Final residual = 5.87478e11, No Iterations 17 DILUPBiCG: Solving for Uy, Initial residual = 0.266124, Final residual = 9.26735e11, No Iterations 17 DICPCG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.538462, Final residual = 8.96817e08, No Iterations 287 time step continuity errors : sum local = 1.26773e12, global = 6.13145e22, cumulative = 5.96591e22 DICPCG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.579184, Final residual = 9.6864e08, No Iterations 280 time step continuity errors : sum local = 3.73869e12, global = 6.34438e22, cumulative = 3.78469e23 ExecutionTime = 0.33 s ClockTime = 0 s Time = 0.05 Courant Number mean: 4.4832e05 max: 0.370209 DILUPBiCG: Solving for Ux, Initial residual = 0.390239, Final residual = 6.12355e11, No Iterations 18 DILUPBiCG: Solving for Uy, Initial residual = 0.312606, Final residual = 1.82604e11, No Iterations 18 DICPCG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.916305, Final residual = 9.79778e08, No Iterations 292 time step continuity errors : sum local = 3.3445e11, global = 1.1319e21, cumulative = 1.16975e21 DICPCG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.7854, Final residual = 9.34491e08, No Iterations 282 time step continuity errors : sum local = 1.78264e10, global = 2.58022e20, cumulative = 2.6972e20 ExecutionTime = 0.36 s ClockTime = 0 s Time = 0.0625 Courant Number mean: 0.00188543 max: 15.577 DILUPBiCG: Solving for Ux, Initial residual = 0.344186, Final residual = 2.53233e11, No Iterations 19 DILUPBiCG: Solving for Uy, Initial residual = 0.325652, Final residual = 1.0124e11, No Iterations 19 DICPCG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.887083, Final residual = 9.42448e08, No Iterations 295 time step continuity errors : sum local = 1.40168e09, global = 4.72842e18, cumulative = 4.75539e18 DICPCG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.968391, Final residual = 9.63933e08, No Iterations 290 time step continuity errors : sum local = 1.7746e08, global = 1.16238e17, cumulative = 6.86843e18 ExecutionTime = 0.39 s ClockTime = 0 s Time = 0.075 Courant Number mean: 0.535059 max: 1724.54 DILUPBiCG: Solving for Ux, Initial residual = 0.642258, Final residual = 0.0046226, No Iterations 1001 DILUPBiCG: Solving for Uy, Initial residual = 0.966405, Final residual = 0.00529744, No Iterations 1001 DICPCG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.892676, Final residual = 0.036825, No Iterations 1001 time step continuity errors : sum local = 0.0900662, global = 9.51614e17, cumulative = 8.82929e17 DICPCG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.979527, Final residual = 0.0190689, No Iterations 1001 time step continuity errors : sum local = 2.48803, global = 7.10808e14, cumulative = 7.09925e14 ExecutionTime = 0.66 s ClockTime = 0 s Time = 0.0875 Courant Number mean: 858.698 max: 2.36043e+07 DILUPBiCG: Solving for Ux, Initial residual = 0.999976, Final residual = 1.00727, No Iterations 1001 DILUPBiCG: Solving for Uy, Initial residual = 0.999974, Final residual = 3.69304, No Iterations 1001 DICPCG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.999999, Final residual = 0.119223, No Iterations 1001 time step continuity errors : sum local = 2.24302e+07, global = 9.7959e10, cumulative = 9.79519e10 DICPCG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.981905, Final residual = 0.335337, No Iterations 1001 time step continuity errors : sum local = 3.96954e+09, global = 1.92904e07, cumulative = 1.91924e07 ExecutionTime = 0.91 s ClockTime = 1 s Time = 0.1 Courant Number mean: 8.4947e+09 max: 1.06993e+14 DILUPBiCG: Solving for Ux, Initial residual = 0.997632, Final residual = 51.6564, No Iterations 1001 DILUPBiCG: Solving for Uy, Initial residual = 0.997067, Final residual = 1.91243, No Iterations 1001 DICPCG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 1, Final residual = 12.3467, No Iterations 1001 time step continuity errors : sum local = 3.52888e+15, global = 0.0227559, cumulative = 0.0227557 DICPCG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.977625, Final residual = 6.17759, No Iterations 1001 time step continuity errors : sum local = 1.0004e+18, global = 41.4258, cumulative = 41.403 ExecutionTime = 1.17 s ClockTime = 1 s Time = 0.1125 Courant Number mean: 2.11207e+18 max: 3.46701e+22 DILUPBiCG: Solving for Ux, Initial residual = 0.997125, Final residual = 0.282022, No Iterations 1001 DILUPBiCG: Solving for Uy, Initial residual = 0.995716, Final residual = 0.775586, No Iterations 1001 DICPCG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 1, Final residual = 76.605, No Iterations 1001 time step continuity errors : sum local = 1.66192e+23, global = 9.79902e+06, cumulative = 9.79906e+06 DICPCG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.980146, Final residual = 1.73321, No Iterations 1001 time step continuity errors : sum local = 1.30072e+25, global = 4.72389e+08, cumulative = 4.6259e+08 ExecutionTime = 1.44 s ClockTime = 1 s Time = 0.125 Courant Number mean: 2.54375e+25 max: 5.71293e+29 DILUPBiCG: Solving for Ux, Initial residual = 0.999787, Final residual = 2.98944, No Iterations 1001 DILUPBiCG: Solving for Uy, Initial residual = 0.995576, Final residual = 1.0834, No Iterations 1001 DICPCG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 1, Final residual = 24.7115, No Iterations 1001 time step continuity errors : sum local = 1.00218e+30, global = 8.54027e+12, cumulative = 8.53981e+12 DICPCG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.96636, Final residual = 4.26514, No Iterations 1001 time step continuity errors : sum local = 1.13572e+32, global = 8.38086e+15, cumulative = 8.37232e+15 ExecutionTime = 1.69 s ClockTime = 2 s Time = 0.1375 Courant Number mean: 2.13843e+32 max: 7.878e+36 DILUPBiCG: Solving for Ux, Initial residual = 0.996796, Final residual = 1.95122, No Iterations 1001 DILUPBiCG: Solving for Uy, Initial residual = 0.997762, Final residual = 8.63034, No Iterations 1001 DICPCG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 1, Final residual = 5.35897, No Iterations 1001 time step continuity errors : sum local = 2.20198e+37, global = 2.42385e+21, cumulative = 2.42386e+21 DICPCG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.990478, Final residual = 0.285598, No Iterations 1001 time step continuity errors : sum local = 5.67344e+38, global = 3.51519e+22, cumulative = 3.2728e+22 ExecutionTime = 1.95 s ClockTime = 2 s Time = 0.15 Courant Number mean: 1.17474e+39 max: 2.13026e+42 DILUPBiCG: Solving for Ux, Initial residual = 0.999335, Final residual = 3.57986, No Iterations 1001 DILUPBiCG: Solving for Uy, Initial residual = 0.996917, Final residual = 1.66825, No Iterations 1001 DICPCG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 1, Final residual = 1.30652, No Iterations 1001 time step continuity errors : sum local = 2.24258e+43, global = 1.45234e+27, cumulative = 1.45237e+27 DICPCG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.957264, Final residual = 1.25507, No Iterations 1001 time step continuity errors : sum local = 9.32738e+44, global = 5.20839e+27, cumulative = 3.75602e+27 ExecutionTime = 2.22 s ClockTime = 2 s Time = 0.1625 Courant Number mean: 2.50055e+45 max: 2.32987e+49 DILUPBiCG: Solving for Ux, Initial residual = 0.999395, Final residual = 2.36754, No Iterations 1001 DILUPBiCG: Solving for Uy, Initial residual = 0.999991, Final residual = 8.579, No Iterations 1001 DICPCG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 1, Final residual = 14.3288, No Iterations 1001 time step continuity errors : sum local = 3.43893e+50, global = 3.69694e+34, cumulative = 3.69694e+34 DICPCG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.986568, Final residual = 3.39767, No Iterations 1001 time step continuity errors : sum local = 7.05453e+52, global = 5.91511e+35, cumulative = 6.28481e+35 ExecutionTime = 2.48 s ClockTime = 2 s Time = 0.175 Courant Number mean: 1.26851e+53 max: 1.75204e+56 DILUPBiCG: Solving for Ux, Initial residual = 0.998998, Final residual = 4.58537, No Iterations 1001 DILUPBiCG: Solving for Uy, Initial residual = 0.999707, Final residual = 0.631888, No Iterations 1001 DICPCG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 1, Final residual = 4.38271, No Iterations 1001 time step continuity errors : sum local = 1.06825e+57, global = 1.93055e+41, cumulative = 1.93056e+41 DICPCG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.982177, Final residual = 14.2403, No Iterations 1001 time step continuity errors : sum local = 7.99535e+59, global = 1.62391e+43, cumulative = 1.60461e+43 ExecutionTime = 2.75 s ClockTime = 3 s Time = 0.1875 Courant Number mean: 1.63464e+60 max: 3.13789e+63 DILUPBiCG: Solving for Ux, Initial residual = 0.998533, Final residual = 9.02987, No Iterations 1001 DILUPBiCG: Solving for Uy, Initial residual = 0.997819, Final residual = 0.571402, No Iterations 1001 DICPCG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 1, Final residual = 4.80908, No Iterations 1001 time step continuity errors : sum local = 9.14904e+64, global = 3.10405e+48, cumulative = 3.10404e+48 DICPCG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.985965, Final residual = 0.660977, No Iterations 1001 time step continuity errors : sum local = 4.48705e+66, global = 2.57311e+50, cumulative = 2.60415e+50 ExecutionTime = 3.01 s ClockTime = 3 s Time = 0.2 Courant Number mean: 8.25292e+66 max: 1.12749e+71 DILUPBiCG: Solving for Ux, Initial residual = 0.999802, Final residual = 0.740613, No Iterations 1001 DILUPBiCG: Solving for Uy, Initial residual = 0.997251, Final residual = 0.921345, No Iterations 1001 DICPCG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 1, Final residual = 0.720763, No Iterations 1001 time step continuity errors : sum local = 5.70309e+70, global = 2.47988e+53, cumulative = 2.48248e+53 DICPCG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.961155, Final residual = 1.68471, No Iterations 1001 time step continuity errors : sum local = 6.78909e+72, global = 1.77559e+56, cumulative = 1.77807e+56 ExecutionTime = 3.27 s ClockTime = 3 s Time = 0.2125 Courant Number mean: 1.06959e+73 max: 2.0314e+76 DILUPBiCG: Solving for Ux, Initial residual = 0.999582, Final residual = 1.20361, No Iterations 1001 DILUPBiCG: Solving for Uy, Initial residual = 0.999582, Final residual = 1.32655, No Iterations 1001 DICPCG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 1, Final residual = 1.88597, No Iterations 1001 time step continuity errors : sum local = 6.02945e+76, global = 1.78773e+60, cumulative = 1.78791e+60 DICPCG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.993942, Final residual = 0.367036, No Iterations 1001 time step continuity errors : sum local = 4.62511e+78, global = 1.37298e+62, cumulative = 1.3551e+62 ExecutionTime = 3.53 s ClockTime = 3 s Time = 0.225 Courant Number mean: 1.55053e+79 max: 4.87871e+82 DILUPBiCG: Solving for Ux, Initial residual = 0.999908, Final residual = 0.330781, No Iterations 1001 DILUPBiCG: Solving for Uy, Initial residual = 0.999967, Final residual = 3.45014, No Iterations 1001 DICPCG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 1, Final residual = 27.8568, No Iterations 1001 time step continuity errors : sum local = 5.8116e+84, global = 6.98023e+68, cumulative = 6.98023e+68 DICPCG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.977871, Final residual = 10.1664, No Iterations 1001 time step continuity errors : sum local = 2.19292e+87, global = 7.59449e+70, cumulative = 7.52469e+70 ExecutionTime = 3.79 s ClockTime = 4 s Time = 0.2375 Courant Number mean: 3.84897e+87 max: 7.63325e+90 DILUPBiCG: Solving for Ux, Initial residual = 0.998776, Final residual = 1.47147, No Iterations 1001 DILUPBiCG: Solving for Uy, Initial residual = 0.999918, Final residual = 6.49108, No Iterations 1001 DICPCG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 1, Final residual = 8.05985, No Iterations 1001 time step continuity errors : sum local = 2.34193e+92, global = 9.36871e+75, cumulative = 9.36878e+75 DICPCG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.976013, Final residual = 1.47685, No Iterations 1001 time step continuity errors : sum local = 1.45774e+94, global = 6.55809e+77, cumulative = 6.65178e+77 ExecutionTime = 4.05 s ClockTime = 4 s Time = 0.25 Courant Number mean: 3.07094e+94 max: 1.31767e+98 The checkMesh is OK. The createPatch to create the cyclic boundaries is OK. The timestep is 0.0125, even if I changed it to 1e8, there is still such problems. And there is nothing new if I changed the Re to a very small value. I suspect there is something wrong with the geometry. But the error shows up again for the third geometry. An example geometry is attached. I wonder if you guys could give some instructions on this problem. Thank you in advance. Best Regards, Bill Last edited by 6863523; March 9, 2017 at 10:49. Reason: geometry was added 

March 9, 2017, 10:36 

#2 
Senior Member
Uwe Pilz
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Posts: 744
Rep Power: 15 
Large Courant numbers mean the time step ist too large. I see your time step is 10 ms. This is not especially small for complex geometries. Please keep in mind: Complex geometry = many nodes = small element sizes = small time for traversing an element = high Courant number.
The first steps have a small Courant number because the flow is zero initially. At least I suppose so. If you can afford the simulation time use a much smaller time step. I guess you need far below 1 ms, rather 100 ĩs. If that ist not possible you have to reduce the complexity of the geometry. That may lead to coarse solutions for some regions of your model. In that case I recommend to use the coarse solution as a starting point for isolating a Region Of Interest and simulating this region isolated. This makes much more manual effort, of course.
__________________
Uwe Pilz  Die der Hauptbewegung überlagerte Schwankungsbewegung ist in ihren Einzelheiten so hoffnungslos kompliziert, daß ihre theoretische Berechnung aussichtslos erscheint. (Hermann Schlichting, 1950) 

March 9, 2017, 10:39 

#3 
Senior Member
Ruben Di Battista
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Paris
Posts: 137
Rep Power: 12 
Moreover if you use the adjustRunTime option in the controlDict together with the maxCo option you can let the solver choose the right timestep each time to stay under the MaxCo value of the Courant Number.


March 9, 2017, 11:01 

#4 
Senior Member
Bill Wang
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 109
Rep Power: 11 
Dear,
Thank you for your replies. Dr. Pilz, I have tried to use timestep=1e8s, the problem also appears. In my case, this is rather a small value and quite impossible for my simulation, since I need to run for 3e4s to ensure that I can observe the flow unsteadiness. I have read through other threads IcoFoam unstability, courant number gets large! High Courant Number @ icoFoam How to choose the right courant number? It seems that this way does not work. Dear Ruben, According to what I have read, it seems that the adjustRunTime and MaxCo options are not designed for icoFoam. I think I need to check the geometry over and over again, since one geometry is executable without this problem. Any possible reason (except the geometry) for this problem is still welcomed. Thank you. Best, Bill 

March 9, 2017, 11:35 

#5 
Senior Member
Uwe Pilz
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Posts: 744
Rep Power: 15 
If I understand the geometry right you try to simulate some kind of draining through a porous material like sand or rubble. If I am right I recommend:
 Use a very small clipping first  Look at your boundary conditions. What is the b.c. for the particles? General the first thoughts should be sacrificed to "What I want to find out" and next "How can this be simulated in an easy way". More complicated and complex conditions may added later. It would be helpful to know what you try to find out and which purpose your simulation serves. ~ > controlDict together with the maxCo option This doesn't work with icoFoam, at least with my version of OF. pimpleFoam is able to accept these entries.
__________________
Uwe Pilz  Die der Hauptbewegung überlagerte Schwankungsbewegung ist in ihren Einzelheiten so hoffnungslos kompliziert, daß ihre theoretische Berechnung aussichtslos erscheint. (Hermann Schlichting, 1950) 

March 15, 2017, 10:26 

#6 
Senior Member
Bill Wang
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 109
Rep Power: 11 
Dear Dr. Pilz,
Thank you for you detailed reply. 1) Reducing the timestep does not solve the problem, only delay the time for the occurance of the error. 2) You are right, I am modeling the flow in the porous media. I started from a simple case and then complex geometry. Interesting thing is that, one of the complex geometries works well, giving me the good results, while for other complex geometries, the courant number will increase. The checkMesh function in OpenFOAM gives me the following information. Code:
Time = 0 Mesh stats points: 1681124 internal points: 0 faces: 5732540 internal faces: 2419290 cells: 1630366 faces per cell: 5 boundary patches: 6 point zones: 0 face zones: 0 cell zones: 0 Overall number of cells of each type: hexahedra: 0 prisms: 1630366 wedges: 0 pyramids: 0 tet wedges: 0 tetrahedra: 0 polyhedra: 0 Checking topology... Boundary definition OK. Cell to face addressing OK. Point usage OK. Upper triangular ordering OK. Face vertices OK. Number of regions: 1 (OK). Checking patch topology for multiply connected surfaces... Patch Faces Points Surface topology LEFT 892 1800 ok (nonclosed singly connected) RIGHT 892 1800 ok (nonclosed singly connected) BOTTOM 841 1706 ok (nonclosed singly connected) TOP 841 1706 ok (nonclosed singly connected) FRONTANDBACK 3260732 1681124 ok (nonclosed singly connected) SOLID 49052 98184 ok (nonclosed singly connected) Checking geometry... Overall domain bounding box (0 0 0) (30 30 0.01) Mesh has 3 geometric (nonempty/wedge) directions (1 1 1) Mesh has 3 solution (nonempty) directions (1 1 1) Boundary openness (2.67981e19 1.23503e19 3.0877e14) OK. Max cell openness = 3.03166e16 OK. Max aspect ratio = 7.5 OK. Minimum face area = 5.96e05. Maximum face area = 0.00127061. Face area magnitudes OK. Min volume = 5.96e07. Max volume = 1.27061e05. Total volume = 7.53512. Cell volumes OK. Mesh nonorthogonality Max: 71.1018 average: 4.27172 *Number of severely nonorthogonal (> 70 degrees) faces: 9. Nonorthogonality check OK. <<Writing 9 nonorthogonal faces to set nonOrthoFaces Face pyramids OK. Max skewness = 0.624914 OK. Coupled point location match (average 0) OK. Mesh OK. End I wonder if there is any other possible reasons for this error, since all the settings in OpenFOAM are totally the same and there seems to be nothing wrong with the mesh. I have looked some related threads, but no final reasons for this error. Thank you. Best, Bill 

March 15, 2017, 11:02 

#7 
Senior Member
Uwe Pilz
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Posts: 744
Rep Power: 15 
It is hard to give an advice at this level of information.
I see two possible reasons: 1) There is something wrong with the mesh. 2) The problem gets instabil with larger complexity You may set the end time to a point where the Courant number does not exceed 1 and look at the solution. If you have probems with the mesh you should find ares where the flow and pressure changes fast. Increasing Co number means that there is a very large flow somewhere. If you find any mistake this way and believe in your mesh, the you could play around with underrelaxation. Another way is slightly increasing the complexity and looking, when the problem starts to occur. In general, complex simulations are often more problematic because of numeric problems solving system of equations. If possible you may switch to an approximation technique. But I have experineces with that in OF. But I would look at the mesh first, which is often the problematic part in such instabilities.
__________________
Uwe Pilz  Die der Hauptbewegung überlagerte Schwankungsbewegung ist in ihren Einzelheiten so hoffnungslos kompliziert, daß ihre theoretische Berechnung aussichtslos erscheint. (Hermann Schlichting, 1950) 

March 16, 2017, 02:51 

#8 
Senior Member
Laurent DASTUGUE
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Chartres, France
Posts: 122
Rep Power: 11 
Code:
*Number of severely nonorthogonal (> 70 degrees) faces: 9. Nonorthogonality check OK. <<Writing 9 nonorthogonal faces to set nonOrthoFaces But the flow can be very complex in local areas. For example, in my case, there was a recirculation of the flow, with huge velocities, in the area where the severe nonorthogonal elements are detected. Maybe you should take a look on the area concerned by this warning about the nonorthogonality, i guess that you will find a particular area with recirculations or things like that.
__________________
Laurent D. 

March 16, 2017, 03:06 

#9 
Senior Member
Uwe Pilz
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Posts: 744
Rep Power: 15 
Areas with high flow need to meshed finer. A good measure of the real mesh quality is the relation between the max and mean Courant number, which should be low. You may get an idea of the flow values even from a coarse and imperfect mesh. Use that to establish a better mesh.
It is a fine idea only to use hex elements. Simulation is more stable in this case. Automated meshers don't reach the quality of a good manual mesh.
__________________
Uwe Pilz  Die der Hauptbewegung überlagerte Schwankungsbewegung ist in ihren Einzelheiten so hoffnungslos kompliziert, daß ihre theoretische Berechnung aussichtslos erscheint. (Hermann Schlichting, 1950) 

March 16, 2017, 03:31 

#10 
Senior Member
Bill Wang
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 109
Rep Power: 11 
Dear Laurant,
Thank you for the reply. Yes, you are right. This is most probably the reason for this problem. I will try to figure the "severely nonorthogonal" problems. Thank you. Cheers, Bill 

March 6, 2018, 07:06 

#11  
New Member
Jagannath Mahato
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 1
Rep Power: 0 
Quote:
I was also facing the same problem with icoFoam, where the Courant Number increases to a very large number. But finally I resolved. It can be solved by the following: 1. Use pimpleFoam with laminar module. 2. Modify the mesh. 3. If you still want to use icoFoam and do not want to do any change in mesh, then manually calculate (roughly), the maximum velocity in steady state condition. Using the minimum mesh size that you had used, and limiting the Courant number to 1, determine the minimum time step required. With a bit of factor of safety (decrease the value a bit), put the time step in controlDict. Hope this will work. Thanks, Jagannath 

May 28, 2018, 11:24 
Having similar problem

#12 
New Member
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 3
Rep Power: 7 
I also have similar problems and doing searches in this forum. I currently using Abaqus CFD and runs satisfactorily. I wants to try out OpenFOAM becaujse of its capability in multiphase problems.
I tried running CFD for three intake manifold models for car engines, two out of three models have Courant numbers large right from the start of the simulations even though the checkMesh reports ok, and both simulations blew up very soon. When the simulations could still running I could see pimpleFoam do adjust the time step to even ~1e12 s, as I turned on maxCo option (which set to 1, 0.45 or even 0.1). What is interesting (or frustrating ... ) is that the same meshes ran perfectly in Abaqus CFD. The 3d meshes consists of tetrahedral and penta elements. All have penta elements modelling the boundary layers. The geometry of the intake manifolds are always complex, making the mesh entirely out of brick (hexa) elements are just not possible, and because of relatively tight project schedule we cannot afford very long run time and very big problem size. The models are intake manifolds for car engines, geometries were input, cleanup and meshed in ANSA (BetaCAD system). Snappyhexmesh was not used, as doing geometry cleanup is much easier in ANSA, and my computer runs on Window 7 (My OpenFOAM v5 is actually on Bluecore CFD). I read the posts in this thread, if as piu58 said only hex elements are fine for OpenFOAM then I have a feeling that the problems I dealt with might be difficult for OpenFOAM ... 

May 28, 2018, 12:18 

#13  
Senior Member
Ruben Di Battista
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Paris
Posts: 137
Rep Power: 12 
Quote:
By the way generally the problem you're facing is associated with wrong BCs. Are you sure that you translated the boundary conditions correctly from Abaqus to OF? 

May 28, 2018, 21:33 
Boundary conditions

#14 
New Member
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 3
Rep Power: 7 
Hi tidusuper91,
Just back, all three cases there is velocity at inlet and pressure at outlet, these are same in both Abaqus CFD and OpenFOAM runs. Because of IP protection issue I cannot share the files, I summarise the BCs below, one from successful model, the other two from failed models: This is from a successful model, running with Spalart Allmaras turb model: Inlet: p  zeroGradient U  surfaceNormalFV, value 10 (m/s) nut  calculated, value uniform 0 nuTilda  fixedValue, 0.01 Outlet (one of the engine cylinder port): p  fixedValue, 0 U  zeroGradient nut  calculated, value uniform 0 nuTilda  zeroGradient Wall and all the other closed engine cylinder ports: p  zeroGradient U  noSlip nut  nutkWallFunction, Cmu 0.09, kappa 0.41, epsilon 9.8, value uniform 0 nuTilda  zeroGradient This is from a failed model, also running with Spalart Allmaras turb model: Inlet: p  zeroGradient U  surfaceNormalFV, value 29.16 (m/s) nut  calculated, value uniform 0 nuTilda  fixedValue, 0.01 Outlet (one of the engine cylinder port): p  fixedValue, 0 U  zeroGradient nut  calculated, value uniform 0 nuTilda  zeroGradient Wall and all the other closed engine cylinder ports: p  zeroGradient U  noSlip nut  nutkWallFunction, Cmu 0.09, kappa 0.41, epsilon 9.8, value uniform 0 nuTilda  zeroGradient This is from another failed model, running with kepsilon turb model: Inlet: p  zeroGradient U  surfaceNormalFV, value 17.67(m/s) k  fixed value, 1. epsilon  fixedValue, 1. Outlet (one of the engine cylinder port): p  fixedValue, 0 U  zeroGradient k  zeroGradient epsilon  zeroGradient Wall and all the other closed engine cylinder ports: p  zeroGradient U  noSlip k  kqRWallFunction, value uniform 1. epsilon  epsilonWallFunction, value uniform 1. 

November 8, 2019, 08:28 

#15 
New Member
Snigdha Ghosh
Join Date: Nov 2019
Posts: 6
Rep Power: 6 
Hi,
I am also working with flow in the porous media (in between the gap of two spheres). I am using interFoam solver. After running for quite some time, the deltaT goes to very low value(1e108 or something). I am using constantAlphaContactAngle condition on the sphere walls. Interestingly, when I use zeroGradient boundary condition for alpha, the program runs well. Any idea what may be going wrong? 

November 8, 2019, 08:32 

#16  
Senior Member
Ruben Di Battista
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Paris
Posts: 137
Rep Power: 12 
Quote:
Well, that hints that probably you're setting wrong BCs. Could it be? 

November 8, 2019, 10:22 

#17 
New Member
Snigdha Ghosh
Join Date: Nov 2019
Posts: 6
Rep Power: 6 
Actually, I want to see the effect of contact angle on the liquid flow process. Hence, i want to put the solid liquid contact angle conditions.
Moreover, I made my mesh from sappy Hex mesh. The following are my BCS for alpha, U and p_rgh respectively  /** C++ **\ =========  \\ / F ield  OpenFOAM: The Open Source CFD Toolbox \\ / O peration  Website: https://openfoam.org \\ / A nd  Version: 7 \\/ M anipulation  \**/ FoamFile { version 2.0; format ascii; class volScalarField; object alpha.water; } // * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * // dimensions [0 0 0 0 0 0 0]; internalField uniform 0; boundaryField { atmosphere { type zeroGradient; } two_sphere_bottom_sphere { type zeroGradient; } two_sphere_top_sphere { type zeroGradient; } } /** C++ **\ =========  \\ / F ield  OpenFOAM: The Open Source CFD Toolbox \\ / O peration  Website: https://openfoam.org \\ / A nd  Version: 7 \\/ M anipulation  \**/ FoamFile { version 2.0; format ascii; class volVectorField; location "0"; object U; } // * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * // dimensions [0 1 1 0 0 0 0]; internalField uniform (0 0 0); boundaryField { atmosphere { type pressureInletOutletVelocity; value uniform (0 0 0); } two_sphere_bottom_sphere { type noSlip; } two_sphere_top_sphere { type noSlip; } } /** C++ **\ =========  \\ / F ield  OpenFOAM: The Open Source CFD Toolbox \\ / O peration  Website: https://openfoam.org \\ / A nd  Version: 7 \\/ M anipulation  \**/ FoamFile { version 2.0; format ascii; class volScalarField; object p_rgh; } // * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * // dimensions [1 1 2 0 0 0 0]; internalField uniform 0; boundaryField { atmosphere { type fixedValue; value uniform 0; } two_sphere_bottom_sphere { type fixedFluxPressure; } two_sphere_top_sphere { type fixedFluxPressure; } } Can you tell me what may be going wrong? if it is the mesh, then what shall improve? 

November 8, 2019, 10:32 

#18  
Senior Member
Ruben Di Battista
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Paris
Posts: 137
Rep Power: 12 
Quote:
Code:
CODE What's your mesh? Showing up the mesh could actually help to understand better if you put the right BCs. Reading the name of the patches is not really enough 

November 8, 2019, 10:40 

#19 
New Member
Snigdha Ghosh
Join Date: Nov 2019
Posts: 6
Rep Power: 6 
I have attached the wireframe of the mesh structure. The two half spheres are top sphere and bottom sphere respectively, and the other portions are atmosphere.


November 8, 2019, 10:45 

#20 
Senior Member
Ruben Di Battista
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Paris
Posts: 137
Rep Power: 12 
As a first guess, I'll try to split the atmosphere patch in "inlet" and "outlet", and put an inlet condition for velocity and zeroGradient for pressure on "inlet", and zeroGradient for velocity and fixed pressure for "outlet".


Thread Tools  Search this Thread 
Display Modes  


Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Foam::error::PrintStack  almir  OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD  91  December 21, 2022 04:50 
[mesh manipulation] Mesh Refinement  Luiz Eduardo Bittencourt Sampaio (Sampaio)  OpenFOAM Meshing & Mesh Conversion  42  January 8, 2017 12:55 
Weird AMI Courant Number  Vyssion  OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD  3  April 13, 2016 02:31 
Could anybody help me see this error and give help  liugx212  OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD  3  January 4, 2006 18:07 
[Commercial meshers] Trimmed cell and embedded refinement mesh conversion issues  michele  OpenFOAM Meshing & Mesh Conversion  2  July 15, 2005 04:15 