|
[Sponsors] | |||||
icoUncoupledKinematicParcelFoam - simpleFoam pisoFoam |
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1 |
|
Member
cal
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: nowhere
Posts: 66
Rep Power: 7 ![]() |
Hi everyone,
I have problem which I can't solve. I've 2 different case with same geometry. One of them is simpleFoam (RAS) case and other pisoFoam (LES) case. I ran the simulations 15 seconds with their own solvers and the results looks good so there isn't any problem. But when I try particle-tracking with icoUncoupledKinematicParcelFoam some things are not going well. Both case, my Reynolds number is 5e4 but if i change to this number in icoUncoupledKinematicParcelFoam the case run just a few step and stop. In any case, when I didn't change kinematic viscosity the loop didn't complete. I give 3 second but it run like 1.9 second. pisoFoam is worse than simpleFoam. I mean, simpleFoam ran about 1.9 second at least. pisoFoam ran like 0.3 second and stop suddenly. Also there is no error. Can someone who knows these situations give an idea? I am open to any advice. This is gif of simpleFoam particle-tracking: https://gfycat.com/energeticdecisivecurlew simpleFoam controlDict Code:
application icoUncoupledKinematicParcelFoam; startFrom latestTime; startTime 0; stopAt endTime; endTime 3; deltaT 0.005; writeControl adjustableRunTime; writeInterval 0.01; purgeWrite 0; writeFormat ascii; writePrecision 6; writeCompression off; timeFormat general; timePrecision 6; runTimeModifiable yes; Code:
solution
{
active true;
coupled false;
transient yes;
cellValueSourceCorrection off;
maxCo 0.3;
interpolationSchemes
{
rho cell;
U cellPoint;
mu cell;
}
integrationSchemes
{
U Euler;
}
}
constantProperties
{
rho0 1.2;
youngsModulus 6e8;
poissonsRatio 0.35;
}
subModels
{
particleForces
{
sphereDrag;
gravity;
}
injectionModels
{
model1
{
type patchInjection;
parcelBasisType fixed;
patchName inlet;
nParticle 1;
SOI 0;
U0 (10 0 0);
parcelsPerSecond 1000;
sizeDistribution
{
type normal;
normalDistribution
{
expectation 650e-6;
variance 25e-6;
minValue 500e-6;
maxValue 800e-6;
}
}
flowRateProfile constant 1;
massTotal 0;
duration 100;
}
}
dispersionModel none;
patchInteractionModel none;
surfaceFilmModel none;
stochasticCollisionModel none;
collisionModel none;
pairCollisionCoeffs
{
maxInteractionDistance 0.0001;
writeReferredParticleCloud no;
pairModel pairSpringSliderDashpot;
pairSpringSliderDashpotCoeffs
{
useEquivalentSize no;
alpha 0.12;
b 1.5;
mu 0.52;
cohesionEnergyDensity 0;
collisionResolutionSteps 12;
};
wallModel wallLocalSpringSliderDashpot;
wallLocalSpringSliderDashpotCoeffs
{
useEquivalentSize no;
collisionResolutionSteps 12;
upperWall
{
youngsModulus 1e10;
poissonsRatio 0.23;
alpha 0.12;
b 1.5;
mu 0.43;
cohesionEnergyDensity 0;
}
lowerWall
{
youngsModulus 1e10;
poissonsRatio 0.23;
alpha 0.12;
b 1.5;
mu 0.43;
cohesionEnergyDensity 0;
}
frontAndBack
{
youngsModulus 1e10;
poissonsRatio 0.23;
alpha 0.12;
b 1.5;
mu 0.1;
cohesionEnergyDensity 0;
}
};
}
}
cloudFunctions
{}
controlDict Code:
application icoUncoupledKinematicParcelFoam; startFrom startTime; startTime 0; stopAt endTime; endTime 1; deltaT 0.005; writeControl adjustableRunTime; writeInterval 0.01; purgeWrite 0; writeFormat ascii; writePrecision 6; writeCompression off; timeFormat general; timePrecision 6; runTimeModifiable yes; Code:
solution
{
active true;
coupled false;
transient yes;
cellValueSourceCorrection off;
maxCo 0.5;
interpolationSchemes
{
rho cell;
U cellPoint;
mu cell;
}
integrationSchemes
{
U Euler;
}
}
constantProperties
{
rho0 1.2;
youngsModulus 6e8;
poissonsRatio 0.35;
}
subModels
{
particleForces
{
sphereDrag;
gravity;
}
injectionModels
{
model1
{
type patchInjection;
parcelBasisType fixed;
patchName inlet;
nParticle 1;
SOI 0;
U0 (10 0 0);
parcelsPerSecond 1000;
sizeDistribution
{
type normal;
normalDistribution
{
expectation 650e-6;
variance 25e-6;
minValue 500e-6;
maxValue 800e-6;
}
}
flowRateProfile constant 1;
massTotal 0;
duration 1;
}
}
dispersionModel none;
patchInteractionModel none;
surfaceFilmModel none;
stochasticCollisionModel none;
collisionModel none;
pairCollisionCoeffs
{
maxInteractionDistance 0.0001;
writeReferredParticleCloud no;
pairModel pairSpringSliderDashpot;
pairSpringSliderDashpotCoeffs
{
useEquivalentSize no;
alpha 0.12;
b 1.5;
mu 0.52;
cohesionEnergyDensity 0;
collisionResolutionSteps 12;
};
wallModel wallLocalSpringSliderDashpot;
wallLocalSpringSliderDashpotCoeffs
{
useEquivalentSize no;
collisionResolutionSteps 12;
upperWall
{
youngsModulus 1e10;
poissonsRatio 0.23;
alpha 0.12;
b 1.5;
mu 0.43;
cohesionEnergyDensity 0;
}
lowerWall
{
youngsModulus 1e10;
poissonsRatio 0.23;
alpha 0.12;
b 1.5;
mu 0.43;
cohesionEnergyDensity 0;
}
frontAndBack
{
youngsModulus 1e10;
poissonsRatio 0.23;
alpha 0.12;
b 1.5;
mu 0.1;
cohesionEnergyDensity 0;
}
};
}
}
cloudFunctions
{}
Code:
Time = 0.291
Evolving kinematicCloud
Solving 3-D cloud kinematicCloud
Cloud: kinematicCloud injector: model1
Added 5 new parcels
Cloud: kinematicCloud
Current number of parcels = 1455
Current mass in system = 2.50729e-07
Linear momentum = (1.9443e-07 4.27472e-08 1.03438e-12)
|Linear momentum| = 1.99073e-07
Linear kinetic energy = 1.09353e-07
model1:
number of parcels added = 1455
mass introduced = 2.50729e-07
Rotational kinetic energy = 0
ExecutionTime = 260.49 s ClockTime = 262 s
Time = 0.292
Evolving kinematicCloud
Solving 3-D cloud kinematicCloud
Cloud: kinematicCloud injector: model1
Added 5 new parcels
Said. |
|
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Tags |
| icouncoupledkinematic, les, pisofoam, ras, simplefoam |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| pimpleFoam vs simpleFoam vs pisoFoam vs icoFoam? | phsieh2005 | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 47 | May 19, 2025 06:04 |
| simpleFoam or pisoFoam, which is better? | Jingxue Wang | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 4 | October 17, 2017 18:45 |
| Modifications work in simpleFoam, not pisoFoam | Aicharem | OpenFOAM Programming & Development | 0 | April 23, 2016 12:15 |
| Porosity model not found for pisoFoam; works fine for simpleFoam | aerogt3 | OpenFOAM | 2 | September 13, 2014 17:39 |
| the result of pitzDaily using simpleFoam and pisoFoam | Kr_kim | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 1 | March 16, 2010 14:38 |