
[Sponsors] 
May 2, 2006, 12:03 
Hi,
we try to calculate a j

#1 
Senior Member
Fabian Braennstroem
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 407
Rep Power: 12 
Sponsored Links
we try to calculate a jet flow in a room using simpleFoam. Inlet velocity is set to 2.6m/s; for the outlet pressureoutlet is used (p=0) and 'wallFunctions' for the surrounding walls. Unfortunately we have strange 'singularity problems' and somehow no 'visible' time steps from 3 to 44 in the log as shown below: Starting time loop Time = 1 BICCG: Solving for Ux, Initial residual = 1.99239e05, Final residual = 8.52279e08, No Iterations 1 BICCG: Solving for Uy, Initial residual = 0.000382404, Final residual = 1.11723e06, No Iterations 1 BICCG: Solving for Uz, Initial residual = 0.00130972, Final residual = 3.30692e06, No Iterations 1 ICCG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 1, Final residual = 0.00981217, No Iterations 76 time step continuity errors : sum local = 4.51616e06, global = 2.50011e07, cumulative = 2.50011e07 BICCG: Solving for epsilon, Initial residual = 0.0527458, Final residual = 8.61077e06, No Iterations 1 BICCG: Solving for k, Initial residual = 1, Final residual = 0.00244073, No Iterations 1 ExecutionTime = 65.93 s ClockTime = 66 s Time = 2 BICCG: Solving for Ux, Initial residual = 1.62207e05, Final residual = 4.69139e08, No Iterations 1 BICCG: Solving for Uy, Initial residual = 0.000286247, Final residual = 9.1854e07, No Iterations 1 BICCG: Solving for Uz, Initial residual = 0.00106412, Final residual = 3.19452e06, No Iterations 1 lution singularity BICCG: Solving for Uy: solution singularity BICCG: Solving for Uz: solution singularity ICCG: Solving for p: solution singularity time step continuity errors : sum local = nan, global = nan, cumulative = nan BICCG: Solving for epsilon: solution singularity BICCG: Solving for k: solution singularity ExecutionTime = 6989.99 s ClockTime = 7395 s Time = 45 BICCG: Solving for Ux: solution singularity BICCG: Solving for Uy: solution singularity BICCG: Solving for Uz: solution singularity ICCG: Solving for p: solution singularity time step continuity errors : sum local = nan, global = nan, cumulative = nan BICCG: Solving for epsilon: solution singularity BICCG: Solving for k: solution singularity ExecutionTime = 7307.35 s ClockTime = 7714 s We used a one time step potential flow solution as initial conditions and reduced the relaxation factors to p=0.0001 and the rest to 0.2. Do you have any suggestions what we can do? Greetings! Fabian 

Sponsored Links 
May 2, 2006, 14:27 
No idea.
My suggestion:
Ha

#2 
Assistant Moderator
Bernhard Gschaider
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,008
Rep Power: 43 
No idea.
My suggestion: Have you written the solution after the first timestep? Usually looking at that gives a good hint (crazy velocities etc). And try it without turbulence (can't think of anything els you can switch off, to isolate the problem) The time warp looks real interesting.
__________________
Note: I don't use "Friend"feature on this forum out of principle. Ah. And by the way: I'm not on Facebook either. So don't be offended if I don't accept your invitation/friend request 

May 3, 2006, 03:52 
Hi,
over night some strange

#3 
Senior Member
Fabian Braennstroem
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 407
Rep Power: 12 
Hi,
over night some strange things happened: the simpleFoam case runs without any solution singularity at time step 800, but as mentioned above we have such a time warp again, but now at two different time steps. One at: Time = 25 BICCG: Solving for Ux, Initial residual = 1.02744e05, Final residual = 2.61834e08, No Iterations 1 BICCG: Solving for Uy, Initial residual = 0.000112404, Final residual = 3.61779e07, No Iterations 1 BICCG: Solving for Uz, Initial residual = 0.000370707, Final residual = 1.23968e06, No Iterations 1 ICCG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.991788, Final residual = 0.00943836, No Iterations 263 time step continuity errors : sum local = 1.61653e05, global = 8.07791e08, cumulative = 3.11282e06 BICCG: Solving for epsilon, Initial residual = 0.000213944, Final residual = 1.55127e07, No Iterations 1 BICCG: Solving for k, Initial residual = 0.00118659, Final residual = 3.08639e06, No Iterations 1 ExecutionTime = 1800.61 s ClockTime = 1805 s Time = 26 BICCG: Solving for Ux, Initial residual = 1.0157e05, Final residual = 2.60278e08, No Iterations 1 BICCG: Solving for Uy, Initial residual = 0.000110948, Final residual = 3.56346e07, No Iterations 1 BICCG: Solving for Uz, Initial residual = 0.000366185, Final residual = 1.21793e06, No Iterations 1 ICCG: 0678 s Time = 54 BICCG: Solving for Ux: solution singularity BICCG: Solving for Uy: solution singularity BICCG: Solving for Uz: solution singularity ICCG: Solving for p: solution singularity time step continuity errors : sum local = nan, global = nan, cumulative = nan BICCG: Solving for epsilon: solution singularity BICCG: Solving for k: solution singularity ExecutionTime = 10572.6 s ClockTime = 11076 s And the second one back from 140 to 73: Time = 139 BICCG: Solving for Ux: solution singularity BICCG: Solving for Uy: solution singularity BICCG: Solving for Uz: solution singularity ICCG: Solving for p: solution singularity time step continuity errors : sum local = nan, global = nan, cumulative = nan BICCG: Solving for epsilon: solution singularity BICCG: Solving for k: solution singularity ExecutionTime = 64227 s ClockTime = 65789 s Time = 140 BICCG: Solving for Ux: solution singularity BICCG: Solving for Uy: solution singularity al = 0.000774369, Final residual = 2.21301e06, No Iterations 1 ExecutionTime = 5199.55 s ClockTime = 5313 s Time = 73 BICCG: Solving for Ux, Initial residual = 6.89053e06, Final residual = 6.89053e06, No Iterations 0 BICCG: Solving for Uy, Initial residual = 8.43502e05, Final residual = 2.05703e07, No Iterations 1 BICCG: Solving for Uz, Initial residual = 0.000290531, Final residual = 6.80189e07, No Iterations 1 ICCG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.967161, Final residual = 0.00946104, No Iterations 267 time step continuity errors : sum local = 2.25708e05, global = 1.6871e07, cumulative = 2.90604e06 BICCG: Solving for epsilon, Initial residual = 0.000100511, Final residual = 1.14051e07, No Iterations 1 BICCG: Solving for k, Initial residual = 0.000770152, Final residual = 2.1998e06, No Iterations 1 ExecutionTime = 5269.9 s ClockTime = 5383 s Do you have an idea? Greetings! Fabian 

May 3, 2006, 05:32 
Just checking: You're using an

#4 
Assistant Moderator
Bernhard Gschaider
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,008
Rep Power: 43 
Just checking: You're using an umodified simpleFoam? You're not using any of the adaptive timestep stuff?
__________________
Note: I don't use "Friend"feature on this forum out of principle. Ah. And by the way: I'm not on Facebook either. So don't be offended if I don't accept your invitation/friend request 

May 3, 2006, 05:38 
Bernhard, there's no adaptive

#5 
Senior Member
Hrvoje Jasak
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: London, England
Posts: 1,802
Rep Power: 24 
Bernhard, there's no adaptive time step here  it's a steady state solver (time is only used as iteration counter).
This looks to me like a problem at the outlet or your solution has already gone bananas. Most of the stuff looks OK, but the initial pressure residual of (0.967161) is way too high for 70odd iterations. I would suggest looking carefully at your solution and discretisation: either there's something obviously wrong with the flow, the turbulence is all wrong or you're using central differencing on some convection terms you should not. In short, visual inspection required. Hrv
__________________
Hrvoje Jasak Providing commercial FOAM/OpenFOAM and CFD Consulting: http://wikki.co.uk 

May 3, 2006, 08:21 
Hrv, I know that it's steadys

#6 
Assistant Moderator
Bernhard Gschaider
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,008
Rep Power: 43 
Hrv, I know that it's steadystate. The adaptive stuff was just a silly notion I had because I was to lazy to look at the source and I couldn't think of any other explanation for the time warps. Now I looked at the source and I have still no idea where the timewarps come from.
If the two runs are with identical settings and they're failing in different ways I have an even sillier idea: maybe it's not Foam. I know this is the lamest excuse in the book: maybe some RAM is failing (never witnessed that myself, but that indeterministic behaviour would be what I would expect in such a case; on the other hand why would Fabian's machine still run) The only other explanation (I can think of, but I have a very limited imagination) for the timewarps would be that somebody is modifying the controlDict during the simulation (which I think is read during the runTime++) without Fabian's knowledge. Which is not a nice prank.
__________________
Note: I don't use "Friend"feature on this forum out of principle. Ah. And by the way: I'm not on Facebook either. So don't be offended if I don't accept your invitation/friend request 

May 5, 2006, 03:03 
I have a similar problem with

#7 
New Member
Steffen Jahnke
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 14
Rep Power: 10 
I have a similar problem with turbFoam but only if I use OF1.3, i.e. running OF1.2 on the same setup everything is o.k.:
OF1.3: Starting time loop Time = 5e05 Mean and max Courant Numbers = 0.0026444 0.117819 BICCG: Solving for Ux, Initial residual = 0.00605567, Final residual = 1.32513e06, No Iterations 2 BICCG: Solving for Uy, Initial residual = 0.0218626, Final residual = 4.30722e06, No Iterations 2 BICCG: Solving for Uz, Initial residual = 0.0224129, Final residual = 4.56185e06, No Iterations 2 AMG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.974855, Final residual = 7.20409e07, No Iterations 28 AMG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.00219321, Final residual = 9.15636e07, No Iterations 6 time step continuity errors : sum local = 7.1722e10, global = 1.12086e11, cumulative = 1.12086e11 AMG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.0295064, Final residual = 8.58992e07, No Iterations 24 AMG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.000449758, Final residual = 9.81688e07, No Iterations 5 time step continuity errors : sum local = 7.20766e10, global = 3.60251e12, cumulative = 7.60611e12 BICCG: Solving for epsilon, Initial residual = 0.0109446, Final residual = 9.07372e06, No Iterations 1 BICCG: Solving for k, Initial residual = 1, Final residual = 9.971e07, No Iterations 3 ExecutionTime = 11.61 s ClockTime = 12 s Time = 0.0001 Mean and max Courant Numbers = 0.00255982 0.120631 BICCG: Solving for Ux: solution singularity BICCG: Solving for Uy: solution singularity BICCG: Solving for Uz: solution singularity AMG: Solving for p, Initial residual = nan, Final residual = nan, No Iterations 501 AMG: Solving for p, Initial residual = nan, Final residual = nan, No Iterations 501 time step continuity errors : sum local = nan, global = nan, cumulative = nan AMG: Solving for p, Initial residual = nan, Final residual = nan, No Iterations 501 AMG: Solving for p, Initial residual = nan, Final residual = nan, No Iterations 501 time step continuity errors : sum local = nan, global = nan, cumulative = nan BICCG: Solving for epsilon: solution singularity BICCG: Solving for k: solution singularity ExecutionTime = 157.94 s ClockTime = 159 s With OF1.2 everything runs fine: Starting time loop Time = 5e05 Mean and max Courant Numbers = 0.0026444 0.117819 BICCG: Solving for Ux, Initial residual = 0.00605567, Final residual = 1.32513e06, No Iterations 2 BICCG: Solving for Uy, Initial residual = 0.0218626, Final residual = 4.30722e06, No Iterations 2 BICCG: Solving for Uz, Initial residual = 0.0224129, Final residual = 4.56185e06, No Iterations 2 AMG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.974855, Final residual = 5.6738e07, No Iterations 33 AMG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.0021932, Final residual = 9.30452e07, No Iterations 6 time step continuity errors : sum local = 7.28832e10, global = 5.95128e12, cumulative = 5.95128e12 AMG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.0295062, Final residual = 9.88774e07, No Iterations 20 AMG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.000449719, Final residual = 4.93959e07, No Iterations 6 time step continuity errors : sum local = 3.62678e10, global = 4.78015e12, cumulative = 1.17113e12 BICCG: Solving for epsilon, Initial residual = 1, Final residual = 7.44754e10, No Iterations 1 BICCG: Solving for k, Initial residual = 1, Final residual = 1.01302e06, No Iterations 3 ExecutionTime = 14.35 s Time = 0.0001 Mean and max Courant Numbers = 0.00255982 0.120631 BICCG: Solving for Ux, Initial residual = 0.0157106, Final residual = 8.84689e07, No Iterations 2 BICCG: Solving for Uy, Initial residual = 0.0641733, Final residual = 2.42521e06, No Iterations 2 BICCG: Solving for Uz, Initial residual = 0.0655767, Final residual = 2.67305e06, No Iterations 2 AMG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.790297, Final residual = 7.86614e07, No Iterations 31 AMG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.00732114, Final residual = 6.37712e07, No Iterations 11 time step continuity errors : sum local = 1.49292e10, global = 5.40232e12, cumulative = 4.23119e12 AMG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.0683789, Final residual = 7.55717e07, No Iterations 23 AMG: Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.0012786, Final residual = 6.3544e07, No Iterations 7 time step continuity errors : sum local = 1.29184e10, global = 7.67925e12, cumulative = 3.44805e12 BICCG: Solving for epsilon, Initial residual = 0.134013, Final residual = 3.11612e11, No Iterations 1 BICCG: Solving for k, Initial residual = 0.158505, Final residual = 5.05454e06, No Iterations 2 ExecutionTime = 25.99 s I tried several modifications of relaxations factors, interpolation schemes (upwind) for grad and div schemes but nothing changed. Also using ICCG for pressure gives the same result. Any suggestions are welcome. Thanks, Steffen 

May 5, 2006, 04:30 
Have you already inspected the

#8 
Assistant Moderator
Bernhard Gschaider
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,008
Rep Power: 43 
Have you already inspected the solution after the first timestep (as already suggested twice in this thread)?
__________________
Note: I don't use "Friend"feature on this forum out of principle. Ah. And by the way: I'm not on Facebook either. So don't be offended if I don't accept your invitation/friend request 

May 5, 2006, 05:57 
Hi,
thanks for the suggesti

#9 
Senior Member
Fabian Braennstroem
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 407
Rep Power: 12 
Hi,
thanks for the suggestion! The bc and ic were probably mixed up a bit; we started to set 'k' and 'epsilon' to 1 after we had singularity issues every run before. It seems to run without any time warps now, but due to the 'weird' bc and ic the jet looks kind of funny. We will start over ... But I wonder that the bc and/or ic can influence the time step procedure!? Greetings! Fabian 

May 5, 2006, 06:12 
Of course they can: with k and

#10 
Senior Member
Hrvoje Jasak
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: London, England
Posts: 1,802
Rep Power: 24 
Of course they can: with k and epsilon = 1 you get the turbulen vicsosity of 0.09 compared with the laminar viscosity of e.g. 1e6, i.e. you are out by 3 orders of magnitude. This would explain a lot...
Hrv
__________________
Hrvoje Jasak Providing commercial FOAM/OpenFOAM and CFD Consulting: http://wikki.co.uk 

May 8, 2006, 02:12 
Hi Hrvoje,
I just thought,

#11 
Senior Member
Fabian Braennstroem
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 407
Rep Power: 12 
Hi Hrvoje,
I just thought, that writing out the actual time step is done in some kind of loop, which is not affected by the bc and ic at all. Greetings! Fabian 

May 8, 2006, 03:20 
Hi Fabian,
I see what you m

#12 
Senior Member
Hrvoje Jasak
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: London, England
Posts: 1,802
Rep Power: 24 
Hi Fabian,
I see what you mean  I was much more interested in the NaNs bit than what happens afterwards. I'm worried by the fact that the solver blows up without any symptoms first so the only possible culprit is a weirdlooking solution. As for the timestep problem, this looks to me like a possible memory violation (someone overwriting bits of memory that contain the time information. Is this all outofbox OpenFOAM stuff you are running? It woul be useful to set the environment variables to catch the error: setenv FOAM_ABORT 1 setenv FOAM_SIGFPE 1 setenv FOAM_SETNAN 1 or to run the solver through valgrind and see what it says. I usually run the debug version with array bounds checking (good for me but not in general), which may tell you much more if you are developing your own code. Hrv
__________________
Hrvoje Jasak Providing commercial FOAM/OpenFOAM and CFD Consulting: http://wikki.co.uk 

May 11, 2006, 01:34 
Hi Hrvoje,
yes, it is outo

#13 
Senior Member
Fabian Braennstroem
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 407
Rep Power: 12 
Hi Hrvoje,
yes, it is outofbox simpleFoam. We will try to set the environments and the debug version. I don't know valgrind yet, but I'll take a look at it; thanks! Greetings! Fabian 

May 11, 2006, 05:03 
You probably already have valg

#14 
Senior Member
Hrvoje Jasak
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: London, England
Posts: 1,802
Rep Power: 24 
You probably already have valgrind on your system and this is the easiets thing to try. Do
valgrind tool=memcheck simpleFoam <root> <case> and (with your permission) I'd like to have a look at the output. A few more questions:  Are you getting these outputs on the screen or into a log file?  Is there any possibility that you've got two processes writing into a same log file at the same time and making a mess of it?  Can you reproduce this with one of tutorial cases (just in case the library got corrupted somehow).  Did you add anything into the FOAM, which required recompiling one of the libraries since you've installed it (maybe we've got an incomplete build here) Hmm, Hrv
__________________
Hrvoje Jasak Providing commercial FOAM/OpenFOAM and CFD Consulting: http://wikki.co.uk 

May 14, 2006, 14:30 
Hello Foam users
i am tryin

#15 
Guest
Posts: n/a

Hello Foam users
i am trying to simulate Fluid Flow and Heat Transfer in a Mixing Elbow (a problem similar with the one in fluent tutorials). the file can be downloaded MixingElbow.tar.gz when i run the case i optain always: BICCG: Solving for Ux: solution singularity BICCG: Solving for Uy: solution singularity BICCG: Solving for h: solution singularity ICCG: Solving for pd: solution singularity time step continuity errors : sum local = nan, global = nan, cumulative = nan rho max/min : 0 0 ExecutionTime = 0.34 s ClockTime = 0 s Can anybody have a look on my file and give me a hint? thanks Atzaru 

May 14, 2006, 14:54 
sorry for posting in the wrong

#16 
Guest
Posts: n/a

sorry for posting in the wrong place, i will open a new thread.
atzaru 

May 15, 2006, 02:23 
Hi Hrvoje,
I did write it o

#17 
Senior Member
Fabian Braennstroem
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 407
Rep Power: 12 
Hi Hrvoje,
I did write it out to a log file; I could send you a copy!? Writing from two processes into the same log file is probably the best explanation, but I do not think that writing it to a log file using the commandline (simpleFoam <case> > logfile &) could mix it; it would rather erase the old file and create a new one. We did not add anything into version 1.3. Thanks for the valgrind hint, it looks pretty easy! Greetings! Fabian 

Thread Tools  
Display Modes  


Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Problem in cavity flow problem  saad  Main CFD Forum  4  November 1, 2007 08:45 
good cold flow results but problem with hot flow  Rams  FLUENT  0  June 20, 2006 00:52 
good Cold Flow Results but problem with Hot Flow  Rams  FLUENT  1  June 18, 2006 19:59 
good cold flow results but problem with hot flow,.  Rams  FLUENT  0  June 13, 2006 11:08 
good Cold Flow Results but problem with Hot Flow  Rams  CFX  2  June 13, 2006 03:30 
Sponsored Links 