Solving stationary two-phase Laplace-equation

Martin123 · June 3, 2009, 19:39

Sorry first for my beginner question, I am quite new to CFD. I would like to solve the Laplace equation for inhomogeneous media:

k div grad U + grad k grad U = 0

For starting, I tried to solve the first term only and managed to setup the k-field (volscalarfield) on run-time. However, I don't see any influence of varying k when using fvm:: discretization - I solved

fvm::laplacian(k, U)

Am I on the right way or should I rethink completely my approach? I am very unsure how OF deals with the extra volScalarField from K: I want to solve certainly for U but I wonder what OF would see with my equation above? Should I better use somehow dictionary values for k and grad k?

Martin123 · June 5, 2009, 12:51

OMG I am really lost. What I tried:

...
volVectorField gradepsilon = fvc::grad(epsilon);
volVectorField gradU = fvc::grad(U);

solve
(
fvm::laplacian(U) + ((gradepsilon & gradU)/epsilon)
);

But still, I don't get correct results. Is my assumption right, that I may not use a second geometric field here inside since it is considered as an additional degree of freedom? Did I understand correctly that: if I use fvc:: this is added as a source term whereas all fvm:: operations cause the DOF (e.g. U) to be considered?

Is it alternatively possible to construct a dictionary from a volScalarField? Or taking dictionary values from a run-time function?

Many thanks in advance for your help.

June 3, 2009, 19:39	Solving stationary two-phase Laplace-equation	#1
Martin123 New Member Martin Tek Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 7 Rep Power: 18	Sorry first for my beginner question, I am quite new to CFD. I would like to solve the Laplace equation for inhomogeneous media: k div grad U + grad k grad U = 0 For starting, I tried to solve the first term only and managed to setup the k-field (volscalarfield) on run-time. However, I don't see any influence of varying k when using fvm:: discretization - I solved fvm::laplacian(k, U) Am I on the right way or should I rethink completely my approach? I am very unsure how OF deals with the extra volScalarField from K: I want to solve certainly for U but I wonder what OF would see with my equation above? Should I better use somehow dictionary values for k and grad k?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Moving mesh	Niklas Wikstrom (Wikstrom)	OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD	122	June 15, 2014 07:20
How to write k and epsilon before the abnormal end	xiuying	OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD	8	August 27, 2013 16:33
Differences between serial and parallel runs	carsten	OpenFOAM Bugs	11	September 12, 2008 12:16
IcoFoam parallel woes	msrinath80	OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD	9	July 22, 2007 03:58
Could anybody help me see this error and give help	liugx212	OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD	3	January 4, 2006 19:07

June 5, 2009, 12:51		#2
Martin123 New Member Martin Tek Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 7 Rep Power: 18	OMG I am really lost. What I tried: ... volVectorField gradepsilon = fvc::grad(epsilon); volVectorField gradU = fvc::grad(U); solve ( fvm::laplacian(U) + ((gradepsilon & gradU)/epsilon) ); But still, I don't get correct results. Is my assumption right, that I may not use a second geometric field here inside since it is considered as an additional degree of freedom? Did I understand correctly that: if I use fvc:: this is added as a source term whereas all fvm:: operations cause the DOF (e.g. U) to be considered? Is it alternatively possible to construct a dictionary from a volScalarField? Or taking dictionary values from a run-time function? Many thanks in advance for your help.