|
[Sponsors] |
parallel results different depending on decomposition strategy |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
November 3, 2009, 11:52 |
parallel results different depending on decomposition strategy
|
#1 |
New Member
Francesco
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 13
Rep Power: 17 |
hello,
I performed a simulation using simpleFoam and for different parallelization strategies: number of processors, simple/hierarchical/... I get slightly different results. Is there anyone which knows it is ok, or if there is any problem. The difference seems to be small (more or less 1% on drag coefficient for the stationary solution). Where is the part depending on the decomposition method? thanks a lot, Francesco |
|
November 4, 2009, 04:07 |
|
#2 |
Senior Member
Anonymous
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 110
Rep Power: 17 |
Hi Francesco,
I've been having some wider-spread issues with using foam in parallel. I'm assuming the differences you are seeing are due to decomposition of the domain each time with different regions having different ghost cells. 1% does appear to be a lot though. Interestingly, I'm finding that when attempting to run foam in parallel, it appears it is trying to run N number of serial jobs and is killing the memory on my machine. Have you seen similar behaviour? Regards, Adriano |
|
November 4, 2009, 06:35 |
|
#3 |
Senior Member
Anonymous
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 110
Rep Power: 17 |
Well, I finally resolved my problem. I was missing the -parallel command out when executing the parallel job.
|
|
November 4, 2009, 07:37 |
|
#4 |
New Member
Francesco
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 13
Rep Power: 17 |
hi adriano,
thanks for your suggestion concerning ghost nodes. I think 1% is a bit too much, too. however, the fields are very similar each other, hence I hope there is no serious problem intersting behaviour missing -parallel... bye, francesco |
|
Tags |
error, parallel, results, simplefoam |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Different Results from Fluent 5.5 and Fluent 6.0 | Rajeev Kumar Singh | FLUENT | 6 | December 19, 2010 12:33 |
MPICH Parallel Run Error on the Windows Server2003 | Saturn | CFX | 3 | August 29, 2006 09:42 |
results with parallel processing | Muhammad Shakaib | Main CFD Forum | 1 | December 29, 2005 01:56 |
CFX-5.7 MPICH Parallel Problem (Output of Results) | James Date | CFX | 7 | February 15, 2005 17:03 |
parallel mode - small problem? | co2 | FLUENT | 2 | June 2, 2004 00:47 |