Floating Point Exception Error

Muhammad Hassan · March 4, 2014, 17:33

Hello. I have been doing combustion simulations on Star CCM+ and have to do combustion of C12H26 fuel with oxygen. The version of star CCM+ is 8.02 and operating system is Windows 8. I created an automatic surface mesh and tetrahedral volume mesh on the fluid volume of a burner and have also set up appropriate physics, soultion control, initial conditions and boundary condition options. Now, whenever I try to run simulations I get the following error message:

'A floating point exception has occurred: floating point exception [Invalid operation]. The specific cause cannot be identified. Please refer to the troubleshooting section of the User's Guide.'

What kind of error is this and how to solve this issue? Has anybody ever encountered this kind of error before? Thank you.

olauer · March 5, 2014, 04:54

This is a quite general error that could happen nearly everywhere.
Very often this is a 'division by zero'.

Do you have any report annotations? For us this error appeared as these reports were run before first iteration and therefore before having any results. One of these reports had an uninitialized division.

Muhammad Hassan · March 5, 2014, 08:02

Thanks for your reply. No, I don't think I had any repot annotations. My question is that what might have gone wrong with my settings? How to solve this problem, I have tried different number of boundary conditions and solver settings settings but am still facing the same problem. Should I do meshing again from scratch? I have followed all the steps of problem set up prescribed in the user manual, but don't know whats going wrong. Where I might be making a mistake in your opinion?

olauer · March 5, 2014, 08:15

Did you check your cell quality (Remove Invalid Cells), do you have unconnected regions?
Does your model run with more simple physics?

It is something I demanded for a long time: error messages in CCM+ are most often not very helpful

me3840 · March 7, 2014, 23:34

Does it blow up without doing any iterations? Most likely one of your reports or field functions divides by zero.

If that's not the case, there is a BC or initial condition issue.

Why are you using a tet grid? A poly grid will give you a better answer with fewer cells, and will generally be higher quality.

Muhammad Hassan · March 9, 2014, 18:08

Hello. I just checked on another forum and I found out these two main reasons of floating point error in star ccm+:

- Running correctly set up simulation that contains difficult physics with poor initial conditions.

- fundamental problem with the set-up of the simulation. Common problems that cause a simulation to diverge are: incorrect boundary conditions; poor quality mesh; incorrect set-up of physics models.

I think my problem belongs to the first category, I changed some initial conditions and also lowered the under rerlaxation factor from 0.9 to 0.5 and this seems to have solved the problem and I am getting the results now.

@ me3840: I am trying to do a comparison of Ansys Fluent simulations with Star CCM+ simulations, the test case which I have is using tetrahedral meshing instead of polyhedral meshing technique, so I have to use tet grid as well, in future simulations I will use poly grid. A questions for you: Is polyhedral grid always the best grid to use for most of the CFD simulations if you want good results?

@ olauer: My model was also not working with simple physics as well, but now I think since I have lowered under relaxation factor now so simulation is giving results.

Thanks for your help, I appreciate it.

me3840 · March 10, 2014, 09:38

The poly grid is not necessarily better. Your grip topology should be chosen based on the flow physics. Polyhedrons are good for highly swirling or rotating flows, or flows that are chaotic. Other flows may demand different topologies. However, I don't think there's an instance where one would want to use a tet grid over a poly grid.

Ahmad134 · November 16, 2015, 23:27

@ Muhammad Hassan!
I am also facing the same problem with comb simulations, while using radial nozzle in nozzle arrangment for fuel and combustion air in non premixed Combustion. (But when I use up down nozzle arrangment the issue is resolved, well i need to use nozzle in nozzle arrangment)
Would u please share, which relaxation factors have u reduced to 0.5.
Cheers !

March 4, 2014, 17:33	Floating Point Exception Error	#1
Muhammad Hassan New Member Muhammad Hassan Join Date: Dec 2013 Posts: 3 Rep Power: 12	Hello. I have been doing combustion simulations on Star CCM+ and have to do combustion of C12H26 fuel with oxygen. The version of star CCM+ is 8.02 and operating system is Windows 8. I created an automatic surface mesh and tetrahedral volume mesh on the fluid volume of a burner and have also set up appropriate physics, soultion control, initial conditions and boundary condition options. Now, whenever I try to run simulations I get the following error message: 'A floating point exception has occurred: floating point exception [Invalid operation]. The specific cause cannot be identified. Please refer to the troubleshooting section of the User's Guide.' What kind of error is this and how to solve this issue? Has anybody ever encountered this kind of error before? Thank you.

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
Undeclared Identifier Errof UDF	SteveGoat	Fluent UDF and Scheme Programming	7	October 15, 2014 07:11
[General] 2 datas on one plot	Akuji	ParaView	46	December 1, 2013 14:06
Floating point error and divergence detected	aannjj	FLUENT	0	July 2, 2013 03:44
[swak4Foam] installing funkySetFields	igo	OpenFOAM Community Contributions	1	November 20, 2012 20:16
[Gmsh] Gmsh and samplesurface	touf	OpenFOAM Meshing & Mesh Conversion	2	December 10, 2007 02:27

March 5, 2014, 04:54		#2
olauer Member Oliver Lauer Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Coburg Posts: 57 Rep Power: 17	This is a quite general error that could happen nearly everywhere. Very often this is a 'division by zero'. Do you have any report annotations? For us this error appeared as these reports were run before first iteration and therefore before having any results. One of these reports had an uninitialized division.

March 5, 2014, 08:02		#3
Muhammad Hassan New Member Muhammad Hassan Join Date: Dec 2013 Posts: 3 Rep Power: 12	Thanks for your reply. No, I don't think I had any repot annotations. My question is that what might have gone wrong with my settings? How to solve this problem, I have tried different number of boundary conditions and solver settings settings but am still facing the same problem. Should I do meshing again from scratch? I have followed all the steps of problem set up prescribed in the user manual, but don't know whats going wrong. Where I might be making a mistake in your opinion?

March 5, 2014, 08:15		#4
olauer Member Oliver Lauer Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Coburg Posts: 57 Rep Power: 17	Did you check your cell quality (Remove Invalid Cells), do you have unconnected regions? Does your model run with more simple physics? It is something I demanded for a long time: error messages in CCM+ are most often not very helpful

March 7, 2014, 23:34		#5
me3840 Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: USA Posts: 1,232 Rep Power: 24	Does it blow up without doing any iterations? Most likely one of your reports or field functions divides by zero. If that's not the case, there is a BC or initial condition issue. Why are you using a tet grid? A poly grid will give you a better answer with fewer cells, and will generally be higher quality.

March 9, 2014, 18:08		#6
Muhammad Hassan New Member Muhammad Hassan Join Date: Dec 2013 Posts: 3 Rep Power: 12	Hello. I just checked on another forum and I found out these two main reasons of floating point error in star ccm+: - Running correctly set up simulation that contains difficult physics with poor initial conditions. - fundamental problem with the set-up of the simulation. Common problems that cause a simulation to diverge are: incorrect boundary conditions; poor quality mesh; incorrect set-up of physics models. I think my problem belongs to the first category, I changed some initial conditions and also lowered the under rerlaxation factor from 0.9 to 0.5 and this seems to have solved the problem and I am getting the results now. @ me3840: I am trying to do a comparison of Ansys Fluent simulations with Star CCM+ simulations, the test case which I have is using tetrahedral meshing instead of polyhedral meshing technique, so I have to use tet grid as well, in future simulations I will use poly grid. A questions for you: Is polyhedral grid always the best grid to use for most of the CFD simulations if you want good results? @ olauer: My model was also not working with simple physics as well, but now I think since I have lowered under relaxation factor now so simulation is giving results. Thanks for your help, I appreciate it.

March 10, 2014, 09:38		#7
me3840 Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: USA Posts: 1,232 Rep Power: 24	The poly grid is not necessarily better. Your grip topology should be chosen based on the flow physics. Polyhedrons are good for highly swirling or rotating flows, or flows that are chaotic. Other flows may demand different topologies. However, I don't think there's an instance where one would want to use a tet grid over a poly grid.

November 16, 2015, 23:27		#8
Ahmad134 New Member Ahmad Jabbar Join Date: Sep 2015 Posts: 5 Rep Power: 10	@ Muhammad Hassan! I am also facing the same problem with comb simulations, while using radial nozzle in nozzle arrangment for fuel and combustion air in non premixed Combustion. (But when I use up down nozzle arrangment the issue is resolved, well i need to use nozzle in nozzle arrangment) Would u please share, which relaxation factors have u reduced to 0.5. Cheers !