-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 18
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
sinwave case: rhoPimpleFoam vs lusgsFoam (Euler & forward ddt scheme) #7
Comments
the LU-SGS scheme is not compatible with forwrd ddt (I mean the explicit Euler). It has to be used with an implicit ddt (i.e. Euler or backward). In the case of time-dependent problems the solver uses dual time stepping technique, i.e. it should use more internal iterations. I run your sinwave case wit lusgs + backward ddt with following (sub-optimal) setup inside fvSolution: In any case, the LU-SGS solver aims to implicit time stepping for steady state or quasi-steady problems with large time steps. For the sine wave I would recommend rather the rhoCentralFoam or an explicit dbns solvers. |
Sorry,Written error, I mean backward. |
Well, you have to use more internal iterations then. You should try to find a good compromise between speed and accuracy obtained with higher number of iterations and computational time. |
Yes, the backward case works now, I have concluded it again.
As your suggestion, I will keep on with dbns solver. |
I will try it. |
It converged when iteration set to 50, and waveform becomes symmetry which is better than rhoPimpleFoam with same time setting. |
Very good. On the other hand with 50 iterations the LUSGS would be deadly slow. In any case, the explicit dbns (foam extend?) would be better choice for this kind of problems. |
Hi, furstj
I am quite interested in your work. I compared rhoPimpleFoam and lusgsFoam solver. The results could be found here.
Some Concerns:
Any ideas or suggestions for improving my cases?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: