|
[Sponsors] |
Parallel run: boundary condition missing on processorX/0 |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
May 17, 2012, 11:57 |
Parallel run: boundary condition missing on processorX/0
|
#1 |
Senior Member
|
Hi all;
if you try and run the motorbike tutorial in parallel you'll get an error about the motorbike patch missing within the processors folders. My error is this one: Code:
keyword cilindro_patch0 is undefined in dictionary "/home/ubuntu/Desktop/condivisa/test/processor0/0/p::boundaryField" Now, I read somewhere on the forum that the problem is due to decomposePar which cannot handle all the "#include" inside the boundary files so I got rid of those but… again… the same error… I enclose my test case. Is a simple cylinder made to speed up the whole process. I started from the motorbike tutorial. Can anybody please help me understanding how a case needs to be set up to be run in parallel? Thank you! |
|
May 17, 2012, 14:08 |
|
#2 |
Senior Member
|
The discussion I was referring is this one:
http://www.cfd-online.com/Forums/ope...omposepar.html So is using changeDictionary the only way to achieve this? There's must be a way of defining the boundary conditions that doesn't require for the changeDictionary command to be run… Also, I found out that if I run decomposePar after snappyHexMesh then the error disappears… I can run the solver in parallel then but it would be nice to run snappy as well in parallel… Last edited by lovecraft22; May 17, 2012 at 14:27. |
|
May 21, 2012, 17:59 |
|
#3 |
Retired Super Moderator
Bruno Santos
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Lisbon, Portugal
Posts: 10,982
Blog Entries: 45
Rep Power: 128 |
Hi lovecraft22,
I can't go into detail, but you can study the tutorials provided here: http://code.google.com/p/bluecfd-sin...untimes202_211 Best regards, Bruno
__________________
|
|
May 21, 2012, 18:07 |
|
#4 |
Senior Member
|
Thank you Bruno;
I had a quick look and it seems that the boundaries are pretty similar to mine, apart for the "proc.*" entry. There's a lot of stuff in the allRun instead so I need to have a better look at that. Thank you! |
|
May 29, 2012, 10:26 |
|
#5 |
Senior Member
|
Hi Bruno;
could you please explain what's the difference between the method you advised and this one: http://www.cfd-online.com/Forums/ope...tml#post363548 Thank you very much for your help! |
|
May 29, 2012, 16:53 |
|
#6 | |
Retired Super Moderator
Bruno Santos
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Lisbon, Portugal
Posts: 10,982
Blog Entries: 45
Rep Power: 128 |
Hi lovecraft22,
Quote:
Another detail was to take into account the changes between scotch and ptscotch for decomposition and snappyHexMesh, respectively. I believe that the method I used was more generic, since it would work for both 2.0 and 2.1, but in OpenFOAM 2.1 I think it doesn't need to reconstruct the mesh in between... the "motorBike" case in the "les" example demonstrates just that. Best regards, Bruno
__________________
|
||
May 29, 2012, 17:06 |
|
#7 |
Senior Member
|
Thank you!
|
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Use sampled data from previous run as boundary condition for new setup | Arnoldinho | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 3 | December 6, 2012 14:16 |
Boundary condition coding - problem in parallel | wavemaster | OpenFOAM | 0 | April 4, 2011 09:06 |
RPM in Wind Turbine | Pankaj | CFX | 9 | November 23, 2009 05:05 |
Own boundary condition modified simpleFoam erorr in parallel execution | sponiar | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 1 | August 27, 2008 10:16 |
Convective Heat Transfer - Heat Exchanger | Mark | CFX | 6 | November 15, 2004 16:55 |