|
[Sponsors] |
April 4, 2006, 11:04 |
courant number for cfx transient run
|
#1 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Hi Guys,
What I understood from early discussions, (I am new in this area and I am reading early discussions to understand better), Courant number is not important if I am using CFX transient run as long as I have a convergence within reasonable number of coefficient loops (like 10 coef.loop). Is that correct? I am asking this because, in my case I have courant number 999 and have convergence too. Should I worry about the courant number or not? I really need help on this and previous questions that I posted yesterday. Thanks alot, Mike |
|
April 4, 2006, 14:05 |
Re: courant number for cfx transient run
|
#2 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Hi Mike,
That is correct. If you are converging within 3 to 6 coefficient loops, there is no need to worry about Courant number. Regards, Robin |
|
April 4, 2006, 14:16 |
Re: courant number for cfx transient run
|
#3 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Mike
If you are converging within a small number of coefficient loops and still have a high courant number, that suggests to me your solution is quite steady. May be restarting using the steady state solver option might give you even quicker convergence. James |
|
April 4, 2006, 14:32 |
Re: courant number for cfx transient run
|
#4 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Robin and James, Thank you so much for your help. Actually, James, I started with steady run and after trying everything and not getting convergence to the desired values, I conclude that the flow is unsteady by its nature. That is why now I am running as transient. In my case, the Re varies alot in the domain, flow starts in a rod shape nozzle with high velocity (highest 2 m/s)(water) and it exits (expands) to a domain which the area is more than 20 times larger than tube diameter. The whole domain is order of 3 meters. Thus, even the determination of time scale is very hard. It is basically the mold flow simulation during casting steel.
I am basically using SST model, CFX with 0.01 time scale for steady run and than with this initial conditions trying to run transient with 0.05 time scale. thats why I am getting very high courant number. But I was not sure whether it is critical or not. Thank you very much again. And any additional comments, helps and ideas would be very much appreciated. Thanks again, Mike |
|
April 5, 2006, 03:16 |
Re: courant number for cfx transient run
|
#5 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Robin,
For this comment "converging within 3 to 6 coefficient loops", what target residual are you referring to? 1e-4 MAX? |
|
April 5, 2006, 08:04 |
Re: courant number for cfx transient run
|
#6 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
In my opinion, it depends the purpose of your simulation. If you just want to get the time averaged solution, you could ignore the importance of Courant number when you have a converged solution. HOWEVER, if you want to capture the transient of unsteady effect, you'd better have a fair small courant number.
By the way, I wasn't sure what I understand about courant number. If I am wrong, pls correct me! |
|
April 5, 2006, 11:01 |
Re: courant number for cfx transient run
|
#7 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
You're spot on Aloh5i, if you want a time accurate solution you should really have a courant number of less than one, unless the problem is approaching a steady solution
|
|
April 5, 2006, 11:02 |
Re: courant number for cfx transient run
|
#8 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
You're spot on Aloh5i, if you want a time accurate solution you should really have a courant number of less than one, unless the problem is approaching a steady solution.
|
|
April 7, 2006, 00:48 |
Re: courant number for cfx transient run
|
#9 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
hmmm....There're two different opinions here....
1. Courant number MUST always be less than one for time accurate solution. The question is: Is it always practical? Life is too short for me. 2. Courant number could be more than one for solver using implicit approach. The question is: Is solution always accurate? What I will do is: Rerun a transient simulation by doubling & halving the time steps. If solution doesn't change too much, then you can reasonably assume that it's time accurate. Any one has better & quicker approach to check the time accuracy of a transient solution? |
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Courant Number Problems | wschosta | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 5 | February 28, 2020 04:45 |
DecomposePar unequal number of shared faces | maka | OpenFOAM Pre-Processing | 6 | August 12, 2010 10:01 |
Unaligned accesses on IA64 | andre | OpenFOAM | 5 | June 23, 2008 11:37 |
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 |