|
[Sponsors] |
Run time post processing vs Post run post processing |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
February 19, 2015, 14:02 |
Run time post processing vs Post run post processing
|
#1 |
Member
Pruthvi
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 41
Rep Power: 12 |
Hi all.
I'm simulating a flatplate in cross flow using pimpleFoam. My mesh seems to be fine. I got the results for Cx and Cy and later on decided to use a different value of Aref. So I changed the Aref value and ran execFlowFunctionObjects to calculate the force Coeffs. The results I got are not as expected. To depict the difference in results I used the same scale as was used for run time postprocessing and plotted the results again. Take a look at the plots below. I'm unable to explain why the periodicity of the force Coeffs has changed. Both graphs should be the same instead they are different. Inconsistent_forcedata.png I'm also adding residual data and a checkMesh log. linear.png courant.png cont.png forceCoeffs.txt Inconsistent_forcedata.png |
|
February 19, 2015, 15:15 |
Found the answer
|
#2 |
Member
Pruthvi
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 41
Rep Power: 12 |
I found the answer guys. Run time post processing has access to all the timesteps. Post run post processing has access to only the written time steps. Sorry for the post.
|
|
Tags |
execflowfunctionobjects, forcecoeffs, pimplefoam, post procesing |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
simpleFoam error - "Floating point exception" | mbcx4jc2 | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 12 | August 4, 2015 03:20 |
[solidMechanics] solidMechanics gear contact in rotation | nlc | OpenFOAM CC Toolkits for Fluid-Structure Interaction | 3 | January 11, 2015 07:41 |
[Q] CHEMISTRY POST PROCESSING takes a long time... | Whitebear | CFX | 3 | August 8, 2014 10:39 |
Moving mesh | Niklas Wikstrom (Wikstrom) | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 122 | June 15, 2014 07:20 |
time step directories naming issue | Andrea_85 | OpenFOAM | 3 | April 3, 2014 09:38 |