|
[Sponsors] |
July 17, 2012, 11:39 |
non-exact gradient values
|
#1 |
Member
Elisabet Mas de les Valls
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Barcelona, Spain
Posts: 64
Rep Power: 17 |
Hi OpenFOAMers!
I've recently found a really strange behaviour on the calculation of the gradients on version 1.6-ext: Starting from a uniform field, called P (partial pressure), which is uniform and equals 1, even at the boundaries, I want to evaluate the gradient of P, which is expected to be zero. However, it is not!! Details on the case and code: 1.- the mesh is uniform, hence non-orthogonal corrections are not required. CheckMesh is o.k. 2.- boundary conditions of P are own made based on fixedValue type but, for this simple verification case, the value is set to 1 (and can be checked when looking at P values on the boundaries) 3.- two different strategies are used for the evaluation of the gradient: 3.a.In the attached figure you can find P map, dPdx_sn (from option 3.a.) and dPdx (from option 3.b.). As the mesh is orthogonal, both options yield to the same results. But the gradient is NOT zero!!!! What's wrong? Am I going crazy? any help is appreciated.... elisabet |
|
July 17, 2012, 12:26 |
|
#2 |
Senior Member
Anton Kidess
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,377
Rep Power: 30 |
The gradient is (Phi_P - Phi_f)/mag(d). I'll assume d=1e-4m, and you get a small error in the computation of the difference of 1e-16 (that's about the precision you can get using double if I'm not mistaken). Dividing that by d leads to 1e-12, about the order of errors you are seeing.
Further reading: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine_epsilon
__________________
*On twitter @akidTwit *Spend as much time formulating your questions as you expect people to spend on their answer. Last edited by akidess; July 17, 2012 at 12:28. Reason: Added machine epsilon link |
|
July 18, 2012, 08:38 |
|
#3 |
Member
Elisabet Mas de les Valls
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Barcelona, Spain
Posts: 64
Rep Power: 17 |
Thanks akidess!
Obviously that was the point! sometimes, when one doesn't get the right solution begins to be suspicious of everything... sorry! now the bad new: I must have a mistake somewhere else in my code... let's see... elisabet |
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Temperature gradient in CFX | Chander | CFX | 5 | January 7, 2015 04:00 |
specified shear at wall - temperature gradient - UDF - access violation error | senD | Fluent UDF and Scheme Programming | 9 | September 18, 2014 08:29 |
vortex cause pressure gradient or pressure gradient induce vortex? | fruitkiwi | Main CFD Forum | 4 | June 12, 2012 02:12 |
Range of wall y+ values | rks171 | Main CFD Forum | 1 | January 4, 2012 17:54 |
Acceptable Gradient Values | Raman Chadha | FLUENT | 0 | January 12, 2005 19:00 |