CFD Online Logo CFD Online URL
www.cfd-online.com
[Sponsors]
Home > Forums > Software User Forums > OpenFOAM > OpenFOAM Programming & Development

Wrong treatment of time derivatives in matrices (Jasak Presentation)

Register Blogs Community New Posts Updated Threads Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old   February 1, 2017, 16:44
Default Wrong treatment of time derivatives in matrices (Jasak Presentation)
  #1
Super Moderator
 
Tobi's Avatar
 
Tobias Holzmann
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Bad Wörishofen
Posts: 2,711
Blog Entries: 6
Rep Power: 52
Tobi has a spectacular aura aboutTobi has a spectacular aura aboutTobi has a spectacular aura about
Send a message via ICQ to Tobi Send a message via Skype™ to Tobi
Dear community,

today I got an interesting presentation that was held last year Hrvoje Jasak with the title Pressure-Velocity Coupling in FOAM - Consistent Derivation for Steady and Transient Flow Solvers. Here it is described that the included time term in the matrices:

Code:
fvVectorMatrix UEqn
(
    fvm::ddt(U)
    ...
)
lead to wrong or lets say time-step depended results. Therefore, I came across this problem again (already forgot it). At the moment I did not read everything but I will do that. It seems that the included ddt term makes troubles in both, transient and steady-state solvers and therefore the ddtCorr() function takes care of removing the troubles somehow.

Can someone provide some information about that and does anyone know if this will be re-implemented in a correct and consistent way in future like Jasak suggested? However, there is one question left because based on the fact that the developers introduced the ddtCorr() function, they know that there is a problem (more or less), so why do they patch it instead of fix it. Maybe there is some special meaning of doing it in that way or there is no other possible way (but again, Jasak demonstrated it).

In addition I want ask kindly if this ddtCorr is related to the Rhie Chow Interpolation because something is mentioned here: DdtPhiCorr However, here it is said that this stuff is consistent while Jasak mentioned in his presentation, that it is not consistent. In addition I will check out the paper that is mentioned in the above mentioned thread.

Thanks in advance.
__________________
Keep foaming,
Tobias Holzmann
Tobi is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   February 27, 2017, 09:35
Default
  #2
Senior Member
 
louisgag's Avatar
 
Louis Gagnon
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Stuttgart, Germany
Posts: 338
Rep Power: 18
louisgag is on a distinguished road
Send a message via ICQ to louisgag
Dear Tobias,
I was at the presentation you are referring to and if I am not mistaking Jasak said the fix was already part of extend-4.0. That said, the technical details of the remainder of your question may need his attention as few of the OpenFOAM users grasp the exact and complete nature of the problem Jasak solved.
Best Regards,
-Louis
louisgag is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 6, 2022, 07:21
Default
  #3
Member
 
Michael Sukham
Join Date: Mar 2020
Location: India
Posts: 84
Rep Power: 6
2538sukham is on a distinguished road
I wish Dr. Jasak have written more on the presentation. I think the code snippets from foam extend 3.2 and 4.1 on this matter is same. I dont know whether the fix has been made because I am getting flux on moving meshes to be inconsistent.
2538sukham is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 6, 2022, 08:54
Default
  #4
Senior Member
 
Santiago Lopez Castano
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 354
Rep Power: 16
Santiago is on a distinguished road
There is an article on the subject: https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...45793018300495
Santiago is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 6, 2022, 09:04
Default
  #5
Member
 
Michael Sukham
Join Date: Mar 2020
Location: India
Posts: 84
Rep Power: 6
2538sukham is on a distinguished road
Thank you Santiago!! I will go through the paper. I am working on HDPC shot sleeve partilaly filled with piston moving wall layer deletion. This will help me a lot
2538sukham is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   June 29, 2022, 21:35
Default
  #6
Member
 
Michael Sukham
Join Date: Mar 2020
Location: India
Posts: 84
Rep Power: 6
2538sukham is on a distinguished road
It has been updated in foam-extend 4.1 .
Code:
        // Time-derivative matrix
        fvVectorMatrix ddtUEqn(fvm::ddt(U));

        // Convection-diffusion matrix
        fvVectorMatrix HUEqn
        (
            fvm::div(phi, U)
          - fvm::laplacian(nu, U)
        );

        if (piso.momentumPredictor())
        {
            solve(ddtUEqn + HUEqn == -fvc::grad(p));
        }

        // Prepare clean 1/a_p without time derivative contribution
        volScalarField rAU = 1.0/HUEqn.A();
But the changes are only in incompressible solvers. Multiphase solver like interFoam reamains the same as earlier codes. Does that mean multiphase transient is not consistent?
2538sukham is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply

Tags
ddtcorr


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
AMI speed performance danny123 OpenFOAM 21 October 24, 2020 05:13
decomposePar problem: Cell 0contains face labels out of range vaina74 OpenFOAM Pre-Processing 37 July 20, 2020 06:38
Moving mesh Niklas Wikstrom (Wikstrom) OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 122 June 15, 2014 07:20
Unstabil Simulation with chtMultiRegionFoam mbay101 OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 13 December 28, 2013 14:12
pisoFoam with k-epsilon turb blows up - Some questions Heroic OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 26 December 17, 2012 04:34


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:42.