|
[Sponsors] |
icoUncoupledKinematicParcelFoam - simpleFoam pisoFoam |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
March 29, 2020, 15:27 |
icoUncoupledKinematicParcelFoam - simpleFoam pisoFoam
|
#1 |
Member
cal
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: nowhere
Posts: 65
Rep Power: 6 |
Hi everyone,
I have problem which I can't solve. I've 2 different case with same geometry. One of them is simpleFoam (RAS) case and other pisoFoam (LES) case. I ran the simulations 15 seconds with their own solvers and the results looks good so there isn't any problem. But when I try particle-tracking with icoUncoupledKinematicParcelFoam some things are not going well. Both case, my Reynolds number is 5e4 but if i change to this number in icoUncoupledKinematicParcelFoam the case run just a few step and stop. In any case, when I didn't change kinematic viscosity the loop didn't complete. I give 3 second but it run like 1.9 second. pisoFoam is worse than simpleFoam. I mean, simpleFoam ran about 1.9 second at least. pisoFoam ran like 0.3 second and stop suddenly. Also there is no error. Can someone who knows these situations give an idea? I am open to any advice. This is gif of simpleFoam particle-tracking: https://gfycat.com/energeticdecisivecurlew simpleFoam controlDict Code:
application icoUncoupledKinematicParcelFoam; startFrom latestTime; startTime 0; stopAt endTime; endTime 3; deltaT 0.005; writeControl adjustableRunTime; writeInterval 0.01; purgeWrite 0; writeFormat ascii; writePrecision 6; writeCompression off; timeFormat general; timePrecision 6; runTimeModifiable yes; Code:
solution { active true; coupled false; transient yes; cellValueSourceCorrection off; maxCo 0.3; interpolationSchemes { rho cell; U cellPoint; mu cell; } integrationSchemes { U Euler; } } constantProperties { rho0 1.2; youngsModulus 6e8; poissonsRatio 0.35; } subModels { particleForces { sphereDrag; gravity; } injectionModels { model1 { type patchInjection; parcelBasisType fixed; patchName inlet; nParticle 1; SOI 0; U0 (10 0 0); parcelsPerSecond 1000; sizeDistribution { type normal; normalDistribution { expectation 650e-6; variance 25e-6; minValue 500e-6; maxValue 800e-6; } } flowRateProfile constant 1; massTotal 0; duration 100; } } dispersionModel none; patchInteractionModel none; surfaceFilmModel none; stochasticCollisionModel none; collisionModel none; pairCollisionCoeffs { maxInteractionDistance 0.0001; writeReferredParticleCloud no; pairModel pairSpringSliderDashpot; pairSpringSliderDashpotCoeffs { useEquivalentSize no; alpha 0.12; b 1.5; mu 0.52; cohesionEnergyDensity 0; collisionResolutionSteps 12; }; wallModel wallLocalSpringSliderDashpot; wallLocalSpringSliderDashpotCoeffs { useEquivalentSize no; collisionResolutionSteps 12; upperWall { youngsModulus 1e10; poissonsRatio 0.23; alpha 0.12; b 1.5; mu 0.43; cohesionEnergyDensity 0; } lowerWall { youngsModulus 1e10; poissonsRatio 0.23; alpha 0.12; b 1.5; mu 0.43; cohesionEnergyDensity 0; } frontAndBack { youngsModulus 1e10; poissonsRatio 0.23; alpha 0.12; b 1.5; mu 0.1; cohesionEnergyDensity 0; } }; } } cloudFunctions {} controlDict Code:
application icoUncoupledKinematicParcelFoam; startFrom startTime; startTime 0; stopAt endTime; endTime 1; deltaT 0.005; writeControl adjustableRunTime; writeInterval 0.01; purgeWrite 0; writeFormat ascii; writePrecision 6; writeCompression off; timeFormat general; timePrecision 6; runTimeModifiable yes; Code:
solution { active true; coupled false; transient yes; cellValueSourceCorrection off; maxCo 0.5; interpolationSchemes { rho cell; U cellPoint; mu cell; } integrationSchemes { U Euler; } } constantProperties { rho0 1.2; youngsModulus 6e8; poissonsRatio 0.35; } subModels { particleForces { sphereDrag; gravity; } injectionModels { model1 { type patchInjection; parcelBasisType fixed; patchName inlet; nParticle 1; SOI 0; U0 (10 0 0); parcelsPerSecond 1000; sizeDistribution { type normal; normalDistribution { expectation 650e-6; variance 25e-6; minValue 500e-6; maxValue 800e-6; } } flowRateProfile constant 1; massTotal 0; duration 1; } } dispersionModel none; patchInteractionModel none; surfaceFilmModel none; stochasticCollisionModel none; collisionModel none; pairCollisionCoeffs { maxInteractionDistance 0.0001; writeReferredParticleCloud no; pairModel pairSpringSliderDashpot; pairSpringSliderDashpotCoeffs { useEquivalentSize no; alpha 0.12; b 1.5; mu 0.52; cohesionEnergyDensity 0; collisionResolutionSteps 12; }; wallModel wallLocalSpringSliderDashpot; wallLocalSpringSliderDashpotCoeffs { useEquivalentSize no; collisionResolutionSteps 12; upperWall { youngsModulus 1e10; poissonsRatio 0.23; alpha 0.12; b 1.5; mu 0.43; cohesionEnergyDensity 0; } lowerWall { youngsModulus 1e10; poissonsRatio 0.23; alpha 0.12; b 1.5; mu 0.43; cohesionEnergyDensity 0; } frontAndBack { youngsModulus 1e10; poissonsRatio 0.23; alpha 0.12; b 1.5; mu 0.1; cohesionEnergyDensity 0; } }; } } cloudFunctions {} Code:
Time = 0.291 Evolving kinematicCloud Solving 3-D cloud kinematicCloud Cloud: kinematicCloud injector: model1 Added 5 new parcels Cloud: kinematicCloud Current number of parcels = 1455 Current mass in system = 2.50729e-07 Linear momentum = (1.9443e-07 4.27472e-08 1.03438e-12) |Linear momentum| = 1.99073e-07 Linear kinetic energy = 1.09353e-07 model1: number of parcels added = 1455 mass introduced = 2.50729e-07 Rotational kinetic energy = 0 ExecutionTime = 260.49 s ClockTime = 262 s Time = 0.292 Evolving kinematicCloud Solving 3-D cloud kinematicCloud Cloud: kinematicCloud injector: model1 Added 5 new parcels Said. |
|
Tags |
icouncoupledkinematic, les, pisofoam, ras, simplefoam |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
pimpleFoam vs simpleFoam vs pisoFoam vs icoFoam? | phsieh2005 | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 45 | March 22, 2021 10:14 |
simpleFoam or pisoFoam, which is better? | Jingxue Wang | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 4 | October 17, 2017 18:45 |
Modifications work in simpleFoam, not pisoFoam | Aicharem | OpenFOAM Programming & Development | 0 | April 23, 2016 12:15 |
Porosity model not found for pisoFoam; works fine for simpleFoam | aerogt3 | OpenFOAM | 2 | September 13, 2014 17:39 |
the result of pitzDaily using simpleFoam and pisoFoam | Kr_kim | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 1 | March 16, 2010 14:38 |