Velocity blows up suddenly after 30,000+ iterations

lordvon · October 25, 2010, 18:58

Hello all,

I am running a 2d turbDyMFoam transient external flow simulation using komegasst and ggi for rotating parts. Qualitatively the simulation is good, all of the flow regimes I have seen in other research papers are forming, and a steady state appears to be almost reached up until the 34,000th time step where the Uy suddenly blows up (output: no. iterations 1000, large final residual), then time step continuity error blows up, etc.

Is it unusual for this to happen at such a high iteration count? Can wrong BCs cause this? I have for the k and omega zerogradient on all surfaces except fixedvalue at the freestream inlet and inletoutlet at the freestream outlet. For U, fixedvalue at freestream inlet, inletoutlet at freestream outlet (inletvalue uniform (0 0 0)), movingwallvelocity on physical surfaces, 'slip' on the top and bottom freestream patches. For p, zerogradiwent everywhere except slip on the top and bottom freestream patches and fixedvalue at freestream outlet.

maddalena · October 26, 2010, 04:33

Hi robert,
may I see the log file of the last 5 iterations before the simulation crashed?
It is always a good idea to post not only the description of your problem but also errors/schemes setup and everything else can be useful to understand what is going wrong.
Cheers

mad

lordvon · October 26, 2010, 10:50

I stopped it before it could crash when I saw astronomical numbers for velocity magnitude and cumulative time step continuity error.

I have attached my fvSchemes file.

The last time steps before the first abnormal number appeared (where the simulation first messes up that I could find is highlighted in red):

Code:

Courant Number mean: 0.00800153 max: 0.249977 velocity magnitude: 19.2813
deltaT = 4.27214e-06
GGI pair (outsideSlider, insideSlider) : 0.00219448 0.00219443 Diff = -1.32848e-08 or 0.000605373 %
Time = 0.142095

Initializing the GGI interpolator between master/shadow patches: outsideSlider/insideSlider
Evaluation of GGI weighting factors:
  Largest slave weighting factor correction : 2.06758e-05 average: 1.92224e-05
  Largest master weighting factor correction: 4.44089e-16 average: 7.35279e-17

PBiCG:  Solving for Ux, Initial residual = 2.46226e-05, Final residual = 5.11939e-08, No Iterations 1
PBiCG:  Solving for Uy, Initial residual = 6.39498e-05, Final residual = 3.51525e-08, No Iterations 2
PCG:  Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.00242034, Final residual = 9.68673e-07, No Iterations 195
PCG:  Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.00017299, Final residual = 9.96505e-07, No Iterations 94
PCG:  Solving for p, Initial residual = 1.41325e-05, Final residual = 8.53351e-07, No Iterations 4
time step continuity errors : sum local = 2.1204e-12, global = -3.02346e-13, cumulative = 4.10983e-10
PCG:  Solving for p, Initial residual = 6.03939e-05, Final residual = 9.89376e-07, No Iterations 77
PCG:  Solving for p, Initial residual = 1.51437e-05, Final residual = 9.50447e-07, No Iterations 3
PCG:  Solving for p, Initial residual = 1.38782e-06, Final residual = 7.04864e-07, No Iterations 1
time step continuity errors : sum local = 1.75143e-12, global = -2.2841e-13, cumulative = 4.10755e-10
PCG:  Solving for p, Initial residual = 5.53689e-06, Final residual = 8.46412e-07, No Iterations 3
PCG:  Solving for p, Initial residual = 1.09958e-06, Final residual = 6.67435e-07, No Iterations 1
PCG:  Solving for p, Initial residual = 6.8453e-07, Final residual = 6.8453e-07, No Iterations 0
time step continuity errors : sum local = 1.7009e-12, global = -2.70951e-13, cumulative = 4.10484e-10
PBiCG:  Solving for omega, Initial residual = 6.95995e-06, Final residual = 3.11373e-08, No Iterations 1
PBiCG:  Solving for k, Initial residual = 1.13897e-05, Final residual = 3.64994e-08, No Iterations 1
ExecutionTime = 23466.6 s  ClockTime = 24298 s

Courant Number mean: 0.00800217 max: 0.249963 velocity magnitude: 19.2672
deltaT = 4.27277e-06
GGI pair (outsideSlider, insideSlider) : 0.00219454 0.00219444 Diff = -1.80767e-08 or 0.000823716 %
Time = 0.142099

Initializing the GGI interpolator between master/shadow patches: outsideSlider/insideSlider
Evaluation of GGI weighting factors:
  Largest slave weighting factor correction : 2.2433e-05 average: 2.09926e-05
  Largest master weighting factor correction: 4.44089e-16 average: 8.0832e-17

PBiCG:  Solving for Ux, Initial residual = 2.46306e-05, Final residual = 5.12302e-08, No Iterations 1
PBiCG:  Solving for Uy, Initial residual = 6.39718e-05, Final residual = 7.7565e-08, No Iterations 2
PCG:  Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.00235717, Final residual = 9.72543e-07, No Iterations 194
PCG:  Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.000171122, Final residual = 9.86475e-07, No Iterations 286
PCG:  Solving for p, Initial residual = 2.08418e-05, Final residual = 8.15853e-07, No Iterations 5
time step continuity errors : sum local = 2.02727e-12, global = -9.79359e-15, cumulative = 4.10474e-10
PCG:  Solving for p, Initial residual = 6.06036e-05, Final residual = 9.72301e-07, No Iterations 72
PCG:  Solving for p, Initial residual = 1.48379e-05, Final residual = 9.36621e-07, No Iterations 3
PCG:  Solving for p, Initial residual = 1.3686e-06, Final residual = 6.83694e-07, No Iterations 1
time step continuity errors : sum local = 1.69887e-12, global = 6.1656e-14, cumulative = 4.10536e-10
PCG:  Solving for p, Initial residual = 5.634e-06, Final residual = 8.38707e-07, No Iterations 3
PCG:  Solving for p, Initial residual = 1.09776e-06, Final residual = 6.58525e-07, No Iterations 1
PCG:  Solving for p, Initial residual = 6.76011e-07, Final residual = 6.76011e-07, No Iterations 0
time step continuity errors : sum local = 1.67978e-12, global = -1.03209e-14, cumulative = 4.10525e-10
PBiCG:  Solving for omega, Initial residual = 6.96026e-06, Final residual = 3.12084e-08, No Iterations 1
PBiCG:  Solving for k, Initial residual = 1.13946e-05, Final residual = 3.65695e-08, No Iterations 1
ExecutionTime = 23467.3 s  ClockTime = 24299 s

Courant Number mean: 0.00800324 max: 0.24995 velocity magnitude: 19.252
deltaT = 4.27362e-06
GGI pair (outsideSlider, insideSlider) : 0.00219457 0.00219446 Diff = -2.29347e-08 or 0.00104507 %
Time = 0.142103

Initializing the GGI interpolator between master/shadow patches: outsideSlider/insideSlider
Evaluation of GGI weighting factors:
  Largest slave weighting factor correction : 2.37478e-05 average: 2.23244e-05
  Largest master weighting factor correction: 4.44089e-16 average: 7.74234e-17

PBiCG:  Solving for Ux, Initial residual = 2.46498e-05, Final residual = 5.12892e-08, No Iterations 1
PBiCG:  Solving for Uy, Initial residual = 6.40071e-05, Final residual = 2.56052e-07, No Iterations 2
PCG:  Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.00231218, Final residual = 9.92148e-07, No Iterations 403
PCG:  Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.00017901, Final residual = 9.7537e-07, No Iterations 289
PCG:  Solving for p, Initial residual = 1.88655e-05, Final residual = 9.51366e-07, No Iterations 4
time step continuity errors : sum local = 2.3647e-12, global = -1.22702e-14, cumulative = 4.10513e-10
PCG:  Solving for p, Initial residual = 6.0832e-05, Final residual = 9.80863e-07, No Iterations 73
PCG:  Solving for p, Initial residual = 1.54561e-05, Final residual = 9.73776e-07, No Iterations 3
PCG:  Solving for p, Initial residual = 1.42861e-06, Final residual = 7.12978e-07, No Iterations 1
time step continuity errors : sum local = 1.77216e-12, global = 4.73874e-14, cumulative = 4.1056e-10
PCG:  Solving for p, Initial residual = 5.49348e-06, Final residual = 8.22964e-07, No Iterations 3
PCG:  Solving for p, Initial residual = 1.07637e-06, Final residual = 6.54928e-07, No Iterations 1
PCG:  Solving for p, Initial residual = 6.71248e-07, Final residual = 6.71248e-07, No Iterations 0
time step continuity errors : sum local = 1.66844e-12, global = 7.73072e-14, cumulative = 4.10638e-10
PBiCG:  Solving for omega, Initial residual = 6.96094e-06, Final residual = 3.12768e-08, No Iterations 1
PBiCG:  Solving for k, Initial residual = 1.14e-05, Final residual = 3.66464e-08, No Iterations 1
ExecutionTime = 23468.1 s  ClockTime = 24300 s

Courant Number mean: 0.00800474 max: 0.249937 velocity magnitude: 19.2358
deltaT = 4.2747e-06
GGI pair (outsideSlider, insideSlider) : 0.00219458 0.00219447 Diff = -2.74837e-08 or 0.00125234 %
Time = 0.142108

Initializing the GGI interpolator between master/shadow patches: outsideSlider/insideSlider
Evaluation of GGI weighting factors:
  Largest slave weighting factor correction : 2.46202e-05 average: 2.32176e-05
  Largest master weighting factor correction: 4.44089e-16 average: 7.18236e-17

PBiCG:  Solving for Ux, Initial residual = 2.46486e-05, Final residual = 5.13601e-08, No Iterations 1
PBiCG:  Solving for Uy, Initial residual = 6.40261e-05, Final residual = 3.55732e-07, No Iterations 3
PCG:  Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.00227735, Final residual = 9.77136e-07, No Iterations 403
PCG:  Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.000179432, Final residual = 9.72128e-07, No Iterations 289
PCG:  Solving for p, Initial residual = 1.88636e-05, Final residual = 9.50111e-07, No Iterations 4
time step continuity errors : sum local = 2.36249e-12, global = -1.5894e-14, cumulative = 4.10622e-10
PCG:  Solving for p, Initial residual = 6.15472e-05, Final residual = 9.65375e-07, No Iterations 76
PCG:  Solving for p, Initial residual = 1.63223e-05, Final residual = 8.82104e-07, No Iterations 4
PCG:  Solving for p, Initial residual = 1.4109e-06, Final residual = 6.21973e-07, No Iterations 1
time step continuity errors : sum local = 1.54656e-12, global = 4.73359e-14, cumulative = 4.10669e-10
PCG:  Solving for p, Initial residual = 5.52386e-06, Final residual = 7.93676e-07, No Iterations 3
PCG:  Solving for p, Initial residual = 1.05287e-06, Final residual = 6.74179e-07, No Iterations 1
PCG:  Solving for p, Initial residual = 6.88394e-07, Final residual = 6.88394e-07, No Iterations 0
time step continuity errors : sum local = 1.71171e-12, global = 9.08264e-14, cumulative = 4.1076e-10
PBiCG:  Solving for omega, Initial residual = 6.96232e-06, Final residual = 3.13412e-08, No Iterations 1
PBiCG:  Solving for k, Initial residual = 1.14059e-05, Final residual = 3.67302e-08, No Iterations 1
ExecutionTime = 23469 s  ClockTime = 24301 s

Courant Number mean: 0.00800667 max: 0.249924 velocity magnitude: 19.2185
deltaT = 4.27601e-06
GGI pair (outsideSlider, insideSlider) : 0.00219458 0.00219448 Diff = -3.1391e-08 or 0.00143038 %
Time = 0.142112

Initializing the GGI interpolator between master/shadow patches: outsideSlider/insideSlider
Evaluation of GGI weighting factors:
  Largest slave weighting factor correction : 2.50498e-05 average: 2.36721e-05
  Largest master weighting factor correction: 4.44089e-16 average: 6.74412e-17

PBiCG:  Solving for Ux, Initial residual = 2.46482e-05, Final residual = 5.14485e-08, No Iterations 1
PBiCG:  Solving for Uy, Initial residual = 6.40494e-05, Final residual = 2.55792e+19, No Iterations 1000
PCG:  Solving for p, Initial residual = 1, Final residual = 9.67511e-07, No Iterations 803
PCG:  Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.127367, Final residual = 9.9397e-07, No Iterations 673
PCG:  Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.0152502, Final residual = 9.66232e-07, No Iterations 483
time step continuity errors : sum local = 1.42352e+11, global = -2.26409e+09, cumulative = -2.26409e+09
PCG:  Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.660487, Final residual = 9.85906e-07, No Iterations 793
PCG:  Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.499159, Final residual = 9.9406e-07, No Iterations 750
PCG:  Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.10088, Final residual = 9.8186e-07, No Iterations 535
time step continuity errors : sum local = 2.29023e+10, global = 2.6318e+09, cumulative = 3.67707e+08
PCG:  Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.81849, Final residual = 9.8874e-07, No Iterations 599
PCG:  Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.307484, Final residual = 9.67672e-07, No Iterations 724
PCG:  Solving for p, Initial residual = 0.0769423, Final residual = 9.21628e-07, No Iterations 654
time step continuity errors : sum local = 3.11283e+09, global = 2.92897e+07, cumulative = 3.96997e+08
PBiCG:  Solving for omega, Initial residual = 1, Final residual = 7.05779, No Iterations 1000
bounding omega, min: -1.66497e+29 max: 1.63748e+29 average: 8.64467e+24
PBiCG:  Solving for k, Initial residual = 0.866969, Final residual = 2.14241e-07, No Iterations 11
ExecutionTime = 23476.6 s  ClockTime = 24308 s

maddalena · October 26, 2010, 11:07

Are you running on multiple processors?
Also, how the vector field looks like at the last saved time step?
Actually, I never run any simulation using your solver, but maybe the cause of your problem is similar to something I have already seen...

mad

lordvon · October 26, 2010, 11:27

Yes, I am using metis decomposition for 4 processors on a single desktop.

As for the vector field on the iteration where it first display bad numbers, the whole field is just one color at some high velocity (on the order of the speed of light). The pressure field is all just one color with the scale set at infinity to negative infinity, with infinity and negative infinity both being the same color.

At the iteration just before, (I have controldict to save every 25 iterations) the flow field seems normal. I think the iteration that I posted above is the first messed up one, because the velocity magnitude still seems normal before the uy residual blows up.

maddalena · October 26, 2010, 11:38

Could you run the very last iterations using GAMG on p and smoothSolver on U and turbulence? Start form the last saved time step and go on. Alternatively, run the very last iterations on a single processor. If the solver run successfully the time step you had problems, than we may have found the solution...
Telling this because it remembers me a problem I had some times ago with incompatibility between DILUPBiCG in parallel and turbulence quantities...

crossed fingers...

mad

lordvon · October 26, 2010, 11:55

Could you give me some pointers on setting up GAMG? I see that there are many parameters to define, and I have not used it before. How do I choose the velue for nSweeps for smoothSolver? (I have looked through the openfoam 1.7 manual) (I use 1.5dev though for ggi)

Thanks for the suggestions, will try out the single processor run and let you know if it works or not.

maddalena · October 26, 2010, 12:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by lordvon

Could you give me some pointers on setting up GAMG?

Here it is:

Code:

    p
    {
        solver          GAMG;
        tolerance       1e-05;
        relTol          0;
        smoother        GaussSeidel;
        nPreSweeps      0;
        nPostSweeps     2;
        cacheAgglomeration true;
        nCellsInCoarsestLevel 10;
        agglomerator    faceAreaPair;
        mergeLevels     1;
    }

    U
    {
        solver          smoothSolver;
        smoother        GaussSeidel;
        tolerance       1e-03;
        relTol          0;
    }

Adjust relTol following your needs. These are not very strict tolerances...

mad

lordvon · October 26, 2010, 12:18

How dependent is convergence on nsweeps and ncoarsestlevel?

My mesh (ggi, turbomachinery external flow) has about 70000 cells, is ncoarsestlevel=10 appropriate?

maddalena · October 26, 2010, 12:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by lordvon

How dependent is convergence on nsweeps and ncoarsestlevel

I really do not know. never performed any study on that... That is a usually suggested setup...

Quote:

Originally Posted by lordvon

My mesh has about 70000 cells, is ncoarsestlevel=10 appropriate?

... well, my mesh are usually double than yours, and I use the setup posted above...

xiao · October 26, 2010, 13:28

It seems that I have the same problem as you said:
"incompatibility between DILUPBiCG in parallel and turbulence quantities".

Switching from DILUPBiCG to GAMG helped. It is stilling running right now, but it at least has not yet crashed so far (further than it went using PBiCG).

I am running pisoFoam with RANS. Periodic and wall boundary conditions on my domain.

maddalena · October 26, 2010, 14:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by xiao

Switching from DILUPBiCG to GAMG helped. It is stilling running right now, but it at least has not yet crashed so far (further than it went using PBiCG).

So, in my opinion, your problem is solved!

Let me know if you will perform any study on the influence of different parameters on GAMG.

Enjoy

mad

xiao · October 27, 2010, 11:46

Could anybody give some insight on that point?
incompatibility between DILUPBiCG in parallel and turbulence quantities.

Why is the incompatibility? I am not really satisfied with that solution without explanation.

Best,
Heng

Quote:

Originally Posted by maddalena

Could you run the very last iterations using GAMG on p and smoothSolver on U and turbulence? Start form the last saved time step and go on. Alternatively, run the very last iterations on a single processor. If the solver run successfully the time step you had problems, than we may have found the solution...
Telling this because it remembers me a problem I had some times ago with incompatibility between DILUPBiCG in parallel and turbulence quantities...

crossed fingers...

mad

lordvon · October 27, 2010, 12:00

Thanks, maddalena! Your diagnosis seems to have been correct.

Since piso is segregated solver (right?) and U was always the first to suddenly mess up, I only changed U to smoothSolver, and everything else in the case was the same. The simulation ran to completion (at least twice as far as previous cases).

I will change every other variable besides p to smoothSolver and see if there is any difference. I am hesitant to use GAMG because I dont know how to at least give educated guesses to the parameters. I imagine the standard parameter values are not applied to external turbomachine flow.

But thanks again! I dont think I would ever have caught such an error.

maddalena · October 27, 2010, 12:13

Well, to say the truth, I simply reported an explanation found over here: http://www.cfd-online.com/Forums/ope...tml#post246561.

But happy to be useful!!!

mad

showhand · October 19, 2015, 14:52

Hi,

Do you have some new ideas about this problem?

Running with smooth-solver, OK; running with PBiCG in serials, OK; running with PBiCG in parallel, crash.
I have the same problem with h equation in reactingFoam.
Changing to smooth solver fixes this, but I am curious about the reason. Could you please share some ideas?

Quote:

Originally Posted by xiao

Could anybody give some insight on that point?
incompatibility between DILUPBiCG in parallel and turbulence quantities.

Why is the incompatibility? I am not really satisfied with that solution without explanation.

Best,
Heng

October 25, 2010, 18:58	Velocity blows up suddenly after 30,000+ iterations	#1
lordvon Senior Member Robert Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 158 Rep Power: 16	Hello all, I am running a 2d turbDyMFoam transient external flow simulation using komegasst and ggi for rotating parts. Qualitatively the simulation is good, all of the flow regimes I have seen in other research papers are forming, and a steady state appears to be almost reached up until the 34,000th time step where the Uy suddenly blows up (output: no. iterations 1000, large final residual), then time step continuity error blows up, etc. Is it unusual for this to happen at such a high iteration count? Can wrong BCs cause this? I have for the k and omega zerogradient on all surfaces except fixedvalue at the freestream inlet and inletoutlet at the freestream outlet. For U, fixedvalue at freestream inlet, inletoutlet at freestream outlet (inletvalue uniform (0 0 0)), movingwallvelocity on physical surfaces, 'slip' on the top and bottom freestream patches. For p, zerogradiwent everywhere except slip on the top and bottom freestream patches and fixedvalue at freestream outlet.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Compressible Nozzle Flow	sebastian	OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD	14	September 21, 2016 11:47
How to write k and epsilon before the abnormal end	xiuying	OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD	8	August 27, 2013 16:33
Running in parallel crashed	zhajingjing	OpenFOAM	4	September 15, 2010 08:12
ForcesCoeffs	ronaldo	OpenFOAM	4	September 14, 2009 08:11
MRFSimpleFoam amp cyclic patches	david	OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD	36	October 21, 2008 22:55

October 26, 2010, 04:33		#2
maddalena Senior Member maddalena Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 436 Rep Power: 23	Hi robert, may I see the log file of the last 5 iterations before the simulation crashed? It is always a good idea to post not only the description of your problem but also errors/schemes setup and everything else can be useful to understand what is going wrong. Cheers mad

October 26, 2010, 11:07		#4
maddalena Senior Member maddalena Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 436 Rep Power: 23	Are you running on multiple processors? Also, how the vector field looks like at the last saved time step? Actually, I never run any simulation using your solver, but maybe the cause of your problem is similar to something I have already seen... mad

October 26, 2010, 11:27		#5
lordvon Senior Member Robert Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 158 Rep Power: 16	Yes, I am using metis decomposition for 4 processors on a single desktop. As for the vector field on the iteration where it first display bad numbers, the whole field is just one color at some high velocity (on the order of the speed of light). The pressure field is all just one color with the scale set at infinity to negative infinity, with infinity and negative infinity both being the same color. At the iteration just before, (I have controldict to save every 25 iterations) the flow field seems normal. I think the iteration that I posted above is the first messed up one, because the velocity magnitude still seems normal before the uy residual blows up.

October 26, 2010, 11:38		#6
maddalena Senior Member maddalena Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 436 Rep Power: 23	Could you run the very last iterations using GAMG on p and smoothSolver on U and turbulence? Start form the last saved time step and go on. Alternatively, run the very last iterations on a single processor. If the solver run successfully the time step you had problems, than we may have found the solution... Telling this because it remembers me a problem I had some times ago with incompatibility between DILUPBiCG in parallel and turbulence quantities... crossed fingers... mad

October 26, 2010, 11:55		#7
lordvon Senior Member Robert Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 158 Rep Power: 16	Could you give me some pointers on setting up GAMG? I see that there are many parameters to define, and I have not used it before. How do I choose the velue for nSweeps for smoothSolver? (I have looked through the openfoam 1.7 manual) (I use 1.5dev though for ggi) Thanks for the suggestions, will try out the single processor run and let you know if it works or not.

October 26, 2010, 12:18		#9
lordvon Senior Member Robert Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 158 Rep Power: 16	How dependent is convergence on nsweeps and ncoarsestlevel? My mesh (ggi, turbomachinery external flow) has about 70000 cells, is ncoarsestlevel=10 appropriate?

October 26, 2010, 13:28		#11
xiao Member Heng Xiao Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Zurich, Switzerland Posts: 58 Rep Power: 17	It seems that I have the same problem as you said: "incompatibility between DILUPBiCG in parallel and turbulence quantities". Switching from DILUPBiCG to GAMG helped. It is stilling running right now, but it at least has not yet crashed so far (further than it went using PBiCG). I am running pisoFoam with RANS. Periodic and wall boundary conditions on my domain.

October 27, 2010, 12:00		#14
lordvon Senior Member Robert Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 158 Rep Power: 16	Thanks, maddalena! Your diagnosis seems to have been correct. Since piso is segregated solver (right?) and U was always the first to suddenly mess up, I only changed U to smoothSolver, and everything else in the case was the same. The simulation ran to completion (at least twice as far as previous cases). I will change every other variable besides p to smoothSolver and see if there is any difference. I am hesitant to use GAMG because I dont know how to at least give educated guesses to the parameters. I imagine the standard parameter values are not applied to external turbomachine flow. But thanks again! I dont think I would ever have caught such an error.

October 27, 2010, 12:13		#15
maddalena Senior Member maddalena Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 436 Rep Power: 23	Well, to say the truth, I simply reported an explanation found over here: http://www.cfd-online.com/Forums/ope...tml#post246561. But happy to be useful!!! mad