|
[Sponsors] |
October 12, 2009, 12:58 |
dnsFoam
|
#1 |
Member
Eelco Gehring
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 70
Rep Power: 17 |
Hi All,
I was running the dnsFoam tutorial case on a 128^3 mesh and I am running into some issues. I get the following error msg: Time = 0.175 Number of forced K = 12 k(0.175) = 1.12316e+48 epsilon(0.175) = 2.81871e+49 U.f(0.175) = -1.60366e+22 #0 Foam::error:rintStack(Foam::Ostream&) in "/usr/local/OpenFOAM/OpenFOAM-1.5/lib/linux64GccDPOpt/lib OpenFOAM.so" #1 Foam::sigFpe::sigFpeHandler(int) in "/usr/local/OpenFOAM/OpenFOAM-1.5/lib/linux64GccDPOpt/libOpenFOA M.so" #2 ?? in "/lib64/libc.so.6" #3 Foam::PBiCG::solve(Foam::Field<double>&, Foam::Field<double> const&, unsigned char) const in "/usr/l ocal/OpenFOAM/OpenFOAM-1.5/lib/linux64GccDPOpt/libOpenFOAM.so" #4 Foam::fvMatrix<Foam::Vector<double> >::solve(Foam::Istream&) in "/usr/local/OpenFOAM/OpenFOAM-1.5/ap plications/bin/linux64GccDPOpt/dnsFoam" #5 main in "/usr/local/OpenFOAM/OpenFOAM-1.5/applications/bin/linux64GccDPOpt/dnsFoam" #6 __libc_start_main in "/lib64/libc.so.6" #7 Foam::regIOobject::readIfModified() in "/usr/local/OpenFOAM/OpenFOAM-1.5/applications/bin/linux64Gcc DPOpt/dnsFoam" k and eps seem to go completely off the chart, do you have any idea what is going on? Thanks! |
|
October 14, 2009, 06:47 |
|
#2 |
Member
Markus Weinmann
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Stuttgart, Germany
Posts: 77
Rep Power: 17 |
Hi
I also tested dnsFOAM a while and I had to reduce the time step for finer meshes! I always thought that dnsFoam does not work in parallel. Do you run your 128^3 on a single processor? I am very interested in your results, since I was never able to successfully use dnsFOAM. Are you getting a nice energy spectrum and do you know who to set the parameters for a certain Reynolds number? Best regards Markus |
|
October 14, 2009, 14:45 |
|
#3 |
Member
Eelco Gehring
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 70
Rep Power: 17 |
Hey Markus,
Yeah that makes sense, I'll reduce the time step. I also found out that dnsFoam doesn't work in parallel. I submitted the 128^3 case to one processor. It is not ideal, but it seems to be working. I just started looking at dnsFoam so I don't know anything about setting the Re #, but I'll share my results for E(k) when the case is finished. Eelco |
|
January 11, 2010, 06:30 |
|
#4 |
Member
Markus Weinmann
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Stuttgart, Germany
Posts: 77
Rep Power: 17 |
Hi Eelco,
how are you getting on with dnsFoam, have you managed to get reasonable results? I am still struggeling to get anything that looks like a energy spectrum !! Regards Markus |
|
January 11, 2010, 12:14 |
|
#5 |
Member
Eelco Gehring
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 70
Rep Power: 17 |
Hey Markus,
I am struggling to get anything remotely close to a reasonable energy spectrum as well. The solver takes way too long to get a decent calculation done. Although it uses a spectral method, the fact that it cannot be used in parallel is not good. I am trying to figure out a way for it to work in parallel, but it's taking some time to understand the solver completely. Regard, Eelco |
|
January 28, 2010, 05:54 |
|
#6 |
Member
Markus Weinmann
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Stuttgart, Germany
Posts: 77
Rep Power: 17 |
Hi Eelco,
I found a bug in dnsFOAM see here: http://www.cfd-online.com/Forums/ope...g-dnsfoam.html If you fix the bug you will get a nice energy spectra, providing the forcing parameters are set correctly. Markus |
|
January 28, 2010, 12:24 |
|
#7 |
Member
Eelco Gehring
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 70
Rep Power: 17 |
Hey Markus,
Thanks for letting me know. I appreciate it. I'll try to some cases with this modification. Eelco |
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
dnsFoam | cfdmarkus | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 0 | July 15, 2009 07:26 |
Is dnsFoam can run in parallel | mamaly60 | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 0 | October 29, 2007 19:27 |
Ek decay | michso | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 7 | August 1, 2006 17:24 |
Turbulence decay | michso | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 0 | July 31, 2006 17:57 |