|
[Sponsors] |
Problems in mesh motion solutor in parallel 4 interDyMFoam. |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
November 21, 2009, 09:54 |
Problems in mesh motion solutor in parallel 4 interDyMFoam.
|
#1 |
Member
Davide Lupo Conti
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 34
Rep Power: 17 |
Hello,
I'm using OpenFOAM 1.5-dev. I'm using the interDyMFoam solutor to run a free surface flow test case (a cube floating in water). I've modified a bit the floatingBody classes, but nothing of major importance. I don't have problems in running the simulation in serial (one processor), but when I try to run the same case in parallel (on four processors) the simulation gets stuck though I think I've done all things correctly, using decomposePar. I've done a bit of debugging and found out that the coode gets stuck on the solutor of the laplacian for the mesh motion in sixDofMotion.C, more precisely in fvMesh::movePoints(motionPtr_->newPoints()). the problem seems to be in newPoints(). In the end I found out that the problem seems to be in laplaceTetDecompositionMotionSolver.C in the line solverPerf_ = motionEqn.solve(). Unfortunately I couldn't get any 'deeper' than that in the code. Does anybody have an idea why the simulation runs in serial and not in parallel? I mean, isn't pretty wierd that running in parallel gives problems in the solutor for the mesh motion? Any idea can be very useful! thanks to all Davide |
|
Tags |
mesh motion, parallel |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
dynamic mesh interDyMFoam parallel run and processor boundaries | lukasfischer | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 0 | August 12, 2009 07:36 |
Mesh motion Hex cells vs tets | kev4573 | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 6 | December 13, 2007 15:37 |
Icemcfd 11: Loss of mesh from surface mesh option? | Joe | CFX | 2 | March 26, 2007 19:10 |
mesh motion | emma chen | FLUENT | 0 | September 26, 2003 10:14 |
unstructured vs. structured grids | Frank Muldoon | Main CFD Forum | 1 | January 5, 1999 11:09 |