|
[Sponsors] |
September 12, 2011, 05:24 |
linearUpwind scheme in OpenFOAM 2.0.1 ???
|
#1 | ||
New Member
Andre Laß
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Rostock, Germany
Posts: 9
Rep Power: 16 |
Hello FOAMers,
i just wanted to set up a new simulation an user the following schemes: Quote:
Quote:
Greeting,s André |
|||
September 13, 2011, 04:59 |
|
#2 |
New Member
Andre Laß
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Rostock, Germany
Posts: 9
Rep Power: 16 |
Does nobody have the same Problem?
|
|
September 13, 2011, 08:00 |
|
#3 | |
New Member
Andre Laß
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Rostock, Germany
Posts: 9
Rep Power: 16 |
Hello there,
i played around with the fvSchemes for a while and ended up with the following settings, that are working for me. Quote:
as mentioned before, the calculation is running fine and the results look good too. Greetings, André |
||
September 13, 2011, 11:37 |
|
#4 |
Senior Member
Claus Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Wiesbaden, Germany
Posts: 241
Rep Power: 18 |
In OF-2 I use linearUpwind(V) in this way:
div(phi,U) Gauss linearUpwindV grad(U); dib(phi,k) Gauss linearUpwind grad(k); and so on. Cheers |
|
November 7, 2011, 14:05 |
|
#5 |
Member
fisch
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 97
Rep Power: 16 |
Hello,
could someome tell me what the meaning of this grad(U) in the div(phi,U) discretization is? Thanks rupert |
|
November 8, 2011, 06:19 |
|
#6 | |
Senior Member
Eugene de Villiers
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 725
Rep Power: 21 |
Quote:
gradSchemes { blahblahblah Gauss linear; } divSchemes { div(phi,U) Gauss linearUpwindV blahblahblah; } should work just fine. In all cases things like "div(phi,U)" and "grad(U)" are just identifiers, thy have no special structure or significance outside this. |
||
November 8, 2011, 06:46 |
|
#7 |
Member
fisch
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 97
Rep Power: 16 |
Thanks for the answer eugene.
now arise two questions: 1.so it should be the same as the gradient in the implicit field in the div-term? 2. what happens then if i dont specify this: just like div(phi,U) Gauss linear? thanks a lot |
|
November 9, 2011, 06:39 |
|
#8 |
Senior Member
Eugene de Villiers
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 725
Rep Power: 21 |
1. As far as I know there is no fixed rule about the nature of the gradient portion of a LUD scheme. Its not like pressure and velocity flux interpolation that has to be consistent.
2. If you don't specify anything at all, the code should crash (or maybe not, I haven't checked). If you specify something with no match in the gradScemes section, it should use the "default" gradScheme entry without complaint. If no default entry is present, it should exit with an error. |
|
November 9, 2011, 07:57 |
|
#9 |
Member
fisch
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 97
Rep Power: 16 |
thank you eugene
|
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Second order upwinding scheme in OpenFoam | subash | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 4 | June 20, 2012 19:28 |
OpenFOAM 1.6.x, 1.7.0 and 1.7.x are not fully prepared to work with gcc-4.5.x | wyldckat | OpenFOAM Bugs | 18 | October 21, 2010 06:51 |
Cross-compiling OpenFOAM 1.7.0 on Linux for Windows 32 and 64bits with Mingw-w64 | wyldckat | OpenFOAM Announcements from Other Sources | 3 | September 8, 2010 07:25 |
Parameter for the cubic upwind scheme in OpenFOAM | JinBiao | OpenFOAM | 1 | May 23, 2010 04:51 |
Different flow pattern between OpenFOAM and CFX | AirS | OpenFOAM | 0 | January 12, 2010 08:08 |