|
|
bug2.png (182,594 bytes) |
|
|
Support request |
|
|
What do you mean by support request? This is a code issue of SprayFoam! |
|
|
The information provided is not enough to reproduce the error. Please, understand that statements like "some times everything suddenly becomes zero" or "I checked everything and it seems to be OK" are not really indicative of the kind of problem that is showing up. Asking for a solution at this moment without giving further details is actually a support request more than a proper bug report. Could you provide a simple case that shows this wrong behavior? That would be very useful to start identifying the actual issue. |
|
|
A case would be an improvement, but if the argument remains that "the results are wrong", then this will still be an issue of support. Spray penetration can fluctuate for any number of reasons, many of which are not bugs. A valid bug report identifies an issue and argues/proves why it is a problem in the code and not just a matter of user error. |
|
|
OK, let me describe it precisely. First look at the file 188.Pdf they have also the same problem with liquid penetration length you can read it for more detail. Secondly, Spray h non-reacting case is a simple case for simulation you can simulate it via SprayFoam and compare the results with the experimental results that had been provided here: http://www.ca.sandia.gov/ecn/cvdata/dsearch/frameset.php They have suggested to use a cylinder of size 108*108 mm with the mesh resolution of 0.25 mm. In order to simulate it and reducing the computational time I'm trying to use a wedge case (or a 30 degree sector of the cylinder) but when running the simulation with sprayFoam at some time after the simulation start everything becomes zero such as deltaT = 4.28541e-07 Time = 0.00358629 Solving 2-D cloud sprayCloud Cloud: sprayCloud Current number of parcels = 1 Current mass in system = 1.41329e-13 Linear momentum = (2.9311e-11 9.95591e-13 1.14472e-13) |Linear momentum| = 2.93282e-11 Linear kinetic energy = 3.04305e-09 model1: number of parcels added = 1136 mass introduced = 1.27455e-07 Parcel fate (number, mass) - escape = 0, 0 - stick = 0, 0 Temperature min/max = 515.303, 515.303 Mass transfer phase change = 1.27455e-07 D10, D32, Dmax (mu) = 0.393021, 0.393021, 0.393021 Liquid penetration 95% mass (m) = 0.00514539 deltaT = 4.28541e-07 Time = 0.00358672 Solving 2-D cloud sprayCloud Cloud: sprayCloud Current number of parcels = 0 Current mass in system = 0 Linear momentum = (0 0 0) |Linear momentum| = 0 Linear kinetic energy = 0 model1: number of parcels added = 1136 mass introduced = 1.27455e-07 Parcel fate (number, mass) - escape = 0, 0 - stick = 0, 0 Temperature min/max = 0, 0 Mass transfer phase change = 1.27455e-07 D10, D32, Dmax (mu) = 0, 0, 0 Liquid penetration 95% mass (m) = 0 As you see at Time = 0.00358629 everything is ok but at the next timesteps everything becomes zero. I hope that I described the problem clearly but if it is not enough please let me know. Also please don't forget to read the attached pdf |
|
|
The spray penetration is zero because the current number of parcels is zero. Do you think another value should be reported for the penetration in this situation? What is wrong with the penetration calculation (SprayCloudI.H, line 76)? Or, maybe you think the number of parcels shouldn't be zero. I would assume that they have all evaporated or left the domain. Is that not the case? Are they disappearing due to a bug? |
|
|
There is no way of knowing from the report whether there is a significant issue with sprayFoam or not, or whether the case is set up incorrectly. (Given the PDF shows users successfully overpredicting non-zero spray penetration, it is likely the latter). The people who contribute their work to the public by resolving issues on this forum (and developing OpenFOAM) do not provide free support here. Closed. |
|
|
Excuse me, You mean that suddenly all of the parcels at the same time had been eliminated?! Although we have uniform injection at all time steps. Then I think there should be some parcels at all time steps. Dear chris I don't know why I feel anger from your message, but you should know that I appreciate all developers helps and I don't want free support!!! I just want to solve the issue if it is related to the SprayFoam itself! |
|
|
@SadeghEbadi: By looking at the guidelines stated in the rules page: https://bugs.openfoam.org/rules.php - from section "Reporting an Issue", the following details are missing in your report: - A clear set of instructions that reproduces the issue, including key files, if required. More specifically, in the current report, it's missing a test case with which the reported problem can be reproduced. Furthermore, complete proof that there is a bug is also missing. From what I can see, it's not clear if the problem has to do with using the 'wedge' boundary conditions or if it's a problem with the case set-up specifically. Therefore, in order to isolate the origin of the problem, a complete case that has the full cylinder is also needed for comparing the results and what is happening. Last but not least, there is another problem with this report: OpenFOAM 4.1 is indicated has the version being used. The current major version is OpenFOAM 5.0, therefore this issue could potentially have already been solved in the more recent developments. |
|
|
@wyldckat: Hello dear Bruno, Ok I have attached the files (0, constant, chemkin, system)(See the attachment named SprayFoam.zip) you can try it by yourself. |
|
|
Thank you all for your efforts, please let me know if you need extra information |
|
|
@SadeghEbadi: Please also provide a case that has the complete 360 degree mesh, for comparing the results. |
|
|
The case is setup incorrectly. |
- Anonymous
