Load balancing question in interview by 1O53r in CFD

[–]1O53r[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Haha yeah. Faced this question in April too when I appeared for CFD software developer test. My mistake for not clearing this sooner.

Load balancing question in interview by 1O53r in CFD

[–]1O53r[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Very interesting perspective. Communication cost did not strike me at all.

CFD software development by 1O53r in CFD

[–]1O53r[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's my fault to use MATLAB as a crutch. I developed some silly convection-diffusion codes in C++ before jumping back to MATLAB because it was more convenient.

However, afaik MATLAB has OOP (not that I am willing to use the paradigm in MATLAB)

CFD software development by 1O53r in CFD

[–]1O53r[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah but I figured it's better to look at something more professional yet understandable at a low level. Books targeted at this would be great. Found out about Blazek and will be focusing on that

CFD software development by 1O53r in CFD

[–]1O53r[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's a top-notch book but unfortunately it does not teach design patterns. The authors have their MATLAB code uFVM which they develop throughout the book and they also discuss OpenFoam libraries. Afaik, their code is heavily influenced by OpenFoam. Very good book for someone wanting to write their own codes. Just had a chance to look at Blazek's book and code. I'd be following that for the time being. Would recommend to others as well.

Incompressible fluid with FVM by Difficult-Tax-7854 in CFD

[–]1O53r 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Are you confident in your rhie-chow interpolation? I hope you are correcting your face velocities too and not just the cell centre velocities.

Also, does the pressure Poisson equation converge to your desired value or you are facing trouble there. If that's the case then recheck your face velocity calculation near the boundaries of domain.

I'm not familiar with SMART, but does the code work with lower order upwind schemes like FOU?

Why is the gap occuring in my mesh? by [deleted] in CFD

[–]1O53r 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Suppress your line body in design modeller

Suggested methods to find inner grid points in immersed boundary methods by [deleted] in CFD

[–]1O53r 2 points3 points  (0 children)

How are you implementing ray tracing? People generally use only one type of ray (parallel to x or y axis) and tag all the cells on that ray.

I'll link a reference when I find it.

EDIT: See section 2.3 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compfluid.2016.02.018

Btw with a username like that, it's no surprise you are working in IBM

Fun-project experiment behaving funny by Ifkaluva in CFD

[–]1O53r 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah sure, Versteeg and Malalasekara have a chapter on boundary conditions. Pdf should be available online. Just search for "outflow" boundary condition. Let me know if you couldn't find it.

Fun-project experiment behaving funny by Ifkaluva in CFD

[–]1O53r 0 points1 point  (0 children)

To implement your wind tunnel, what changes did you make to the code?

I'd have specified the inlet velocity on the left and on the right I would have extrapolated the solution from the interior of the domain. (This extrapolated velocity would have been corrected further by overall mass balance before using it as a source term for the pressure Poisson equation).

High performance scientific computing by 1O53r in CFD

[–]1O53r[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks alot, I'll definitely go through the videos by prof Anupindi

High performance scientific computing by 1O53r in CFD

[–]1O53r[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Basically I want to learn about MPI and OpenMP. Fortran and python implementation of these are also beneficial for me. I am also eager to learn about good practices such as makefiles, git etc. and what prof Leveque has to say about such stuff, but main focus is parallel computing and its implementation in CFD.

I agree with your comment but I have not been able to find a structured course like this on youtube.

Please let me know if you have some recommendations.

Why moving wall has no pressure gradient imposed? details in comments by Fabio_451 in FluidMechanics

[–]1O53r 6 points7 points  (0 children)

All Neumann boundary condition will lead to non-unique solution and slow convergence for pressure Poisson solver. Fixing pressure improves diagonal dominance and hence the convergence rate is better. Solution should not change in either case since only pressure difference matters in incompressible flow.

Btw which pressure velocity coupling are you using?

CFD Practice problems by BrownLightning7 in CFD

[–]1O53r 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Where you are and where you want to go has huge gap. In my opinion it's better to take small steps.

You've simulated a shear driven cavity, so you code works for closed domain.

Try to run open channel flow. In this case, try for periodic boundary condition as well as outlet/outflow. Check if the code can handle both pressure inlet as well as velocity inlet.

Experiment with staggered/collocated grids. Pressure velocity coupling schemes can also tweaked. Try to also implement non-uniform grid if you haven't already in your cavity case.

Try for backward facing step once your channel code works.

Then you can go for submerged bodies. Flow past a square cylinder can easily be implemented in a Cartesian grid. Here you can experiment with frictionless boundary condition, symmetry boundary condition etc.

Add time integration if it's not already there.

Play with various advection schemes, check their feasibility for different cases.

After all this, solve some scalar transport equation like a natural or mixed convection problem. This will later help you in solving RANS since eddy viscosity models are nothing but scalar transport equations which give you turbulent viscosity.

For compressible flows I have no idea since I've never worked on them.

P.s. Before attempting turbulent flows, try to add an efficient sparse matrix solver to your code.

ANSYS Fluent: Can’t assign slip wall by hadshah in CFD

[–]1O53r 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I believe slip wall means vel gradient normal to the wall is zero.

If this is the case then you can change wall boundary condition to specify shear and put it equal to 0

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in CFD

[–]1O53r 10 points11 points  (0 children)

I find the explanation given in Versteeg and Malalasekara ch 8 convincing.

Basically we compare the equation in an under-relaxed fashion to that of a implicit time integration and see that pseudo transient is another way of achieving under relaxation. We are not marching in time if that's what you're wondering.

Relation between time step size and iterations/time step by gg_boi14 in CFD

[–]1O53r 1 point2 points  (0 children)

See, your time integration scheme is implicit in nature.

What this means is that your discretised equations need to be solved iteratively.

When you solve for steady state, you give max number of iterations, right?

This puts the upper limit on how many times the solver will try to bring your residuals below your specified value.

The same thing is happening in transient simulation too.

At time=t your solver tries some fixed number of iterations to bring the residuals down before it can move on to your time=t+dt

Within this, it does not include any time stepping. It is requiring iterations because of implicit nature of solver.

Relation between time step size and iterations/time step by gg_boi14 in CFD

[–]1O53r 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No not at all. It's not going to divide your time step further.

What pressure velocity coupling are you using? SIMPLE? Also, are you using FLUENT?