Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Dirichlet Boundary Conditions #120

Open
robert-DL opened this issue Mar 19, 2022 · 3 comments
Open

Dirichlet Boundary Conditions #120

robert-DL opened this issue Mar 19, 2022 · 3 comments

Comments

@robert-DL
Copy link

Hi,

I want to initialize proper Dirichlet Boundary Conditions, e.g. of the Form

\u_D = \u_{avg} * \frac{6y(H-y)} {H^2} * w(t),

with w(t) given as
w(t) = 0.5 - 0.5cos(2pi*t) if t < 0.5 and 1 if t > 0.5.

In the Krüger et. al. book, there is a short chapter on proper initialization. They mention the method by Mei et. al. However, this approach is only for one single time step (most likely t=0). How to handle the above case. Use the iterative approach of Mei, repeat it for subsequent time steps and set the initial condition for every time step separately? Seems a little bit odd to me.

Furthermore, there is a method in the Simulation class, that initializes f such that it matches the given moments. It looks pretty similar to the approach of Mei et. al., with the only difference that the termination criterion is pressure-dependent, Mei et. al. propose a density-dependent criterion.

Any suggestions on that?

Best,
Robert

@Olllom
Copy link
Collaborator

Olllom commented Apr 3, 2022

Hi @robert-DL,

sorry, just saw this. Did you figure something out?

It should not matter whether you use density or pressure variation as a stopping criterion, as there is a linear relation between the two.

Pressure is probably a bit more convenient. For a fixed tolerance it gives you the same quality initial solution independent of Mach number. So checking for pressure facilitates setting a default tolerance.

Cheers,
Andreas

@PhiSpel
Copy link
Contributor

PhiSpel commented Aug 1, 2024

@Olllom we can close this, right?

@Olllom
Copy link
Collaborator

Olllom commented Aug 1, 2024

I don't think this is solved.

Depends if the native implementation is currently utilized and if there are plans to further develop it.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants