Science method

AMG - Science method

Explore the latest questions and answers in AMG, and find AMG experts.
Questions related to AMG
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
3 answers
Reversed flow on 28 faces of pressure-outlet 7.
Stabilizing mp-x-momentum to enhance linear solver robustness.
Stabilizing mp-x-momentum using GMRES to enhance linear solver robustness.
Stabilizing mp-y-momentum to enhance linear solver robustness.
Stabilizing mp-y-momentum using GMRES to enhance linear solver robustness.
Stabilizing k to enhance linear solver robustness.
Stabilizing k using GMRES to enhance linear solver robustness.
Divergence detected in AMG solver: k Stabilizing epsilon to enhance linear solver robustness.
Stabilizing epsilon using GMRES to enhance linear solver robustness.
Divergence detected in AMG solver: epsilon Stabilizing flue-gas-species-0 to enhance linear solver robustness.
Stabilizing flue-gas-species-1 to enhance linear solver robustness.
Stabilizing temperature to enhance linear solver robustness.
Stabilizing temperature using GMRES to enhance linear solver robustness.
Stabilizing vof-1 to enhance linear solver robustness.
absolute pressure limited to 5.000000e+10 in 2708 cells on zone 4
turbulent viscosity limited to viscosity ratio of 1.000000e+05 in 7089 cells
Divergence detected in AMG solver: k
Divergence detected in AMG solver: epsilon
Divergence detected in AMG solver: k
Divergence detected in AMG solver: epsilon
Divergence detected in AMG solver: k
Divergence detected in AMG solver: epsilon
Divergence detected in AMG solver: k
Divergence detected in AMG solver: epsilon
Divergence detected in AMG solver: k
Divergence detected in AMG solver: epsilon
Divergence detected in AMG solver: k
Divergence detected in AMG solver: epsilon
Divergence detected in AMG solver: k
Divergence detected in AMG solver: epsilon
Divergence detected in AMG solver: k
Divergence detected in AMG solver: epsilon
Divergence detected in AMG solver: k
Divergence detected in AMG solver: epsilon
Divergence detected in AMG solver: k
Divergence detected in AMG solver: epsilon
Divergence detected in AMG solver: k
Divergence detected in AMG solver: epsilon
Error at host: floating point exception
===============Message from the Cortex Process================================
Compute processes interrupted. Processing can be resumed.
==============================================================================
Error at Node 2: floating point exception
Error at Node 5: floating point exception
Error at Node 3: floating point exception
Error at Node 9: floating point exception
Error at Node 1: floating point exception
Error at Node 4: floating point exception
Error at Node 7: floating point exception
Error at Node 11: floating point exception
Error at Node 0: floating point exception
Error at Node 6: floating point exception
Error at Node 8: floating point exception
Error at Node 10: floating point exception
Relevant answer
Answer
Thank you all for your suggestion.
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
1 answer
I am working on Battery Pack Thermal Analysis for an Electric Vehicle. Whenever I get to the point of pressing "Run Calculation", the solver displays 1 iteration only then displays some info and "Floating Point Exception". Here are the messages displayed in the console:
iter energy uds-0 uds-1 time/iter
1 1.6096e-07 7.8111e-07 7.7842e-07 0:00:40 10
Stabilizing temperature to enhance linear solver robustness.
Stabilizing temperature using GMRES to enhance linear solver robustness.
Divergence detected in AMG solver: temperature Stabilizing uds-0 to enhance linear solver robustness.
Stabilizing uds-0 using GMRES to enhance linear solver robustness.
Divergence detected in AMG solver: uds-0 Stabilizing uds-1 to enhance linear solver robustness.
Stabilizing uds-1 using GMRES to enhance linear solver robustness.
Divergence detected in AMG solver: uds-1
Divergence detected in AMG solver: temperature
Divergence detected in AMG solver: uds-0
Divergence detected in AMG solver: uds-1
Divergence detected in AMG solver: temperature
Divergence detected in AMG solver: uds-0
Divergence detected in AMG solver: uds-1
Divergence detected in AMG solver: temperature
Divergence detected in AMG solver: uds-0
Divergence detected in AMG solver: uds-1
Divergence detected in AMG solver: temperature
Divergence detected in AMG solver: uds-0
Divergence detected in AMG solver: uds-1
Divergence detected in AMG solver: temperature
Divergence detected in AMG solver: uds-0
Divergence detected in AMG solver: uds-1
Error at host: floating point exception
===============Message from the Cortex Process================================
Compute processes interrupted. Processing can be resumed.
==============================================================================
Error at Node 3: floating point exception
Error at Node 2: floating point exception
Error at Node 5: floating point exception
Error at Node 4: floating point exception
Error at Node 1: floating point exception
Error at Node 0: floating point exception
Error: floating point exception
Error Object: #f
I am new to Ansys Fluent, so I will be glad if anyone helps me throughout this problem. Thanks in advance!
Relevant answer
well, you have two user defined scalar, they uses a transport equation with transient, advection, disusion, and sources.
All UDS are solved AFTER the principal linear system (P-velocity, turbulence, energy, and so on...) You need be carefull with Courant number for advcetive transport of these scalars (a hypernbolic behavior). Co<1 or less if possible .
Other possibility is the Sources if they do exits, Souces can create grow up or down vary fastly with a good flow time step ( the critical time step is given lower time scale in your system). A good practice, is to create a lienar expansion of you source S= So - Sp*Phi ( Phi is your scalar) This is good for diagonal dominance and matriz contidiong - anf for AMG and GMRES solver.
GMRES troubles gereraly means that you problem is not convex - there are a lot of hills and valleys in th Rn surface solution field - generated from the sources and a lot of couling , no lineariaties, etc...
Try to change you Time Step, and turn-off sources iff they are there. If it works, you'll knows where to refine your numerical tunning
Do not fotget the relaxationsm and solver parameters.... they helps a lot if know what they do!
Good look!
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
4 answers
Hello everyone.
I am doing a CFD simulation for waste heat boiler and simulation boiling in steam drum.
I used ANSYS Fluent to perform the simulation. However during the calculation section. I received this error
"reversed flow in 274 faces on pressure-outlet 18.
Stabilizing mp-x-momentum to enhance linear solver robustness.
Stabilizing k to enhance linear solver robustness.
Divergence detected in AMG solver: k temperature limited to 1.000000e+00 in 8519 cells on zone 2 in domain 3
turbulent viscosity limited to viscosity ratio of 1.000000e+05 in 18252 cells
Divergence detected in AMG solver: k
Error at host: floating point exception
Error at Node 0: floating point exception
Error at Node 1: floating point exception
Error: floating point exception
Error Object: #f"
May I know what are the possible cause of this error?
Any advice? Thank you
Relevant answer
Answer
The "reversed flow in 274 faces on pressure-outlet 18" error message indicates that there is a problem with the boundary conditions at pressure outlet 18. This error can occur if the pressure outlet boundary condition is not properly defined, or if the flow direction at the outlet is opposite to the expected flow direction.
The "Divergence detected in AMG solver: k temperature limited to 1.000000e+00 in 8519 cells on zone 2 in domain 3" and "turbulent viscosity limited to viscosity ratio of 1.000000e+05 in 18252 cells" messages indicate that the solver is encountering numerical instability during the simulation. This can be caused by a variety of factors, including an inappropriate grid, inaccurate boundary conditions, or a poorly defined model.
The "floating point exception" error message indicates that there is a problem with the numerical computation being performed by the solver. This can be caused by a division by zero, an invalid operation, or an overflow.
There are a few things you can try:
  1. Review the boundary conditions at pressure outlet 18 to make sure they are properly defined and the flow direction is correct.
  2. Check the grid quality to ensure that it is suitable for the simulation. A poorly resolved or skewed grid can cause numerical instability.
  3. Review the model and make sure it is properly defined and all necessary parameters are specified.
  4. Check for any invalid or unrealistic input values that may be causing problems with the numerical computation.
  5. Try using a different solver or solver settings to see if the error persists.
I hope this helps!
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
1 answer
Hi there
Isohumic coefficient form SIMEOS AMG are not really correlated to our on field observation in no till farming fields in france.
The model is based on incubating plant cover residues at 25 tonnes of dry matter with 180 kg of nitrogen per hectare. However, the fertilization of plant cover is prohibited in France
So im looking for other references, all the datas i find are only from France.
Regards
Relevant answer
Answer
K1 of crop residue of wheat (0.15), barley (0.15) and corn (0.20) and cover crops (0.25).
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
9 answers
Dear All,
In Ansys fluent 2021 R2, I compile and load a UDF file and even initialize successfully but when I click on calculate then at the beginning of 0% calculation I am getting the following error,
Divergence detected in AMG solver: uds-0
Divergence detected in AMG solver: uds-0
Error at host: floating point exception
===============Message from the Cortex Process================================
Compute processes interrupted. Processing can be resumed.
==============================================================================
Error: floating point exception
Error Object: #f
Please tell me the possible solution to solve this error, its been a week but I am stuck in solving this issue, I am really in need of someone who can give guidance. Please Help.
Relevant answer
Answer
@hazrat glad to hear that.
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
42 answers
As I start the simulation of bubble column (air-water system), just after 15 iterations, it displays "floating point exception" and shows "divergence detected in AMG solver". What is the reason behind it?
Relevant answer
Answer
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
2 answers
Dear all,
I am simulating the combustion of diesel-biodiesel-gasoline mixtures, in which I developed the kinetic mechanism via Chemkin. My case is a 2-D constant volume bomb chamber, and the fuel is injected through the nozzle, while I ignite the mixture using the spark option. However, right when the timestep reaches the time where the spark is ignited, I get this error:
divergence detected in AMG solver: temperature
By this I mean there is no problem with the simulation if there was no spark activated. But when it is used, the running stops with a floating point.
I have searched a lot to find a solution, and I have tried, mesh refinement, BC, URF, smaller timesteps, energy equation, control limits and all you might possibly find on the internet. Could you please kindly guide me on what sort of action should I take to resolve this issue?
Appreciate it,
Relevant answer
Answer
I appreciate it Ruben Borrajo
As I mentioned in the question there are a myriad of possible solutions you can try, and so far I believe I tried numerous combinations of ways to resolve it, and I could not. Until I curiously applied another combustion model to scrutinise the combustion characteristics in that chamber, and it worked. FYI, actually, I was trying to use spray diffusion instead of non-premixed, premixed and other available options in the spray module of fluent, which brings about a cumbersome array of mechanisms and equations, whilst, if you build a pdf for the same model, you will be able to resolve this issue. Also, the contours and line graphs I retrieved were corresponding exp data acceptably.
Again, thanks for your response.
Alan Zandie
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
6 answers
I am simulating a two-axisymmetric supersonic jet impinging on a flat plate. When I am rotating my mesh in fluent and running simulation, i am getting the following error, "Divergence detected in AMG solver" (details in the attachments) Please, need help.
Relevant answer
Answer
Thanks, Mr. Ahmed. I understand the fact now
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
3 answers
Hello,
I have been trying to model evaporation at temperatures far well below 100C in Fluent. This is primarily driven by the vapor content of air at the water-air interface.
A saturation temperature UDF is attached below.
The setup this is used with has 2 phases, one a species mixture of air and water vapor and the other is water.
After some help from the forum, I have got it up and running and it seems to be performing fairly well in transient simulations. However, when I try to use this code to calculate the saturation temperature for any steady-state simulation, I get a floating-point error. This is sometimes instant and sometimes after a few iterations. An example error message is:
Error at Node 0: floating point exception
Error at Node 1: floating point exception
Error at Node 2: floating point exception
Error at Node 3: floating point exception
Stabilizing pressure correction to enhance linear solver robustness.
Stabilizing pressure correction using GMRES to enhance linear solver robustness.
Divergence detected in AMG solver: pressure correction Stabilizing temperature to enhance linear solver robustness.
Divergence detected in AMG solver: pressure correction
Divergence detected in AMG solver: pressure correction
Divergence detected in AMG solver: pressure correction
Error at host: floating point exception
I can't understand why I am running into this issue. Is there anything I could try to remedy the problem? I have tested on many geometries, with a variety of problems. Is this UDF unsuitable for steady simulations? and if that's the case then what alternatives do I have? I really need this functionality.
I thought it may be because the system varies a lot so I set up a closed system with a little water in with the walls set to a temperature of 300k and initialized it at 300k. My logic was that the only thing left to solve was the vapor fraction. I got a simulation to run 10000 iterations. However, the vapor fraction was 1.0 everywhere in the gas phase leading to relative humidities many times larger than 100%. This makes me worry there is something wrong with the UDF itself. I know that this kind of study must be possible somehow as I have read papers of people doing similar things, yet these don't go into enough detail for me to successfully imitate.
Any help is appreciated.
Cheers
#include "udf.h"
#define MOLAR_MASS_WATER 18.01534 //g/mol
#define MOLAR_MASS_AIR 28.97 // g/mol
#define RHO_WV 0.5542 // kg/m3
#define RHO_AIR 1.225 // kg/m3
DEFINE_PROPERTY(saturation_temp, c, t)
{
// t: mixture thread
// c: cell variable
// Cell volume
real vol = C_VOLUME(c, t);
Thread *pt = THREAD_SUB_THREAD(t, 0); // Primary phase thread
Thread *st = THREAD_SUB_THREAD(t, 1); // Secondary phase thread
// Get the volume fraction of both phases
real vf_s = C_VOF(c, st);
real vf_p = 1 - vf_s;
// Get the pressure of the mixture 
real p_mix = C_P(c, t);
// Get the operating pressure
real p_op = RP_Get_Real("operating-pressure");
// Primary phase density
real rho_p = C_R(c, pt);
// Get mass fractions in primary phase
real mf[2]; // Array to store mass fractions
Material *m = THREAD_MATERIAL(pt);
Material *sp = NULL;
int i; // Species index - 0 for water vapor and 1 for air
mixture_species_loop(m, sp, i)
{ mf[i] = C_YI(c, pt, i);
}
real p_w; // h20 pressure for cell
// If secondary phase only
if (vf_s == 1)
{
p_w = p_mix + p_op; //****** I'm not sure if this is right *******
}
// If primary phase or mixture of phases
else 
{
// Find the partial pressure of water vapour
// partial pressure = cell pressure * water mole fraction
// mass of primary phase in cell
real m_prim = rho_p * vol * vf_p;
// mass of water vapour and air in cell
real m_wv = mf[0] * m_prim;
real m_air = m_prim - m_wv;
// No of moles in water vapour and air
real N_wv = m_wv / MOLAR_MASS_WATER;
real N_air = m_air / MOLAR_MASS_AIR;
real N_total = N_wv + N_air;
// water vapour partial pressure
p_w = (C_P(c, t)+ p_op)* (N_wv / N_total);
}
// Calculate saturation temperature
real t_sat;
t_sat = (1730.63 / (10.196 - log10(p_w))) + 39.724;
return t_sat;
}
Relevant answer
Answer
Hayder Ibrahim Mohammed I would definitely be interested in seeing your solution to understand what you mean, Thank You!
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
1 answer
Recently, I was simulating the tutorial file "SIEngine_PortInjected_AMG_Tutorial.ftsim". After the simulation completed I got some results. I have some basic questions that make me doubt the solver, maybe I am wrong.
The questions are as follows:
  1. 100% combustion efficiency. ( On which basis combustion efficiency is calculated? ) I calculated fuel mass multiplied by LHV which is greater than the chemical heat release rate. How is that possible? This seems like an ideal case.
  2. UHC is almost zero. How is this possible?
  3. Fuel Mass per Engine Cycle is showing  2.07651E-002 [g], whereas in the excel sheet iC8H18 concentration is 2.18E-002 gram before combustion. Why there is a deviation?
  4. Fuel Lower Heating Value per g  44.00000 [kJ]. This LHV value remains the same if I change the combustion from gasoline to CNG also. I guess it may affect results also.
Please answer these questions.
Relevant answer
Answer
Combustion efficiency is an input in such cases, not an output; that is, you tell the software (or it assumes) a combustion efficiency. If you have assumed it's 100% efficient, then there is no UHC, as this is an inevitable consequence of the assumption. You need to dig deeper into the science of combustion calculations and not rely on software that somebody else wrote for you.
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
8 answers
Hello everyone!
I'm doing a simulation in fluent and at some point, usually after the first 15 steps, the error appears:
Divergence detected in AMG solver: temperature
Divergence detected in AMG solver: temperature
Error at host: floating point exception
Error at Node 0: floating point exception
Error at Node 1: floating point exception
===============Message from the Cortex Process================================
Compute processes interrupted. Processing can be resumed.
==============================================================================
Error: floating point exception
Error Object: #f
I'm compiling a UDF file, Time transient, convergence criterion relative, number of time steps 1000, able Specified Operating Density like zero kg/m^3. The mesh is refined in the best possible way.
What is the reason behind it?
Best regards.
Relevant answer
Answer
Dear all,
Today, I want to guide you through all the possibilities that could solve this problem, and, in the end, I will give a solution to this problem that will 99% will work with all the cases and solve all the problem related to this issue, especially in the dynamic mesh.
First of all, you need to make sure these things:
1-Your mesh is set to CFD, fluent and NOT mechanical
2- Your mesh should have at least a good skewness and orthogonal array value
3- you have unstructured mesh, with tringles arrangement
4-your mesh should show all the bodies of your geometry without cuts
5-If it did not initialize properly, reset the setting and do it again
6- for transient application, take PISO as your method
7- your timesteps must be less than 0.005
Finally, the real setup that really can solve this problem in the dynamic mesh is to activate
Implicit Update Settings
"For transient problems, you can enable implicit mesh updating when you want to have the dynamic mesh updated during a time step (as opposed to just at the beginning of a time step). This capability is beneficial only for applications in which the mesh motion depends on the flow field (for example, cases that use the six DOF solver or involve fluid-structure interaction). For such applications, having the mesh motion updated within the time step based on the converging flow solution results in a stronger coupling between the flow solution and the mesh motion, and leads to a more robust solver run. Implicit mesh updating allows you to run simulations that otherwise could not be solved or would require an unreasonably small time step." quoted from Ansys help center
The main reason for this error is usually not the mesh that is not good enough, but the software cannot cope with the changing in the dynamic mesh, so the developers added this technique(Implicit Update Settings) to solve this problem.
Thank you all ..
Baqer
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
3 answers
In 2D Model, Reaction in porous Zone, Error occurs on hooking UDF , DEFINE_VR_RATE in Fluent, .The error spikes just after running calculation after 1st iteration.
Divergence detected in AMG Solver:TEMPERATURE
Divergence detected in AMG solver species 0
and Divergence detected in AMG solver species 1...2..3..4
Floating point exception error object #f
Any solution for this, Any one come across such a situation in using UDF in FLuent?
Relevant answer
Answer
Nasim Hasan
and Yuan Tang Thank you for your reply.
Yes the divergence error can be due to the above-mentioned issues. But in my case it was due to the reaction rate too big. The temperature varies a lot during switching on the reaction and iterating. Due to this the reaction rate reaches a big value which is not realistic. In the UDF i made some min and max limit criteria and the issue solved now.
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
2 answers
Dear All
Can you help me clarify the basic difference among the following command in STATA. xtmg, xtpmg, xtcce and xtdcce, xtdcce2. When and which method we should choose to estimate MG, AMG, PMG, CCE etc.
Relevant answer
Answer
Thanks for your help Prof. Mohamed-Mourad Lafifi
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
2 answers
After building the udf on Ansys. Flow is getting converge but after starting the energy equation and UDS1, UDS2 UDS3 UDS4 and UDS5.The folowing type of error is getting detected:
# Divergence detected in AMG solver: uds-5 -> Increasing relaxation sweeps!
# You may try the enhanced divergence recovery with (rpsetvar 'amg/protective-enhanced? #t)
Error: Divergence detected in AMG solver: uds-5
Error: Divergence detected in AMG solver: uds-5
Error Object: #f
Relevant answer
Answer
No idea towards your question sir.
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
4 answers
I split the model of the S-Duct into 4 separate parts and meshed them separately. (This is of utmost importance when I will add control methods to the geometry). I created a new Project and opened the .uns files one-by-one and clicked on Merge everytime. The only named selections were Wall, Inlet and Outlet. When I ran the simuation on Fluent, the solution never converged even after 1000 iterations, the residuals oscillated rather than converging.
Next, I tried to name the two interfaces and merge them, but now I'm left with an extra named selection "Interface" and could not specify an appropriate boundary condition to treat it as part of the interior.
I tried to name the interface as 'Interior' during meshing, but the Solver showed "Divergence detected in AMG Solver".
Kindly tell me how to merge the separate mesh files.
Relevant answer
Answer
Hello everyone!
First of all, thank you all for your response. I resolved the issue in the following manner :
All the parts were separately meshed, either tetrahedrally or prismatic. For naming, one side was given INTRF_x, the other INTRF_x+1
So 4 parts : INLET INTRF1, INTRF2 INTRF3, INTRF4 INTRF5, INTRF6 OUTLET.
The rest of the parts were named as WALL.
I opened one mesh file on Fluent using Read Mesh and the others were opened using Mesh--Zones--Append Case
The adjacent interfaces were combined into a single interface using the Create/Edit Interface option on Fluent. (Each new interface was named Interior1,2 and so on and Matching option was selected).
I ran the simulation using k-w SST model. The residuals are convergung with absolutely no fluctuation!
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
6 answers
I've these errors and I tried so long to fix it but I couldn't .. I don't know what's the problem can anyone help me plzzz :-
# Divergence detected in AMG solver: temperature -> Increasing relaxation sweeps! # You may try the enhanced divergence recovery with (rpsetvar 'amg/protective-enhanced? #t)
Error: Divergence detected in AMG solver: temperature
Error: Divergence detected in AMG solver: temperature Error Object: #f
Relevant answer
Answer
Ahmed El-Shafei : You are true, that v2f is not implemented in CFX, but the SST turbulence model should do a similar good job for most applications. The advantages (if any) of v2f turb. model are in my honest opinion not that strong.
That in CFX there are only 2 turbulence models available is not true. CFX has more than 28 turbulence models in its code, but most of them are hidden from normal users in order to avoid confusion for unexperienced users - the contrary to ANSYS Fluent where each and any expert feature is equally exposed to all users of the code. Please mind in the place, where models are selected the button with the three dots [...] on the right hand side of the selector. This leads you to more advanced turbulence (and other model) settings. and selections.
Regarding Nusselt: The Nusselt number is not readily pre-calculated in CFD-Post. But you can easily calculate it by yourself by using the expression language in CFD-Post and based on the provided wall heat flux values. For definition of Nusselt number see here:
The heat transfer coefficient is given in the variable list in CFD-Post, so you need to add L as the characteristic length of your model and k as the thermal conductivity of the fluid. That's it.
For the intended calculation of the heat transfer coefficient a reference temperature needs to be provided. So you can calculate this heat transfer coefficient by yourself in CFD-Post as well based on formula:
or you can add this reference temperature BEFORE the simulation to your CFX setup by inserting the following expert parameter:
--> Insert --> Solver --> Expert Parameter:
On tab "Physical Models":
tbulk for htc
Value = your reference temperature which you like to use for calculation of the heat transfer coefficient
This should work for you.
Best regards,
Thomas Frank.
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
1 answer
Hi,This is Prashant
I am trying to solve the multiphase flow simulation for countercurrent flow of Solid(ferrite Fe2O3) and reducing gas (CO)for reduction process in rotary kiln. To solve this I am using Euler-Euler TFM simulation scheme in which primary phase is the gas phase while secondary phase is solid phase and both phase patch. To account the reaction species I am using species transport reaction (Fe2O3 +2CO = 2Fe + 2CO2)(Fe and CO2 both consider as secondary species of phase3 and phase 4 respective phase mass fraction enter in the boundary condition) for radiation P1 model employed.In order to provide rotation moving wall motion given to adjacent cell with rotation speed of 5rpm.In calculation activities initially lower time step 0.01 time step 6000 for 100 iteration(I want to run this for 60 min as per experimentation).
The problem is solution not getting converged and showing following massage
1.Divergence detected in AMG solver
Reversed flow in 3 faces on pressure outlet
2.Divegence detected in AMG solver phase 1 species -3=increase relaxation sweep
3.You may try the enhanced divergence recovery with (rpsetvar ‘amg/protective-enhanced)
4.D.D. in AMG solver –mp x momentum –decreasing coarsening size
5. D.D. in AMG solver –mp x momentum-decresing relaxation sweep.
Relevant answer
Answer
Dear Prashant Jikar did you solve your problem? Has your problem converge?
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
2 answers
I am currently working on Gas Turbine Blade Cooling design where inside a turbine blade a cooling channel is incorporated. The cooling channel is made of a single pipe system which is recirculated inside the turbine blade. Both inlet and outlet of the cooling channel is present at the base of the blade profile. The blade is of dimension around 120mm span and 160mm tall. Material- blade: N155 coolant: air Simulation is being done in ansys fluent 18.2
General solver type set at pressure based, velocity formulation absolute and time steady. For the initial run viscosity model taken as laminar and energy model ON. Boundary condition imposed inlet air of gas turbine section: Temp- 1100K   Velocity- 265m/s Pressure-101325Pa(Gauge Pressure- 0) coolant inlet: Temp-500K  Velocity- 30m/s Pressure-101325Pa(Gauge Pressure- 0) With the initiation of calculation only, divergence is occuring in the AMG solver. Any suggestion or help would be highly appriciated.
Relevant answer
Answer
Okay, I will try this. Thanks a lot!
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
5 answers
22 country
22 year
two variables
1. Can i use Augmented Mean Group (AMG) Estimator even though there is no cross-sectional dependency?
2.Can i use the second generation unit root tests even though there is no cross-sectional dependency?
Thank you.
Relevant answer
Answer
Mr. Karakas,
AMG approach allows to unbiased estimations in the presence of cross-section dependency or no cross-section dependency. Moreover, some papers employ second generation unit root test in case of no cross-section dependency. Herewith, it could be also said that, second generation unit root tests may be used both in the presence of cross-section dependency or not.
Regards.
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
29 answers
I am modeling Boiling in a vertical tube in Fluent 14.the model that i used is RPI  model.after setting up, I faced this message:
'Divergence detected in AMG solver"
Temporarily relaxing and trying again...
I've decreased URFs, changed stablization method,changed cycle type from F-cycle to W-cycle and flexibe in advanced solution controls dialog box. But again I confronted divergency!
How can i control it? Is the mesh a factor of it? or is it affected by solution controls and methods?
Any help will be greatly appreciated.
Relevant answer
Answer
you have the reynolds problem. the mesh is not compatible fo your simulation. the relaxation factor is just a coefficient which accelerates the convergency or divergency. the answer will not change by different relaxation factors.
best regards.
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
3 answers
How can i solve this error
Error: Divergence detected in AMG solver: pressure correction
Error Object: #f
?
Relevant answer
Answer
Divergence in Algebraic Multi Grid (AMG) solver is a common problem when the used under relaxation factors (URF) are so high that it makes the individual cells imbalance of any field properties or when some cells are not suitable for the physical problem..
Solution: try to reduce the URFs slowly (momentum or pressure) then run the simulation with out initialising , if you are still getting the same problem, then change those cells by checking the contour of residual .
Thank you....
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
1 answer
Dear All,
Could you helps for this please,
I got identical problem as below after 3370 iterations in my 3D bluff body cantilevered using UDF
# Divergence detected in AMG solver: x-momentum -> Increasing relaxation sweeps!
# You may try the enhanced divergence recovery with (rpsetvar 'amg/protective-enhanced? #t)
reversed flow in 7250 faces on outflow 6.
Divergence detected in AMG solver: x-momentum
Divergence detected in AMG solver: y-momentum
Divergence detected in AMG solver: z-momentum
Divergence detected in AMG solver: pressure correction
Divergence detected in AMG solver: pressure correction
Error at Node 0: floating point exception
Error at Node 1: floating point exception
I just modify length bluff body from all case including UDF which original case it is running well. In addition, the case without UDF is run well.
I will send original UDF and my modified UDF if it possible.
I am totally a new comer in UDF
Thanks a lot in advance
regards
Barata
Relevant answer
Answer
I solved this problem only by change solution setting paralel instead of series processor
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
2 answers
after iteration the solution is not converged, it shows error as temperature divergent in AMG and increase relaxation sweep. i am using energy equation with laminar condition.my objective is to find leakage between swash plate and slipper of an axial piston pump at different inlet pressure and rotational velocity of swash plate.
Relevant answer
Answer
Not knowing all the details which support your question, I can only suggest the following:
1) You imply that the system is mathematically unstable,
by the fact that your solution is divergent;
2) In working the problem associated with helicopter dynamics, i experience a similar problem. It was corrected by modeling the system by its 2 equations.
3) The equations were defined as
- state propagation, and
- measurement.
4) Stability was evaluated by examination of the eigenvalues of the Dynamics matrix A of the state propagator -- see attachments
5) Rotational velocity may be expressed in terms of it's linear velocity by
noting that v = w x R where v = linear velocity ; w = angular velocity and R is the radius vector. Note: the linear velocity in this case is expressed in a moving coordinate frame-- see Einstein equations
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
1 answer
i am now doing simulation in DPM model viscous k - omega species transport of N2 and C02 and injections titanium with all specified diameter distribution(rossin rammler) and temperature and starting point of injection. pressure inlet is 45 atm and particle pressure inlet is 44 atm temp of inlet gas - 1173 K and temp of particle inlet is 323 K
mesh are very fine - 5630375 nodes
Discrete Phase Method (DPM) Rossin-Ramler distribution Φmin = 10 μm, Φmax = 87 μm, Φmean = 34.8 μm Spread Φ = 3.533, # of Φ = 20, T = 50 C
tried adjusting URF !! turn off energy equation for certain iterations !!
divergence detected in AMG solver - pressure!!
Relevant answer
Answer
Dear Aravinth Kamaraj,
I don't know whether disabling energy is possible in compressible flow simulations or not....I hope you are using a density-based solver. In that case, I think one needs to set density to Ideal Gas and get viscosity computed using Sutherland's law. One also needs to tweak the operating pressure for compressible flow simulations....I think there is some connection between the operating pressure and supersonic/initial gauge pressure options for compressible simulations.
You also need to have prior knowledge regarding couplings existing in the problem formulation. For example, 300K air flowing over a cylinder at 325K is one-way coupled since flow would only transport temperature as a passive (and diffusive) scalar. On the other hand, if very high density particles are being injected in air, the coupling between air flow and particle distribution is not one-way. Then, the equations for DPM, turbulence and flow should (probably) not be solved in segregated (separated) form.
Having said that, you can initially turn off DPM, k-ω, species transport etc. and see whether flow alone is converging or not. If not, then there are issues at the solution-setup level itself. Try reducing all solution methods to first order accuracy (initially) and see if the divergence problem is solved or not.
I realize that this may not be of much help....but a general suggestion is that you need to zero down to either the region of the domain/mesh or the portion of the numerical model that is causing solver divergence....and that can only be achieved by simplifying the simulation setup as much as possible.
Best regards.
Shaswat Saincher
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
6 answers
Modeling a sediment transport phenomena using Volume of Fluid (VOF) method for Multiphase problem and Eulerian-Larangian particle transport method for Discreet Phase Modeling (DPM). My mesh maximum skewness is around 0.5. For solver settings pressure-velocity coupling was introduced with Green-Gauss Cell Based gradient, PRESTO! pressure and Second Order Upwind momentum. I tightened all URF (Under-Relaxation Factors) to 0.1~0.2 and used 0.001 time step size.
After running the solution for some time everything looks fine in the animation but the solver fails showing "Error: Divergence detected in AMG solver: epsilon". Anyone has any idea on how it can be solved or the error can be removed?
Relevant answer
Answer
" In the name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful"
If you are sure your case is set up right, try the following step(are one of best answer that i found about this problem):
1- check your mesh. Is your skewness, mesh orthogonal quality, ... acceptable? 2- Initialization. Try the hybrid (FMG) initialization. 3- Under-relaxation Factors. try using 0.5 for both k & e, then ramp them up to 0.9 after 50~100 iterations. Also decrease time step or Currant Number (dependent on solver)
4- Boundary Conditions. k & e values suitable?
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
5 answers
hello every body, I was trying to simulate fluid flow and heat transfer in axisymmetric vertical channel but when I set all condition and solve the case I got this massage (Divergence detected in AMG solver: ads-0). and when I changed 2D space to planar case is solved. what is the problem? could anyone tell me what is the problem? I tried to refine the mesh but same problem. thanks in advance  
Relevant answer
Answer
Hello Mohammed
the reasons for this may be many
but one of the reasons may be the direction of the axis of symmetry is to be in FLUENT only the x-axis
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
16 answers
I am working on a flame affected by external magnetic field using MHD module with fluent 14.5 . I am using compiled UDF to produce non-uniform profile for boundary condition. My settings are:
Model settings: 2D, k-w SST ,Non-premixed combustion (with 8 species), Magnetic Induction model with under relaxation of 0.6
Boundary conditions: axis,velocity inlet (for fuel), the non uniform magnetic field applied in x-direction for pressure inlet boundary
Solver: Pressure Coupled
But I got the following error:
# Divergence detected in AMG solver: pressure coupled -> Decreasing coarsening group size!
# Divergence detected in AMG solver: pressure coupled -> Increasing relaxation sweeps!
# Divergence detected in AMG solver: pressure coupled -> Changing to W-cycle!
After the detected error, I used Pseudo Trandient method, but nothing was changed.
I decreased “coarsen by” and increased the pre-sweep for scalar and coupled parameters in advanced solution controls, but the error persist. I also reduced the URF of the pressure,energy,density, fmean, and B_y to 0.1 step by step and I couldn’t fix the problem.
When I used BCGSTAB stabilization method for flow I encountered AMG Divergence for k Equation. As I changed the Stabilization method for k, AMG divergence detected in the next equation. Finally I changed all of the equation to BCGSTAB stabilization method, But immediately all the residual changed to 1.#QNBe+00 and the solution is converged!
I should mention that the combustion with MHD equation was solved without Lorenz Force and Joule Heating, but as I turned on Lorenz force the solution process stopped working (with b_0 Scale factor of 0.1).
When I applied magnetic field for cold flow (combustion model is off), the problem converged without any error. And when I turned off magnetic problem the combustion is converged. In other word, but I cannot combine both of them.
Thank you in advance for your help.
Relevant answer
Answer
Dear Javad,
Please see the following papers:
Good luck
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
3 answers
I am working on natural convection heat transfer in nano fluids flowing inside vertical annulus using Ansys FLUENT 14.0. When i use UDF for viscosity as function of  temperature, output results are correct. But When i use UDF for thermal conductivity as function of viscosity and  temperature, divergence detected in AMG solver. How this problem can be rectified?
Relevant answer
You can define thermal conductivity as a function of temparature only. Because viscosity is also a function of temperature. 
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
4 answers
When i reduced the pressure and momentum relaxation factors to 0.2 and 0.5 respectively and run my simulation i get another ; Error: Divergence detected in AMG solver: vof-1 Error Object: #f
Relevant answer
Answer
Dear Fortunate Ogene,
Is it a discrete phase simulation coupled with turbulence (SKE)? Is the model working correctly with SKE (k-epsilon) turned off?
I may be of some help here...however, I need more details about your simulation.
Best regards,
Shaswat Saincher
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
5 answers
I am simulating condensation of water vapor in a vertical, square minichannel with VOF - modified HRIC, steady state, SIMPLE method and 3rd order MUSCL for energy, momentum and turbulence equations. I am having "turbulent viscosity ratio limited to.." and "temperature limited to ...". I am also encountering convergence issues with temperature AMG and sometimes VOF-1 AMG. Can anyone help or advice? Thank you
Relevant answer
Answer
try to solve single phase flow to see if you face same problem
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
1 answer
Why there are two types of transient studies for laminar two phase flow level set (tpf) module in Comsol (Time dependent and transient with phase initialization) and how to tune the parameters "phi" and "epsilon" for phase initialization? Also, what are the physical meanings of these parameters?
Same problem for the "phase field" method exists.
If anyone can help and share his experience I will be very greatful.
Relevant answer
Answer
Epsilon is the turbulence parameter which defines the intensity they used for solving turbulent flow problems:RANS
MODELS: the L-VEL, yPlus, Spalart-Allmaras, k-epsilon, k-omega, Low Reynolds number k-epsilon, and SST models
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
13 answers
I am doing a CFD simulation for Plate Heat Exchangers.
I used ANSYS Fluent to perform the simulation. However during the calculation section. I received this error "Divergence detected in AMG Solver:TEMPERATURE". The error appears even when the iteration has just started
May I know what are the possible cause of this error? I activated the energy equation and also reduced the UDF (Pressure, Momentum and Turbulent Kinetic). Also, I reduced the limit of the static temperature but it seems that these 2 modifications does not help me get rid of this error.
Any advice? Thank you
Relevant answer
Answer
this error of divergence detected is encounter when the dot or cross product of temperature is becoming zero becomes zero in the energy equation (governing equation).. you can avoid it by redefining the mesh.....you also have to re look over your boundary conditions
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
2 answers
I am doing the simulation of binary particles in Ansys Fluent 15.0 for 2D multiphase case. Divergence detected after 583 time steps ,and I want to know how to solve it.
Relevant answer
Answer
From my research activities, I mainly observed that divergence mainly arises from improper meshing and boundary conditions.
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
3 answers
I am doing the simulation of binary particles in Ansys Fluent 15.0,  and also I use UDF to modified the solid viscosity, solid ressure, granular conductivity,bulk viscosity.The problem takes place when I use the partial differential equation (granular temperature model), and it doesn't appear when choose the phase property.But the partial differential equation is that I want, for I also have to add a source term.
I have tried to refine the mesh and changed the URF,but these didn't work. So, I want to  know how to solve the error "Divergence detected in AMG solver: vof-2" when the partial diffenrential equation is choosed?
The erro is as followed:
# You may try the enhanced divergence recovery with (rpsetvar 'amg/protective-enhanced? #t)
Error: Divergence detected in AMG solver: vof-2
Error: Divergence detected in AMG solver: vof-2
Error Object: #f
The scaled residuals is as  attached.
Thanks!
Relevant answer
Answer
Thanks @ Ketan Ajay
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
1 answer
I built an electrowetting model. But when I compute it, it had some error like this:
Repeated error test failures. May have reached a singularity.
Last time step is not converged.
Does anyone have a solution for this?
Relevant answer
Answer
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
2 answers
Hello Dear all,Greetings
I am conducting a CFD analysis of Double pipe heat  exchanger .In doing so,I am trying to compare SIMPLE vs COUPLED solution methods.SIMPLE looks fine ,but takes too much time for convergence.However,when I try to use COUPLED approach,the iteration stops after 5 or 6 iterations displaying" #Divergence detected".How can I take care of this problem?
Warm regards,
Tarikayehu
Relevant answer
Answer
Thank you very much dear Mohamed-Mourad Lafifi
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
3 answers
During ASPEN Adsorption simulation for single PSA bed. This message shows in simulation message: Group 9: Nonlinear solver failed. A sub-group in the decomposition failed to solve.  Initialization failed at time 0. 
Thank you in advanced.
Relevant answer
Answer
You should find additional diagnostics in the run time log. Maybe missing parameters in the property set, unmatched groups in the property estimation, impossible input or out put specifications.
Nonlinear implies something is recycled, either materials or energy. If there is  recycle stream try first to run with the recycle replaced by a feed stream and an output stream.
Also you can try running with a different feed composition, example one that is almost pure inert.
Time zero failure usually means incomplete or impossible data and/or configuration is supplied.  
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
5 answers
 I am doing transient simulation for what is called friction stir welding processes of Aluminium 6061, so far the model is facing a problem. The problem takes place when I use the UDF for defining Aluminium viscosity which is a temperature dependent property. Although, the UDF seemed successfully Interpreted, the next error appeared when running the model.  
# Divergence detected in AMG solver: x-momentum -> Increasing relaxation sweeps!
# You may try the enhanced divergence recovery with (rpsetvar 'amg/protective-enhanced? #t)
Error: Divergence detected in AMG solver: x-momentum
Error: Divergence detected in AMG solver: x-momentum
Error Object: #f
Registering SurfaceMonitors, ("surf-mon-1.out")
Registering Udf, ("C:\Users\u1473797\Desktop\Deforming_files\dp0\FFF\Fluent\mu.c.C")
Relevant answer
Answer
Several times I did face the same problems and I think relaxation factor is not only the prime factor, but we should also consider the model (laminar or turbulent) that might have a great influence in this problem..
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
4 answers
I was running a fluent natural convection simulation with a time step of 0.5 seconds and everything was going fine until i decided to increase to 0.7s then there was a divergence in the solution until it crashed. I've been on this simulation for the past 2 days and I can't afford to restart the simulation. I have just the case (.cas) file for the last time step saved and the CFD post compatible data file (.cdat) extension. Is it possible to restart the simulation from the last saved timestep using these files?
Thanks.
Relevant answer
Answer
hi, Obiajulu Nnaemeka,
Simulation can be resume from last saved files without initialize the case again. I mean, just reopen your simulation and do not initialize, direct click on " Calculate".
Good Luck
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
3 answers
i have convex problem that start solved for first 50 iteration the after that its go to inaccurate solved .How to resolve the problem?
Relevant answer
Answer
A remark might be added to this: if you have a convex problem, as you state, WHY do you use heuristics?? If you know that the problem is convex, you probably have an expression on the objective function and the constraints (if any), so you should be able to solve it accurately by convex optimization methods, such as by utilising (sub-)gradients.
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
1 answer
Hello, 
I'm running 2 phase flow implicit Eularian-Eularian flow model.
created model.
defined material to each phase.
defined boundary conditions-for inlet, it's mass flow rate with initial gauge pressure defined
defined outlet pressure boundary condition- as outlet pressure values.
Then velocity slip ratio defined based on variable mass flow rate of phase 1 but constant mass flow rate of phase 2.
All above boundary conditions are defined as profile UDFs as function of flow time.
then phase coupled simple solver is used.
rest is just a calculations activities, with surface monitors.
the case successfully setup and started calculations till 300 time steps with 1 second as time step size.
after that UDF, as function of time, provides new values to the solver. and that's where everything goes wrong and suddenly I receive divergence in AMG solver. Which I shouldn't be getting since the case ran successfully for first 300 time steps
so I need help to know what exactly went wrong.
thank you,
regards,
Relevant answer
Answer
It sounds like something is wrong with the UDF, but it's hard to say without seeing it. Check your flow rates and see if anything looks suspicious. Other than that, I would say reduce your time step. I usually use 1e-7, but I need this kind of resolution. 
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
3 answers
I am solving a conjugate heat transfer case for flow through microchannels and inlet from a small opening to distribution manifold. Its a 3d case. Kindly suggest something to remove this error.
Relevant answer
Answer
It could also be due to some ill-defined boundary conditions in FLUENT. As Mojtaba said, it can be due to the algorithm or due to the numerical discretization schemes you have used. 
Make sure your mesh is checked and your problem is clearly defined
Best Regards
Akr
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
5 answers
Dear Sir/ Madam,
I need your assistance, please.
I see the following error message after run calculation of ANSYS-Fluent.
“Divergence detected in AMG solver: temperature”
How can I overcome this problem, please?
Regards,
Ahmed Alkaisi
Relevant answer
Hi,
There are multiple explanations for this kind of error message.
You should first carefully check your simulation setup in terms of models and boundary conditions. If this is the case, I guess you would probably see the error occurrence in the simulation first steps.
After you guarantee everything is physically consistent, you can try to use classical numerical stabilization techniques, such as reducing the time step, use smooth ramp functions for boundary conditions, reduce under-relaxation factors (maybe increasing the maximum iteration number). Check out the manual for specific recommendations based on the models you are using.
Another good thing to do is to plot the simulation residuals and verify if you can localize the source of error (it always can be related with a poor quality mesh).
Good luck!
Daniel
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
11 answers
Hi all,
Commercial solvers like COMSOL and Fluent uses Algebraic multigrid methods to solve the PDEs. AMG method uses V, F, W cycles. 
I was just going through a link,but i could not understand the method at all. 
Can anyone please tell me a easy to read materials for beginners or explain it ?
Thanks
Vivek
Relevant answer
Answer
Vivek - AMG uses relaxation methods to reduce 'high-frequency error,' which is generally error associated with large eigenvalues of the original matrix. Relaxation methods are extremely slow to capture 'low-frequency error,' or modes associated with very small eigenvalues of the original matrix. This is where multigrid comes in - a 'coarse-grid-correction' is used to remove low-frequency error.
This can be conceptualized in a geometric setting - low frequency modes are, e.g., the single sin hump (smallest eigenfunction of Laplacian). Relaxation is very slow to remove error like this. But, one also does not need a super fine grid to capture a single sin hump - this should only require a few discrete points to capture. Thus on an appropriate coarse grid, this error can be removed. On the original 'fine' grid with a small step size, high frequency error, e.g. sin(1000x), will be accounted for by relaxation. Note, you could not discretize sin(1000x) with only a few grid points.
Now algebraic multigrid doesn't have an actual grid, per-se. Not in a geometric setting. In algebraic multigrid, progressively smaller matrices (as opposed to actual geometric grids) are used to account for algebraically smooth modes of the operator A, which is another word for modes with small eigenvalues.
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
3 answers
Hello everyone
I am doing a fluid mechanics project on a vortex tube
I am utilizing a 3D full vortex tube with 4 tangential nozzles with a conic valve hot outlet using Ansys fluent.
But I don't know what model to use and what dimensions to apply on my 3D geometry.
When I tried, I used the standard k-epsilon model ( steady flow) with 5 bars inlet pressure with an extremely fine mesh ( around 5 millions elements ) but each time I got a problem like 
divergence detected in amg solver Temperature.
I need this to be done fast and I am working hard on it.
I hope I can find someone to help me and show me how to do it properly. Best regards
Relevant answer
The y+ is related to the turbulent boundary layer, and as in laminar case, there is a functional dependence with Re number. You need to calculate your Re number and estimate your y+. The kolmogorov scales are important, even you not using those parameters in a k-e model as a LES model. But is good to know how far  you are  from those scales to generate a good mesh far from boundary layer. You can capture some dynamic behavior with a  good mesh. But regarding tom y+ an d ist value. Im my dissertation there are a methodology to calculate it using Re. That is a estimative. A 1st run must bu done and , so on, refine if need. 
A observation. It is hard to retain the correct y+ for whole domain boundaries. Some deviations are expected and  you must evaluate if these regions are importants or can be negleted. Huge deviations are not good. A good range to CFX and Fluent is 11.05-400 or 500 ( less os better  as 200-300). Evaluate the turbulence scales and with these information, design your mesh.
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
8 answers
CFD Researchers
Relevant answer
Answer
Try changing the VOF algorithm according to this suggestions
1. All the VOF schemes are used to calculate the face values for VOF, with different algorithmic treatment.
- Geo-Reconstruct scheme follows two steps, (a) Constructing the interface based on liquid avaialble in the cell and normal to the interface (b) calculating face values based on advection of interface and applying some limiters.
Therefore, this scheme produces the sharp interface ( interface thickness - 1 cell)
- Modified HRIC and CICSAM do not construct the interface, face value is calculated taking two upwinded and one downwinded cell with different limiters, so that values are bounded.
These schemes are diffusive in nature, but produces sharper interface because of limiters. ( interface thickness 2-3 cells, depending on the mesh).
2. For modified HRIC and CICSAM, VOF Gradient calculation is consistence for conformal and Non-Conformal mesh.
Geo-Reconstruct has different VOF gradient calculation for conformal and non-conformal mesh. Which might give difference in results for some cases. This case could be one of them.
As, other schemes do not give such unphysical results for non-conformal mesh. I have to still investigate this issue.
3. Geo-Reconstuct takes larger time compared to other schemes, Using CICSAM could be a good option, As it maintains sharper interface and less time consuming than Geo-Reconstruct.
Modified HRIC becomes more diffusive for unstructured grids comapred to CICSAM.
4. For high viscosity ratio, CICSAM is preferable than Geo-Reconstruct.
Than you can try following:
1. Set rpvar 'mp/every-iter? to #t.
2. Set 'pressure/dissipation? to #t.
Another thing to try out to run the case without surface tension along with above options.
Let me know.
Franco
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
2 answers
Hi,
I just started to work with Fluent. I am trying to model a 2D axisymmetric problem.
The simulation is transient conduction (material has constant conductivity and heat capacity), and a heat generation that is a function of temperature.
Boundary conditions:
Bottom edge is adiabatic, sides have free convection, and top edge has constant heat flux. 
For the heat generation, I interpret the following UDF:
#include "udf.h"
DEFINE_SOURCE(ecomb,c,t,dS,eqn)
{
real source;
real temp = C_T(c,t);
int A = 29.8e18;
int B = -12779.78;
source = A*exp(B/temp);
dS[eqn] = -A*B*exp(B/temp)/(temp*temp);
return source;
}
I have tried the following without success: refine the mesh, lower the timestep or the relaxation, hybrid initialization (with very low courant), and initialize with temperature higher than ambient.
Any ideas what could be the cause?
Relevant answer
Answer
Such type of massage reflects when Fluent is detecting higher temperature value somewhere in your problem domain during calculation. So, check your temperature boundary condition and its further consequences.
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
27 answers
Hello,
The case is with regards to a 2-D Axis-symmetric pipe - turbulent flow - water - density varying with temperature - polynomial ( 6th order )
I have reduced the under relaxation factors for all of them to very low but am still getting the same error.
Thanks a lot.. !!!
Relevant answer
Answer
Check mesh quality for skewness (0.5 is adequate). Check the model if its is properly scaled or for  units. 
First switch off energy equation and density variation. If simulation runs smooth then enable energy equation. After this if it is OK, specify density variation ( first try simple relation and then custom desired).
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
5 answers
Am solving species transport, melting and evaporation problem and I keep getting this error which reads "Error: Divergence detected in AMG solver: species-0". How do I deal with this?
Relevant answer
Answer
AMG solver is turned on by default. And other option available is FAS ( which is only for density based explicit formulation).
By the way AMG is algebraic multigrid and FAS is full approximation storage, both are powerful tools used to reduce the computational time and robustness by multigrid concept. It reduces the matrix at coarser levels, to solve for error, thus error is reduced at coarser grids. And it is interpolated  back to actual grid. Thereby reducing the overall computational time.
The error you are getting is a divergence issue. Please check the following:
problem formulations, boundary conditions, initialization, mesh quality etc. The problem might by with any of the above.
if it is not clear let me know.
Hope this helps you.
Regards! 
  • asked a question related to AMG
Question
5 answers
I am investigating the wave propagation in a tube with a Helmholtz resonator attached to one end by using CFD. I am using a temperature profile and an UDF unsteady solver. each time I run it, fluent is giving this error 'divergence detected in AMG solver: x-momentum', floating point exception. whatever I tried, it did not go away.
Is there any solution to this problem?
Relevant answer
Answer
Hello Haydar!
The following suggestions may be valuable for you about your problem:
Advice 1. Problem may be related to initial values. I advise you to do what Dimitrios K. Fytanidis told you;
Advice 2. Problem may be related to discretization scheme. If the problem is not solved using advice in 1, you should change the discretization scheme to low-order discretization scheme. For example, the spatial discretization is first-order-upwind, the transient formulation is first order implicit; The first order scheme is the most steady scheme;
Advice 3. Problem may be related to mesh. The mesh you used may be too rough.  The ideal mesh is hexahedron (3D) or quadrangle (2D). If your mesh includes too much unstructured grids, even includes high skew cells, it is easy to diverge during calculation. Therefore, if the plobelm is not solved by advice 1 and advice 2, i think you should improve your mesh;
Advice 4. Problem may be related to source item in momentum equation. if the above suggestion still not resolve your problem, I advise you unload all source items firstly, then calculate some iterations, then load your UDF again;
Advice 5. Problem may be related to the formulation of source item. if using above advices, the problem still be not resolved, I advice you to check your formulation of source item, whether there is wrong format or unreasonable formulation. You can change the source items into other any simple format, to check whether the divergence is related to formulation of source item; After that, if the calculation succeed, then the problem result from the wrong or unreasonable source item.
At last, by the above steps, I think your question may be solved.
My e-mail  is gongmaoming@163.com
Wish you good luck!