Cleanup wall functions and add user controls#1360
Cleanup wall functions and add user controls#1360TobiKattmann merged 125 commits intosu2code:developfrom
Conversation
Co-authored-by: TobiKattmann <31306376+TobiKattmann@users.noreply.github.com>
…to fix_wallfunctions
Co-authored-by: Pedro Gomes <38071223+pcarruscag@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Pedro Gomes <38071223+pcarruscag@users.noreply.github.com>
spaces Co-authored-by: Pedro Gomes <38071223+pcarruscag@users.noreply.github.com>
spaces Co-authored-by: Pedro Gomes <38071223+pcarruscag@users.noreply.github.com>
refvel Co-authored-by: Pedro Gomes <38071223+pcarruscag@users.noreply.github.com>
const bool Co-authored-by: Pedro Gomes <38071223+pcarruscag@users.noreply.github.com>
spaces Co-authored-by: Pedro Gomes <38071223+pcarruscag@users.noreply.github.com>
spaces Co-authored-by: Pedro Gomes <38071223+pcarruscag@users.noreply.github.com>
spaces Co-authored-by: Pedro Gomes <38071223+pcarruscag@users.noreply.github.com>
…to fix_wallfunctions
away with the comment blocks! Co-authored-by: Pedro Gomes <38071223+pcarruscag@users.noreply.github.com>
…to fix_wallfunctions
|
Changes that are necessary in a follow-up PR:
Please add to this post other things (I am fine with others editing this) |
|
i made a little Test for the Non-dimensionalization: Turns out the inc Testcases did not specify I think the non-dim is currently correct: attached the incomp-SA case comparison INITIAL_VALUES against DIMENSIONAL.
Here the non-dim value is dimensionalized using what gets printed in the screen output |
|
|
||
| if (!wallfunctions) { | ||
| YPlus[iMarker][iVertex] = WallDistMod * FrictionVel / (Viscosity / Density); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This change made the comp SST WF reg test fail. There are no changes for the inc SST case and the SA cases, though.
| if (Y_Plus < 5.0) continue; | ||
| if (Y_Plus < minYPlus) { | ||
| /* --- Use zero flux (Neumann) conditions, i.e. nothing has to be done. --- */ | ||
| continue; | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That might be a positive change @TobiKattmann, the recomputation of y+ could be interfering with the logic here, affecting the boundary conditions of the turb solver.
…into fix_wallfunctions
| turb_wallfunction_flatplate_sst.cfg_file = "turb_SST_flatplate.cfg" | ||
| turb_wallfunction_flatplate_sst.test_iter = 10 | ||
| turb_wallfunction_flatplate_sst.test_vals = [-4.230000, -1.930543, -1.998684, 1.250334, -1.635534, 1.462491, 10, -2.151894, 0.072872, 0.002514] #last 10 columns | ||
| turb_wallfunction_flatplate_sst.test_vals = [-4.229955, -1.930560, -1.998477, 1.250383, -1.635663, 1.462396, 10.000000, -2.151959, 0.072873, 0.002514] #last 10 columns |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for this "final" addition and all the help on this (where of course @bigfooted did the heavy lifting ;) )
Now this is good to go from my perspective, I have no further comments. Maybe we can merge this in todays dev meeting :)
Things tbd in the future are
- consolidate compr and inc implementation into some unified entitiy
- Distribute Testcases over parallel, hybrid regression test
- explanation on the website, tutorial
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Alright merging this in now
|
See #1430 for some more things to fix |
Proposed Changes
Give a brief overview of your contribution here in a few sentences.
Related Work
Resolve any issues (bug fix or feature request), note any related PRs, or mention interactions with the work of others, if any.
PR Checklist
Put an X by all that apply. You can fill this out after submitting the PR. If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask! We want to help. These are a guide for you to know what the reviewers will be looking for in your contribution.