Skip to content
GitLab
Projects Groups Snippets
  • /
  • Help
    • Help
    • Support
    • Community forum
    • Submit feedback
    • Contribute to GitLab
  • Sign in / Register
  • openfoam openfoam
  • Project information
    • Project information
    • Activity
    • Labels
    • Members
  • Repository
    • Repository
    • Files
    • Commits
    • Branches
    • Tags
    • Contributors
    • Graph
    • Compare
  • Issues 421
    • Issues 421
    • List
    • Boards
    • Service Desk
    • Milestones
  • Merge requests 8
    • Merge requests 8
  • Deployments
    • Deployments
    • Releases
  • Wiki
    • Wiki
  • Activity
  • Graph
  • Create a new issue
  • Commits
  • Issue Boards
Collapse sidebar
  • Development
  • openfoamopenfoam
  • Issues
  • #2217
Closed
Open
Issue created Sep 21, 2021 by Tobias Holzmann@THO

Post-processing error while displaying noSlip boundary condition in Paraview (especially for patches inside MRF regions)

I came across some potential issue inside the noSlip boundary condition in terms of displaying the correct data in paraview or other post-processing programs (especially for boundary patches inside a MRF zone).

  • I checked the simpleFoam tutorial named mixerVessel2D in which the patch rotor is set to a noSlip condition for U
  • I copied this case named mixerVessel2DFixedValue in which I changed rotor patch in the U field to a fixedValue; uniform (0 0 0); type

Outcome:

  • The cell values of both analysis are identical and hence everything is fine
  • However, analyzing the patch values for the patch rotor (or field interpolated data) will result in different outcomes/visualizations
  • Due to the fact of a missing value entry inside the noSlip condition, Paraview will display the internal field values -> as given in the commit Kitware Commit - Resolving OpenFOAM patches without a value field
  • For any patch inside a MRF region (or even on normal walls), the displayed results will be inconsistent compared to the fixedValue condition. The reason is simple. Here we either keep the value uniform (0 0 0) or update the patch values to a nonuniform List<vector> list (e.g., for patches inside a MRF zone)

Therefore, in order to allow the user to access the correct data and visualize it, a value field for the noSlip condition should be written into the boundary condition.

If anything is not clear or one needs more information, please let me know. Tobi

Assignee
Assign to
Time tracking