> Am 21.12.2018 um 08:39 schrieb lc <lorenzo.camp...@uniroma1.it>:
> 
> Good morning,
> 
> I have one general question:
> 
> is it possible to run 1 dimensional test case, for example, buckely leverett?
> 

yes. 

Timo
> Kind regards,
> 
> Lorenzo
> 
> 
> 
>> On 19.12.2018 13:26, Timo Koch wrote:
>> Hi Lorenzo,
>> 
>> does it get better if you lower the CFL factor?
>> 
>> Timo
>> 
>>> On 19.12.18 11:10, lc wrote:
>>> Hello, 
>>> 
>>> I observed an unexpected behaviour for which I'd like to ask your help. In 
>>> the attached figure you can see a snapshot of the solution. In both the 
>>> contour and in the line chart you may notice some spurious "background 
>>> noize". I noticed that such effects starts at a certain time from the right 
>>> (outlet) boundary and then increase entity and becomes as you see. 
>>> 
>>> I think it could be due to the fact that my initial condition is not 
>>> consistent with boundary condition but it is just an hypothesis. I enclose 
>>> the file where you can read the IC. 
>>> 
>>> I would like to ask if you ever noticed some similar effect and possible 
>>> ways to fix it. 
>>> 
>>> About fixing, I had 2 ideas: 
>>> 
>>> 1) to add an "epsilon" premultiplying the wetting phase saturation term 
>>> which I expect should dump it out; (how to do it?) 
>>> 
>>> 2) to add a cut-off function to the initial. 
>>> 
>>> Is there anything like this availble in DuMux? 
>>> 
>>> Or should I use the regularization of the saturation, which now I don't 
>>> use? 
>>> 
>>> I use DuMux 2.12. 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Thank you, 
>>> 
>>> Lorenzo 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On 17.12.2018 16:43, Dennis Gläser wrote: 
>>>> Hi Lorenzo, 
>>>> 
>>>> sorry, I didn't realize that you were using Dumux2.12. In this case, 
>>>> forget my last mail. In the future, please try to reply to previous mails 
>>>> of the conversation so that they can be read (I am sure you mentioned 
>>>> somewhere that you were using 2.12). 
>>>> 
>>>> In DuMuX2.12 there was no support for a spatially varying definition of 
>>>> the wetting/non-wetting phase. Using 2.12 you can obtain the 
>>>> wetting/non-wetting phase mass conservation equation indices from the 
>>>> Indices class via Indices::contiWEqIdx and Indices::contiNEqIdx. 
>>>> 
>>>> Best wishes, 
>>>> 
>>>> Dennis 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> On 17.12.18 14:33, Dennis Gläser wrote: 
>>>>> Hi Lorenzo, 
>>>>> 
>>>>> you have to distinguish between primary variable indices and equation 
>>>>> indices. Your equations (2p model) are always the mass balances of the 
>>>>> two phases, independent of you choice of primary variables. In 
>>>>> 2p/implicit/incompressible/problem.hh you have an example on how to 
>>>>> adress the equation indices: 
>>>>> 
>>>>> using Indices = typename GetPropType<TypeTag, 
>>>>> Properties::ModelTraits>::Indices;
>>>>> enum { 
>>>>>         pressureH2OIdx = Indices::pressureIdx, 
>>>>>         saturationDNAPLIdx = Indices::saturationIdx, 
>>>>>         contiDNAPLEqIdx = Indices::conti0EqIdx + FluidSystem::comp1Idx, 
>>>>>         waterPhaseIdx = FluidSystem::phase0Idx, 
>>>>>         dnaplPhaseIdx = FluidSystem::phase1Idx 
>>>>> }; 
>>>>> 
>>>>> In this case DNAPL is the non-wetting phase. The equation index is 
>>>>> adressed via Indices::conti0EqIdx (which gives the index of the first 
>>>>> mass balance equation within your vector of equations) plus the component 
>>>>> index of the first component in the fluid system. 
>>>>> 
>>>>> So, in order to determine the right equation indices for the phases of 
>>>>> your fluid system within the equation vector, you need to use conti0EqIdx 
>>>>> and then add the index of the respective components of your fluid system. 
>>>>> 
>>>>> I am sorry if my last answer wasn't adressing the right issue. Also, it 
>>>>> seems that I wrote the default formulation is pw-sn. That is wrong, the 
>>>>> default formulation is p0s1, meaning that the pressure primary variable 
>>>>> is associated with the phase with index 0 of your fluid system, and the 
>>>>> saturation variable is associated with the phase with index 1 of your 
>>>>> fluid system. You can change this to p1s0, if desired. 
>>>>> 
>>>>> However, from the indices you can only obtain pressureIdx or 
>>>>> saturationIdx (there is no such thing as Indice::snIdx anymore), as DuMuX 
>>>>> can not decide for you which phase is the wetting phase or which the 
>>>>> non-wetting phase. You tell DuMux which phase is the wetting phase by 
>>>>> implementing the function wettingPhase() or wettingPhaseAtPos() in your 
>>>>> spatial parameters. 
>>>>> 
>>>>> I hope this helps you! 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Best wishes, 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Dennis 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 17.12.18 13:51, lc wrote: 
>>>>>> Hello, 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 02.11.2018 10:45, Dennis Gläser wrote: 
>>>>>>> per default, the formulation for the 2p model is pw-sn. That means your 
>>>>>>> primary variables are the water pressure and the non-wetting phase 
>>>>>>> saturation (in your case oil I assume). Therefore, Indices::swIdx does 
>>>>>>> not exists as it is not part of your primary variables. 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> then, if physically I have a water (wetting) phase injection at inlet 
>>>>>> (which traduces into a mass flow rate) how can I impose it in 2p 
>>>>>> implicit model? 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Best regards, 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Lorenzo 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> _______________________________________________ 
>>>>>> Dumux mailing list 
>>>>>> Dumux@listserv.uni-stuttgart.de               
>>>>>> https://listserv.uni-stuttgart.de/mailman/listinfo/dumux 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Dumux mailing list
>>> Dumux@listserv.uni-stuttgart.de
>>> https://listserv.uni-stuttgart.de/mailman/listinfo/dumux
>> -- 
>> _______________________________________________________________
>> 
>> Timo Koch                              phone: +49 711 685 64676
>> IWS, Universität Stuttgart             fax:   +49 711 685 60430
>> Pfaffenwaldring 61        email: timo.k...@iws.uni-stuttgart.de
>> D-70569 Stuttgart            url: www.hydrosys.uni-stuttgart.de
>> _______________________________________________________________
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Dumux mailing list
>> Dumux@listserv.uni-stuttgart.de
>> https://listserv.uni-stuttgart.de/mailman/listinfo/dumux
> _______________________________________________
> Dumux mailing list
> Dumux@listserv.uni-stuttgart.de
> https://listserv.uni-stuttgart.de/mailman/listinfo/dumux
_______________________________________________
Dumux mailing list
Dumux@listserv.uni-stuttgart.de
https://listserv.uni-stuttgart.de/mailman/listinfo/dumux

Reply via email to