Hello,
yes, I saw the example in the dumux-lecture.
Is it the dimension induced by the Grid definition in the input file:
Cells 100 1 ?
And consequently the system of equations solved is 1d?
Thank you,
Lorenzo
On 21.12.2018 11:52, Timo Koch wrote:
Am 21.12.2018 um 08:39 schrieb lc <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>:
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
[email protected]
https://listserv.uni-stuttgart.de/mailman/listinfo/dumux
_______________________________________________
Dumux mailing list
[email protected]
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:[email protected]
D-70569 Stuttgart url:www.hydrosys.uni-stuttgart.de
_______________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________
Dumux mailing list
[email protected]
https://listserv.uni-stuttgart.de/mailman/listinfo/dumux
_______________________________________________
Dumux mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
https://listserv.uni-stuttgart.de/mailman/listinfo/dumux
_______________________________________________
Dumux mailing list
[email protected]
https://listserv.uni-stuttgart.de/mailman/listinfo/dumux
_______________________________________________
Dumux mailing list
[email protected]
https://listserv.uni-stuttgart.de/mailman/listinfo/dumux
