Edward, This may be to do with having a very small volume (or area or
line or point) for the inner most element of the domain. It should be
the same whether one is using a 1D or 2D mesh. Since you are getting
differences in the 1D and 2D case, it should be relatively easy to
debug and figure out what's going on. It could also be that the
boundary condition on the inner boundary as zero area and this is
causing issues. Try shifting the grid by a small value away from the
zero point and see if things are improved. I have always had this
issue with cylindrical grids and have never really had a satisfactory
solution (other than shifting away from the zero point). If you
discover a better way to handle this, let me know. Cheers.


 If you can't debug it, then send me the most minimalist scripts that
show the issue and I'll give it a shot.

On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 9:53 PM, Eduard Manley <[email protected]> wrote:
> Problem partially solved:
>
> I'm using a logarithmic discretization (first dr= 5e-04 and next
> dr increasing as 1.05)(with internal radius= 0.00125, external radius=0.03)
> and,
> for some unknown reason this create problems and wrong result with
> cylindrical 1D mesh. I tried using a uniform discretization (dr=5e-04 nx=58)
> and now the result is correct.
>
> However I need to use the logarithmic discr. so after some hours of sleep
> I'll think about the reason.....
>
> ________________________________
> Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection. Sign up now.



-- 
Daniel Wheeler


Reply via email to