[aspect-devel] steady state problem

[Max Rudolph]

I also wondered about the best way to do this in the context of trying to
reproduce the Van Keken kinematic subduction zone benchmark.
For that problem, there is no coupling between the energy and momentum
equations (no buoyancy contribution to flow), so it is even simpler than
what you are considering.
Setting the CFL number to a large value is a good idea. I also used the
'additional refinement times' option to do the spinup on increasingly
well-resolved meshes.

On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 12:54 PM, Wolfgang Bangerth <bangerth at colostate.edu>
wrote:

>
> we are currently looking at benchmark-type problems and we are only
>> interested in the steady state of the system.
>> Long story short, we would like for instance to run the Blankenbach
>> experiment (i.e. convection-box.prm) and arrive at steady state
>> as fast as possible since we are not interested in the time evolution of
>> the model: ideally we would like to arrive after 1 timestep at the
>> steady state solution,
>>
>
> That's going to be difficult because the problem is nonlinear and you
> somehow have to iterate out this nonlinearity. Time stepping is one method
> to achieve this. Did you take a look at the cookbook in the manual that
> shows how to set up an example where I'm only interested in the steady
> state?
>
> or in other words we would like to zero the \rho c_p dT/dt term in the
>> heat transport equation.
>> We have (naively) tried this approach by zeroing the term bdf2_factor *
>> scratch.phi_field[i] * scratch.phi_field[j])in advection.cc <
>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__
>> advection.cc&d=DwMFAg&c=ODFT-G5SujMiGrKuoJJjVg&r=KkOrCga5Ic
>> WjxrpeTIn1nmQG6jJSnwzdZwfNniMeeCc&m=ogr2JJ9z8kM0HK_cqi8xzJSL
>> CogoCEPeGwe6Af_wgpA&s=WRmWoLRpZXp7UtehYlrBbUbRabw1sZ0P-ltbulQAK0I&e=> .
>>
>> Unsurprisingly, this did not work and the code aborted. Instead of
>> zeroing the term, we tried placing in front of it a coefficient alpha=0.5
>>
>
> This only re-scales the time variable. This does not actually make the
> problem simpler -- it it equivalent to just taking a larger time step
> (which you can achieve by selecting a larger CFL number).
>
>
> but this lead to a temperature field which on average was twice as large
>> as the initial one. (if alpha=0.25, then it is approx 4times larger).
>> We suspect that this alpha coefficient of ours probably should come in
>> somewhere else too
>>
>
> Yes. There is a corresponding term on the right hand side because where
> you put it is one half of the term
>   (T_n - T_{n-1} ) / dt
>
>
> Best
>  W.
>
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Wolfgang Bangerth          email:                 bangerth at colostate.edu
>                            www: http://www.math.colostate.edu/~bangerth/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Aspect-devel mailing list
> Aspect-devel at geodynamics.org
> http://lists.geodynamics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aspect-devel
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.geodynamics.org/pipermail/aspect-devel/attachments/20171201/d5620552/attachment.html>