Hi Ray,

Yes. You make a good point.  I see that the analytical solution to the 
particular problem I have posted is also zero.

The reason I posted is because I wanted to present an (oversimplified) 
analogous problem when posting to the group, retaining the generality, since 
many other subject experts might have faced similar situations.

The actual problem I am solving is the solid diffusion PDE (only 1 equation) in 
a Li-ion battery.   I am solving this PDE in a pseudo-2D domain.  i.e. I have 
defined a Cartesian 2D space, wherein the y-coordinate corresponds to the 
radial direction. The bottom face corresponds to particle centres, and the top 
face corresponding to surface of each spherical particle.   The x-axis 
co-ordinate corresponds to particles along the width (or thickness) of the 
positive electrode domain.  Diffusion of Li is restricted to be within the 
solid particle (i.e. y-direction only), by defining a suitable tensor diffusion 
coefficient as described in the Anisotropic diffusion example and FAQ in FiPy.  
I have normalised my x and y dimensions to have a length of unity.

Now, the boundary condition along the top face is
[cid:image005.png@01D1C26E.2386E850]

Now, j is non-linear (Butler-Volmer), and I am using a Taylor-expanded linear 
version for this boundary condition. All other field 
variables[cid:image006.png@01D1C26E.2386E850] are assumed as constants.   The 
idea is to set up the infrastructure and solve this problem independently, 
before worrying upon the rubrics of setting up the coupled system.  In a 
similar fashion, I have built up and solved the solid phase potential PDE 
(thanks to your help for pointing out about the implicit source term). Thus, 
the idea is to build up the coupled P2D Newman model piecemeal.

The linearised version of my BC’s RHS at a given operating point 
([cid:image007.png@01D1C26E.2386E850])is
[cid:image008.png@01D1C26E.2386E850]

As you can see, the linearised Boundary condition, is cast in terms of the 
field variable, [cid:image007.png@01D1C26E.2386E850] .  Hence, we need it in an 
implicit form corresponding to  (pseudocode: c.faceGrad.constrain([-( 
(j_at_c_star - partial_j_at_op_point*c_star) + coeff = 
partial_j_at_op_point)],mesh.facesTop) , or something of this form/meaning.   
(just like the very useful ImplicitSourceterm method)

If I instead apply the c.faceValue method,i.e. using it in setting the BC as

c.faceGrad.constrain([-(j_at_c_star + partial_j_at_op_point*(c.faceValue - 
c_star))], mesh.facesTop),  then c.faceValue gets immediately evaluated at the 
operating point, c_star,  and we are left with 0 multiplying the first-order 
derivative.

ie.  the Boundary conditions becomes,
[cid:image009.png@01D1C26E.2386E850]

Leading to huge loss of accuracy.

Is there any hope at all in this situation ? ☺ . Cheers and thanks for your 
help thus far.


Krishna

From: fipy-boun...@nist.gov [mailto:fipy-boun...@nist.gov] On Behalf Of Raymond 
Smith
Sent: 09 June 2016 16:06
To: fipy@nist.gov
Subject: Re: casting implicit Boundary Conditions in FiPy

Hi, Krishna.

Could you give a bit more detail and/or an example about how you know it's 
doing the wrong thing throughout the solution process? In the example you sent, 
the correct solution is the same (c(x, t) = 0) whether you set n*grad(phi) to 
zero or to phi at the boundary, so it's not a good example for concluding that 
it's not behaving as you'd expect. It's helpful here to find a situation in 
which you know that analytical solution to confirm one way or the other. For 
example, you should be able to get the solution to the following problem using 
a Fourier series expansion:
dc/dt = Laplacian(c)
c(t=0) = 1
x=0: c = 0
x=1: c - dc/dx = 0
Ray

On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 10:52 AM, Gopalakrishnan, Krishnakumar 
<k.gopalakrishna...@imperial.ac.uk<mailto:k.gopalakrishna...@imperial.ac.uk>> 
wrote:
Hi Ray,

Thanks for your help.

But when I apply phi.harmonicFaceValue , it is immediately evaluated to a 
numerical result (a zero vector in this case, since initial value = 0, the data 
type  is 
fipy.variables.harmonicCellToFaceVariable._HarmonicCellToFaceVariable', i.e. 
the boundary condition is not remaining implicit.

The same is the case with the examples.convection.robin example.  Here, the 
phi.faceValue method is used.  However, this also results in an immediate 
numerical evaluation.

However, what is actually required is that,  the BC must remain implicit (in 
variable form, without getting numerically evaluated), being cast in terms of 
the field variable being solved for. Then the solver needs to solve the PDE on 
the domain to yield the solution of the field variable.

[cid:image010.png@01D1C26E.2386E850]

I think we need to solve for the PDE, keeping this implicit BC, rather than 
immediately evaluating the term [cid:image011.png@01D1C26E.2386E850] , since 
[cid:image012.png@01D1C26E.2386E850] is the field variable to be solved for, 
i.e. there ought to be some way to cast the Boundary condition as implicit.

In FiPy,  I have previously set up an implicit source term, 
[cid:image013.png@01D1C26E.2386E850]    by using the following code snippet, 
ImplicitSourceTerm(coeff=k) . Perhaps there might be an equivalent method in 
FiPy  to set up the implicit BC, I think ?


Krishna




From: fipy-boun...@nist.gov<mailto:fipy-boun...@nist.gov> 
[mailto:fipy-boun...@nist.gov<mailto:fipy-boun...@nist.gov>] On Behalf Of 
Raymond Smith
Sent: 09 June 2016 14:23

To: fipy@nist.gov<mailto:fipy@nist.gov>
Subject: Re: casting implicit Boundary Conditions in FiPy

Oh, right, the boundary condition is applied on a face, so you need the 
facevalue of phi:
phi.faceGrad.constrain([phi.harmonicFaceValue])
Ray

On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 7:28 AM, Gopalakrishnan, Krishnakumar 
<k.gopalakrishna...@imperial.ac.uk<mailto:k.gopalakrishna...@imperial.ac.uk>> 
wrote:
Hi ray,

Casting the implicit PDE does not work for my problem.  FiPy throws up a ton of 
errors.
I am attaching a minimal example (based off example1.mesh.1D)

from fipy import *

nx = 50
dx = 1.
mesh = Grid1D(nx=nx, dx=dx)

phi = CellVariable(name="field variable", mesh=mesh, value=0.0)
D = 1.

valueLeft  = 0.0
phi.constrain(valueLeft, mesh.facesLeft)
phi.faceGrad.constrain([phi], mesh.facesRight) # This is the problematic BC

eq = TransientTerm() == DiffusionTerm(coeff=D)

timeStep = 0.9 * dx**2 / (2 * D)
steps = 100

viewer = Viewer(vars=phi)

for step in range(steps):
    eq.solve(var=phi, dt=timeStep)
    viewer.plot()

The errors are as follows:

line 22, in <module>
    eq.solve(var=phi, dt=timeStep)
\fipy\terms\term.py", line 211, in solve
    solver = self._prepareLinearSystem(var, solver, boundaryConditions, dt)
\fipy\terms\term.py", line 170, in _prepareLinearSystem
    buildExplicitIfOther=self._buildExplcitIfOther)
\fipy\terms\binaryTerm.py", line 68, in _buildAndAddMatrices
    buildExplicitIfOther=buildExplicitIfOther)
\fipy\terms\unaryTerm.py", line 99, in _buildAndAddMatrices
    diffusionGeomCoeff=diffusionGeomCoeff)
\fipy\terms\abstractDiffusionTerm.py", line 337, in _buildMatrix
    nthCoeffFaceGrad = coeff[numerix.newaxis] * var.faceGrad[:,numerix.newaxis]
\fipy\variables\variable.py", line 1575, in __getitem__
    unit=self.unit,
\fipy\variables\variable.py", line 255, in _getUnit
    return self._extractUnit(self.value)
\fipy\variables\variable.py", line 561, in _getValue
    value[..., mask] = numerix.array(constraint.value)[..., mask]
IndexError: index 50 is out of bounds for axis 1 with size 50

I have tried including the implicit BC within the time-stepper loop, but that 
does not still help.


Best Regards

Krishna



From: fipy-boun...@nist.gov<mailto:fipy-boun...@nist.gov> 
[mailto:fipy-boun...@nist.gov<mailto:fipy-boun...@nist.gov>] On Behalf Of 
Gopalakrishnan, Krishnakumar
Sent: 08 June 2016 23:42
To: fipy@nist.gov<mailto:fipy@nist.gov>
Subject: RE: casting implicit Boundary Conditions in FiPy

Hi Raymond,

Sorry, it was a typo.

Yes, It is indeed d (phi)/dx,  the spatial derivative BC.  I shall try setting 
phi.faceGrad.constrain([k*phi], mesh.facesRight), and see if it will work.

Thanks for pointing this out.


Krishna

From: fipy-boun...@nist.gov<mailto:fipy-boun...@nist.gov> 
[mailto:fipy-boun...@nist.gov] On Behalf Of Raymond Smith
Sent: 08 June 2016 23:36
To: fipy@nist.gov<mailto:fipy@nist.gov>
Subject: Re: casting implicit Boundary Conditions in FiPy

Hi, Krishna.
Just to make sure, do you mean that the boundary condition is a derivative with 
respect to the spatial variable or with respect to time as-written? If you mean 
spatial, such that d\phi/dx = k*phi, have you tried
phi.faceGrad.constrain(k*phi) and that didn't work?
If you mean that its value is prescribed by its rate of change, then I'm not 
sure the best way to do it. Could you maybe do it explicitly?
 - Store the values from the last time step with hasOld set to True in the 
creation of the cell variable
 - In each time step, calculate the backward-Euler time derivative manually and 
then set the value of phi with the phi.constrain method.

Ray

On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 6:26 PM, Gopalakrishnan, Krishnakumar 
<k.gopalakrishna...@imperial.ac.uk<mailto:k.gopalakrishna...@imperial.ac.uk>> 
wrote:
I am trying to solve the standard fickean diffusion equation on a 1D uniform 
mesh in (0,1)

$$\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t} = \nabla.(D \nabla\phi)$$

with a suitable initial value for $\phi(x,t)$.

The problem is that, one of my boundary conditions is implicit, i.e. is a 
function of the field variable being solved for.

$ \frac{\partial\phi}{\partial t} = k \phi $ , at the right boundary edge, k = 
constant

The left BC is not a problem, it is just a standard no-flux BC.

How do I cast this implicit BC in FiPy ? Any help/pointers will be much 
appreciated.


Best regards

Krishna
Imperial College London

_______________________________________________
fipy mailing list
fipy@nist.gov<mailto:fipy@nist.gov>
http://www.ctcms.nist.gov/fipy
  [ NIST internal ONLY: https://email.nist.gov/mailman/listinfo/fipy ]


_______________________________________________
fipy mailing list
fipy@nist.gov<mailto:fipy@nist.gov>
http://www.ctcms.nist.gov/fipy
  [ NIST internal ONLY: https://email.nist.gov/mailman/listinfo/fipy ]


_______________________________________________
fipy mailing list
fipy@nist.gov<mailto:fipy@nist.gov>
http://www.ctcms.nist.gov/fipy
  [ NIST internal ONLY: https://email.nist.gov/mailman/listinfo/fipy ]

_______________________________________________
fipy mailing list
fipy@nist.gov
http://www.ctcms.nist.gov/fipy
  [ NIST internal ONLY: https://email.nist.gov/mailman/listinfo/fipy ]

Reply via email to