Facing problem to match TOUGH output with excel and Python
Dear TOUGH community,
Recently I am conducting 1-D stead-state radial heat conduction problem
The result I got from PetraSim(TOUGH) could not match with the result from excel or python, here I have attached word file (Output_excel_python_TOUGH) that represent all results including TOUGH (attached Pic of the figure of equation, excel graph, python graph, and output of THOUG).
I want to know that is it possible to reproduce the problem result by TOUGH? If it is, what I need to do in my Sim file, Please give me any suggestion you have
Here, I have also attached the Sim file of TOUGH. I have used PetraSim v2018
Thank you in advance for your time.
Given parameters:
- Solid Density : 2.0 tm^-3 or 1814.37 kg/m³
- Heat capacity : 900 J/Kg/K
- Thermal conductivity: 5.5 W/(m·K)
- Thermal Diffusivity K: 0.000128 m^2/s
- Function of r injecting as time value in PeraSim
As it is solid, there is no flow of liquid
- Heat In : 30 W/m^2 (heat flux) or 3393.0 J/s
3 replies
-
Though I am not a Tough use, but i have some experience of observing differences in results.
Though you have not stated explicitly how you ran these simulation
I believe you ran separate simulation using different mesh. One created using petrasim and other made using meshmaker
What you should do is check the magnitude of error.. if it is less than 1 or 2 percent .,then perhaps there is not much to worry about.
You might also want to check the boundary conditions setup again since it's one of the major reasons for any major deviations in results.
-
I noticed the following:
* the thermal diffusivity for the given parameters seems to be 3.368E-6 m2/s, not the stated 1.28E-4 m2/s.
* you want to inject heat at 30 W/m2. I guess the area is that on the left side of the model, which is 1 x 100 = 100 m2. So, the injected heat should be 3,000 W, not 3,393 W.
* if you want to inject on the left side of the model, the grid discretisation chosen migth not be appropriate, as the injection node is at 8.33 m from the left boundary.
* a finer grid along the x axis could improve the solution accuracy over space, which might be helpful when you want to compare a numerical solution with an analytical one. Now you have 6 elements over 100 m.
* you should limit the time step, let say at 10 days, to obtain a more accurate solution over time, otherwise the 5 yrs are simulated in a few time steps.
* I would increase the horizontal permeability to 1.E-20 m2 and include a tiny pore compressibility (1.E-10 Pa-1) to avoid a too high water P at the injection element due to liquid water expansion. When running your original file the P rose to >100 MPa. The tiny water flow should be negligible with respect to heat conduction.
I was not able to open the World file, so I could miss some information.
Regards,
Alfredo