search

firemodels / fds

Fire Dynamics Simulator
https://pages.nist.gov/fds-smv/
Other
673 stars 627 forks source link

Cup_Burner processing script not working #1365

Closed gforney closed 9 years ago

gforney commented 9 years ago 
I ran the Cup_Burner validation cases successfully but then noticed the Matlab script
is not working. It appears that the FDS output files (_devc.csv) have different numbers
of columns, which causes the Matlab script to fail on the read. I think that all that
needs to be done is to make the DEVC lines consistent with the Matlab script, but I
was not sure exactly what was to be output. Adding IDs to the DEVC lines will help.
Remove any DEVC lines that are unnecessary, then make adjustments to the Matlab script.

I plan to add these cases to the Suppression Chpater of the Validation Guide. If you
have a general description of the experiments and references, please add to the Experiment
Chapter. The experiments are listed in alphabetical order.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by mcgratta on 2011-04-29 20:32:26

gforney commented 9 years ago 
Posted a fix to both Cup_C7H16_Ar.fds input file and Cup_burner.m script. Not yet verified.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by shostikk on 2011-05-03 12:55:14

gforney commented 9 years ago 
I will run the cases again, and then try the script.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by mcgratta on 2011-05-03 21:22:20

gforney commented 9 years ago 
I committed the latest Cup_Burner results. Something is still wrong with either the
cases or the Matlab script.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by mcgratta on 2011-05-04 17:09:10

gforney commented 9 years ago 
Cannot run the cup cases with r8256

ERROR: Element named Soo in FORMULA Soot is not found.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by jmvaari on 2011-05-04 18:02:10

gforney commented 9 years ago 
I just ran the cases last night. Must be a fresh bug.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by mcgratta on 2011-05-04 18:10:45

gforney commented 9 years ago 
Fixed.  In fixing a problem that Simo had emailed me yesterday I didn't get the fix
to be general enough.  Should hopefully work now.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by drjfloyd on 2011-05-04 18:16:37

gforney commented 9 years ago 
The input files should work OK now. Thanks.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by mcgratta on 2011-05-04 18:28:16

gforney commented 9 years ago 
There may be multiple problems.

1. The heptane cup burning rate is way too high, the flame is outside the cup and interferes
with the DEVC measuring the agent concentration.

2. For nitrogen agent, the excess nitrogen should not be referred to with SPEC_ID='NITROGEN'
because it will add to the ambient nitrogen, and the sum will be recorded in the *_devc.csv
file. If it was called 'NITRO', would it have the thermal properties of nitrogen?

3. In the result files, I notice that He volumetric concentrations are lower than with
svn7988 (7988 produced good MEC values for CH4) although the input file specifies the
same agent concentration ramp in terms of mass fractions. The mass fractions measured
by point devices are correct for both svn's. There may be an issue with computing volumetric
concentrations.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by jmvaari on 2011-05-05 18:03:10

gforney commented 9 years ago 
1. Simo -- I had to restore the "MFLUX" term to the old evaporation model. Is it OK?

2. No, it would have the same properties as AIR, but with whatever molecular weight
you choose. This might be good enough.

3. Is there a verification case to check this?

Original issue reported on code.google.com by mcgratta on 2011-05-05 18:09:31

gforney commented 9 years ago 
2. Define a species mixture for nitrogen and call it NITRO.

&SMIX ID='NITRO',SPEC_ID='NITROGEN',MASS_FRACTION=1./

Now you can inject NITRO and it will have the properties of NITROGEN.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by drjfloyd on 2011-05-05 19:11:26

gforney commented 9 years ago 
Clever

Call it 'NITROGEN AGENT' or something similar so that new users can understand its
role. I assume that FDS will not confuse the names.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by mcgratta on 2011-05-05 19:19:10

gforney commented 9 years ago 
Kevin, regarding your point #3 above, I am attaching a verification case for inert gas
species, based on Simo's FED case. You can see that the volume fraction outputs for
the domains involving helium are wrong although the volume fractions add up to 1 (checked
with SVN 8894).

Original issue reported on code.google.com by jmvaari on 2011-08-18 08:53:11

gforney commented 9 years ago 
OK, I'll take a look. Thanks.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by mcgratta on 2011-08-18 11:48:08

gforney commented 9 years ago 
I noticed that on line 2150 of data.f90 the formula for HELIUM is 'He2'. I think this
results in HELIUM molecular weight of 8. Jason do you agree?

Original issue reported on code.google.com by jmvaari on 2011-08-18 11:59:22

gforney commented 9 years ago 
I would expect HELIUM to mean He_2, just like NITROGEN is N_2 and OXYGEN is O_2. But
Jason will know for sure. If HELIUM means He_2, does this solve the problem?

Original issue reported on code.google.com by mcgratta on 2011-08-18 18:36:59

gforney commented 9 years ago 
That is a typo.  Helium is a noble gas.  Should just be He for the formula.  I fixed
that in data.f90.  Does that solve the problem?

Original issue reported on code.google.com by drjfloyd on 2011-08-18 18:55:02

gforney commented 9 years ago 
Hmm. I guess the atomic number of 2 made me think of He_2.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by mcgratta on 2011-08-18 18:59:48

gforney commented 9 years ago 
The verification case above is now working as it should.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by jmvaari on 2011-08-18 19:42:55

gforney commented 9 years ago 
I committed new Cup Burner input files and results, plus a processing script that should
work. The heptane cups are now implemented as gas burners. We can revert back to liquid
evaporation once we get that working.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by jmvaari on 2011-08-19 14:27:04

gforney commented 9 years ago 
Thanks. I am also still having trouble with the liquid evaporation model.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by mcgratta on 2011-08-19 14:29:19

gforney commented 9 years ago 
I've got a student here assembling data from a large series of pool fire burns we did
at ATF.  Multiple fuels with varied fuel depth and pan size.  HRR from a calorimeter,
TC's in the liquid, and heat flux gauges at the surface of the liquid and at the bottom
of the pan.  This should help us in testing the liquid evaporation routines.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by drjfloyd on 2011-08-19 14:39:42

gforney commented 9 years ago 
I'm transferring the case to Craig. 

Craig, please confirm that the Cup_Burner cases are working and written up. Then mark
as Verified.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by mcgratta on 2012-08-13 21:18:02

gforney commented 9 years ago 
Cup Burner script works and writeup/plots have been added to Validation Guide.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by CraigWeinschenk on 2012-08-13 22:05:17

gforney commented 9 years ago 
Nice, thanks. One minor thing -- when looking at the scatter plots, I initially thought
that the red and blue colors indicated something. If so, explain what. If not, is it
possible to get 8 unique symbols in Matlab and just color them black. No need to use
color if it doesn't mean anything.

Also, note that I added an extra set of {...} to the title of the second reference.
By doing this, you maintain lower and upper case. Otherwise, LaTeX will follow a particular
style and set abbreviations like NMERI to nmeri. I committed this change already. Just
an FYI.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by mcgratta on 2012-08-14 15:13:02