Menu

Discussion Forum

New Discussion
Filtrer

Note: This discussion is about an older version of the COMSOL Multiphysics® software. The information provided may be out of date.

Discussion Closed This discussion was created more than 6 months ago and has been closed. To start a new discussion with a link back to this one, click here.

Frequency sweep in a magnetic field interface

Posted 17 janv. 2013, 16:34 UTC−5 Low-Frequency Electromagnetics Version 3.5a, Version 4.3 3 Replies

Venkatram Pepakayala
Send Private Message Flag post as spam

Please login with a confirmed email address before reporting spam

Hello everyone,
This should be seemingly siomple problem. I am trying to model the AC magnetic field due to a coil in 3D. I am using a magnetic field interface on a simple cylinder (acting as the coil) kept in air. A current has been given to this cylinder axially using "external current density feature". Now if I run a stationary solver, it is able to solve for a magnetic field without hassle. Even if I give a periodic current to the coil and solve for time-dependent solution at a particular frequency, I am getting an answer. But when I want to do a frequency sweep analysis I am getting the following error:
"Failed to find a solution for the initial parameter.
Matrix has zero on diagonal.
Returned solution is not converged."
Now I know that usually this kind of error is due to inadequate boundary condition. But that does not explain to me how the simulation is successful with a stationary and time domain analysis.

Also if I try to make the coil using a 2D axisymmetric simulation, I am able to do even the frequency sweep giving the exact same boundary conditions that I am using for 3D simulation. I am at loss to see what could be the problem. Any suggestions or advice will be highly appreciated.
I have attached the model file in case anyone wants to check it out.
Venkat

Attachments:

3 Replies Last Post 18 janv. 2013, 08:46 UTC−5
Sergei Yushanov Certified Consultant
Send Private Message Flag post as spam

Please login with a confirmed email address before reporting spam

Posted: 1 decade ago 17 janv. 2013, 17:25 UTC−5
Venkat,

Set air conductivity to small value compared to the conductivity of copper (say, sig_air=10[S/m]) and re-run analysis. This helps solver to be more stable.

Regards,
Sergei
Venkat, Set air conductivity to small value compared to the conductivity of copper (say, sig_air=10[S/m]) and re-run analysis. This helps solver to be more stable. Regards, Sergei
Venkatram Pepakayala
Send Private Message Flag post as spam

Please login with a confirmed email address before reporting spam

Posted: 1 decade ago 17 janv. 2013, 22:38 UTC−5
Thanks Sergei! Works like a charm. Makes me wonder why this was not the case in COMSOL 3.5. The conductivity values even if 0 seem to pose no problem in 3.5.
Thanks Sergei! Works like a charm. Makes me wonder why this was not the case in COMSOL 3.5. The conductivity values even if 0 seem to pose no problem in 3.5.
Sergei Yushanov Certified Consultant
Send Private Message Flag post as spam

Please login with a confirmed email address before reporting spam

Posted: 1 decade ago 18 janv. 2013, 08:46 UTC−5
Venkat,

Good question – I am also wondering about the difference between 3.5 and 4.3 in this regard. May be you can submit this question to Comsol Support?

Regards,
Sergei
Venkat, Good question – I am also wondering about the difference between 3.5 and 4.3 in this regard. May be you can submit this question to Comsol Support? Regards, Sergei

Note that while COMSOL employees may participate in the discussion forum, COMSOL® software users who are on-subscription should submit their questions via the Support Center for a more comprehensive response from the Technical Support team.

Suggested Content