Scaling and Performance test

The scaling case can exercise both weak- and strong-scaling. It adjusts itself depending on the number of requested ranks.

This directory also contains a collection of scripts used to test strong and weak scaling on OLCF Frontier.

Weak Scaling

Pass --scaling weak. The --memory option controls (approximately) how much memory each rank should use, in Gigabytes. The number of cells in each dimension is then adjusted according to the number of requested ranks and an approximation for the relation between cell count and memory usage. The problem size increases linearly with the number of ranks.

Strong Scaling

Pass --scaling strong. The --memory option controls (approximately) how much memory should be used in total during simulation, across all ranks, in Gigabytes. The problem size remains constant as the number of ranks increases.

Example

For example, to run a weak-scaling test that uses ~4GB of GPU memory per rank on 8 2-rank nodes with case optimization, one could:

./mfc.sh run examples/scaling/case.py -t pre_process simulation                    \
             -e batch -p mypartition -N 8 -n 2 -w "01:00:00" -# "MFC Weak Scaling" \
             --case-optimization -j 32 -- --scaling weak --memory 4

Backward Facing Step (2D)

Final Condition (Density)

Rayleigh-Taylor Instability (2D)

Final Condition and Linear Theory

Shock Droplet (2D)

Reference:

Panchal et. al., A Seven-Equation Diffused Interface Method for Resolved Multiphase Flows, JCP, 475 (2023)

Initial Condition

Result

Rayleigh-Taylor Instability (3D)

Final Condition and Linear Theory

Perfectly Stirred Reactor

Reference:

G. B. Skinner and G. H. Ringrose, “Ignition Delays of a Hydrogen—Oxygen—Argon Mixture at Relatively Low Temperatures”, J. Chem. Phys., vol. 42, no. 6, pp. 2190–2192, Mar. 1965. Accessed: Oct. 13, 2024.

$ python3 analyze.py
Induction Times ([OH] >= 1e-6):
 + Skinner et al.: 5.200e-05 s
 + Cantera:        5.130e-05 s
 + (Che)MFC:       5.130e-05 s

3D Turbulent Mixing layer (3D)

Liutex visualization at transitional state

2D Riemann Test (2D)

Reference:

Chamarthi, A., & Hoffmann, N., & Nishikawa, H., & Frankel S. (2023). Implicit gradients based conservative numerical scheme for compressible flows. arXiv:2110.05461

Density Initial and Final Conditions

Isentropic vortex problem (2D)

Reference:

Coralic, V., & Colonius, T. (2014). Finite-volume Weno scheme for viscous compressible multicomponent flows. Journal of Computational Physics, 274, 95–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2014.06.003

Density

Density Norms

2D Hardcodied IC Example

Initial Condition and Result

2D Triple Point (2D)

Reference:

Trojak, W., & Dzanic, T. Positivity-preserving discoutinous spectral element method for compressible multi-species flows. arXiv:2308.02426

Numerical Schlieren at Final Time

Taylor-Green Vortex (3D)

Reference:

Hillewaert, K. (2013). TestCase C3.5 - DNS of the transition of the Taylor-Green vortex, Re=1600 - Introduction and result summary. 2nd International Workshop on high-order methods for CFD.

Final Condition

This figure shows the isosurface with zero q-criterion.

Titarev-Toro problem (1D)

Reference:

V. A. Titarev, E. F. Toro, Finite-volume WENO schemes for three-dimensional conservation laws, Journal of Computational Physics 201 (1) (2004) 238–260.

Initial Condition

Result

Lid-Driven Cavity Problem (2D)

Reference:

Bezgin, D. A., & Buhendwa A. B., & Adams N. A. (2022). JAX-FLUIDS: A fully-differentiable high-order computational fluid dynamics solver for compressible two-phase flows. arXiv:2203.13760

Ghia, U., & Ghia, K. N., & Shin, C. T. (1982). High-re solutions for incompressible flow using the Navier-Stokes equations and a multigrid method. Journal of Computational Physics, 48, 387-411

Final Condition

Centerline Velocities

IBM Bow Shock (3D)

Final Condition

2D IBM CFL dt (2D)

Result

1D Multi-Component Inert Shock Tube

Reference:

P. J. Martínez Ferrer, R. Buttay, G. Lehnasch, and A. Mura, “A detailed verification procedure for compressible reactive multicomponent Navier–Stokes solvers”, Computers & Fluids, vol. 89, pp. 88–110, Jan. 2014. Accessed: Oct. 13, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compfluid.2013.10.014

Initial Condition

Results

1D Multi-Component Reactive Shock Tube

References:

P. J. Martínez Ferrer, R. Buttay, G. Lehnasch, and A. Mura, “A detailed verification procedure for compressible reactive multicomponent Navier–Stokes solvers”, Computers & Fluids, vol. 89, pp. 88–110, Jan. 2014. Accessed: Oct. 13, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compfluid.2013.10.014

H. Chen, C. Si, Y. Wu, H. Hu, and Y. Zhu, “Numerical investigation of the effect of equivalence ratio on the propagation characteristics and performance of rotating detonation engine”, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, Mar. 2023. Accessed: Oct. 13, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2023.03.190

Initial Condition

Results

Forward Facing Step (2D)

Reference:

Woodward, P. (1984). The numerical simulation of two-dimensional fluid flow with strong shocks. Journal of Computational Physics, 54(1), 115–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9991(84)90140-2

Final Condition (Density)

Gas Jet (2D)

Final Condition

Lax shock tube problem (1D)

Reference:

P. D. Lax, Weak solutions of nonlinear hyperbolic equations and their numerical computation, Communications on pure and applied mathematics 7 (1) (1954) 159–193.

Initial Condition

Result

Shu-Osher problem (1D)

Reference:

C. W. Shu, S. Osher, Efficient implementation of essentially non-oscillatory shock-capturing schemes, Journal of Computational Physics 77 (2) (1988) 439–471. doi:10.1016/0021-9991(88)90177-5.