Butterfly solution proble value is NULL,but the result works in Paraview

I have a problem in Butterfly’s solution and really need your help.
The program of FOAM has been successfully completed, but the result of exporting from solution to solution proble value is null. The report of the solution is “Failed to read files simpleFOAM.err, reconstructPar.err, rm.err at the end.” But I can see normal results in PARAVIEW software.

simpleFoam.err and reconstructPar.err are not output. This is a bug, but not a particular problem. Calculations can be performed correctly.
Also, in case of parallel computation, an error may occur due to the absence of simpleFoam.log, but this can be solved by changing the name of mpirun.log to simpleFoam.log.

Thanks a lot,therefore its doesnt matter. NULL in solution proble value is a problem now.

If you want to read results, write must be set to True at the point where the solution, case and mesh are created, run can be False.

Hi,my friend. In fact,all the toggle to the write is true(windtunnel,block and snappyhex mesh,solution).Im appreciate to discuss more about this with you,thanks again.
The case is that the result can be find in Openfoam Paraview but null in the Grasshopper solution proble value. And next, let me tell you about my solution.When I discovered this problem, I thought that the problem might lie in two aspects.The first one that I think has a greater impact is the complicated BF geometry and the mesh cell number.The other is the test points distribution for solution view in grasshopper.

1 Like

to be continue, I will break down my solution to the problem in detail and highlight some new cases i meet.
Firstly, I tried to simplify the outline of the research object,change the refinelevel and set up windtunnel condition. Then the case is much more suitable for blockmesh and the snappyhex mesh.Secondly,the I change the test point distribution from populate 2D as random to the honeybee generate as the parameter.Finally, the problem is solved and I get what I want.

This is the final view in Rhino.

The output of such a result actually went through a long revision process. Although I finally achieved my goal, this is not a scientific method and a process of forward design based on the wind environment. Why use LADYBUG? Visualize a result you already know through BF?Therefore,I beg you guys for leaning about the following question.
1.Is refinelevel for the same object different for the mesh and brep? Mesh is more complexed?
2.The soluion in Openform is for the whole mesh in wind tunnel.Why sometimes the result in GH is null? Does test points distribution as the proble parameter affect the grasshopper solution? Or it is because of the relationship between distribution and meshcell position.
3. Sometimes there will be many large values and cannot be displayed in GH. Is this result wrong?I filtered the results with ghpy and displayed those large values that were not displayed, and found that their direction is the same and does not match the wind direction I set.
4.In my case,a zone nearby due northeasterly doesnt work in BF.WHY?

I’m really happy to share my experience with you all, hope this post can lead to some brainstorming and fun,