runParallel $decompDict splitMeshRegions -cellZones -overwrite # Remove fluid fields from solid regions (important for post-processing) for region in $(foamListRegions solid)</span><br><span class="line">do</span><br><span class="line"> rm -f 0/"$region"/{nut,alphat,epsilon,k,U,p_rgh} rm -f processor*/0/"$region"/{nut,alphat,epsilon,k,U,p_rgh} done
for region in $(foamListRegions) do runParallel $decompDict -s "$region" changeDictionary -region $region done # Redistribute onto fewer processors, with special treatment for heater for region in $(foamListRegions)</span><br><span class="line">do</span><br><span class="line"> runParallel -np 6 -s redist-"$region" \ redistributePar -overwrite -region "$region" done #-- Run in parallel runParallel $(getApplication) # Reconstruct for region in $(foamListRegions)</span><br><span class="line">do</span><br><span class="line"> runParallel -s reconstruct-"$region" \ redistributePar -reconstruct -region "$region" done #------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The main difference with chtMultiRegionReactingFoam is the form of PEqn.H. PEqn in chtMultiRegionReactingFoam is based on PEqn from chtMultiRegionFoam, while PEqn in multiRegionReactingFoam is based on reactingFoam. One may find multiRegionReactingFoam to be better than chtMultiRegionReactingFoam for some situations, especially where there are large pressure changes during the simulation.