# FSI with interFoam and CalculiX: Convergence

**URL:** <https://precice.discourse.group/t/fsi-with-interfoam-and-calculix-convergence/334>\
**Category:** Using preCICE\
**Tags:** openfoam, fsi, multiphase, inactive\
**Created:** [September 7, 2020, 8:53am UTC](https://precice.discourse.group/t/fsi-with-interfoam-and-calculix-convergence/334 "2020-09-07T08:53:06Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 12

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Stan](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/free1/user_avatar/precice.discourse.group/stan/32/599_2.png) [@Stan](https://precice.discourse.group/u/Stan)\
**Post date:** [October 25, 2022, 2:08am UTC](https://precice.discourse.group/t/fsi-with-interfoam-and-calculix-convergence/334/12 "2022-10-25T02:08:57Z")

</div>

Thank you for your reply. I’ll try IsoAdvector with smaller time steps.  
I also have a question about the Poisson’s ratio adopted in the benchmark. In Vilmar Fuchs’s dissertation ([Link Ref 2](https://kobra.uni-kassel.de/handle/123456789/2014071645726)), the Poisson’s ratio of the solid is set as 0.5. However, in this [thread](https://precice.discourse.group/t/iqn-fails-for-quickly-changing-forces-during-wetting-in-a-free-surface-fsi-problem/248/17), it is said that CalculiX will not run if the Poisson’s ratio is set as 0.5 (also in our solid solver). Could you please provide the Poisson’s ratio you adopted in the benchmark?

---

_[View the full topic](https://precice.discourse.group/t/fsi-with-interfoam-and-calculix-convergence/334)._