Jump to content

acupro

Members
  • Content Count

    281
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    15

acupro last won the day on June 23

acupro had the most liked content!

4 Followers

About acupro

  • Rank
    Super User

Profile Information

  • Are you University user?
    No

Recent Profile Visitors

2384 profile views
  1. acupro

    begineer

    AcuSolve does have the restart functionality - where you can change anything but mesh node count going from the original run to the restart run. You could probably do this in one run, using a multiplier function to change the value on heat sources (or whatever is your source of heat) during the run.
  2. With AcuSolve you can perform the conjugate heat transfer simulation as one model, though you'll probably want to use AcuConsole as the preprocessor for that. I don't know if VWT (AcuSolve) has the inputs for heat transfer, but AcuSolve itself has the capability for both flow and heat transfer.
  3. You should also look at HyperWorks CFD 2020 as it will have similar look and feel to VWT, but with much more general capability.
  4. As stated before, AcuSolve still requires enough mesh (nodes and/or elements) to resolve the relevant flow features and gradients. It's just that AcuSolve is more forgiving of individual element quality than some other codes. So the mesh still needs to be 'good', but the individual element requirements are much less stringent.
  5. Multiphase will be quite a bit more computationally expensive - more equations, interface tracking, etc.
  6. I would suggest 0.34 m/s as initial conditions, and run a 'steady' state first to establish some sort of flowfield, before switching to transient and mesh motion at free surface. If you're more interested in the buildup of the wave at the cylinder, then you could start from rest and increase the velocity over time within a single transient run. That will just take longer to develop to the full behavior at the cylinder. But, again, since you say the experiment does show chaotic wave breaking, you won't get very far with the single-phase free-surface simulation, since you'll get mesh distortion. (You need a constant fluid topology, and a chaotic breaking wave is not a constant fluid topology.)
  7. Does the experiment show wave breaking - or is the free/top surface fairly smooth? You may also want to try running a 'steady' case first to establish the overall flowfield, then restart to transient with the free surface motion. Are you willing/able to share the .inp file here, for a look at it?
  8. If the flow rate is high enough such that there might be a breaking wave by/around the cylinder, you'll get failure, since AcuSolve requires a constant fluid topology. Try it with a lower flow rate to see if it holds together. Generally you want 30 to 50 time steps per 'vibration' cycle, but more would be better. How well does it work without the free surface boundary condition on the top surface - just doing the riser motion?
  9. What are you trying to solve within the vacuum/void space?
  10. Did you also update the driver for the other Display Adapter?
  11. If you start from the desktop AcuFieldView icon, right-click the icon and select properties. In the 'Target' entry, after what is there, add -software_render then hit OK. Or if starting from AcuSolve Command Prompt: acuFV -software_render
  12. Are you trying to use remote graphics? Or - are you displaying locally on that machine? AcuFV (and FV in general) really doesn't support remote display very well. You'll probably need to set up for client/server, where you run AcuFV locally, and access the data on the remote server. You could also try adding -software_render to your start 'Target'.
  13. The OS is also quite old, and my not be supported. Is there any other Display Adapter on the machine - or only that GPU? (I'm trying to check on compatibility...)
  14. You mentioned you didn't want to use the 'multiple layers' in the thermal shells, but that is exactly the better way to approach this, and the reason for having thermal shells. You would neglect any potential heat transfer from the edges, and simply assume that anything that enters the thermal shell at one 'end' leaves from the other. In fact, you could check that by reviewing the heat flux values from the surfaces bounding the thermal shell.
  15. That's probably going to be tricky (if not impossible) to do. Can you explain the scenario when you need this?
×
×
  • Create New...