CFD Online Logo CFD Online URL
www.cfd-online.com
[Sponsors]
Home > Forums > Main CFD Forum

POD or ROM (Proper Orthogonal Decomposition)

Register Blogs Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   May 20, 2006, 01:47
Default POD or ROM (Proper Orthogonal Decomposition)
  #1
mike
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Dear freinds

I don't have any background in POD (or ROM), but have interest to it. If you have experience, please guide me how enter in this field. (Introduce some basic refrences, easy to understand).

Also, How is implementation of POD ? (suppose the CFD code is present)
  Reply With Quote

Old   May 21, 2006, 14:56
Default Re: POD or ROM (Proper Orthogonal Decomposition)
  #2
Peter Attar
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
The earliest work was by Sirovich. Also look for work by Lumley and Holmes at Princeton and Dowell,Hall and Thomas at Duke and Beran at AFRL. The latter two reference groups are involved in aeroelastic computations.

If you have a CFD code the way you implement it is to basically run the CFD to obtain data to get your POD modes. Then once you have the POD modes you project the modes onto your governing equations(Galerkin or subspace projection).

  Reply With Quote

Old   May 22, 2006, 12:01
Default Re: POD or ROM (Proper Orthogonal Decomposition)
  #3
ztdep
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Hi:

Peter Attar, what do you thinke of the future of the POD, my supervisor want the POD be my doctor's subjects, but i think it is a old technique, so what is your idea!

  Reply With Quote

Old   May 22, 2006, 13:07
Default Re: POD or ROM (Proper Orthogonal Decomposition)
  #4
Peter Attar
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I think it has it's place. Right now computers are still not fast enough to allow optimization with 5 million grid point CFD models so a medium fidelity(between panel codes and full blow CFD) method like POD is perfect. Are you planning on doing a purely CFD thesis or some aeroelastic/fluid-structure interaction problems? What type of POD work is he proposing for you?
  Reply With Quote

Old   May 22, 2006, 13:57
Default Re: POD or ROM (Proper Orthogonal Decomposition)
  #5
rt
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Dear

Thanks peter. Can you send to me some of these papers via email.

  Reply With Quote

Old   May 22, 2006, 14:00
Default Re: POD or ROM (Proper Orthogonal Decomposition)
  #6
Peter Attar
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I don't have any of them electronically..and I don't have time to search for them download them and then send them to you...sorry. If you are at a University just go to your library and search in one of the libraries techical search engines..Compendex for example.
  Reply With Quote

Old   May 23, 2006, 01:17
Default Re: POD or ROM (Proper Orthogonal Decomposition)
  #7
mike
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Dear Peter

Can you send to me some of these Ref. via email.
  Reply With Quote

Old   May 23, 2006, 09:08
Default Re: POD or ROM (Proper Orthogonal Decomposition)
  #8
Peter Attar
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
As I mentioned to the previous poster I do not have these electronically..do a literature search and I 'm sure you can get them all yourself.
  Reply With Quote

Old   June 10, 2006, 03:39
Default Re: POD or ROM (Proper Orthogonal Decomposition)
  #9
ztdep
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
do google search ,you can have some of them! the other you can go to the library!
  Reply With Quote

Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Proper orthogonal decomposition of turbulent flow with k-e Blob Main CFD Forum 0 June 5, 2009 09:32
Snapshot Proper Orthogonal Decomposition (POD) Mehmet SEN Main CFD Forum 7 May 19, 2006 12:38
"PROPER ORTHOGONAL DECOMPOSITION" dpshaka Main CFD Forum 6 December 17, 2005 02:38
On Proper Orthogonal Decomposition R.D.Prabhu Main CFD Forum 0 March 15, 2000 18:31


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 22:55.