[pi06jl6]

Greetings,

For two years ago, I evaluated the ALE mesh motion solver, applied to the Turek case. 2D frozen approximation for the OF2.3.X. I failed. Today I can see more people in the OF community that have succeeded but it seems to be extended-Foam.

Short case description: a cylinder with splitter blade, frozen along Z-axis, inflow along X-axis and the degrees of freed for mesh motion is thus X, Y coordinates.

I could conclude that from studying the mesh after mesh.update: when I moved the splitter blade, the points of the intersection between plane and blade moved across the cells in the plane but the cells were fixed. Hence, I must provide a motion for all the points in these planes.

Question: Is there any solution to this problem for OF2.3.X?

Best Regards

Johan

[pi06jl6]

A more detailed description:

The splitter plade, intersects with the wall and thus it must be specified accordingly.

The most naive approach is to set it to fixed. Then it works for the FSI1 case. The extended-Foam uses a patch called "empty", then applied tetFem mesh motion solver which solves it.

There is of course a possibility to solve this in two steps, firstly moving the points according boundary patch in 2D and then use the pointfield distribution and apply update directly. OR, i write my own mesh motion solver, but this is outside my research goals, no room for that.

So, since i did not have the time to fix this, i left the case behind and continued with other research goals, Tureks case were not among them.

No when I keep noticing newsflash, "Tureks case on OF", i am starting to wonder if I did it wrong then. Is there a simple solution to this?

.