Hello Is it possible to cha
Is it possible to change fvmSup.C so that it can be used for volVectorFields oder volTensorfields, too? I tried to add the following lines:
const volVectorField& sp,
const fvMesh& mesh = vf.mesh();
tmp<fvmatrix<type> > tfvm
fvMatrix<type>& fvm = tfvm();
fvm.diag() += mesh.V() * sp.internalField();
const tmp<volvectorfield>& tsp,
tmp<fvmatrix<type> > tfvm = fvm::Sp(tsp(), vf);
Of course it didn't work that way because the dimensions in line "fvm.diag() += mesh.V() * sp.internalField(); " did not fit. Can anybody tell me how to do this right?
Can't do it at the moment. Th
Can't do it at the moment. The matrix support given by the lduMatrix class only allows a scalar diagonal and off-diagonal, which is then through tricks (ugly and painful ones) expanded to a vector diagonal but only in the near-wall cells and for the boundary condition handling.
In order to do this, you need a vector diagonal throughout and for this you will need my new block matrix stuff. However, this is still experimental and I'm considering whether to re-base the whole FVM discretisation on it or not (FEM will definitely go that way).
In short, not easy and requires a major rewrite.
Okay thank u you told me in
Okay thank u
you told me in another thread that for porous material i only have to solve darcys law. I understand now that the confection term and the diffusion term of the momentum equation are negligible but my problem stay. I don't know how to implement this term for directetd permeabilities.
I hoped that it is possible to change fvmSus.C, but as you told me, it isn't.
I would be very thankful, if you gave me some more hints.
Thanks a lot
P.S. I don't know if it matters, but I am looking for symmetric tensorial resistance.
|All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:29.|