[lr103476]

What is the difference between the implementation of mesh motion between the following two solvers: interFoam and icoFoamAutoMotion.

Thanks, Frank

[hjasak]

From the mesh motion side, none really. I don't know which version you're looking at, but now both solvers should have the run-time selectable mesh motion and have the option of using the automatic mesh motion solver.

Algorithmically, the icoFoamAutoMotion solver uses the relative flux formulation of the pressure equation whereas interFoam works wih absolute fluxes.

Enjoy,

Hrv

[lr103476]

I am running OpenFOAM 1.2.

As far as I can see, the icoFoamAutoMotion solver takes care of the motion using the motionSolver.C class. The way the unsteady boundary motion could be implemented is by applying transient boundary conditions on motionU.

On the other hand, interFoam uses the movingFvMesh.C class to move/deform the mesh. According to this implementation it is possible to write a user defined class, like movingFlapFvMesh or movingInkjetFvMesh. Then the main motion parameters, like frequency and amplitude, can be run time selectable. In fact I want to implement the movingFlapFvMesh into icoFoamAutoMotion, is that possible?

Is my understanding correct, or not?

Thanks, Frank

[hjasak]

Yup, just rip out the movingFvMesh stuff form the interFoam solver and put it into (your own version) of icoFoamAutoMotion, update the call syntax, make sure moving flap is linked in and you're in business. I have already done so for the next release.

Hrv