Fixed mesh method for rigid body motion

philippose · January 10, 2009, 14:50

Hello,

A Good Evening to everyone :-)! Hope its not overly cold! Havent seen such temperatures in a long time now!

Anyway, I was looking through the net for methods of treating rigid body motion for CFD, and came across some interesting papers at the website of the CFD software "Flow-3D", by Flow Science (www.flow3d.com)

They call it "General Moving Objects (GMO)" and the "FAVOR" method (which seems to be trademarked by them).

In this approach, a fixed mesh is used, in which the rigid bodies are defined via a combination of Volume Fractions and Area Fractions (which looks very similar to the VOF method) in order to simulate 6-dof motion coupled with fluid flow.

Motion then becomes a variation of the volume and area fraction fields (as a function of time), rather than a physical deformation / modification of the mesh itself.

Has anyone used a similar approach in OpenFOAM, and what would the main disadvantages of this method be? At the face of it, it seems to be "the" solution to large scale motion, without having to worry about mesh quality...remeshing...etc...etc...

It would be great if someone could shed some light on this concept...

As a passing question.... any idea why Flow-3D has not made it bigger? Its been around a while, and their approaches seem to be very novel and interesting....!

Have a great weekend!

Philippose

nico765 · January 12, 2009, 04:57

Hello,

I'd say that Flow-3D is great at single/multiple body (large) motion. It's probably less accurate at getting good values of resistance (see
Validation of the CFD code Flow-3D for the free surface flow around the ships).
I've tried to raise the question of the moving mesh approach (vs a deforming mesh) in this thread (about a 2D wedge). This approach can and has been successfully used on other cases. CD-Adapco, in their last versions of Star-CCM, have implemented what they called DFBI (dynamic fluid body interaction). Mesh can be body-fitted (could force calculation) and handles well large motions.

In OpenFoam, the only missing parts (that I can see) are the handling of boundary conditions when handling motion. (MRF, 6DOF and VOF solvers are already available)

Regards,

January 10, 2009, 14:50	Hello, A Good Evening to ev	#1
philippose Senior Member Philippose Rajan Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Germany Posts: 552 Rep Power: 25	Hello, A Good Evening to everyone :-)! Hope its not overly cold! Havent seen such temperatures in a long time now! Anyway, I was looking through the net for methods of treating rigid body motion for CFD, and came across some interesting papers at the website of the CFD software "Flow-3D", by Flow Science (www.flow3d.com) They call it "General Moving Objects (GMO)" and the "FAVOR" method (which seems to be trademarked by them). In this approach, a fixed mesh is used, in which the rigid bodies are defined via a combination of Volume Fractions and Area Fractions (which looks very similar to the VOF method) in order to simulate 6-dof motion coupled with fluid flow. Motion then becomes a variation of the volume and area fraction fields (as a function of time), rather than a physical deformation / modification of the mesh itself. Has anyone used a similar approach in OpenFOAM, and what would the main disadvantages of this method be? At the face of it, it seems to be "the" solution to large scale motion, without having to worry about mesh quality...remeshing...etc...etc... It would be great if someone could shed some light on this concept... As a passing question.... any idea why Flow-3D has not made it bigger? Its been around a while, and their approaches seem to be very novel and interesting....! Have a great weekend! Philippose

January 12, 2009, 04:57	Hello, I'd say that	#2
nico765 Member nicolas Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Glasgow Posts: 42 Rep Power: 17	Hello, I'd say that Flow-3D is great at single/multiple body (large) motion. It's probably less accurate at getting good values of resistance (see Validation of the CFD code Flow-3D for the free surface flow around the ships). I've tried to raise the question of the moving mesh approach (vs a deforming mesh) in this thread (about a 2D wedge). This approach can and has been successfully used on other cases. CD-Adapco, in their last versions of Star-CCM, have implemented what they called DFBI (dynamic fluid body interaction). Mesh can be body-fitted (could force calculation) and handles well large motions. In OpenFoam, the only missing parts (that I can see) are the handling of boundary conditions when handling motion. (MRF, 6DOF and VOF solvers are already available) Regards,

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Rigid body motion + Boundary Layer	Manoj Kumar	FLUENT	4	May 26, 2012 10:34
simple rigid body motion UDF	Dan	FLUENT	0	January 11, 2006 05:48
Define the motion of rigid-body CG using profiles!	ducvinh	FLUENT	2	October 2, 2004 02:50
rigid body motion	antonello	FLUENT	3	July 28, 2004 03:25
Rigid Body Motion in Eulerian Grid	Zi-Wei Chiou	Main CFD Forum	0	November 14, 2001 22:39