 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
[Sponsors] | ||||
Is there something more suitable than GAMBIT? |
 |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
May 17, 2005, 05:59
|
Is there something more suitable than GAMBIT?
|
#1 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Hi Users,
I have been given a project to model fluid flow through a porous rock core. The core sample contains a complex geometry of organic curves and is in ASCII format. What kind of pre-processor could you recommend for constructing this geometry? Thanks in advance, Owen |
|
|
||
|
May 18, 2005, 06:02
|
Re: Is there something more suitable than GAMBIT?
|
#2 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Autocad might be a good option
H |
|
|
|
||
|
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| mass flow in is not equal to mass flow out | saii | CFX | 12 | March 19, 2018 06:21 |
| Constant velocity of the material | Sas | CFX | 15 | July 13, 2010 09:56 |
| Gambit 2.3.16, Xming or Exceed...HELP! | bambam3417 | FLUENT | 10 | May 7, 2010 13:39 |
| Gambit -dev X11 doesn't work | Ervin Amet | FLUENT | 0 | October 28, 2007 09:33 |
| Gambit boundary conditions not suitable for fluent | ann | FLUENT | 3 | October 12, 2005 13:51 |
Linear Mode
