CFD Online Logo CFD Online URL
www.cfd-online.com
[Sponsors]
Home > Forums > General Forums > Main CFD Forum

Analysis differences with respect to size

Register Blogs Community New Posts Updated Threads Search

Like Tree3Likes
  • 1 Post By evcelica
  • 1 Post By FMDenaro
  • 1 Post By flotus1

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old   June 22, 2020, 12:00
Default Analysis differences with respect to size
  #1
New Member
 
Ozgur
Join Date: Feb 2020
Posts: 7
Rep Power: 6
AerospaceEngineer is on a distinguished road
I have a wooden computer. So solving big geometries is nearly impossible. When I scale geometry like 1/10 would that matter or change the results ?
AerospaceEngineer is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   June 22, 2020, 15:18
Default
  #2
Senior Member
 
Erik
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Earth (Land portion)
Posts: 1,167
Rep Power: 23
evcelica is on a distinguished road
It depends on what you are doing, but scaling the size is not a smart solution.
Geometric Size should not matter for calculation time. It is the # of mesh elements which matters.
AerospaceEngineer likes this.
evcelica is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   June 22, 2020, 17:47
Default
  #3
New Member
 
Ozgur
Join Date: Feb 2020
Posts: 7
Rep Power: 6
AerospaceEngineer is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by evcelica View Post
It depends on what you are doing, but scaling the size is not a smart solution.
Geometric Size should not matter for calculation time. It is the # of mesh elements which matters.
Yes the problem starts after meshing. I have a wooden pc and if my mesh number goes like 2m computer gives me headaches. Solution takes hours and i cant even see if its right or wrong. So I thought i could scale body, give appropriate meshing and solve it in a hour. But it is not ideal, you say.
AerospaceEngineer is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   June 23, 2020, 03:22
Default
  #4
Senior Member
 
Filippo Maria Denaro
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 6,769
Rep Power: 71
FMDenaro has a spectacular aura aboutFMDenaro has a spectacular aura aboutFMDenaro has a spectacular aura about
Quote:
Originally Posted by AerospaceEngineer View Post
Yes the problem starts after meshing. I have a wooden pc and if my mesh number goes like 2m computer gives me headaches. Solution takes hours and i cant even see if its right or wrong. So I thought i could scale body, give appropriate meshing and solve it in a hour. But it is not ideal, you say.
Scaling can be done, provided the Re number is the same. Therefore the computational resolution, required for your case is the same even after scaling.

Several hours of computational time are quite normal...
AerospaceEngineer likes this.
FMDenaro is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   June 23, 2020, 03:48
Default
  #5
New Member
 
Ozgur
Join Date: Feb 2020
Posts: 7
Rep Power: 6
AerospaceEngineer is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by FMDenaro View Post
Scaling can be done, provided the Re number is the same. Therefore the computational resolution, required for your case is the same even after scaling.

Several hours of computational time are quite normal...
So if i rearrenge re number an continue with scaled geometry it is ok. I am trying to solve for a small aircraft. But geometry is too big for pc. Always stops, program freezes etc.
AerospaceEngineer is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   June 23, 2020, 08:24
Default
  #6
Super Moderator
 
flotus1's Avatar
 
Alex
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Germany
Posts: 3,399
Rep Power: 46
flotus1 has a spectacular aura aboutflotus1 has a spectacular aura about
Quote:
Originally Posted by AerospaceEngineer View Post
So if i rearrenge re number an continue with scaled geometry it is ok. I am trying to solve for a small aircraft. But geometry is too big for pc. Always stops, program freezes etc.
To re-iterate what FMDenaro wrote: scaling the geometry does not achieve anything with regards to computational cost.
If you decreased the geometric size of your model by a factor of 10, you would need to e.g. decrease viscosity by a factor of 10 in order to have the same Reynolds Number. Otherwise, you would change physics, and get absolutely useless results in regards to your original case.
That in turn means your cell size would also have to decrease by a factor of 10 in order to achieve the same resolution.
You can scale the geometric size all you want, it does nothing to reduce computational cost.
FMDenaro likes this.
flotus1 is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Issues with poor performance in faster CPU gian93 Hardware 9 October 29, 2018 13:34
Superlinear speedup in OpenFOAM 13 msrinath80 OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 18 March 3, 2015 05:36
Bubble size analysis in Fluidized beds Musa FLUENT 1 March 18, 2013 04:01
[Commercial meshers] ST_Malloc: out of memory.malloc_storage: unable to malloc Velocity SA, cfdproject OpenFOAM Meshing & Mesh Conversion 0 April 14, 2009 15:45
Phase locked average in run time panara OpenFOAM 2 February 20, 2008 14:37


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:00.