|
[Sponsors] |
May 20, 2020, 14:05 |
Cutting cells for constructing alpha=0.5
|
#1 |
New Member
Yağmur GÜLEÇ
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 9
Rep Power: 11 |
Dear Foamers,
I tried to cut the cells to find isoSurface at 0.5 volume fraction for a VOF application using the isoAdvector concept devised by Roenby, J., Bredmose, H., & Jasak, H. (2016). A computational method for sharp interface advection. Royal Society open science, 3(11), 160405. I compiled codes from https://github.com/isoadvector for Foam extend 4.1 version. First, I constructed an icc object isoCutCell icc(mesh,alpha1) using the volume fraction field and mesh itself. Then, to compute which cells are cut by0.5 volume fraction. label cellStatus = icc.calcSubCell(ci,0.5); To calculate surface areas and to visualize the concerning variable I created volVectorField called temp to save the surface areas for cells that were cut by 0.5 volume fraction. forAll(mesh.cells(),ci) { label cellStatus = icc.calcSubCell(ci,1); //label cellStatus=icc.vofCutCell(ci,0.5,1e-3,100); if (cellStatus == 0) { temp.internalField()[ci]= icc.isoFaceArea(); } } However, the problem is that the areas saved in temp field is in very irrelevant positions, as seen in Fig in the attachment. What could be the reason? Should I use the code below label cellStatus=icc.vofCutCell(ci,0.5,1e-3,100) instead of label cellStatus = icc.calcSubCell(ci,0.5); ? What are the differences between them? Thanks in advance, Best Regards, |
|
May 23, 2020, 19:57 |
|
#2 |
New Member
Yağmur GÜLEÇ
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 9
Rep Power: 11 |
I could manage to extract isocells at volume fraction 0.5. I was making mistake. Instead, I should have interpolated as follows:
volPointInterpolation vpi_(alpha_mesh); scalarField ap_; ap_ = vpi_.interpolate(alpha1); isoCutCell icc(alpha_mesh,ap_); volPointInterpolation vpi_(alpha_mesh); |
|
September 14, 2023, 22:41 |
IsoAdvector on foamExtend 4.1
|
#3 |
Member
Michael Sukham
Join Date: Mar 2020
Location: India
Posts: 79
Rep Power: 6 |
As per git "A foam-extend version of the code is also available in isoAdvector/foam-extend. This was developed for foam-extend-32 and will most likely need modifications to work with newer versions. It does not contain the latest code developments.". And there are also problems on porting. How did you manage to compile isoAdvector on foamExtend 4.1? Does it support topological changes? I remember that someone tried but had many road blocks and the compiling was not successful. Any roadmap which i can use to compile on my foam extend 3.2 or 4.1
|
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Cutting cells for constructing alpha=0.5 | yagmur_89 | OpenFOAM | 0 | May 20, 2020 13:46 |
cellZone not taking all the cells inside | rahulksoni | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 6 | January 25, 2019 00:11 |
[snappyHexMesh] No layers in a small gap | bobburnquist | OpenFOAM Meshing & Mesh Conversion | 6 | August 26, 2015 09:38 |
[snappyHexMesh] snappyHexMesh matches wrong cells to CellZone | Siegunn | OpenFOAM Meshing & Mesh Conversion | 4 | July 31, 2015 05:10 |
physical boundary error!! | kris | Siemens | 2 | August 3, 2005 00:32 |