Forum: OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD
November 28, 2010, 14:47
|
|
Replies: 122
Views: 41,627
Well, this was pretty major and I have been...
Well, this was pretty major and I have been delaying it in 1.5-dev until the new release went out. You should have no problems with the new code and I would advise to upgrade.
Sorry for being...
|
|
Forum: OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD
November 25, 2010, 05:27
|
|
Replies: 122
Views: 41,627
|
|
Forum: OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD
June 12, 2009, 04:33
|
|
Replies: 122
Views: 41,627
|
|
Forum: OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD
September 12, 2006, 09:49
|
|
Replies: 122
Views: 41,627
Sounds nasty - are you picking
Sounds nasty - are you picking up the wrong compiler of libstdc++?
I have to say I'm happy you can now see that I was telling the truth when I said "it works for me" :-)
I really don't know...
|
|
Forum: OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD
September 11, 2006, 19:55
|
|
Replies: 122
Views: 41,627
Hi Frank,
Don't worry about
Hi Frank,
Don't worry about it - I am just trying to find out if there are bugs or some problems I haven't see before. Here are two ways to produce a core dump and traceback on linux.
1)...
|
|
Forum: OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD
September 11, 2006, 12:01
|
|
Replies: 122
Views: 41,627
Just as a proof: no changes no
Just as a proof: no changes no modifications, all checking switched on. I have tried both the debug and optimised version and the log file is below.
Could you please investigate further why...
|
|
Forum: OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD
September 11, 2006, 10:36
|
|
Replies: 122
Views: 41,627
Well, this works for me, the m
Well, this works for me, the motion solver did its job well and I cannot tell you anything further based on the data. You can do two things:
- produce a complete trace-back, using dgb
- if you...
|
|
Forum: OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD
September 10, 2006, 07:33
|
|
Replies: 122
Views: 41,627
Well, I recently did some flu
Well, I recently did some fluid-structure interaction work which seems to cover all your stuff. You can, of course, throw out the actual structures solution and just use the code to run the fluids...
|
|
Forum: OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD
August 31, 2006, 08:00
|
|
Replies: 122
Views: 41,627
Yup, it has actually been vali
Yup, it has actually been validated on test examples for accuracy. I cannot remember the bug fix (it was nasty, that I do remember) so I'm afraid no patch this time.
Sorry :-(
Hrv
|
|
Forum: OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD
July 5, 2006, 16:49
|
|
Replies: 122
Views: 41,627
No ideas:
/*---------------
No ideas:
/*---------------------------------------------------------------------------*\
| ========= | |
| \ / F ield ...
|
|
Forum: OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD
July 5, 2006, 12:37
|
|
Replies: 122
Views: 41,627
That lot should say
this -
That lot should say
this - > currentScale()
all together. Looks like the forum software is playing games with me.
|
|
Forum: OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD
July 5, 2006, 12:35
|
|
Replies: 122
Views: 41,627
Doh. Go to
void oscillati
Doh. Go to
void oscillatingFixedValueFvPatchField<type>::updateCoeffs() and do:
Info <<>currentScale() << endl;
Clear?
Hrv
|
|
Forum: OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD
July 5, 2006, 12:19
|
|
Replies: 122
Views: 41,627
Try:
1. Save the file in yo
Try:
1. Save the file in your home directory
run
tar xzf oscillatingCavityMesh.tgz
cd oscillatingCavityMesh
blockMesh $FOAM_RUN oscillatingCavityMesh
moveMesh $FOAM_RUN...
|
|
Forum: OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD
June 29, 2006, 06:54
|
|
Replies: 122
Views: 41,627
|
|
Forum: OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD
June 27, 2006, 08:08
|
|
Replies: 122
Views: 41,627
Forgot to say: if you want the
Forgot to say: if you want the case, please E-mail me. Also, there may be a mionr difference on how you specify the amplitude (mine is a vector, yours might be a scalar), but that's easily fixed. ...
|
|
Forum: OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD
June 27, 2006, 07:08
|
|
Replies: 122
Views: 41,627
OK, I have prepared a little e
OK, I have prepared a little example for you. Have a look at the movie:
http://powerlab.fsb.hr/ped/kturbo/OpenFOAM/movies/oscillatingMeshMotion.mpg
The b.c. specification I am using is:
...
|
|
Forum: OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD
June 26, 2006, 14:01
|
|
Replies: 122
Views: 41,627
Sounds like a boundary conditi
Sounds like a boundary condition problem to me. Do you my any chance have a 2-D geometry with a symmetry plane front and back? Also, have a look at the motionU files in the time directories and see...
|
|
Forum: OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD
June 26, 2006, 09:58
|
|
Replies: 122
Views: 41,627
Easy: have a look at your flux
Easy: have a look at your flux file and you will see you've got a flux through the wall.
This is because you have specified the velocity to be zero in the absolute reference frame and the wall...
|
|
Forum: OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD
June 21, 2006, 17:33
|
|
Replies: 122
Views: 41,627
There has been a bunch of name
There has been a bunch of name changes but without substantial algorithmic changes (e.g. various motion solvers are now run-time selectable + you can choose your diffusion model at run-time as well)....
|
|
Forum: OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD
May 17, 2006, 10:24
|
|
Replies: 122
Views: 41,627
Force it - the compiler is con
Force it - the compiler is confused:
dynamicFvMesh is derived from fvMesh which is derived from polyMesh which is derived form objectRegistry which has got the function you need. So, all is...
|
|
Forum: OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD
May 17, 2006, 09:42
|
|
Replies: 122
Views: 41,627
When in doubt: cheat :-)
Th
When in doubt: cheat :-)
The easiest way is from the database:
// Grab motion patches
tetPointVectorField& motionU =
const_cast<tetpointvectorfield&>
(
...
|
|
Forum: OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD
February 7, 2006, 13:23
|
|
Replies: 122
Views: 41,627
Use laplace with constant diff
Use laplace with constant diffusion and you will get no history effects. If the mesh gets bad next to the boundary you can try constant with patchEnhanced, which should make it better next to the...
|
|
Forum: OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD
November 3, 2005, 05:27
|
|
Replies: 122
Views: 41,627
That would be because the moti
That would be because the motion solver is FEM and the flow solver is FVM. Since motionU is a tetFem field, the number of boundary locations is be different and mapping is required.
Enjoy,
...
|
