Infinitely better than any of the Ansys provided "courses" on youtube.
@Userpk7193
Жыл бұрын
You’re a saviour
@kauepaulinodecastro5629
Жыл бұрын
Im out of words, literally most youtube videos on this subject lack the objetivity and clarity that you've had.. Thumbs up man, please continue posting more videos, you're probably one of the best I've watched so far.. As a question, something that bothers me alot is checking the mesh quality feature while meshing, at first intuitively I would think having a mesh with 100% (all squared divisions) is always the best, but then why is there tetragonal and triangular modes? to better capture curvature?
@cfdkareem
Жыл бұрын
You are correct. A hexahedron "hex" mesh, all squares, is usually the most efficient mesh. This comes from the fact that you can discretize a volume with less elements and therefore the simulation runs faster. However, when the geometry gets complex (curved surfaces, small channels, organic shapes, etc.) it becomes difficult to fit a mesh of hexahedrons of good quality. This is why tetrahedral meshing is more popular for complex modeling. There is no inherit difference in solution accuracy between each type of mesh. As long as the mesh quality is good either technique it will give good results. To take advantage of the strengths and weaknesses of each it is common to due "multi-zone" meshing for complex models. I.e. use hex mesh elements in simple regions and transition to tetrahedral in complex regions.
@kauepaulinodecastro5629
Жыл бұрын
@@cfdkareem Fascinating, thank you very much.
@saurenkhosla
Жыл бұрын
thank you CFDkareem very cool
@zhanghaozhi1494
Жыл бұрын
Keep up the great work!
@gootothegoo
5 ай бұрын
Best video❤thank you
@literallynothinghere9089
Жыл бұрын
Vest mesh independence study tutorial video on youtube(by my personal opinion)
@franklineze8636
10 ай бұрын
Thank you for this! If I may ask, how does one perform mesh independence test for a complex model without an analytical solution?
@cfdkareem
10 ай бұрын
Without an analytical solution the next best thing is comparing to experimental data. If no data or equation exists, then you can compare the simulation to itself. You do this by picking a parameter of interest and tracking the percent change over each mesh iteration. When the mesh is refined the parameter should be changing only a small amount from one simulation to the next.
@franklineze8636
10 ай бұрын
@@cfdkareem much helpful! Thank you!
@kauepaulinodecastro5629
Жыл бұрын
Would it be really hard making a video about UDF's? I personally found very little about it here in youtube, atleast those that are actually helpfull.
@cfdkareem
Жыл бұрын
Hello, making tutorials about UDF's can be challenging. Most of the challenge with writing UDF's is understanding the coding in C+. In the context of Fluent, I will consider making a tutorial on the Fluent specific coding aspects of UDF's. Thanks!
@kauepaulinodecastro5629
Жыл бұрын
@@cfdkareem I agree lol, I imagine making any tutorial for Fluent challenging, and for that I wish you had more visibility to compensate the hard work :/ Be sure that i'll help by sharing as much as possible. I asked for an UDF tutorial mainly because im unaware on how to implement to my model the phenomena that im trying to simulate.. Im looking to simulate the effects of using periodic excitation to control a fluid jet of any sort, as in a speaker placed right at a duct exit where a jet is liberated. Essentially making a simple pontual sinusoidal "vibration" on the boundary (inlet) perhaps. Do you have any idea on where I should look to learn on how to do that, like is UDF even the thing :0? I asked on ANSYS learning forum and the guy said to look for a variety of things like Dynamic meshing, "Fluidic switches" (which doesn't even make sense), profiles (on which you've already made a video about) and 'expressions'. Meanwhile, thank for answering my comments, sincerely :)
Пікірлер: 15