CFD Online Logo CFD Online URL
www.cfd-online.com
[Sponsors]
Home > Forums > Software User Forums > ANSYS > CFX

6-dof rigid body solver

Register Blogs Community New Posts Updated Threads Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old   July 11, 2011, 03:33
Arrow 6-dof rigid body solver
  #1
AUN
New Member
 
AUN
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 11
Rep Power: 15
AUN is on a distinguished road
Dear All,

I am working on a HAWT Project. The geometry of the blade is available, however, the power curves have to be generated given different input wind speeds and directions.

For this purpose, I am applying the 6-DOF Rigid Body Solver in CFX.

At first I modelled the fluid domain as a cuboid with the blades subtracted from it. Not only did the 6-DOF take insanely long (Mesh 2.2 million) however, after a rotation of three degrees, the solver crashed due to volume negativity. I had kept mesh skewness low, and the mesh was fine in proximity of the blade. The raeson why this problem is occuring is unclear to me.

To counter this effect, I 'tried' doing the same as they have done in the Tutorial 'Decoupling Mesh Motion'. I created a subdomain in the fluid domain, a cylinder, ascribed to it the same motion as the Rigid Body and ignoring rotations at the outer domain inrerfaces. The mesh at the boundary of the subdomain was conformal. Mesh Size 1.9 million made in ICEM CFD. The same negative element volume problem persisted.

What can be done regarding this?

Regards,

Aun

AUN is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   July 11, 2011, 07:47
Default
  #2
Super Moderator
 
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 17,854
Rep Power: 144
ghorrocks is just really niceghorrocks is just really niceghorrocks is just really niceghorrocks is just really nice
I do not think you are using the correct approach. Forget 6DOF and FSI.

The way to do this is to put the blades in a rotating frame of reference and assume a rotation speed. Do a simulation and get the net torque. If the net torque is positive (ie blades would accelerate) then do another simulation a bit faster. Keep iterating until you get the rotation speed which produces a torque which matches the load on the turbine.

Once you have a few points on your speed versus torque curve you can use non-linear curve fits to greatly accelerate finding the converged value.

This way you replace an extemely long and difficult to converge transient run with a series of simple steady state runs. Much simpler.
ghorrocks is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   July 11, 2011, 23:59
Default
  #3
AUN
New Member
 
AUN
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 11
Rep Power: 15
AUN is on a distinguished road
Dear Glenn,

Thanks for your response.

Best Wishes
Aun
AUN is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   October 2, 2017, 23:56
Default
  #4
New Member
 
VM
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 5
Rep Power: 9
Ved1994 is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by ghorrocks View Post
I do not think you are using the correct approach. Forget 6DOF and FSI.

The way to do this is to put the blades in a rotating frame of reference and assume a rotation speed. Do a simulation and get the net torque. If the net torque is positive (ie blades would accelerate) then do another simulation a bit faster. Keep iterating until you get the rotation speed which produces a torque which matches the load on the turbine.

Once you have a few points on your speed versus torque curve you can use non-linear curve fits to greatly accelerate finding the converged value.

This way you replace an extemely long and difficult to converge transient run with a series of simple steady state runs. Much simpler.
Can you elaborate this method a bit more? Say I have the resistance value that opposes the rotation and the fluid flow is rotating my geometry. How do I go about it?
Ved1994 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   October 3, 2017, 20:49
Default
  #5
Super Moderator
 
Glenn Horrocks
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 17,854
Rep Power: 144
ghorrocks is just really niceghorrocks is just really niceghorrocks is just really niceghorrocks is just really nice
The method is unchanged. You do a series of simulations looking for the point where the torque on the rotor equals the external torque. That is all there is to it, a very simple concept.
ghorrocks 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
different results between serial solver and parallel solver wlt_1985 FLUENT 11 October 12, 2018 09:23
Working directory via command line Luiz CFX 4 March 6, 2011 21:02
Getting too many iterations by velocity solving (aborting). Changing U - Solver? suitup OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 0 January 20, 2010 08:45
Multi-Phase (VOF) & Rigid Body Motion in Star-CCM+ Star-CCM+ User Siemens 1 February 11, 2009 15:14
cannot run solver if body spacing less than 1 wan CFX 1 February 28, 2008 17:41


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 15:49.