|
[Sponsors] |
Particle tracks for already calculated transient velocity field |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
December 7, 2013, 23:31 |
Particle tracks for already calculated transient velocity field
|
#1 |
New Member
Pete
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 13
Rep Power: 14 |
Hello everyone,
I have already obtained a transient solution of the velocity field (multiple data files at fixed time intervals). I now want to calculate particle tracks (10,000 particles) at these time instances. The only way that I know of requires me to run DPM model and solve the flow field together. Is there a way I do not have to do the calculation for the flow field and just calculate particle tracks? I know it is possible for steady state results. My problem does not involve two-way coupling. Any answers/suggestions will be highly appreciated. Thank you |
|
December 8, 2013, 13:06 |
|
#2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 268
Rep Power: 17 |
if you assume that there is no influence of your flow field and only one--way couling rules then you may read case and dat file of the transient and carry out the dpm tracks in one-way manner in post-processing in fluent or in other CFD-Post
|
|
December 10, 2013, 20:06 |
|
#3 |
New Member
Pete
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 13
Rep Power: 14 |
Hi Zaktatir,
That calculation will give me particle tracks for just one transient file (and fluent will consider that solution as a steady state solution), however, I am looking to calculate particle tracks at different instances of time i.e. multiple transient files. Patrick |
|
December 12, 2013, 17:47 |
|
#4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 268
Rep Power: 17 |
read dat of each transient then do the track. There is no another way
|
|
December 12, 2013, 18:11 |
|
#5 |
New Member
Pete
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 13
Rep Power: 14 |
I don't believe that will provide me the right answer. May be I will have to do the entire calculation again. Anyways, thank you for your replies.
|
|
December 18, 2013, 19:41 |
|
#6 |
New Member
huolong liu
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 2
Rep Power: 0 |
hi, Zakzatir,
How to do DPM tracks in the one-way coupling manner? Does that mean only to calculate the DPM particle track in post-processing after the transient data file obtained? Or, in other words, I can calculate the multiphase flow filed firstly, then stop and to carry out particle track completely in post-processing fluent? Any reply would be appriciated. Thank you. Huolong |
|
December 18, 2013, 19:46 |
|
#7 |
New Member
huolong liu
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 2
Rep Power: 0 |
Hi, Tech Neo,
I think i have the same questions. I am doing the multiphase flow (gas-solid) in transient form in fluent using eulerian-eulerian model. But now I want to look at the exact single particle track in the flow field. My friend told me that i can do the multiphase flow field firstly, then to do the particle track in the post-processing. But he forgot how to do it in details. Has your question been solved? I think my current problems is very similar with yours. Any reply would be very appriciated. Thank you. Huolong |
|
December 19, 2013, 12:20 |
|
#8 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 268
Rep Power: 17 |
One-Way Particle Track you do it in post-processing manner under display particle tracks from graphic and animations panel. You have to setup first of all an injection
|
|
Tags |
ansys 14.5, discrete phase model, fluent, multiphase flow, particle tracking |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
velocity of massless particles and velocity of flow field in same coordinate | payam_IUST | FLUENT | 0 | October 19, 2009 00:24 |
DPM UDF particle position using the macro P_POS(p)[i] | dm2747 | FLUENT | 0 | April 17, 2009 02:29 |
About Particle velocity of DPM in Fluent? | long zhengwei | FLUENT | 0 | March 13, 2009 05:02 |
Particle Tracks | Anand | Siemens | 2 | October 10, 2005 14:38 |
Terrible Mistake In Fluid Dynamics History | Abhi | Main CFD Forum | 12 | July 8, 2002 10:11 |