|
[Sponsors] |
December 7, 2004, 06:09 |
non-convective terms
|
#1 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Hi
suppose that you have two materials, one of which you are not interested in solving the convective terms of the N.S. equations. The question is how do you set star not to solve for this terms in only one of the two materials. If you were only to solve for the material that doesn't need any convective terms you would switch off the flow variables and the fluid properties from the equation status tab in the equation beahaviour folder of the GUI. But what if, you have two materials, one of which suppose to solve for all of these? With regards CM |
|
December 7, 2004, 08:11 |
Re: non-convective terms
|
#2 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Try defining it as a solid.
|
|
December 7, 2004, 11:20 |
Re: non-convective terms
|
#3 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Hi thanks for replying, it is true, it makes a lot of sence although I can't do it for this particular case, am afraid. You see I am injecting some fluid in to it (via u.subroutines), as bizarre as it seems, I am trying to measure potential and potential losses. The problem is that voltage distributes as a laplacian, which is why I don't need the convective terms. And it is not possible to meassure this sort of distribution in a solid plate (at least not that I know).
|
|
December 7, 2004, 15:24 |
Re: non-convective terms
|
#4 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Do you mean "no convection" or "no velocity"? If it's the latter you could use sormom to impose zero velocity where you need it. I don't think you can selectively deactivate convection though - it's all or nothing.
|
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Implicit or explicit treatment of convective terms | CH | Main CFD Forum | 1 | March 14, 2007 08:51 |
advective-convective terms | george | Main CFD Forum | 1 | January 24, 2007 14:59 |
convective bc | star | Main CFD Forum | 0 | March 24, 2005 09:35 |
Convective terms | Maciej Matyka | Main CFD Forum | 0 | June 21, 2004 08:41 |
convective | ent | Main CFD Forum | 1 | March 18, 2004 14:10 |