A nice idle computer begs for some numbers to crunch, so here's some recycled
results from about a year ago.  To really do 'good' CFD would require a
complete overhaul, but it's perhaps marginally better than the semi-Lagrangian
technique.  I think the channel height Reynolds number is about 250, which puts
it beyond the realm of accuracy.  FYI, it turns out a general
speed*length/viscosity (= Reynolds #) fully defines the problem, so if you've
solved one Re, you've solved for all whole class of flows.  Further FYI, the
sizing in this problem is for air at about 1m/s and a cube of 2.5 mm!  That's
why turbulent flow is such a challenging problem.  Think of analyzing a 747...
(I think an estimate was around 760 Million years for a full simulation.
Ouch.)

 - Ricky

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'output.mpg' (685 KB)

holly crap!  too much math for me... are those blobs?

Post a reply to this message

"nemesis" <nam### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> holly crap!  too much math for me... are those blobs?

df3 files with isosurfaces.  Should figure out how to mesh it.  Another project
for another day.

 - Ricky

Post a reply to this message

triple_r nous apporta ses lumieres en ce 2008/02/12 00:10:
> "nemesis" <nam### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>> holly crap!  too much math for me... are those blobs?
> 
> df3 files with isosurfaces.  Should figure out how to mesh it.  Another project
> for another day.
> 
>  - Ricky
> 
3df! Do it as media ;)

-- 
Alain
-------------------------------------------------
It doesn’t matter what you do. It only matters what you say you’ve done and what 
you’re going to do.

Post a reply to this message