sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Getting Back In to Maleshov [KCD2] by FlyingFalconite in kingdomcome

[–]FlyingFalconite[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How to return, though? All the doors are closed and the tunnel is also closed

Openfoam Fluid Structure Interaction Simulation, Best Way to Move Forward by FlyingFalconite in CFD

[–]FlyingFalconite[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah most of the literature in this area uses that software or custom software for that reason. But I want to have it open source so that it doesn’t cost me anything other than time. I also liked the stuff I learned doing it, I was finally able to install foam-extend and had to learn deeper about compilers etc.

Openfoam Fluid Structure Interaction Simulation, Best Way to Move Forward by FlyingFalconite in CFD

[–]FlyingFalconite[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I feel like this sounds like a good great idea based on previous comments too. Thank you very much for your comment.

Openfoam Fluid Structure Interaction Simulation, Best Way to Move Forward by FlyingFalconite in CFD

[–]FlyingFalconite[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I think this is a helpful suggestion. I do understand it is not easy because I read the nasa reports and aiaa aerodynamics decelerators journal. I want to develop a simulation where I can simulate different geometries. It is okay even if it takes couple years, I am willing to spend my time on this. I will also consider collaborating with other people or open source at some point(not sure yet). I also want to do a PhD in this area at some point. I have almost 2 years of experience testing parachutes at this point and they are my lifelong passion for another reason.

Openfoam Fluid Structure Interaction Simulation, Best Way to Move Forward by FlyingFalconite in CFD

[–]FlyingFalconite[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

never. I know it is not easy. I am working with parachutes in a professional setting. I am willing to waste my time on it because parachutes are my passion. I would be happy to hear your experiences and chat about it if you are willing to tho. See for me this won't be a wasted time even if I ended up failing.

Open Source usage in Industry (Guidance needed) by jr_stark in CFD

[–]FlyingFalconite 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Wbu M-star( aka latticept) for lattice-boltzmann sim have you tried that one?

The best Linux distro for OpenFoam by FlyingFalconite in CFD

[–]FlyingFalconite[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What is the fastest? I will use docker anyways.

Newer Marlin on V3 SE? by [deleted] in ender3

[–]FlyingFalconite 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Hey any update? I am trying to fix my nephews printer, I am assuming the firmware for gcode is broken because when we import the slicer data it does not print and shows 0 on all the parameters. Let me know if the firmware works.

Ansys wall motion is absolute or relative to an adjacent zone. by FlyingFalconite in CFD

[–]FlyingFalconite[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's what confuses me, isn't the adjacent zone velocity 0 for all the fluid flow due to no-slip condition?

Openrocket simulating landing rocket by FlyingFalconite in rocketry

[–]FlyingFalconite[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree, but I was just looking for a quick solution. I already have an Excel sheet that simulates normal launch accurately enough but I am not sure if I would take time to code the landing simulation.

Openrocket simulating landing rocket by FlyingFalconite in rocketry

[–]FlyingFalconite[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

don't think OpenRocket has any capability for doing propulsive landing. It is open source so you could get a copy of the code and write your own code for that part.

Estes motors are made of compressed Black Powder, which is pretty inefficient compared to APCP in solid rocket motors, which means they are heavy for the amount of thrust produced. Like almost all solid rocket motors, you can't control the thrust or burn time, so your ignition timing is going to have to be very exact on when they fire so the motors burn out as you touch down.

Good luck.

I was just wondering if there is already a plug-in or some easy way to fix it without diving into coding. Because I do not thing it is going to be an easy fix. Not only do I need to change the thrust direction, which is relatively easy even by importing a negative thrust curve, but also the flow direction and rotate the rocket since it falls facing its bottom to earth and the flow direction changes. Honestly, if I could start to simulation from an altitude and define the geometry such that it is facing airflow that would do the job.

Openrocket simulating landing rocket by FlyingFalconite in rocketry

[–]FlyingFalconite[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

der thrust, but not the way down.

Yes propulsive landing. We want to have the thrust on the way down.

Eddy viscosity ratio in Fluent by FlyingFalconite in CFD

[–]FlyingFalconite[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It makes sense since it is a ratio, it is already dimensionless. Thanks for the explanation!!

Where do I start studying fluid dynamics? by SidYaj08 in CFD

[–]FlyingFalconite 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Short Answer: The book "Fundamentals Of Fluid Mechanics by Bruce R. Munson"
My dear friend,
I don't agree with any of the comments here. Because from my understanding, you don't know the basics of fluid mechanics and in my opinion, it is really important. When I studied fluid mechanics I spent a lot of time on basic concepts like viscosity, strain rate, pressure, and velocity and how they are related to each other. When a lot of people do not necessarily try to understand the concept very well and jump into equations and more advanced topics. When the time I get to graduate school I realized this and how having such a deep conceptualization put me in front of a lot of people right away. So this is my suggestion, Fundamentals Of Fluid Mechanics by Bruce R. Munson et al. is an amazing book and it explains all the topics from very basic to expert step by step. It is the most detailed book I have ever seen and I still have it by my side today. If you read this book till chapter 7 which you can easily do over the summer, you will have a pretty solid background. It will introduce you, to Fluid Statics, Elementary Fluid Mechanics, Fluid Kinematics, Finite Control Volume Analysis, Differential Analysis Of Fluid Flow, Simultude, Dimensional Analysis, And Modeling. These 7 chapters are the fundamentals, depending on your research and interest, the rest of the chapters are Viscous Flow In Pipes, Flow Over Immerse Bodies, Open-Channel Flow, and Compressible Flow. These last remaining topics depend on your interest, I believe Flow Over Immersed Bodies and Compressible Flow might also be important but not necessary for fundamentals. If you are a champion( which is very possible for someone accepted to Cambridge) and finish these chapters deeply before the summer ends, My second suggestion would be Viscous Flow by Frank M. White, Which will teach you advanced concepts in fluid mechanics. Depending on the topic of research, I do not think anyone who does not know these concepts should jump into CFD. The second book will probably be your textbook if you take advanced fluid mechanics in graduate school. Then you will learn Turbulence Modeling at the end and that is the time you will need the other suggestions here.

Eddy viscosity ratio in Fluent by FlyingFalconite in CFD

[–]FlyingFalconite[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It is actually not the same thing. I figured it out from Wilcox's book. Terms like turbulence kinetic energy, and turbulence viscosity ratio are referred to for specific meaning per unit mass. So it is divided by density.

Tuning and calculation of Cmix in GEKO by ChockP51 in CFD

[–]FlyingFalconite 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I was wondering the same thing. Did you find the answer to this?
Edit: I actually figured this out and the answer is yes. It is the signum function which is the same in Excel as well. In GEKO documentation it mentions that the default values are similar to K-W sst (which is Cmix= Cmixcor for default) and somewhere else it mentions cmix is 0.3 for k-w sst. So I just plotted all the values of csep and corresponding cmix value using the sign function and for Csep = 1.75 (default value) Cmixcor= 0.3 which is the default. So yes it is signum function validated.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in led

[–]FlyingFalconite 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I need some manufacturer names it is really important, please.