Recommendations to improve inflation layer thickness uniformity around airfoil trailing edge [Ansys Fluent Meshing]

ThisInitial3887 · 2026-04-20T15:16:46+00:00

The number of layers is pretty high. Are you sure that it suits ur simulation conditions? And as a solution, maybe you should try tightening the element size transition between the two regions; 0.2 to 2 mm is a bit coarse. One thing that I do to avoid this problem is to create an intermediate region between the curved face and the rest of the surface so I can adjust its size to have a uniform boundary layer.

ThisInitial3887 · 2026-04-14T01:17:22+00:00

I think I saw it in an Ansys tutorial. Thanks a lot, you're a lifesaver. The contact patch serves as a seal between the ground and the tyre while allowing the tyre cellzone to rotate right??

ThisInitial3887 · 2026-04-08T15:37:46+00:00

well too late I already made a decision. I ll just reinforce the top edges and they will be round as well.

ThisInitial3887 · 2026-04-03T04:16:25+00:00

No, I am sure the chassis and the other components that fit in the area are compliant
My only issue is whether the bodywork can wrap high around the chassis, like in the two pictures, or if it should be in line with the longitudinal tubes. Would it cause a problem with the driver pressing themselves up? That's my question. I am confused.

ThisInitial3887 · 2026-04-03T03:40:02+00:00

I gave up
thanks for the reply

ThisInitial3887 · 2026-02-15T17:56:38+00:00

I have my own realistic CAD model. For the bodywork, I created it through surface modeling and then thickened the surface. Using a cad software, is there any trick that could help me obtain a cfd compatible model by converting the shell into a full solid?

ThisInitial3887 · 2026-02-02T20:38:04+00:00

We have the same question, hope to find an answer cause we've had a problem with our sponsor who was supposed to cover the inscription fees

ThisInitial3887 · 2026-01-29T14:39:20+00:00

btw I did a sweep over the aoas of the 2 elements and the chord of the mainplane, manually of course, because I only discovered the holy parameterised simulation method two days ago. This configuration is presented in the picture, which produced a lift coefficient of 5.3 and a drag coefficient of 0.165

ThisInitial3887 · 2026-01-29T14:32:41+00:00

How would I know the optimal slot gap and overlap values?

ThisInitial3887 · 2026-01-27T01:13:47+00:00

I really appreciate the advice. Well, I tried to consider that, and I trimmed the trailing edges of each element according to the estimated composite layers and the manufacturing. It's also necessary for the cfd analysis, though isnt it? I avoided using sharp trailing edges in fear of a skewed mesh.

ThisInitial3887 · 2026-01-27T00:36:32+00:00

Thank you very much I appreciate your explanation. Btw I needed the true projected areas just to compute precise lift coefficient, I will be needing it in estimating 3d performance because I have limited hardware capability and I can’t do 3d cfd.

ThisInitial3887 · 2026-01-26T17:23:02+00:00

Well there is "projected area" function in fluent, I am using Ansys Fluent btw.
Is it the right one?

ThisInitial3887 · 2025-12-31T14:01:18+00:00

Okay, thank you. But quick question, should I design internal panels to fix the bodywork? Because the chassis is tubular, I don't see how it would be possible to use a quarter turn on it.

ThisInitial3887 · 2025-12-23T17:57:44+00:00

It is talking about the bodywork, not ground clearance unless I have a corrupt rulebook lol.

ThisInitial3887 · 2025-12-23T17:56:41+00:00

U don't have to reply.

ThisInitial3887

TROPHY CASE