OpenFOAM-plus issueshttps://develop.openfoam.com/Development/OpenFOAM-plus/-/issues2019-01-07T22:32:41Zhttps://develop.openfoam.com/Development/OpenFOAM-plus/-/issues/1145dictionary closing scope does flush2019-01-07T22:32:41ZMattijs Janssens4-Mattijs@users.noreply.develop.openfoam.comdictionary closing scope does flushWriting a subdictionary using dictionary::write causes a flush of the underlying stream. Ideally we would only flush at IOdictionary closing.Writing a subdictionary using dictionary::write causes a flush of the underlying stream. Ideally we would only flush at IOdictionary closing.Mark OLESENMark OLESENhttps://develop.openfoam.com/Development/OpenFOAM-plus/-/issues/1134sampledSets that sampled mesh points/faces/cells (e.g. reads pointSet, faceSe...2018-12-19T11:46:45ZMattijs Janssens4-Mattijs@users.noreply.develop.openfoam.comsampledSets that sampled mesh points/faces/cells (e.g. reads pointSet, faceSet, cellSet)Would be quite nice to sample selected mesh elements. We've got cellCentreSet but that samples all cells. There are probes but they only sample a single location.Would be quite nice to sample selected mesh elements. We've got cellCentreSet but that samples all cells. There are probes but they only sample a single location.https://develop.openfoam.com/Development/OpenFOAM-plus/-/issues/1133cyclic pathes converted into processorCyclic not handled in patch name lookups2018-12-20T14:33:03ZMattijs Janssens4-Mattijs@users.noreply.develop.openfoam.comcyclic pathes converted into processorCyclic not handled in patch name lookupsdecomposePar can split a cyclic into processorCyclics. These then will not be picked up by user patch-selection (e.g. through `polyBoundaryMesh::patchSet`).
Add functionality to e.g. patchSet to support this transparently.decomposePar can split a cyclic into processorCyclics. These then will not be picked up by user patch-selection (e.g. through `polyBoundaryMesh::patchSet`).
Add functionality to e.g. patchSet to support this transparently.https://develop.openfoam.com/Development/OpenFOAM-plus/-/issues/1101Stability issue in dynamicLagrangian model2019-06-24T10:26:39ZNing RenStability issue in dynamicLagrangian modelHi,
There is a stability issue in the dynamicLagrangian model, which is caused by flm_/fmm_. Some cells may have 0 value in fmm_. If replacing flm_/fmm_ with flm_/(fmm_+fmm0_), the model will be stable, where fmm0_ is a VSMALL defined i...Hi,
There is a stability issue in the dynamicLagrangian model, which is caused by flm_/fmm_. Some cells may have 0 value in fmm_. If replacing flm_/fmm_ with flm_/(fmm_+fmm0_), the model will be stable, where fmm0_ is a VSMALL defined in the model.
Attached is a patch file for this model.[V1806-Fix-stability-issue-in-dynamicLagrangian-model.patch](/uploads/706afdd4f55d19ebd6ab62394d7c6e61/V1806-Fix-stability-issue-in-dynamicLagrangian-model.patch)
Thanks,
Ning RenKutalmış BerçinKutalmış Berçin2019-01-13https://develop.openfoam.com/Development/OpenFOAM-plus/-/issues/1099checkMesh faceWeight field does not show actual surfaceInterpolation::weights2019-01-31T16:36:59ZMattijs Janssens4-Mattijs@users.noreply.develop.openfoam.comcheckMesh faceWeight field does not show actual surfaceInterpolation::weightsThe checkMesh faceWeights field shows the geometric interpolation weights at the polyMesh level. These are equivalent to the fv interpolation weights for internal faces but not for boundary faces. It be useful to have those instead.The checkMesh faceWeights field shows the geometric interpolation weights at the polyMesh level. These are equivalent to the fv interpolation weights for internal faces but not for boundary faces. It be useful to have those instead.https://develop.openfoam.com/Development/OpenFOAM-plus/-/issues/1091runTimePostProcessing: use existing cutting planes2018-12-17T00:07:17ZPrashant SonakarrunTimePostProcessing: use existing cutting planesCross ref : EP#868
@andy @markCross ref : EP#868
@andy @markhttps://develop.openfoam.com/Development/OpenFOAM-plus/-/issues/1070chemkinToFoam not working for the chemical mechanism format from latest Chemk...2018-11-13T09:11:57ZXiaoerchemkinToFoam not working for the chemical mechanism format from latest Chemkin VersionHello,
We recently would like to convert chemical mechanism to OpenFOAM format. However, for some chemical mechanisms, they have the information about "PLOG" in the mechanism file. They are used to identify the kinetic parameters for s...Hello,
We recently would like to convert chemical mechanism to OpenFOAM format. However, for some chemical mechanisms, they have the information about "PLOG" in the mechanism file. They are used to identify the kinetic parameters for some special pressure conditions (see attached image). Because of them, the conversion failed. The error information has been attached in this email.
The Openfoam we are using is 5.0 version. Do you have comments about how to resolve this issue if we still would like to use chemkinToFoam.
![20181113131347](/uploads/8a4968f9b269e6f26c6d4ca661c311a8/20181113131347.png)
![20181113131337](/uploads/1f7e08e3bc2c10803e6ca338bbcd9542/20181113131337.png)
![20181113131327](/uploads/a941ebcf1be9bc4fd28ba0f148f231e6/20181113131327.png)https://develop.openfoam.com/Development/OpenFOAM-plus/-/issues/1049Generalising the MRF implementation to dynamic cases.2018-11-29T11:54:46ZGurpreet GrewalGeneralising the MRF implementation to dynamic cases.The MRF Dict currently allows for a table of values as input to omega but not for origin or axis. The interface should be made general such that the forces in the cellSet can be updated in a time varying manner.
The proposal is to allow...The MRF Dict currently allows for a table of values as input to omega but not for origin or axis. The interface should be made general such that the forces in the cellSet can be updated in a time varying manner.
The proposal is to allow for origin and axis to be updated according to motion of a specified body in addition to allow for a table of values that may be directly input into the MRFDict.Mark OLESENMark OLESENhttps://develop.openfoam.com/Development/OpenFOAM-plus/-/issues/1042External forces for rigid body dynamics2019-10-08T21:09:58ZStephanExternal forces for rigid body dynamicsCurrently the rigidBodyDynamics library only supports springs, dampers and a prescribed rotation. I'd love to see a functionality that allows for an external force restraint. E.g for simulating a rigid body that is being pushed by a cert...Currently the rigidBodyDynamics library only supports springs, dampers and a prescribed rotation. I'd love to see a functionality that allows for an external force restraint. E.g for simulating a rigid body that is being pushed by a certain force. Which might be especially useful for overset simulations. Attached is this restraint, which I'd like to see added to src/rigidBodyDynamics/restraints. The force is time and direction variable via function1.
[externalForce.zip](/uploads/a7e0e7af6e122a0b2b3b8c67b7ef001a/externalForce.zip)
Best regards
Stephanhttps://develop.openfoam.com/Development/OpenFOAM-plus/-/issues/1005snappyHexMesh cannot refine existing patches2018-09-18T05:43:18ZMattijs Janssens4-Mattijs@users.noreply.develop.openfoam.comsnappyHexMesh cannot refine existing patchessnappyHexMesh can only refine geometry, not existing patches. Would be nice if this was possible. Maybe have a searchableSurface which does the actual intersections on an existing patch?snappyHexMesh can only refine geometry, not existing patches. Would be nice if this was possible. Maybe have a searchableSurface which does the actual intersections on an existing patch?https://develop.openfoam.com/Development/OpenFOAM-plus/-/issues/972snappyHexMesh does not check input2019-01-23T17:34:03ZMattijs Janssens4-Mattijs@users.noreply.develop.openfoam.comsnappyHexMesh does not check inputMattijs Janssens4-Mattijs@users.noreply.develop.openfoam.comMattijs Janssens4-Mattijs@users.noreply.develop.openfoam.comhttps://develop.openfoam.com/Development/OpenFOAM-plus/-/issues/863Coordinate system issues: cylindricalCS / fixedProfileFvPatchField2019-07-19T14:09:59ZMattijs Janssens4-Mattijs@users.noreply.develop.openfoam.comCoordinate system issues: cylindricalCS / fixedProfileFvPatchField- cyclindricalCS cannot be run-time selected: missing TypeName and addToRunTimeSelectionTable.
- hard to specify
```
coordinateSystem
{
coordinateRotation
{
type axesRota...- cyclindricalCS cannot be run-time selected: missing TypeName and addToRunTimeSelectionTable.
- hard to specify
```
coordinateSystem
{
coordinateRotation
{
type axesRotation;
e3 (1 0 0);
e1 (0 1 0);
}
type cylindricalCS;
origin (0 0 0.01);
}
```
With this in place we could re-write various boundary conditions to use cylindrical coordinates. E.g. `fixedProfileFvPatchField`.
@matej
Remark: cylindrical coordinateRotation currently stores transformation tensors. This should be stored outside.
https://develop.openfoam.com/Development/OpenFOAM-plus/-/issues/787forceCoeff writeFields option producing strange values: areaIntegrate of forc...2018-04-05T09:55:39ZAaronforceCoeff writeFields option producing strange values: areaIntegrate of forceCoeff field != forceCoeffI have been using the forceCoeffs function object for a long time, and am trying the writeFields option in v1712. However, it produces very strange values. I have a test case with one wall patch, and from the solving log, I can see that ...I have been using the forceCoeffs function object for a long time, and am trying the writeFields option in v1712. However, it produces very strange values. I have a test case with one wall patch, and from the solving log, I can see that the forceCoeff for that patch is quite different from the areaIntegrate of forcesAll:forceCoeff on that patch. I would expect the integral to give a value close to Cd pressure+viscous.
When I plot contours of forcesAll:forceCoeff in paraview, I see very low max values (~0.0002), when I should see surface normal*Cp, and Cp is roughly between -2 and 1.
I can supply a solved test case, and the relevant /system files and log files are attached.
```
forceCoeffs forcesAll execute:
Coefficients
Cm : -239.9753 (pressure: 176.0671 viscous: 0.6762368 porous: -416.7187)
Cd : 2.021964 (pressure: 1.242636 viscous: 0.005935802 porous: 0.7733919)
Cl : 2.230875 (pressure: 0.2968915 viscous: 0.001180773 porous: 1.932802)
Cl(f) : -238.8599
Cl(r) : 241.0908
surfaceFieldValue surfaceFieldValue1 write:
total area = 2.59955
areaNormalIntegrate(wall_l_body) of forcesAll:forceCoeff = (-0.0001750436 0 0)
surfaceFieldValue surfaceFieldValue2 write:
total area = 2.59955
areaIntegrate(wall_l_body) of forcesAll:forceCoeff = (9.107523e-05 -9.712166e-06 2.222456e-05)
```
[forcesAll](/uploads/3e40a39f7e41c19ceb9658ac4428ec60/forcesAll)
[controlDict](/uploads/bba6ee01fbd6897c829fa71d341de1e7/controlDict)[log.solve_OF.log](/uploads/19fd0116aeba1926522729982229ff92/log.solve_OF.log)