Відео

Thanks for reaching out! That depends on the application, allow me to break it down for simplification from hardest to simplest in term of setting up the model and typical computation time: A. Accurate airflow physics and particle to particle interaction are both very important particle to particle physics can be approximated: In this case you are looking at Fluent+Rocky coupled. B. Accurate airflow physics is very important but particle to particle physics can be approximated: Fluent with DPM (dilute particles) or DDPM (dilute to dense flows) simulation are the tool of choice. Note that with DPM particles to particles interaction is not modeled and that with DDPM it is modeled but not to the level of accuracy of Rocky. C. Accurate particle to particles physics is important but airflow can be approximated In this case you are looking at a Rocky simulation with SPH activated Hope this helps!

Hi, @sardarvayghannezhad9673 Thanks for reaching out! In a two-way Rocky-Fluent coupled simulation, Fluent will consider the impact of particles on the fluid dynamics and vice versa, allowing for a comprehensive multiphysics simulation that accounts for the behavior of both the fluid and the particles. There is no need to activate the SPH module in a coupled Fluent-Rocky simulation since the fluid physics will be handled in Fluent.

Hi @sardarvayghannezhad9673 !! Thanks for the kind words! Rocky definitely is easy to get excited about. When doing a 2-way coupling, you may indicate an initial flow field. In your case, this initial flow field may be either at 0s or 10s. From there, Rocky and Fluent will both simulate concurrently, and exchange TONS of information relating to the particles; location, size & velocity, etc. or information pertinent to the flow field; flow velocity, temperature, humidity (if in software), etc. All of that information exchange means that you won’t be able to reuse the fluent unsteady simulation that you already ran (except as an initial solution) and as a matter of fact, it also means that when running in 2-way coupling, your Fluent solution at each time step could be vastly different than the Fluent simulation you ran in standalone. Hope this answers your question!

@@randsimulation thank you so much for your detailed reply. I now know Rocky is a way to go!

Thanks for reaching out. Rocky can record strength of each impact with a surface. As long as you can correlate impact strength to penetration depth this should give you the answer you seek.

Thanks for the interest! Please feel free to reach out via our website and we can discuss arranging a training session.

Glad you found this useful!

A fluent native multi-GPU solver relies on both system RAM to load the data and GPU RAM to run the simulation. We advise you to get about 2Gb of RAM per 1E6 cells that you intend to run. So if you intend to run 8E6 cells, having 16Gb system RAM and 16GB GPU RAM should work well. Some specific physics/setup may require a bit more RAM but the recommendation above should work for most.

@@randsimulation Many thanks for your reply. One more thing - does NVlink technology have anything to do with multi gpu solver? I mean, is it helpful if using (for example) multiple V100 GPU's on one server? Also, where I can learn/read more about speeding up CoupledSolver DP with GPU? I understand that it is not as straight forward as with "native gpu solver". Information that I've found so far is very controversial and many people report worsening of performance when using GPU acceleration with CPU based solver.

Thank you!

lol that's you right Lou? :) Thx

Thanks, Asad! We really appreciate the feedback. It's a combination of technical info and what our team excels at.

😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊

The mesh boxes cannot overlap, that would result in an error. You can increase the size of the non-model object created for mesh fusion by editing the properties of the object.

Hi Philip, thanks for tuning in. Here is the best way to contact one of our MBU experts: www.randsim.com/contact/email-form

Hi Saroj, thanks for tuning in. Here is the best way to contact one of our MBU experts: www.randsim.com/contact/email-form

Thank you!

Hi Pratik, here is the best way to contact us. www.randsim.com/contact/email-form

Hello Bret, for simulations including both electric and magnetic fields you can include those resulting surface and volumetric losses into thermal simulations. So, yes you can take results from an RFID simulation and bring it into a thermal study.

@@randsimulation excellent!

Hi Bret, the lab is the facility that performs environmental tests on the electronic device. These can include: thermal, shock, and vibration. These tests can take a significant amount of time and be costly. Electronics reliability simulation assists in driving design decisions/changes before going to the lab to reduce the risk of repeat visits.

@@randsimulation got it!