Chamfer works too,Blackout wrote:I have a question. How do you call that 'technique' when you smooth the angles/add a radius to an angle to improve the airflow
(red in this rough illustration)
http://www.servimg.com/image_preview.ph ... u=14795526
Has someone a better illustration ?
Well... most on here will talk about and use solvers based on Navier-Stokes, which indeed assumes continuous fluid properties over a reasonably small space. For N-S, the individual molecules are never modelled or considered. Instead only fluid properties are considered.Nando wrote:is CFD so advanced that it calculates individual molecules, or groups of molecules or does it work by other principles?
Where do they draw the limit?
I am afraid this will be difficult. There are some guys that have modeled imaginary F1 cars in the Engineering projects section that might do this, but I really do not know of any existing model available.TDH wrote:Does anybody has a CATIA part (assembly) of a F1 car? I need one so I can make a graphical design for my final year thesis. It would be great if I can present a F1 car with the logo's of all my sponsors.
I hope someone can help me.
LMB does show promise, but can be quite demanding in terms of resources ( I have seen models implementing LMB and requiring significantly more memory for the discrete probability dsitribution algorithms than we normally would have in classical/typical models).kilcoo316 wrote:Well... most on here will talk about and use solvers based on Navier-Stokes, which indeed assumes continuous fluid properties over a reasonably small space. For N-S, the individual molecules are never modelled or considered. Instead only fluid properties are considered.Nando wrote:is CFD so advanced that it calculates individual molecules, or groups of molecules or does it work by other principles?
Where do they draw the limit?
To say never is in my view is shortsighted. If the physics are understood then the only thing stopping such a simulation is computing power, and to say never is to put a limit on the computing power achievable, and I don't believe that will happen. Whether it is ever useful to run such an in depth simulation is cause for speculation, but it is unlikely as you say. But maybe in 100 or 200 years time, a researcher somewhere with a large amount of computing resources available will decide to run such a simulation purely for shits and giggles.Just_a_fan wrote: We'll probably never need to carry out molecular-CFD on things like cars because the RANS/LES/DNS models will be "close enough". This is just as well as we'll probably never be able to do molecular-CFD on cars...the numbers are just stupidly huge!
You need to know a lot about classically solved aerodynamics before you just model something up In CAD and push the CFD button.kosioBG wrote:All this CFD is so interesting, but so scary... i don't know where to start(i have no experience whatsoever) And i can only make 3d models with google sketchup, would that be ok or would i have to learn cad?
If you go back 10 years, the FLOPS record was 36 Terraflops, which cost millions to install. Today you can get that sort of power with 35 $450 graphics cards. A super computer from the early 90s is as powerful as a quad core laptop processor today. I don't see it as inconceivable that in 200 years that a single person will have access to such processing power.Just_a_fan wrote:I'd be hugely disappointed if we still have cars, or anything remotely like them, in 100 or 200 years. As for computing power, you're looking at having the equivalent of all of the world's supercomputers, squared, available for "shits and giggles". Sure, it might happen but only if there is nothing more interesting than studying an historic irrelevance - which is what F1 will be by then.
