March 6, 2021 at 10:33 pmmcgrat25Subscriber
I am running an MPM simulation in which I am trying to get a particle in a pipe to block an extruded 'leak' section by becoming fixed over the leak position. The particle is drawn to the leak by the pressure differential created by the 0 Pa pressure at the leak outlet (with 100k Pa inside the pipe). See below of a particle in contact with the leak:March 8, 2021 at 3:43 amKeyur KanadeAnsys EmployeePlease check following. nRegards,nKeyurnHow to access Ansys Online Help DocumentnHow to show full resolution imagenGuidelines on the Student CommunitynHow to use Google to search within Ansys Student CommunitynMarch 8, 2021 at 8:05 amDrAmineAnsys EmployeeActually the DPM BC's do not apply. MPM is completely different as DPM and is an add-on module. What do you want to do?nMarch 8, 2021 at 10:51 ammcgrat25SubscriberI am trying to define boundary conditions that cause the MPM particle to cease motion as it comes into contact with the 'leak' outlet - its a bit hard to see in that screenshot, but this one might be a bit better:nThe reason I thought 'trap' applied to MPM, and not just DPM, is that I read somewhere that as MPM is an addon module, a lot of the settings within the user interface are not tailored directly for MPM, so state DPM but can be used for both. Given that the 'trap' option appeared when I activated mpm, I assumed it would be applicable to mpm.nIf trap doesn't apply, is my only option to use the particle deposition setting to stop the particle from moving? They don't seem to work for some reason, even when minimum detachment drag force is set very high and max velocities for deposition to be very low. I have an edge sizing of 0.05mm applied to the leak outlet at particles of 2.5mm, giving 50 cells at the point of contact (over the 20-30 minimum needed for MPM to predict drag), with -0.5m/s applied as the main pipe 'outlet' BC, 100,000Pa at the pressure inlet, and 0 Pa as the leak BC. The particle remains in contact with the leak when it reaches it, but moves ever so slightly every time step, so doesn't achieve a 'rest' state.nCan you think what the issue might be? Thanks again for the help.nnMarch 8, 2021 at 12:06 pmDrAmineAnsys EmployeeMPM time step size should be choosen very carefully to resolve the particle wall collision. You might tune the coefficient of restitution to make the particle stick to the wall.nnYes it is built on top of DPM but has nothing to do with DPM. Actually even post-processing is made via text commands and you should not use the DPM Post Processing at all.nViewing 4 reply threads
Ansys Innovation Space
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Earth Rescue – An Ansys Online Series
The climate crisis is here. But so is the human ingenuity to fight it. Earth Rescue reveals what visionary companies are doing today to engineer radical new ideas in the fight against climate change. Click here to watch the first episode.
Subscribe to the Ansys Blog to get great new content about the power of simulation delivered right to your email on a weekly basis. With content from Ansys experts, partners and customers you will learn about product development advances, thought leadership and trends and tips to better use Ansys tools. Sign up here.Trending discussions
- Suppress Fluent to open with GUI while performing in journal file
- Floating point exception in Fluent
- What are the differences between CFX and Fluent?
- Heat transfer coefficient
- Getting graph and tabular data from result in workbench mechanical
- The solver failed with a non-zero exit code of : 2
- Difference between K-epsilon and K-omega Turbulence Model
- Time Step Size and Courant Number
- Mesh Interfaces in ANSYS FLUENT
- error in cfd post
© 2023 Copyright ANSYS, Inc. All rights reserved.Ansys does not support the usage of unauthorized Ansys software. Please visit www.ansys.com to obtain an official distribution.