Please login with a confirmed email address before reporting spam
Posted:
1 decade ago
2011年9月8日 GMT-4 10:35
Hi,
The results depend on the grid when the grid is too coarse. You should perform a mesh convergence study.
Regards.
Hi,
The results depend on the grid when the grid is too coarse. You should perform a mesh convergence study.
Regards.
Please login with a confirmed email address before reporting spam
Posted:
1 decade ago
2011年9月9日 GMT-4 07:20
Thanks for your discussion.
I try this test in Abaqus. The temperature field does not depend on the mesh. I'll give you this result.
Regards
Thanks for your discussion.
I try this test in Abaqus. The temperature field does not depend on the mesh. I'll give you this result.
Regards
Jeff Hiller
COMSOL Employee
Please login with a confirmed email address before reporting spam
Posted:
1 decade ago
2011年9月9日 GMT-4 08:50
I suspect that none of your models (COMSOL or Abaqus) represent an adiabatic condition. The analytical solution in the adiabatic case (i.e. heat flux=0 on all boundaries) with a uniform distributed heat source is a uniformly-increasing temperature.
I suspect that none of your models (COMSOL or Abaqus) represent an adiabatic condition. The analytical solution in the adiabatic case (i.e. heat flux=0 on all boundaries) with a uniform distributed heat source is a uniformly-increasing temperature.
Please login with a confirmed email address before reporting spam
Posted:
1 decade ago
2011年9月9日 GMT-4 09:15
None of my examples is adiabatic condition. These examples take account a convective flux with the environement : q=h. (Text-T).
The result of temperature in abaqus is continuous. But in the Comsol, the distribution of temperature is depend on layers of mesh as in the picture.
Do you have any opinion to improve this result?
Regards
None of my examples is adiabatic condition. These examples take account a convective flux with the environement : q=h. (Text-T).
The result of temperature in abaqus is continuous. But in the Comsol, the distribution of temperature is depend on layers of mesh as in the picture.
Do you have any opinion to improve this result?
Regards
Jeff Hiller
COMSOL Employee
Please login with a confirmed email address before reporting spam
Posted:
1 decade ago
2011年9月9日 GMT-4 09:22
Well, your original posting said you were trying to model an adiabatic condition...
Anyways, if you want help figuring out what's wrong with your model set-up, please post the COMSOL mph file.
Well, your original posting said you were trying to model an adiabatic condition...
Anyways, if you want help figuring out what's wrong with your model set-up, please post the COMSOL mph file.
Please login with a confirmed email address before reporting spam
Posted:
1 decade ago
2011年9月9日 GMT-4 09:37
Thank you for your discussion.
I have posted this model.
Regards
Thank you for your discussion.
I have posted this model.
Regards
Jeff Hiller
COMSOL Employee
Please login with a confirmed email address before reporting spam
Posted:
1 decade ago
2011年9月9日 GMT-4 11:24
I had a quick look at your model file and it looks like given the values of the material properties and time span you selected you have extremely thin thermal boundary layers that simply cannot be resolved by these meshes. You'd need a mesh with much finer elements along the boundaries to arrive at a solution that's reasonably close to the analytical solution.
I had a quick look at your model file and it looks like given the values of the material properties and time span you selected you have extremely thin thermal boundary layers that simply cannot be resolved by these meshes. You'd need a mesh with much finer elements along the boundaries to arrive at a solution that's reasonably close to the analytical solution.