CFDEM®coupling - User Forum

Hi all,

I try to do a simple CFD-DEM coupling simulation so as to validate our new drag force model. Thus I canceled the "gradPForce" and "viscForce" force models, however, the solver complains that the two forces are not defined.

My questions is that the two force models are essential and could not be cancelled? Do you have some suggestions on fixing the problem?

Regards,
Yutian

Hey
Can anyone tell that while running the cfdem tutorials, after running the DEM script I am not able to couple the CFD and DEm together. What command should I use to run the Allrun script.

Hi everyone,
I am looking at my results at different steps of Immersed boundary method in cfdemSolverIB. The question is that why the intermediate pressure for a settling particle is something like the first attached image. On the other hand, using some correction for imposing particle velocity, the pressure field is modified to the second image and this field is used for drag calculation. Can anyone tell me more about the differences between these two steps?

Dear all,

I am trying to setup a CFD-DEM case which should be able to model the particle packing. the geometry is attached in the figure, you can see that lower wall is not on single plane rather on different planes.

Hi Everyone,
I have a question about cfdemSolverIB. How is it possible to consider the same density value for a sedimenting particle and fluid in cfdemSolverIB?
Cheers,
Mohammad

Looks like this is a dead forum.

Hi all,

Hi All,

This is Marshall. I am running a CFDEM case with particles passing through a screen to test the efficiency of particle blocking. However, the simulation needs the particles to pack before passing through the screen to get a better result. Building a wall right above the screen can block all particles and make the pack. After that, remove the wall and let the particles fall, then it can meet all the requirements

Hello,

I work in the cement industry and I am trying to model the particle flow of the material in the preheat that we have to determine the optimal particle distribution and cyclone efficiency. I have managed to do this in OpenFOAM-dev with the new MPPIC solver. However I would like to see the difference between LIGGGHTS and the MPPIC solver. From the best of my understanding LIGGGHTS should produce a more accurate result.

The geometry is complete so a box won't be able to work for the region.