Solving Engineering Tasks

SOLIDWORKS Flow Simulation 2015

 Contents

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-1
1 Setting Up Engineering Problem in Flow Simulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-4
Selecting Geometrical and Physical Features of the Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-4
Creating the Model and the Flow Simulation Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-4
2 Solving Engineering Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-6
Strategy of Solving Engineering Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-6
Settings for Resolving the Geometrical Features of the Model and for Obtaining the Required
Solution Accuracy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-7
Monitoring the Calculation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-8
Viewing and Analyzing the Obtained Solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-9
Estimating the Reliability and Adequacy of the Obtained Solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-10
3 Frequent Errors and Improper Actions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-11

Solving Engineering Problems with Flow Simulation 2016 i

ii
Introduction

The most common problem, which almost every engineer faces every day, is to design a
device or process with the desired parameters, having only limited resources both for the
design effort itself and for the resulting device or process operation. Various tools and
methods are used to solve this problem.
Flow Simulation can help the engineer to predict and optimize fluid flows and heat
transfer in a wide variety of applications, and makes solving the engineering problems
easier and faster.
In general, there are three approaches to solving engineering problems:
an experimental approach: a hardware rig or prototype, i.e., the full-scale object
and/or its model, is manufactured and the experiments needed for designing the
object are conducted with this hardware;
a computational approach: the computations needed for designing the object are
performed and their results are directly used for designing the object, without
conducting any experiments;
a computational-experimental approach combines computations and
experiments (with the manufactured full-scale object and/or its model) needed for
designing the object; their sequence and contents depend on the solved problem and
iterative procedures may be run.
Each of the first two approaches has advantages and disadvantages.
The purely experimental approach, being properly conducted, does not require additional
validation of the obtained results, but is very expensive, even if it is performed on the
object models, since testing facilities and hardware are required anyway. Moreover, if the
object models are tested, the obtained results must be scaled to the full-scale object, so
some computations are still involved.
The purely computational approach, being properly performed, is substantially less
expensive than the experimental one, both in terms of finances and time, but it requires
assurance in adequacy of the obtained computational results. Naturally, such assurance
must be based on numerous verifications and validations of the used computational codes,
both on the mathematical accuracy of the obtained results (the results adequacy to the used
mathematical model) and on the adequacy of the used mathematical model to the
governing physical processes, which is validated by comparing the computation results to
the available experimental data.
The third approach, if it combines experiments and computations reasonably, joins the
advantages of both of the first two above-mentioned approaches and avoids their
disadvantages. Complex engineering problems are solved mainly in this way. A
computational code validated on available experimental data allows quickly selecting the
optimal object design and/or its optimal operating mode. Then necessary experiments are
conducted to verify the selection.

Solving Engineering Problems with Flow Simulation 2016 1

 When selecting a computational code most suitable for solving your problems, it is
necessary to consider the following suggestions.
Any computational code is based, firstly, on a mathematical model of the governing
physical processes (expressed in the form of a set of differential and/or integral equations
derived from physical laws, and include, if necessary, semi-empirical and empirical
constants and relationships) and, secondly, on a method of solving these equations. Since
the equations of the mathematical model cannot be solved analytically, they are solved
numerically, in a discrete form on a computational mesh, and the solution of the
mathematical problem is obtained with a certain degree of accuracy.
Naturally, the accuracy of the solution of a mathematical problem depends on both the
method of discretising the differential and/or integral equations and on the method of
solving the obtained discrete equations. Once these methods have been selected, the
accuracy of solution of the mathematical problem depends on how well the computational
mesh resolves the regions of a non-linear behavior in the problem. To provide a good
accuracy, the mesh has to be rather fine in these regions. Moreover, the usual way of
estimating the accuracy of the solution consists in obtaining solutions on several different
meshes, from coarse to fine. So, if beginning from some mesh in this set, the difference in
the physical parameters of interest between the solutions obtained on the finer and coarser
meshes becomes negligible from the standpoint of the solved problem (the solution
flattens), then the accuracy of the solution of the mathematical problem required for
solving this engineering problem is considered to be attained, since the so-called solution
mesh convergence is attained. Naturally, the solution of the mathematical problem can
differ from the experimental values, and this difference depends, firstly, on the conformity
of the mathematical model and the simulated physical processes, and, secondly, on the
error, which these experimental values have been measured with, and which is known and
tends to decrease upon increasing the number of tests performed to measure them.
Correspondingly, the computational codes differ from each other not only in their cost, but
also in the accuracy of the mathematical simulation of physical problems, as well as in the
procedure of specifying the initial data, in the amount of the user time needed for this
specification, in the procedure of solving a problem and the computer memory and CPU
time needed for obtaining a solution of the required accuracy, and in the procedures of
processing and visualization of the obtained results and the user time needed for that.
Naturally, a highly accurate solution requires a fine computational mesh, and,
consequently, substantial computer memory and CPU time, as well as, in some cases,
increased user time and efforts for specifying the initial data for the calculation. As the
result, if the time needed to solve an engineering problem with a computational code
exceeds some threshold time, then either the engineering problem becomes irrelevant (for
instance, because your competitors have outpaced you by that time), or alternative
approaches, which may be not so accurate, but are surely faster, are used instead to solve
the problem within given time limits.

2
 Before getting acquainted with the recommended procedure of obtaining a reliable and
accurate solution of an engineering problem with Flow Simulation, it is expedient to
consider Flow Simulation features governing the below-described strategy of solving
engineering problems with Flow Simulation.
Since Flow Simulation is based on solving time-dependent Navier-Stokes equations,
steady-state problems are solved through a steady-state approach. To obtain the
steady-state solution quicker, a method of local time stepping is employed over the
computational domain considered. A multigrid method is used for accelerating the
solution convergence and suppressing parasitic oscillations. The computational domain is
designed as a parallelepiped enveloping the model with planes orthogonal to the axes of
the Cartesian Global coordinate system of the model. The computational mesh is built by
dividing the computational domain into parallelepiped cells with its sides orthogonal to
the Global coordinate system axes. (The cells lying outside the fluid-filled regions and
outside solids with heat conduction specified do not participate in the calculations).
Procedures of the computational mesh refinement (splitting) are used to resolve the model
features better, such as high-curvature surfaces in contact with fluid, thin walls surrounded
by fluid, narrow flow passages (gaps), and the specified insulator boundaries. During the
calculation the computational mesh can be refined additionally (if that is allowed by the
user-defined settings) to better resolve the high-gradient flow and solid regions revealed in
the calculation (Solution-Adaptive Meshing).
Since steady-state problems are solved in Flow Simulation through the steady-state
approach, it is necessary to determine the termination moment for the calculation properly.
If the calculation is finished too early, when the steady state solution has not been attained
yet, then the obtained solution can depend on the specified initial conditions and so be not
very reliable. On the contrary, if the calculation is finished too late, then some time is
wasted. To optimize the termination moment for the calculation and to determine physical
parameters of interest (such as a force acting on a model surface, or a model hydraulic
resistance) with a sufficient accuracy, you can specify them as the calculation goals.
The way to simulate an engineering problem with SOLIDWORKS+Flow Simulation
correctly and adequately from the physical standpoint, i.e. to state the corresponding
model problem, and to solve this model problem properly and reliably with Flow
Simulation, is described in the chapters Setting Up Engineering Problem in Flow
Simulation and Solving Engineering Problem.

Solving Engineering Problems with Flow Simulation 2016 3

1 Setting Up Engineering Problem in Flow Simulation

It is necessary to remember that a fast but inaccurate beginning will cost you more efforts
and time spent not only for specifying the initial data, but, even worse, for the subsequent
calculations, until they finally become reliable. Therefore, we strongly recommend that
you carefully read this section.

Selecting Geometrical and Physical Features of the Problem

Before you open or create a SOLIDWORKS model and define a Flow Simulation project,
it is necessary to understand which geometrical and physical features most substantially
influence the problem solution - first of all, those that are important for estimating the
possibility of solving the problem with Flow Simulation. For example,
if the problem contains movable parts, then it is necessary to estimate the
importance of taking into account their motions when solving the problem, and, if
these motions are important, to estimate the possibility of solving this problem with
a quasi-stationary approach, since model parts motions during the calculation are
not considered in Flow Simulation (however, you may specify a translational and/or
rotational motion of the specific wall or a rotating reference frame),
if the problem includes fluids of different types (for example, a gas and a liquid),
and there is an interface between them or these fluids are mixing, then it is
necessary to estimate the importance of taking this into account, since Flow
Simulation does not consider a free fluid surface, or mixing of fluids of different
types.
We can present other examples of a clear impossibility of solving some engineering
problems with Flow Simulation, as well as of simplifying the engineering problems for
solving them with Flow Simulation, but it is impossible to envision and describe all the
possible situations in the present document, so in each particular case you will have to
make decision by yourself.

Creating the Model and the Flow Simulation Project

If a SOLIDWORKS model has already been created when designing the object, and it is
fully adequate to the object, then, to solve the engineering problem with Flow Simulation,
it can be required:
to simplify the model by removing the parts, which do not influence the problem
solution, but consume computer resources, i.e. memory and CPU time. For
example, a corrugated model surface which will result in an exceedingly large
number of mesh cells required to resolve it can be specified instead as a smooth
surface with equivalent wall roughness. If the model has narrow fluid-filled blind
holes, whose influence on the overall flow pattern is, by rough estimate, barely
perceptible, it would be better to remove these features in order to avoid the
excessive mesh splitting around them.

4
 to add auxiliary parts to the model such as inlet and outlet tubes for stabilization of
the flow, lids to cover the inlet and outlet openings, and parts to denote rotating
regions, local initial meshes or other areas where special conditions are applied.
All these actions, being executed properly, can be very pivotal in obtaining a reliable and
accurate solution. On the contrary, adding auxiliary parts to a model will inevitably cause
an increase of the computational mesh cells and, consequently, the required computer
memory and CPU time, therefore these parts dimensions must be adequate to the stated
problem.
If a model has not been created yet, it is expedient to consider all the above-mentioned
factors when creating it.
If all effects of these actions are not clear enough, it can be worthwhile to vary the model
parts and/or their dimensions in a series of calculations in order to determine their
influence on the obtained solution.
Then, in accordance with the problem physical features revealed and adapted to Flow
Simulation capabilities, the basic part of the Flow Simulation project is specified: the
problem type (internal or external), fluids and solids involved in the problem, physical
features considered (such as heat conduction in solids, time-dependent analysis,
gravitational effects, etc.), boundaries of the calculation domain, initial and boundary
conditions, and, if necessary, fluid subdomains, rotating regions, volume and/or surface
heat sources, fans and other features and conditions.
The specified boundary conditions, as well as heat sources, fans, and other conditions and
features must correspond to the statement of the physical problem and must not conflict
with each other.
Eventually, you specify the physical parameters of interest as the Flow Simulation project
goals. They can be local or integral, defined within the whole computational domain or in a
certain volume, on a surface or in a point. The parameters determined over some region are
expressed in the form of their minimum, or maximum, average, or bulk average values. This
allows you to increase the reliability and accuracy of determination of these parameters,
since the goal values are saved on each iteration during the calculation and can be analyzed
later. On the contrary, the convergence behavior of the parameters not specified as goals
cannot be analyzed afterwards, as they are saved only at the last iteration and, optionally, at
the user-specified iterations in transient simulations.

Solving Engineering Problems with Flow Simulation 2016 5

2 Solving Engineering Problem

As soon as you have specified the basic part of the Flow Simulation project that is unlikely
to be changed in the subsequent calculations, the next step is to select the strategy of
solving the engineering problem with Flow Simulation to obtain a reliable and accurate
solution of the problem.

Strategy of Solving Engineering Problems

As it is mentioned in Introduction, by performing a series of calculations on a set of
computational meshes ranging from coarse to fine ones, we can estimate the accuracy of
the solution of the mathematical problem. As soon as the calculation on a finer mesh does
not yield a noticeably different (from the engineering problem standpoint) solution, i.e. the
solution flattens with respect to the mesh cell number, we can conclude that the solution of
the mathematical problem has achieved mesh convergence, which means that the required
mathematical solution accuracy is attained. Naturally, first you must determine the
threshold for the solution-vs.-mesh change, so that the change smaller than this threshold
will be considered as negligible. Since the determination of this threshold is only possible
in relation to some physical parameter, it is natural to connect it to the physical parameters
of interest in the engineering problem, in particular, with the admissible error in
determination of these physical parameters. Moreover, since steady-state problems are
solved in Flow Simulation through the steady-state approach, monitoring the behavior of
the calculation goals during the calculation can serve two purposes. Firstly, if these
parameters oscillate during the calculation, it will allow you to determine their values and
observation errors more accurately by averaging them over a number of iterations and
determining their deviation from this average value. Secondly, you may want to intervene
in the calculation process by finishing the calculation manually if you see that either the
solution is unacceptable for you by some reasons, or, vice versa, if the solution has already
converged, so that there is no reason to continue the calculation any further.
Therefore, the strategy of solving an engineering problem with Flow Simulation consists,
first of all, in performing several calculations on the same basic project (with the same
model, inside the same computational domain, and with similar boundary and initial
conditions) varying only the computational mesh. Since the computational mesh is built
automatically in Flow Simulation, it can be changed by varying the project parameters that
govern the mesh (the initial computational mesh on which the calculation starts, and
maybe its refinement during the calculation): Result Resolution Level, Minimum Gap
Size, Minimum Wall Thickness and other.

6
 An additional item in this strategy of solving an engineering problem with Flow
Simulation consists in varying the auxiliary elements added to the model as needed to
solve the problem with Flow Simulation (such as inlet and outlet tubes attached to the inlet
and outlet openings, for internal problems), the dimensions of which are questionable
from the standpoint of their necessity and sufficiency. Those physical parameters of the
engineering problem, whose values are not known exactly and which, in your opinion, can
influence the problem solution, must be varied also. When performing these calculations,
there is no need to investigate the solution-vs.-mesh convergence again, since it has
already been achieved before. It is enough to just perform these calculations with the
project mesh settings that provided the solution with satisfactory accuracy during the
solution-vs.-mesh convergence investigation. The same applies also to the parametric
engineering calculations where you change the model geometry and/or flow parameters.
However, you must keep in mind the potential necessity for checking the
solution-vs.-mesh convergence, because in doubtful cases it must be checked again.
In spite of the apparent simplicity of the proposed strategy, its full implementation is
usually troublesome due to the substantial difficulties including, first of all, a dramatic
increase in the requirements for computer memory and CPU time when you substantially
increase the number of cells in the computational mesh. Since both the computer memory
and the time for which the engineering problem must be solved are usually restricted, the
specific implementation of this strategy eventually governs the accuracy of the problem
solution, whether it will be satisfactory or not. Perhaps, a further simplification of the
model and/or reducing the computational domain will be required.
Some specific description of this strategy is presented in the next sections of this
document.

Settings for Resolving the Geometrical Features of the Model and for
Obtaining the Required Solution Accuracy
The computational mesh variation described in the previous section is the key item of the
proposed strategy for solving engineering problems with Flow Simulation.
The level of initial mesh (result resolution level) governs the number of basic mesh cells,
the criteria for refinement (splitting) of the basic mesh to resolve the model geometry,
creating the initial mesh. The Level of initial mesh governs the initial mesh and is
accessible from the Global Mesh dialog. The Refinement level is accessible from the
Calculation Control Options dialog and controls the refinement of computational mesh
during the calculation. The geometry resolution options that also influence the initial mesh
can be changed under the Settings of the Global Mesh dialog (if the Automatic type is
selected) and under the Advanced Refinement of the Global Mesh dialog (if the Manual
type is selected) and the Settings Local Mesh dialogs. The effects of the geometry
resolution options can be altered on the other tabs of these dialogs.

Solving Engineering Problems with Flow Simulation 2016 7

 Before creating the initial mesh, Flow Simulation automatically determines the Minimum
gap size for the walls contacting the fluid with both sides. This is required for resolving
the geometrical features of the model with the computational mesh. Flow Simulation
creates the initial mesh so that the number of the mesh cells along the normal to the model
surface must not be less than a certain number, if the distance along this normal from this
surface to the opposite wall is not less than the minimum gap size. This insures that a flow
passage or gap with the width larger than the specified minimum gap size will be resolved
with a certain number of cells across it.
In the automatic mode these mesh parameters are determined from the dimensions of the
surfaces with the boundary conditions specified, such as the model inlet and outlet
openings in an internal analysis, as well as the surfaces and volumes with the heat sources,
local initial conditions, surface and/or volume goals and some of the other conditions and
features. If you select the options to specify the Minimum gap size manually, you can see
the its value determined by Flow Simulation. If this value cannot provide an adequate
resolution of the model geometry, you can change it. At that, it is necessary to remember
that the number of the computational mesh cells generated to resolve the model
geometrical features depends on the specified level of initial mesh.
Evidently, when creating a Flow Simulation project, it is always worthwhile to make sure
that the minimum gap size is relevant to the model geometry. However, if the model
geometry is complicated (for instance, there are non-circular flow passages, sharp edges
protruding into the stream, etc.), it can be difficult to determine this parameter
unambiguously. In this case it can be useful to perform several calculations by varying this
parameter within a reasonable range in order to reveal its influence on the problem
solution. In accordance with the strategy of solving engineering problems, these
calculations must be performed at various levels of initial mesh.
It makes sense to perform calculations at the level of initial mesh of 3 if both the model
geometry and the flow field are relatively smooth. For more complex problems we
recommend, first of all, to perform the calculation at the level of initial mesh of 4 or 5
(naturally, explicitly specifying the minimum gap size). After that, if the calculation at the
level of initial mesh of 5 is finished properly and, if the computer resources allow you to
do this, we recommend, in order to ascertain the mesh convergence, to perform the
calculation at the level of initial mesh of 6.

Monitoring the Calculation

Monitoring the calculation - at least, monitoring the behavior of the physical parameters
specified by you as the project goals (you can also inspect physical parameters fields at the
specified planar cross-sections) is useful for the following reasons:
you can intervene in the process of calculation - for instance, manually finish the
calculation before it finishes automatically, if you see that either the calculation is
unacceptable for you for some reasons (for example, if Flow Simulation generates
warnings), or, vice versa, when solving a steady-state problem (and some transient
problems also), the solution has already converged, so that there is no reason to
continue the calculation;

8
 if a steady-state problem is solved, and the physical parameters specified by you as
the project goals oscillate with iterations, then inspecting the behavior of these
parameters during the calculation will allow you to determine their values and
determination errors more accurately by averaging their values over the iterations
and determining their deviations from these average values;
if the physical parameters of interest do not change substantially during the
calculation, you can obtain their intermediate (preliminary) values beforehand and
use them for engineering analysis, while letting the calculation to continue until the
final values are reached;
if you solve a time-dependent problem, you can see the calculation results obtained
at the current physical time moment before the calculation is finished.
The first above-mentioned reason is particularly useful since it allows you to substantially
reduce the CPU time in some cases. For example, if you do not specify the high Mach
number gas flow in the project settings, whereas in fact the flow reaches high Mach
numbers, or if Flow Simulation warns you about a vortex at the model outlet, both
situations substantially reducing the calculation accuracy and making it necessary to
change some of the problem settings (specify high Mach number flow for the first case or
lengthen the model outlet tube for the second one). If you solve a steady-state problem at
the result resolution level of 7 or 8 and you see that the computational mesh refinements
performed during the calculation do not increase the number of cells in the mesh and,
therefore, do not noticeably improve the problem solution (the values of the project goals
do not change), you can finish the calculation relatively early (say, after 12 travels have
been performed).

Viewing and Analyzing the Obtained Solution

When viewing and analyzing the obtained solution after finishing the calculation, it is
recommended to plot the history of the project goals during the calculation, if you did not
monitor them directly as the calculation went on. If a steady-state problem is solved, and
you specified the physical parameter of interest as the project goal, then, if this parameter
oscillated during the calculation, you can determine its value more accurately by
averaging it over the last iterations interval, in which its steady-state oscillation is seen.
This way you can also determine the variance of this goal, i.e. its deviation from the
average value, that characterizes the goal determination error in the obtained solution.
It is also useful to check for vortices at the model outlet, as well as to see the flow pattern
in the model and, if heat transfer in solids is considered, the temperature distribution
through the solid parts of the model. Naturally, first of all it is expedient to see the
obtained field of the physical parameter of interest, not only in the region of interest, but
also in a broader area, in order to check this field for apparently inconsistent results.
It is also worthwhile to examine the obtained fields of other physical parameters related to
the parameter of interest. For example, if you are interested in the total pressure loss, you
may want to see the velocity field, whereas if you are interested in the temperature of
solid, a picture of the fluid-to-solid heat flux field is also useful.

Solving Engineering Problems with Flow Simulation 2016 9

Estimating the Reliability and Adequacy of the Obtained Solution
In accordance with the general approach to estimating the reliability and accuracy of the
engineering problem solution obtained with a computational code, this estimation consists
of the following two parts: an estimation of how accurate is the solution of the
mathematical problem corresponding to the mathematical model of the physical process,
and an estimation of the accuracy of simulating the physical process with the given
mathematical model.
The accuracy of solution of the mathematical problem is determined by mathematical
methods, independently of the consistency of the model to the physical process under
consideration. In our case, this accuracy estimation is based on analyzing the mesh
convergence of the problem solutions obtained on different computational meshes. Then,
since steady-state problems are solved with Flow Simulation via a steady-state approach
by employing local time steps, it is useful to verify additionally the accuracy of the
obtained solution by solving the similar time-dependent problem not employing local time
steps.
As soon as the mathematical problem solution of a satisfactory accuracy is obtained, the
next step consists in estimating the accuracy the physical process simulation with the
mathematical model employed in the computational code. To do this, the obtained solution
is compared with the available experimental data (considering the errors which consist of
measurement errors and experimental errors arising from possible spurious influences).
Naturally, since experimental data are always restricted, for the validation it is desirable to
select the data which are as close to the engineering problem being solved as possible. To
validate the computational code against the available experimental data, you must solve
the corresponding test problem in addition to the practical engineering problem you are
solving (preferably before you start to solve the practical problem following the
above-mentioned strategy). This operation increases the reliability of estimating the
obtained solution of the engineering problem so substantially that the required additional
time and efforts will fully pay back later on, in particular when solving similar engineering
problems.
If after solving the test problem you see that the accuracy of its solution obtained with
Flow Simulation is not satisfactory from your standpoint, check to see that you have
properly specified the Flow Simulation project, that all substantial features of the
engineering problem hare considered, and, finally, that Flow Simulation restrictions do not
impede solving this engineering problem.

10
3 Frequent Errors and Improper Actions

Let us consider the most common errors and improper actions that can occur when solving
engineering problems with Flow Simulation.
When Specifying Initial Data:
not considering physical features which are important for the engineering
problem under consideration: for instance, high Mach number gas flow (it must
be considered if M>3 for steady-state and M>1 for transient problems or if the
supersonic flow occurs in about a half of the computational domain or greater),
gravitational effects (must be considered if either the fluid velocity is small, the
fluid density is temperature-dependent, and a heat source is considered, or
several fluids having substantially different densities are considered in a
gravitational field), necessity of a time-dependent analysis (for instance, at the
moderate Reynolds numbers, when unsteady vortices are generated);
incorrectly specifying symmetry planes as the computational domain boundaries
(for instance, at the moderate Reynolds numbers, when unsteady vortices are
generated; you should keep in mind that the symmetry of model geometry and
initial and boundary conditions does not guarantee the symmetry of the flow
field);
if you specify symmetry planes and intend to specify a mass or volume flow rate
at a model inlet or outlet opening, please do not forget to adjust the flow rate
accordingly, instead of specifying the total flow rate: for instance, if the
symmetry plane crosses the inlet opening and splits it in two halves, specify a
half of the flow rate value;
if you specify integral boundary or volume conditions (heat transfer rates, heat
generation rate, etc.), please remember that their values specified in the Flow
Simulation dialog boxes correspond to the fraction of area or volume laying
inside the computational domain;
if you specify a flow swirl on a model inlet or outlet opening (in the Fans or
Boundary Conditions dialogs), please do not forget to properly specify their
swirl axes and the coordinate system;
if you specify a Unidirectional or Orthotropic porous medium, please do not
forget to specify their directions;
please make sure that the specified boundary conditions do not conflict with each
other. For example, if you deal with gas flows and the model inlet flow is
subsonic, whereas the flow inside the model becomes supersonic, it is incorrect
to specify flow velocity or volume flow rate as the boundary condition at the
model inlet, since they are fully determined by the geometry of the model flow
passage and the fluid specific heat ratio;
if you solve a time-dependent problem, and this problem has cyclic-in-time
boundary conditions, thus leading to a steady-state cyclic-in-time solution, to
obtain which you have to calculate the flow several times in cycle, every time

Solving Engineering Problems with Flow Simulation 2016 11

 specifying the solution from the previous calculation as the initial condition for
the next calculation, there is no need to specify the boundary conditions for
several cycles. Instead it is more convenient to specify them for a cycle and
perform a series of calculations, running each calculation with the Take previous
results check box selected in the Run dialog;
when specifying Surface Goals, Volume Goals, Point Goals or Equation
Goals, it is better to give them sensible names to identify these goals
unambiguously;
if you want to monitor the intermediate calculation results at certain sections of
the model during the calculation, it is better to determine these sections positions
in the Global coordinate system before actually running the calculation, since
during the calculation it is more difficult;
When Monitoring a Calculation:
when monitoring intermediate calculation results during a calculation, please do
not forget the spatial nature of the problem being solved (of course, if the
problem itself is not 2D). To take a look at the full pattern it is expedient to see
the results at least in 2 or 3 intersecting planes;
When Viewing the Obtained Solution after Finishing a Calculation:
to view different result features in different panes simultaneously, you can
split the SOLIDWORKS graphics area into 2 or 4 panes and build different
result features in different graphical areas through their individual Cut Plots,
3D Plots, Surface Plots, Flow Trajectories, Isosurfaces defined in these
areas;
if you intend to see integral physical parameters (such as area, mass or volume
flow rates, heat generation rates, forces, etc.) with the Surface Parameters
dialog box, please remember that:
the shown values are determined over the parts of the surface that belong to
the computational domain;
their determination errors include errors of representing these surfaces in
SOLIDWORKS and Flow Simulation, the latter depends on the computational
mesh.

12