Note: This discussion is about an older version of the COMSOL Multiphysics® software. The information provided may be out of date.
Discussion Closed This discussion was created more than 6 months ago and has been closed. To start a new discussion with a link back to this one, click here.
Moving heat source in welding
Posted Jan 14, 2012, 11:03 a.m. EST Heat Transfer & Phase Change Version 4.2 1 Reply
Please login with a confirmed email address before reporting spam
Hi
In the forum a moving heat source is simulated in 2D(using a moving cylindrical coordinate). the heat source in my model is a semi circle appended to a semi ellipse.when i tried to model this using moving cylindrical coordinate(moves along with the heat source) my solution is not converging. Can i model this using a moving Cartesian co-ordinate?
If not what will the suitable solution.
thank u in advance.
In the forum a moving heat source is simulated in 2D(using a moving cylindrical coordinate). the heat source in my model is a semi circle appended to a semi ellipse.when i tried to model this using moving cylindrical coordinate(moves along with the heat source) my solution is not converging. Can i model this using a moving Cartesian co-ordinate?
If not what will the suitable solution.
thank u in advance.
1 Reply Last Post Jan 15, 2012, 3:39 a.m. EST
Please login with a confirmed email address before reporting spam
Posted:
1 decade ago
Hi
fr me the difference between a cylindrical and cartesian coordinates is "just" some static math it should not interact with the solver process. I suspect more, particularly if you are in the time domain, that you have a mesh size, time step HT physics issue that makes like tough or just impossible for the solver. Or that you have driveng BC that have sharp steps or dirac transition that the solver cannot evaluate to get a good jacobian for the "step and through" iteration
--
Good luck
Ivar
fr me the difference between a cylindrical and cartesian coordinates is "just" some static math it should not interact with the solver process. I suspect more, particularly if you are in the time domain, that you have a mesh size, time step HT physics issue that makes like tough or just impossible for the solver. Or that you have driveng BC that have sharp steps or dirac transition that the solver cannot evaluate to get a good jacobian for the "step and through" iteration
--
Good luck
Ivar