| Page: |
| Home > Technical Chat > CFD Head Study | |||||||
 8604 Posts Member #: 573 Formerly Axel Podland |
14th Dec, 2012 at 12:45:40pm
I wouldn't go that far Joe, but maybe play with port diameters :)
Edited by Paul S on 14th Dec, 2012. Saul Bellow - "A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."
|
||||||
 12307 Posts Member #: 565 Carlos Fandango Burnham-on-Crouch, Essex |
14th Dec, 2012 at 01:06:35pm
cocked up the divider radius? On 28th Aug, 2011 Kean said:
At the risk of being sigged... Joe, do you have a photo of your tool? http://www.turbominis.co.uk/forums/index.p...9064&lastpost=1 https://joe1977.imgbb.com/ |
||||||
|
8604 Posts Member #: 573 Formerly Axel Podland |
14th Dec, 2012 at 04:37:40pm
On 12th Dec, 2012 mossy2a said:
What's your residuals like? The pressure spike at the base of the valve could be due to poor meshing or mesh type? I would expect it to elevate but that looks high. Not that I've got anything to back it up with in terms of cylinder head simulations. I'm more Venturi's and pipework. I can't find anything in Solidworks Flow Simulation that identifies the residuals. I dont think it has the capabilities of dedicated CFD like Ansys or Fluent. I can reduce the mesh size in certain areas, so the valve seat might get a bit more attntion. Saul Bellow - "A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."
|
||||||
| Home > Technical Chat > CFD Head Study | |||||||
|
|||||||
| Page: |