Can't create a porous baffle inside a "BooleanFragments"

A subforum specific to the development of the OpenFoam-based workbenches ( Cfd https://github.com/qingfengxia/Cfd and CfdOF https://github.com/jaheyns/CfdOF )

Moderator: oliveroxtoby

Post Reply
kaaree
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2022 4:03 pm

Can't create a porous baffle inside a "BooleanFragments"

Post by kaaree »

Hi, all!
I'm following this example: https://github.com/opensimsa/opensim/bl ... (Gmsh).pdf
but the simulation does not include the baffle, and I get this warning when I create the baffle:
<App> Document.cpp(3553): Unnamed#BooleanFragments still touched after recompute
User avatar
oliveroxtoby
Posts: 810
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2016 9:43 am
Location: South Africa

Re: Can't create a porous baffle inside a "BooleanFragments"

Post by oliveroxtoby »

kaaree wrote: Sun Dec 04, 2022 9:48 am Hi, all!
I'm following this example: https://github.com/opensimsa/opensim/bl ... (Gmsh).pdf
but the simulation does not include the baffle, and I get this warning when I create the baffle:
<App> Document.cpp(3553): Unnamed#BooleanFragments still touched after recompute
Please upload your FreeCAD file.
kaaree
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2022 4:03 pm

Re: Can't create a porous baffle inside a "BooleanFragments"

Post by kaaree »

@oliveroxtoby
I've skipped the "gmsh" and using snappyHexMesh instead on a "compound" of the model (pipe with a wire baffle inside) and it works fine. It looks like the example I tried to follow uses the "CFD" workbench, but I'm not able to install "CFD" through the "Addon Manager". It says "Installed" but it does not show up in the workbench list (FreeCAD 0.20.1), so I'm not actually able to fully reproduce the example. I guess this is why my former simulation failed. Unfortunately, I no longer have that FreeCAD file stored on my PC.
KAKM
Posts: 109
Joined: Tue May 04, 2021 12:17 am

Re: Can't create a porous baffle inside a "BooleanFragments"

Post by KAKM »

The CFD workbench does not play well with the CfdOF workbench-they use too many of the same file names with slightly different contents. I wouldn't recommend using it anyway, they forked a while ago and CfdOF has a lot more functionality and a better interface.
Post Reply